Movatterモバイル変換

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

XV.

(1, 2)And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying . . . —We learn fromDeuteronomy 1:46 that the Israelites “abode in Kadesh many days,” and fromDeuteronomy 2:1 that afterwards they “turned,” in obedience to the command given in the preceding chapter of this book, and “took their journey into the wilderness by the way of the Red Sea.” It appears, further, fromNumbers 20:1 that in the first month of the fortieth year they came again into the desert of Zin, and “abode in Kadesh.” In regard to the transactions recorded in this and in the four following chapters we have no certain chronological data. The fact that additional laws were given during the long period of the wanderings in the wilderness furnished a practical proof of the continuance of the covenant which had been made with Israel at Sinai. Bishop Wordsworth supplies the following answer to the inquiry how the Israelites were able to find a sufficient quantity of cattle and of birds in the wilderness to fulfil the requirements of the Levitical law:—“God,” he writes, “promulgated that law on Mount Sinai in order that it might be observed in Canaan; and when he gave it, the Israelites had not as yet incurred the sentence of exclusion, and theymight—and if they had not been disobedient, they would—have been in Canaan within a fortnight of its delivery. The Levitical law was given under the presumption that they would obey Him who gave it, and that they would be soon afterwards in Canaan, when they would be abletocomply with that law. (Comp.Deuteronomy 4:14.) But they murmured against God at Kadesh-barnea, and thus they forfeited His favour—they, as it were, excommunicated themselves. They forfeited theprivileges of obedience.They had kept one Passover at Mount Sinai, but there is no evidence that they were everpermittedto keep another Passover during the whole term of their wanderings. They themselves felt and acted as men under a ban; they did not even administer circumcision in the wilderness, nor until they were admitted into Canaan under Joshua; then—but not till then—they were again allowed to eat the Passover.” The words which follow were evidently addressed to those of the Israelites who were under twenty years of age at the time of the exodus.

(4)A meat offering of a tenth deal of flour . . . —The meal offering and the drink offering which are here ordered to be brought when a lamb was offered in performance of a vow, or as a free will offering, or at the solemn feasts, are the same as those which were appointed to be offered with the morning and evening lamb. (Exodus 29:38-40.) Meal offerings and drink offerings had already been prescribed in connection with the three great feasts. (Leviticus 23:13;Leviticus 23:18;Leviticus 23:37.)

(8)In performing a vow.—Rather,in making a special vow.(SeeNumbers 6:2.)

(13)All that are born of the country.—The Targum of Jonathan is, “all that are born in Israel, and not among the people.” It seems clear, however, fromNumbers 15:14 that the reference in this verse is to the indigenous Israelites.

(15)One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation . . . —Literally,As for the congregation, there shall be one ordinance for you and for the stranger that sojourneth.Some render the words thus:—O congregation, one ordinance shall be for you and for the stranger,&c.

(20)Of the first of your dough.—Or,mixed meal.The wordarisothis used only in the plural number, and is found only inNehemiah 10:37 andEzekiel 44:30, besides this and the following verse.

(22)And if ye have erred, and not observed.—Rather,And if ye shall err and not observe.

(23)And henceforward.—Rather,and onward,orthenceforward.There is nothing in the word which is here used to denote whether the reference is or is not to legislation of a later date than that at which the words were spoken. Theterminus a quois expressed in the preceding words. Comp.Isaiah 18:2, where the meaning seems to beup to the present time,andEzekiel 39:22, where the reference is to theindefinite future.

(24)By ignorance.—The wordshegagahis used to denote transgressions committed unwittingly in contrast to sins committed presumptuously (Numbers 15:30). (SeeLeviticus 4:2 and Note.) Provision had already been made in Leviticus 4 for sins of commission committed unwittingly by the whole congregation, but no provision appears to have been made for the guilt contracted in the case of sins of omission. It is possible, also, that in this place transgressions committed by an individual, but affecting the whole of the congregation, may be included. InLeviticus 4:14 a young bullock is appointed as a sin offering; in the present case a young bullock is appointed for a burnt offering and a kid of the goats for a sin offering. It must be remembered, moreover, that the commandments delivered in this chapter have express reference to the land of Canaan, whereas many of the commandments previously delivered had already become obligatory.

(25) For it is ignorance.—Rather,for it is asin of ignorance,oran error.So also at the end of the verse.

(26)Seeing all the people were in ignorance.-Rather,for in regard to all the people, it was done in ignorance,orunwittingly.

(27)And if any soul sin through ignorance.—There is no restriction here, as inLeviticus 4:27, to sins of commission.

(30)That doeth ought presumptuously.—Literally,with a high hand.

Reproacheth the Lord.—Rather,blasphemeth,as in2Kings 19:6;2Kings 19:22.

(32)And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness . . . —Better,Now the children of Israel were in the wilderness, and they found,&c. It is probable that the incident which is here recorded is designed to illustrate the presumptuous sins which were to be punished by death. The offence may have been committed shortly after the promulgation of the commandments contained in this chapter, but all that is certain is that it was committed “in the wilderness,”i.e.,according to Ibn Ezra, in the wilderness of Sinai, but more probably during the period of the wanderings in the wilderness after the arrival at Kadesh. No inference can be drawn from this verse as to the time at which the account was committed to writing. The observance of the Sabbath was obligatory in the wilderness as well as in the land of Canaan (comp.Exodus 16:27-30), and the punishment of death had already been denounced against those who profaned it by doing any work thereon (seeExodus 31:15;Exodus 35:2),but the manner in which death was to be inflicted does not appear to have been hitherto declared. The same verb which is here rendered “declared” occurs in the parallel case of the blasphemer inLeviticus 24:12, where it is rendered “shewed”:—“And they put him in ward, that the mind of the Lord might be shewed them.” The punishment of death had already been denounced against those who cursed father or mother (Leviticus 20:9). It could hardly be thought that a lighter punishment was to be inflicted on one who blasphemed the name of Jehovah, but in that case, as in this, the mode of death does not appear to have been previously enjoined.

(38)That they make them fringes . . . —Better,That they make them tassels on the corners of their garments throughout their generations, and that they put upon the tassel of the corner(i.e., on each tassel) a thread(or cord) of blue.Thetassels(zirith) appear to be the same as thegedilim(fringes) ofDeuteronomy 22:12. The outer garment of the Jews was a fourcornered cloth, which was also used by the poor as a counterpane (Exodus 22:26-27). It appears to have been commonly used with a hole in the centre, through which the head was put, so that one-half covered the front and the other the back of the body. These tassels, or fringes (LXX.κράσπεδα—craspeda), were enlarged by the Pharisees to exhibit their punctilious fulfilment of the Law (Matt. xiii 5). Great sanctity was attached to these fringes or tassels, and for this cause the woman with the issue of blood desired to touch akraspedonof our Saviour’s garment (Matthew 9:20).

(39)That ye seek not after your own heart.—Or,That ye go not about,orsearch not out,&c.