Deuteronomy 14
HEATHEN CUSTOMS OF MOURNING TO BE AVOIDED
(vs. 1-2)
Israel, as the people of God, chosen by Him to be His
children by adoption, must
not
only abstain from idolatry, but also avoid all heathenish usages and practices,
such as those connected with mourning for the dead and those pertaining to
the
use
of food.
1 “Ye are
the children of the LORD your God:” – (compare Exodus 4:22). As
His children, it behooved them to avoid all that would be
offensive to Him or
indicate distrust in Him
- “ye shall not cut yourselves,” – (Leviticus 19:28; 21:5;
Jeremiah 16:6; 48:36-37; Ezekiel 7:18; 27:31) - “nor make any baldness between
your eyes for the dead.”
2 “For
thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the
LORD hath
chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto Himself,
above all the nations that are
upon the earth.” (Compare ch.7:6.) The reason assigned here is an emphatic
expansion of the statement in v. 1.
There Ought to be a Great
Difference Between God’s People
and Others In
the Presence of Death (vs. 1-2)
In one sense, indeed,
there is none; or, at least, none which can be discerned. One
event cometh
alike to all, even to the righteous and the wicked, and the house of
the
good man may be as frequently darkened by “the shadow of death” as
that of another who fears not God (Ecclesiastes 9:2-3). But still, when death does
come, there may well be a very wide difference between those who are the
children
of
God and those who are not, especially when the departed one is a member of
“the whole family in heaven and on earth.” When the Christian
expositor is
opening up the principle contained in these verses, he can do so
from much higher
vantage-ground than one who confines himself to the Old Testament
teaching. Some
such main lines of thought as the following will be the Christian unfolding
of the
principles so long ago laid down.
in the new birth by the Holy Ghost. Those thus born anew are children of
God — not merely under a
national covenant, as sharing a common
privilege, but as brought into a personal covenant through the
impartation
of a new life. The mark of this new birth is the saving reception
of Christ
by faith, and the effect of it is to transfer men from the
region of darkness
to that of light, “from the power of Satan unto God”
(Acts 26:18) and
from being subjects of a kingdom, to their being citizens in
God’s city and
sons in God’s family — “fellow-citizens
of the saints and of the
household of God.” (Ephesians 2:19)
everlasting covenant”
(Hebrews 13:20). They are redeemed with
the
“precious blood of Christ. (I Peter 1:19)
of the dead, and
has “opened the kingdom of heaven to all
believers.”
(Matthew 27:52-53)
“Christ died for
us, that whether we wake or sleep we should live
together with Him” (I Thessalonians 5:10); “whether we live or die,
we are the Lord’s” (Romans 14:8); “Christ both died,
and rose,
and revived, that He might be Lord of the dead and of the
living.”
(Ibid. v. 9)
follows the firstfruits. “Now is Christ risen from the dead, and become
the Firstfruits of them that slept.” (I Corinthians 15:20)
us by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15. Of these there
are four:
Ø
That the body, as the
seed, must be buried before it can rise again, (v.36)
Ø
That the body sown is
not the body that shall be. (v. 37)
Ø
That to every seed
there is its own body, (v. 38)
Ø
That the precise
relation or connection between the body that is sown
and the body that will be raised is a secret in the mind of
God. “God
giveth it a
body as it hath pleased Him.” (Ibid.) These things we
know: we know no more. If we let
our affirmations go beyond the
statements of Scripture, we shall plunge ourselves into inextricable
difficulties, and we shall be even risking the credit of Scripture, since
many will think that, in disposing of our
affirmations, they demolish the
teaching of the Book. In confining ourselves to the four points named
by Paul in his great argument, we shall be remaining on
ground that
will ever be firm, and that can never be invaded. No physical science
can affirm or deny either one or the other. (No doubt God did
this with a purpose, since
men are often “too smart for their britches”
CY – 2012) There never lived, there never will live, the man who on
scientific grounds can weaken either
of them. Our holy and glorious
faith is beyond such
reach.
world is even vastly deeper and stronger than it was under
Moses. If
might not sorrow as those without hope when they had the
assurance, “I
am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of
Jacob,” how
much less should we, when earth has seen the Firstfruits of the great
resurrection from the dead! How much
light is thrown by Christ’s grace
and love into the portals of the grave, and what a hallowed
and
hallowing calm may pervade the chamber of death if OUR LORD
IS WITH US
THERE! Yea, (He is not the God of the dead, but the
God of the Living! - Mark 12:24-27) there
is no real death to the believer.
OUR SAVIOUR,
JESUS CHRIST hath “abolished
death” (II Timothy
1:10). He hath said, “If a man keep my
sayings, he shall never taste of
death” (John
8:52). Then we
may well bless our God that, amid the
changing scenes of earth,
we stand on ground which can never be shaken.
There ariseth light in the darkness.
“With
joy we tell the scoffing age,
He that was dead has left His tomb;
He
lives above their utmost rage,
And we are waiting till He come.”
(One
other note: God “hath appointed a day, in the which He will
judge
the world in righteousness by that man whom He
hath ordained;
whereof He hath given
assurance unto all men, IN THAT HE HATH
RAISED HIM FROM THE DEAD! – (Acts 17:31)
NO ABOMINABLE THING TO BE EATEN (v. 4)
3 “Thou
shalt not eat any abominable thing.” Any abomination, i.e. anything
which is an abomination to the Lord, having been by him pronounced
unclean
and
forbidden; “anything which I have put
far away from you (i.e. made to be
abominable to you)” (Targum Jonath.). “Every
creature of God is good,”
and
“there is nothing unclean of itself”
(I Timothy 4:4; Romans 14:14);
but
by the ordinance of God, certain creatures, meats, and drinks were made
unclean to the Jews and this taught them holiness in abstaining
from the
impure communion with the wicked.
MEATS CLEAN AND UNCLEAN (vs. 4-21)
The regulations here concerning food, and the animals the
use of which is
forbidden, are substantially the same as in Leviticus 2. There are, however, some
differences between the two accounts which may be noticed:
o
In Deuteronomy, the
mammals which may be used for food are
severally specified as well as described by the general
characteristic
of the class; in Leviticus, only the latter description is
given.
o
In the list of fowls
which may not be eaten, the raah (glede) is
mentioned in Deuteronomy, but not in Leviticus; and the bird which
in the one is called da’ah, is in
the other called dayyah (vulture).
o
The class of reptiles
which is carefully described in Leviticus is
wholly omitted in Deuteronomy.
o
Winged insects are
forbidden without exception in Deuteronomy;
in Leviticus, the locust and certain other insects of the
same kind
are excepted.
o
Some slight
differences in the order of enumeration appear.
4 “These are
the beasts which ye shall eat: the ox, the sheep, and the goat,
5 The hart,” - ayyal (אַיָּל), probably the fallow deer, or deer generally
- “and
the roebuck,” – tsebi (צְבִי), the gazelle (Gazella
Arabica) - “and the fallow
deer,” - yachmur (יחְמוּר), the roebuck - “and the wild goat,” - akko (אַקּו),
the
ibex - “and the pygarg,” - dishon (דִישׁון), some kind of antelope, probably the
Gazella Dorcas. “and the wild ox,” - the’o (תְאו), probably the bubale,
or wild
cow of the Arabs (Alcephalus bubalis),
a species of antelope - “and the
chamois.” -
zamer (זָמֶר), probably the wild sheep (Ovis Tragelaphus.)
6 “And
every beast that parteth the hoof, and cleaveth the cleft into two claws,
and cheweth the cud
among the beasts, that ye shall eat. 7 Nevertheless these
ye shall not eat of them that chew the cud,
or of them that divide the cloven
hoof; as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but
divide not the hoof; therefore they are unclean
unto you. 8
And the swine,
because it divideth the
hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto
you:
ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch
their dead carcase.
9 These ye shall
eat of all that are in the waters: all that
have fins and scales shall ye eat:
10 And
whatsoever hath not fins and scales ye may not eat; it is unclean unto
you. 11 Of all clean birds ye shall eat. 12 But these
are they of which ye shall
not eat: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,”
13 “And
the glede,” - ra’ah (רָאָה). This word occurs only here, and it is supposed
by
some that, by an error of the copyist, substituting ר for ד, it has come instead of
דָאָה,, as used in Leviticus 11:14. But it is more probable, as
above suggested, that
the
da’ah of Leviticus is represented
by the dayyah of Deuteronomy, and that
consequently the reading raah should
be retained. This word, derived from ha;r;,
to
see, to look, would appropriately designate a bird of keen sight, one of the
hawk
species. The bird intended may be a buzzard, of which there are
now several kinds
in
after his kind, 15 And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the
hawk after his
kind, 16 The little
owl, and the great owl, and the swan,
17 And the
pelican, and the gier eagle, and the cormorant, 18
And the stork,
and the heron after her kind, and the lapwing,
and the bat. 19
And every
creeping thing that flieth
is unclean unto you: they shall not be eaten.
20 But of
all clean fowls ye may eat.”
21 “Ye
shall not eat of anything that dieth of itself:” – (Leviticus 17:15) –
“thou shalt give it unto the stranger that is in thy gates,” – .) “The uncircumcised
stranger that is in thy cities ‘(Targum),
i.e. “a heathen who takes upon him that he
will serve no idol, with the residue of the commandments which were
commanded
to
the sons of Noah, but is not circumcised nor baptized - “that
he may eat it; or
thou mayest sell it
unto an alien:” - Alien; a foreigner, one not
resident in the land
of
seethe a kid in his mother’s milk.” This precept, several times repeated in the Law
(Exodus 23:16; 34:26), the act was condemned as an outrage
on the connection
Naturally subsisting between parent and
offspring. It is thus related to the
commands
forbidding the killing of a cow and a calf on the same day (Leviticus
22:28), or the
taking a bird with its young (ch.
22:6), and to the precepts enjoining a scrupulous
regard for natural distinctions — not sowing a field with mingled
seed (Leviticus 19:19).
It suggests:
NATURE. The act here forbidden could hardly be called cruelty, the
kid
being dead, but it was unnatural. It argued a blunted state of
the
sympathies. A finer instinct, alive to the tenderness of the relation
between
parent and offspring, would have disallowed it. It is beautiful to see the
ancient Law inculcating this rare and delicate fineness of feeling — this
considerateness and sympathy even for dead animals. The lesson is that
everything is to be avoided which would tend to blunt our moral
sensibilities (Compare Isaiah 66:1-3).
The act has its analogue in higher
relations. Not
infrequently has the affection of a parent been used by the
ingenuity of cruelty to inflict keener tortures on a child; or,
conversely, a
child has been betrayed into disclosures afterwards used to
injure the parent.
IRRATIONAL CREATURES.
Ø
It is right that
irrational creatures should be treated kindly. And if the
Law required that this
delicate consideration should be shown towards
dead animals, how much more
does it require of us kindly treatment of
them while living!
Ø
Our behavior towards
irrational creatures, as seen above, reacts upon
ourselves. In certain cases, this is readily perceived. Most people
would
shrink from the wanton mutilation of a dead animal, even in
sport, and
would admit the reactive effect of such an action in deadening
humane
instincts in him who did it. But it is the same with all cruelty and
unfeelingness.
Any action which, in human relationships, would be
condemned as unsympathetic, will
be found, if performed to animals,
to have a blunting
effect on the sensibilities of the agent. A man’s
dog is more to him than a brute. He is a friend. We can carry into our
behavior towards the irrational creatures many of the feelings which
actuate us in our personal relations, and the more we do it, the better
for ourselves.
Clean and Unclean (vs. 3-21)
The distinction of clean and unclean appears to have
rested:
preferences and repugnances — an index,
often, to deeper correlations. We
instinctively recognize certain creatures to be unfit for food. The Law
of
Moses drew the line practically
where men’s unguided instincts have
always drawn it. A lesson of respect for
natural order. In diet, as in higher
matters, we do well to follow Nature’s guidance, avoiding
violations of her
laws, and refraining from obliterating her distinctions.
blood had consequences in the region of cleanness and
uncleanness of
food. All flesh-eating and blood-eating animals — all beasts
and birds of
prey — were of necessity excluded. Ceremonially unclean
themselves, they
could not be clean to those eating them.
certain animals may have had to do with their rejection. We can
see reason
in the exclusion of creatures of cruel and rapacious habits,
of those also in
whose dispositions we trace a reflection of the human vices. It may be
pushing the principle too far to seek recondite meanings in the
chewing of
the cud (meditation) and the dividing of the hoof (separation
of walk), or in
the possession of fins and scales in fishes (organs of advance
and
resistance). But a Law impregnated with symbolism could scarcely
reckon
as clean a filthy and repulsive creature like the sow. The
accursed serpent,
the treacherous fox, the ravenous jackal, even had they been
suitable for
food in other respects, could scarcely on this principle have
been admitted.
The reptile tribes generally, and
all tribes of vermin, were similarly unclean
by a kind of natural brand. A lesson of seeing in
the natural a symbol of
the moral. Nature is a symbolic lesson-book, daily open to our
inspection.
The distinction once ordained,
and invested with religious significance,
observance of it became to the Jews a sign and test of holiness. The
general
lesson taught is that of sanctification in the use of food. Holiness, indeed,
is to be carried into every sphere and act of life. Eating, however, is an act
which, though on its animal side related to the grossest part of
us, is yet,
on its spiritual side, of serious religious import. It is the
act by which we
supply oil to the flame of life. It has to do with the
maintenance of those
vital functions by which we are enabled
to glorify God in the body. There
is thus a natural sacredness about food, and it is to be
received and used in a
sacred fashion. That it may be “clean” to us, it is to be “sanctified
by the
Word of God and
prayer,” being “received with thanksgiving of them
which believe and know the truth” (I Timothy 4:3-5). It is to be
remembered, too, that in the sphere of the higher life, if not in the
lower,
clean and unclean are distinctions of abiding validity. Intellect, heart, spirit,
etc. — the books we read,
the company we keep, the principles we
imbibe.
TITHES (vs. 22-29)
A tithing of each year’s produce of the cultivated ground
was to be made; and this tithe
was
to be brought to the place which the Lord should choose, as also the firstling
of the
herds and flocks; and there a sacrificial meal was to be
partaken of, that
learn to fear Jehovah their
God always, reverencing Him as their Ruler, and
rejoicing in Him as the Giver of all good.
22 “Thou shalt truly tithe all the increase of thy seed,” - “Seed” here refers to
plants as well as what is raised from seed (Jeremiah 2:21;
Ezekiel 17:5-6). The
reference is to the second or festival tithe which was exclusively
of vegetables - “that the
field bringeth forth year
by year. 23 And
thou shalt eat before the LORD thy
God, in the place which He shall choose to
place His name there, the tithe of thy
corn, of thy wine, and of thine
oil, and the firstlings of thy herds and of thy flocks;
that thou mayest learn
to fear the LORD thy God always.”
The fellowship with God is the crown of true religion. A feast with God, He
taking the best portions, His priests the next best, and the offerer joyful over the
remainder of the sacrifice, constituted the glory of the Jewish ritual. All the
sin offerings, burnt offerings, and meat offerings were valueless if not crowned by
the peace offering and its feast of fellowship. No wonder our Lord makes out
fellowship to be the substance of eternal life, when in His prayer He
says, “And this
is
life eternal, TO KNOW THEE, THE ONLY TRUE
GOD, AND JESUS
CHRIST, WHOM THOU HAST SENT” (John 17:3). If we are not led up into this
knowledgeable relationship, our religion is a name and not a reality.
24 “And if
the way be too long for thee, so that thou art not able to carry it;
or if the place be too far from thee, which
the LORD thy God shall choose to
set His name there, when the LORD thy God hath
blessed thee: 25
Then shalt
thou turn it into money, and bind up the money
in thine hand, and shalt go
unto
the place which the LORD thy God shall
choose:” In
the
people would be dispersed over a wide tract, it might happen that the
place which the
Lord should choose was at such
a distance from the usual residence of many that to
observe this injunction would be to them very
difficult, if not impossible. To meet
this, therefore, it was enacted that the tithe might be commuted into money,
and with
this the things required for the sacrificial meals at the sanctuary might be
purchased.
26 “And
thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after,
for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for
strong drink,” - shecar (שֵׁכַר).
“Any drink which can inebriate, whether that is made from
grain, or the juice of apples,
or
when honey is boiled into a sweet and barbarous potion, or the fruit of the
palm
[dates], is expressed into liquor,
and the duller water is colored by the prepared
fruits” (Jerome, ‘De Vit. Cler.’) -“or for whatsoever thy soul
desireth: and
thou shalt eat there
before the LORD thy God, and thou shalt rejoice,
thou,
and thine household, 27 And the
Levite that is within thy gates; thou shalt
not forsake him;
for he hath no part nor
inheritance with thee.”
Provided that religious motives predominate, and other
duties are not neglected,
the
enjoyment of what we have is pleasing to God.
(v.26.) True religion is not ascetic.
It does not frown on our joy. It regulates, but does not
seek to banish, the pleasures
of
the festive board, and the flow of the soul connected therewith (John 2:1-12;
I Corinthians 10:27; I Timothy 6:18). The sanctuary
services were associated with
feasts, in which, of course, religious motives were expected to
predominate. The
eating was “before the Lord,” and the guests were invariably to include the
Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and
the widow. This would give a high-toned
character to the feast, and would preclude coarse debauchery. Festivities
should
be so conducted that God’s presence can be invoked, and His
blessing asked
on
all that is said and done.
Every third year the whole tithe of the year’s produce was
to be set apart, not to
be
brought to the sanctuary to be eaten before the Lord, but as a portion in their
towns for the Levite, the stranger, the widow, and the
fatherless.
28 “At the
end of three years” - i.e. as the third year expired, consequently, in
the
last year of the triennium (ch.26:12-15); just as “the end of seven years” means
each seventh year (ch.15:1; 31:10; Jeremiah 34:14) - “thou shalt
bring forth all
the tithe of thine increase the
same year, and shalt lay it up within thy gates:
29 And the
Levite, (because he hath no part nor inheritance with thee,)
and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the
widow, which are within thy gates,
shall come, and shall eat and be satisfied; that
the LORD thy God may bless
thee in all the work of thine
hand which thou doest.” This was not an additional
tithe, but the former differently applied; the tithe of the
first and second years was to
be
eaten before the Lord at the sanctuary; the tithe of the third year was for the
poor
and
needy.
is not the tithe of all profits, which was due to the Levite,
but a second
tithe. The first tithe was regarded as an equivalent to the
tribe of Levi, for
Levi’s share
in the allotted possessions. Each man
in the twelve tribes
received, in the original distribution of land, one-twelfth more
than his due,
from the fact that Levi did not participate. In return for this
increment of
property, each proprietor paid to the tribe of Levi yearly
one-tenth of the
produce of the land. This was due as a legal right, and as a just equivalent
for non-participation in the territory. But this second tithe was peculiarly
THE LORD’S. Nevertheless, it was returned, with added blessing, into
Their own
bosoms. Its first use was to afford a
banquet for the offerers
themselves. The temple was to be the scene of sacred feasting. The
guests
might select such viands as pleased their taste. The overshadowing
presence of Jehovah would serve as a sufficient check against excess.
To this banquet, in which the
entire household shared, they were to invite the
Levite, the
stranger, the widow, and the orphan. The essential idea thus
embodied was philanthropy. The institution was intended to foster a spirit
of benevolence and charity. The presence of the poor in their midst was to
be accounted a benefit. It offered scope for the exercise of
noblest
dispositions. There was to be no niggardly stint in this provision, for
IT WAS
AT JEHOVAH’S COST and the occasion was to be characterized
by
UNRESTRAINED JOY
Ø It served as a
practical reminder of God’s proprietorship
in them
and in their possessions. Nothing is more easy than to forget our
obligations; and such forgetfulness is an immeasurable loss. Not an
item was there in their
persons, property, or enjoyments, but
came from the hand of a GENEROUS GOD!
Ø
It was a potent check upon their worldly-mindedness. The
Propensity for selfish
avarice is indigenous in human nature. Every
wise man will welcome any breakwater that will withstand this
mischievous tide of cupidity. Thus GOD,
WITH WONDEROUS
FORETHOUGHT
provided
a safeguard against the abuse
of prosperity. He designs to make even worldly gain serve as a
stepping-stone to piety. Money is nothing more than means to an
end. Reconciliation
with God, and personal holiness, — these
are to be the aims of human life.
Ø
It fostered kindly dispositions among all classes of the
people.
Though, as the children of
Abraham, they enjoyed great external
privileges, they were not to despise the stranger. Yea, he too might
be
admitted to a full share in
their blessings. Brotherly love is a
reciprocal boon: both parties are
blessed. The fountain of love is
replenished in the very act of giving. The
helped today may become
the helper tomorrow. We are only stewards of God’s
possessions.
Consider that the enjoyment of what we have is enhanced by
sharing it with others.
(v. 29.) This is a truth recognized in all festivity. But the Law
gave the truth a peculiar
turn when it bade the Jew seek his guests among the classes who were most in
need.
The Savior would have
us recall our feasting to the like pattern (Luke 14:12-14).
Each feast of the kind prescribed would be an invaluable
education of the disinterested
affections in their purest exercise. How far we have departed from
this idea may be
seen in the stiff, exclusive, and ceremonious, if often superb and stately,
dinner-parties
and
public feasts of modern society. Which
type of feast contributes most to happiness?
And is it not in fulfilling the duties of a warm-hearted
love that we are most entitled to
expect blessing from our Maker (v. 29)? When Jesus made His great
supper, He
acted on His own principle, and invited the “poor, and the maimed, and the
halt, and the blind,”
to come and sit down at it (Luke 14:21).
"Excerpted text Copyright AGES
Library, LLC. All
rights reserved.
Materials are reproduced by
permission."
This material can be found at:
http://www.adultbibleclass.com
If this exposition is helpful, please share
with others.