THE Holy Times and Seasons of the Israelites may be arranged under three heads.
I. Those that were connected with the Seventh Day of Rest, such as (a) the Weekly Sabbath, (b) the Month-Sabbath or New Moon, (c) the Year-Sabbath, (d) the Year of Jubilee.
II. The Day of Atonement.
III. The Great Historical Festivals; (a) The Passover, (b) The Feast of Pentecost or Weeks, (c) The Feast of Tabernacles.
I. Those connected with the seventh Day of Rest.
(a) The observance of the weekly Sabbath, or day of Rest, is not improbably thought to have been known to the Israelites before the giving of the Law (Ex. xvi. 22, 23), as, indeed, the words of the Fourth Commandment, “Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy,” seem to imply (Ex. xx. 8–11, comp. Gen. ii. 1–3). The observance of this day was appointed for a perpetual covenant, as a sign between God and the children of Israel for ever (Ex. xxxi. 16, 17). It was to be shared by the whole people with the stranger; and, to complete the picture of tranquillity, with the animals. Bodily labour was strictly prohibited: it was unlawful to kindle a fire for cooking food (Ex. xxxv. 3; Num. xv. 32), or to go out of the camp to gather manna (Ex. xvi. 22–30). Wilful desecration of the day was punished by stoning (Ex. xxxi. 14; Num. xv. 35).
In the Tabernacle-service the daily burnt-offering was doubled (Num. xxviii. 9), the shew-bread was renewed (Lev. xxiv. 8), and the priestly course for the week commenced their duties.
The Sabbath was not regarded as a fast, but a day for rest from worldly occupation and holy joy; it was ordained by God for man and the furtherance of his truest and highest interests (Mk. ii. 27, 28). “The thought of Him, who is raised above all change, and who after the completion of the works of Creation rejoiced that everything was very good; this coupled with the cessation from work was to lead man up to the contemplation of his own origin from God. As the bodily refreshment restored his physical energies, so should the consciousness of union with the Almighty and the Eternal restore the true life to the soul93.”
(b) The Month-Sabbath, or New Moon Festival, was ushered in by blowing with the silver trumpets, and by the sacrifice of eleven victims in addition to the daily offering (Num. x. 10; xxviii. 11, &c.). Business and trade were in later times suspended (Amos viii. 5), sacrificial feasts were held (1 Sam. xx. 5–24), and the people resorted to the prophets for religious instruction (2 Kings iv. 23).
The New Moon of the seventh month (Tisri, October), being the commencement of the civil year, was observed with still greater solemnity. It was one of the seven94 days of Holy Convocation. Not merely were the trumpets blown at the time of offering the sacrifices, but it was a day for the blowing of trumpets (Num. xxix. 1–6), whence its name the Feast of Trumpets. In addition to the daily sacrifices, and the eleven victims offered on the first day of each month, nine other victims were offered as burnt-offerings with a kid for a sin-offering95.
(c) During the Seventh or Sabbatical year the land was to lie fallow, and enjoy her Sabbaths (Ex. xxiii. 10, 11; Lev. xxv. 2–7; Deut. xv.). No tillage or cultivation of any sort was to be practised, and the spontaneous produce of the fields, instead of being reaped, was to be freely gleaned by the poor, the stranger, and even the cattle. By this rest the land, like man, was to do homage to its Lord and Creator, and the poorest were to share without stint in those spontaneous blessings which by His will it brings forth, and the Israelite, who every seventh day acknowledged God’s claim on his time, thus acknowledged also His claim upon his land. In Deut. xv. we find that the seventh year was also to be one of release for debtors. In spite of the threatenings in Lev. xxvi. the Sabbatical year, as appears from 2 Chron. xxxvi. 20, 21, was greatly neglected; after the return from the Captivity its observance revived (see 1 Macc. vi. 49)96.
(d) The Year of Jubilee. At the end of seven times seven years, that is, forty-nine entire years, the fiftieth was observed as the year of Jubilee, a word of uncertain meaning. It was proclaimed by the sound of trumpets on the tenth day of the seventh month, Tisri, the Day of Atonement. During this year the soil was to lie fallow, as in the Sabbatical year, but in addition to this, all land that had been alienated was to return to those to whom it had been allotted at the original distribution, and all bondmen of Hebrew blood were to be liberated (Lev. xxv. 8–16, 23–35; xxvii. 16–25). “As the weekly Sabbath and the Sabbatical year was intended to restore thorough rest to man and to the land, so the year of Jubilee was designed to raise the whole people, in respect to their rights and possessions, from the changeableness of outward circumstances to the unchangeableness of the Divine appointment; to prevent the inordinate accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few; to relieve those whom misfortune or fault had reduced to poverty; to restore that equality in outward circumstances which was instituted on the first settlement of the land by Joshua; and to vindicate the right of each Israelite to his part in the Covenant, which God had made with his fathers respecting the Land of Promise97.”
II. The Day of Atonement was observed on the tenth day of the seventh month, Tisri, as the great day of national humiliation, and for the expiation of the sins both of the priests and the people. This was the highest, the most perfect, the most comprehensive of all the acts of expiation, and not only took place but once in the entire year, but was performed by the High-priest alone, and that not in the Holy Place but the Holy of Holies.
Its celebration is prescribed in Lev. xvi.; xxiii. 26–32; Num. xxix. 7–11. The day was to be regarded as a high Sabbath, a day of holy Convocation, on which the Israelites, under pain of extirpation, were expected to afflict their souls with fasting and mourning. (Comp. Lev. xvi. 29, 31 with Acts xxvii. 9.) The ritual was as follows. The High-priest having bathed, arrayed himself not in his gorgeous robes, but in the white linen garments common to himself and the rest of the priesthood. As a sacrifice for himself and the priests he brought a bullock for a Sin-offering, and a ram for a Burnt-offering, which he had purchased at his own cost; as a sacrifice for the people two he-goats for a Sin-offering, and a ram for a Burnt-offering, which were purchased out of the public treasury. The two he-goats he then brought to the Door of the Tabernacle, i.e. to the Brazen Altar, and there having presented them before the Lord, cast two lots upon them, one inscribed for Jehovah, the other for Azazel98. This done, as the head of a priesthood itself compassed with infirmity (Heb. v. 2), he first proceeded to make atonement for his own order. Accordingly he slew the bullock, and taking a censer filled with live coals from the Altar of Burnt-offering and two handfuls of Incense, he passed with these through the Holy Place onwards behind the veil into the Holy of Holies, and there threw the incense upon the coals so that the fragrant cloud might envelope the Mercy-Seat. Then returning to the Brazen Altar and taking some of the blood of the bullock in a vessel he once more passed into the Holy of Holies, and sprinkled it seven times before the Mercy-Seat, the seat of the glory of Jehovah. Having thus made expiation for himself and his own order, he slew the goat upon which the lot for Jehovah had fallen as a Sin-offering for the people, and sprinkled its blood as he had done that of the bullock. Then on his return from the Holy of Holies he purified the Holy Place, now solitary and deserted, by sprinkling the blood of both victims seven times on the horns of the Golden Altar of Incense, and, as some think, on those of the Altar of Burnt-offering.
The purification of the Tabernacle completed, he came forth and laid both his hands upon the goat, on which the lot for Azazel had fallen, solemnly confessed over it the sins of the people, and then gave it to a man chosen for the purpose to be led away into the wilderness, into a place not inhabited, and there let loose. This done, he once more entered the Tabernacle, bathed, and having arrayed himself in his gorgeous robes, offered the two rams as a burnt-offering, one for himself, the other for the people, and at the same time placed upon the altar the fat of the two sin-offerings99. While these were consuming, the remains of the victims were conveyed outside the camp, nor could they who were deputed for this office, or the man who had led away the scape-goat, return into the camp till they had purified themselves and their clothes with water.
The distinction between this solemnity and others is very striking. It took place but once a year, five days before the joyous Feast of Tabernacles, which testified to the nation’s gratitude for the preservation of the seasonable fruits of the earth. In it the High-priest alone officiated. Clad not in his gorgeous robes, but in the simple, pure white robes common to him and the rest of the priesthood, he made expiation for himself, his order, and the people,—an atonement for the sins of the whole year. On this day, and this day only, he entered within the Veil, and sprinkled the blood before the Mercy-Seat seven times. On this day, and this day only, the idea of the remission of sin found its highest expression in the sacrifice of one goat as a sin-offering to Jehovah, and the solemn confession of the sins of the whole people over another, and its dismissal laden with its awful typical burden into a far distant and separated land, a land not inhabited, lying, as it were, under the curse of Jehovah. This solemnity contained the exact antidote to the sombre and often cruel rites of heathenism. The lots were cast over both the goats, both were presented to Jehovah at the Door of the Tabernacle, at His command the Scape-Goat carried away the burden of the people’s sins into an unknown desert land, He sanctified the people, and accepted the atonement for the High-priest, the priestly order, and the entire nation, and the purification of the Place where He had condescended to meet the Israelites. In the Epistle to the Hebrews (ix., x.) we have the key to the expressive imagery of this Great Day in the Jewish year. The fact that once in the year the High-priest could enter within the Veil, intimated that under a system of provisional and typical ordinances the way into the Holiest of all was not as yet made manifest. But when the true High-priest, even Jesus Christ, offered Himself unto death on the Altar of His Cross for the sins of the whole world, the Veil of the Temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom (Matt. xxvii. 51; Mark xv. 38). He died, He rose again, and, clad not in the resplendent robes of that Divine Nature He had before the world, but in the garb of our human nature, He ascended into the Heavenly Sanctuary, the antitype of the Jewish Sanctuary on earth, and there pleads, and will for ever plead, the merits of His blood before the throne of God.
THE great Historical Festivals, at which all males amongst the Israelites were required to appear before the Lord, were, as has been said already, (i) The Passover; (ii) The Feast of Weeks or Pentecost; (iii) The Feast of Tabernacles.
(i) The Passover. The original institution of this Festival has been already noticed. The directions for its yearly celebration are given in Ex. xxiii. 14–17; Lev. xxiii. 5–8; Num. xxviii. 16–25; Deut. xvi. 1–8.
As in Egypt, so now, on the 10th day of Nisan or Abib, corresponding to the close of March or the beginning of April, each Paschal company, which might not exceed twenty or be less than ten, was to select a lamb or kid, a male of the first year, and keep it till the 14th day. If pronounced by the priests to be free from blemish, it was to be slain between the evenings, in the Court of the Tabernacle, and its blood poured round the Altar of Burnt-offering. It was then, after being flayed, to be taken to the house where the Paschal Company intended to assemble, to be roasted with fire, whole and entire without the breaking of a single bone, and to be eaten with unleavened bread and bitter herbs.
The Festival lasted from the 14th to the 21st of Nisan, and during this period nothing but unleavened bread might be eaten, and all leaven was to be carefully removed from the house before the 14th. The daily sacrifices for the nation consisted of (i) a Burnt-Offering of two bullocks, one ram, seven yearling lambs, accompanied by the usual meat-offering, and (ii) one goat for a Sin-Offering. Thank-offerings, called by the Jews Chagigah, might also be offered by individuals during the Festival, especially on the 15th, the first day of Holy Convocation. (Comp. Lev. vii. 29–34; 2 Ch. xxx. 22–44; xxxv. 7.)
On the 16th the first ripe sheaf of barley was to be brought into the sanctuary, and there waved by the priest before the Lord, and at the same time a yearling lamb was offered with a meat- and drink-offering (see Lev. xxiii. 9–14). Till this sheaf had thus been waved, and this offering presented, no produce of the now ripening harvest, whether bread or parched corn, or green ears, might be eaten (Josh. v. 11, 12)100.
(ii) At the end of seven complete weeks from the 16th of Nisan, the second day of unleavened bread, commenced the Feast of Weeks (Ex. xxxiv. 22; Deut. xvi. 10), or of Harvest (Ex. xxiii. 16), or of First-fruits (Numb. xxviii. 26), or of Pentecost (Acts ii. 1), from the Greek word for the fiftieth day.
The passages bearing on it will be found in Ex. xxiii. 16; Lev. xxiii. 15–22; Num. xxviii. 26–31; Deut. xvi. 9–12.
The Festival lasted but one day, which was kept with a holy Convocation. Its distinguishing feature was the offering of two leavened loaves, made from the new corn of the now completed harvest, which together with two lambs as a thank-offering were waved before the Lord. The especial sacrifices in addition to the daily offering were one young bullock, two rams, and seven yearling lambs as a Burnt-offering with the usual meat- and drink-offering, and a goat for a Sin-offering; but thank-offerings might, as at the Passover, be made at pleasure by individuals.
The character of the Festival was pre-eminently an expression of gratitude for the harvest, which commenced with the offering of the first sheaf of ripe barley at the Passover, and ended with that of the two loaves now presented and made of the newly-ripened wheat. In its festive joy the man-servant and maid-servant, the stranger, the fatherless and the widow were to share with the freeborn Israelite, who was to be reminded of the bondage in Egypt, and his obligation to keep the Law101 (Deut. xvi. 12).
(iii) The Feast of Tabernacles or of Ingathering (Ex. xxxiv. 22) was so called as being (i) a feast of thanksgiving for the completion of the ingathering of fruits and of the vintage, and (ii) as commemorating the dwelling of the Israelites in tents during their wanderings in the wilderness (Lev. xxiii. 43).
The chief passages relating to it are Ex. xxiii. 16; Lev. xxiii. 34–43; Num. xxix. 13–39; Deut. xvi. 13–15; and compare with these Neh. viii.
It was celebrated in the autumn on the 15th of the seventh month Tisri, and lasted seven days, of which the first and last were days of Holy Convocation. It was the most joyous of all the Festivals. During it the Israelites were commanded to live in tents or booths of green boughs of the olive, palm, pine, myrtle, and other trees with thick foliage (Neh. viii. 15, 16). The burnt-offerings were more numerous at this Feast than any other, including, besides the sacrifice on each day of 2 rams, 14 lambs, and a kid for a sin-offering, that of 70 bullocks, 13 on the first day, 12 on the second, and so on to the seventh, when 7 bullocks only were offered. If the Festival fell in a Sabbatical year, portions of the Law, chiefly Deuteronomy, were read each day in public (Deut. xxxi. 10–12; Neh. viii. 18). The most remarkable celebrations of this Feast were (i) at the dedication of Solomon’s Temple (1 Kings viii. 2, 65); (ii) after the Captivity (Ezra iii. 4; Neh. viii. 17)102.
Later festivals were (i) the Feast of Purim, or Lots, instituted by Mordecai to commemorate the defeat of Haman’s machinations against the Jews (Esth. iii. 7–15; ix. 24–26). It began on the 14th day of the 12th month Adar, and lasted two days. (ii) The Feast of Dedication, to commemorate the cleansing of the Temple after its defilement by Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan. xi. 31). Established by Judas Maccabæus, it was kept on the 25th of the winter month Chisleu, December (Jn. x. 22), and lasted eight days, being distinguished by the offering of many sacrifices, a general illumination (hence its name the Feast of Lights), and other rejoicings.
In Scripture, dates are often fixed by a reference to the seasons or productions (Num. xiii. 20; 2 Sam. xxi. 9). The following Table, therefore, is here given, in which the civil and sacred months, their approximate English equivalents, the various annual feasts, and the chief features of the seasons are combined. It is assumed that Abib or Nisan answers to April. (See Article Month in Smith’s Bib. Dict. and Angus’s Bible Handbook, p. 270.)
| Year | Month |
English Month (nearly) |
Festivals |
Seasons and Productions | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sacred i. |
Civil 7 |
Abib or
Nisan (green ears) Days 30 Exod. xii. 2 |
April | 14. The Passover | Fall of the latter or spring rain. (Deut. xi. 14.) Floods (Josh. iii. 14). | |
| HARVEST | ||||||
| 16. First-fruits of barley-harvest presented | Barley ripe at Jericho. | |||||
| Wheat partly in the ear. | ||||||
| ii. | 8 |
Zif (blossom) Days 29 1 Kings vi. 1 |
May | 14. Second Passover for those who could not keep the first. Num. ix. 10, 11 | Barley harvest general (Ruth i. 22). | |
| Wheat ripens. | ||||||
| iii. | 9 |
Sivan Days 30 Esth. viii. 9. |
June | 6. Pentecost or Feast of Weeks | Wheat harvest. Summer begins. | |
| No rain from April to Sept. (1 Sam. xii. 17). | ||||||
| iv. | 10 |
Thammuz Days 29 Zec. viii. 19 |
July | HOT SEASON. | ||
| Heat increases. | ||||||
| v. | 11 |
Ab Days 30 Esth. vii. 9 |
Aug. | The streams dry up. | ||
| Heat intense. | ||||||
| Vintage (Lev. xxvi. 5). | ||||||
| vi. | 12 |
Elul Days 29 Neh. vi. 15 |
Sept. | Heat still intense (2 Kin. iv. 18–20). | ||
| Grape harvest general (Num. xiii. 23). | ||||||
| vii. | 1 |
Tisri or
Ethanim Days 30 1 Kin. viii. 2 2 Chr. v. 3 |
Oct. | 1. Feast of Trumpets | SEED TIME | |
| 10. Day of Atonement | Former or early rains begin (Joel ii. 23). | |||||
|
15. Feast of Tabernacles First-fruits of wine and oil (Lev. xxiii. 39) |
Ploughing and sowing begin. | |||||
| viii. | 2 |
Bul (rain) Days 29 1 Kin. vi. 38 |
Nov. | Rain continues. | ||
| Wheat and barley sown. Vintage in N. Palestine. | ||||||
| ix. | 3 |
Chisleu Days 30 Neh. i. 1 |
Dec. |
25. Feast of Dedication (1 Macc. iv. 52–59) |
WINTER | |
| Winter begins. Snow on the mountains. | ||||||
| x. | 4 |
Thebeth Days 29 Est. ii. 16 |
Jan. | Coldest month. Hail, snow (Josh. x. 11). | ||
| xi. | 5 |
Shebat Days 30 Zech. i. 7 |
Feb. | Weather gradually becomes warmer. | ||
| xii. | 6 |
Adar Days 29 Esth. iii. 7 Esth. ix. 27 |
March | COLD SEASON | ||
| 14, 15. Feast of Purim | Thunder and hail frequent. | |||||
| Almond-tree blossoms. | ||||||
Note.
Laws of Purity.Not altogether unconnected with these regulations respecting Holy Times and Seasons were other enactments of the Mosaic code, having for their object the enforcement of ideas of purity and holiness. Ye shall be holy unto Me, was the Divine command; for I the Lord thy God am holy, and have severed you from other people that ye should be Mine (Lev. xix. 2; xx. 7). Many of these regulations were, doubtless, laws of health, tending to regulate diet, enforce cleanliness, and guard against many prevalent disorders. But over and above this, they had a higher object, and formed part of the moral discipline of the elect nation.
They regard (i) things unclean to eat; (ii) things unclean to touch; (iii) unclean matters or conditions103.
i. Things unclean to eat. The prohibitions respecting food follow directly the laws concerning sacrifice. Portions of many sacrifices, as we have seen, might be eaten. From this eating the Law passes on to food generally, the nature of which has “commonly no little influence on the refinement and manners of a people.” Concerning vegetable eating, no rules are laid down. In respect to animal food, the laws are clear and precise. (i) Of quadrupeds, the clean were such as both parted the hoof and chewed the cud, all others were unclean. All animals, therefore, used in sacrifice might be eaten, as also the numerous species of deer and gazelles (Deut. xiv. 5), but none of the carnivora, or such animals as the camel, coney, hare, or pig. (ii) Of birds also, all that were offered in sacrifice might be eaten, such as doves, pigeons, and also quails, but all birds of prey, and nearly all the water-fowl, were unclean. (iii) Of Fish, those only were clean that had both fins and scales. (iv) All Reptiles and Insects were unclean, except locusts, and such as had four legs for walking and two for springing (Lev. xi. 21, 22; comp. Matt. iii. 4). But the Israelite was also strictly forbidden to eat anything that died of itself (Ex. xxii. 31), or was torn by beasts, emphatically the blood of any animal (Gen. ix. 4; Lev. iii. 17; xvii. 10, 12; Comp. 1 Sam. xiv. 32, 33).
(ii) Things unclean to touch. An Israelite incurred defilement who touched or handled (i) the dead body of any animal, whether clean or unclean (Lev. xi. 24–28), (ii) the body, bones, or grave of a dead man (Num. xix. 11, 13, 16). The latter was deemed a defilement calling for special purification. The person was unclean seven days. For his cleansing a young red heifer was slain outside the camp or town, in the presence of one of the priests. Some of the blood the priest was then to sprinkle seven times in the direction of the Sanctuary, to burn the entire carcase, and cast into the fire cedar-wood, scarlet wool, and hyssop. The ashes were then collected, and laid up in a clean place, and a portion mixed with water was to be sprinkled on whatever had been defiled, man, or place, or vessel. This ceremony was to be repeated twice, on the third and on the seventh day. On the latter day the person defiled washed his clothes, bathed, and was clean at even. But still stricter regulations were enforced when a priest or a Nazarite had become defiled (Num. xix. 1–22).
(iii) Unclean matters or conditions. Many are enumerated, but we need speak of only one, the disease of Leprosy. This fearful malady, indigenous in Egypt and Asia Minor, disfiguring the whole person, and making it horrible to the beholder, was called by the Jews the Stroke, and even by the Greeks the first-born son of Death104. It made itself apparent by a white swelling on the skin, especially on the face, turning the skin white (Ex. iv. 6), and the hair white or yellow (Lev. xiii. 3, 10, 30), and producing other disfigurements. The person affected with it was instantly to repair to the priests (Lev. xiii. 2, 9), whose duty it was to make a minute examination, and pronounce whether it was a case of “true leprosy.” If so, the sufferer was pronounced utterly unclean, and forthwith assumed the awful badges of his sad condition. He rent his clothes, bared his head, put a covering on his upper lip (Lev. xiii. 45), as though he was mourning for the dead (Ezek. xxiv. 17, 22), and wherever he went cried out, Unclean! unclean! An exile from his home, his family, his friends (Num. v. 2), he was bound to reside without the camp or city in a separate house by himself, or in the society of others similarly afflicted (Lev. xiii. 46; 2 Kings xv. 5; 2 Kings vii. 3; Lk. xvii. 12). No Israelite ever pretended to effect a cure of this awful malady. The priest could pronounce upon the symptoms, shut out the sufferer from the congregation, but he had no power to heal. If, however, the symptoms abated, and there were any signs of a cure, the sufferer again went to the priest, who carefully ascertained whether this was the case. If so, a peculiar ceremony celebrated the healing. It consisted of two stages, (i) Two birds were taken, one killed by the priest over running water, the other dipped, together with cedar-wood, scarlet wool, and hyssop, in its blood, and suffered to fly away into the open air. The priest then sprinkled the leper with the blood seven times, and pronounced him clean. (ii) But before he could return to the society of his fellowmen, he must wash his clothes, shave off all his hair, bathe, and then present himself at the Sanctuary with a he-lamb as a Trespass-offering, an ewe lamb as a Sin-offering, and a he-lamb as a Burnt-offering with its usual meat-offering. In cases of poverty two doves or pigeons might be presented in place of the two latter offerings, but the he-lamb as a Trespass-offering was indispensable. This was first slain, and its blood smeared by the priest on the leper’s right ear, the thumb of his right hand, and the great toe of his right foot. Consecrated oil was then similarly applied, and poured on his head, and the other sacrifices offered, at the conclusion of which atonement was deemed to have been made, and the Leper was clean (Lev. xiv. 49–53).
The regulations respecting this fearful malady were no mere sanitary regulations, for it was not catching from one person to another (comp. 2 Kings v. 1; viii. 4), and the ordinances respecting it did not apply to the stranger and the sojourner. “From the whole host of maladies and diseases which had broken in upon man’s body, God selected this, the sickness of sicknesses, that He might thereby testify against that out of which it and all other sicknesses grew, against Sin, as not from Him, and as grievous in His sight105.” It was the outward and visible sign of the innermost spiritual corruption, a meet emblem in its small beginnings, its gradual spread, its internal disfigurement, its dissolution little by little of the whole body, of that which corrupts, degrades, and defiles man’s inner nature, and renders him unmeet to enter the Presence of a Pure and Holy God.
(iv) Among the Vows known before the time of Moses (and which, as a general rule, were discouraged by him, comp. Deut. xxiii. 21–23) was that of the Nazarite. The person making this vow was bound, usually for a certain term, to abstain from wine or strong drink, from grapes or anything made from the vine, from cutting the hair of his head, or approaching a corpse, even that of his nearest relative (Num. vi. 2–7). If he accidentally touched a corpse, he was obliged on the seventh day to cut off his hair, and begin his vow afresh on the next day, after presenting to the priest two turtle-doves, or two young pigeons, one for a sin, and the other for a burnt-offering, and a lamb as a trespass-offering. At the expiration of his vow, he brought to the Tabernacle a burnt-, sin-, and thank-offering (Lev. vii. 12, 13) with a meat- and drink-offering (Num. vi. 15), had the left shoulder of the thank-offering waved upon his hands by the priest (Num. vi. 19, 20), and cutting off his hair burnt it in the fire on the altar. Of Nazarites for life three are mentioned in Scripture, Samson (the only one actually called a Nazarite, Judg. xiii. 5), Samuel (1 Sam. i. 11), John the Baptist (Lk. i. 15).
HITHERTO we have been concerned with those portions of the Mosaic Law, which instructed the Israelite in his duty towards God, and the mode in which He was to be worshipped. We will now turn to the chief of those which instructed him in his duty as (i) a member of a family, and (ii) of a nation.
(i) The Family Relations include (1) The mutual duties of Parents and Children, (2) of Husband and Wife, (3) of Master and Servant.
(1) The duties of Parents and Children. Reverence for parents is enjoined in the Decalogue as the first duty next after those appertaining to God Himself. Honour thy father and mother is the first and the only commandment to which a promise of long life and continuance in the Promised Land is definitely attached (Ex. xx. 12; Eph. vi. 2), and to smite or revile father or mother is made a capital offence (Ex. xxi. 15, 17; Lev. xix. 3; xx. 9). In the Patriarchal times, as we have already seen106, the authority of the father over his children was very great. His blessing conferred special benefits, his curse special injury (Gen. ix. 25, 27; xxvii. 27–40; xlviii. 15, 20; xlix.). His authority was of great moment, not only in the marriage of sons (Gen. xxiv. 3), but of daughters, though in the latter case the consent of the brothers, or at least of the elder brother, was deemed important (Gen. xxiv. 50, 51; xxxiv. 11). But the Mosaic Law did not invest the father with the same boundless power as the Greek or Roman Law107. He could not inflict death irresponsibly. The incorrigible son, whom he could not restrain from flagrant crimes, he might bring before the elders of the city, who, having obtained the concurrence of both parents, might sentence him to be stoned to death. But in the execution of the judgment the whole congregation were required to take part, in order to promote a more general abhorrence of the sin (Deut. xxi. 18–21). The father could not disinherit his sons; to the firstborn he must give two portions, and equal shares to the rest; but in case of extreme indigence he might sell his children, especially his daughters, into servitude, or surrender them to creditors as a pledge (Ex. xxi. 7).
(2) The Relations of Husband and Wife. The institution of marriage was jealously guarded by the Mosaic Law. Adultery ranked next to murder, and the punishment for both parties was death by stoning (Lev. xviii. 20; xx. 10; Deut. xxii. 22). In deference to the universal custom of Oriental nations, and the example of the Patriarchs, polygamy was allowed, though by no means encouraged, and though frequently practised by the kings of Israel, was rare in private life (1 Sam. i. 2). The right of divorce was conceded (Deut. xxiv. 1–4) on account of the hardness of the hearts of the people (Matt. xix. 8), but a woman once divorced and marrying again might not return to her first husband, either on the death of, or when put away by, the second. The Mosaic Law sanctioned a custom of the Patriarchal age (Gen. xxxviii. 8), which made it necessary that if a man died childless, his wife should be taken in marriage by his surviving brother, and it was further ordained that the firstborn son by such a marriage should succeed in the name of his brother, that it be not put out in Israel (Deut. xxv. 5, &c.). The rigour, however, of the old custom was relaxed. If the brother had children of his own alive, he was exempt; and if he declared in open court his unwillingness to enter into the marriage, the duty devolved on the next relation of the deceased husband. (See Ruth iv. 5–11.)
(3) The Relation of Master and Servant. Slavery existed amongst the Israelites as amongst all other Eastern nations. Slaves could be acquired in four ways. (1) They might be taken in war (Num. xxxi. 11, 35; Deut. xx. 14); (2) they might be purchased of parents or former owners or merchants in time of peace (Gen. xvii. 23; Lev. xxv. 44, 45); (3) they might have sold themselves in satisfaction for a debt (Lev. xxv. 39–43; 2 Kings iv. 1); (4) they might be the children of slaves born in their master’s house. But while slavery was thus recognised as an institution, it was the aim of the Mosaic Law to mitigate its evils as much as possible. Thus, not only does it open with a number of precepts relating to slaves (Ex. xxi. 2–6), but it ever pronounced them to be equal before God as regarded their spiritual relation, and freely admitted them to all religious privileges, circumcision (Gen. xvii. 10–14; Ex. xii. 44), the rest of the Sabbath (Ex. xx. 10), the festivals (Ex. xii. 44), and gave them an interest in all the sacrifices offered by the family (Deut. xvi. 11, 14).
In regard, again, to civil rights, the Hebrew slave was never looked upon as a mere thing or chattel. A master could not chastise a slave to death without being punished (Ex. xxi. 20, 21), and if he inflicted bodily mutilation, the slave, whether male or female, might claim to be free (Ex. xxi. 26, 27). In the seventh year of his service the Hebrew slave might take up his freedom, leaving, however, his wife given him by his master during service and her children (Ex. xxi. 3, 4); if he declined to avail himself of this privilege, his master might take him before the elders, bore his ear with an awl to the door, and then he was his servant for ever, i.e. till the year of Jubilee (Ex. xxi. 5, 6; Deut. xv. 16, 17). Moreover, as the Israelites when delivered from Egyptian bondage had not gone forth empty, so the Hebrew bondslave at his release (which took effect in the Jubilee year, even though he had not served his full time) was to be furnished liberally out of the flock, the floor, and the winepress (Deut. xv. 13, 14). Besides bondslaves we also find hired servants among the Hebrews. They were to be treated kindly, and their wages duly paid (Lev. xix. 13; Deut. xxiv. 14, 15). Strangers also within the gates, whether runaway slaves or exiles from their own land, who would naturally be in extreme want, were to be treated with great kindness, for the Israelite himself was a stranger in the land of Egypt (Ex. xxii. 21; xxiii. 9). Together with the poor generally, whether Hebrews or heathens, they were to have the free enjoyment of the gleaning of the field and the garden (Lev. xix. 9, 10; xxiii. 22; Deut. xxiv. 19–21), of the spontaneous produce of the Sabbatical year (Lev. xxv. 5, 6), of the sacrificial and tithe-feasts (Deut. xiv. 28, 29), and their share at joyous family festivals, such as marriages, circumcision, the weaning of children.
(ii) The Laws affecting the Israelite in his civil capacity may be arranged in three groups, according as they regarded the sanctity of (1) Life, (2) Character, and (3) Property.
(1) Life. The Laws protecting the life and person include those against (a) premeditated murder, and (b) unintentional manslaughter.
(a) Premeditated murder. The wilful shedder of man’s blood met with no compassion from the Mosaic Code. The original law at Sinai (Ex. xxi. 12–14) and the subsequent repetition of it (Deut. xix. 11–13) made death the inevitable penalty of murder, even as it had been in the days of Noah (Gen. ix. 6). The murderer was regarded as accursed; for him the horns of the altar were to be no refuge; he was to be dragged from them by force to suffer his doom, nor could rank or wealth exempt him from it, for it was expressly provided that on no pretext whatever should any ransom be taken (Num. xxxv. 31, 32). Nor was his person only regarded as accursed, but so long as he remained undiscovered, even the land was looked upon as polluted. If no efforts could detect the murderer, the elders of the nearest town were to take a heifer, and bring it down to a rough valley, neither eared nor sown, and there strike off its head. They were then to wash their hands over it, and in the presence of the Levites pronounce the following words; Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it. Be merciful, O Lord, unto Thy people, whom Thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood to Thy people of Israel’s charge. Thus atonement was to be made (Deut. xxi. 1–9).
(b) Unintentional homicide. Prior to the Mosaic age, the duty of avenging blood devolved upon the next of kin, who was called the Goel or Avenger, and together with his office inherited the property of the deceased. Sometimes a whole family took upon them this duty (2 Sam. xiv. 7). Amongst the other nations, as the Arab tribes of the present day, “any bloodshed whatever, whether wilful or accidental, laid the homicide open to the duteous revenge of the relatives and family of the slain person, who again in their turn were then similarly watched and hunted by the opposite party, until a family war of extermination had legally settled itself from generation to generation, without the least prospect of a peaceful termination.” It was the aim of the Mosaic Law, without abolishing this long established custom, to mitigate its evils as far as possible. Accordingly it was directed that, on the arrival of the people in the Promised Land, six Cities of Refuge should be set apart, to which the homicide might fly, if not overtaken by the Avenger. Of these, three were to be on either side of the Jordan, almost equally remote from each other, and the roads leading to them were to be kept in a state of perfect repair (Ex. xxi. 13; Num. xxxv. 11; Deut. xix. 3). They were to be chosen out of the priestly and Levitical cities, as likely to be inhabited by the most intelligent portion of the community. On reaching one of them, the case of the homicide was to be examined by the elders; if they pronounced him guilty he was to be delivered up to the Avenger; if innocent, an abode was to be provided him in the city, where he was to remain till the death of the high-priest, but if found at any time by the Avenger beyond the limit of protection, 2000 cubits, he was liable to be put to death. On the demise of the high-priest he might return to the city of his possession (Num. xxxv. 25, 28)108.
(2) The sacredness of a man’s character was enforced by the commandment in the Decalogue forbidding false witness, and by laws prohibiting calumny, hatred, partiality in judgment for rich or poor (Ex. xxiii. 1–3; Lev. xix. 16–18). No exact penalty was enforced, but it was enjoined that in case of false witness the parties should be brought before the priests and judges, and if after diligent inquisition the charge was established, then should be done unto the slanderer as he had thought to have done unto his brother, that so the evil might be put away (Deut. xix. 19–21).
(3) Property was carefully guarded in the Mosaic Law, which forbade not only stealing, the act, but coveting, the intention.
(a) Direct theft was punished by restitution. If the stolen goods were found in the hands of the thief, he was to restore twofold; if before his detection he had applied them to his own use, he was to restore five oxen for an ox, four sheep for a sheep (Comp. 2 Sam. xii. 6); but a still heavier fine was exacted if he had not only sold, but killed and injured. If unable to pay the fine, he was to be sold into slavery to a Hebrew master, and serve him till he could pay (Ex. xxii. 1–4). A night-thief might be resisted even to death (Ex. xxii. 2). Man-stealing or kidnapping was a capital offence (Ex. xxi. 16). The crime of removing a neighbour’s landmark was severely reprobated (Deut. xix. 14; xxvii. 17).
(b) Indirect injury through carelessness or other causes. This included injury done to property entrusted to another for safe keeping. If it was stolen and the thief detected, he was to repay double; if he could not be found, the trustee, on being declared guilty of negligence by the judges, was to restore twofold. Compensation was also exacted, where property was injured through a pit being left open, through cattle straying amongst other cattle or trespassing on another’s land, or through fire spreading to standing corn (Ex. xxi. 33–36; xxii. 5, 6). Straying or suffering beasts, even if the property of an enemy, were to be brought back or relieved (Ex. xxiii. 4, 5).
Land. All land was to be regarded as belonging to God, and the holders as His tenants. At the conquest of Palestine each tribe was to have its allotment, and each family its portion, and these were to remain for ever inalienable (Num. xxvii. 1–11; xxxvi.; comp. 1 Kings xxi. 3; 2 Kings ix. 25, 26). All sold land, therefore, was to return to its original owners at the Jubilee, but might be redeemed by the owner or his representative at any period before then (Lev. xxv. 13–16, 23–28).
Laws of debt. An Israelite who had fallen into debt from any cause, might (i) sell himself as a slave to one of his own nation, with the right of resuming his freedom after six years, and at the Jubilee recovering his inheritance, (ii) claim a timely loan (Deut. xv. 1–11), but no usury might be taken from an Israelite (Ex. xxii. 25–27; Deut. xxiii. 19, 20). Thus pledges would become frequent, but they might not be cruelly or ruinously exacted. The handmill, a necessity in every family, might not be pledged (Deut. xxiv. 6); the cloak must be restored before nightfall when it became essential (Ex. xxii. 26, 27; Deut. xxiv. 12, 13); the lender was not to go into the house of his debtor to claim his pledge, or seize any article he chose; he was to stand abroad, and the pledge was to be brought out to him (Deut. xxiv. 10, 11).