You shall not remove your neighbor’s landmark, which they of old time have set, in your inheritance which you shall inherit, in the land that Yahweh your God gives you to possess.
Parallel Translations
-
You shall not remove your neighbor’s landmark, which they of old time have set, in your inheritance which you shall inherit, in the land that Yahweh your God gives you to possess.
-
Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance, which thou shalt inherit in the land that the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it.
-
Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark, which they of old time have set, in thine inheritance which thou shalt inherit, in the land that the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it.
Examined in Scripture Analysis
Commandments (1)
The laws of the Torah, each cited and shown as a primary source.
Cross-references (5)
Passages linked to Deuteronomy 19:14 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Proverbs 22:28 Don’t move the ancient boundary stone which your fathers have set up.
- Deuteronomy 27:17 ‘Cursed is he who removes his neighbor’s landmark.’ All the people shall say, ‘Amen.’
- Job 24:2 There are people who remove the landmarks. They violently take away flocks, and feed them.
- Proverbs 23:10 Don’t move the ancient boundary stone. Don’t encroach on the fields of the fatherless,
- Hosea 5:10 The princes of Judah are like those who remove a landmark. I will pour out my wrath on them like water.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (16 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Deu 19:14 Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark,…
Deu 19:14 Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance, which thou shalt inherit in the land that the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it.
Ver. 14. Thy neighbour’s landmark, which they of old, &c.] Erasmus met with an adversary so silly, as to object unto him this text against the new translation of the New Testament: Quasi per terminos, voces intellexisset Spiritus Sanctus atque huius legis violatae illi postulari possent, qui mutant rerum vocabula, {a} Whereas by terms or "landmarks" hero are clearly meant bounds, borders, limits, whereby every man’s inheritance was severed.
Read full note →
{a} Erasm., in Apologiis, p. 637.
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 Thy neighbour’s land-mark; by which the several portions of…
Thy neighbour’s land-mark; by which the several portions of land distributed to several families were distinguished one from another. See Job 24:2; Pro 22:28; Hos 5:10.
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 Here is a statute for the preventing of frauds…
Here is a statute for the preventing of frauds and perjuries; for the divine law takes care of men's rights and properties, and has made a hedge about them. Such a friend is it to human society and men's civil interest.
I. A law against frauds, Deu 19:14. 1. Here is an implicit direction given to the first planters of Canaan to fix land-marks, according to the distribution of the land to the several tribes and families by lot. Note, It is the will of God that every one should know his own, and that all good means should be used to prevent encroachments and the doing and suffering of wrong. When right is settled, care must be taken that it be not afterwards unsettled, and that, if possible, no occasion of dispute may arise. 2. An express law to posterity not to remove those land-marks which were thus fixed at first, by which a man secretly got that to himself which was his neighbour's. This, without doubt, is a moral precept, and still binding, and to us it forbids, (1.) The invading of any man's right, and taking to ourselves that which is not our own, by any fraudulent arts or practices, as by forging, concealing, destroying, or altering deeds and writings (which are our land-marks, to which appeals are made), or by shifting hedges, meer-stones, and boundaries. Though the land-marks were set by the hand of man, yet he was a thief and a robber by the law of God that removed them. Let every man be content with his own lot, and just to his neighbours, and then we shall have no land-marks removed. (2.) It forbids the sowing of discord among neighbours, and doing any thing to occasion strife and law-suits, which is done (and it is very ill done) by confounding those things which should determine disputes and decide controversies. And, (3.) It forbids breaking in upon the settled order and constitution of civil government, and the altering of ancient usages without just cause. This law supports the honour of prescriptions. Consuetudo facit jus - Custom is to be held as law.
Read full note →
II. A law against perjuries, which enacts two things: - 1. That a single witness should never be admitted to give evidence in a criminal cause, so as that sentence should be passed upon his testimony, Deu 19:15. This law we had before, Num 35:30, and in this book, Deu 17:6. This was enacted in favour to the prisoner, whose life and honour should not lie at the mercy of a particular person that had a pique against him, and for caution to the accuser not to say that which he could not corroborate by the testimony of another. It is a just shame which this law puts upon mankind as false and not to be trusted; every man is by it suspected: and it is the honour of God's grace that the record he has given concerning his Son is confirmed both in heaven and in earth by three witnesses, Jo1 5:7. Let God be true and every man a liar, Rom 3:4. 2. That a false witness should incur the same punishment which was to have been inflicted upon the person he accused. If two, or three, or many witnesses, concurred in a false testimony, they were all liable to be prosecuted upon this law. (2.) The person wronged or brought into peril by the false testimony is supposed to be the appellant, Deu 19:17. And yet if the person were put to death upon the evidence, and afterwards it appeared to be false, any other person, or the judges themselves, ex officio - by virtue of their office, might call the false witness to account. (3.) Causes of this kind, having more than ordinary difficulty in them, were to be brought before the supreme court, The priests and judges, who are said to be before the Lord, because, as other judges sat in the gates of their cities, so these at the gate of the sanctuary, Deu 17:12. (4.) There must be great care in the trial, Deu 19:18. A diligent inquisition must be made into the characters of the persons, and all the circumstances of the case, which must be compared, that the truth might be found out, which, where it is thus faithfully and impartially enquired into, Providence, it may be hoped, will particularly advance the discovery of. (5.) If it appeared that a man had knowingly and maliciously borne false witness against his neighbour, though the mischief he designed him thereby was not effected, he must undergo the same penalty which his evidence would have brought his neighbour under, Deu 19:19. Nec lex est justior ulla - Nor could any law be more just. If the crime he accused his neighbour of was to be punished with death, the false witness must be put to death; if with stripes, he must be beaten; if with a pecuniary mulct, he was to be fined the sum. And because to those who considered not the heinousness of the crime, and the necessity of making this provision against it, it might seem hard to punish a man so severely for a few words' speaking, especially when no mischief did actually follow, it is added: Thy eye shall not pity, Deu 19:21. No man needs to be more merciful than God. The benefit that will accrue to the public from this severity will abundantly recompense it: Those that remain shall hear and fear, Deu 19:20. Such exemplary punishments will be warnings to others not to attempt any such mischief, when they see how he that made the pit and digged it has fallen into the ditch which he made.
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 One witness shall not rise up against a man…
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth,.... Whether capital sins, or pecuniary debts; or whatsoever sins a man may be guilty of whether sins against the first or second table of the law, whether greater or lesser sins, whether in moral or civil things; the Jews except only in the case of a woman suspected of adultery and of beheading the heifer:
at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established; either for acquittance or condemnation; and the witnesses may not, as Jarchi says, write their testimony in a letter, and send it to the sanhedrim, nor may an interpreter stand between the witnesses and the judges; See Gill on Deu 17:6.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 14. Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark]…
Verse 14. Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark] Before the extensive use of fences, landed property was marked out by stones or posts, set up so as to ascertain the divisions of family estates. It was easy to remove one of these landmarks, and set it in a different place; and thus the dishonest man enlarged his own estate by contracting that of his neighbour. The termini or landmarks among the Romans were held very sacred, and were at last deified.
To these termini Numa Pompillus commanded offerings of broth, cakes, and firstfruits, to be made. And Ovid informs us that it was customary to sacrifice a lamb to them, and sprinkle them with its blood: -
Read full note →
Spargitur et caeso communis terminus agno.
FAST. lib. ii., ver. 655.
And from Tibullus it appears that they sometimes adorned them with flowers and garlands: -
Nam veneror, seu stipes habet desertus inagris,
Seu vetus in trivio florida serta lapis.
ELEG. lib. i., E. i., ver. 11.
"Revere each antique stone bedeck'd with flowers,
That bounds the field, or points the doubtful way."
GRAINGER.
It appears from Juvenal that annual oblations were made to them: -
-------------Convallem ruris aviti
Improbus, aut campum mihi si vicinus ademit,
Aut sacrum effodit medio de limite saxum,
Quod mea cum vetulo colult puls annua libo.
SAT. xvi., ver. 36.
"If any rogue vexatious suits advance
Against me for my known inheritance,
Enter by violence my fruitful grounds,
Or take the sacred landmark from my bounds,
Those bounds which, with procession and with prayer
And offer'd cakes, have been my annual care."
DRYDEN.
In the digests there is a vague law, de termino moto, Digestor. lib. xlvii., Tit. 21, on which Calmet remarks that though the Romans had no determined punishment for those who removed the ancient landmarks; yet if slaves were found to have done it with an evil design, they were put to death; that persons of quality were sometimes exiled when found guilty; and that others were sentenced to pecuniary fines, or corporal punishment.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Deu 19:14. Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s land-mark…
Deu 19:14. Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s land-mark — Having provided for the preservation of the lives of innocent persons against such as might be disposed to take them away, he proceeds to give a charge for securing every man’s right and property in other matters; and especially forbids all encroachments upon boundaries of lands and estates. Josephus considers this as a prohibition, not only against removing any land-mark of an Israelite, but also any that might distinguish their territories from those of any of the neighbouring nations, with whom they might be at peace, the breaking in upon these bounds being generally the occasion of wars and insurrections, which arise from the covetousness of men, who would thus fraudulently enlarge their possessions.
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 As a man’s life is to be held sacred,…
As a man’s life is to be held sacred, so are his means of livelihood; and in this connection a prohibition is inserted against removing a neighbor’s landmark: compare the marginal references.
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 Landmarks, either which divided the tribes, or the inheritance…
Landmarks, either which divided the tribes, or the inheritance of individuals. The former were strictly kept up till after the captivity. Those who removed the latter were to be scourged for theft, and again for disobeying this law. (Selden, Jur. vi. 3.) Josephus ([Antiquities?] iv. 8) understands that encroachments on the territories of others, which give rise to many wars, are hereby prohibited. (Calmet) --- So are likewise innovations in religion. The Romans had a superstitious veneration for these landmarks, which they adored under the name of the god Terminus, (Haydock) crowning them with flowers, and offering cakes and sacrifices to them. Spargitur et cœso communis Terminus agno. (Ovid, Fast.) --- They punished the crime of removing them either with death, banishment, or a fine.
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).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain THE LANDMARK IS NOT TO BE REMOVED. (Deu 19:14)
THE LANDMARK IS NOT TO BE REMOVED. (Deu 19:14)
Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour's landmark, which they of old have set in thine inheritance--The state of Palestine in regard to enclosures is very much the same now as it has always been. Though gardens and vineyards are surrounded by dry-stone walls or hedges of prickly pear, the boundaries of arable fields are marked by nothing but by a little trench, a small cairn, or a single erect stone, placed at certain intervals. It is manifest that a dishonest person could easily fill the gutter with earth, or remove these stones a few feet without much risk of detection and so enlarge his own field by a stealthy encroachment on his neighbor's. This law, then, was made to prevent such trespasses.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain 14. Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark —…
14. Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark — Among the Romans boundaries were placed under the protection of a special deity — Terminus; and the severest penalty was visited upon the one who removed a landmark defining property. So among the Assyrians there were evidently the most stringent provisions for the security of landed rights. On a stone found on the western side of the Tigris, which George Smith thought was of the date 1340 B.C., is an inscription of a grant of land made by Merodach-Baladan to one of his officers. On the back of the stone is a rudely carved picture of the deities invoked to protect the property, and to punish any who should remove the boundary-stone. The inscription closes with curses upon any who should injure or remove the stone. See Records of the Past, vol. ix, p. 29. Compare also Deu_27:17, where among the curses to be pronounced on Mount Ebal is one against him who removeth his neighbour’s landmark. Comp. also Hos_5:10; Job_24:2; Pro_22:28; Pro_23:10.
They of old time — This is not a suitable translation of the Hebrew word. The Vulgate has priores. Schroeder renders it predecessors. We prefer to consider it as explained by Jos_14:1, where we learn that Eleazar the priest and Joshua and the heads of the tribes distributed the land on the west of Jordan. We understand the term rendered they of old time in our version to mean the heads of the tribes, who, after the general division of the land to the tribes, subdivided each tribal division to the several families. The expression, then, by no means implies that the land had been long occupied by the Israelites.
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 14. Against Removing Boundary Stones
14. Against Removing Boundary Stones
In the Sg. address, but as in Deu_19:4 f., 11 and Deu_15:2, q.v., with neighbour instead of brother, usual in Sg. passages; and followed by a deuteronomic formula. It is significant that the formula is not only separable from the law proper (as in the previous law) but contradicts it. For while the law betrays its date as subsequent to Israel’s settlement in the land—and with this agree the facts that there is no parallel in the earlier codes and that protests against removing boundary-stones appear in the prophets and later books (Isa_5:8, Hos_5:10, Pro_22:28; Pro_23:10, Job_24:2)—the closing formula adopts the standpoint of Moses, the land which the Lord is to give thee. Clearly, therefore, the law has been adopted from some other source into D’s Code—cp. the Decalogue—but there is nothing to show whether this incorporation was due to the authors of the Code or to editors.
Read full note →
It is difficult to explain the position of the law just here. Steuern. and Berth, attribute this to its use of the term gebul, boundary, used also in the previous law (Deu_19:3 a, yet with a different meaning from here); the former thinking that in its original form the law was entered on the margin and thence taken into the text by the compiler of the Code, the latter that it may have formed part of the original Code. Notice rather that both laws besides being in the Sg. address use the term neighbour, and were therefore probably from the same source. Dillm. points out that in this ch. murder, theft and false-witness appear in the same order as in the Decalogue, and Dri. compares Deu_27:17 ff.
Other nations expressed the same reverence for the sacredness of boundaries, in similar laws, or protests, against their removal. For the Greeks see Plato, Legg. viii. 842 e, for the Romans Dion. Hal. ii. 74, Plutarch, Numa 16. For the settled Semites cp. the border-stones of fields which are among the oldest Babyl. monuments; bearing dedications to the gods ‘they were regarded as sacred and great importance was attached to their preservation. The Kings taxed their powers of cursing [cp. Deu_27:17] in order to terrify men from removing their neighbours’ landmarks’ (Johns, Babyl. and Assyr. Laws, etc., 191 f.). For other Semites cp. Clay Trumbull, Threshold Covenant 166, Musil, Ethn. Ber. 87, Doughty i. 163. No such Israelite stones have been found, but M. Clermont-Ganneau discovered the boundary inscriptions of the town of Gezer (‘at or near the 1st Cent. b.c.’) bearing the term teḥum, the later Heb. for gebul (Arch. Res. ii. 26 ff., 270 ff.). For modern Palestine see Baldensperger, PEFQ 1906, 194.
14. remove] Lit. so: re-move, move back, so as to make one’s own field larger.
landmark] Heb. gebul, applied both to the border-line whether of private fields (here, and in E, Jos_24:30, cp. texts cited above) or of urban (Isa_54:12) or tribal (Deu_2:18, Deu_3:16) territories: as well as to the area enclosed by the border (Deu_19:3; Deu_19:8, Deu_2:4, Deu_28:40).
they of old time] Heb. rîshônîm, the former generations, the forefathers: LXX B etc., πατέρες σου; A etc., πρότεροί σου.
in thine inheritance which thou inheritest] Part of the law proper: the portion of ground (LXX κληρονομία) that passes from one generation of a family to another.
in the land which the Lord thy God is to give thee, etc.] the frequent deuteronomic formula, Deu_4:40, Deu_5:31, Deu_12:1, Deu_17:14, Deu_21:1, Deu_25:19; and in shorter form, Deu_15:7, Deu_18:9, Deu_25:15, Deu_27:2, Deu_28:8.
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 (14) Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark.—Another law…
(14) Thou shalt not remove thy neighbour’s landmark.—Another law manifestly appropriate here, where it appears for the first time, like the “field” in the tenth commandment (Deu_5:21). But the immediate connection is not obvious. Perhaps the idea is to caution the people to avoid a most certain incentive to hatred and murder. Ancient landmarks are also important and almost sacred witnesses.
They of old time.—The first dividers of the land. There is no idea of antiquity about the expression.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain To the ordinance concerning cities of refuge Moses appends…
To the ordinance concerning cities of refuge Moses appends one prohibiting the removing of landmarks; if these had been placed by a man"s ancestors to mark the boundaries of possessions, they were not to be surreptitiously altered. Landmarks were held sacred, and a curse is pronounced against those who remove them. (Deu_27:7; cf. Job_24:2; Pro_22:28 Pro_23:10; Hos_5:10) Among other nations also landmarks were regarded as sacred (cf. Plato, "De Legibus," 8. p. 842; Dionys. Halic. 2:17; Plutarch, "Numa," 16; Ovid, "Fast.," 2:639). They of old time; i.e. those of a former age ( earlier ones, ancestors, predecessors). The word does not necessarily imply that the age described as "former" was removed at a great distance in the past; it might designate men of the immediately preceding age. The LXX have here oiJ paterev, and the Vulgate priores. That the law here given was uttered whilst Israel was yet outside of Canaan, is evident from what follows in this verse.
Removing the landmark.
Read full note →
1. A dishonest act.
2. A deceitful act.
3. A covetous act.
4. An injurious act.
Nothing would as a rule be more keenly resented than this mean attempt to rob the owner of land of a bit of his ancient possession. J.O.
Vers. 14-21. The law of retaliation.
When we consider "retaliation," we find that it is the converse of the "golden rule." In fact, it is giving back to a person his breach of that rule to see how he likes it. It is just a rough method of teaching rude, selfish souls that there is retribution in all selfish practices; the gun may be fired maliciously, but it sooner or later lays the sportsman in the dust. Now, it is morally right that those who do to others as they do not wish others to do to them should have precisely their own paid back to them. It is simple justice.
I PUBLIC JUSTICE MAKES PROVISION FOR THIS IN EVERY CIVILIZED COUNTRY. When Jesus directed his disciples not to retaliate, but to cultivate the spirit of nonresistance to evil, (Mat_5:38, Mat_5:42) he did not wish them to take the law into their own hands, but toleave to public justice what in the olden time had to be settled privately. He certainly did not mean that his disciples should screen men from the processes of public law, when they had made themselves amenable thereto. His advice regarded the edifice of public justice as raised by advancing civilization, and taking up consequently many matters which private parties in a ruder age had to deal with.
II RETALIATION WAS IN THE EARLY TIME A DUTY WHICH INDIVIDUALS OWED TO THE PUBLIC. It is too often supposed that revenge is such a gratification that men need no exhortation to take it. But we find men that are too cowardly to retaliate, men who would rather let the greatest ruffians escape than risk anything in giving them their desert. Before the erection of public justice, therefore, as a recognized and well-wrought institution, it was necessary to sustain the courage of the people against lawlessness by making retaliation a public duty. The avenger was not a man thirsting for blood, but one who would very likely have remained snugly at home instead of risking his life in retaliation. Men have to be "whipped up" oftentimes to the requisite courage for public duty.
III RETALIATION, WHEN FAITHFULLY CARRIED OUT, WAS A CHECK ON SELFISH CONDUCT AND A HELP TO A HIGHER MORALITY. The golden rule of doing unto others as we would that they should do to us was the goal at which the morality of the Old Testament was aiming. One way of leading up to it is by carrying out its opposite, and giving to the wrong-doer an idea of what it is to receive what we do not desire. We have to practice this in the correction of children. When they act a cruel part by others, they get a taste of suffering themselves, just to let them know what it is like.
IV AT THE BACK OF ALL GOD"S MERCY THERE IS THE ALTERNATIVE OF STRICT JUDGMENT IN CASE HIS MERCY IS REFUSED. The gospel is the golden rule in its highest exemplification. It is God doing unto man as he would have man do unto him were he in such circumstances. But if men reject the Divine mercy, and will not receive God"s love, then there is no other alternative but strict justice. And strict justice means retaliation. It is giving back to man what he dares to give to God. If man refuses God"s love, and, instead of accepting and returning it, gives to God hate; then it is only right, eternally right, that he should receive what he gives. God cannot bat hate as utterly abominable the soul that hates him who is essential Love. Wrath is the "love-pain of God" (Liebes-schmertz Gottes), as Schoberlein has called it. It is forced on him by the action of his creatures. They have had the opportunity of love, but, since they refuse it, they must be visited by wrath.
Hence there is nothing weak about the Divine administration. Its backbone is justice; but special arrangements were made in the atonement of Jesus to allow of God being "justly merciful;" when, however, this just mercy is rejected, God must return to the stricter lines, and deal with the ungrateful as they deserve. In the retaliation of God there is, of course, nothing mean and nothing selfish. His vengeance is in the interests of public morals, and a necessary part of a wise administration. There should be no trifling, then, with the Divine offer; for, if it be not accepted, men must prepare for wrath. R.M.E.
Caution against fraud.
Nothing that concerns man"s welfare and joy is beneath God"s care. The vast extent of his kingdom hinders not his guardianship ever every minute interest of his creatures. Even landmarks, boundary stones, are under his protection.
I GOD IS TO BE RECOGNIZED AS THE ABSOLUTE PROPRIETOR OF ALL THINGS. As the Creator and Upholder of the universe, he has supreme claim to this solid globe. "The earth is the Lord"s" Nor has he ever parted with his rightful claim, for he keeps the globe hourly in existence, and so continually proclaims his control over it. It is his gift to men, not in the sense that he has transferred all his rights to others, but only in the sense that we were unable to purchase from him. We hold every possession from him in trust, and are bound by such terms and conditions as his will may impose.
II IT IS GOD"S WILL THAT LAND SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED AS PERSONAL ESTATE. Although evils result from the division of the land into personal property, greater evils would result from communal or indiscriminate possession. The fields would not be well cultured. The land would not yield her prolific plenty. Dispute and strife would be the chronic state of society. Personal property is essential to healthy life in the State. Yet men are stewards, and not absolute proprietors.
III BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN OUR OWN AND OTHER"S POSSESSIONS ARE TO BE SCRUPULOUSLY RESPECTED. The arrangements of personal property offer a fine field for self-restraint, as well as for neighborly kindness. If we had been destitute of all possessions, we should be denied the enjoyment of helping others. A man who has regard for the health of his own soul, will not remove his neighbor"s landmarks by so much as a single inch. He will rather lose a pound than take by fraud a penny. This Divine command is but a tiny branch springing out of the root principle, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 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 Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain Thou shalt not remove thy neighbours landmark.
Deu_19:14
Thou shalt not remove thy neighbours landmark.
Read full note →
Ancient landmarks removed
Stones indicating boundaries might easily be removed. Ditches could be secretly levelled. This would materially affect property, and be a great evil in land where territory was distributed by lot. Removal would be--
I. To disregard ancient custom. They of old have set, with care and justice. Custom is held as law. Fixed law and fixed boundaries should he respected. But many scorn ancient landmarks as relics of bygone days. Impatient of restraint, they seek wider range of thought and action, indulge in novelties, and cry, Down with temples, and away with creeds and the Bible!
II. To violate the law of God. Heathen nations held every landmark as sacred. God, as the proprietor of all the earth, set bounds for Israel, allotted their lands which they held in trust, and bound them in terms imposed by His will (Deu_27:17). Hence removal of landmarks is violation of His command, and direct insult to His authority.
III. To defraud our neighbour. Landmarks were witnesses of the rights of each man. Removal was selfish and unjust invasion of property. To enlarge your own estate at the expense of your neighbours is theft. Each one should know his own, and not defraud another by concealment, forgery, or robbery. Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob him (Lev_19:13; Mar_10:19; 1Th_4:6).
IV. To expose to a dreadful curse. The execration of men is something, but who can bear the curse of God? The field of the fatherless is under Almighty protection. The poor may seem helpless, but special warning is given against their oppression. Remove not the old landmark, and enter not into the fields of the fatherless (by acts of violence or removal of boundaries), for their Redeemer is mighty to vindicate outraged innocence (Pro_23:10-11). This in after times was the great affront of national provocation (Hos_5:10). (J. Wolfendale.)
.
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain Precepts Regarding Witnesses
Precepts Regarding Witnesses
v. 14. Thou shalt not remove thy neighbor’s landmark, the fence or the posts which indicated the boundary of his property, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance, which thou shalt in her it in the land that the Lord, thy God, giveth thee to possess it. Whatever the heads or chiefs, the first possessors, the fathers, Joshua and the renowned elders, determined, should be observed down to the most distant future. It is clear that this direction was given while the people were riot yet in possession of Canaan.
Read full note →
v. 15. One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, guilt, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth, for a single witness is no witness; at the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses, according to the testimony of two or three persons, shall the matter be established. This rule was to hold not only in case of one on trial for his life, Deu 17:6, but was to find general application, Num 35:30; Mat 18:16; 2Co 13:1; 1Ti 5:19.
v. 16. If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong, as might happen where only a single witness is available and the charge is a very grave one, literally, one of falling away from the Law of God, especially in a deliberate transgression, a crime,
v. 17. then both the men between whom the controversy is, the accuser and the accused, shall stand before the Lord, at the central Sanctuary, before the priests and the judges, Deu 17:9, which shall be in those days, for these were to be regarded as the representatives of God;
v. 18. and the judges shall make diligent inquisition, conduct their investigation with painstaking care; and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother, spoken lies against him to harm him, perhaps even to the extent of causing him to lose his life,
v. 19. then ye shall do unto him as he had thought to have done unto his brother, his evil plans should be executed against himself; so shalt thou put the evil away from among you, Exo 21:23; Lev 24:20.
v. 20. And those which remain shall hear and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you, Deu 17:13.
v. 21. And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, namely, in punishing the false witness. The punishment of a false witness, even today, is in the hands of God: "A false witness shall not be unpunished, and he that speaketh lies shall not escape," Pro 19:5.
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 General Information:
General Information:
Moses is still speaking to the people of Israel.
Read full note →
You must not remove your neighbor's landmark
The full meaning of this statement can be made explicit. AT: "You must not take land away from your neighbor by moving the markers on the borders of his land" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
they set in place
"that your ancestors placed"
a long time ago
Moses means that when the people have lived in the land for a long time, they should not move the borders that their ancestors made when they first took the land.
in your inheritance that you will inherit, in the land that Yahweh your God is giving you to possess
Yahweh giving the land to the people of Israel is spoken of as if they were inheriting the land. AT: "in the land that Yahweh your God is giving to you to possess" (See: Metaphor)
translationWords
neighbor
inherit
possess
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.