The priests and the Levites—all the tribe of Levi—shall have no portion nor inheritance with Israel. They shall eat the offerings of Yahweh made by fire and his portion. They shall have no inheritance among their brothers. Yahweh is their inheritance, as he has spoken to them.
Show the surrounding paragraph
Deuteronomy 18:1-2 sits inside this longer paragraph.
The priests and the Levites—all the tribe of Levi—shall have no portion nor inheritance with Israel. They shall eat the offerings of Yahweh made by fire and his portion. They shall have no inheritance among their brothers. Yahweh is their inheritance, as he has spoken to them. This shall be the priests’ due from the people, from those who offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep, that they shall give to the priest: the shoulder, the two cheeks, and the inner parts. You shall give him the first fruits of your grain, of your new wine, and of your oil, and the first of the fleece of your sheep. For Yahweh your God has chosen him out of all your tribes to stand to minister in Yahweh’s name, him and his sons forever.
Parallel Translations
-
The priests and the Levites—all the tribe of Levi—shall have no portion nor inheritance with Israel. They shall eat the offerings of Yahweh made by fire and his portion.
They shall have no inheritance among their brothers. Yahweh is their inheritance, as he has spoken to them.
-
The priests the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel: they shall eat the offerings of the LORD made by fire, and his inheritance.
Therefore shall they have no inheritance among their brethren: the LORD is their inheritance, as he hath said unto them.
Show all 3 translations
-
The priests the Levites, even all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion nor inheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings of the LORD made by fire, and His inheritance.
And they shall have no inheritance among their brethren; the LORD is their inheritance, as He hath spoken unto them.
Cross-references (19)
- Numbers 18:8-9 (v1) Yahweh spoke to Aaron, “Behold, I myself have given you the command of my wave offerings, even all the holy things of the children of…
- Deuteronomy 10:9 (v1) Therefore Levi has no portion nor inheritance with his brothers; Yahweh is his inheritance, according as Yahweh your God spoke to him.)
- 1 Corinthians 9:13-14 (v1) Don’t you know that those who serve around sacred things eat from the things of the temple, and those who wait on the altar have their…
- Deuteronomy 12:19 (v1) Be careful that you don’t forsake the Levite as long as you live in your land.
- Numbers 18:20 (v1) Yahweh said to Aaron, “You shall have no inheritance in their land, neither shall you have any portion among them. I am your portion and…
Show all 19 cross-references
- Numbers 26:62 (v1) Those who were counted of them were twenty-three thousand, every male from a month old and upward; for they were not counted among the…
- Joshua 13:14 (v1) Only he gave no inheritance to the tribe of Levi. The offerings of Yahweh, the God of Israel, made by fire are his inheritance, as he spoke…
- Joshua 13:33 (v1) But Moses gave no inheritance to the tribe of Levi. Yahweh, the God of Israel, is their inheritance, as he spoke to them.
- Genesis 15:1 (v2) After these things Yahweh’s word came to Abram in a vision, saying, “Don’t be afraid, Abram. I am your shield, your exceedingly great…
- Psalms 16:5 (v2) Yahweh assigned my portion and my cup. You made my lot secure.
- Psalms 73:24-26 (v2) You will guide me with your counsel, and afterward receive me to glory. Whom do I have in heaven? There is no one on earth whom I desire…
- Psalms 84:11 (v2) For Yahweh God is a sun and a shield. Yahweh will give grace and glory. He withholds no good thing from those who walk blamelessly.
- Psalms 119:57 (v2) Yahweh is my portion. I promised to obey your words.
- Isaiah 61:6 (v2) But you will be called Yahweh’s priests. Men will call you the servants of our God. You will eat the wealth of the nations. You will boast…
- Lamentations 3:24 (v2) “Yahweh is my portion,” says my soul. “Therefore I will hope in him.”
- 1 Peter 2:5 (v2) You also, as living stones, are built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God…
- 1 Peter 2:9 (v2) But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, that you may proclaim the excellence of…
- 1 Peter 5:2-4 (v1) Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, exercising the oversight, not under compulsion, but voluntarily, not for dishonest gain, but…
- Revelation 1:5-6 (v2) and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us, and…
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this passage (23 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On v1 That is, the Lord’s part of his inheritance.
That is, the Lord’s part of his inheritance.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On v1 Deu 18:1 The priests the Levites, [and] all the…
Deu 18:1 The priests the Levites, [and] all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel: they shall eat the offerings of the LORD made by fire, and his inheritance.
Ver. 1. And his inheritance,] i.e., Whatsoever by the law belonged to the Lord, as decimae Deo sacrae, &c.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv1–2 The offerings of the Lord made by fire; by…
The offerings of the Lord made by fire; by which phrase we here manifestly see that he means not burnt-offerings, which were wholly consumed by fire, and no part of them eaten by the priests; but other sacrifices, whereof part was offered to the Lord by fire, and part was allotted to the priests for their food. His inheritance, i.e. the Lord’s portion or inheritance, which God had reserved to himself, as tithes and first-fruits, and other oblations distinct from those which were made by fire; and so these two branches make up the whole of that which belonged to God, and was by him given to the Levites.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v1 Magistracy and ministry are two divine institutions of admirable…
Magistracy and ministry are two divine institutions of admirable use for the support and advancement of the kingdom of God among men. Laws concerning the former we had in the close of the foregoing chapter, directions are in this given concerning the latter. Land-marks are here set between the estates of the priests and those of the people.
I. Care is taken that the priests entangle not themselves with the affairs of this life, nor enrich themselves with the wealth of this world; they have better things to mind. They shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel, that is, no share either in the spoils taken in war or in the land that was to be divided by lot, Deu 18:1. Their warfare and husbandry are both spiritual, and enough to fill their hands both with work and profit and to content them. The Lord is their inheritance, Deu 18:2. Note, Those that have God for their inheritance, according to the new covenant, should not be greedy of great things in the world, neither gripe what they have nor grasp at more, but look upon all present things with the indifference which becomes those that believe God to be all-sufficient.
Read full note →
II. Care is likewise taken that they want not any of the comforts and conveniences of this life. Though God, who is a Spirit, is their inheritance, it does not therefore follow that they must live upon the air; no,
1. The people must provide for them. They must have their due from the people, Deu 18:3. Their maintenance must not depend upon the generosity of the people, but they must be by law entitled to it. He that is taught in the word ought in justice to communicate to him that teaches him; and he that has the benefit of solemn religious assemblies ought to contribute to the comfortable support of those that preside in such assemblies. (1.) The priests who in their courses served at the altar had their share of the sacrifices, namely, the peace-offerings, that were brought while they were in waiting: besides the breast and shoulder, which were appointed them before (Lev 7:32-34), the cheeks and maw are here ordered to be given them; so far was the law from diminishing what was already granted that it gave them an augmentation (2.) The first-fruits which arose within such a precinct were brought in, as it should seem, to the priests that resided among them, for their maintenance in the country; the first of their corn and wine for food, and the first of their fleece for clothing (Deu 18:4); for the priests who were employed to teach others ought themselves to learn, having food and raiment, to be therewith content. The first-fruits were devoted to God, and he constituted the priests his receivers; and if God reckons what is, in general, given to the poor, lent to him, to be repaid with interest, much more what is, in particular, given to the poor, lent to him, to be repaid with interest, much more what is, in particular, given to poor ministers. There is a good reason given for this constant charge upon their estates (Deu 18:5), because the Levites were chosen of God, and his choice must be owned and countenanced, and those honoured by us whom he honours; and because they stood to minister, and ought to be recompensed for their attendance and labour, especially since it was in the name of the Lord, by his warrant, in his service, and for his praise, and this charge entailed upon their seed for ever; those who were thus engaged and thus employed ought to have all due encouragement given them, as some of the most needful useful members of their commonwealth.
2. The priests must not themselves stand in one another's light. If a priest that by the law was obliged to serve at the altar only in his turn, and was paid for that, should, out of his great affection to the sanctuary, devote himself to a constant attendance there, and quit the ease and pleasure of the city in which he had his lot for the satisfaction of serving the altar, the priests whose turn it was to attend must admit him both to join in the work and to share in the wages, and not grudge him either the honour of the one or the profit of the other, though it might seem to break in upon them, Deu 18:6-8. Note, A hearty pious zeal to serve God and his church, though it may a little encroach upon a settled order, and there may be somewhat in it that looks irregular, yet ought to be gratified and not discouraged. He that appears to have a hearty affection to the sanctuary, and loves dearly to be employed in the service of it, in God's name let him minister; he shall be as welcome to God as the Levites whose course it was to minister, and should be so to them. The settling of the courses was intended rather to secure those to the work that were not willing to do so much than to exclude any that were willing to do more. And he that thus serves as a volunteer shall have as good pay as the pressed men, besides that which comes of the sale of his patrimony. The church of Rome obliges those who leave their estates to go into a monastery to bring the produce of their estates with them into the common stock of the monastery, for gain is their godliness; but here it is ordered that the pious devotee should reserve to himself the produce of his patrimony, for religion and the ministry were never appointed of God, however they have been abused by men, to serve a secular interest.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv1–2 The priests, the Levites, and all the tribe of…
The priests, the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel,.... That is, in the land of Canaan, in the division of it among the tribes:
they shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and his inheritance; the meat offerings, see Lev 2:2, and whatsoever of the sin offerings and peace offerings which were the Lord's; so Ben Melech says, the flesh of the offerings which belonged to the priests was called fire offerings, after part of it was consumed by fire. All these, with other things, Num 18:8, were given, as the Targum of Jonathan expresses it, for their inheritance, in lieu of their having none in the land of Canaan.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On v1 Rules concerning priests and Levites, ver. 1-8. Cautions against…
Rules concerning priests and Levites, ver. 1-8. Cautions against witchcraft, ver. 9-14. A promise of Christ, ver. 15-19. The punishment and mark of a false prophet, ver. 20-22.
His inheritance - The Lord's portion or inheritance, which God had reserved to himself, as tithes and first fruits, and other oblations distinct from those which were made by fire.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv1–2 The priests and Levites to have no inheritance, 1,…
CHAPTER XVIII
The priests and Levites to have no inheritance, 1, 2.
Read full note →
What is the priest's due, 3-5.
Of the Levites that come from any of the other cities, 6-8.
The Israelites must not copy the abominations of the former
inhabitants, 9.
None to cause his son or daughter to pass through the fire, or
use any kind of divination or enchantment, as the former
inhabitants did, 10-14.
The great prophet which God promised to raise up, 15-19.
Of false prophets, 20;
and how to discern them, 21, 22.
NOTES ON CHAP. XVIII
Verse 1. The priests the Levites - shall have no part] That is, says Rab. Maimon, they shall have no part in the spoils taken from an enemy.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On v1 Deu 18:1. His inheritance — The Lord’s portion or…
Deu 18:1. His inheritance — The Lord’s portion or inheritance, which God had reserved to himself, as tithes and first-fruits, and other oblations distinct from those which were made by fire.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On v1 Better, “there shall not be to the priests, the…
Better, “there shall not be to the priests, the Levites, yea the whole tribe of Levi, any inheritance, etc.”
And his inheritance - i. e., God’s inheritance, that which in making a grant to His people of the promised land with its earthly blessings He had reserved for Himself; more particularly the sacrifices and the holy gifts, such as tithes and first-fruits. These were God’s portion of the substance of Israel; and as the Levites were His portion of the persons of Israel, it was fitting that the Levites should be sustained from these. On the principle here laid down, compare 1Co 9:13-14.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On v1 Oblations. Hebrew "they shall eat the holocausts of the…
Oblations. Hebrew "they shall eat the holocausts of the Lord and his inheritances." The priests shall have the parts of the sacrifices for peace allotted to them, &c., tithes shall be given to support the Levites. (Haydock) --- These parts are what God claims from the people, as their Sovereign, (Calmet) and these he assigns to his ministers. Septuagint, "The fruits of the Lord are their inheritance, they shall eat them." (Haydock)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On v1 THE RIGHTS OF THE PRIESTS AND LEVITES, Deu_18:1-8.
THE RIGHTS OF THE PRIESTS AND LEVITES, Deu_18:1-8.
As the tribe of Levi was to have no tribal district allotted, the question would naturally arise, How are they to be supported? Here, in general terms, Moses states that “they shall eat of the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and his inheritance.” To the earlier books of the Pentateuch we must look for the explanation of these expressions. Comp. Lev_1:8; Num_18:20.
Read full note →
1. The priests the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi — More literally, There shall not be to the priests the Levites, the whole tribe of Levi, any part or inheritance with Israel: that is, neither the priests nor any one of the tribe of Levi shall have any part or portion with Israel. As they were to be entirely devoted to the service of Jehovah they were not, like the other tribes, to have a separate tribal territory.
His inheritance — What Jehovah in a certain sense had reserved for himself is intended by this term: the sacrifices, the tithes, the firstfruits.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv1–2 1. The priests the Levites] This double title, peculiar…
1. The priests the Levites] This double title, peculiar to D, is found both in the Code, Deu_17:9; Deu_17:18, Deu_24:8 (cp. Deu_21:5 : the priests the sons of Levi) and in Deu_27:9 (edit.?), cp. Deu_31:9. By God’s appointment (Deu_18:5) all members of the tribe of Levi were priests de jure, but in consequence of the law abolishing the rural altars and rendering priestly functions impossible except in the Temple, a member of the tribe while resident in the country is called Levite alone—the Levite within thy gates—and can secure the name and the rights of a priest only when he removes to Jerusalem (Deu_18:6); where however he does not cease to be called Levite (Deu_18:7). With this distinction the priests and the Levites are to D synonymous. This is further emphasised by the addition—
all the tribe of Levi] The and prefixed by the A.V. and R.V. Marg. is not in the Heb., in which the phrase stands in apposition to the priests the Levites. There is therefore no possibility in the interpretation that D intended by Levites ‘all other members of the tribe of Levi.’ This interpretation is a forced attempt to reconcile D’s law with those of P which distinguish between priests and Levites.
Read full note →
no portion nor inheritance with Israel] Cp. Deu_10:9 (with his brethren), Deu_12:12 (with you), Deu_14:27; Deu_14:29 (with thee), and the deuteronomic Jos_13:14; Jos_13:33; Jos_18:7. The tribe are landless. So in P, Num_18:20; Num_18:23 f., Num_26:62.
they shall eat] live, or subsist, by; cp. Ar. ’ukul (from the same root) ‘means of subsistence.’
the offerings of the Lord made by fire] This expression, an early instance of which occurs in 1Sa_2:28, is found more than 60 times in P and nowhere else (the grammar shows that it is an intrusion. Jos_13:14).
and his inheritance] all other offerings to the Deity, such as are detailed in Deu_18:4.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On v1
XVIII.
Deu_18:1-5.
Read full note →
THE PBIESTS’ DUE.
(1) The priests the Levites, (and) all the tribe of Levi.—The fact that there is no “and” here in the original, and the look of the sentence in English, might dispose a superficial reader to find some ground here for the theory that priest and Levite are not distinguished in Deuteronomy. No such idea occurred to Rashi. He says, “all the tribe of Levi, not only those that are perfect (who can serve), but those who have a blemish (and cannot).” The distinction between priest and Levite has already been sufficiently noted on Deu_11:6; Deu_17:9. The passage is evidently on the same lines with Num_18:18-21, which see.
(3) The shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw.—This would be from the peace offering. The shoulder is assigned to them in Lev_7:32-33 (comp. Num_18:18). The “two cheeks and the maw” are not mentioned elsewhere, and the latter word is found in this place only. They are not a valuable part of the sacrifice. An absurd reason for the gift is assigned by Rashi. We know that in the time of Eli, the priests varied their requirements at pleasure, and in the face of the law (see 1Sa_2:13). The “priests’ due “here, and “the priests’ custom” there, are the same word in Hebrew, which we have elsewhere translated “requirement.”
(4) The flrstfruit also of thy corn.—See Num_18:12. The first of the wool is mentioned here only. The quantity in all these cases has been defined by the Rabbis, on grounds somewhat arbitrary.
(5) To stand to minister in the name of the Lord.—This is the office of the priests. The Levites are said, “to stand before the congregation to minister unto them” (Num_16:9). If the writer of Deuteronomy knew no distinction between priest and Levite, it is difficult to see how the Jews could have derived the distinctive privileges of the priests from these enactments.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. H. Mackintosh 1880 · Public Domain On v1 Deuteronomy 18
Deuteronomy 18
The opening paragraph of this chapter suggests a deeply interesting and practical line of truth.
Read full note →
"The priests the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and his inheritance. Therefore shall they have no inheritance among their brethren: the Lord is their inheritance, as he hath said unto them. And this shall be the priest’s due from the people, from them that offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep; and they shall give unto the priest, the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw. The firstfruit also of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the first of the fleece of thy sheep, shalt thou give him. For the Lord thy God hath chosen him out of all thy tribes, to stand to minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons for ever. And if a Levite come from any of thy gates out of all Israel, where he sojourned, and come with all the desire of his mind unto the place which the Lord shall choose; then he shall minister in the name of the Lord his God, as all his brethren the Levites do, which stand there before the Lord They shall have like portions to eat, beside that which cometh out of the sale of his patrimony." (Vers. 1-8.)
Here, as in every part of the book of Deuteronomy, the Priests are classed with the Levites, in a very marked way. We have called the reader’s attention to this, as a special characteristic feature of our book, and shall not dwell upon it now, but merely, in passing, remind the reader of it, as something claiming his attention. Let him weigh the opening words of our chapter, "The priests the Levites," and compare them with the way in which the priests, the sons of Aaron, are spoken of in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers; and if he should be disposed to ask the reason of this distinction, we believe it to be this, that in Deuteronomy the divine object is to bring the whole assembly of Israel more into prominence, and hence it is that the priests, in their official capacity, come rarely before us. The grand Deuteronomic idea is, Israel in immediate relationship with Jehovah.
Now, in the passage just quoted, we have the priests and the Levites linked together, and presented as the Lord’s servants, wholly dependent upon Him, and intimately identified with His altar and His service. This is full of interest, and opens up a very important field of practical truth to which the Church of God would do well to attend.
In looking through the history of Israel, we observe that when things were in anything like a healthful condition, the altar of God was well attended to, and, as a consequence, the priests and Levites were well supplied. If Jehovah had His portion, His servants were sure to have theirs. If He was neglected, so were they. They were bound up together. The people were to bring their offerings to God, and He shared them with His servants. The priests the Levites were not to exact or demand of the people, but the people were privileged to bring their gifts to the altar of God, and He permitted His servants to feed upon the fruit of His people’s devotedness to Him.
Such was the true, the divine idea as to the Lord’s servants of old. They were to live upon the voluntary offerings presented to God by the whole congregation. True it is that, in the dark and evil days of the sons of Eli, we find something sadly different from this lovely moral order. Then "the priest’s custom with the people was, that, when any one offered sacrifice, the priest’s servant came, while the flesh was in seething, with a fleshhook of three teeth in his hand; and he struck it into the pan, or kettle, or caldron, or pot; all that the flesh hook brought up the priest took for himself. So they did in Shiloh unto all the Israelites that came thither. Also before they burnt the fat" - God’s special portion - "the priest’s servant came, and said to the man that sacrificed, Give flesh to roast for the priest; for he will not have sodden flesh of thee, but raw. And if any man said unto him, Let them not fail to burn the fat presently, and then take as much as thy soul desireth then he would answer him, Nay; but thou shalt give it me now; and if not, I will take it by force. Wherefore the sin of the young men was very great before the Lord; for men abhorred the offering of Lord." (1 Sam. 2: 13-17.)
All this was truly deplorable, and ended in the solemn judgement of God upon the house of Eli. It could not be otherwise. If those who ministered at the altar could be guilty of such terrible iniquity and impiety, judgement must take its course.
But the normal condition of things, as presented in our chapter, was in vivid contrast with all this frightful iniquity. Jehovah would surround Himself with the willing offerings of His people, and, from these offerings He would feed His servants who ministered at His altar. Hence, therefore, when the altar of God was diligently, fervently and devotedly attended to, the priests the Levites had a rich portion, an abundant supply; and, on the other hand, when Jehovah and His altar were treated with cold neglect, or merely waited upon in a barren routine or heartless formalism, the Lord’s servants were correspondingly neglected. In a word, they stood intimately identified with the worship and service of the God of Israel.
Thus, for example, in the bright days of the good king Hezekiah, when things were fresh and hearts happy and true, we read, "And Hezekiah appointed the courses of the priests and the Levites after their courses, every man according to his service, the priests and Levites for burnt offerings, and for peace offerings, to minister, and to give thanks, and to praise in the gates of the tents of the Lord. He appointed also the king’s portion of his substance for the burnt offerings, to wit, for the morning and evening burnt offerings, and the burnt offerings for the Sabbaths, and for the new moons, and for the set feasts, as it is written in the law of the Lord. Moreover he commanded the people that dwelt in Jerusalem to give the portion of the priests and the Levites, that they might be encouraged in the law of the Lord. And as soon as the commandment came abroad, the children of Israel brought in abundance the firstfruits of corn, wine, and oil, and honey, and of all the increase of the field; and the tithe of all things brought they in abundantly. And concerning the children of Israel and Judah, that dwelt in the cities of Judah, they also brought in the tithe of oxen and sheep, and the tithe of holy things which were consecrated unto the Lord their God, and laid them by heaps. In the third month they began to lay the foundation of the heaps, and finished them in the seventh month. And when Hezekiah and the princes came and saw the heaps, they blessed the Lord, and his people Israel Then Hezekiah questioned with the priests and the Levites concerning the heaps. And Azariah the chief priest of the house of Zadok answered him, and said, Since the people began to bring the offerings into the house of Lord, we have had enough, to eat, and have left plenty, for the Lord hath blessed his people; and that which is left is this great store." (2 Chr. 31: 2-10.)
How truly refreshing is all this! And how encouraging! The deep, full, silvery tide of devotedness flowed around the altar of God bearing upon its bosom an ample supply to meet all the need of the Lord’s servants, and "heaps" beside. This, we feel assured, was grateful to the heart of the God of Israel, as it was to the hearts of those who had given themselves, at His call and by His appointment, to the service of His altar and His sanctuary.
And let the reader specially note those precious words, "As it is written in the law of the Lord." Here was Hezekiah’s authority, the solid basis of his whole line of conduct, from first to last. True, the nation’s visible unity was gone; the condition of things, when he began his blessed work, was most discouraging; but the word of the Lord was as true, as real, and as direct in its application in Hezekiah’s day as it was in the days of David or Joshua. Hezekiah rightly felt that Deuteronomy 18: 1-8 applied to his day and to his conscience, and that he and the people were responsible to act upon it, according to their ability. Were the priests and the Levites to starve because Israel’s national unity was gone? Surely not. They were to stand or fall with the word, the worship, and the work of God. Circumstances might vary, and the Israelite might find himself in a position in which it would be impossible to carry out in detail all the ordinances of the Levitical ceremonial, but he never could find himself in circumstances in which it was not his high privilege to give full expression to his heart’s devotedness to the service, the altar, and the law of Jehovah.
Thus, then, we see, throughout the entire history of Israel, that when things were at all bright and healthy, the Lord’s worship, His work, and His workmen were blessedly attended to. But, on the other hand, when things were low, when hearts were cold, when self and its interests had the uppermost place, then all these great objects were treated with heartless neglect. Look for example, at Nehemiah 13. When that beloved and faithful servant returned to Jerusalem, after an absence of certain days, he found, to his deep sorrow, that, even in that short time, various things had gone sadly astray; amongst the rest, the poor Levites had been left without anything to eat. " And I perceived that the portions of the Levites had not been given them; for the Levites and the singers that did the work were fled every one to his field." There were no "heaps" of firstfruits in those dismal days, and surely it was hard for men to work and sing when they had nothing to eat. This was not according to the law of Jehovah, nor according to His loving heart. It was a sad reproach upon the people that the Lord’s servants were obliged, through their gross neglect, to abandon His worship and His work, in order to keep themselves from starving.
This, truly, was a deplorable condition of things. Nehemiah felt it keenly, as we read, "Then contended I with the rulers, and said, why is the house of God forsaken? And I gathered them together, and set them in their place. Then brought all Judah the tithe of the corn, and the new wine, and the oil, unto the treasuries. And I made treasurers over the treasuries....for they were counted faithful;" - they were entitled to the confidence of their brethren - "and their office was to distribute unto their brethren." It needed a number of tried and faithful men to occupy the high position of distributing to their brethren the precious fruit of the people’s devotedness; they could take counsel together, and see that the Lord’s treasury was faithfully managed, according to His word, and the need of His true and bona fide workmen fully met, without prejudice or partiality.
Such was the lovely order of the God of Israel - an order to which every true Israelite such as Nehemiah and Hezekiah, would delight to attend. The rich tide of blessing flowed forth from Jehovah to His people, and back from His people to Him, and from that flowing tide His servants were to draw a full supply for all their need. It was a dishonour to Him to have the Levites obliged to return to their fields; it proved that His house was forsaken, and that there was no sustenance for His servants.
Now, the question may here be asked, What has all this to say to us? What has the church of God to learn from Deuteronomy 18: 1-8? In order to answer this question, we must turn to 1 Corinthians 9 where the inspired apostle deals with the very important subject of the support of the Christian ministry - a subject so little understood by the great mass of professing Christians. As to the law of the case, it is as distinct as possible. "Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written; that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless" - here grace shines out, in all its heavenly lustre - "we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. Do ye not know, that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. But" - here, again, grace asserts its holy dignity - "I have used none of these things; neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me; for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void. For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of; for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel! For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward; but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me. What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel." (1 Cor. 9: 7-18)
Here we have this interesting and weighty subject presented in all its bearings. The inspired apostle lays down, with all possible decision and clearness the divine law on the point. There is no mistaking it. "The Lord hath ordained that they that preach the gospel should live of the gospel;" that, just as the priests and the Levites, of old, lived on offerings presented by the people, so, now, those who are really called of God, gifted by Christ, and fitted by the Holy Ghost, to Preach the gospel, and who are giving themselves constantly and diligently, to that glorious work, are morally entitled to temporal support. It is not that they should look to those to whom they preach for a certain stipulated sum. There is no such idea as this in the New Testament. The workman must look to his Master, and to Him alone for support. Woe be to him if he looks to the church, or to men in any way The priests and Levites had their portion in and from Jehovah. He was the lot of their inheritance. True, He expected the people to minister to Him in the persons of His servants. He told them what to give, and blessed them in giving; it was their high privilege as well as their bounden duty to give; had they refused or neglected, it would have brought drought and barrenness upon their fields and vineyards. (Haggai 1: 5-11)
But the priests the Levites had to look only to Jehovah. If the people failed in their offerings, the Levites had to fly to their fields and work for their living. They could not go to law with any one for tithes and offerings; their only appeal was to the God of Israel who had ordained them to the work, given them the work to do.
So also with the Lord’s workmen, now; they must look only to Him. They must be well assured that He has fitted them for the work and called them to it ere they attempt to push out - if we may so express it - from the shore of circumstances, and give themselves wholly to the work of preaching. They must take their eyes completely off from men, from all creature streams and human props, and lean exclusively upon the living God. We have seen the most disastrous consequences resulting from acting under a mistaken impulse in this most solemn matter; men not called of God, or fitted for the work, giving up their occupations, and coming forth, as they said, to live by faith and give themselves to the work. Deplorable shipwreck was the result in every instance. Some, when they began to look the stern realities of the path straight in the face, became so alarmed, that they actually lost their mental balance, lost their reason for a time; some lost their peace; and some went right back into the world again.
In short, it is our deep and thorough conviction, after forty years’ observation, that the cases are few and far between in which it is morally safe and good for one to abandon his bread-winning calling in order to preach the gospel. It must be so distinct and unquestionable to the man himself, that he has only to say, with Luther, at the Diet of Worms, "Here am; I can do no otherwise: God help me! Amen" Then he may be perfectly sure that God will sustain him in the work to which He has called him, and meet all his need, "according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus." And as to men, and their thoughts respecting him and his course, he has simply to refer them to his Master. He is not responsible to them nor has he ever asked them for anything. If they were compelled to support him, reason would they might complain or raise questions; but, as they are not, they must just leave him, remembering that to his own Master he standeth or falleth.
But when we look at the splendid passage just quoted from 1 Corinthians 9, we find that the blessed apostle, after having established, beyond all question, his right to be supported, relinquishes it completely. "Nevertheless, I have used none of these things." He worked with his hands; he wrought with labour and travail night and day, in order not to be chargeable or burdensome to any. These hands," he says, "have ministered to my necessities, and those that were with me." He coveted no man’s silver, or gold, or apparel. He travelled, he preached, he visited from house to house, he was the laborious apostle, the earnest evangelist the diligent pastor, he had the care of all the churches. Was not he entitled to support? Assuredly he was. It ought to have been the joy of the church of God to minister to his every need. But he never enforced his claim; nay, he surrendered it. He supported himself and his companions by the labour of his hands; and all this as an example, as he says to the elders of Ephesus, "I have showed you all things how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.
Now, it is perfectly wonderful to think of this beloved and revered servant of Christ, with his extensive travels, from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum, his gigantic labours as an evangelist, a pastor and a teacher, and yet finding time to support himself and others by the work of his hands. Truly he occupied high moral ground. His case is a standing testimony against hirelingism, in every shape and form. The infidel’s sneering reference to well-paid ministers could have no application whatever to him. He certainly did not preach for hire.
And yet he thankfully received help from those who knew how to give it. Again and again, beloved assembly at Philippi ministered to the necessities of their revered and beloved father in Christ. How well for them that they did so! It will never be forgotten. Millions have read the sweet record of their devotedness, and been refreshed by the odour of their sacrifice; it is recorded in heaven where nothing of the kind is ever forgotten, yea, it is engraved on the very tablets of the heart of Christ. Hear how the blessed apostle pours out his grateful heart to his much loved children "I rejoice in the Lord greatly, that now at the last your care of me hath flourished again; wherein ye were also careful, but ye lacked opportunity. Not that I speak in respect of want;" - blessed, self-denying servant - "for I have learned in whatsoever state I am, to be content. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound; everywhere, and in all things I am instructed, both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need. I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me. Notwithstanding, ye have well done that ye did communicate with my affliction Now ye know Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church communicated with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only. For even in Thessalonica ye sent once and again unto my necessity. Not because I desire a gift, but I desire fruit that may abound to your account. But I have all and abound; I am full, having received from Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you, an odour of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing to God. But my God shall supply all your need, according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus." (Phil. 4: 10-19.)
What a rare privilege to be allowed to comfort the heart of such an honoured servant of Christ, at the close of his career, and in the solitude of his prison at Rome! How seasonable, how right, how lovely was their ministry! What joy to receive the apostle’s acknowledgments! And then how precious the assurance that their service had gone up, as an odour of sweet smell, to the very throne and heart of God! Who would not rather be a Philippian ministering to the apostle’s need, than a Corinthian calling his ministry in question, or a Galatian breaking his heart? How vast the difference! The apostle could not take anything from the assembly at Corinth. Their state did not admit of it. Individuals in that assembly did minister to him, and their service is recorded on the page of inspiration, remembered above, and it will be abundantly rewarded in the kingdom by-and-by. "I am glad of the coming of Stephanus and Fortunatus and Achaicus: for that which was lacking on your part they have supplied. For they have refreshed my spirit and yours: therefore acknowledge ye them that are such." (1 Cor. 16: 17, 18.)
Thus, then, from all that has passed before us, we learn, most distinctly, that both under the law and under the gospel, it is according to the revealed will, and according to the heart of God that those who are really called of Him to the work, and who devote themselves, earnestly, diligently and faithfully to it, should have the hearty sympathy and practical help of His people. All who love Christ will count it their deepest joy to minister to Him in the persons of His servants. When He Himself was here upon earth, He graciously accepted help from the hands of those who loved Him, and had reaped the fruit His most precious ministry - "certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils, and Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, and Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto Him of their substance." (Luke 8: 2, 3.)
Happy, highly privileged women! What joy be allowed to minister to the Lord of glory, in the days of His human need and humiliation! There stand their honoured names, on the divine page written down by God the Holy Ghost, to be read by untold millions, to be borne along the stream of time right onward into eternity. How well it was for those women that they did not waste their substance in self-indulgence, or hoard it up to be rust on their souls, or a positive curse, as money must ever be if not used for God!
But, on the other hand, we learn the urgent need on the part of all who take the place of workers, whether in or out of the assembly, of keeping themselves perfectly free from all human influence, all looking to men, in any shape or form. They must have to do with God in the secret of their own souls, or they will, assuredly, break down, sooner or later. They must look to Him alone for the supply of their need. If the church neglect them, the church will be the serious loser here and hereafter. If they can support themselves by the labour of their hands, without curtailing their direct service to Christ, so much the better; it is unquestionably the more excellent way. We are as persuaded of this as of the truth of any proposition that could be submitted to us. There is nothing more spiritually and morally noble than a truly gifted servant of Christ supporting himself and his family, by the sweat of his brow or the sweat of his brain, and, at the same time, giving himself diligently to the Lord’s work, whether as an evangelist, a pastor or a teacher. The moral antipodes of this is presented to our view in the person of a man who, without gift, or grace, or spiritual life, enters what is called the ministry, as a mere profession or means of living. The position of such a man is morally dangerous and miserable in extreme. We shall not dwell upon it, inasmuch as it does not come within the range of the subject which been engaging our attention, and we are only too thankful to leave it, and proceed with our chapter.
"When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto Lord; and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee. Thou shalt be perfect with the Lord thy God. For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners; but as for thee, the Lord thy God hath not suffered thee so to do." (Vers. 9-14.)
Now, it may be that, on reading the foregoing quotation, the reader feels disposed to ask what possible application it can have to professing Christians? We ask, in reply, Are there any Christians who are in the habit of going to the performances of wizards, magicians and necromancers? Are there any who take part in table- turning, spirit-rapping, mesmerism, or clairvoyance?* If so, the passage which we have just quoted very pointedly and solemnly, upon all such. We most surely believe that all these things which we have named are of the devil. This may sound harsh and severe; but we cannot help that. We are thoroughly persuaded that when people lend themselves to the awful business of bringing up, in any way, the spirits of the departed, they are simply putting themselves into the hands of the devil to be deceived and deluded by his lies. What, we may ask, do those who hold in their hands a perfect revelation from God, want of table-turning and spirit-rapping? Surely nothing And, if not content with that precious word, they turn to the spirits of departed friends or others, what can they expect but that God will judicially give them over to be blinded and deceived by wicked spirits who come up and personate the departed, and tell all manner lies?
{*Some of our readers may object to our classing with mesmerism with spirit-rapping and table-turning. It may be they would regard it in the same light, and use it in the same way, as ether or chloroform, in medical practice. We do not attempt to dogmatise on the point. We can only say that we could have nothing whatever to do with it. We consider it a solemn thing for any one to allow himself to be placed by another in a state of utter unconsciousness [mesmerism, Compiler.], for any purpose whatsoever. And as to the idea of listening to, or being guided by the ravings of a person in that state, we can only regard it as absolutely absurd, if not positively sinful.}
We cannot attempt go fully into this subject here. We have no time, for anything of the sort. We merely fell it to be our solemn duty to warn the reader about having anything whatever to do with consulting departed spirits. We believe it to be most dangerous work. We do not enter upon the question as to whether souls can come back to this world; no doubt, God could permit them to come if He saw fit; but this we leave. The great point for us to keep ever before our hearts is the perfect sufficiency of divine revelation, what do we want of departed spirits? The rich man imagined that if Lazarus were to go back to earth and speak to his five brethren, it would have a great effect. "I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father’s house; for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham; but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead" (Luke 16: 27-31.)
Here we have a thorough settlement of this question. If people will not hear the word of God, if they will not believe its clear and solemn statements as to themselves, their present condition, their future destiny, neither will they be persuaded though a thousand departed souls were to come back and tell them what they saw, and heard, and felt in heaven above or in hell beneath; it would produce no saving or permanent effect upon them. It might cause great excitement, great sensation, furnish great material for talk, and fill the newspapers far and wide; but there it would end. People would go on all the same, with their traffic and gain, their folly and vanity, their pleasure-hunting and self-indulgence. "If they hear not Moses and the prophets," - and we may add, Christ and His holy apostles - "neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. The heart that will not bow to scripture will be not convinced by anything; and as to the true believer, he has in scripture all he can possibly want, and therefore he has no need to have recourse to table-turning, spirit-rapping or magic. "And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter; should not a people seek unto their God for the living to the dead? To the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah 8: 19, 20.)
Here is the divine resource of the Lord’s people, at all times and in all places; and to this it is that Moses refers the congregation in the splendid paragraph which closes our chapter. He shows them, very distinctly, that they had no need to apply to familiar spirits, enchanters, wizards, or witches, which all were an abomination to the Lord. The Lord thy God," he says, " will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me unto him ye shall hearken; according to all that desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb, in day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear the voice of the Lord my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. And the Lord said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. But the prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." (Vers. 15-22.)
We can be at no loss to know who this Prophet is, namely, our adorable Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. In the third chapter of Acts, Peter so applies the words of Moses. "He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you; whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things, whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people." (Vers. 20-23.)
How precious the privilege of hearing the voice of such a Prophet! It is the voice of God speaking through the lips of the Man Christ Jesus - speaking, not in thunder, not with flaming fire, nor the lightning’s flash, but in that still small voice of love and mercy which falls in soothing power, on the broken heart and contrite spirit, which distills like the gentle dew of heaven upon the thirsty ground. This voice we have in the holy scriptures, that precious revelation which comes so constantly and so powerfully before us, in our studies on this blessed book of Deuteronomy. We must never forget this. The voice of scripture is the voice of Christ, and the voice of Christ is the voice of God.
We want no more. If any one presumes to come with a fresh revelation, with some new truth not contained in the divine Volume, we must judge him and his communication by the standard of scripture and reject them utterly. "Thou shalt not be afraid of him" False prophets come with great pretensions, high-sounding words and sanctimonious bearing. Moreover they seek to surround themselves with a sort of dignity, weight and impressiveness which are apt to impose on the ignorant. But they cannot stand the searching power of the word of God. Some simple clause of holy scripture will strip them of all their imposing surroundings, and cut up by the roots their wonderful revelations. Those who know the voice of the true Prophet will not listen to any other; those who have heard the voice of the good Shepherd will not listen to the voice of a stranger.
Reader, see that you listen only to the voice of Jesus.
C. H. Mackintosh, Notes on the Pentateuch — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv1–2 Vers. 1-8. After the ruling powers, the judges and…
RIGHTS OF THE PRIESTS AND THE LEVITES. THE ARTS OF DIVINATION OF THE HEATHEN TO BE AVOIDED. PROPHETS PROMISED WHOM ISRAEL MUST HEAR. THE FALSE AND PRESUMPTUOUS PROPHET TO BE PUT TO DEATH.
Vers. 1-8. After the ruling powers, the judges and the king, come the priests and the Levites. In regard to them Moses repeats here the law as before laid down (cf. Num_18:20, Num_18:23, Num_18:24)
Read full note →
The priests the Levites, the whole tribe of Levi; i.e. the whole tribe of Levi, including both the priests and the general body of the Levites. They shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire. "The offerings of the Lord made by fire" (literally, the fires or firings of Jehovah), here referred to, were the meal offering, the sin offering, and the trespass effusing (cf. Num_18:9) And his inheritance ; i.e. of Jehovah, what was appropriated to him, and from him to the tribe of Levi, such as tithes, firstlings, and firstfruits.
Vers. 1-8. The support of the ministry the duty of God"s people.
In a note on a corresponding passage in Num_18:21, Num_18:22, Dr. Jameson remarks, "Neither the priests nor the Levites were to possess any allotments of land, but to depend entirely upon him who liberally provided for them out of his own portion; and this law was subservient to many important purposes, such as that, being exempted from the cares and labors of worldly business, they might be exclusively devoted to his service; that a bond of mutual love and attachment might be formed between the people and the Levites, who, as performing religious services for the people, derived their subsistence from them; and further, that, being the more easily dispersed among the different tribes, they might be more useful in instructing and directing the people." This suggestive note seems to us to contain the pith of the Mosaic instructions concerning the maintenance of the Levites. (For the several details, see Exposition.) We can scarcely fail to see in this passage principles far wider in their application than to the Jewish people alone, and reaching much further onward than the times of the old covenant. And though, as it falls to the lot of the preacher to expound these principles, it may not quite fall within his preference to do so, if he is, like the Levites, supported by the contributions of the people, yet, when he is continuously expounding the Word of God, he may not omit to teach the people that" he that is taught in the Word should communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things." This is part of the counsel of God," and should not be withheld, since it is not for his own sake, but for the sake of the entire ministry of the Lord Jesus, for which, if he is faithful, he will plead. The principles which may be expounded by the ministers of the New Testament are these
I A GODLY, ABLE MINISTRY IS THE WANT OF THE PEOPLE. True, there are now no sacrifices to be offered, nor is there any complicated ritual of service to be performed; but there is a mighty work to be done in heralding the gospel "to every creature," and in "building up the body of Christ." And so long as sin and ignorance prevail, so long will the people need those who will lead the way in seeking their expulsion and extinction. For this end our Lord has instituted a New Testament ministry. The work now to be fulfilled is that of teaching and preaching Jesus Christ. (Eph_4:1-16 1Co 9) "Faithful men, able to teach," are to be appointed. These are the qualifications. The Church needs no priesthood in it. It is itself the priesthood for the world. Ministers do not come now in a family, a tribe, or line. The figment of apostolical succession is "less than nothing, and vanity." It is not by the law of "a carnal commandment" that any ministry is valid now. But wherever God"s Spirit fills a man with holy yearning for this work, where the needful gifts are imparted, where God"s providence leads and clears the way, and the divinely inspired voice of a free Christian people says to him, "Come and be our teacher and guide in the ways of the Lord," there are calls to a ministry such as cannot be mistaken, and such as ought not to be ignored. And when, on such a ministry, the seals of Divine approval are set, when the minister can see the law of Christ which is promulgated by his lips, reproduced in men"s hearts and lives, when he can see many a wanderer reclaimed through his pleading and prayers, then can his ministry show a like validity even with that of Paul, for he, like him, can point to one and another and say, "If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you, for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.
II THE MINISTRY OF THE WORD DEMANDS THE DEVOTION OF THE ENTIRE LIFE. We by no means intend here that none should teach or preach but those who can give their whole time thereto. But that, as a part of the application of the "division of labor" in the Church, the demands on those who make the ministry of the Word their care are such, that only the entire consecration of their life to it will enable them fittingly to meet them. To take the oversight of the flock of God: to give unto each one their portion of meat in due season: to visit the fatherless and widow, the poor and the sick: to observe the signs of the times: to know what Israel ought to do, and to direct them in doing it: to keep abreast of the thinking of the day, whether helpful or adverse: and so to declare the whole counsel of God, as by manifestation of the truth to commend himself to every conscience: all these things go to make up a work so varied, so momentous, so exhausting, that nothing less than "giving himself wholly" to it can enable any man even approximately to discharge it.
III THIS BEING THE CASE, IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT THE MINISTER SHOULD NOT BE ENTANGLED IN IMPEDING CARES. The Levites were not to have great estates that might draw off their interest from the duties of their office, nor were they to be left at an uncertainty respecting the supply of their temporal need. Even so now. It will greatly fetter and hamper a minister if he is entangled with the affairs of his life, whether by having so much on his hands that his time is absorbed in secular, which ought to be devoted to sacred, things; or by having so little on which he can rely, that the anxiety about feeding the people with living bread, is diverted from its proper channel, by anxiety about having the "bread that perisheth" for himself and his.
IV CONSEQUENTLY IT IS AN ORDINANCE OF GOD THAT THE MINISTRY, WHICH IS FOR THE PEOPLE, SHOULD BE THE CARE OF THE PEOPLE. This may be set on several grounds.
1. It is manifestly right. If a man gives up all ways of securing temporal comforts for the sake of serving the people, they are bound to secure him the temporal comforts in some other way.
2. The Apostle Paul distinctly lays it down as an appointment by the Lord. (1Co_9:14) (Paul waived this. right, rather than hinder the gospel by pressing it, as is now done under like circumstances; but it was a right, nevertheless, and a Divine appointment.)
1. Wherever a people cause a minister to be embarrassed in temporalities, they will suffer for it. The minister"s work, teaching, and preaching will all bear the traces of such embarrassment, and will be the weaker for it.
2. This Divine ordinance helps to promote the mutual care of minister and people for each other. They reap his spiritual things; he reaps their carnal things.
3. There is also thus a high and holy spiritual education of the people, in calling out their own kindly and just activities to uphold that ministry by which they themselves are upheld. The ministry is not to be found for them, but to be maintained by them. Thus there is seen to be a guard against abuse of position on either side.
V ISRAEL WAS TO GUARD ITS OWN PRIESTHOOD AS BEING ITSELF A PRIESTHOOD FOR THE WORLD. So Churches are to guard the honor of their own ministry, because they have a ministry for the world. It is not for the ministers" own sakes that they are to be thus cared for, but on account of the high and holy cause which they represent, and which they seek, however imperfectly, to maintain. They are to be esteemed very highly in love for their works sake; for the work which they fulfill is that which is purifying and saving the world. It is, in fact, by thus supporting a ministry that the Church is fulfilling its commission, "to preach the gospel to every creature." Of course, it follows from all this, that a ministry can claim such and such support, only so far as it is carrying out the Divine intent, or seeking in all fidelity to do so. It is not that God has put clergy as a kind of official police over the people; but that those who love righteousness are to show it by upholding the preaching of righteousness, and that those who love their Savior"s Name are to sustain the heralds of that Name, both at home and abroad.
HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR. Vers. 1-8. God"s provision for the priests and Levites.
From the limitations of the monarchy, Moses next turns to the provision for the priests the Levites, and all the tribe of Levi." They were not to receive any estate in Canaan beyond the suburbs of certain cities. They were to take the Lord as their inheritance." We have already seen that Palestine was a good land for training up a spiritual people; it was a land where dependence upon God was constantly enforced. Bat among this people, thus invited to depend upon God, there was a tribe whose dependence upon God was to be further stimulated by the absence of any tangible inheritance. Their life was thus to be a life of trust in God"s continual care. In these circumstances the Lord made certain laws about the priests" due. He took good care of the tribe that trusted him. It has been supposed that the animals, of which the priests were to have a definite part, were not merely sacrifices, but also those privately slaughtered, and the words (jbZh yjebzO) translated "them that offer a sacrifice" will bear the rendering those who slaughter animals." Still, it seems more probable that it was by the central altar that the priests and Levites were to live. Assuming this, then, the following lessons are here taught.
I THOSE WHO TRUST GOD SHALL NEVER BE DISAPPOINTED IN THEIR ALLOTTED PORTION. For as a matter of fact, "the shoulder, the two cheeks, and the maw" were deemed dainty portions of the animal. The best portions ascended to God in the altar fire, and then the second best were assigned to the priests and Levites, while the offerer was content with what was left. God and his ministers were regarded as the guests of the Jewish worshippers, and, as the guests enjoy the best which we can offer in the exercise of our hospitality, the support of the priests and Levites was amply secured. These dues of the priests and Levites seem to have been regularly paid while the people remained true to God; of course, their support would suffer in sinful and idolatrous times, yet, even when they suffered with the neglect of God"s altar, it was suffering with God.
And as a rule those who trust God are not disappointed with his provision. Even when it is limited in amount, he is sure to give sublime compensations. Though ministerial support is not what it ought to be, there is no class of men who enjoy life so much as God"s servants.
II THOSE WHO ARE THE LORD"S CHOSEN SERVANTS ARE CALLED PRE-EMINENTLY TO THE LIFE OF TRUST. There is a great temptation to encircle ourselves with so much worldly possession as that trust in God will be difficult and seem superfluous. In other words, there is an effort to be able to live by sight rather than by faith. But the Master whom we serve is realized by faith, and his kingdom must be propagated by faith. Hence he so arranges the lot of his servants that a loud call for faith is always ringing in their ears, and they should never neglect that call. The priests and Levites were at liberty to purchase land and leave it to their children, and doubtless many of them so far made assurance doubly sure, and took a bond of fate." Yet the life of faith, the dependence upon God"s altar, was better and wholesomer than the life of sight.
III THE PEOPLE HAD NO RIGHT TO WITHHOLD THE PRIESTS AND LEVITES DUE BECAUSE OF ANY PRIVATE PATRIMONY INDIVIDUALS MIGHT POSSESS. A good deal of deficient ministerial support is due to the people very unfairly discounting private incomes and often exaggerating them, so as to save themselves. Ministers may inherit means through the kindly consideration of parents and friends; but this is no reason why people should hold their hand in the matter of ministerial support. The Lord specially provided that the Levite (ver. 8) should have like portions to eat beside that which cometh of the sale of his patrimony. The truth is that private means invariably go to make a public ministry more effective, if the ministry is true at all. They are not selfishly utilized, but used as a matter of" stewardship. In such circumstances, instead of being a hindrance to liberality, these private possessions should be a stimulus, as they are so much more in the line of things devoted to the Lord.
IV DUE RESPECT SHOULD BE SHOWN TO A DEVOTED SPIRIT. The case of the Levite here referred to corresponds to a minister who has responded to a Divine call, against what one might call the dictates of worldly prudence. He has followed the inward impulse (ver. 6), and come to aid the priests at the central altar from his snug patrimony at home. Such devotion is to be considered and rewarded. The Levite, who was so interested as to relinquish his country life and patrimony, deserved the payment of the dues at the altar. So with the generous devotion of the ministers of God. When men relinquish good worldly prospects for the Church, their doing so should be considered. R.M.E.
HOMILIES BY J. ORR Vers. 1, 2. The Lord our inheritance.
True of the priests and Levites, it is true also of each believer, that "the Lord is his inheritance". (Psa_16:5, Psa_16:6) He is in this respect a "priest unto God" (1Pe_2:9; Rev_1:6)
I THE MEANING OF THE EXPRESSION. Inheritance equal to lot, part, share. Inheritance in families the share which each receives of the patrimony. In the partition of Canaan, each tribe had its lot, its portion, its share. God"s portion or inheritance was the tithes, with the prescribed parts of the sacrifices, the firstfruits, etc. Levi had as his portion God himself, involving a share of the provision from God"s table (ver. 1).
II THE GRANDEUR OF THE TRUTH.
1. The believer possesses God. God is a better possession for the soul than any of his gifts. "It is a thought which lies at the foundation of all true religion, that God himself is the Supreme Good, the true and real portion of the soul.... More intimately than light becomes the possession of the eye on which it streams, or air of the organs of breathing which inhale it, or the food we eat, assimilated and diffused through the physical system, incorporates itself with the nature of him who partakes of it, does he, that Infinite One, the Light of all our seeing, the Bread of Life, the nutriment of our highest being, become the deep inward portion of each soul that loves him" (Caird, sermon on "The Christian"s Heritage").
2. In possessing God, the believer possesses all things. And this, though in an outward sense he has nothing. (2Co_6:10; cf. 1Co_3:21-23)
(1) God provides for him out of the fullness at his command. Possessing God, the Possessor of all, he knows that he will want "no good thing". (Psa_84:11) Temporally and spiritually, he will be provided for, kept, saved, delivered (Psa_37:3, Psa_37:9, Psa_37:11, Psa_37:25, 34 Ps 121; Mat_6:33; Eph_1:3)
(2) All things work together for his good. (Rom_8:28)
(3) He perceives and enjoys God in all things, as none else can. (Ps 104)
(4) He is one of the" heirs of God" in "the times of the restitution of all things", (Act_3:24) when the redeemed enter on their glory. (Mat_25:34)
Let the saint reflect on his inheritance in God.
(1) How surpassingly rich it is!
(2) How delightsome it is! (Psa_16:6)
(3) How enduring it is eternal! (2Co_4:17, 2Co_4:18)
(4) How all-satisfying it is! J.O. (Psa_73:26)
HOMILIES BY D. DAVIES Vers. 1-8. The true priest is the highest type of man.
God here lays down the lines along which men may rise to the dignity of the true priesthood. The ordinance did not secure the ideal reality. "The Law was weak through the flesh." Human choice and endeavor were requisite to attain to God"s ideal priest. It is his privilege to receive from God, and to reveal to men.
I DIVINE CHOICE AND HUMAN DESIRE MUST COMBINE TO MAKE A REAL PRIEST. The man, though born a Levite, must "come with all the desire of his mind unto the place which the Lord shall choose" (ver. 6). The human will must co-operate with God"s will. This is the product of the second birth. In this ancient arrangement, we see the forecast of the Christian life the true priesthood.
II THE PRIEST"S OFFICE IS, NOT FOR HONOR, BUT FOR SERVICE. "He shall minister in the Name of the Lord his God." In other words, he shall serve in the stead of God, and by his authority. This is the hardest work, yet the most honorable. No toil or self-sacrifice can he decline while appearing in the stead of God, for he serves the noblest part of man. In God"s kingdom there is no honor apart from character; and character is attained by service.
III THE PRIEST"S EARTHLY NEEDS SHALL BE MET WITHOUT ANXIETY ON HIS PART. "They that minister at the altar shall partake of the altar" (vers. 3, 4, 8). While we are employed on the King"s errands, the King will provide our rations. We have a Divine guarantee that bodily wants shall be supplied, for God himself is our inheritance. It is surely better to trust the Fount rather than the stream, the First Cause rather than the intermediate channel, the Creator rather than the creature. The priest shall be supplied before other men, for the firstfruits of corn and wine and oil are his. They that serve God without stint shall never be forgotten.
IV THE TRUE PRIEST OCCUPIES THE APEX OF THE SOCIAL PYRAMID. The true priest really rules. For him all other orders of men toil. For the priest to possess any earthly inheritance would be a burden, a care, an injury. Others till the ground for him, thresh his corn, and winnow his grain. As a god, he receives. For other men the inferior creation toils and groans. The unreasoning animals bear his burdens and do his will. Yet these men, served well by the subordinate orders of life, wait upon the priest, and minister to his human wants. And in return, the real priest ministers to the hunger of the soul, and supplies light and guidance and hope. The real priest is the greatest benefactor to the human race; the counterfeit priest is a pest. D.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On v1
SPEAKERS FOR GOD -
II. THE PRIEST
Read full note →
Deu_18:1-8
THE priesthood naturally follows the kingship in the regulations regarding the position of the governing classes. But it was an older and much more radical constituent in the polity of Israel than we have seen the kingship to be. Originally, the priests were the normal and regular exponents of Yahwehs will. They received and gave forth to the people oracles from Him, and they were the fountain of moral and spiritual guidance. The Torah of the priests, which on the older view was the Pentateuch as we have it, or its substance at least, which Moses had put into their hands, is much more probably now regarded as the guidance given by means of the sacred lot and the Urim and Thummim. Because of their special nearness to and intimacy with God, the priests were in contact with the Divine will and could receive special Divine guidance; and in days when the voice of prophecy was dumb, or in matters which it left untouched, the priestly Torah, or direction, was the one authorized Divine voice. But this was not the only function of the priests. Sacrificial worship was a more fundamental function. Wellhausen and his school indeed seem inclined to deny that as priests of Yahweh they had any Divinely ordered connection with sacrifice. But the truer view is that their power to give Torah to Israel depended entirely upon their being the custodians of the places where Yahweh had caused His name to be remembered. The theory was that, as they approached Him with sacrifices in His sanctuaries, they consequently could speak for Him; so that the guarding of His shrines, and the offering of the peoples sacrifices there were their first duties. In fact they were the mediators between Yahweh and Israel Yahweh was King, but He was invisible, and the priests were His visible earthly representatives. The dues, which in a merely secular state would have gone to the king, as rent for the lands held of him, were employed for their appointed uses by the priests, as the servants and representatives of the heavenly King who had bestowed the land upon Israel and allotted to each family its portion. Occupying a middle position, then, between the two parties to the Covenant by which Israel had become Yahwehs chosen people, they spoke for the people when they appeared before Yahweh, and for Him when they came forth to the people. They were, as we have said, the oldest and most important of the ruling classes, and must have been from early times a special order set apart for the service of Israels God.
The main passages in Deuteronomy which bear upon the position and character of the priesthood and of the tribe of Levi are the following. In Deu_18:1-8; Deu_10:6-9, and Deu_27:9-14 the strictly priestly functions of the tribe of Levi are dealt with; in Deu_17:9 ff; Deu_19:17, the judicial functions; in Deu_21:1-5 their function in connection with sanitary matters is referred to. Besides these there are the various injunctions to invite the Levites to the sacrificial feasts, because they have no inheritance, and a number of references to the priesthood as a well-known body, the constitution and duties of which did not need special treatment. These last are of themselves sufficient to prove beyond question that in dealing with the priests and Levites the author of this book writes from out of the midst of a long established system. He does not legislate for the introduction of priests, neither does he refer to a priestly system recently elaborated by himself, and only now coming into operation. He does not tell us how priests are to be appointed, nor from whom, nor with what ceremonies of consecration they are to be inducted into their office. In fact the writer speaks of what concerns the priests and Levites in a manner which makes it certain that in his day there were, and had long been, Levites who were priests, and Levites of whom it may at least be said that they were probably nothing more than subordinates in regard to religious duty. In a word, while presupposing an established system of priestly and Levitical service, he nowhere attempts to give any clear or complete view of that system. His whole mind is turned towards the people. It is about their duties and their rights he is anxious, about their duties perhaps more than their rights; and he touches upon matters connected with others than the people only in a cursory way. In this matter, especially, he clearly needs to be supplemented by information drawn from other sources, and his every word about it shows that he is not introducing or referring to anything new. Any modifications he makes are plainly stated and are limited to a few special points.
The chief passage for our purpose is, however, Deu_18:1-8, where we have the agents of the cultus defined, and directions for the dues to be given them. In Deu_18:1 these agents are clearly said to be the whole tribe of Levi; for the phrase "The priests, the Levites, the whole tribe of Levi," cannot mean the priests and the Levites who together make up the whole tribe of Levi. Notwithstanding the arguments of Keil and Curtiss and other ingenious scholars, the unprejudiced mind must, I think, accept Dillmanns rendering, "The Levitical priests, the whole tribe of Levi," the latter clause standing in apposition to the former. In that case Deuteronomy must be held to regard every Levite as in some sense priestly. This view is confirmed by Deu_10:8 f., where distinctly priestly duties are assigned to the "tribe of Levi." Some indeed assert that this verse was written by a later editor, but valid reasons for the assertion are somewhat difficult to find. Neither Kuenen nor Oettli nor Dillmann find any. We may, then, accept it as Deuteronomic since critics of such various leanings do so. To quote Dillmann, "Beyond question, therefore, the tribe as a whole appears here as called to sacred, especially priestly service; only it does not follow from that that every individual member of the tribe could exercise these functions at his pleasure, without there being any organization and gradation among these servants of God." No, that does not follow; and this very passage {Deu_18:1-8} shows that it does not, for it makes a very clear distinction. In Deu_18:3 ff. the dues of the priest are dealt with, while in Deu_18:6 ff. those of the Levite in one special case are provided for. As if to emphasize the distinction between them, the priest in Deu_18:3 is not called "Levitical," as he is in other passages.
Further, the verses concerning the Levite also emphasize the distinction; for few will be able to adopt the view that here in Deu_18:6 ff. every Levite who chooses is authorized to become a priest, by the mere process of presenting himself at the central sanctuary. The author of Deuteronomy must have known, better probably than any one now considering this matter, that the priests in the central sanctuary would never consent to divide their privileges and their income with every member of their tribe who might choose to come up to Jerusalem. Indeed, if they had received each and every one, the crowd would have been an embarrassment instead of a help. As a matter of fact, when the Deuteronomic reform came to be put in practice, this free admission of every Levite to the service of the Jerusalem Temple was not adopted, and it is prima facie improbable that the author of it can have meant his provision in that sense. The meaning seems to be that, as only those Levites who were employed in the central sanctuary could be de facto priests, those living in the country were not priests in the same sense; and the regulation made is that if any Levite came up to Jerusalem and was received into the ranks of the Temple Levites, i.e., the sacrificial priests, he should receive the same dues as the others performing the same work did. But though no conditions of admission to the Temple service. are mentioned, obviously there must have been some conditions, some division of labor, some organization involving gradations in rank, and perhaps also some limitation as to time in the case of such voluntary service as is here dealt with. For, as Dillmann points out, it is not said that the service of every Temple Levite is the same; numbers of them may have had no higher work than the Levites under the laws of the Priest Codex.
Moreover the other functions assigned to the priests confirm the argument, and prove that in the time of Deuteronomy distinctions of rank among the Levites must have been firmly established. They had a place in the public justiciary, even in the supreme court, "in the place which Yahweh their God" had chosen. {Deu_17:9; Deu_19:17} Not only so, the law concerning a man found slain in Deu_21:1-5, implies that there were in the cities throughout the land priests, the sons of Levi, whom "Yahweh thy God hath chosen to minister unto Him and to bless in the name of Yahweh, and according to their word shall every controversy and every stroke be." Now it cannot possibly have been the intention of the author of Deuteronomy that every member of the tribe of Levi should have equal power to decide such matters. If in his view every Levite was a priest, then we should have this impossible state of affairs, that the highest courts for judicial process should be in the hands of a class which was more largely indebted to the generosity of the rich for its maintenance than any other in the country. It seems plain therefore that every Levite could not exercise full priestly functions because of his birth. Clearly, if any Levite might become a priest it was only in the same sense in which every Napoleonic soldier was said to carry a marshals baton in his knapsack.
Finally, in this passage (Deu_18:5), by the words "him and his sons for ever," which refer back to "the priest," a hereditary character of the priesthood is asserted. This phrase is remarkably parallel to that so frequently used by P, "Aaron and his sons"; and though we are not told in what family or families the priesthood was hereditary, it must have been so in some. But in Deu_10:6-7, the family of Aaron is mentioned by the Deuteronomist as having hereditary right to the priesthood at the central shrine. There can therefore be no doubt that in the time of the author of Deuteronomy priesthood was hereditary, perhaps in several families, but certainly in the family of Aaron.
The remaining point in these verses of chapter 18, is the dues. As the whole tribe had no land, so the whole tribe had a share in the dues paid by the people to their Divine King. In Deu_18:3 ff. we have a statement of what these were. The whole tribe of Levi are to eat "the offerings of Yahweh made by fire, and His inheritance. And they shall have no inheritance among their brethren: Yahweh is their inheritance, as He hath spoken unto them." The only place in Scripture in which such a promise is given is Num_18:20; Num_18:24, so that these passages, if not referred to by the author of Deuteronomy, must be founded upon a tradition already old in his time. As the servants of Yahweh, the Levites were to be wholly Yahwehs care; as His representatives, they were to use for the supply of their needs all such portions of the offerings made to Him by fire as were not to be consumed on the altar. Their remaining provision was to be "His," i.e., Yahwehs "inheritance," or rather "portion," or that which belongs to Him. Now Yahwehs "portion" consisted of all the other sacred dues (besides the sacrifices) which should be paid to Yahweh, such as the tithes, the firstlings, and the first fruits. On these the whole tribe of Levi was to live, and so be free to give their time to the special business of the sanctuary, and to related duties, in so far as they were called upon.
But there were to be distinctions. In Deu_18:3-5 we have a special statement of what was to be paid by the people to the priests, i.e., the sacrificing priests. Of every animal offered in sacrifice, except those offered as whole burnt-offerings, they were to receive "the shoulder, the two cheeks, and the maw," all choice pieces. Further, they were to receive the "first fruits of corn, wine, oil, and the first of the fleece of the sheep." For the priests of one sanctuary these would be quite provision enough, though the word translated "first fruits," reshith, is very indefinite, and probably meant much or little, according as the donor was liberal or churlish. But how does this agree with that which is bestowed upon the priests according to the Priest Codex? In the passage corresponding to this {Lev_7:31-34} the wave breast and the heave thigh are the portions which are to be bestowed upon "Aaron the priest and his sons, as a due forever from the children of Israel"; and where the first fruits are dealt with {Num_18:12 ff.} "the first of the fleece of the sheep" is not mentioned. That is an addition made by the author of Deuteronomy; but what of "the shoulder, the two cheeks, and the maw"? Are they a substitute for the "wave breast and the heave thigh," or are they an addition? If we hold that the laws in the Pentateuch were all given by Moses in the wilderness, and in the order in which they stand, it will be most natural to think that what we have here is meant to be an addition to what Numbers prescribes. But if it is established that Deuteronomy is a distinct work, written at a different period from the other books of the Pentateuch, then, though there is not sufficient evidence to justify a dogmatic decision on either side, the weight of probability is in favor of the supposition that the Deuteronomic provision is a substitute, or at least an alternative, for what we have in Numbers. The fact that the prescription in Numbers is not repeated makes for that view, as well as the fact that Deuteronomy does not as a rule tend to increase the burdens on the people. Keils view, that Deuteronomy and Numbers are dealing with quite different sacrifices, will hardly stand examination. He thinks that the feasts at which the firstlings, turned into money, and the third-year tithes were eaten, are referred to here, while in Numbers it is the ordinary peace-offerings which are dealt with. But the postponed firstlings were eaten at the sanctuary, and would consequently come under the head of ordinary sacrifices; and the third-year tithes were eaten in the local centers, so that the bringing of the priestly portions would be as difficult in this case as in the case of the slaughterings for ordinary meals, which Keil, partly for that reason, thinks cannot be referred to here. On the whole, the best opinion seems to be that Deuteronomy has here different prescriptions from those in Numbers, and that probably there is a considerable interval of time between the two.
In Deu_18:6-8 the Levite as distinguished from the priest is dealt with, though by no means fully. Only in one respect are special regulations given. When such a one came to do duty at the central sanctuary, he was to receive his share of the sacrifices with the rest.
In Chapter 1, the main outlines of the Deuteronomic system of priestly arrangements have been placed alongside those of the Book of the Covenant and JE, and those of P, with a view to decide whether they could all have been the work of one lawgivers life. Here they must be compared in order that we may ascertain whether a view of the development of the priestly tribe which will do justice to these various documents and their provisions can be suggested.
Some schools of critics offer the hypothesis that there was no special priesthood till late in the time of the kings. From the beginning, they say, the head of each household was the family priest, and secular men, such as the kings, and men of other tribes than the Levites, could be and were priests, and offered sacrifice even at Jerusalem. With Deuteronomy the tribe of Levi was established as the priestly tribe, and only after the Exile was priesthood restricted to the sons of Aaron. But this scheme does justice to one set of passages only at the expense of another. It accounts for all that is anomalous in the history, and pushes aside the main and consistent affirmation of all our authorities, that from the earliest days the tribe of Levi had a special connection with sacred things and a special position in Israel. To what straits its advocates are reduced may be seen in the fact that Wellhausen has to declare that there were two tribes of Levi, one purely secular that was all but destroyed in an attack upon Shechem, and which afterwards disappeared, and a later ecclesiastical and somewhat factitious tribe, or caste, which "towards the end of the monarchy arose out of the separate priestly families of Judah." A more improbable suggestion than that can hardly be conceived.
But historical analogy, the favorite weapon of these very critics, also condemns it. Let us look at the growth of the priesthood in other ancient nations. In small and isolated communities the head of the household was generally the family priest, and in all probability this was the case in the various separate tribes of which Israel was composed; at least it was so in the households of the patriarchs. But, in communities formed by amalgamation of different tribes-and according to modern ideas Israel was so formed-there was almost always super-induced upon that more primitive state of things another and different arrangement. In antiquity no bond could hold together tribes or families conscious of different descent, save the bond of religion. Consequently, whenever such an amalgamation took place, the very first thing which had to be done was to establish religious rites common to the whole new community, which of course were not the care of the heads of households as such. Each separate section of the composite body kept up, no doubt, the family rites; but there had to be a common worship, and of course a special priesthood, for the new community. This is sufficiently attested for the Greeks and Romans by De Coulanges, who in his "La Cite Antique" gathers together such a mass of authorities in regard to this matter that few will be inclined to dispute his conclusion. On page 146 he says: "Several tribes might unite, on condition that the worship of each was respected. When such an alliance was entered into, the city or state came into existence. It is of little importance to inquire into the causes which induced several tribes to unite; what is certain is that the bond of the new association was again a religion. The tribes which grouped themselves to form a state never failed to light a sacred fire, and to set up a common religion." But the family and tribal rites continued to exist as sacra privata, just as the central government dominated but did not destroy the family and tribal governments.
It may be objected that these customs are proved only for the Aryan races, and that, though proved for them, they form no valid analogy for Semitic peoples. But besides the fact that part of the statements we have quoted are obviously true of Israel, we have a guarantee that the principle enunciated is also valid for it. The whole process traced in the religious progress of the Aryan nations is based upon the worship of ancestors. Now one of the critical discoveries is that ancestor-worship was a part of the religion of the tribes which afterwards united to form the Israelite nation. Some, like Stade, tell us that that was the early religion of Israel itself. In that form the theory is, I think, to be rejected; but there would seem to be little doubt that, before the birth of the nation, ancestor-worship was much practiced by the Hebrew tribes. If so, we may quite safely take over the analogy we have established, and believe that when Moses united the tribes into a nation, the religion of Yahweh was the absolutely necessary connecting link which bound them together. For though the tribes were related, and are represented as the descendants of Abraham, they must have varied considerably from each other in religious beliefs and usages. By Moses these variations were extinguished, as far as that was possible, by the establishment of an exclusive Yahweh-worship as the national cult; and to carry on this, not the heads of households, but a priesthood that represented the nation, must have been selected. But if so, who would most naturally be selected for this duty? A sentence from De Coulanges will show that in this case the tribe of Levi would almost necessarily be chosen. Speaking of cases in which a composite state relieved itself of the trouble of inventing a new worship by adopting the special god of one of the component tribes, he says: "But when a family consented to share its god in this fashion it reserved for itself at least the priesthood." Now if that was the case in Israel, the priesthood of the tribe of Levi would at once become a necessity. Whether Yahweh had been ever known to the other tribes or not, there can be little doubt that the knowledge of Him which made them a nation and started them on their unique career of spiritual discovery came from the Mosaic tribe and family.
The God whom the family worshipped became the God of the confederacy, and they would he the natural guardians of His sanctuary. This would not in the least involve special sanctity and meekness on the part of the tribe, as some insist. They would remain a tribe like the others; hut their leading men would discharge the functions of priests for the confederated nation. It is difficult, indeed, to see why any one else should have been thought of: most likely the arrangement was made as a thing of course.
But if there was such a common worship, there must have been a sanctuary for it, and at it the Levitic priests must have discharged their functions. Now though the Tabernacle, as P knows it, is not spoken of either in JE or in Deuteronomy, a "tent of meeting" at which Jehovah revealed Himself to Moses and to which the people went to seek Yahweh {Exo_33:7 ff.} is known to all our authorities. Further, Wellhausen himself says, "If Moses did anything at all he certainly founded the sanctuary at Qadesh and the Torah there, which the priests of the ark carried on after him," so that even he recognizes the necessity we have pointed out. From the days of Moses onwards, therefore, there must have been special priests of Yahweh, a special Yahwistic sanctuary, ritual with a special sacrifice presented to Yahweh, and lastly a central oracle, which is precisely what the passages explained away by Wellhausen assert. But of course at that early time, even if the ultimate purpose was to have an exclusively Levitical priesthood, concessions to the old state of things would have to be made. The Passover was left in the hands of the household priest, and in other ways probably he would be considered. The old order would insist on surviving, and the rigor of the later arrangements cannot then have been attained. In other respects we know that it was so; and we may well believe that the priesthood of the individual householder and of the rulers was tolerated, and as far as possible regulated, so as to offer no public scandal to the religion of Yahweh. So, among the Homeric Greeks special hereditary priesthoods coexisted with a political priesthood of the head of the State, and with the household priesthood.
The laxity on these points ascribed to Moses is, however, less than has been supposed. At Mount Sinai he certainly did appoint the "young men of the children of Israel" {Exo_24:5} to slaughter the beasts for sacrifice; but he reserved for himself, a Levite, the sprinkling of the blood on the altar. {Exo_24:6} He also made Joshua his servant, an Ephraimite, the keeper of the sanctuary; but even under the Levitical law, a priests slave was reckoned to be of his household and could eat of the holy things. These were not very great laxities, and there is nothing in them to make us suppose that a regular priesthood did not exist from Sinai. Moreover, that a special place should be assigned to Aaron and his sons was natural. He was the brother of Moses, and would be the natural representative of the tribe, since Moses was removed from it as being leader of all. Everything therefore concurs to confirm the Biblical view that the Levitic priesthood had its origin at Sinai, and that at the chief sanctuary and oracle the chief place in the priesthood fell to Aaron and his sons. Worship at other sanctuaries was permitted, and there the heads of households may have performed priestly functions, or in later times in Canaan some other Levitic families; but that there was a central sanctuary in the hands of Levitic priests, among whom the family of Aaron had a chief place, is what the circumstances, the historical data we have, and all historical analogy alike demand.
For the discharge of their sacred functions certain dues were doubtless assigned to the priests, and the Levites sharing in the subordinate duties of the sanctuary would share also in the emoluments. In other respects Levi in the wilderness would differ in nothing from other tribes. But in preparation for the arrival in Canaan, it was decreed that Levi should "have no part or inheritance in Israel." Yahweh was to be their inheritance.
The point to notice here is that this tribe was to retain the nomadic life when the other tribes became agricultural. The reason for it is plain. That ancient manner of life was looked upon as superior in a religious aspect to the agricultural life. In the first place, the ancestral life of Israel had been of that kind. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had been heads of nomadic families or tribes; and the pure and peaceful religious life, the intimate communion with God which they enjoyed, always dominated the imagination of the pious Israelite. Moreover the fundamental revelation had come to Moses when he was a shepherd in the waste. Further, the life of the shepherd is necessarily less continuously busy than that of the agriculturist; it has, therefore, more scope in it for contemplation; and in many countries and at various times shepherds have been a specially thoughtful, as well as a specially pious class. But, perhaps the chief reason was that the shepherd life was not only simple and frugal in itself, but it was also by its very conditions free from some of the greatest dangers to which the religious life of the Israelite in Canaan was exposed. When the bulk of the people adopted the settled life, they were not only thrown among the Canaanites, but they went to school to them in all that concerned elaborate agriculture. This necessarily made the intercourse and connection between the two peoples extremely intimate, and was fruitful in evil results. From this the semi-nomadic portions of the people were to a great extent free, and they would seem to have been regarded as the guardians of a higher life and a purer tradition than others. They represented to the popular mind the Israel of ancient days, which had known nothing of the vices of cities, and in which the pure, uncorrupted religion of Yahweh had held exclusive sway.
A remarkable narrative of the Old Testament establishes this: When Jehu was engaged in his sanguinary suppression of the house of Ahab, and the Baal-worship which they had introduced, we read in 2Ki_10:15 ff. that he lighted on Jonadab the son of Rechab coming to meet him. This Jonadab was the chief of the Rechabites, a nomadic clan, who were bound by oath to drink no wine, nor to build houses, nor sow seed, nor plant vineyards, and to dwell in tents all their days. {Jer_35:6-7} This was clearly intended as a protest against the prevailing corruption of manners, and was founded on a special zeal for the uncorrupted religion of Yahweh. Recognizing Jonadabs position as a champion of true religion, Jehu anxiously seeks his approval and co-operation. He says, "Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thy heart?" And Jonadab answered, "It is." "If it be," said Jehu, "give me thine hand." And he gave him his hand, and he took him up to him into the chariot. And he said, "Come with me, and see my zeal for Yahweh." At a much later time, Jeremiah, at the Divine command, used the faithfulness of these nomads to the ordinances of their chiefs to put to shame the unfaithfulness of Israel to Yahwehs ordinances; and promises {Jer_35:19} that because of it "Jonadab the son of Rechab shall never want a man to stand before Yahweh," i.e., as His servant. The Nazarites, again, were in some measure an indication of the same thing. Their rigorous abstinence from the fruit of the vine (the special sign and gift of a settled life in a country like Palestine) was their great distinguishing mark, as persons peculiarly set apart to the service of God. Something analogous is seen in that other desert faith, Mohammedanism. When the great reformer, Abdel-Wahab, attempted to bring back Islam to its primitive power, he fell back largely upon the simplicity of the desert life, though he did not insist upon the abandonment of agriculture and fixed habitations.
It is, therefore, not surprising that the priestly tribe was kept to the nomadic life by the ordinance that they should not have a portion in the distribution of the Canaanite territory. But according to the narrative of the attack upon Shechem by Levi and Simeon, and the verses in the blessing of Jacob {Genesis 49} dealing with these tribes, the course of history reinforced this command. Whether the treachery at Shechem occurred, as the Genesis narrative places it, before the Exodus, when Israel was only a family, or was an incident in the history of the two tribes after Canaan had been invaded, as many critics think, the significance of it is that because of a historical exhibition of fierce and intolerant zeal on the part of Levi and Simeon, which the other tribes would not defend, their settlement in that part of the land was rendered difficult, if not impossible. Hence Simeon had to seek other settlements, while Levi fell back to the position assigned to it by its priestly character. It is not a valid exception to this view-which reconciles the two statements that Levi had no inheritance with the other tribes because of its specially near relation to Yahweh, and also because of its cruel treachery at Shechem-that a priestly tribe is likely to have been not more, but rather less, fierce than the others. That would entirely depend upon the cause or occasion which called out the fierceness. In all that concerned religion Levi would naturally be more inclined to extreme measures than the other tribes, and in this case the higher morality, secured by the separateness of Israel, might easily appear to be at stake. {Cf. Exo_32:15-23} It is, therefore, quite credible that the excessive vengeance taken should have been planned mainly by Levi, and that the resulting hatred should have broken up Simeon, and driven back Levi with emphasis to its higher call.
In any case there never was again any doubt that the Levites were to be excluded from the number of land-owning tribes. Even in the legislation regarding the forty-eight priestly cities this principle asserts itself. The keeping of sheep and cattle on the pastures, which were the only lands attached to these cities, was to be the Levites only secular occupation, and they were neither to own nor work agricultural land. But to compensate for any hardship this arrangement might bring with it, the Levites, as the special servants of Yahweh, were to have Him for their inheritance, i.e., as we have seen, the dues coming to Yahweh were to become the property of the Levites in great part. I say in great part, because the gift to the Levites exclusively of a tithe of the income of the people is thought by many to be only a late provision.
After Canaan had been conquered, the state of things in connection with the priesthood would be something like this. The tent with the ark would be the principal sanctuary, served by a hereditary Levitic priesthood, at the head of which would be a descendant of Aaron. The tribe of Levi, being nomadic, would probably encamp in the neighborhood of the central sanctuary in part, and recruits for the priestly work would be taken occasionally from them, while other sections would gravitate to the neighborhood of other sanctuaries. As we see from the story of Micah in Judges, it was considered desirable to have a Levite for priest everywhere, and consequently there would arise at all the High Places Levitic priesthoods, most probably in part hereditary. But notwithstanding their dues, the bulk of the tribe, being nomads, would be looked upon by the agricultural population as poor, just as the Bedouin, in Palestine now are, comparatively speaking, very poor. This state of things would correspond entirely with what Deuteronomy tells us; and after that legislation the position of the Levites as a priestly body would be more assured than ever. In the post-exilic period all that had been regulated by practice in earlier days found written expression. Differentiation of function was minutely carried out. The priesthood was confined rigorously to the Aaronic house, and the other Levites were given to them as attendants. In this way the whole Levitic system was introduced, and with the exclusive altar came the exclusive priesthood. So far as I can see, it is only by some such hypothesis that justice can be done to all the statements of Scripture; and considering the elastic nature of Old Testament law, there is nothing improbable in it. In any case there is an amount of evidence of various kinds for the Mosaic origin of the Levitic, and even the Aaronic priesthood, which no proof of irregularities can overturn.
In the Divinely sanctioned arrangements of the Old Testament Church, therefore, the existence of a body of ecclesiastical persons, having little share in the ordinary pursuits of their neighbors, and dependent upon their clerical duties for a large part of their maintenance, was deemed necessary to secure the continuity of worship and religious belief. As has been already pointed out, the priesthood was necessarily more conservative than progressive. As an institution, it was suited rather to gather up and perpetuate the results of religious movements otherwise originated, than to originate them itself. But in that sphere it was an absolutely necessary element in the life of Israel. Difficult as it was to permeate the people with the truths of revealed religion, it would have been impossible without the services of the priestly tribe. Wherever they went they were a visible embodiment of the demand for faithfulness to Yahweh, and, with all their aberrations, they probably lived at a higher spiritual level than the average layman. As has been well said, though Malachi had much reason to complain of the priests in his own day, his estimate of what Levi had been in the past is no exaggeration: {Mal_2:6} "The law of truth was in his mouth, and unrighteousness was not found in his lips: he walked with Me in peace and uprightness, and did turn many away from iniquity." But such a body as the Levites could not have been kept thus spiritually alive, unless the members of it had lived somewhat aloof from the strifes and envies of the market-place, and this they could not have done had they not lived by their sacred function. The prophets, under the power and impulse of new truth adapted to their own time, did not need this protection; consequently some of them were called from ordinary secular work-from the plough, like Elisha, or from the midst of the rich and highborn inhabitants of Jerusalem, like Isaiah. If one may so say, they were men of religious genius; while the bulk of the priests and Levites must always have been commonplace men in comparison. Yet even of the prophets a number were trained in the nomadic life; others were priests who were shut off also from agriculture. Clearly, therefore, some measure of separation from the full pulsing life of the world was, even in the most favorable circumstances, helpful in developing religious character. For the ordinary average ecclesiastic it was indispensable; and that he should exist, and should live at as high a level as possible, was as much a condition of Israels discharge of her great mission, as that the voice of the prophet should be heard at all the great turning-points of her career.
The modern tendency in Old Testament study is to depreciate the priest and to exalt the prophet, just as in ecclesiastical life we tend to make much of those who are or give themselves out to be religious reformers and thinkers, and to make little of the ordinary parish or congregational ministry. But the good done by the latter is, and must be, for each individual generation more than that done by the former. No one can estimate too highly the conserving and elevating effect of a faithful high-minded spiritual minister. Often without genius either intellectual or religious, without much speculative power, with so firm a hold of the old truth, which has been their own guiding star, that they cannot readily see the good in anything new, such men, when faithful to the light they have, are the stable, restful, immediately effective element in all Church life. And such a body can be best spiritualized by being separated somewhat from the stress and strain of competition in the race of life. Being what they are, the necessity of taking their full part in the business of the world would inevitably secularize them, to the great and lasting damage of all spiritual interests. For though to modern students of Old Testament religion, who are interested most in its growth and progress towards its consummation in Christianity, the prophet is by far the most interesting figure, to the ancient people itself it must have seemed that the priests and Levites, if they in any degree deserved Malachis eulogy, were the entirely indispensable element in their religious life. They gave the daily bread of religion to the people. They embodied the principles, which came to them from prophetic inspiration in ceremonies and institutions; they treasured up whatever had been gained, and kept the people nurtured in it and admonished by it. In short, they prepared the soil and cultivated the roots from which alone the consummate flower of prophecy could spring; and when the voice of prophecy was dying away they brought the piety of the average Israelite to the highest point it ever reached.
In modern times the necessity for such a body of special churchmen is challenged from two opposite sides. There is, on the one hand, the body of over-spiritualized believers who abhor organization, and the machinery of organization, as if it were an intolerable evil. Conscious very often of quick spiritual impulse and vivid life in themselves, they fret against the slow movements of large bodies of men; they separate themselves from all the organized Churches and reject a regular ministry. All the Lords people are now under the Christian dispensation, priests and prophets, they say, and a separate paid ministry in sacred things they refuse to hear of. For spiritual nourishment they rely solely upon the prophetic gifts of their members, and are satisfied that thus they are preparing the way for the universal prevalence of a higher form of Church life. But, so far as can be judged, their experiment has not prospered, nor is it likely to do so. For these separatist Christians have found that spiritual life, like other kinds of life, cannot express itself without an organism. That implies organization; and though they do with less of it than other Christians, still they are often driven into arrangements which really bring back the regular ministry with its separate position; and in other respects they are saved from the inconveniences they have fled from, only by their want of success. If their system ever became general, it would necessarily drift into organization, for only at that price can any coherent, continuous, and lasting effect be produced. Unfettered by the dull, the critical, and the judicious, the impulsive and enthusiastic would always be outrunning the possibilities of the present time. In the interests of the best, they would be continually ignoring or destroying the good. To prevent that, a special body of religious men set apart for sacred services, and freed from the rough struggle for existence so far as a maintenance from funds devoted to religious purposes can free them, is one of the best provisions known. Where in the mass they are really religious men, they secure that the pressure upward, which the Church exerts upon the lives of its own members and upon the community in general, shall be effective to the highest degree then possible, and shall be exerted in the directions in which such pressure will most fully answer to the needs and aspirations of the time. Where, on the contrary, the mass of them are secularized, they no doubt are a power for evil; but the contrast between their profession and their practice in that case is so shocking, that unless they be supported by the "dead hand" of endowments with no living spiritual demand behind them, they soon sink by their own weight, to give place to a better type. And even when they are thus supported, though unfaithful, their calling in name at least remains spiritual, and sooner than the other elements in the nation they are apt to be stirred by breathings of a new life.
The other objectors to the regular ministry are those, in the press and elsewhere, who demand of all ministers that they should be prophets, or inspired religious geniuses, and, because they are not, deny their right to exist. According to this view every sermon that is not a new revelation is a failure, every minister of the sanctuary who is not a discoverer in religion is a pretender, every one who only exemplifies and lives by the power of the Gospel, as it was last formulated so as to lay hold upon the popular mind, is an obscurantist. But no reasonable man really believes this. Such reproaches are merely the penalty which must be paid for claiming so high a calling as that of an ambassador for Christ. No man can quite adequately fill such a position; and the bulk of ministers of Christ know better than others how much below their ideal their real service is. But this also is true, that, take them all in all, no class of men are doing anything like so much as Christian ministers throughout the world are doing to keep up the standard of morals and to keep alive faith in that which is spiritual. We have no right to complain that in their sphere they are conservative of that which has been handed on to them. They have tried and proved that teaching; they know that wherever it secures a foothold it lifts men up to God, and they are naturally doubtful whether new and untried teaching will do as much. They have pressing upon them, too, as others have not, the interest of individual men and women whom they see and know, men and women who for the most part, and so far as they can see, are accessible to spiritual impulse only on lines with which they are familiar; and they dread the diversion of their thoughts from their real spiritual interests, to matters which, for them at least, must remain largely intellectual and speculative. No doubt it would be well if all pastors could, as the most highly endowed do, look beyond that narrower field; could take account of the movements which are drifting men into new positions, from which the old landmarks cannot be seen and consequently exert no influence; and could endeavor to rethink their Christianity from new points of view, which may be about to become the orthodoxy of the next generation. But no ministry will ever be a ministry of prophets. It may even be doubted whether such a ministry could be borne if it ever should arise. Under it one might fear that spiritual repose and spiritual growth would alike be impossible for the average man, in his breathless race after teachers each of whom was always catching sight of new lights. The mass of men need, first of all, teachers who have firmly seized the common truth by which the Church of their day lives, who live conspicuously nearer the Christian ideal, as generally conceived, than others do, who devote themselves in sincerity and self-sacrifice to the work of making the things that are most surely believed among Christians a common and abiding possession. Such men need never be ashamed of themselves or of their calling. Theirs is the foundation work, so far as any attempt to realize the Kingdom of God on earth is concerned; for without the general acceptance of the truth attained which they bring about, no further attainment would be possible. The very environment out of which alone the prophet could be developed would be wanting, and stagnation and death would certainly and necessarily follow.
One other thing remains to be said. Though we have taken these significant words of Deu_18:2 -"And they shall have no inheritance among their brethren: Yahweh is their inheritance, as He hath spoken unto them"-in their first and most obvious reference, it is not to be supposed that that meaning has exhausted all that the words conveyed to ancient Israel. The perpetuation of the nomadic form of life among the Levites, and the bestowal of tithes and sacrificial meats upon them, was undoubtedly the first purpose of this command. But it had, even for ancient Israel, a more spiritual meaning. Just as in the promise of Canaan as a dwelling-place the spiritual Israelite never regarded merely the gift of wealth and the prospect of comfort, -Canaan was always for them Yahwehs land, the land where they would specially live near Him and find the joy of His presence, -so in this case the spiritual gift, of which the material was only an expression, is the main thing. To have Yahweh for their heritage can never have meant only so much money and provisions, so much leisure and opportunity for contemplation, to any true son of Levi. Otherwise it is inexplicable how the words used to indicate this very earthly thing should have become so acceptable a formula for the deepest spiritual experience of Christian men. It meant also a spiritual bond between Yahweh and His servants-a special nearness on their part, and a special, condescension on His. To the other tribes Yahweh had given His land, to them He had given Himself as a heritage; and though doubtless any unspiritual son of Levi must have thought the tangible advantages of a fertile farm more attractive than visionary nearness to God, the spiritual among the Levites must have felt that they had received the really good part, which no hostile invasion, no oppression of the rich, could ever take away. Their ordinary life-work brought them more into contact with sacred things than others. The goodness, the mercy, the love of God were, or at least ought to have been, clearer to them than to their brethren; and the joy of doing good to men for Gods sake, the rapture of contemplation which possessed them when they were privileged to see the face of God, must have made all the coarser benefits of the earthly heritage seem worse than nothing, and vanity. Of course there was the danger that familiarity with religious things should dull instead of quickening the insight; and many passages in the Old Testament show that this danger was not always escaped. But often, and for long periods, it must have been warded off; and then the superiority of Gods gift of Himself must have been manifest, not only to the chosen tribe, but to all Israel. For the nature of man is too intrinsically noble ever to be quite satisfied with the world, and the riches and comforts of the world, for its inheritance. At no time has man ever failed to do homage to spiritual gifts. Even today, in spheres outside of religion, there are multitudes of men and women who would put aside without a sigh any wealth the world could give, if it were offered as a substitute for their delight in poetry, or for their power to rethink and re-enjoy the ideas of those whose "thoughts have wandered through eternity." And the power to follow and to yield oneself up to the thoughts of the Eternal God Himself is a reward far above these. To the faithful servant of God at all times and in all lands that joy has been open, for God Himself has been their heritage; and though in ancient Israel the beauty of "Yahweh their God" was not quite unveiled, yet we know from the Psalms that many penetrated even then to the inner glory where God meets His chosen, and there, though having nothing, yet found that in Him they had all.
William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On v1 CRITICAL NOTES.—After speaking of the rulers of the people,…
CRITICAL NOTES.—After speaking of the rulers of the people, Moses now mentions the teachers priests, Levites, and prophets; and what their privileges and position must be in their settlement in Canaan.
Deu_18:3-5. Rights of priests. The tribe of Levi had no inheritance like other tribes (Numbers 18-20); wholly consecrated to the priestly office, they were supported by tithes, first-fruits, and portions of sacrifices, which God had expressly reserved to Himself, yet when offered bestowed upon His servants. Priest’s due, the shoulder, two cheeks, and the maw, i.e., the front leg. The two jaw bones, and the rough stomach of ruminants in which digestion is completed, and which was considered a great dainty (ver, 3). First-fruits, the law repeated from Num_18:12-13, for the purpose of adding “the first of the fleece of thy sheep” (Deu_18:4). Him and his sons. Reference to Aaron and his sons, in whom the priesthood was established (Deu_18:5).
Read full note →
Deu_18:6-8. The Levites, i.e., the non-priestly Levites contrasted with the priests must be remembered. “These verses presuppose that part of the Levites only will be in residence and officiating at the sanctuary, the others dwelling in their homes in the Levitical cities (cf. Numbers 35). But if any Levite, out of love for the service, chose to resort to it when he might reside in his own home, he was to have his share in the maintainance which was provided for those ministering in the order of their cause.”—(Speak. Com.) Sojourned, though not homeless. He was regarded as a sojourner only, for he had no inheritance in the land. Minister assistant to the priest (Num_3:6). Patrimony, lit. his price upon (the house) of (his) fathers. Margin, his soles by the fathers. The Levites had no part in the land, but they might individually have property, buy and sell houses and fields. Abiathar (1Ki_2:26; Jer_32:7). A Levite who desired to settle at the sanctuary, must have his share of the perquisites, notwithstanding private resources. Have like portion, lit., “part like part shall they eat.” The new comer and those already in attendance must share and share alike.
Deu_18:9-14. Passing on to speak of the prophets, the legislator begins by enumerating and prohibiting the various superstitions by which heathen nations of Canaan had sought to explore the future and to test the will of the Deity.—(Sp. Com.) Through fire, i.e., to Molech, (cf. Lev_18:21; Lev_20:2-5), a rite of doubtful character, but connected with magical arts, and probably with unlawful lusts (2Ki_18:17; 2Ch_33:6; Eze_23:37) Divination (cf. Eze_21:21) for different methods of it, and (Num_23:23) observance of times, mode of dividing days into lucky and unlucky, or of drawing omens from clouds (Lev_19:26). Enchanter, serpent charmer. Witch, sorcerer (Exo_7:11). Charmer (Deu_18:11), one who fascinates noxious animals, like Eastern serpent-charmers. The word is derived from a root to bind, referring to the custom of binding or banning by magical knots. Wizard, originally “the wise one,” “the knowing one,” from a verb to know. Necromancer, one who interrogates the dead (2Ch_33:6). Thus all known words are grouped together, which belong to the practices described—perfect, upright, sincere or blameless (Latin integer) in relation to God. For thee emphatic, not so thou, God never allowed (Heb. given), granted thee to do such things.
Deu_18:15-22. No need for Israel to turn to soothsayers; God would raise up from amongst them a prophet time after time, a series of prophets. Like me, not in every sense, but as intercessor for the people and revealer of God’s will. Assembly (Deu_18:16 cf. cp. Deu_18:9-10, and Exo_20:19). To this prophet who should speak words received directly from God, reverence and obedience must be rendered. Require it (Deu_18:19), i.e., visit disobedience with punishment (cf. Psa_10:13; Act_3:23). The prophet who presumed to speak in God’s name, or utter words not given him, must be regarded as a blasphemer and put to death (Deu_18:20). If his prophecy failed, or if his words did not come to pass, he was discovered to be an imposter. Whatever signs and wonders were performed, fulfilment of prediction was the true test of prophecy (cf. cp. Deu_12:2 sq.).
THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF PRIESTS.—Deu_18:1-5
From the limitations of monarchy, Moses turns to the duties of the priests and specifies their inheritance and dues.
I. The dignity of priests. They were a special tribe called to minister in the name of the Lord (Deu_18:5).
1. Chosen of God. “Thy God hath chosen him.” This is an honour which no man taketh upon himself (Heb_5:5), not hereditary, nor conferred by men, and which should not be despised. “Seemeth it but a small thing unto you, that the God of Israel hath separated you … to bring you nearer to Himself” (Num_16:9).
2. Consecrated to holy service. “To minister in the name of the Lord.” He was not engaged in secular callings, nor employed in the service of an earthly monarch, but in the serivce, by the authority and for the praise of God. A sense of this dignity should be carefully formed, and constantly realised. Dignity of character should correspond with dignity of station. Ministers should “magnify” (glorify) their “office” (Rom_11:13) by a due appreciation of its nature, an earnest endeavour to live up to its demands, and a fearless discharge of its duties.
II. The due of priests. Deprived of land and specially set apart for spiritual functions, they had special reverences.
1. They required the sympathy of the people. The order preceded from the midst of the people (Exo_28:1), was appointed for the benefit of the people and depended upon the people. They were not a sacred caste, standing in proud pre-eminence above the rest of the nation. A principle of equality was indicated in priesthood and monarchy. “Taken from among men.”
2. They required the support of the people. To reward their labour, performed instead of the first-born of the people, and to compensate their loss of material wealth, it was ordained that they should receive tithes of produce and parts of animal sacrifices. The Levite, as well as the widow and orphan, was commended to the special kindness of the people (Deu_14:27-29; Deu_12:19). “He commanded the people to give the portion of the priests and the Levites, that they might be encouraged in the law of the Lord” (2Ch_31:4).
III. The inheritance of priests. They had cities and residence that they might exercise a refined influence upon the people, and disseminate a knowledge of the law, but no territorial possessions. “The Lord is their inheritance” (Deu_18:2). Theirs by adopting love, personal preference, and public avowal. An inheritance blessed, satisfactory, secure, and permanent. “I am their inheritance and ye shall give them no possession in Israel” (Eze_44:28).
THE MINISTRATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PRIESTS.—Deu_18:1-8
The words may be applied to the Christian ministry, though not a priesthood in the Old Testament sense. The sacred office is filled with men divinely called and qualified, entrusted with the most responsible and enriching blessing, and rendering the greatest service to their fellow men.
I. The calling of a priest is one of the highest into which a man can enter. It eclipses earthly callings as the sun outshines the stars.
1. An office divinely instituted. Not left to the wisdom and device of men. “The ministry is a matter of free grace and favour,” says Quesnel, “who then will dare to enter into it without a Divine call? There is nothing in which a king would willingly be more absolute than in the choice of his ministers, and shall we dare to contest, and take away this right from the King of Kings.” “Ordained of God as was Aaron.”
2. An office spiritual in its nature. Levites were forbidden to become farmers and enter into commercial pursuits. They were devoted to the service of God and the ministration of His house. The work is not an ordinary profession, conducted on the principles of commercial transactions. Ministers “must give themselves to prayer and the ministry of the word.”
3. An office perpetual in its duration. “Him and his sons for ever.” Aaron died but successors entered the office. Human life is uncertain; we must not trust to man whose breath is in his nostrils. Ministers die, but the ministry remains a perpetual monument, a gift of God to all generations.
II. Many priests in discharging the duties of their calling are exemplary in their zeal. Sometimes a Levite would leave his own home, and from intense love devote himself to the altar of the sanctuary. “Come with all the desire of his mind unto the place which the Lord shall choose.” This is the true spirit of service, the spirit of the Master and of His apostles. No coldness and formality here. We often lack zeal and spiritual fervour; are too carnal, selfish, and slothful. Love is wanting. “O that I was all heart, and soul, and spirit,” said Rowland Hill, “to tell the glorious gospel of Christ to perishing multitudes.” We must sacrifice worldly pleasure, and personal convenience, and devote ourselves with energy to our work. “I longed to be as a flame of fire continually glowing in the Divine service,” cried Brainerd. “The zeal of Thine house hath eaten me up (devoured like a flame)” (Joh_2:17; Psa_69:9).
III. It is the duty of the people to support the priests in their calling. “The priests” had their “due from the people.”
1. This is reasonable. “If we have sown unto you spiritual things, it is a great tiling if we shall reap your carnal things!” If a man gives his time and talents for the benefit of the people, surely they are bound to secure his temporal comforts. “The labourer is worthy of his hire.”
2. This is scriptural. The principle laid down by our Lord and applied by apostles in support of the ministry is confirmed by scripture. “Do ye not know, that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so the Lord hath ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.” This arrangement helps to secure an efficient ministry, to promote mutual good, and to bring out energies for the spread of the gospel.
DESIRE FOR MINISTERIAL SERVICE.—Deu_18:6
It appears that the Levites served in rotation from the earliest times; but from their great numbers, it was only at distant intervals they could be called into actual service. Should any Levite, however, under the influence of eminent piety, resolve to devote himself wholly and continually to the sacred duties of the Sanctuary, he was allowed to realise his ardent wishes; and as he was admitted to the share of the work, so also to a share of the remuneration (Jamieson). This desire for the work is a prominent feature in the character and qualifications of the Christian minister.
I. It is a constraining desire. More than a general desire to be useful—a special kindling within, like “the burning fire shut up” in the prophet’s bosom overcoming reluctance for God’s service (Jer_20:9). This constraint rises above all difficulties, and takes pleasure in sacrifices for the work’s sake. “This is a true saying (note the emphasis), if a man desire (vehemently, intensely) the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work” (1Ti_3:1).
II. It is a considerate desire. The result of matured thought. The cost is counted, most watchful caution exercised, and the providence of God ascertained. Matthew Henry warns against intrusion into the sacred office. “We must not be forward to put forth ourselves in the exercise of spiritual gifts. Pride often appears under the pretence of a desire to be useful. If the motive be correct it is good, but humility will wait for a call.” “He that believeth shall not make haste.”
III. It is a disinterested desire. A choice not influenced by love of literature, respect and professional dignity. “With all brave and and rightly-trained men, their work is first, their fee second,” says Ruskin. It is an office in which we “seek not great things for ourselves.” God always implants a love in the heart for the service to which He calls, and better not enter than seek to get a name or maintain a party. “If I do this thing willingly (spontaneously without renumeration) I have a reward (Deu_18:18), but if against my will (not spontaneously), a dispensation (a stewardship) is committed to me, “and so have no special claim to reward for that which necessity is laid upon me to do.” (1Co_9:17.)
HOMILETIC HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Deu_18:2. The Lord their inheritance. True of the believer as well as the Levite and priest. An inheritance.
1. Divinely bestowed. Not gained like earthly possessions by favouritism, wealth, and heriditary succession.
2. Ever sufficient. Men of the world seek pleasure here and there, labour for possessions and are doomed to disappointment. Charles V., Emperor of Germany, cried out to all his honours and trophies “Get you hence, no more of you.”
3. Indissolubly sure. It never diminishes, changes hands nor leads to poverty. “An everlasting portion.”
Stand to minister.
1. Priestly service, active, energetic ministry nor idleness, apathy nor negligent habits. “Exercise thyself.”
2. Priestly spirit. Not selfish, but self-sacrificing and Christlike, which prompts to self-denial and readiness of mind. “Here Lord am I, send me.”
3. Priestly reward. In God the object of affection and centre of bliss. “I am their inheritance,” etc. (Eze_44:28).
Deu_18:6-8. Voluntary service.
1. Devoted to the noblest purpose.
2. Rendered in the holiest place.
3. Springing from the warmest spirit. We must offer ourselves. Self-consecration, the first act of priestly service. “Our character is our will,” says Archbishop Manning, “for what we will we are.”
THE VOCATION AND DUTY OF GOD’S PEOPLE.—Deu_18:9-13
Israel had constantly to be warned against infection from the idolatrous customs of the Canaanites. The nature of such customs is described, and they are reminded of their calling and relation to God.
I. God calls His people to be like Him. “Be perfect with the Lord thy God” (Deu_18:13). Israel were to be upright in conduct, unpolluted in worship, and devoted entirely to Him. Likeness to God must be the aim of life. A Christian must progress in knowledge and love of God every day; for the less we think of God, the greater the danger of conforming to the world. “Let us go on unto perfection.” This is the high calling and destiny of the believer. “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”
II. In responding to this call, they must avoid worldly customs. Called out of the world, though living in it, they must avoid its “abominations,” charmers and “observers of times.” It has its witches, and “women of familiar spirits.” Notions of lucky and unlucky days are not confined to heathen countries. In this country, men observe the stars, charm diseases, and prognosticate success of wars, the happiness or misfortune of marriages, and the length of human life. This dethrones God from the heart and supersedes the promises and threatenings of His word. It rejects the doctrine of Divine Providence and is treason to the Ruler of the Universe. “Should not a people seek unto their God? for (on behalf of) the living (should they consult) to the dead?” (Isa_8:19).
III. In seeking to avoid worldly customs God alone can help. God alone had preserved Israel in the past. “Thy God hath not suffered thee so to do” (Deu_18:14). In the future, instead of having recourse to heathen superstitions, He would provide them with “a prophet,” with divine teaching time after time. In Christ and the scripture we have help. If weak and sinful, God’s grace can renew and strengthen. If dark and uncertain, the word is a light and guide. Christ completes what Moses begins. He is still performing the prophetic office, calling ministers by His Spirit, enlightening men to understand the scriptures and making the gospel come to them, not in word only, but in power and in the Holy Ghost and in much assurance.
HEATHEN ABOMINATIONS AVOIDED
One reason to shun the practices of idolatry springs from the nature of the evils themselves.
1. They are cruel. Children “pass through the fire.” How inhuman that religion which requires children to be burned or thrown into rivers, and parents in age and infirmity to be given to wild beasts! “Cruelty is one of the highest scandals to piety,” says Seeker. “The dark places of the earth are full of the habitations of cruelty (homesteads of violence.) “—Kay. (Psa_74:20.)
2. They are enticing. Divination, enchanter and witch have their spells. Idolatry, “a shameful creed of craft and cruelty,” delights in what fills the sensuous imagination. Ritualistic practices attract the eyes, fascinate the mind, and minister to self-conceit. “Who hath bewitched (fascinated) you, that ye should not obey the truth?” (Gal_3:1).
3. They are defiling “Abominations.” Paintings and sculptures, laws and legends, reveal the awful corruptions of the heathen world. All sin defiles, and men through sin “are together become unprofitable (corrupt, useless)” (Rom_3:12). Their odour is not praise and prayer, but the poison of asps and secreted malice. “Those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart, and they defile the man.”
4. They are destructive. “Because of these abominations the Lord doth drive them out.” Sin drives away from God here and from heaven hereafter. The fruit of idolatry and superstitions is death. Death spiritual and death eternal. “Ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which 1 cast out before you, for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them.”
HOMILETIC HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Deu_18:13; Deu_14:1. Preserving grace. God did not suffer Israel to do these things. Other nations He “gave up to their own hearts’ lusts, and suffered to walk in their own ways” (Acts 14-16).
2. High vocation. “Be perfect.” Every man has an ideal, some ruling thought, some object of life. Religion sets forth the ends of life and supplies motives and power for striving for them. God is the desire of our nature, fills the highest capacities of the mind, and should be the aim of our life.
3. Constant effort to reach it. “Thou shalt not learn to do these” Life is a school in which we must learn to know God and do good.
Deu_18:13. Christian perfection. A solemn injunction. I. Unfold its import. We must be perfect with the Lord our God.
1. In love to His name.
2. In affiance to His care.
3. In zeal for His glory. II. Enforce its authority. Without real integrity before God, we can have—
1. No comfort in our souls.
2. No stability in our ways.
3. No acceptance with God. Address—
(1) Those who are unable to ascertain with confidence their real state.
(2) Those who have an inward evidence that their hearts are right with God.—C. Simeon, M.A.
Perfect, i.e., whole, entire.
1. In the elements of your character. Have nothing defective, weak and lacking.
2. In the method of your worship. No admixture of heathenism and error.
3. In the duties of your life. Be blameless, innocent, and upright Scatter thy life through every part, and sanctify the whole.
THE PROPHET LIKE TO MOSES
Here Moses is not speaking of a collective body of prophets, to which Christ is at the end incidentally annexed, as Calvin and other expositors understand the passage; but the whole office and station of the prophets is represented to him as personified in Christ, as the person in whom his conception of that office would be perfectly realised. Thus there is a concurrent reference to the other prophets, not in their individual capacities, but only in relation to the Spirit, who, though in a manner not yet completed, was powerfully efficient in them and conjoined them along with their Head in one united body, They were viewed in Christ, as they were but His instruments; His spirit constituted the essence of their office. (Hengstenberg). Look at the principal circumstances in the description, the likeness to Moses.
I. Like to Moses as a Prophet. Man has ever sought instruction and desired light Heathen oracles were dumb and philosophy impotent to satisfy this moral craving. Plato said “we must wait till someone shall teach us how we ought to conduct ourselves towards the gods”—Moses was a prophet of the highest rank who revealed and interpreted the will of God to men. Not merely a religious man, but one supernaturally inspired. But Christ was “the teacher sent from God.” He came from the bosom of the Father and declared (expounded) him in all his relationships to man (Joh_1:18). He is the manifestation of God’s character, the revelation of His purpose. The manifold partial disclosures of former messengers, have given place to one complete and final revelation in Christ. “God who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in times past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son.”
II. Like to Moses as a Lawgiver. Man requires law, loves order, and is appy only in loyal obedience. No Jewish prophet was legislator, no ruler had right to govern supremely. David was king, inspired teacher and sweet psalmist of Israel, but his work was merely executive. Jesus only was like Moses the founder of a new constitution and a new period. He is the Head of the Church and the Sovereign of men. Moses was faithful as a servant, but Christ has the natural right “as a son over his own house.”
III. Like to Moses as an Intercessor (Deu_18:16). When Israel sinned, Moses interceded with God, obtained forgiveness, and delivered from temporal punishments. Jesus is the Mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises (Heb_8:6). When cursed by the law, condemned by conscience and afraid of intercourse with God, then even we find access and receive help through “Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant.”
IV. Like to Moses as leader of his people. Moses was the general and leader of the nation. As chieftain of the community he administered their affairs, and led them in the wilderness. But he could bring them only to the borders of Canaan, and did not enter it himself. Christ guides through life into heaven, and will for ever satisfy His people with fruits of faith and holiness. We know not the way and could never discover it, but He leads by example and precept. There are enemies powerful and combined, but he commands, emboldens, and gives victory. “A leader, and commander to the people.”
FALSE PROPHETS.—Deu_18:20-22
1. The presumption they display. “Presume to speak,” with a commission from false gods as prophets of Baal; or a pretended commission from the true God. Just as there were false Christs, so were there false prophets, who impersonated for popularity and gain.
2. The test by which they are known. “If thou say how?” It is often difficult to distinguish the true from the false, but facts and fulfilment are the test. Whatever teaching or prediction does not accord with history, scripture and God’s will, we may be sure, is not from God. Samuel’s mission was proved because God “let none of His words fall to the ground” (1Sa_3:19-20).
3. The punishment which they endure. “That prophet shall die.” They seek to deceive, to draw away the people. They have committed high treason against the crown and authority of Jehovah, and had to be condemned by the Sanhedrim which sat at Jerusalem. Hence the people cautioned not to fear a false, but to obey a true prophet. The caution is needful in our day. “Beware of false prophets.”
HOMILETIC HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Deu_18:15 to Deu_19:1. Man’s craving for light. On all the great problems of life. God, the future and how to be just with God.
2. Worldly wisdom unable to reveal light. Man has “sought out” many inventions (entangled himself with an infinity of questions, Douay Vers) but never succeeded (Ecc_7:29).
3. God in mercy has given light. Raised up prophets, sent His Son and given His Spirit and Word. “Walk in the light,” etc.
Deu_18:18. Christ like Moses.
1. In coming from the people. “From among their brethren.”
2. In the intercourse he had with God. With Moses God spoke “mouth to mouth.”
3. In the attention which they demand. We must “hear.” Some do not even hear, but ridicule and oppose. Hearken with attention and desire to learn. “In all” that I speak; not some things, as the love and mercy of God, but all things concerning justice, repentance, and faith. There must be no choice, no separation of one doctrine from another. Disobedience results in death (Act_3:22-23). “Every soul” without partiality, “shall be cut off.” This excision, not correction, not annihilation, but death eternal. “From among the people.” Intermixed now in families and congregations, then separated for ever.
This remarkable promise has two great objects of reference. First, the assurance that God would from time to time, after Moses, send such prophets as he was; that is persons who should make known to the Israelites the will of God, stimulate them to obey His precepts, and when it was requisite foretel future events. These promises God faithfully fulfilled in Moses, Joshua, Samuel, and their successors down to the coming of the Messiah, who was known by the fulfilment of prophecy to be the promised Redeemer. The second point contained is the obedience to Christ with willing hearts. In His capacity as lawgiver, deliverer, and guide, His people hearken unto Him. (Seiler.) Like unto me. Both in the participation of nature and of office. A true man, and a true Mediator. Similes they are, but not pares; Christ being “worthy of more glory than Moses,” and why, see Heb_3:3; Heb_7:22; Heb_9:15.—Trapp.
ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 18
Deu_18:1-5. Priests. The priesthood hath, in all nations and all religions, been held highly venerable.—Bp. Atterbury. The vesture of that older priesthood is with us an adornment of the heart; and the glory of them that are chief in priesthood is to us no longer commended by the beauty of vestments, but by a splendour that is of the soul.—St. Gregory.
Deu_18:6. Desire of mind. The virtues of the will are above the successions of time.—Abp. Manning. Most merciful Father! grant me to covet with an ardent mind those things which may please thee; to search them wisely, to know them truly, and to fulfil them perfectly; to the praise, laud, and glory of thy name. Order my living so that I may do that which thou requirest of me, and me give grace that I may know it, and have will and power to do it.—Edward VI.
Deu_18:9-12. Witch. A border between earth and hell; her qualities are rather those of the former than of the latter.—G. Gilfillan. Those who go to astrology, or wise men as they call them, to know their fortunes and enquire of the events of their life, they forsake God, and betake themselves to lying vanities.—Abp. Tillotson.
Submit thy fate to Heaven’s indulgent care,
Though all seems lost, tis impious to despair;
The tracks of Providence, like rivers wind,
And though immerged in earth from human eyes,
Again break forth, and more conspicuous rise.
Young.
Deu_18:13. Perfect. Moral perfectibility is our destiny.—G. Forster. The Christian ought to know more of God every day; otherwise he may think of Him less, till he totally forgets Him; and then he is in danger of falling into that state, out of which men cannot be renewed by repentance.—Jones of Nayland.
Deu_18:15-19. Prophet. The mission of the prophets was the religious education of the Jewish people. They were raised up according to the exigencies of the times to preserve them from error, and to prepare their minds for the future development of the kingdom of God. Their object was twofold—to maintain the Church in allegiance to prescribe rites, institutions and ordinances, and yet to prepare the people for a further manifestation of the blessing of the new covenant.
Deu_18:19. Not hearken. Man is deaf and blind in the things of God. “Having ears he hears not, having eyes he sees not.” To his need and to his remedy he is alike insensible. His ear is open to sound advice, to moral doctrine, to the dictates of external decency. But as to the gospel, he is a perfect statue without life.—Bridge. “Is the sermon done?” it was asked of one who returned from church sooner than usual. “No, not yet;” was the answer. “It is preached, but it still remains to be done.”—G.S. Bowes.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Sermon Bible 1900 · Public Domain On v1 The history of Moses is valuable to Christians, not…
Deu 18:15
The history of Moses is valuable to Christians, not only as giving us a pattern of fidelity towards God, of great firmness, and great meekness, but also as affording us a type or figure of our Saviour Christ. Let us consider in what respects Moses resembled Christ.
Read full note →
I. If we survey the general history of the Israelites, we shall find that it is a picture of man’s history as the Gospel displays it to us, and that in it Moses takes the place of Christ. We are born in a spiritual Egypt, a land of strangers. Satan is a tyrant over us, and it seems useless to rebel. Christ is a second Moses, and greater than he, inasmuch as Christ leads from hell to heaven, as Moses led the Israelites from Egypt to Canaan.
II. Christ reveals to us the will of God, as Moses did to the Israelites. He is our Prophet as well as our Redeemer. Favoured as he was, Moses saw not the true presence of God. Flesh and blood cannot see it. But Christ really saw, and ever saw, the face of God, for He was no creature of God, but the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father. Christ has brought from His Father for all of us the full and perfect way of life.
III. Moses was the great intercessor when the Israelites sinned. In this he shadows out the true Mediator between God and man, who is ever at the right hand of God making intercession for us. Moses was excluded from the Promised Land, dying in sight, not in enjoyment, of Canaan, while the people went in under Joshua. This was a figure of Him that was to come. Our Saviour Christ died that we might live; He consented to lose the light of God’s countenance that we might gain it. Moses suffered for his own sin; Christ was the spotless Lamb of God. His death is meritorious; it has really gained our pardon.
J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. vii., p. 118.
References: Deu 18:15.—Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. ix., p. 27; E. H. Gifford, Twelve Lectures, p. 151. Deu 18:15-19.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxv., No. 1487; J. G. Murphy, The Book of Daniel, p. 20. Deu 18:15-22.—Parker, vol. iv., p. 273. Deu 18:18.—J. Hamilton, Works, vol. v., p. 99.
The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 The Priestly Dues. Character and Work of the True…
The Priestly Dues. Character and Work of the True Prophet
1-8. The Priestly dues: see on Numbers 18.
Read full note →
4. This is the only place where the priests are said to receive the first of the fleece: cp. Num_18:12.
9-14. Condemnation of superstitious and magical practices.
10. Pass through the fire] The context here seems to imply that this was a method of divining or obtaining an oracle from a god: cp. on Lev_18:21. Useth divination] a general term, but applied specially to the casting of lots: see e.g. Eze_21:21. Observer of times] RV 'One that practises augury': the meaning of the word is uncertain. An enchanter] one who observes omens, watches for signs in the sky or in the flight of birds. Witch] RV 'sorcerer,' one who practises magic by means of drugs and spells: cp. on Exo_22:18.
11. Charmer] one who ties knots, weaves magic spells and curses. Consuiter with familiar spirits, or a wizard] lit. 'one who consults a ghost or familiar spirit,' probably a ventriloquist who professes to hold communication with subterranean spirits. Necromancer] one who inquires of the dead: cp. Lev_19:31; Lev_20:27.
15. This is closely connected with what precedes. Israel has no need to employ such arts of divination as other nations use. Jehovah Himself will communicate His will to them through the prophets whom He raises up and instructs. See Isa_8:19. The singular number here, a Prophet, does not refer to a particular individual, but to a succession of prophets. Israel will never want a prophet to communicate to them God's will. This prophecy found its ultimate fulfilment in Christ, the perfect revealer of God's grace and truth and the new law-giver, and is applied to Him by St. Peter and St. Stephen: see Act_3:22; Act_7:37.
18. This v. contains the definition of a prophet. He is one who speaks the word of God and interprets to men the divine will: see on Num_11:25, and cp. the words of our Lord in Joh_14:10.
20. That prophet shall die] For an instance see Jer_28:15-17.
22, 21. At no time is it easy to distinguish the true from the false prophet. Different prophets in Israel not unfrequently contradieted each other. One test of the true prophet, but not the only one, is proposed here, viz. the fulfilment of prediction. Manifestly this test could only be applied to predictions of the immediate future. But the prophet sometimes prophesied of things that were afar off (Eze_12:22-27) so that his words could not be verified by those to whom they were addressed. The ultimate criterion of the true prophet is the moral character of his utterance. Conscience is the true judge. Our Lord reproached His generation because they insisted on seeing signs and wonders before they would believe.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On v1 14. The Rights of the Priests and the Levites,…
14. The Rights of the Priests and the Levites, the True and the False Prophet
CHAPTER 18
Read full note →
1. The rights of the priests and Levites (Deu 18:1-8)
2. Forbidden things (Deu 18:9-14)
3. The true and the false prophet (Deu 18:15-22)
The priests, the Levites, were the servants of Jehovah and had no inheritance with Israel, but Jehovah Himself was their inheritance. How the people were to minister unto them is now commanded by Moses. They were both dependent on the Lord and closely identified with Him. And this is true of us, who are in Christ constituted priests and called to the Levite service.
Of great interest are verses 9-14. The nations who possessed the land practised evil things, through which Satan manifested his awful power to lead astray and to corrupt. His people were to beware of these things. We, too, are warned not to intrude into those things which we have not seen (Col 2:18). Moses puts together the words which the language contained for the different modes of finding out the future and discovering the will of God. Passing a son or daughter through the fire, the awful Moloch service, is forbidden once more (Lev 18:21). Then follow all the abominable things. There are seven of them mentioned, which come under the term “divination”: 1. Observer of times, predicting good or bad things by observation of the heavens and circumstances; 2. Enchanter. The Hebrew word is _menachesh connected with _nachash the Hebrew word for serpent. It means one who murmurs enchantments; 3. Witch; 4. Charmer; 5. A consulter with familiar spirits; 6. A wizard, who has access to an unlawful wisdom; 7. The necromancer, who asks the dead. These abominations existed then and they exist today. Clairvoyancy, palmistry, astrology, soothsaying, fortune-telling, spiritualistic seances, theosophy, the formulas and treatments of “Christian Science” are a few of the modern names of this ancient demonism. It is awful to see their growth as the end draws near. What is claimed to be “Psychical research,” studying “occult phenomena,” is nothing less than stepping upon the same territory of evil. And Satan uses these wicked things, his familiar spirits, and asking the dead to prepare the way for the great delusion of the end, with its signs and lying wonders. Spiritualism with its demon-possessed mediums, Psychical research, theosophy, Christian Science, are Satan-cults. They are an abomination to Jehovah and His righteous judgment will soon fall upon them. We add here the solemn warning of another.
I take this opportunity of solemnly warning every soul--more particularly the young--from levity in hankering after that which they do not understand, and very especially in the way of giving up their will to any but the Lord Jesus. This is the essential point of danger. I do not raise the smallest doubt that there are powers in the natural world which lie quite beyond the explanation of men. It is not my wish therefore to excite a kind of hue and cry against that which may not be yet explained. Let us avoid the presumption of supposing that we can account for everything. But in our ignorance (which the wisest most feel and own) this wisdom at least ought to belong to the least of God’s children, that they know in whom they believe, and they have His word and His Spirit, and can count on infinite love and power as well as wisdom on their behalf. They can well afford therefore to leave what is beyond themselves or any others in the hands of God their Father. They with sorrow see others rush in who have nothing higher, who have no God to count on or look to. But above all beware. Whenever any one asks you to give up your mind or will to another--were it but for a moment--there is the evident hand of the devil in it. This is no question of physical powers, or of what is naturally inexplicable. What is behind giving up yourself, your will, to any one but God, is plain enough in its character and consequences; it is too easy to understand it. The divine axiom is that the Lord and He alone has a right to you. Consequently such a demand proves that Satan is taking advantage, it may be of what is natural, but certainly of you (W. Kelly).
The Prophet promised in verse 15 is the Lord Jesus Christ. Act 3:22-23 refers us to this prophecy. Act 7:37 also confirms the fulfilment of Moses’ prediction in the person of Christ.
Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v1 The Dues of Priests and Levites
The Dues of Priests and Levites
v. 1. The priests, the Levites, the sons of the tribe of Levi, and all the tribe of Levi, the ministers known as the Levites proper, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel, Num 18:20; they shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire, Num 18:8-9, and His inheritance.
Read full note →
v. 2. Therefore shall they have no inheritance among their brethren; the Lord is their inheritance, as He hath said unto them. The inheritance of Jehovah, which was to be the reward of the priests and Levites, consisted not only in the wave-breast and heaveshoulder of the sacrifices, as specified in the precepts of the sacrifices, but in all the gifts devoted to the Lord, also tithes and firstlings.
v. 3. And this shall be the priest’s due from the people, that which he had a right to expect and demand, from them that offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep; and they shall give unto the priest the shoulder, Num 6:19, and the two cheeks, and the maw, the abomasum, the fourth, or true digestive stomach of ruminants, these three parts being considered great delicacies.
v. 4. The first-fruit also of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, Exo 22:29; Num 18:12-24, and the first of the fleece of thy sheep shalt thou give him; that was the priest’s portion.
v. 5. For the Lord, thy God, hath chosen him out of all thy tribes to stand to minister in the name of the Lord, Deu 10:8; Exo 28:1, him and his sons forever.
v. 6. And if a Levite come from any of thy gates out of all Israel, from any of the cities which were set aside for the Levites, where he sojourned, Num 35:2-3, and come with all the desire of his mind, with all eagerness to share in the ministry of worship, unto the place which the Lord shall choose, the central Sanctuary,
v. 7. then he shall minister in the name of the Lord, his God, as all his brethren the Levites do, which stand there before the Lord. It seems that only a part of the Levites was actively engaged in the ministry of the Sanctuary, probably because their ministry was regulated by courses. The men here spoken of were not on duty, not under obligation to be present at the Sanctuary, but were simply zealous to be active.
v. 8. They shall have like portions to eat, as much as those who were on duty by selection, beside that which cometh of the sale of his patrimony, that is, regardless of the income he may have from the sale of goods inherited from his father. The meadow-land belonging to the Levites could not be sold, but they had the right either to sell or to rent a house belonging to them. The precept of the New Testament which corresponds to this order is that which establishes the rule that "they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel. "
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On v1 General Information:
General Information:
Moses continues telling the people what Yahweh wants them to do.
Read full note →
will have no portion nor inheritance with Israel
The Levites not receiving any land from Yahweh is spoken of as if they would not receive an inheritance. AT: "will not possess any of the people's land" or "will not receive any of the land that the Israelites will possess" (See: Metaphor)
no portion
"no part" or "no share"
among their brothers
"among the other tribes of Israel" or "among the other Israelites"
Yahweh is their inheritance
Moses speaks of the great honor that Aaron and his descendants will have by serving Yahweh as priests as if Yahweh were something that they will inherit. See how you translated a similar phrase in Deuteronomy 10:9. AT: "instead, they will have Yahweh" or "instead, Yahweh will allow them to serve him and he will provide for them through that service" (See: Metaphor)
translationWords
priest
Levi
tribe
inherit
Israel
sacrifice
Yahweh
fire
brother
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv1–2 18:1 The term Levitical priests described the entire tribe…
18:1 The term Levitical priests described the entire tribe of Levi. Technically, however, only Aaron’s descendants were priests. The non-priestly Levites were their assistants (see 12:12).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.