Shemot (Exodus)
|
Meaning
|
Day Three
|
Haftara
|
B'rit Hadashah
|
1 Our Father, we receive Your Words and hide Your commandments with us; 2 we incline our ear unto wisdom, and apply our hearts to understanding; 3 We cry after knowledge and lift up our voices for understanding; 4 we seek it as silver; and search for it as for hidden treasures; 5 We declare that we shall understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God. Declaration of Proverbs 2:1-5
Exodus 22:10-31 (NASB)1
10 "If a man gives his neighbor a donkey, an ox, a sheep, or any animal to keep for him, and it dies or is hurt or is driven away while no one is looking, 11 an oath before the LORD shall be made by the two of them that he has not laid hands on his neighbor's property; and its owner shall accept it, and he shall not make restitution. 12 "But if it is actually stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its owner. 13 "If it is all torn to pieces, let him bring it as evidence; he shall not make restitution for what has been torn to pieces. 14 "If a man borrows anything from his neighbor, and it is injured or dies while its owner is not with it, he shall make full restitution. 15 "If its owner is with it, he shall not make restitution; if it is hired, it came for its hire. 16 "If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and lies with her, he must pay a dowry for her to be his wife. 17 "If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the dowry for virgins. 18 "You shall not allow a sorceress to live. 19 "Whoever lies with an animal shall surely be put to death. 20 "He who sacrifices to any god, other than to the LORD alone, shall be utterly destroyed. 21 "You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. 22 "You shall not afflict any widow or orphan. 23 "If you afflict him at all, and if he does cry out to Me, I will surely hear his cry; 24 and My anger will be kindled, and I will kill you with the sword, and your wives shall become widows and your children fatherless. 25 "If you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, you are not to act as a creditor to him; you shall not charge him interest. 26 "If you ever take your neighbor's cloak as a pledge, you are to return it to him before the sun sets, 27 for that is his only covering; it is his cloak for his body. What else shall he sleep in? And it shall come about that when he cries out to Me, I will hear him, for I am gracious. 28 "You shall not curse God, nor curse a ruler of your people. 29 "You shall not delay the offering from your harvest and your vintage. The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me. 30 "You shall do the same with your oxen and with your sheep. It shall be with its mother seven days; on the eighth day you shall give it to Me. 31 "You shall be holy men to Me, therefore you shall not eat any flesh torn to pieces in the field; you shall throw it to the dogs.
The onset of chapter twenty-two introduce us readers to the concepts of restitution and damages and The Word today continues with the same. Restitution, in first year law school, is said to go back to a Roman law concept and yet, here we are reading about it in the Bible... who knew that it went back a lot further than the Roman period! I picked four websites to surf over for this Torah project this week and three of them mention that Rome is that start off point for concept of restitution. The Roman notion of restitution is “the action for recovery of a thing not due”. A plainer way to say that might be to say, that “no one be made richer through another one's loss”. Thus when dealing with issues such as breach of trust (trespass), or restitution, the term 'damages' comes into play.
10 If a man deliver unto his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast, to keep; and it die, or be hurt, or driven away, no man seeing it: 11 Then shall an oath of the LORD be between them both, that he hath not put his hand unto his neighbour's goods; and the owner of it shall accept thereof, and he shall not make it good. 12 And if it be stolen from him, he shall make restitution unto the owner thereof. 13 If it be torn in pieces, then let him bring it for witness, and he shall not make good that which was torn. 14 And if a man borrow ought of his neighbour, and it be hurt, or die, the owner thereof being not with it, he shall surely make it good. 15 But if the owner thereof be with it, he shall not make it good: if it be an hired thing, it came for his hire. Exodus 22:10-15.
Under tort law, that deals with theft or harm to a person, harm is a delicate matter to handle in terms of restitution and so 'a determined by the judge amount' can be substituted. If a man's fist lands on your face, that doesn't actually enrich him, but if he steals your cattle or your vehicle, then that does 'enrich' that party. That 'punch in the face' may require 'damages'. This can be exhibited in the matter of the man whose pregnant wife was injured in a fight between her husband and another man:
22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. Exodus 21:22.
Yah dictated a way for borrowing and lending, as verse thirteen above takes note. It just makes so much sense! If you borrow something and anything happens to it in your possession, then you make good! The most I can say is that “common sense” approach works for me. Beavering on in this list of instances, we find the content turns to illegal relationships.
16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. 17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins. Exodus 22:16-17.
And while The Word speaks of illegal 'relationships', I suppose that the following verses aren't so out of place as I previously thought in my much earlier cycles of Torah. Some relationships are definitely illegal and there is no gray area, no loopholes, and certainly, no discussion.
18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. 19 Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death. 20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed. Exodus 22:18-20.
For most of us, witchcraft is not a study we undertake normally, but we have enough ex-practitioners who have warned the rest of us away from it because of all it entails. Where there are witches there's bestiality and where there is bestiality there's witchcraft. The term for witch or the 'craft of witches' from the Hebrew is כָּשַׁף kâshaph, kaw-shaf' a primitive root; properly, to whisper a spell, i.e. to inchant or practise magic:—sorcerer, (use) witch(-craft). Witchcraft is 'sold' to 'outsiders' as merely a course of spell-casting and enchantments while the very heart of it incorporates acts of incest, bestiality, mutilation, orgies and human sacrifice. The Greek term for witchcraft is φαρμακεία pharmakeía, far-mak-i'-ah from G5332; medication ("pharmacy"), i.e. (by extension) magic (literally or figuratively):—sorcery, witchcraft. The knowledge of “the craft” is not widely known but that knowledge can be expanded a bit wider, by looking up a biography of Aleister Crowley. He's become known as “The Wickedest Man in the World” and is stated to be “the most renowned magic (magik/occult) practitioner” of our era. He founded several occult and very 'spiritual' organizations that are all in opposition to Yahweh, and Scripture. I leave it to you to investigate as you will under Yah's authority.
It is noted in the Apostolic writings of Paul to the Galatians that the subject of witchcraft is also warned against as “works of the flesh”.
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Galatians 5:19-21.
This list of instructions, that if Israel took to heart and followed carefully, would lead to a standard of living that would be unmatched by any other nation in all the earth.
22 Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child. 23 If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry; 24 And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless. Exodus 22:11-24.
The notion that one human shall not encroach and afflict any member of a vulnerable sector of humanity is outlawed in the kingdom of God. This amounts, I suppose to being a type of bully, which is a common term in our vernacular these days. There's a lot of talk about it, but it doesn't seem to stem the tide of it's practice by many. I always look at those posts on social media that say, “Re-post this to fight against bullying”. What on earth good is it re-posting such rhetoric when it's the human soul that needs to see the error of their ways? I would think that the best thing would be to pray for the bullies to change, if there is no other way in which we can directly intervene. Widows and orphans are vulnerable in any era, for they've lost their advocates. If there's no other who will 'stand in' for the husband or the parents, this can lead to a disastrous life for widows and orphans. God's way is to nurture all vulnerable sectors of society.
The topic of usury comes into vision here. Usury, that is, the collecting of more money as the price for buying anything “on time”, OR for the payment on 'late payments'.
25 If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury. 26 If thou at all take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge, thou shalt deliver it unto him by that the sun goeth down: 27 For that is his covering only, it is his raiment for his skin: wherein shall he sleep? and it shall come to pass, when he crieth unto me, that I will hear; for I am gracious. Exodus 22:25-27.
This practice is rampant in our era! To take pledges (or collateral?) of the most a person has, like their blanket or his clothing, or his place where he can rest and sleep between work days, until he pays in full, is another form of bullying and cruelty. What the main focus here is not so much the usury/interest payments themselves, but the issue of human KINDNESS. We've all been created by a Divinity that is nothing BUT: full with loving kindness. God was saying to Israel (and us): Be kind to the vulnerable sector, no matter who they might be!
28 Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people. Exodus 22:28.
Now what sort of statement is this one? What is up with that reviling “the gods”? That term 'gods' in this passage is אֱלֹהִים ʼĕlôhîym, el-o-heem' plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative:—angels, × exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), × (very) great, judges, × mighty. The very roots of this word used can be applied “by way of deference to magistrates” or “judges”. The term here for 'rulers' is נָשִׂיא nâsîyʼ, naw-see' or נָשִׂא nâsiʼ; from H5375; properly, an exalted one, i.e. a king or sheik; also a rising mist:—captain, chief, cloud, governor, prince, ruler, vapour.
I've become so politically aware in the past two years that this one is a hard saying for this writer. Charles Ellicott doesn't 'sugar-coat' this verse in his understanding and so I feel under judgment here in this respect. It's one thing to rail against a government or a leader that is indeed governing with some sort of Biblical essence. But when they're championing such practice that is directly in opposition to rational thinking, (two examples only would be supporting males in drag reading stories to pre-schoolers and supporting the inane belief that men can have babies too), that makes my blood boil. And yet, if one doesn't respect the person in office, then perhaps we need to respect the 'office' itself.
“(28) Thou shalt not revile the gods.--The LXX. And Vulgate give the passage this sense; and so it was understood, or at any rate expounded, by Philo (De Vit. Mos. ii. 26) and Josephus (Ant. Jud. iv. 8, § 10), who boasted that the Jews abstained from reviling the gods of the nations. But the practice of the most pious Israelites in the best times was different (1Ki 18:27; Ps 115:4-8; 135:15-18; Isa 41:29; 44:9-20; Jer 10:11-15, &c.). The gods of the heathen were uniformly, and with the utmost scorn. "reviled." It has been suggested that the true meaning of elohim in this place is "judges" (Rosenmüller, Zunz, Herxheimer); but to have that sense, the word requires the article. It is best, therefore, to translate by "God," as is done by De Wette, Knobel, Keil, Kalisch, Canon Cook, &c., and to understand the entire passage as intended to connect the sin of cursing a ruler with that of reviling God, the ruler being regarded as God's representative.”
I have a very difficult time to accept the major leaders of our political parties here as “representatives of God”. To say the least in my reviling, I might rework a meme from present days and say, “They don't represent MY God”. But it is truth, when I did a little rabbit trail down the direction of “what is the origin of the term “jackass”? I found that it helped me to no longer use the term in the same sentence as many politicians that are prominent today. I've discovered that it came from a nickname of the donkey genus: Equus africanus asinus and their characteristics include a variety of many good things. The term “jack” is a broad term for any 'male'. The donkey turns out to be a herd animal that is invaluable in carrying heavy loads and has intelligence that is considered rather 'high'. They're very sturdy and well built for work. Add to that, from what I've learned about donkeys since Hurricane Helene, how they trekked up in places where no other animal would go, to bring supplies and help to people isolated because of the terrain broken up by the hurricane... I confess that I can no longer apply that same term to anyone in political leadership. While that might be a streak of jocularity it remains serious that these politicians and leaders were made in “the image of God”. So, in these terms of discussion I need to clean up my act.
I admit, it's just too easy not to clean up my act in this regard. However, John Gill also comments and further Scripture has convicted me in the court of “being transparent” and lands me in 'jackass jail' for the day, as a student of Torah:
“nor curse the ruler of thy people whether civil or ecclesiastic; the last mentioned Jewish writer intend of the king, who is the supreme ruler in things civil, and ought to be honoured and loved, served and obeyed, and not hated and cursed, no, not secretly, not in the bedchamber, nor in the thought of the heart, since not only the thing is criminal but dangerous; it is much if it is not discovered, and then ruin follows upon it, Ec 10:20. The Apostle Paul applies it to the high priest among the Jews, who was the ruler in sacred things, Ac 23:5 and may be applicable to the prince of the sanhedrin, or chief in the grand court of judicature; and even to all dignified persons, who ought not to be spoken ill of, and to be abused in the execution of their office, and especially when they perform well.”
Especially if they aren't “preforming well”, and we can see it, it's just SO apparent, officials have been stubborn in the most negative ways, the term 'jackass' is definitely a misnomer. Better for me to apply no 'nomer' at all!
29 Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me. Exodus 22:29.
(29) The first of thy ripe fruits.—Heb., of thy fulness. "Firstfruits" were the spontaneous tribute of natural piety among almost all nations. They were called by the Greeks ἀπαρχαί, by the Romans primitive. Abel's offering (Ge 4:4) was one of the "firstlings of his flock," and Cain's probably one of firstfruits. In the present passage it is assumed that firstfruits are due, and the stress is laid upon offering them promptly, without "delay." Delay would show a grudging spirit. Of thy liquors.—As wine and oil. (Compare Ne 10:37,39.)
We seldom think of 'oil' as being important and considering the types of 'oils' that are available for our consumption these days that are just plain toxic, (like the vegetable, the soy, and the canola oil about which Canada has nothing to be proud), we might rethink 'oil'. The finest of the oils for Israel in those days and now, is the finest, fresh first pressed oil from the olive that remains the best of the best of the first-fruits.
We can move on to our dailies now. I had to sleep late in recovery from that huge burst of activity yesterday and so everything on the schedule has been pushed back today as 'later'. Today is my day to go and groom Luna, the pompous and demanding Persian, and at the same time enjoy a visit with her owner that has become my custom since answering the ad for the 'cat nail clipper person'. God is good. Let's return tomorrow, and see what the Torah will say. If Israel kept to this covenant with Yah, they would be holy, as God requested of them. Think about it.
10 If a man deliver unto his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast, to keep; and it die, or be hurt, or driven away, no man seeing it: 11 Then shall an oath of the LORD be between them both, that he hath not put his hand unto his neighbour's goods; and the owner of it shall accept thereof, and he shall not make it good. 12 And if it be stolen from him, he shall make restitution unto the owner thereof. 13 If it be torn in pieces, then let him bring it for witness, and he shall not make good that which was torn. 14 And if a man borrow ought of his neighbour, and it be hurt, or die, the owner thereof being not with it, he shall surely make it good. 15 But if the owner thereof be with it, he shall not make it good: if it be an hired thing, it came for his hire. Exodus 22:10-15.
Under tort law, that deals with theft or harm to a person, harm is a delicate matter to handle in terms of restitution and so 'a determined by the judge amount' can be substituted. If a man's fist lands on your face, that doesn't actually enrich him, but if he steals your cattle or your vehicle, then that does 'enrich' that party. That 'punch in the face' may require 'damages'. This can be exhibited in the matter of the man whose pregnant wife was injured in a fight between her husband and another man:
22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. Exodus 21:22.
Yah dictated a way for borrowing and lending, as verse thirteen above takes note. It just makes so much sense! If you borrow something and anything happens to it in your possession, then you make good! The most I can say is that “common sense” approach works for me. Beavering on in this list of instances, we find the content turns to illegal relationships.
16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. 17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins. Exodus 22:16-17.
And while The Word speaks of illegal 'relationships', I suppose that the following verses aren't so out of place as I previously thought in my much earlier cycles of Torah. Some relationships are definitely illegal and there is no gray area, no loopholes, and certainly, no discussion.
18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. 19 Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death. 20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed. Exodus 22:18-20.
For most of us, witchcraft is not a study we undertake normally, but we have enough ex-practitioners who have warned the rest of us away from it because of all it entails. Where there are witches there's bestiality and where there is bestiality there's witchcraft. The term for witch or the 'craft of witches' from the Hebrew is כָּשַׁף kâshaph, kaw-shaf' a primitive root; properly, to whisper a spell, i.e. to inchant or practise magic:—sorcerer, (use) witch(-craft). Witchcraft is 'sold' to 'outsiders' as merely a course of spell-casting and enchantments while the very heart of it incorporates acts of incest, bestiality, mutilation, orgies and human sacrifice. The Greek term for witchcraft is φαρμακεία pharmakeía, far-mak-i'-ah from G5332; medication ("pharmacy"), i.e. (by extension) magic (literally or figuratively):—sorcery, witchcraft. The knowledge of “the craft” is not widely known but that knowledge can be expanded a bit wider, by looking up a biography of Aleister Crowley. He's become known as “The Wickedest Man in the World” and is stated to be “the most renowned magic (magik/occult) practitioner” of our era. He founded several occult and very 'spiritual' organizations that are all in opposition to Yahweh, and Scripture. I leave it to you to investigate as you will under Yah's authority.
It is noted in the Apostolic writings of Paul to the Galatians that the subject of witchcraft is also warned against as “works of the flesh”.
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Galatians 5:19-21.
This list of instructions, that if Israel took to heart and followed carefully, would lead to a standard of living that would be unmatched by any other nation in all the earth.
22 Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child. 23 If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry; 24 And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless. Exodus 22:11-24.
The notion that one human shall not encroach and afflict any member of a vulnerable sector of humanity is outlawed in the kingdom of God. This amounts, I suppose to being a type of bully, which is a common term in our vernacular these days. There's a lot of talk about it, but it doesn't seem to stem the tide of it's practice by many. I always look at those posts on social media that say, “Re-post this to fight against bullying”. What on earth good is it re-posting such rhetoric when it's the human soul that needs to see the error of their ways? I would think that the best thing would be to pray for the bullies to change, if there is no other way in which we can directly intervene. Widows and orphans are vulnerable in any era, for they've lost their advocates. If there's no other who will 'stand in' for the husband or the parents, this can lead to a disastrous life for widows and orphans. God's way is to nurture all vulnerable sectors of society.
The topic of usury comes into vision here. Usury, that is, the collecting of more money as the price for buying anything “on time”, OR for the payment on 'late payments'.
25 If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury. 26 If thou at all take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge, thou shalt deliver it unto him by that the sun goeth down: 27 For that is his covering only, it is his raiment for his skin: wherein shall he sleep? and it shall come to pass, when he crieth unto me, that I will hear; for I am gracious. Exodus 22:25-27.
This practice is rampant in our era! To take pledges (or collateral?) of the most a person has, like their blanket or his clothing, or his place where he can rest and sleep between work days, until he pays in full, is another form of bullying and cruelty. What the main focus here is not so much the usury/interest payments themselves, but the issue of human KINDNESS. We've all been created by a Divinity that is nothing BUT: full with loving kindness. God was saying to Israel (and us): Be kind to the vulnerable sector, no matter who they might be!
28 Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people. Exodus 22:28.
Now what sort of statement is this one? What is up with that reviling “the gods”? That term 'gods' in this passage is אֱלֹהִים ʼĕlôhîym, el-o-heem' plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative:—angels, × exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), × (very) great, judges, × mighty. The very roots of this word used can be applied “by way of deference to magistrates” or “judges”. The term here for 'rulers' is נָשִׂיא nâsîyʼ, naw-see' or נָשִׂא nâsiʼ; from H5375; properly, an exalted one, i.e. a king or sheik; also a rising mist:—captain, chief, cloud, governor, prince, ruler, vapour.
I've become so politically aware in the past two years that this one is a hard saying for this writer. Charles Ellicott doesn't 'sugar-coat' this verse in his understanding and so I feel under judgment here in this respect. It's one thing to rail against a government or a leader that is indeed governing with some sort of Biblical essence. But when they're championing such practice that is directly in opposition to rational thinking, (two examples only would be supporting males in drag reading stories to pre-schoolers and supporting the inane belief that men can have babies too), that makes my blood boil. And yet, if one doesn't respect the person in office, then perhaps we need to respect the 'office' itself.
“(28) Thou shalt not revile the gods.--The LXX. And Vulgate give the passage this sense; and so it was understood, or at any rate expounded, by Philo (De Vit. Mos. ii. 26) and Josephus (Ant. Jud. iv. 8, § 10), who boasted that the Jews abstained from reviling the gods of the nations. But the practice of the most pious Israelites in the best times was different (1Ki 18:27; Ps 115:4-8; 135:15-18; Isa 41:29; 44:9-20; Jer 10:11-15, &c.). The gods of the heathen were uniformly, and with the utmost scorn. "reviled." It has been suggested that the true meaning of elohim in this place is "judges" (Rosenmüller, Zunz, Herxheimer); but to have that sense, the word requires the article. It is best, therefore, to translate by "God," as is done by De Wette, Knobel, Keil, Kalisch, Canon Cook, &c., and to understand the entire passage as intended to connect the sin of cursing a ruler with that of reviling God, the ruler being regarded as God's representative.”
I have a very difficult time to accept the major leaders of our political parties here as “representatives of God”. To say the least in my reviling, I might rework a meme from present days and say, “They don't represent MY God”. But it is truth, when I did a little rabbit trail down the direction of “what is the origin of the term “jackass”? I found that it helped me to no longer use the term in the same sentence as many politicians that are prominent today. I've discovered that it came from a nickname of the donkey genus: Equus africanus asinus and their characteristics include a variety of many good things. The term “jack” is a broad term for any 'male'. The donkey turns out to be a herd animal that is invaluable in carrying heavy loads and has intelligence that is considered rather 'high'. They're very sturdy and well built for work. Add to that, from what I've learned about donkeys since Hurricane Helene, how they trekked up in places where no other animal would go, to bring supplies and help to people isolated because of the terrain broken up by the hurricane... I confess that I can no longer apply that same term to anyone in political leadership. While that might be a streak of jocularity it remains serious that these politicians and leaders were made in “the image of God”. So, in these terms of discussion I need to clean up my act.
I admit, it's just too easy not to clean up my act in this regard. However, John Gill also comments and further Scripture has convicted me in the court of “being transparent” and lands me in 'jackass jail' for the day, as a student of Torah:
“nor curse the ruler of thy people whether civil or ecclesiastic; the last mentioned Jewish writer intend of the king, who is the supreme ruler in things civil, and ought to be honoured and loved, served and obeyed, and not hated and cursed, no, not secretly, not in the bedchamber, nor in the thought of the heart, since not only the thing is criminal but dangerous; it is much if it is not discovered, and then ruin follows upon it, Ec 10:20. The Apostle Paul applies it to the high priest among the Jews, who was the ruler in sacred things, Ac 23:5 and may be applicable to the prince of the sanhedrin, or chief in the grand court of judicature; and even to all dignified persons, who ought not to be spoken ill of, and to be abused in the execution of their office, and especially when they perform well.”
Especially if they aren't “preforming well”, and we can see it, it's just SO apparent, officials have been stubborn in the most negative ways, the term 'jackass' is definitely a misnomer. Better for me to apply no 'nomer' at all!
29 Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me. Exodus 22:29.
(29) The first of thy ripe fruits.—Heb., of thy fulness. "Firstfruits" were the spontaneous tribute of natural piety among almost all nations. They were called by the Greeks ἀπαρχαί, by the Romans primitive. Abel's offering (Ge 4:4) was one of the "firstlings of his flock," and Cain's probably one of firstfruits. In the present passage it is assumed that firstfruits are due, and the stress is laid upon offering them promptly, without "delay." Delay would show a grudging spirit. Of thy liquors.—As wine and oil. (Compare Ne 10:37,39.)
We seldom think of 'oil' as being important and considering the types of 'oils' that are available for our consumption these days that are just plain toxic, (like the vegetable, the soy, and the canola oil about which Canada has nothing to be proud), we might rethink 'oil'. The finest of the oils for Israel in those days and now, is the finest, fresh first pressed oil from the olive that remains the best of the best of the first-fruits.
We can move on to our dailies now. I had to sleep late in recovery from that huge burst of activity yesterday and so everything on the schedule has been pushed back today as 'later'. Today is my day to go and groom Luna, the pompous and demanding Persian, and at the same time enjoy a visit with her owner that has become my custom since answering the ad for the 'cat nail clipper person'. God is good. Let's return tomorrow, and see what the Torah will say. If Israel kept to this covenant with Yah, they would be holy, as God requested of them. Think about it.
31 And ye shall be holy men unto me: neither shall ye eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; ye shall cast it to the dogs. Exodus 22:31.
1 NASB www.lockman.org for daily reading and KJV in commentary unless otherwise specified
Daily Torah Bites ©
anne@anchorchurchsufside.com