Leviticus 24

Chap. XXIV. Ver. 1—23. The candlestick and shew-bread— The blasphemer stoned.—The directions respecting the lamp and the cakes of the shew-bread were given to Moses, (Exodus 27:20-21).; xxv. 30, 31.: and their spiritual meaning pointed out in our exposition of the chapter last quoted, namely, the perpetual light, and the living bread, with which God’s temple is now furnished. The twelve loaves, or cakes, had doubtless a reference to the twelve tribes of Israel; and the Jews say that they were made square, each cake containing a peck of fine flour, and that golden reeds were placed between each to admit the air, that they might not moulder. But why are they called shew-bread? The Hebrew name is “Bread of the faces,”

or, of the (divine) presence,” because set before the presence of God in the holy place: in the Greek, “the bread of proposition;” (Mark it. 26.; (Hebrews 9:2).) and in both Testaments rendered by our translators shew-bread, as appearing before God in the holy place.; But the principal topic of this chapter relates to the case of a notorious blasphemer, the son of an Egyptian by an Israelitish woman, who ‘‘blasphemed the name’’—even that of Jehovah and was therefore ordered by the divine oracle to be stoned without the camp. ‘No gba (says Scott) this man was one of the mixed multitude who accompanied Israel out of Egypt; ((Exodus 12:37-38).) but it is uncertain whether he had ever professed the religion of Israel.

It is supposed that, by reason of the dispute betwixt him and an Israelite, he was brought before the magistrates; and the cause being, according to the law of God, decided against him, he blasphemed, or cursed Him, *before whose tremendous name all heaven adores, and all hell trembles.’ By the express command of God himself, all who heard the blasphemy were required to lay their hands on the head of the blasphemer, as solemnly persevering in their testimony, and as devoting him to death, that the guilt of such a crime might not rest on Israel; and avowing that his blood was upon his own head, and that they were clear.” Some consider the phrase, ‘‘curseth his God,” as applying to idols, equally as to the true God; but it was sinful to name an idol deity, and we believe there is no instance of a law made in protection of idolatry.

It is clear that the culprit, in this case, was punished, not for blaspheming Molech, or any of the gods of Egypt, but the name of the God of Israel; and such is the law now put on record. This punishment has often been objected to by the profane, as severe and unreasonable, on the ground that man cannot injure his Maker; but is he, therefore with impunity to “curse him to his face?” The same plea might in many cases be urged with equal truth against treason and sedition; but are these no crimes, unless accompanied with an assault upon the person of the prince? Would any well-regulated chief magistrate suffer to be reviled or cursed, merely because the culprit has not the power to inflict personal injury?

Certainly not: how, then, shall the Supreme Governor of the world suffer his name to be treated with contempt and execration? O ye angels! could ye endure the sight? Besides, the very thought supposes an enmity of heart in the blasphemer, who would assassinate his Creator if he had the power. The case has been tried; once Deity became incarnate, and no sooner did he submit himself to the power of men, than they nailed him to the accursed tree!; Guar. X XV.» Ver. 1—22. The sabbatic year, and year of jubilee.—Of so great importance was the devout rest of the sabbath day considered, that other laws were made in harmony with it, as the sabbatic year, and the year of jubilee. Not only was the seventh day to be a day of rest, but the seventh year was to be a year of rest; and at the end of seven sabbatic years was to be the grand period of the jubilee.

As the sabbath was made for man, so was the sabbatic year, that the land should rest by the ground lying fallow; in order to which, an extraordinary fruitful season was ever to precede the year of rest: thus the whole Jewish system was founded upon miracles, and continually appealed to such displays of the divine power in its support. So the learned Dr. Graves remarks, that authority of Moses and his laws. ‘‘How incredible is it, that any legislator would have ventured to propose such a law as this, or any people have submitted to receive it, except in consequence of the fullest conviction, on both sides, that a divine authority had dictated this law, and that a peculiar providence would constantly facilitate its execution!

Nothing could have produced this conviction but the experience, or the belief, of some such miraculous interposition as the history of the Pentateuch details. The very existence of this law is a standing monument, that when it was given, the Mosaic miracles were fully believed. Now the law was coeval with the witnesses of the miracles themselves.” Some persons have supposed, that the 49th year (as being the seventh sabbatic year) was the year of jubilee; but the contrary is distinctly stated, (ver. 10.) from which it is evident, that both the jubilee and the year preceding were without any harvests, and, therefore, made a Diacalhs interference on the government suffer the a of Providence the more necessary.

It is not, however, to be inferred that either the year of jubilee, or the sabbatic year preceding, was absolutely unproductive; and many things, especially the grapes, would grow spontaneously, and the cattle, for the support of the servant, and the stranger who were to feast uncontrolled, while the Israelites themselves were to subsist on the abundance provided in the preceding years. The moral design of these laws was certainly to inculcate, in a certain sense, an equality of rights, and guard against oppression. “Ye shall not oppress one another;… for I am the Lord your God.” There is, however, a higher and more spiritual sense intimated in the prophetic writings, in reference to the year of jubilee, and we know to whom the prediction is applied (said the Messiah).

‘The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings ah,) because he hath sent me to bind up the broken hearted, to the meek; to the captives, and the opening of the prison to proclaim liberty to them that are bound: to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, the day of vengeance of our God; to give unto them that mourn; to comfort all that mourn in Zion; to appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness.” In harmony with this reference, it is to be remarked that the jubilee was to be which alone the liberty and salvation of the gospel is set forth, intimating the channel through which alone the liberty and salvation of the gospel is set forth. Parkhurst (Heb. (Leviticus 10)p. 213.) farther considers it as “a most lively and animating prefiguration of that grand consummation delivered of time, which is to be introduced in like manner by the trump of God; when the children and heirs of God shall be delivered from all their forfeitures, and restored to the eternal inheritance allotted to them by their Father,

Notes on the verses

Chap. XXIV. Ver. 3. Shall Aaron order it.— Samaritan, insert after Aaron, “‘and his sons,” inserts into his text.; _ Ver. 5, Twelve cakes.—By the quantity of flour used. i yw size of peck loaves. According to Maimonides, they were baked in square moulds ten handbreaths long, and five broad, so that they extended on each side two handbreadths beyond the table. The Jews add, that they were separated by golden reeds, or half rods, which rested on a sort of fork; but of this we see no occasion. Being removed weekly, they became the last cakes for one week following, which may account for their being large. The frankincense was placed, yes, in little golden cups, generous “4 frankincense on the loaves, in little golden er.

Ul. Blasphemed the name.—{Houbigant and others think the name which this man blasphemed was the name of his god; a crime Seer we learn from Porphyry, was common among the Egyptians, when they were disappointed in the object of their prayers. But that hashshem, the name, denotes Jehovah, singly its being used in the latter part of verse 16 as equivalent to ‘‘the name of Jehovah,” in the former part. The Jews also frequently use hashshem, for Jehovah; and that it was an ancient custom thus to allude to the Deity without mentioning his name appears from inscriptions among the Palmyrenians, on whose marbles we find, “to the blessed same be fear for ever;’—’‘To the blessed name for ever good and merciful, be fear; ‘“*To the blessed name for ever be fear,”

&c. The custom among the Jews of not writing the name of Jehovah would then appear to have originated from some Several MSS. Hebrew and Sasuch ancient usage. ]|}—Bagster. i which Dr. Boothroyd therefore Ver. 14. Let all the congregation stone him.—Not in a riotous or tumultuous manner, as the Jews often did in later times; but first the witnesses on whose evidence he had been convicted, and afterwards the rest of the congregation. See the instances of Achan, (Joshua 7:21-26).; and Naboth, (1 Kings 21:13), Ver. 15. Curseth his God.—{As the Hebrew word nakav not only signifies to curse or blaspheme, but also to arraign or distinguish by name, ((Numbers 1:17). (Leviticus 12:31). (Isaiah 62:2).) hence the Jews at a very early period, understood this law as prohibiting them from uttering the name, JEHOVAH on any other than sacred occasions.

The Septuagint, which was made at least 250 years before Christ, renders it, ‘‘Whosoever nameth the name of the Lord, let him die;” from which we see that the Jews at this time were accustomed to pronounce adonay, or Lord, instead of Jehovah; for in place of it the LXX. always put Kyrios. Philo, who lived in the time of Christ, explains the passage, connecting it with the preceding verse, in the following terms: Strange gods are not to be blasphemed, lest men should be accustomed to think meanly of the Deity. But if any one, (I do not say blaspheme, for that is not here the question, but) even so much as utter unseasonably the name of the Lord of men and gods, he shall die.” ‘This explanation, whether it please king or not, cannot therefore be looked upon as a piece of superstition originating with the Jews, who lived after the destruction of Jerusalem.

]— Bagster. Ver. 19. So shall it be done unto him.—This is the law called by the Romans Lex talionis, or the law of retaliation, very common among all uncivilized nations. See (Exodus 21:23-25). and compare (Matthew 5:38-39).: