Deuteronomy 5

Chap. V. Ver. 1—33. The covenant of Sinai.—As this covenant has been much misunderstood, it may be well to bestow some particular attention on it. 1. It was not a covenant of works. The Ten Commands contain, indeed, an abstract of the original law under which man was created, delivered in a prohibitory form. “This law (says the excellent) could not be designed as a covenant, by obedience to which man should be justified; for long before this, the gospel had been preached unto Abraham. ((Galatians 2:8).) But “the law entered that sin might abound;’ ((Romans 5:20).) that is, that the extent, evil, and desert of sin, might be known; for it reaches to the most hidden thoughts of the heart, requires absolute and perpetual obedience, and denounces a curse upon all who continue not therein.

((Galatians 3:10).) Believers of old were relieved from the strictness [i.e. the penalty] of the moral law by the sacrifices which pointed to Christ: believers under the gospel are relieved by a direct application of ‘the blood of the covenant.’ ((Hebrews 10:29).) Both renounce any dependance on the moral law for justification, and both accept it as a rule of life in the hands of a Mediator; and are enabled to yield a sincere, though not perfect, obedience.” 2. But the covenant of Sinai was a national covenant between Jehovah, as their absolute sovereign, (absolute by right both of creation and redemption,) and the people of Israel, of which covenant Moses was the mediator; ((Galatians 3:19).) and, therefore, here says, ‘I stood between the Lord and you at that time, to show you the word of the Lord: for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount.”

“Nor was this covenant made with one generation only, but with every succeeding one, so long as they continued a nation. ‘“The Lord made not this covenant with our fathers [only] but with us, even us who are here alive this day;”—of whom the younger part were unborn when the law was delivered at mount Sinai.” These remarks may lead us to a correct view of the true nature of the Ten Commands. Upon the people of Israel, they were enjoined as a national code; and, therefore, 1. With them was blended the ordinance of the seventh day sabbath; which, so far as respects its being the seventh day, may be considered as a positive institution. 2. The authority of the Legislator is here founded, not only upon the authority of God, as creator, (as in (Exodus 20:11),) but also upon his redemption of the nation from Egyptian bondage: “I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt.” 3. There are in this covenant temporal sanctions peculiar to Israel as a nation, such as length of days—“‘That thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.” (For a fuller account of this covenant, see Dr. John Erskine’s Theol. Dissertations, Diss. 1.). But it may be said, What, then, have we to do with these commands? We reply, so far as they are purely moral, and founded on the relation between the Creator and his creature, so far are they binding upon all intelligent beings; nor can we be released from their obligation so long as we remain creatures; that is, so long as we exist.

The summary of these commands, therefore, as given us by our Lord himself, must be universally and forever binding: ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment; and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” ((Matthew 22:37-39).) St. Paul, moreover, writing to the Romans, (who, it is to be remembered, were not Jews,) says, “Love is the fulfilling of the law.’ ((Romans 13:8-10).) As to the commands themselves, we shall refer to our observations* on the 20th chapter of Exodus, adding only two or three remarks there omitted. 1. The second command, forbidding the use of images, is so clear and explicit, that one would have thought it almost impossible to mistake or to evade it.

It not only forbids the worshipping of images, but even the making of them for such a purpose: yet such is the ingenuity of some writers in the Church of Rome, that they explain away the whole, by assigning to saints and angels a lower degree of worship; and making these images merely the medium, and not the objects of adoration. But if we wish not to be deceived, let us ask, 1. Were the Jews allowed to pay a lower degree of worship to the sun and moon, to Baal and Ashtaroth? Certainly not; nor did Satan himself think of such an evasion, when he tempted our Saviour in the wilderness; but was silenced with the answer, “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.” ((Matthew 4:10).) 2. It is said, Catholics worship not the idols of the heathen, but saints and angels only. We reply, there were saints and angels under the Old Testament; but which of them received religious worship, except only the great “Angel of the Covenant,” whom angels worship? And as to mediators, we Christians have but “One Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” ((1 Timothy 2:5).) With respect to the use of images to represent the divine glory and perfections, they are also prohibited in the most general and severe manner. Thus, in the preceding chapter, it is strongly impressed upon the children of Israel, that when they heard “the voice of words” at mount Sinai, they saw no similitude, but only heard a voice.”

((Deuteronomy 4:12).) They saw, indeed, a cloud of glory, and of darkness, that was terrible to behold; so much so, that they desired to see it no more; but there was no likeness of any created being, either “in heaven above, or in earth beneath, or in the waters beneath the earth.” On the subsequent parts of this chapter, we shall only remark, that though the people were very ready to promise, there was too much reason to suspect their equal readiness to obey. ‘O that there were a heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children, for ever!” God delighteth not in the death of a sinner, much less in the punishment of his own people.

((Ezekiel 18:32). (Isaiah 28:21).) Chap. VI. Ver. 1—25. Moses enforces the first principles of all true religion—the unity and love of God. “The unity of God is so much a first principle with us, that we generally regard it as a truism; but it was far otherwise in those early ages. It was, in fact, peculiar to the Hebrews, and the ground on which they were universally hated. Had Jehovah been content to rank among the gods of the Egyptians or Assyrians, the Greeks or Romans, they would probably have allowed him a niche in their idol temples: but the Lord is a jealous God, and will not even suffer his name to be associated with theirs,—will not permit his worshippers even to name an idol. There is certainly something striking and expressive in the manner in which a first article of the Jewish and Christian faith is here expressed, especially in the original; ‘Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.”

Many Christian divines have thought the Trinity in Unity here intimated; and though the Rabbins will not admit this, some of them have confessed (according to Bishop Patrick) there is something very mysterious, both in the text itself, and in the manner in which they write it. If the word of God dwell in our hearts, we shall always be anxious to teach it to our children; and where the Bible is not employed as a medium of instruction, it certainly marks a low sense of its excellence and importance. Not that all should be promiscuously read by children, (for the Jews themselves omitted the Song of Solomon,) but the more important parts of the history of the Old Testament, the Psalms, the Proverbs, and the Gospels, cannot be taught to children too early.

Many have in old age blessed God for the Scriptures they had learned in their infancy. Every thing in education, however, requires prudence. The mind may be overburdened without the judgment being informed: when the words are taught, the meaning (so far as is necessary to render them useful to children) should be imparted with them: and no method can be better adapted for this purpose than that which is here suggested, namely, to introduce them into our family conversations, at home or abroad, and especially evening and morning. It is added, “Thou shalt bind them as a sign upon thine hand,” &c. Some Christian expositors suppose this meant only figuratively, that they should continually have them in mind: but seeing their religion was full of ritual observances, it seems very natural to understand them literally, as the Jews did: and as our Lord did not reprove the Pharisees for wearing phylacteries, but only for making them broad, by an ostentatious display, we have reason to conclude that the use of them was not only lawful, but a duty.

Indeed, we are so apt to forget the most important truths, that we need every rational means to impress them on our

Notes on the verses

Moses was pressing upon them the worship of Jehovah alone; and perhaps [very temple where so many had sinned to their own destruction.]— Ver. 48. Mount Sion.—Not Zion, but Hermon, on the east of Jordan, which had no less than five different names given it by different people, and in different parts,— Arnsworth. Ver. 49. On this side Jordan.—‘Along the east side of Jordan.” —Taylor’s Fragments, No. 322. Chap. V. Ver. 2. Made a covenant.—Hebrew, “cut a Covenant;” alluding to the sacrifices cut in pieces on these occasions. Ver. 9, Lord thy God.—(On the import of the word Jehovah, which we translate Lord, see Note on (Exodus 3:15). The word elohim, which is rendered God, in the singular, eloah, and in Arabic, allah, is derived from the Arabic, alaha, he worshipped, adored, was struck with astonishment, fear or terror.

and hence, he adored with sacred horror and veneration: it also signifies, he succoured, liberated, kept in safety, or defended. Hence we learn that elohim denotes the sole object of adoration; the perfections of whose nature must astonish all who contemplate them, and fill with horror all who rebel against him; that consequently he must be worshipped with reverence and religious fear; and that every sincere worshipper may expect help in his weaknesses, &c. freedom from the power, guilt, and consequences of sin and support and defence to the uttermost. Dr. A. Clarke.—Bagster. Ver. 21. His field.—This occurs not in (Exodus 20:17). Ver. 26. That hath heard, &c.—[It seems to have been a general opinion, that if God appeared to men, it was for the purpose of destroying them.

And indeed most of the extraordinary manifestations of God were in the way of it; but here it was widely different. God did appear in a sovereign and extraordinary manner, but it was for the instruction, direction, deliverance, and support of his people. 1. They heard this voice there with them in a distinct articulate manner. 2. They saw the fire, the symbol of his presence, the appearances of which demonstrated it to be supernatural. 3. Notwithstanding God appeared so terrible, yet no person was destroyed; for he came not to destroy, but to save.—Bagster. Ver.

29. Were such a heart.—[The language of the original is very emphatic; mee yittain wehayah levavom zeh lahem, literally, “Who will give that there may be such a heart in them?” They refuse to receive such a heart from me, who then can supply it?]—Death Ver.

30. That ye may live.—That is, live long. Compare ver. 16.