Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them, ‘When a man consecrates a person to Yahweh in a vow, according to your valuation, your valuation of a male from twenty years old to sixty years old shall be fifty shekels of silver, according to the shekel of the sanctuary. If she is a female, then your valuation shall be thirty shekels. If the person is from five years old to twenty years old, then your valuation shall be for a male twenty shekels, and for a female ten shekels. If the person is from a month old to five years old, then your valuation shall be for a male five shekels of silver, and for a female your valuation shall be three shekels of silver. If the person is from sixty years old and upward; if he is a male, then your valuation shall be fifteen shekels, and for a female ten shekels. But if he is poorer than your valuation, then he shall be set before the priest, and the priest shall assign a value to him. The priest shall assign a value according to his ability to pay.
“ ‘If it is an animal of which men offer an offering to Yahweh, all that any man gives of such to Yahweh becomes holy. He shall not alter it, nor exchange it, a good for a bad, or a bad for a good. If he shall at all exchange animal for animal, then both it and that for which it is exchanged shall be holy. If it is any unclean animal, of which they do not offer as an offering to Yahweh, then he shall set the animal before the priest; and the priest shall evaluate it, whether it is good or bad. As the priest evaluates it, so it shall be. But if he will indeed redeem it, then he shall add the fifth part of it to its valuation.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10 Which art the Priest.
Which art the Priest.
As of his son or his daughter.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv1–13 Lev 27:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Lev 27:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
Ver. 1. And the Lord spake.] This is oft premised and prefaced for authority’s sake, and that we may learn to resolve all divine doctrines into Deus dixit.
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 vv2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11 A singular vow, or, an eminent or hard or…
A singular vow, or, an eminent or hard or wonderful vow; not concerning things, which was not strange, but customary; but concerning persons, as it here follows, which he vowed, or by vow devoted unto the Lord, which indeed was unusual and difficult: yet there want not instances of such vows, and of persons which devoted either themselves or their children to the service of God, and that either more strictly and particularly, as the Nazarites and the Levites, 1Sa 1:11, and for these there was no redemption admitted, but they were in person to perform the service to which they were devoted; or more largely and generally, as some who were not Levites, nor intended themselves or their children should be Nazarites, might yet, through zeal to God and his service, or to obtain God’s help in giving them some mercy which they wanted and desired, or in freeing them from some evil felt or feared, devoted themselves or their children to the service of God and of the sanctuary, though not in such a way as the Levites, which they were forbidden to do, yet in some kind of subserviency to them. And because there might be too great a number of persons thus dedicated, which might be burdensome and chargeable to the sanctuary, therefore an exchange is allowed, and the priests are directed to impose and require a tax for their redemption.
For the Lord, i.e. dedicated to the Lord, and consequently to the priest. By whose estimation?
Read full note →
Answ. Either, 1. Thine, O priest, to whom the valuation of things belonged, and here is ascribed, Lev 27:12. Or rather,
2. Thine, O man that vowest, as appears from Lev 27:8, where his estimation is opposed to the priest’s valuation. Nor was there any fear of his partiality in his own cause, for the price is particularly limited. But where the price is undetermined, there, to avoid that inconvenience, the priest is to value it, as Lev 27:8,12.
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 This is part of the law concerning singular vows,…
This is part of the law concerning singular vows, extraordinary ones, which though God did not expressly insist on, yet, if they were consistent with and conformable to the general precepts, he would be well pleased with. Note, We should not only ask, What must we do, but, What may we do, for the glory and honour of God? As the liberal devises liberal things (Isa 32:8), so the pious devises pious things, and the enlarged heart would willingly do something extraordinary in the service of so good a Master as God is. When we receive or expect some singular mercy it is good to honour God with some singular vow.
I. The case is here put of persons vowed to God by a singular vow, Lev 27:2. If a man consecrated himself, or a child, to the service of the tabernacle, to be employed there in some inferior office, as sweeping the floor, carrying out ashes, running of errands, or the like, the person so consecrated shall be for the Lord, that is, "God will graciously accept the good-will." Thou didst well that it was in thy heart, Ch2 6:8. But forasmuch as he had no occasion to use their service about the tabernacle, a whole tribe being appropriated to the use of it, those that were thus vowed were to be redeemed, and the money paid for their redemption was employed for the repair of the sanctuary, or other uses of it, as appears by Kg2 12:14, where it is called, in the margin, the money of the souls of his estimation. A book of rates is accordingly provided, by which the priests were to go in their estimation. Here is, 1. The rate of the middle-aged, between twenty and threescore, these were valued highest, because most serviceable; a male fifty shekels, and a female thirty, Lev 27:3, Lev 27:4. The females were then less esteemed, but not so in Christ; for in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female, Gal 3:28. Note, Those that are in the prime of their time must look upon themselves as obliged to do more in the service of God and their generation than can be expected either from minors, that have not yet arrived to their usefulness, or from the aged, that have survived it. 2. The rate of the youth between five years old and twenty was less, because they were then less capable of doing service, Lev 27:5. 3. Infants under five years old were capable of being vowed to God by their parents, even before they were born, as Samuel was, but not to be presented and redeemed till a month old, that, as one sabbath passed over them before they were circumcised, so one new moon might pass over them before they were estimated; and their valuation was but small, Lev 27:6. Samuel, who was thus vowed to God, was not redeemed, because he was a Levite, and a particular favourite, and therefore was employed in his childhood in the service of the tabernacle. 4. The aged are valued less than youth, but more than children, Lev 27:7. And the Hebrews observe that the rate of an aged woman is two parts of three to that of an aged man, so that in that age the female came nearest to the value of the male, which occasioned (as bishop Patrick quotes it here) this saying among them, That an old woman in a house is a treasure in a house. Paul sets a great value upon the aged women, when he makes them teachers of good things, Tit 2:3. 5. The poor shall be valued according to their ability, Lev 27:8. Something they must pay, that they might learn not to be rash in vowing to God, for he hath no pleasure in fools, Ecc 5:4. Yet not more than their ability, but secundum tenementum - according to their possessions, that they might not ruin themselves and their families by their zeal. Note, God expects and requires from men according to what they have, and not according to what they have not, Luk 21:4.
Read full note →
II. The case is put of beasts vowed to God, 1. If it was a clean beast, such as was offered in sacrifice, it must not be redeemed, nor any equivalent given for it: It shall be holy, Lev 27:9, Lev 27:10. After it was vowed, it was not to be put to any common use, nor changed upon second thoughts; but it must be either offered upon the altar, or, if through any blemish it was not meet to be offered, he that vowed it should not take advantage of that, but the priests should have it for their own use (for they were God's receivers), or it should be sold for the service of the sanctuary. This teaches caution in making vows and constancy in keeping them when they are made; for it is a snare to a man to devour that which is holy, and after vows to make enquiry, Pro 20:25. And to this that rule of charity seems to allude (Co2 9:7), Every man, according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give. 2. If it was an unclean beast, it should go to the use of the priest at such a value; but he that vowed it, upon paying that value in money, and adding a fifth part more to it, might redeem it if he pleased, Lev 27:11-13. It was fit that men should smart for their inconstancy. God has let us know his mind concerning his service, and he is not pleased if we do not know our own. God expects that those that deal with him should be at a point, and way what they will stand to.
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 vv1–13 And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... After he had…
And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... After he had delivered the body of laws in the preceding chapter, which by the close of the last seem to have been finished; but here some rules and instructions concerning vows are given, which a man was not obliged to make, but which he did of his own freewill and good pleasure: saying; as follows.
And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... After he had delivered the body of laws in the preceding chapter, which by the close of the last seem to have been finished; but here some rules and instructions concerning vows are given, which a man was not obliged to make, but which he did of his own freewill and good pleasure: saying; as follows.
Read full note →
Leviticus 27:2
lev 27:2
lev 27:2
lev 27:2Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them,.... This being an affair which only concerned them; for the Jewish writers say (h), by this phrase, the children of Israel, Gentiles are excluded:
when a man shall make a singular vow; an unusual, an uncommon one, a very distinguished one, and even what is wonderful, as the word signifies; as when a man, through uncommon zeal for God and his service, devotes himself, or his children, or his cattle, or his houses or fields, to the Lord: the word "man", the Jewish writers say (i), includes every male, and even a Gentile; yea, it is said all estimate and are estimated, vow and are vowed, priests, and Levites, and Israelites, women and servants (k): the persons shall be for the Lord by thy estimation: as when a man devoted himself or any that belonged to him to the service of the sanctuary, out of his great zeal for it, as to assist the priests and Levites in the meaner sort of work, as to carry wood and draw water, and sweep the tabernacle, and the like; they were not allowed to do these things, partly because it was not the will of God that any or every Israelite should be employed in such menial service, and partly because there were men appointed for such work, as well as to prevent too great a number of persons in the sanctuary, which would be troublesome, and only stand in one another's way; wherefore, on every devoted person to such service a value or price was set, according to the rules after given, which were to be paid in to the priests for the service of the sanctuary, the repair of the house, &c. see Kg2 12:4; the word may be rendered, agreeably to the accents, "according to thy estimation of souls (or persons) the vow shall be to the Lord" (l); that is, the price of the person devoted, according to the estimation of the priest, or as settled by the Lord in some following verses, shall be given to him: the word "souls" being used, the Jewish doctors understand it of estimation or value of that on which the soul or life depends; thus, for instance, if a man says, the value of my hand or of my feet be upon me, he says nothing; but if he says, the value of my head or of my liver be upon me, he gives the whole value, i.e. of himself; if he says, the half of my value be upon me, he gives the half of it; but if he says, the value of half of me, he gives the whole value: this is the general rule, that on which the soul or life depends pays the whole value (m); for a man cannot live without his head, or without his liver, or when half of himself is taken away.
(h) Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Eracin, c. 1. sect. 2. (i) Ibid. (k) Misn. Eracin, sect. 1. (l) "pro tua aestimatione animarum, votum erit" Domino, Reinbeck de Accent. Heb. p. 320; (m) Misn. Eracin, c. 5. sect. 2, 3.
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 vv1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11 Laws concerning persons sanctified to God, ver. 1-8. Concerning…
Laws concerning persons sanctified to God, ver. 1-8. Concerning cattle, ver. 9-13. Concerning houses and lands, ver. 14-25. An exception concerning firstlings, ver. 26-27. Concerning what was devoted, ver. 28, 29. Concerning tithes, ver. 30-34.
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, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 13 Laws concerning vows, 1, 2.
CHAPTER XXVII
Laws concerning vows, 1, 2.
Read full note →
Of males and females from twenty to sixty years of age, and
their valuation, 3, 4.
Of the same from five to twenty years, 5.
Of the same from a month to five years of age, 6.
Of males and females from sixty years old and upwards, and
their valuation, 7.
The priest shall value the poor according to his ability, 8.
Concerning beasts that are vowed, and their valuation, 9-13.
Concerning the sanctification of a house, 14, 15.
Concerning the field that is sanctified or consecrated to the
Lord, to the year of jubilee, 16-24.
Every estimation shall be made in shekels, according to the
shekel of the sanctuary, 25.
The firstlings of clean beasts, being already the Lord's,
cannot be vowed, 26.
That of an unclean beast may be redeemed, 27.
Every thing devoted to God shall be unalienable and
unredeemable, and continue the Lord's property till death,
28, 29.
All the tithe of the land is the Lord's, 30;
but it may be redeemed by adding a fifth part, 31.
The tithe of the herd and the flock is also his, 32.
The tenth that passes under the rod shall not be changed, 33.
The conclusion of the book, 34.
NOTES ON CHAP. XXVII
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 vv2, 9, 10, 11 Lev 27:2. Shall make a singular vow — The…
Lev 27:2. Shall make a singular vow — The Hebrew may be rendered, Shall separate, or set apart a vow; that is, shall, by solemn promise; separate any thing from a common to a sacred use. For vows were religious promises made to God, for obtaining some blessing or deliverance from some evil or danger, and were accompanied with prayer, and paid with thanksgiving. The words, however, יפלא נדר, japhli neder, may be properly translated, as here, Shall make a singular, or hard, or eminent vow. And this is to be understood, not of things, but of persons, which he devoted to the Lord. Although vows of this kind were not usual, yet there want not instances of persons who devoted either themselves or their children, and that either more strictly, as the Nazarites and the Levites, (1Sa 1:11,) and for these no redemption was admitted, but they were in person to perform the service to which they were devoted; or more largely, as some who were not Levites might yet, through zeal for God, or to obtain a blessing which they wanted, devote themselves or their children to the service of God and of the sanctuary, though not in such a way as the Levites, which was forbidden, yet in some kind of subserviency to them. And because there might be too great a number of persons thus dedicated, which might be burdensome to the sanctuary, an exchange is allowed, and the priests are directed to receive a tax for their redemption. A book of rates is, accordingly, provided here, by which the priests were to be guided in their valuation. 1st, The middle-aged, between twenty and sixty, were valued highest, the males at fifty shekels each, and the females at thirty, (Lev 27:3-4,) women being generally inferior to men in strength and serviceableness. 2d, The rate of the youth between five years old and twenty was less, because they were then less capable of doing service. 3d, Infants under five years old were capable of being vowed to God by their parents, as Samuel was, but were not to be presented and redeemed till they were a month old; that, as one sabbath passed over them before they were circumcised, so one new moon might pass over them before they were estimated; and their valuation was but small, Lev 27:6. Samuel, who was thus vowed to God, was not redeemed, because he was a Levite, and designed by his parents to be lent to the Lord as long as he lived, 1Sa 1:28. Therefore he was employed in his childhood in the service of the tabernacle. 4th, The aged are valued at a less rate than youth, but greater than children, Lev 27:7. And the Hebrews observe, that the rate of an aged woman is two parts of three to that of an aged man, so that in that age the female came nearest to the value of the male. 5th, The poor were to be valued according to their ability, Lev 27:8. Something they must pay, that they might not be rash in vowing to God; for he hath no pleasure in fools, Ecc 2:6; yet not more than their ability, that they might not ruin themselves and their families by their zeal.
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 vv1, 2, 4, 8 Dues. The position which this chapter holds after the…
Dues. The position which this chapter holds after the formal conclusion, Lev 26:46, suggests that it is of a supplementary character. There seems, however, no reason to doubt its Mosaic origin.
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 vv2, 5, 8, 13 Estimation. Hebrew is obscure, "Whoever has separated, or made…
Estimation. Hebrew is obscure, "Whoever has separated, or made a singular vow; the souls to the Lord according to thy estimation." (Calmet) --- Septuagint, "shall vow as it were the price of a soul to the Lord." (Haydock) --- The person or the beast shall belong to the Lord; but if it be redeemed, the priests shall fix a price, according to the following regulations. Whatever was vowed must be subject to these rules, or it shall remain for the service of the altar. The priests may sell it, if it be an impure animal. Those which are fit for sacrifice, were to be immolated, ver. 9, &c. No change of them was allowed, lest a worse should ever be substituted for a better; (Calmet) and because God is better pleased with things that are offered to him by vow. (Worthington)
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).
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures 1864 · Public Domain On v1 Of Vows
APPENDIX
Of Vows
Read full note →
Lev_27:1-34
1And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, 2Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow, the persons shall be for the Lord by thy estimation [special1 vow, the souls shall be to the Lord according3to an2 estimation]. And thy2 estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy2 estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary. 4And if it be a female, then thy2 estimation shall 5be thirty shekels. And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy2 estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels. 6And if it be for a month old even unto five years old, then thy2 estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy2 estimation shall be three 7shekels of silver. And if it be from sixty years old and above; if it be a male, then thy2 estimation shall be fifteen shekels, and for the female ten shekels. 8But if he be poorer than thy2 [be too poor to pay the2] estimation, then he shall present himself before the priest, and the priest shall value him: according to his ability that vowed shall the priest value him.
9And if it be a beast, whereof men bring an offering unto the Lord, all that any man giveth of such unto the Lord shall be holy. 10He shall not alter it, nor change it, a good for a bad, or a bad for a good: and if he shall at all change beast for 11beast, then it and the exchange thereof shall be holy. And if it be any unclean beast, of which they do not offer a sacrifice [an offering3] unto the Lord, then he shall present the beast before the priest: 12and the priest shall value [estimate4] it, whether it be good or bad: as thou valuest it, who art the priest [according to the5 estimation4 of the priest], so shall it be. 13But if he will at all redeem it, then he shall add a fifth part thereof unto thy2 estimation.
14And when a man shall sanctify his house to be holy unto the Lord, then the priest shall estimate it, whether it be good or bad: as the priest shall estimate it, so shall it stand. 15And if he that sanctified it will redeem his house, then he shall add the fifth part of the money of thy2 estimation unto it, and it shall be his.
16And if a man shall sanctify unto the Lord some part of a field of his possession [inheritance6], then thy2 estimation shall be according to the seed thereof: an homer of barley seed shall be valued at fifty shekels of silver. 717If he sanctify his field from the year of jubile, according to thy2 estimation it shall stand. 18But if he sanctify his field after the jubile, then the priest shall reckon unto him the money according to the years that remain, even unto the year of the jubile, and it shall be abated from thy2 estimation. 19And if he that sanctified the field will in any wise redeem it, then he shall add the fifth part of the money of thy2 estimation unto it, and it shall be assured to him. 20And if he will not redeem the field, or if he have sold the field to another man, it shall not be redeemed any more. 21But the field, when it goeth out in the jubile, shall be holy unto the Lord, as a field devoted; the possession 22[inheritance5] thereof shall be the priest’s. And if a man sanctify unto the Lord a field which he hath bought, which is not of the fields of his possession 23[inheritance5]; then the priest shall reckon unto him the worth of thy2 estimation, even unto the year of the jubile: and he shall give thine2 estimation in that day, as a holy thing unto the Lord. 24In the year of the jubile the field shall return unto him of whom it was bought, even to him to whom the possession [inheritance5] of the land did belong.
25And all thy2 estimations shall be according to the shekel of the sanctuary: twenty gerahs shall be the shekel.
26Only the firstling of the beasts, which should be the Lord’s firstling, no man shall sanctify it; whether it be ox, or sheep [one of the flock8], it is the Lord’s.27And if it be of an unclean beast, then he shall redeem [free9] it according to thine2 estimation, and shall add a fifth part of it thereto: or if it be not redeemed, then it shall be sold according to thy2 estimation.
28Notwithstanding no devoted thing, that a man shall devote unto the Lord of all that he hath, both of man and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy unto the Lord. 29None devoted, which shall be devoted of men, shall be redeemed [freed8], but shall surely be put to death.
30And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit ofthe tree, is the Lord’s: it is holy unto the Lord. 31And if a man will at all redeem ought of his tithes, he shall add thereto the fifth part thereof.
32And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the Lord. 33He shall not search whether it be good or bad, neither shall he change it: and if he change it at all, then both it and the change thereof shall be holy; it shall not be redeemed.
34These are the commandments, which the Lord commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai.
TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL
Lev_27:2. “הִפְלִיא נֶדֶר does not mean to dedicate or set apart a vow, but to make a special vow.” Keil.
Lev_27:2-3; Lev_27:5-8, etc. “The second כ in בְּעֶרְכְּךָ is formative of the noun, by reduplication of the third radical: it is not the pronominal suffix.” Horsley. The Heb. subst. ערך, estimation or value, is never found in Scripture, but with the pronoun of the second person joined to it; and which is an expletive, having no use but to distinguish it from the meaning of an ordinance, or laying in order.” Delgado. According to Fürst “the suff. refers to the person valued.” The LXX., Onk., Vulg. and Syr. omit the pronoun altogether.
Lev_27:11. קָרְבָּן. See Textual Note2 on Lev_2:1.
Lev_27:12. Valuation is quite as good a translation of עֵרךְ; but as the A. V. has estimation in all other places in this chapter, it should be retained here.
Lev_27:2-3; Lev_27:5-8, etc. “The second כ in בְּעֶרְכְּךָ is formative of the noun, by reduplication of the third radical: it is not the pronominal suffix.” Horsley. The Heb. subst. ערך, estimation or value, is never found in Scripture, but with the pronoun of the second person joined to it; and which is an expletive, having no use but to distinguish it from the meaning of an ordinance, or laying in order.” Delgado. According to Fürst “the suff. refers to the person valued.” The LXX., Onk., Vulg. and Syr. omit the pronoun altogether.
Lev_27:16. אֲחֻזָּתוֹ = Possession here means possession by inheritance, and it is better to mark this in the translation as purchased fields (Lev_27:22) come under another law.
Lev_27:17. A conjunction is here supplied by the Sam., 16 MSS., the LXX., Chald. and Syr.
Lev_27:26. שֶׂה. See Textual Note 6 on Lev_12:8.
Lev_27:27; Lev_27:29. וּפָדָה = free or deliver. It is a different word from the גָּאַל of the second clause of Lev_27:27 and of both clauses of Lev_27:20, and should be differently translated.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
The question of the relation of this chapter to the rest of the book is partly a matter of form, and partly to be determined by the contents. As to the former, the preceding chapter of promises and warnings is an appropriate close of the legislation, and its last verse certainly has the air of the subscription to a finished work. The present chapter also closes with an abbreviated form of the same subscription. It may be compared to the close of John 20, after which Leviticus 21 follows plainly as an addition. As to the subject matter: our chapter is very clearly distinguished from the rest of the book in that it treats of special voluntary consecrations to the Lord; and yet it is connected with the foregoing, in that these also are to be brought under the same general law of sacred fidelity. The chapter therefore constitutes precisely what is understood by an appendix, appropriate to the book. Lange’s objection to this seems based upon a different idea of the word, and his arguments go to show only that it is appropriate. He says, “1. With our section corresponds Numbers 6; Numbers 30; Deu_23:21; Jdg_11:35 [34–40]; Ecc_5:5. According to Keil this section should be an appendix—contrary to the declaration at the close of Lev_27:34. He gives as his reason: “The directions concerning vows follow the express termination of the Sinaitic law-giving (Lev_26:46), as an appendix to it, because vows formed no integral part of the covenant laws, but were a freewill expression of piety common to almost all nations, and belonged to the modes of worship current in all religions, which were not demanded, and might be omitted altogether, and which really lay outside the law, though it was necessary to bring them into harmony with the demands of the law upon Israel.” According to this apprehension, however, much of the Mosaic legislation must stand in an appendix; indeed, it may be said of the sacrifices, that they are the theocratic regulation of a primeval sacrificial custom, and not originally theocratically commanded. We accept then the view that the prescriptions of this section are attached to the foregoing chapter as a law of keeping the covenant in particulars, viz. in relation to the pledged word, or as a law of particular and individual duties under the law of keeping the covenant as a whole.” [We cannot see that this could be better defined than by the word Appendix.—F. G.] “The superscription of this section ‘Of vows’ is not truly congruous with the whole. The unity is: of special consecrations, or of the keeping holy of special covenant duties in relation to their remissibleness or their irremissibility, and indeed 1) of voluntary and remissible vows or consecrations, Lev_27:1-27; Leviticus 2) of the extraordinary, but commanded and irremissible consecration, or of the ban, Lev_27:28-29; Leviticus 3) of the consecrated holy first-fruits, or of the tithes, partly redeemable and partly unredeemable. Lev_27:30-33 (34).
2. “The religious fundamental thought of the section. Cursorily considered, it appears a kind of regulation for the remissible and irremissible special duties of the covenant, and in particular it assumes the external character of a tax; the ideal germ of the whole, however, is again the keeping holy of the personal life in relation to the personal Jehovah, the manliness of individual piety; one might say: the keeping pure of the religious vow, of the word given to God; the Divine ordinance of the ban; the holy fruit-tax which is appointed for the maintenance of the priests and Levites in the same way as the temple-tax for the support of the temple and the sacrifice……
“3. The vows. On the meaning and the nature itself, comp. the lexicons, especially both the articles in Herzog’s Real-encyklopädie. Writings on this subject of Weise and others.” [See also the archæologies, Art. vows in Smith’s Bib. Dict., and important observations scattered in Michaelis’ laws, Art. 73, 83, 124, 145.—F. G.]. “We distinguish promissory vows and vows of renunciation,…. so that it may be not without meaning that the vows are spoken of here, as efficient Levitical consecrations; the renunciations, or Nazarite vows, on the other hand, in the book of Numbers, the book of the social relations of the commonwealth. Samson was qualified as a Nazarite for a theocratico-political action; Paul’s Nazarite vow also was devoted to ecclesiastical politics (Acts 21); and James the Just had consecrated himself as a Nazarite to the deliverance of his nation. The religious vows, as such, form a parallel to the peace offerings and partly indeed were connected with them. The ethics of the Old Testament vows consists in this: first, that they are not commanded but voluntary, Deu_23:22-24 (consequently not the object of the mediæval so-called consilia evangelica); and secondly, that as a pledged word they must be held inviolable (Pro_20:25; Ecc_5:3; Ecc_5:5), yet not literally, since equivalents for their discharge were legally prescribed; thirdly, that the neglect of their fulfilment is to be expiated with a sin offering (Lev_5:4-6). The vows were formal promises given to God for the benefit of the Sanctuary; they had for their object not only cattle, houses, and lands, but also persons, of course, dependent children and slaves. The examples of Jacob (Gen_35:14) and others, show how significantly the vows of the Old Testament operated. The superstitious misinterpretation of the vow of Jephthah, according to the corrections of Hengstenberg, P. Cassel, and others previously, appears yet capable of being held tolerably righteous. It is indeed one of the exegetical prejudices in which, from different motives, literal orthodoxy and negative criticism come together.” [The question of the actual sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter has always divided opinion in ancient as well as modern times. Jewish tradition is decided for the actual sacrifice as an unrighteous act. There are several reasons why it is not likely to have taken place: no priest could have been found to offer it; nor could it possibly have received the Divine acceptance; and it is contrary to the most probable interpretation of the closing verses of the story (Jdg_11:37-40). Moreover it is unlikely that Jephthah would have committed such an act when he was not bound to it by his vow; the vow was an alternative one,—that he would dedicate what met him to the Lord, or offer it as a sacrifice. That this is the true sense of וand not and, as in the A. V., is plain, for even the most rash of men must have remembered the great improbability that the first thing he met on his return would be either one “of the flock of the herd,” or a pigeon, the only animals admissible in sacrifice. There is therefore in the execution of the vow of Jephthah no just ground for the absurd charge of the allowance of human sacrifices among the Israelites.—F. G.]. “There is no question that the vows, on account of their legal character, belong more to the Old than to the New Testament; although they still have their place in the New Testament time also, but certainly not in the sense of the mediæval, avaricious priesthood.”
The general principle on the subject of vows is clearly laid down in Deu_23:21-24 : they were not obligatory, and no sin was incurred by not making them; but once made they were to be conscientiously kept, and their neglect (Lev_5:4-6) required the expiation of the sin offering. It appears from this chapter that nothing could be made the subject of a vow which was already marked out by the law as belonging to God; but anything else might be, and having been vowed, might be redeemed, with the exception of the sacrificial animals, and except also things or persons devoted, Lev_27:28-29. The subject of this chapter is the ordinary vow, and has no reference to the vow of the Nazarite, Num_6:1-21. The exceptional conditions under which the vow was not binding are detailed in Numbers 30.
Lev_27:1-25. regulate the commutation of vows; Lev_27:28-29 declare the incommutability of things devoted; Lev_27:30-33 declare what tithes and under what conditions may be commuted: while Lev_27:34 closes the whole. Under the first head, Lev_27:2-8 relate to the commutation of persons; 9–13, of cattle; 14, 15, of houses; 16–25, of land.
Lev_27:2-8. Lange: “According to Knobel the consecration of persons means that one allots himself, or another of whom he has the disposal, to the service of the Sanctuary. He cites as examples the consecration of Samuel, the Gibeonites, the augmentation of the temple slaves by David and Solomon, Ezr_2:58; Ezr_8:20; Neh_7:60; Neh_11:3 (p. 583). Keil, on the other hand, asserts that in every vow of a person redemption must take place according to the value, with reference to the Mishna (see p. 179), [Trans, p. 480 and note. Keil also cites Saalschutz, and thinks Oehler wrong in referring to 1Sa_2:11; 1Sa_2:22; 1Sa_2:28, in proof of the opposite view.—F. G.]. “But the appointed valuation little accords with this. It is inconceivable why in this case old men and old women should have been redeemed at a smaller cost than men and women in their vigor. Keil himself makes prominent that the valuation was conformed to the vitality and skill. Besides the diversity of the valuation, it was entrusted to the priest to value a poor man less, from which it does not follow that he must be redeemed, but only that he might be. The fact that children under five years of age could not be consecrated, points also to the ability to serve.” In regard to the difference of valuation, Lange’s argument does not seem to be a determining one; on either theory the valuation would naturally be based upon what might be called the actual worth of the person; but there would be no object in a valuation at all except for the purpose of redemption, and it is expressly provided that all persons who had been vowed must be valued. The diminished valuation of a poor man was a merciful provision analogous to the alternate sin offering in case of poverty. Notwithstanding Lange’s view, it seems to point very strongly to the universality of redemption; otherwise there would be no reason why the poor man should not have worked out his vow, or why he should have been redeemed at a lower rate than others whose services were of the same intrinsic value. In saying “that children under five years could not be consecrated,” Lange must have overlooked Lev_27:6, which expressly provides a valuation for those vowed from one month to five years. The form of expression in Lev_27:2, moreover, seems to contemplate redemption in all cases of personal vows. The objection to this view is that a personal vow thereby becomes only a roundabout and awkward way of consecrating the amount of the redemption money to the Lord; but the moral effect appears to have been different, and with the personal vow there is to be supposed a sense of spiritual consecration to God which was not removed by the payment of the redemption. Kalisch speaks very strongly: “To our author vowing a person to God meant neither offering him up as a sacrifice, nor dedicating him to the service of the temple, and much less selling him as a slave, but simply redeeming him by money in favor of the sacred treasury; so foreign were the two former alternatives to his mind, that he utterly ignored them, and stated the third as a matter of course, and the only one to be considered.”
Lev_27:9-13. Vows of animals. The right of redemption in this case depended upon the nature of the animal; if it was one suitable for sacrifice (Lev_27:9-10), after being once vowed, it could not be redeemed or exchanged, and the result of an attempt at exchange was that both animals should belong to the Lord. It does not follow that the animals were to be immediately sacrificed, but they may have been put into the herd from which the public sacrifices were taken. The case of animals of the sacrificial kinds, with blemishes which unfitted them for the altar, is not especially mentioned; but after the analogy of Lev_27:33, these probably went to the support of the priests. If, on the other hand, the animal was unclean (Lev_27:11-13), it must be valued by the priest; then it might be redeemed by adding one-fifth to its value, or else it belonged to the sanctuary. Keil thinks it was then sold for the benefit of the sanctuary; but in this case the original owner would have had no occasion to redeem it at a higher price since he could have bought it at its estimated value. It is more likely therefore that such animals were retained, at least for a time, for the use of the priests and Levites. Keil considers that the Heb. בֵּין .… וּבֵין means “ ‘between good and bad,’ i.e., neither very high as if it were very good, nor very low as if it were bad, but at a medium price.” The A. V., however, is in accordance with the ancient versions, and is sustained by Gesenius.
Lev_27:14-15. The law for houses is the same as for unclean animals. It relates probably only to houses in the cities, as those in the country would come under the following law for land.
Lev_27:16-24. Lange: “Lands, a. Inheritances. If they were not redeemed they lapsed in the year of Jubilee to the Sanctuary. If they were redeemed, the price was determined partly according to the money value of the seed for the land, partly according to the number of sowings or seed years to the Jubilee year, and a fifth part of the amount must be added besides. These ordinances applied also to the purchaser (the under tenant). A field was taken for the measure of valuation which yielded until the year of Jubilee one Homer (225 pounds, or two bushels of seed).” [The expression (Lev_27:16) according to the seed thereof is generally understood to mean, according to the seed required to sow it; but the difference is immaterial; it is merely an expression of the measure of valuation, and the proportion will remain the same whatever it be. The value of the homer of barley, however (estimated by Thenius at 225 pounds), is so great, amounting probably to about twenty-seven dollars, that it is necessary to understand it, as Lange has done, not of the single homer, but of a homer annually during the forty-two years (omitting the seven Sabbatical years) intervening between two Jubilee years. This would make the money value of the single homer of barley about 64 cts.; but it is to be remembered that en the average it was to be paid many years in advance, so that we cannot estimate from this the actual price of the barley. Others however (as Clarke and Keil) think it was an annual payment as it accrued. The meaning of the expression, Lev_27:20, if he have sold the field to another man is uncertain. According to Knobel it means “if he has fraudulently sold the field to another, and taken the price to himself, after having vowed it to the sanctuary.” In this case the confiscation of the field to the Lord would be the penalty upon his trickery and deceit. Keil rejects this view, and supposes that the owner continued to cultivate the land himself, paying a yearly rent to the sanctuary; in such a case the basis of sale would be the possible surplus of the produce above the yearly rental, and the fault of the seller “consisted simply in the fact that he had looked upon the land which he vowed to the Lord as though it were his own property, still and entirely at his own disposal, and therefore had allowed himself to violate the rights of the Lord by the sale of his land.” Wordsworth, following Jarchi, suggests another interpretation; that the pronoun he is used impersonally, and the expression means, if the field had been sold by the treasurer for the benefit of the sanctuary. The object would then be to make the title given by the sanctuary in all cases perfect. A simpler explanation is to understand have sold in a pluperfect sense = had sold—viz.: before making his vow. In this case he would have no claim upon it until after the Jubilee (except by redemption), and therefore his vow could only be accomplished by the land falling to the sanctuary at the Jubilee. The reason for the same result in case of refusal to redeem is apparently based upon the persistent wish of the owner. He might redeem at any time up to the Jubilee; and if he did not, he showed that he wished absolutely to give the field to the Lord. It does not appear that the landed possessions of the sanctuary ever grew large in this way.—F. G.]. “b. Purchased possessions. Since these must fall back in the Jubilee year to the heir, they could only become the subject of vows in a very limited sense.” The vow of a purchased field required(Lev_27:23) the immediate payment of its full value (without addition) to the year of Jubilee. In this case the actual occupation and usufruct of the land undoubtedly remained with the one who had made the vow, subject to the ordinary law of redemption (Lev_25:23-28). The requirement here of immediate payment does not imply that in the former case (Lev_27:19) the payment was annual (so Keil, Clark, and others), but only that here the money must be immediately paid down as the only security for its payment at all.
Lev_27:25 simply provides that the standard of all valuations must be the shekel of the sanctuary— a silver coin estimated at 54 cents. It was divided into 20 gerahs of 2.7 cts. each. The LXX. uses the word δίδραχμα, which is employed in Mat_17:24 for the half-shekel, the Alexandrian δραχμὴ being double the Attic.
Lev_27:26-27. The positive law concerning vows is now completed. It remains to treat negatively of certain things which were not allowed to become the subject of vows. First, all the first-born of animals are excluded as already belonging to the Lord, and therefore incapable of being given to Him either by vow or in any other way: no man shall sanctify it. A firstling of an unclean beast, however, might be redeemed by adding a fifth to its valuation—otherwise it was to be sold for the benefit of the sanctuary. The reason for its peremptory sale in this case, instead of its retention for use, was doubtless the tender age of the firstlings, so that if they were retained they must have occupied much time and care. Lange: “Keil remarks ‘ By this regulation the earlier law, which commanded that an ass should either be redeemed with a sheep or else be put to death (Exo_13:13; Exo_34:20) was modified in favor of the revenues of the sanctuary and its servants.’ Comp. Winer,etc. We cannot consider this correct. Concerning the first-born of an unclean beast, the law was peremptory. And how should the law-giver here come back once more to the unclean beast? Nevertheless, a special ordinance concerning the first-born might certainly be met with which had dropped out through a defect under the law of unclean animals.” Keil, Clark and others must have overlooked the fact that the law of Exodus is only a special law concerning the ass, but making no mention of other unclean animals; while here the law is a general one which, as often in general laws, does not mention the already known and established exception. It had been but a year since the law for the ass was first given in Exodus, and less than this since its repetition in Exo_34:20. The time is too short, therefore, for the reason given by Keil and Clark for its modification.
Lev_27:28-29. From redeemable vows is also to be excepted every devoted thing, whether of man, or beast, or land. This is the first instance of the use of the word חֵרֶם, and it occurs afterwards in the law but seldom (Num_18:14; Deu_7:26, bis; Lev_13:17). It is introduced as a term already familiar. It is translated by various words in the A. V. (as curse, accursed, dedicated, devoted, appointed to utter destruction, etc.), but etymologically and by usage always means irrevocably cut off from all common use—in the case of persons, devoted to destruction—in the case of things entirely surrendered to the Lord to be disposed of at His will. “What was devoted could never be offered in sacrifice; but in all places where mention is elsewhere made of the ban laid on any thing (Num_18:14; Numbers 31; Deu_2:34; Deu_13:12-18; Deu_25:19; Jos_6:17-19; Mal_4:6) this appears as a dedication to destruction, as a fulfilling of the Divine vengeance, as an honoring of God on those in whom He cannot show Himself holy and glorious.” Von Gerlach. In regard to inanimate objects the meaning is therefore clear enough; but the expression which shall be devoted of men (Lev_27:29) has been the occasion of some difficulty. This much is certainly plain: that the sentence of cherem once pronounced was absolutely irrevocable, and in 1Sa_15:21; 1Sa_15:33, we have an instance of the prophet’s indignant rebuke of the attempt to set it aside. Beyond this, the only instances of the cherem in Scripture are those which rested upon an express Divine command. Jephthah’s vow does not come under this category at all, for that was a vow either to offer a burnt offering, or to devote to the Lord; but the cherem is not treated as a vow at all, and is separated from ordinary vows by being irredeemable. The general sense of the passage, historically interpreted, is therefore that man may not interfere to thwart the purpose of the Almighty: Jehovah’s sentence of destruction must always be unflinchingly carried out. Lev_27:28, however, clearly asserts that an individual man might devote persons belonging to him in the same way that he could his animals or fields, while Lev_27:29 requires that any one so devoted must be put to death. The meaning of this very mysterious provision must be gathered from the historical instances of the cherem. It could have applied only to the devoting of those who were already manifestly under the ban of Jehovah—those guilty of such outrageous and flagrant violation of the fundamental law of the covenant that they manifestly came under the penalty of death. Such persons, instead of being tried and condemned, might be at once devoted and put to death. Lange’s exegesis is as follows: “That which had been placed under the ban was absolutely irredeemable. No object was banned, however, or consecrated to Jehovah by an irrevocable reversion (for the use of the Sanctuary in the case of impersonal things, or for death instead of capital punishment in the case of persons) through any private will; only Jehovah, or the community in His service, executed the ban. The various particulars of the ban are explained by Knobel, p. 588.” See also Selden de Jure Gent. IV., vi.–xi.; Waterland Scripture vindicated, Works IV., p. 226–229.
Lev_27:30-33. Tithes also are to be excluded from the possible subjects of vows, since they already belonged to the Lord; in certain cases, however, they might be redeemed like vows. The tithe, like the thing devoted, is referred to as something already familiar. From Abraham’s tithe to Melchizedec (Gen_14:20) and Jacob’s vow (Gen_28:22), and probably from still far earlier times, it had been immemorially an essential part of the worship of God. The tithe is here spoken of, therefore, not for the purpose of enjoining it, but to exclude it from vows, and to prescribe how far and under what conditions, like vows, it might be redeemed. In Num_18:20-32; Deu_12:6; Deu_12:11; Deu_14:22, directions are given as to the use and the collection of the tithes. “According to Rabbinical tradition, the animals to be tithed were enclosed in a pen, and as they went out, one by one at the opening, every tenth animal was touched with a rod dipped in vermilion. Comp. Jer_33:13; Eze_20:37.” Clark. The tithe was applied, of course, only to the increase of the flock and the herd, i.e., to animals which had never been tithed before. Lange: “It must not be overlooked that the tithes were a ground-rent in favor of the hierarchy, primarily of the Levites, who again must themselves pay tithes to the priest; and were also a perpetual theocratic civil tax which could not properly be maintained in Christian times by the side of other taxes, notwithstanding the strong Old Testament disposition of the middle ages in this matter. It is easy to see that at the present day, by the side of the modern forms of voluntary and involuntary taxes, ecclesiastical and secular, tithes can only be claimed by an overstrained literal zeal.” The law (32, 33) absolutely forbade the redemption or exchange of the tithe of sacrificial animals, as in case of a vow; other tithes were also under the same law as the vow, and might be redeemed by the payment of their value with one-fifth in addition.
Lev_27:34 closes this appendix, and forms, as it were, a second close to the whole book of Leviticus, the aim and object of which has been holiness—holiness to be typically acquired by the sacrificial system prescribed to point to “the Lord our righteousness;” and to be preserved by those many legal enactments superadded to the great law of faith, “because of transgressions, until the promised seed should come.”
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
I. In the law for the redemption of personal vows is again brought out very strongly the equality of all men before God. Differences were made according to sex and age, but none according to social position and rank. The redemption for the high-priest himself was precisely the same as for the day-laborer.
II. In the prohibition of vows of the first-born, of tithes, etc., which already belonged to the Lord, the general principle is taught that man may not make that a matter of extraordinary piety which already forms a part of his ordinary duty. In a sense this would absolutely exclude all vows, since the Christian requirement is that we should devote ourselves with all that we have to Him who gave Himself for us, and indeed the highest standard of the Christian life, making of that life itself one perpetual vow, necessarily supercedes all minor vows; but nevertheless practically, special dedications of ourselves and ours may be made, and when made are to be sacredly kept. See Ecc_5:4-5.
III. Here as elsewhere Moses is made only the channel and instrument by whom the laws are given; their authorship is expressly referred to the Lord Himself. Accepting this as a truth, the wonderful character of this legislation occasions no difficulty; but if with the negative critics, it be denied and the legislation be referred to human authorship, we have in this book the impossible phenomenon of a legislation wholly occupied with the promotion of holiness, and yet stamped with fraud and deliberate forgery upon its very front. We have also a legislation far superior to that of any nation of antiquity, and indeed morally superior to any that has ever existed except under the influence of Christianity, proceeding from a people whose history shows them to have been unfitted for the conception, much more the enactment of even a very inferior code.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Lange: “The religious observance of vows. Before all things man must not be willing to cheat Jehovah; also he must be thoroughly honest and true in his vows, his professions, his fasts, his devotion, and his religious duties generally.”
Also under exegetical: “The importance of these prescriptions is that they oppose all unmanliness in relation to a pledged word, confirmation vows, marriage vows, ordination vows, false discharge of fasting that has been vowed by fish-eating and the like; the removal of all evasions of criminal justice and of churchly discipline, and finally, of all frauds in regard to the duties which one owes to the cultus and to the religious rights of the community. The ordinance concerning the irremissibility of various actions shows clearly that there can be a true freedom within this obligation. The sanctification of manliness—thus might the whole section be entitled.”
Also under the same: “It is an old story that worldliness, cunning, and impiety, very willingly put obstructions in the way of religious, theocratic, and ecclesiastical discharge of duty, and the complaints of the Old Testament of the want of manliness in this matter, which was connected with dimness of faith in the Omniscient, have been continually repeated even to the present. But here Jehovah, who deals faithfully and reliably with His holy people, approaches with the demand in regard to them, that they should hold themselves holy, and faithful, and trustworthy in all their business in regard to Him. If moral laxity begins first in concealments in relation to God and His institutions, it will diffuse itself more widely until it completes its process of dissolution in religious and moral deceptions, especially in the province of all religious and moral vows.”
Footnotes:
[1]Lev_27:2. “הִפְלִיא נֶדֶר does not mean to dedicate or set apart a vow, but to make a special vow.” Keil.
[2]Lev_27:2-3; Lev_27:5-8, etc. “The second כ in בְּעֶרְכְּךָ is formative of the noun, by reduplication of the third radical: it is not the pronominal suffix.” Horsley. The Heb. subst. ערך, estimation or value, is never found in Scripture, but with the pronoun of the second person joined to it; and which is an expletive, having no use but to distinguish it from the meaning of an ordinance, or laying in order.” Delgado. According to Fürst “the suff. refers to the person valued.” The LXX., Onk., Vulg. and Syr. omit the pronoun altogether.
[3]Lev_27:11. קָרְבָּן. See Textual Note2 on Lev_2:1.
[4]Lev_27:12. Valuation is quite as good a translation of עֵרךְ; but as the A. V. has estimation in all other places in this chapter, it should be retained here.
[5]Lev_27:2-3; Lev_27:5-8, etc. “The second כ in בְּעֶרְכְּךָ is formative of the noun, by reduplication of the third radical: it is not the pronominal suffix.” Horsley. The Heb. subst. ערך, estimation or value, is never found in Scripture, but with the pronoun of the second person joined to it; and which is an expletive, having no use but to distinguish it from the meaning of an ordinance, or laying in order.” Delgado. According to Fürst “the suff. refers to the person valued.” The LXX., Onk., Vulg. and Syr. omit the pronoun altogether.
[6]Lev_27:16. אֲחֻזָּתוֹ = Possession here means possession by inheritance, and it is better to mark this in the translation as purchased fields (Lev_27:22) come under another law.
[7]Lev_27:17. A conjunction is here supplied by the Sam., 16 MSS., the LXX., Chald. and Syr.
[8]Lev_27:26. שֶׂה. See Textual Note 6 on Lev_12:8.
[9]Lev_27:27; Lev_27:29. וּפָדָה = free or deliver. It is a different word from the גָּאַל of the second clause of Lev_27:27 and of both clauses of Lev_27:20, and should be differently translated.
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On v9 if it be a beast, whereof men bring an…
if it be a beast, whereof men bring an offering unto the Lord--a clean beast. After it had been vowed, it could neither be employed in common purposes nor exchanged for an equivalent--it must be sacrificed--or if, through some discovered blemish, it was unsuitable for the altar, it might be sold, and the money applied for the sacred service. If an unclean beast--such as an ass or camel, for instance, had been vowed, it was to be appropriated to the use of the priest at the estimated value, or it might be redeemed by the person vowing on payment of that value, and the additional fine of a fifth more.
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 On vv2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 PERSONS THE OBJECTS OF VOWS, Lev_27:2-8.
PERSONS THE OBJECTS OF VOWS, Lev_27:2-8.
2. A singular vow — That is, special and extraordinary; Hebrews, “if any man definitely announces (R.V., ‘accomplishes’) a vow, souls shall be to Jehovah according to thy estimation.” The same Hebrew verb expresses the separation of a Nazarite unto the Lord. See Num_6:2, note. Persons who were the objects of the vow were to be redeemed according to a scale of values fixed by Moses. “This implies, clearly enough, that whenever a person was vowed redemption was to follow according to the valuation. Otherwise what was the object of valuing them? ‘Estimation’ supposes either redemption or purchase. But in the case of men (Israelites) there could be no purchasing as slaves, and therefore the object of the valuing could only have been for the purpose of buying off the person vowed to the Lord, and the fulfilment of the vow could only have consisted in the payment into the sanctuary of the price fixed by the law.” — Keil and Delitzsch. The theory that an unredeemed Israelite became a slave of the sanctuary cannot be sustained by 1Sa_2:11; 1Sa_2:22; 1Sa_2:28, since Hannah did not consecrate Samuel by a simple vow, but as a Nazarite for the whole of his life. Still less pertinent to the support of this theory is 2Sa_15:8, adduced by Michaelis. The valuation of persons without any thought of the relations of servitude appears further in the redemption of the firstborn.
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, 3, 8, 9, 12, 13 1–8. The case of persons
1–8. The case of persons
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 vv1–13 (1) And the Lord spake unto Moses.—Like the group…
XXVII.
(1) And the Lord spake unto Moses.—Like the group of enactments contained in Lev_25:1 to Lev_26:45, the regulations about the different kinds of vows are introduced with the formula which indicates that the section before us constitutes a separate Divine communication. As sundry allusions are made throughout this book to vows, thus legally acknowledging the existence of the ancient practice of votive offerings (Lev_7:16; Lev_22:18; Lev_22:21; Lev_22:23; Lev_23:38), the Levitical code, which is pre-eminently designed to uphold the holiness of the sanctuary and its sacrifices, as well as the holiness of the priests and the people, would be incomplete without defining the nature and obligation of these self-imposed sacrifices.
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 Leviticus 27
Leviticus 27
This closing section of our book treats of the "singular vow," or the voluntary act whereby a person devoted himself or his property unto the Lord. "And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow the persons shall be for the Lord by thy estimation. And thy estimation shall be . . . . . . after the shekel of the sanctuary."
Read full note →
Now, in the case of a person devoting himself, or his beast, his house, or his field, unto the Lord, it was obviously a question of capacity or worth; and, hence, there was a certain scale of valuation, according to age. Moses, as the representative of the claims of God, was called upon to estimate, in each case, according to the standard of the sanctuary. If a man undertakes to Make a vow, he must be tried by the standard of righteousness; and, moreover, in all cases, we are called upon to recognise the difference between capacity and title. In Exodus 30: 15, we read, in reference to the atonement money, "The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less, than half a shekel, when they give an offering unto the Lord, to make an atonement for your souls." In the matter of atonement all stood upon one common level. Thus it must ever be. High and low, rich and poor, learned and ignorant, old and young, all have one common title. "There is no difference." All stand alike on the ground of the infinite preciousness of the blood of Christ. There may be a vast difference as to capacity, as to title there is none. There may be a vast difference as to experience - as to title there is none. There may be a vast difference as to knowledge, gift, and fruitfulness - as to title there is none. The sapling and the tree, the babe and the father, the convert of yesterday and the matured believer, are all on the same ground. "The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less." Nothing more could be given, nothing less could be taken. "We have boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus." This is our title to enter. Our capacity to worship, when we have entered, will depend upon our spiritual energy. Christ is our title. The Holy Ghost is our capacity. Self has nothing to do with either the one or the other. What a mercy! We get in by the blood of Jesus; we enjoy what we find there by the Holy Ghost. The blood of Jesus opens the door; the Holy Ghost conducts us through the house. The blood of Jesus opens the casket; the Holy Ghost unfolds the precious contents. The blood of Jesus makes the casket ours; the Holy Ghost enables us to appreciate its rare and costly gems.
But, in Leviticus 27, it is entirely a question of ability, capacity, or worth. Moses had a certain standard from which he could not possibly descend. He had a certain rule from which he could not possibly swerve. If any one could come up to that well; if not, he had to take his place accordingly.
What, then, was to be done in reference to the person who was unable to rise to the height of the claims set forth by the representative of divine righteousness? Hear the consolatory answer: "But if he be poorer than thy estimation, then he shall present himself before the priest, and the priest shall value him; according to, his ability that vowed shall the priest value him." (Ver. 8) In other words, if it be a question of man’s undertaking to meet the claims of righteousness, then he must meet them. But if, on the other hand, a man feels himself wholly unable to meet those claims, he has only to fall back upon grace, which will take him up, just as he is. Moses is the representative of the claims of divine righteousness. The priest is the exponent of the provisions of divine grace. The poor man who was unable to stand before Moses fell back into the arms of the priest. Thus it is ever. If we cannot "dig" we can "beg;" and directly we take the place of a beggar, it is no longer a question of what we are able to earn, but of what God is pleased to give. "Grace all the work shall crown, through everlasting days." How happy it is to be debtors to grace! How happy to take when God is glorified in giving! When man is in question, it is infinitely better to dig than to beg; but when God is in question, the case is the very reverse.
I would just add, that I believe this entire chapter bears, in an especial manner, upon the nation of Israel. It is intimately connected with the two preceding chapters. Israel made "a singular vow" at the foot of Mount Horeb; but were quite unable to meet the claims of law - they were far "poorer than Moses’ estimation.’’ But, blessed be God, they will come in under the rich provisions of divine grace. Having learnt their total inability "to dig," they will not be "ashamed to beg;" and, hence, they shall experience the deep blessedness of being cast upon the sovereign mercy of Jehovah, which stretches, like a golden chain, "from everlasting to everlasting." It is well to be poor, when the knowledge of our poverty serves but to unfold to us the exhaustless riches of divine grace. That grace can never suffer any one to go empty away. It can never tell any one that he is too poor. It can meet the very deepest human need; and not only so but it is glorified in meeting it. This holds good in every case. It is true of any individual sinner; and it is true with respect to Israel, who, having been valued by the Lawgiver, have proved "poorer than his estimation." Grace is the grand and only resource for all. It is the basis of our salvation; the basis of a life of practical godliness; and the basis of those imperishable hopes which animate us amid the trials and conflicts of this sin-stricken world. May we cherish a deeper sense of grace, and more ardent desire for the glory!
We shall here close our meditations upon this most profound and precious book. If the foregoing pages should be used of God to awaken an interest in a section of inspiration which has been so much neglected by the Church, in all ages, they shall not have been written in vain.
C. H. M.
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, 3, 8, 9, 11 The final chapter, attached to the book after the…
The final chapter, attached to the book after the concluding exhortation, is a short treatise on persons (verses 2-8), animals (verses 9-13), houses (verses 14, 15), lauds (verses 16-24), vowed to God; and on the commutation of vows.
A man might vow to the service of God whatever he had a right over, that is, himself, his wife, his children, his slaves, his beasts, his houses, his fields. In case persons were vowed, the rule was that they should be redeemed at a certain price, though occasionally the redemption was not made. Vowing a person to God thus, was, as a rule, no more than vowing so much money to the use of the sanctuary as was fixed as the price of the redemption of the person vowed. Yet there is a great difference between the two acts of vowing a person and vowing the correlative sum of money. A man in great danger or distress might devote himself (Gen_28:20) or another (Jud_1:11:30 1Sa_1:11) to God, when he never would have vowed money. Such vows were redeemable, and, as a rule, were redeemed, though there were some exceptions, as in the case of Samuel.
Read full note →
If beasts were vowed to the Lord (verses 9-13), they could not be redeemed if they were such as could be sacrificed to him; if they were not such as could be sacrificed, they were to be valued by the priest, and either retained as a possession of the sanctuary, or, if the owner preferred it, redeemed by him at the price fixed and out-fifth additional.
If houses were vowed to the Lord (verses 14, 15), they became the property of the sanctuary, unless they were redeemed at the valuation set upon them by the priest, with one-fifth additional.
If hereditary lands were vowed to the Lord (verses 16-21), they became the possession of the sanctuary at the year of jubilee, unless they had been previously redeemed; redemption, however, was in this case the ordinary rule, and we do not hear of any accumulation of landed property in the hands of the priests from this source. In the ease of a field which was not the commutation sum was paid down "in that day," that is, on the spot a hereditary possession, but a purchase, being vowed to the Lord (verses 22-24), in a lump sum, the land going back at the jubilee to the original owners from whom the temporary possession had been bought by the man who made the vow.
A section is added forbidding the firstborn of animals, things devoted, and tithes to be vowed, because they were already the Lord"s; allowing the redemption of the firstborn of unclean animals, and of the tithes of corn and fruits, but prohibiting redemption in the ease of sacrificial animals, of things devoted, and of the tithes of animals.
Vers. 1-34. Vows are not instituted by the Mosaic legislation; they were already in existence as a habit of the Hebrew people, and they are only regulated by Moses. The principle on the subject of vows is that no one was bound to make a vow, but that when a vow was made, it must be observed by the payment of the thing vowed or its recognized commutation. Thus Deu_23:21, "When thou shalt vow a vow unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee. But if thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee." And Num_30:2, "If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth." And Ecc_5:5, "Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.
I OLD-TESTAMENT VOWS WERE PROMISES TO GOD TO GIVE UP TO HIM SOMETHING OF VALUE ON CONDITION OF DELIVERANCE IN DISTRESS OR HELP IN ATTAINING SOMETHING DESIRED. Examples:
1. Jacob"s vow: "And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my father"s house in peace; then shall the Lord be my God: and this stone, which I have set for a pillar, shall be God"s house: and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee". (Gen_28:20-22)
2. Jephthah"s vow: "And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lord"s, and (or) I will offer it up for a burnt offering". (Jud_1:11:30, 31) What Jephthah appeared to contemplate as likely to meet him was either a non-sacrificial animal, which would then be handed over to the sanctuary, (Lev_27:11-13) or a sacrificial animal, which would be offered up. His daughter came under the first head. (Lev_27:9, Lev_27:10)
3. Hannah"s vow: "And she vowed a vow, and said, O Lord of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thine handmaid, but wilt give unto thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the Lord all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head". (1Sa_1:11)
4. Absalom"s pretended vow: "For thy servant vowed a vow while I abode at Geshur in Syria, saying, If the Lord shall bring me again indeed to Jerusalem, then I will serve the Lord (offer sacrifices in Hebron)". (2Sa_15:8)
II CHRISTIAN VOWS ARE PROMISES MADE TO GOD, DIFFERING FROM THE JEWISH VOW BY BEING INDEPENDENT OF ANY DELIVERANCE OR, BENEFIT TO BE RECEIVED IN RETURN. Examples:
1. The baptismal vow, ratified and confirmed in Confirmation: "Wilt thou then obediently keep God"s holy will and commandments, and walk in the same all the days of thy life? I will." "Do you here, in the presence of God, and of this congregation, renew the solemn promise and vow that was made in your name at your baptism; ratifying and confirming the same in your own person? I do" (Baptism and Confirmation Services).
2. The marriage vow: "Wilt thou have this woman to thy wedded wife, to live together after God"s ordinance in the holy estate of matrimony?" "Wilt thou have this man to thy wedded husband, to live together after God"s ordinance in the holy estate of matrimony?" "I will" (Form of Solemnization of Matrimony).
3. The ordination vow: "Will you then give your faithful diligence always so to minister the doctrine and sacraments, and the discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded, and as this Church and realm hath received the same, according to the commandments of God?" "I will so do, by the help of the Lord" (The Ordering of Priests).
III THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH VOWS AND OATHS ARE NOT, OR CEASE TO BE, OBLIGATORY. Jeremiah writes, (Jer_4:2) "And thou shalt swear, The Lord liveth, in truth, in judgment, and in righteousness." Isaiah speaks of those "which swear by the Name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth, nor in righteousness". (Isa_48:1) Accordingly, any oath or vow is void which was an unrighteous oath or vow when taken; and the sin of breaking it, though a sin, is less than that of keeping it. Therefore Herod ought not to have kept his oath to the daughter of Herodias; (Mat_14:9) and the observance of their oath by the forty conspirators who had bound themselves to kill Paul, would have been a sin on their part. (Act_23:12-21) Further, a vow, as distinct from an oath or contract, ceases to be obligatory if the person concerned comes to regard it as unrighteous and wrong for him to fulfill with his changed mind or under changed circumstances. Thus, the vow taken at ordination to administer the sacraments in the form received by a special Church, is not binding if a man ceases on conscientious grounds to be a member of that Church, and. the vow of celibacy taken by Luther and others, who have become reformers, no longer binds them when they have come to the conviction that the vow was unrighteous, and when they have rejected the discipline of their Church. The marriage vow, however, stands upon a different basis, because marriage is a contract, containing not only a vow to God, but also a promise to man, by the non-fulfillment of which wrong would be done.
HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR Chapter 27On keeping vows.
Cf. Ecc_5:4, 5 Gen_28:20-22 Gen_35:1-7. We have in this apparent appendix to the book an interesting chapter about keeping vows. Religious enthusiasm may very properly express itself in the dedication either of one"s self, or a relative in whose destiny we have a voice, or a beast, or a house, or finally a field. Such a sense of special obligation may be laid upon us that we feel constrained to dedicate either a person, an animal, or a piece of property unto God. But it may be highly inconvenient for the priests to accept of the dedicated article at the tabernacle. It may be much more convenient to receive, in lieu thereof, its money equivalent, and so a scale of charges is here given, according to which the vow"s value is to be estimated.
I WE MUST DEDICATE IN THIS SPECIAL WAY ONLY WHAT LIES BEYOND THE LORD"S USUAL DUES. The tithes, the firstlings, and the Nazarites may be regarded as the Lord"s ordinary dues. We have no fight to "make a fuss" about what is lawfully his own. The margin beyond the tithe is broad enough from which to make our special vows without encroaching upon the tithe. Let the nine-tenths or the four-fifths, according as we regard a single or a double tithe the Jewish proportion in systematic giving, be the source from which we shall draw our special vows.
II IT IS A GOOD THING TO GIVE OUR INCREASING GRATITUDE SUCH SPECIAL OUTLETS. For after all, the Lord has given us everything, and may demand all if he pleases. When he is so "modest in his demands if we may be allowed such an expression regarding his claim upon the tithes it is surely becoming in us from time to time to give our hearts free play, and have persons or things specially set apart for him.
III BUT WE MUST NOT BE RASH OR INCONSIDERATE IN OUR VOWS. Jephthah, for example, was most rash in his vow. So was Saul in the war with the Philistines, when he almost insisted on Jonathan dying because, in eating a little honey in the wood, he had in ignorance transgressed the vow of the inconsiderate king. We have no right to make "rash promises" to any one, much less to God.
IV WHEN WE HAVE REGISTERED A SPECIAL VOW WE MUST KEEP IT SCRUPULOUSLY. There is a temptation to make liberal vows on condition of receiving certain blessings from God, and then to forget them when the blessing is received. Let us take in illustration the case of Jacob. When he was posting in hot haste towards Padan-aram for fear of the injured Esau, he spent a remarkable night at Bethel. God there gave him a reassuring vision. Sin, he saw, had not separated him altogether from heaven, but even a deceiver like himself might return penitently to God and rise on the rounds of a ladder of light into fellowship and peace. In this ecstasy he registers in the calm morning light a vow: "If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my father"s house in peace; then shall the Lord be my God: and this stone, which I have set for a pillar, shall be God"s house: and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee". (Gen_28:20-22) Did Jacob keep his vow? Surely the moment he returns to Canaan he will make for Bethel, and set up his altar, and discharge his vow? Nothing of the kind. He forgot all about it, and went to Succoth, and then to Shechem, and it was not till Dinah had been defiled, and members of his family were becoming idolaters, and God commanded him to go to Bethel and perform it, that the wily old patriarch was brought to a sense of his duty. (Gen_35:1-7)
Let us, then, enter upon our vows calmly, deliberately, without any unseemly haste. Then, whatever it may cost, no matter how great the sacrifice, let us undertake it, and our whole religious life will rise to the occasion. The future life, into which we hope to enter, will be so completely dedicated to God"s glory, that the distinction we must needs now make between ordinary and special vows shall be lost completely, for the enthusiasm which leads to such special vows now shall make them the ordinary rule for ever. R.M.E.
HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD Vers. 1-25. Singular vows.
The loving heart will ask not only what must, but what may, be done; and the sacrifices offered in the flames of love are acceptable to God. (2Ch_6:8) These are the principles which underlie the laws concerning singular vows.
I THE SINGULARITY LIES IN THE ELEMENT OF SEPARATION.
1. Hence the subject of the vow is styled a Nazarite.
(1) From rzn, to separate, to consecrate. (see Nu 6 Jud_1:13:5 1Sa_1:11, 1Sa_1:28)
(2) Probably the prayer of Jabez was of the nature of a singular vow. (1Ch_4:10) Paul seems to have taken upon himself such a vow. (see Act_18:18)
2. Jesus was a Nazarite in spirit.
(1) He was not a Nazarite in the letter. (Mat_11:19) What a rebuke is here to the uncharitableness of certain extreme advocates of total abstinence!
(2) Yet in spirit was Jesus the Grand Antitype of all those anciently separated to God. Hence his dwelling at Nazareth was in the order of providence, and in fulfillment of prophecy, viz. that he should be called a Nazarene. (Mat_2:23)
3. So are true Christians.
(1) The disciples of Jesus, who were first called "Christians" at Antioch, were also distinguished as "Nazarenes". (see Act_11:26 Act_24:5) They do not appear to have refused either title.
(2) Professors should strive to prove themselves worthy of both. All Christians, in their baptism and in their voluntary acceptance of Christ, are bound by sacred vows.
(3) The true merit of our modern abstainers from intoxicants who are so for the glory of God, is that of the Nazarite.
II THINGS MAY BE CONSECRATED AS WELL AS PERSONS.
1. A beast might be the subject of a singular vow.
(1) The Law prescribes that should it be such as might be offered in sacrifice to God, it must not be exchanged (verses 9, 10). The reason appears to be that in this case it must be looked upon as a type of Christ, and for him there can be no substitute.
(2) But if unsuitable for sacrifice, then it becomes the priests". In this case it became the subject of estimation, and from the value put upon it by the priest there is no appeal. This assumes that his valuation is just; and this certainly is true of his Great Antitype, who will be our Judge.
2. A house may be the subject of a singular vow.
(1) By means of dedicated things the sanctuary came to be the depository of great treasure. (1Ki_15:15)
(2) The riches of the gospel are principally spiritual. The houses which enrich the Church are saintly families.
3. A field might be the subject of a singular vow.
(1) The estimation of the land is by the quantity of seed sown in it, fifty shekels to the homer (verse 16). But the estimation was modified with respect to the law of the jubilee. The values of all earthly things are influenced by their relation to things heavenly.
(2) If the owner would redeem that he vowed to God, he must add a fifth to the estimated value. This was a general rule; and was instituted to discourage fickleness in relation to the service of God. J.A.M.
HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON Vers. 1-33. Spontaneous devotion.
The relations between God and his ancient people were not so rigid as they are sometimes supposed to have been. It was not all enactment on the one hand, and obedience or disobedience on the other. We find illustration here
I THAT THE LAW OF GOD LEAVES AMPLE ROOM FOR THE PLAY OF SPONTANEOUS DEVOTION. Under the inspiring influence of some signal mercies, individual or national, the Israelite might devote to God either
(1) a person (verse 2), or
(2) an animal (verse 9), or
(3) a house (verse 14), or
(4) a piece of land (verse 16).
This was to be a singular vow (verse 2), the dedication of something over and above that which was, by law, already appropriated to the service of Jehovah (see verses 26, 30). It was and is the will of our God that special favours received at his hand, or special influences wrought by his Spirit in our heart, should be marked by optional and exceptional services on our part. We may, when thus animated by gratitude for his kindness, or penetrated with a sense of his goodness and grace, freely and spontaneously bring to the altar of our Lord
(1) our possessions,
(2) our time and labour,
(3) our children (whom we may surrender to his service in distant and dangerous scenes),
(4) any precious thing which we are not bound to give, but which we voluntarily and joyfully lay at his feet.
II THAT THE FORM OF OUR DEVOTION MAY CHANGE SO LONG AS THE SPIRIT OF IT IS RETAINED. The Israelite who vowed a "person" redeemed the vow by presenting money according to a nicely graduated scale (verses 3-8); or he might redeem a beast by paying money equal to its estimated value, together with one-fifth part added thereto (verse 13); so with a piece of land (verse 19): In a similar way, we may resolve and may undertake to give ourselves or our possessions to some particular sacred cause, and there may arise conditions which render it undesirable or even impossible for us to complete our work. In such case our Lord does not hold us to a mere literal fulfillment; what he looks for, and should certainly receive at our hands, is some equivalent in which we at least as freely express our gratitude and devotion. The essential thing is to preserve the spirit of our piety, and also to maintain a good measure of its most suitable expression, whatever that, at any time, may be.
III THAT WE MAY GO SO FAR IN THE WAY OF DEDICATION THAT IT IS NOT PERMISSIBLE TO RETIRE. The Jew under the Law might, as we have seen, redeem certain things at a certain point; but there was a point at which everything was irredeemable. No "devoted thing" could be redeemed (verses 28, 29). A beast "devoted to the Lord" must be offered up; an enemy once "devoted" must be put to death. When this point is reached in Christian consecration must be left to each Christian conscience. But we may contend that withdrawal is seldom, if ever, allowable when
(1) there has been a solemn and formal dedication of person or substance in the presence of Christ and his people;
(2) an overt action has been taken which commits other people, and when our retirement would involve theirs also;
(3) such withdrawal would bring dishonour on the sacred Name we bear. Under such conditions as these we must proceed at all risks and costs, and having vowed, we must "pay unto the Lord our God". C. (Psa_66:11)
HOMILIES BY R.A. REDFORD Vers. 1-34. Vows and dues.
I We find here a representation of the union of righteousness and grace in the kingdom of God. The sacredness of vows and dues; but the estimation, by the priest, according to the ability of him that made the vow. The Law makes its claim, but God provides against its rigour.
II Comparison of the Law of God as given to his ancient people with the imperfect and cruel laws of merely human origin. Especially as to human sacrifices. The only human life which could be vowed to God was that which was already doomed by right of war or otherwise. The animal sacrifices, being strictly prescribed, excluded human sacrifice. The true religion is the only protection of human life. Those who profess enthusiasm of humanity, instead of and as a substitute for faith in Christ, have no security to offer that their inadequate theory of human obligation will extirpate cruelty and promote the happiness of the world.
III The commutation of vows and dues pointed to the pitifulness of Jehovah, who, while upholding the inviolability of his Law, would yet, provide for the weakness of man. "He knoweth our frame," etc. These glimpses of love in the midst of the thunders of Sinai were the promises of a revelation of the Divine nature in which love should predominate a new covenant, which should take up into itself all that was enduring and Divine in the old. Underneath all the regulations of Leviticus lies the original promise of redemption, and through all the vail of the Mosaic economy shines the Shechinah glory of God manifest in the flesh the Prophet, Priest, and King, who came, not to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it, and in whom all the promises of God are Yea and Amen. R.
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 On v2 When a man shall make a singular vow.
Lev_27:2-13
When a man shall make a singular vow.
Read full note →
Laws concerning vows
I. That voluntary and special vows were permitted by the Lord. Vows should be made cautiously, deliberately, and, in most instances, conditionally; because further enlightenment, or changed conditions may render their fulfilment undesirable, unnecessary, or even impossible.
II. That vows were acceptable to the Lord according to the spirit which prompted them, and in which they were paid. When circumstances justified an Israelite repenting of his vow, it could be com-mutated or remitted, or some compensation offered in its stead. Jehovah would accept nothing that was recklessly or reluctantly presented. All adjustments and decisions were to be made according to the standards of the sanctuary, not according to human fallibility and caprice. Though a vow should not be literally performed, it must be perfectly fulfilled in respect to honourable intention and sacred fidelity. The state of heart, in the presentation of sacrifice, determined the value of the gift. This law has fever been repealed.
III. That freedom of choice given in the fulfilment of vows did not contravene the purposes of the lord concerning his work and worship. The compensation paid in lieu of the original vow went to sustain the sanctuary services, and the Lord reserved to Himself some unalienable rights. Some things when devoted could not be withheld or withdrawn under any circumstances. He demanded a tenth of the produce of the land, and enforced His claim with righteous and unrelaxing rigour. Thus the preservation and perpetuation of Jehovahs worship were secured, and not left contingent upon the fickleness and uncertainty of human devotedness. Righteousness lies at the foundation of the Levitical economy; is the basis of natural and revealed religion. Leviticus is a witness to Christ and His gospel. In Him we have combined all that the law embodied--Altar, Sacrifice, Priest. Simplicity, and purity of aims, loftiest motives, deepest meanings, and incomparable excellence, lift the law and the gospel infinitely above all other religions of the world. The superiority to Jewish narrowness and bigotry, to human sinfulness and shortsightedness, demonstrate their divinity of origin, mutual dependence, absolute authority, undying vigour, and inestimable worth. (F. W. Brown.)
The extraordinary in the service of God
This is part of the law concerning singular vows, extraordinary ones; which though God did not expressly insist on, yet if they were consistent and conformable to the general precepts, He would be well pleased with. Note--We should not only ask what must we do, but what may we do, for the glory and honour of God. As the liberal deviseth liberal things (Isa_32:8), so the pious deviseth pious things, and the enlarged heart would willingly de something extraordinary in the service of so good a Master as God is. When we receive or expect some singular mercy, it is good to honour God with some singular vow. (Matthew Henry, D. D.)
The singular vow
I. Speaking in modern phrase, we should describe this chapter as the act of the old law on the singular vow. This vow was distinguished from certain other vows common among the Hebrews by the circumstance that it was susceptible of redemption. We can all understand that a consecration of a mans self or of a mans estate might be so hurriedly or so thoughtlessly made (as in the case of Jephtha with his daughter) that the author of them would find out afterwards how rashly the promise had been given, and how unequal he was to the keeping it, and so be anxious to compound by a money equivalent for the more spiritual service he found himself incompetent to bring. This kind of engagement is called in the Hebrew the Neder, and is further marked by the character of singularity or wonderfulness; whereas towards the end of this very chapter we have another vow provided for, and called the Cherem, which, being accompanied with some sort of anathema or execration, allowed no redemption. But now, observe very carefully the method appointed for gaining release from the obligation. Moses was to arbitrate according to what he considered the ability of the applicant to render. Pay so much, would be the decision of the lawgiver, and thou mayest go free. Rut the remarkable and the beautiful thing is, that even that measure of relief to the vow-maker was not absolutely or invariably final. Moses might overestimate the resources of the devotee for the buying himself off from the personal service of the Tabernacle--Moses might adjudge too heavy a ransom--and therefore the law provided a yet further and more merciful escape. The man was at liberty to appeal from Moses to the priest. Aaron was the priest. His very name stands for a representative before God of the wants and the sorrows and the sins of the people; and hence to transfer the adjudication of a debtors affairs from Moses to his brother would, as you can all see, be the introduction of a perfectly new element into the ease to be tried. The appellant would be as poor in the presence of Aaron as he was in the presence of the former judge. He would also be as rich. And yet the very terms of the text are all but decisive on the fact that he would gain by carrying his cause before this new tribunal. Aaron would certainly--if we understand the law of the case--fix the money ransom at a lower figure. And the obvious reason is that Aaron, by virtue of his own calling, would make up for it--i.e., for the deficiency--in some other way, and in some way in which Moses could not make up for it. We must not pronounce with any authority on the exact method in which the priest would settle with the poverty of a debtor, and make it possible for him to go free whom his brother would have handed over to the full penalties of the vow, to do, perhaps, Gibeonites work as a hewer of wood or a drawer of water. But the probability is that the remedy in Aarons hands would be the appointment of some easy offering in which the priest would render him the aid of his sacred functions.
II. Now it will hardly require any one of us to be very deep in controversial divinity to understand that if we are going to Christianise this type and turn it to the account of a modern religious experience, we shall be treading on most critical, though it may turn out very lawful and very instructive, ground. In a word, then, let us say we are now having no business whatever with an unregenerate man, nor any business whatever with the sacrifice of Christ as the only channel of his justification. The solitary topic of the text is a topic for men already in the covenant. Regeneration, and even justification, must be understood as settled already; and the vow-making of Leviticus must be looked upon wholly and solely as the service of the Christian, at peace with the law, but struggling with subsequent duties. Is there no difference? There is all the difference in the world between the terms on which the great God will take a man to heaven and the terms on which He will treat him when already in the covenant. In the former transaction the man may vow as he likes; he can pay nothing, and he is never asked to pay. In the latter transaction, where the former is finished, the man is commanded to pay, and struggles to pay; but, nevertheless, our point with you is that times without number he is unable to pay. The universal and the sad fact is that entire duty is what none of us can render. Even in the Church the law is too much for us. And what we have to do a hundred times a day, and all our lives long, is to fall back on the solitary and sufficient and omnipotent righteousness of Christ. We do greatly err if we limit the sacerdotal functions of Immanuel to the gaining us forgiveness at our conversion or the taking us to heaven when we die. We want a priest every moment; some one that is to furnish the balance of service and duty demanded by our profession, but never forthcoming. Those two men, Moses and Aaron, may be said to travel with the Christian every inch of his journey: Moses standing for what I ought to do and to be; Aaron standing for what I take refuge in as often as I come short or fall below, If he be poorer than thy estimation. Which of us is not poorer than the Lawgivers estimation? Can we pay what is due from us? We acknowledged, when first we believed, that we could do nothing of the kind. But remember that there is a power and a merit in the righteousness of Christ that continues at the disposal of the saint till the day of his death. Immanuel is certain to judge me, or, according to the text, to value me on other grounds than those of justice and of law: and the reason is that He has something to give me, something of His own. He is my Priest, and has business with the altar and the sacrifice, and under the gospel Christ is Himself all three. You who tell me my duty are only my lawgivers fresh from Mount Sinai. So is the Sermon on the Mount; so is my conscience; so is everything and every one, but Christ. But do you not see that if a Mediator, who for ever is holding up His righteousness on my behalf--if He values me my value alters? I am now not the bankrupt debtor who had not enough to pay, I am that debtor and some one else besides. I am a part of Christ. I bring now my poor offerings of duty, for I must still bring them, but I bring them covered with blood, and made worth something by blood. And, therefore, though I was not rich enough to pay what I owed as bare law sat and measured my resources, I can pay the uttermost farthing as soon as Jesus the Saviour adds His own Cross to my inheritance. (H. Christopherson.)
The provisions of righteousness and grace
Now, in the case of a person devoting himself, or his beast, his house, or his field, unto the Lord, it was obviously a question of capacity or worth; and, hence, there was a certain scale of valuation, according to age. Moses, as the representative of the claims of God, was called upon to estimate, in each case, according to the standard of the sanctuary. If a man undertakes to make a vow he must be tried by the standard of righteousness; and, moreover, in all cases we are called upon to recognise the difference between capacity and title. Moses had a certain standard from which he could not possibly descend. He had a certain rule from which he could not possibly swerve. If any one could come up to that, well; if not, he had to take his place accordingly. What, then, was to be done in reference to the person who was unable to rise to the height of the claims set forth by the representative of Divine righteousness? Hear the consolatory answer (Lev_27:8). In other words, if it be a question of mans undertaking to meet the claims of righteousness, then he must meet them. But if, on the other hand, a man feels himself wholly unable to meet those claims, he has only to fall back upon grace, which will take him up, just as he is. Moses is the representative of the claims of Divine righteousness. The priest is the exponent of the provisions of Divine grace. The poor man who was unable to stand before Moses fell back into the arms of the priest. Thus it is ever. If we cannot dig we can beg; and directly we take the place of a beggar it is no longer a question of what we are able to earn, but of what God is pleased to give. Grace all the work shall crown, through everlasting days. How happy it is to be debtors to grace! How happy to take when God is glorified in giving! When man is in question it is infinitely better to dig than to beg; but when God is in question the case is the very reverse. I would just add, that I believe this entire chapter bears, in an especial manner, upon the nation of Israel. It is intimately connected with the two preceding chapters. Israel made a singular vow at the foot of Mount Horeb; but were quite unable to meet the claims of law--they were far poorer than Moses estimation. But, blessed be God, they will come in under the rich provisions of Divine grace. (C. H. Mackintosh.)
Influence of a singular vow
I made a solemn vow before God, that if General Lee were driven back from Pennsylvania, I would crown the result by the declaration of freedom to the slaves. (President Lincoln.)
A vow kept
I met some time ago a gentleman residing in a retired town in Kent, who told that he was recently confined to his house by indisposition and inclement weather on a wintry Sunday. When the rest of the family were at church he took up George Mullers book, in which he describes The Lords Dealings with him. He became so much interested in the authors life and labours that he promised his conscience, then and there, that if a certain business transaction he had in hand resulted in a certain amount of success, he would send the philanthropist £100 for his Orphans Home. The success was realised, and he was then just on the point of sending off a cheque for the promised amount. (Elihu Burritt.)
Brittle vows
It is said of Andreas, one of the kings of Hungary, that having engaged himself by promise to go to the holy wars (as they then called them), went with all his forces, and coming to Jerusalem, only bathed himself there, as one that had washed off his promise, and so returned back again without striking One blow. Such is the case with many men at present, their promises, covenants, and agreements with others, though sealed and subscribed, prove too, too often as brittle as the glasses they drink in; no bounds will hold them, they rob the Grecians of their proverb, and own it themselves. For let but the worst of men say they will do this or that, is as much as if they had sworn they would not do it, unless it be when they embark themselves in some unwarrantable actions, and the sun may sooner be thrust out of his sphere than they diverted from their adamantine resolutions. (J. Spencer.)
The redemption of a singular vow
Incidents in Oriental history often read like parables. Men are moved by strange motives to do strange things; and the student from the west wanders in a maze of fancies and facts that are bewildering indeed. Thus it is that the early portion of a missionarys life in an eastern land teems with things that are unreal, and he is surrounded by fellow-men who seem in no true sense his fellows. There is so much that is inexplicable to him in their motives and conduct, that, until he gets a clue to the maze, from a constant study of the religions that dominate their lives, his blunders are many, and sometimes even disastrous to his mission. The following is an instance of what I mean, and as it is recorded as an historical fact, will serve the purpose admirably: Abd-al-Muttalib once vowed that if he should be so greatly blessed as to have ten sons, one should certainly be devoted to Allah. In process of time, the number was fulfilled, and the reluctant father gathered his offspring in the Kaaba, and cast lots for the one to be sacrificed. The lot fell upon Abdalla, the beautiful son of his old age. The sacrifical knife was solemnly prepared; and, like Abraham, he stood ready for the awful deed. But the lads sisters came to the rescue. They knew that the Arabs offered camels in sacrifice, and in their abounding grief they entreated their father to cast lots between their brother and ten of these valuable creatures. He consented; but, to their sorrow, the lot fell a second time on the favourite boy. The number of beasts was then doubled, and the lot cast again; but still it fell upon the lad. Time after time trial was made, as the sorrowing sisters and the troubled father became more and more desperate in their anxiety to save the dear one. At last one hundred camels had been proffered, and then, to their great joy, the lot fell upon the beasts. Abdalla was saved. God had set his own value upon the devoted boy, and when an equivalent was provided he was free. Arabs value highly the ships of the desert; for they are so essential to their mode of life. But a human being is more precious than many of them. This was recognised when ten camels were proffered; but until an unprecedented number had been Divinely sanctioned, the true worth of the man was not fully believed in. Thus, all the world over, man has had to learn the value of his fellow by degrees. Many have not learnt the lesson yet, because only mans Maker and Redeemer can aright estimate the worth of man, and reveal it to us. This He hath done in the gift of His Only-begotten Son, who took mans place that the lot might fall upon Him as of more than equal value with the whole of our race. (Robert Spurgeon.)
Philip Henrys vow
A good man named Philip Henry resolved, when he was young, to give himself to God, and he did it in these words: I take God the Father to be my Chief End; I take God the Son to be my King and Saviour; I take God the Holy Ghost to be my Guide and Sanctifier; I take the Bible to be my rule of life; I take all Gods people to be my friends; and here I give my body and soul to be Gods--for God to use for ever. That was Philip Henrys resolve, which he wrote out for himself when he was young; and he put at the end of it--I make this vow of my own mind freely: God give me grace to keep it. (C. Bullock.)
A vow fulfilled
I remember that when we arrived at the hotel at White Mountains, the ladies sat down to a cup of tea, but I preferred to take a walk alone. It was a beautiful spot. The sun was just then reclining his head behind Mount Washington, with all that glorious drapery of an American sunset, of which we know nothing in this country. I felt that I should like to be walking with my God on this earth! I said, What shall I render to my Lord for all His benefits to me? I was led further to repeat that question which Paul asked under other circumstances, Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do? The answer came immediately. It was this: It is true thou canst not bring the many thousands thou hast left in thy native country to see this beautiful scenery; but thou canst create beautiful scenes for them. It is possible on a suitable spot so to arrange art and nature, that they shall be within the walk of every working man in Halifax; that he shall go and take his stroll there after he has done his hard days toil, and be able to get home again without being tired. He pondered the thought, prayed over it, and the next day resolved to carry it into execution. On his return to England he took immediate steps for the fulfilment of his purpose; the design of the proposed park was entrusted to the late Sir Joseph Paxton, and on the 14th of August, 1857, it was publicly opened. It covers twelve and a half acres of ground, and its entire cost was upwards of £30,000. (Memoir of Sir Francis Crossley.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Expositor's Bible 1887 · Public Domain On vv1, 9 As already remarked, the book of Leviticus certainly seems,…
CONCERNING VOWS
Lev_27:1-34
Read full note →
As already remarked, the book of Leviticus certainly seems, at first sight, to be properly completed with the previous chapter; and hence it has been not unnaturally suggested that this chapter has by some editor been transferred, either of intention or accident, from an earlier part of the book - as, e.g., after chapter 25. The question is one of no importance; but it is not hard to perceive a good reason for the position of this chapter after not only the rest of the law, but also after the words of promise and threatening which conclude and seal its prescriptions. For what has preceded has concerned duties of religion which were obligatory upon all Israelites; the regulations of this chapter, on the contrary, have to do with special vows, which were obligatory on no one, and concerning which it is expressly said. {Deu_23:22} "If thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee." To these, therefore, the promises and threats of the covenant could not directly apply, and therefore the law which regulates the making and keeping of vows is not unfitly made to follow, as an appendix, the other legislation of the book.
Howsoever the making of vows be not obligatory as a necessary part of the religious life, yet, in all ages and in all religions, a certain instinct of the heart has often led persons, either in order to procure something from God, or as a thank offering for some special favour received, or else as a spontaneous expression of love to God, to "make a special vow." But just in proportion to the sincerity and depth of the devout feeling which suggests such special acts of worship and devotion, will be the desire to act in the vow, as in all else, according to the will of God, so that the vow may be accepted of Him. What then may one properly dedicate to God in a vow? And, again, if by any stress of circumstances a man feels compelled to seek release from a vow, is he at liberty to recall it? and if so, then under what conditions? Such are the questions which in this chapter were answered for Israel.
As for the matter of a vow, it is ruled that an Israelite might thus consecrate unto the Lord either persons, or of the beasts of his possession, or his dwelling, or the right in any part of his land. On the other hand, "the firstling among beasts" (Lev_27:26-27), any "devoted thing" (Lev_27:28-29), and the tithe (Lev_27:30-33) might not be made the object of a special vow, for the simple reason that on various grounds each of these belonged unto the Lord as His due already. Under each of these special heads is given a schedule of valuation, according to which, if a man should wish for any reason to redeem again for his own use that which, either by prior Divine claim or by special vow, had been dedicated to the Lord, he might be permitted to do so.
OF THE VOWING OF PERSONS
Lev_27:1-8
"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall accomplish a vow, the persons shall be for the Lord by thy estimation. And the estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary. And if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels. And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels. And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver. And if it be from sixty years old and upward; if it be a male, then thy estimation shall be fifteen shekels, and for the female ten shekels. But if he be poorer than thy estimation, then he shall be set before the priest, and the priest shall value him; according to the ability of him that vowed shall the priest value him."
First, we have the law (Lev_27:2-8) concerning the vowing of persons. In this case it does not appear that it was intended that the personal vow should be fulfilled by the actual devotement of the service of the person to the sanctuary. For such service abundant provision was made by the separation of the Levites, and it can hardly be imagined that under ordinary conditions it would be possible to find special occupation about the sanctuary for all who might be prompted thus to dedicate themselves by a vow to the Lord. Moreover, apart from tins, we read here of the vowing to the Lord of young children, from five years of age down to one month, from whom tabernacle service is not to be thought of.
The vow which dedicated the person to the Lord was therefore usually discharged by the simple expedient of a commutation price to be paid into the treasury of the sanctuary, as the symbolic equivalent of the value of his self-dedication. The persons thus consecrated are said to be "for the Lord," and this fact was to be recognised and their special dedication to Him discharged by the payment of a certain sum of money. The amount to be paid in each instance is fixed by the law before us, with an evident reference to the labour value of the person thus given to the Lord in the vow, as determined by two factors-the sex and the age. Inasmuch as the woman is inferior in strength to the man, she is rated lower than he is. As affected by age, persons vowed are distributed into four classes: the lowest, from one month up to five years; the second, from five years to twenty; the third, from twenty to sixty; the fourth, from sixty years of age and upwards.
The law takes first (Lev_27:3-4) the case of persons in the prime of their working powers, from twenty to sixty years old, for whom the highest commutation rate is fixed; namely, fifty shekels for the male and thirty for a female, "after the shekel of the sanctuary," i.e., of full standard weight. If younger than this, obviously the labour value of the persons service would be less; it is therefore fixed (Lev_27:5) at twenty shekels for the male and ten for the female, if the age be from five to twenty; and if the person be over sixty, then (Lev_27:7), as the feebleness of age is coming on, the rate is fifteen shekels for the male and ten for the female. In the case of a child from one month to five years old, the rate is fixed (Lev_27:6) at five, or, in a female, then at three shekels. In this last case it will be observed that the rate for the male is the same as that appointed {Num_18:15-16} for the redemption of the firstborn, "from a month old," in all cases. As in that ordinance, so here, the payment was merely a symbolic recognition of the special claim of God on the person, without any reference to a labour value.
But although the sum was so small that even at the most it could not nearly represent the actual value of the labour of such as were able to labour, yet one can see that cases might occur when a man might be moved to make such a vow of dedication of himself or of a child to the Lord, while he was yet too poor to pay even such a small amount. Hence the kindly provision (Lev_27:8) that if any person be poorer than this estimation, he shall not therefore be excluded from the privilege of self-dedication to the Lord, but "he shall be set before the priest, and the priest shall value him; according to the ability of him that vowed shall the priest value him."
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 Dotibe Offerings of the Lord
Dotibe Offerings of the Lord
SUGGESTIVE READINGS
Read full note →
Lev_27:2.—Shall make a singular vow. The Rabbins interpreted the phrase as meaning to “pronounce a vow,” and the Chaldee version renders the words, “shall distinctly pronounce a vow.” From this followed the subtle and misleading theory that no vow, unless pronounced audibly, was binding: ignoring the solemn truth that “Our thoughts are heard in heaven”; that “there is not a word in our tongue but the Lord knoweth it altogether” (Psa_139:4). Thus they made void the law by their traditions. Surely, if iniquity, which secretly is “regarded in our hearts” (Psa_66:18), offends God, so that He will not hear our prayers, the formation of a solemn resolve in the privacy of thought is “regarded” by Him as equal to an uttered vow. He values a purpose when it is as yet only “in thy heart” (1Ki_8:18).
Lev_27:1-13.—The persons shall be for the Lord by thy estimation. Gratitude impels to dedication; and it led individual Israelites to dedicate themselves or their children to God’s service in His house for life. Hannah thus devoted Samuel. But while this was right, and it is well for the zeal and love of the soul to find outlet in such acts of surrender, vows made rashly are harmful in themselves and displeasing to God, whereas hesitancy in fulfilling right vows, will equally wound our own conscience and dishonour the Lord (Ecc_5:2-5).
Lev_27:14-25.—Sanctify his house to be holy to the Lord. Just as “persons” (Lev_27:2) might be devoted to Jehovah, so might possessions—houses, lands, cattle, and all worldly substance. Yet God, while valuing the piety which led to such consecration, gently arrested excess of zeal which might carry persons beyond prudence in their act of dedication. In Lev_27:16 the words “some part of a field” hold the suggestion, which afterwards became a recognized regulation in Israel, that no man should vow the whole of his estates to sacred purposes, since that would reduce him and his family to penury. God values a zeal ruled by prudence. In this Christian age of spiritual obligations it rises into a privilege to be permitted to use all we possess for the glory of our Lord and His kingdom rather than to consign it by vows to any ecclesiastical order or priestly control. Each is a steward, and must “spend and be spent” for his Lord: the right fulfilment of our stewardship may not be entrusted to another. [See Rom_16:6-8]. Every man must bear his own burden, and give account of himself to God, for all are now priests unto God” (Rev_1:6), each having his ministry to fulfil and his sacrifies to present (1Pe_2:4).
Lev_27:26-27.—The Lord’s firstling: no man should sanctify it. Those firstlings belonged to Jehovah already; were His property by express enactment (Exo_13:2), and therefore were not free for the possessor to dedicate. A vow implies something beyond defined duty. God has made some sacred demands upon His people so emphatic as to necessitate implicit obedience; but beyond these absolute duties there is a realm of liberty in which each may obey the incitements of gratitude and the spontaneity of love.
Lev_27:28-29—Every devoted thing is most holy unto the Lord. It was allowed to the Israelite to transfer to God complete and Irrevocable possession of his living treasures as children or servants, and also his material substance, cattle and estates. Once so devoted, it could never be redeemed. So Hannah devoted Samuel, and Jephtha his daughter. And we, who have surrendered ourselves to Christ, and devoted our children in baptismal covenant to the faith, may not “draw back” under penalty of death. The Lord’s possessions may not be recalled from their sacred purpose and aim. “Therefore glorify God in body and spirit, which are His.”
Lev_27:30-34.—The tithe of the land. [See “History of Tithes,” homily on this section of chapter].
SECTIONAL HOMILIES
Topic: LAWS CONCERNING VOWS
Reasonable to suppose that pious Hebrews, anxious to obey the laws of the Lord, would resolve upon devoting themselves and their substance to His service. Some of them might make vows under sudden excitement or ecstatic feeling, which, upon calm reflection, they would devoutly wish commuted or remitted. Moses, and his successors, would need to know how to deal with such cases, with equity to worshippers, and the approval of Jehovah. Hence, necessity and blessing of such directions contained in this appendix to the book of Leviticus, which teach,
I. THAT VOLUNTARY AND SPECIAL VOWS WERE PERMITTED BY THE LORD.
The people were commanded, but never compelled to obey. In the strictest injunctions respecting ritual, a margin was left for voluntary service, free will offerings. Special vows were optional. “If thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin to thee” (Deu_23:22). Circumstances would be frequently occurring to prompt the formation and utterance of special dedication of persons or property to the Lord, e.g., special blessing, signal deliverances, etc. Gratitude would suggest and duty demand exceptional service. Enthusiastic love, always inventive and ready to lavish, is ready to offer what unsympathetic spectators rashly denominate “waste” (Mar_14:4). Jehovah accepts unaccomplished purposes, if unavoidable circumstances or personal inability prevent their fulfilment. Vows should be made cautiously, deliberately, and in most instances, conditionally; because further enlightenment, or changed conditions may render their fulfilment undesirable, unnecessary, or even impossible.
II. THAT VOWS WERE ACCEPTABLE TO THE LORD ACCORDING TO THE SPIRIT WHICH PROMPTED THEM, AND IN WHICH THEY WERE PAID.
When circumstances justified an Israelite repenting of his vow, it could be commutated or remitted, or some compensation offered in its stead. Jehovah would accept nothing that was recklessly or reluctantly presented. All adjustments and decisions were to be made according to the standards of the sanctuary, not according to human fallibility and caprice. Though a vow should not be literally performed, it must be perfectly fulfilled in respect to honourable intention, and sacred fidelity. The state of heart, in the presentation of sacrifice, determined the value of the gift. This law has never been repealed. Through the vail of the Levitical economy beam the rays of the Gospel, which do not destroy the law, but fulfil it.
III. THAT FREEDOM OF CHOICE GIVEN IN THE FULFILMENT OF VOWS DID NOT CONTRAVENE THE PURPOSES OF THE LORD CONCERNING HIS WORK AND WORSHIP.
The compensation paid in lieu of the original vow went to sustain the sanctuary services, and the Lord reserved to Himself some unalienable rights. Some things when devoted could not be withheld or withdrawn under any circumstances He demanded a tenth of the produce of the land, and enforced His claim with righteous and unrelaxing rigour. Thus the preservation and perpetuation of Jehovah’s worship were secured, and not left contingent upon the fickleness and uncertainty of human devotedness. Righteousness lies at the foundation of the Levitical economy; is the basis of natural and revealed religion.
Though in the gospel, Moses and Elias withdrew, and we see “Jesus only”; though under the new dispensation the yoke of service is easy, the burden of sacrifice light; yet obedience is the divine test of love, and Christly works are the essential proofs of saving faith. Leviticus is a witness to Christ and His gospel. In Him we have combined all that the law embodied,—Altar, Sacrifice, Priest.
Simplicity, and purity of aims, loftiest motives, deepest meanings, and incomparable excellence, lift the law and the gospel infinitely above all other religions of the world. The superiority to Jewish narrowness and bigotry, to human sinfulness and shortsightedness, demonstrate their divinity of origin, mutual dependence, absolute authority, undying vigour, and inestimable worth.—F. W. B.
Topic: COMPARATIVE ABILITY (Lev_27:1-8)
1. It is distinctly stated that no obligation enforces individuals to make a vow to the Lord (Deu_23:22).
2. But the stringency of fulfilling a vow when once made is emphatically laid down (Deu_23:21; Ecc_5:4-5).
3. The practice of making vows largely prevailed during the Mosaic dispensation (1Ch_29:9; Jdg_11:30; Num_30:2, etc.).
4. Voluntary vows had recognition or place in the Christian Economy (Act_18:18, etc.). Yet in the act of devoting ourselves or our possessions, it must be considered that
I. ABILITY IS NO STANDARD FOR OUR PERSONAL ACCEPTANCE WITH GOD.
It was obviously a question of capacity or resources, when a man was making his vow, what that vow should be; but ability or resources had no place in God’s acceptance of the individual himself. The rule of personal acceptance appears in Exo_30:15.
1. Atonement and acceptance stand on the common basis of guilt. And there is no difference between rich and poor in this.
2. Redemption requires an equal price for every human soul. Christ’s full merits are needed for and by each one.
3. No votive offering is accepted unless and until the atonement price has been paid.
Then we may come with our vows. But Christ’s preciousness must proceed. Personal merits or possessions have no regard with God until Christ has atoned for our souls. Into the relationship of acceptance with God we can only enter—and “we have boldness to enter”—by “the blood of Jesus.”
II. ABILITY WILL BE ESTIMATED AS REGULATING OUR OFFERINGS TO GOD.
When atonement is made for our souls, and which are accepted on that ground, then we may bring our offerings.
1. The diferences which separate us are reckoned in the “estimation” of our gifts. It is thus: “According to that a man hath.”
2. The righteousness of God requires that we offer according to what He has bestowed on us. If riches, then a large gift, etc.
3. Our own judgment is not sufficient to decide our obligation. “The shekel of the sanctuary is to weigh every offering. All this disposes of fitfulness and caprice in the performances of religion; God looks to our bringing our utmost; and He weighs what we bring.
III. ABILITY, WHEN BELOW THE MEASURE OF OBLIGATION, IS DETERMINED BY THE PRIEST OF GOD.
There was a rigid rule by which the votive offerings were estimated: but to this standard some were too poor to attain (Lev_27:8). “It be be poorer than thy estimation then shall he present himself to the priest.” Note: he turns from Moses to the priest: from the embodiment of righteous exaction to the representative of gracious mediation.
1. A sense of insufficiency for righteous requirements is here provided for. “We have a High Priest over the house of God.”
From the righteousness of the law we may turn to the spaciousness of the Priest.
2. Our poverty only serves to unfold the resources of divine compassion and grace. God does not burden the weak; He meets our penury with gentleness. His grace is magnified by our inability to rise to the standard of righteousness.
3. Yet every sinner is certainly found by the lawgiver “poorer than his estimation.” What then? “Where sin abounded grace doth much more abound.” “It is of grace that it might not be of works.” “To the poor the gospel is preached.”
Topic: REDEMPTION OF VOTIVE OFFERINGS (Lev_27:14-34)
(a) Vows were sometimes made erroneously and with faulty motives; for it is human to err. In God’s pity, arrangements were sanctioned for releasing devotees from these solemn obligations and bonds.
(b) By the imposition of a ransom price, which was in the nature of a fine, rashness was punished, and thus checked.
(c) This insistance upon an equivalent for the withdrawal of votive offerings, enforced the fact that inconsiderate action or impetuosity could not be neutralised by the mere feeling of regret for what had been done: God exacted His dues, and bound them to a reverence for His righteous claims.
I. SPONTANEITY IN RELIGIOUS OFFERINGS.
Into every career come such manifest mercies or gracious deliverances as to constrain the thought, “What shall I render unto the Lord for all His benefits towards me?”
1. A grateful recognition of God in our life impels to acts of devotion: The glad heart would “bring an offering.”
2. The outgoing of our gratitude is arrested by no strict imposts or demands. The offering may be a person or his possessions. God allows freedom where He can.
3. Exceptional causes for gratitude should find outlet in exceptional consecration. This “singular vow” was something in excess of the usual religious gifts and services; it was something besides the continual burnt offering.
Ask (a) Is there one of God’s children to whom God, in providence or grace, has not extended exceptional proofs of loving kindness or deliverance? “What hath God wrought!” What abounding grace has He shown!
(b) Is there one of God’s children from whom God has received no return of dedication or devotion for His wondrous goodness and love? Have our hearts been sepulchres in which to bury the records of His love?
(c) Is there one of God’s children in whom awakes a sense of “how mucoh he owes his Lord,” ready now to lay self, heart, powers on the consecrating altar? “I will pay my vows unto the Lord now in the presene of all His people.” God values a willing offering, and waits to receive what we earnestly bring.
II. ENFORCEMENT OF ESPOUSED OBLIGATIONS.
It is our melancholy tendency to lapse from vows made in times of mercy.
1. God holds us to our vows. In some covenants and consecrations He allows no recall (Lev_27:28-29); while in every instance some substitution or commutation is required. This is an enforcement of the law of fidelity. Between God and man there must be the fulfilment of rights. Never does He violate an obligation to which He has pledged Himself. He fulfils all that He covenants to regard—precious promises, supplies of grace, riches, provisions of mercy, plenteous redemption. There is no withdrawal from His word, on “that which He has caused us to hope:” “faithfulness is the girdle of His loins.”
Neither may there be fickleness in our obligations to Him. Jacob might forget Bethel amid his successes in Padan-aran; but God did not: “Arise, go up to Bethel, and make there an altar unto God that appeared unto thee,” etc. (Gen_35:1).
2. God concedes to our weaknesses. “He is very pitiful and of tender mercy,” not a hard task-master. While maintaining the law of righteousness, and requiring our fidelity, He yet provides for our short-sightedness and variability. Vows made in an earnest moment might prove most burdensome and inexpedient to fulfil. We see only the moment; fuller reflexion may show us that the pledge we made was not wise, or that it would overtax us. Therefore, God allows commutation. Vows were redeemable on terms here defined.
a. A gracious principle of considerateness and concession runs through all God’s requirements of us. He looks for the spirit of fidelity, the wish to act aright; and then He relaxes the literal bond. For He sees our frailty. “Know then that the Lord exacteth of thee less than thine iniquity requireth” (Job_11:6).
b. The gentle law of substitution is here unveiled. God accepts something else, something less, in the place of that we owe Him. We owe Him perfect obedience. He accepts the wish and effort to obey. We owe Him all we are and have: He accepts a portion of our time, substance, and energies. We owe Him our complete ruin, for “the soul that sinneth shall die”; but He says, “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return,” etc., and He will accept this, and stay the doom.
In the Person and Sacrifice of Christ, substitution reaches its climax. But it was not something less when He stood for the human race: it was infinitely more! A perfect Son for rebellious children; a spotless Sacrifice for a sinful world. “Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable gift.” See Addenda, Vows.
Topic: THE HISTORY OF TITHES (Lev_27:30-33)
I. THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS concerning the law of tithes.
1. Antecedent to the Mosaic legislation. The principle of dedicating a tenth to God was recognised in the act of Abraham, who paid tithes of his spoils to Melchizedek in his sacerdotal rather than his sovereign capacity (Gen_14:20; Heb_7:6). Later, in Jacob’s vow (Gen_28:22), the dedication of a “tenth” presupposes a sacred enactment, or a custom in existence which fixed that proportion rather than any other proportion, such as a seventh, or twelfth.
2. The Mosaic statutes. These given in this section lay claim in God’s name to the tenth of produce and cattle. An after enactment fixed that these tithes were to be paid to the Levites for their services (Num_18:21-24), who were to give a tithe of what they received to the priests (Lev_27:26-28). The sacred festivals were later made occasion for a further tithe (Deu_12:5-6; Deu_12:11; Deu_12:17; Deu_14:22-23); which was allowed to come in money-value rather than in kind (Deu_14:24-26).
3. Hezekiah’s reformation. This was signalized by the eagerness with which the people came with their tithes (2Ch_31:5-6).
4. After the Captivity. Nehemiah made marked and emphatic arrangements concerning the tithing (Neh_10:37; Neh_12:44).
5. Prophets’ teachings. Both Amos (Lev_4:4) and Malachi (Lev_3:10) enforce this as a duty, by severely rebuking the nation for its neglect—as robbing God.
6. In Christ’s day. Our Lord exposed and denounced the ostentatious punctiliousness of the Pharisees over their tithing (Mat_23:23).
7. Teaching of the New Testament. The fact of the existence of ministers as a distinct class, assumes provision made for their maintenance. The necessity for such provision, and the right on which it is founded, are recognized in such texts as Mat_10:10; Luk_10:7; Rom_15:27; 1Co_9:7-14.
II. THE ECCLESIASTICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE demand FOR TITHES.
1. The Fathers urged the obligation of tithing on the earliest Christians. The “Apostolical Canons,” the “Apostolical Constitutions,” St. Cyprian on “The Unity of the Church,” and the writings of Ambrose, Chrysostom, Augustine, and other Fathers of both divisions of the early Church, abound with allusions to this as a duty; and the response was made, not in enforced tithing, but by voluntary offerings.
2. The legislation of the first Christian Emperors recognised the obligation of maintaining the ministers of Christ. But while they assigned lands and other property to their support, they enacted no general payment of the tenth of the produce of the lands.
3. Ancient Church councils favoured tithings of land and produce, e.g., the Councils of Tours, A.D. 567; the second Council of Macon, A.D. 585; the Council of Rouen, A.D. 650; of Nantes, A.D. 660; of Metz, 756.
4. Its first imperial enactment. Charlemagne (king of the Franks, A.D. 768–814; and Roman Emperor, A.D. 800–814) originated the enactment of tithes as a public law, and by his capitularies formally established the practice over the Roman Empire which his rule swayed. From this start it extended itself over Western Christiandom; and it became general for a tenth to be paid to the Church.
5. Introduction of tithes into England. Offa, king of Mercia, is credited with its assertion here, at the close of the eighth century. It spread over other divisions of Saxon England, until Ethelwulf made it a law for the whole English realm. It remained optional with those who were compelled to pay tithes to determine to what Church they should be devoted; until Innocent III. addressed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, A.D. 1200, a decretal requiring tithes to be paid to the clergy of the parish to which payees belonged. About this time also, tithes, which had originally been confined to those called prædial, or the fruits of the earth, was extended to every species of profit and to the wages of every kind of labour.
6. The great and small tithe. The great tithe was made upon the main products of the soil, corn, hay, wood, etc.; the small on the less important growths. To the rector the great tithes of a parish are assigned, and to the vicar the small.
7. Tithes paid “in kind” These claim the tenth portion of the product itself (Lev_27:30-33). This is varied by a payment of an annual valuation; or an average taken over seven years; or by a composition, which, in a bulk sum, redeems the land from all future impost, rendering it henceforth “tithe free.”
III. THE ARGUMENTS FOR REJECTING THE MODERN impost OF TITHES.
1. The rule of Equity is infringed. When every man belonged to the one Church of the realm, all inhabitants might, with some show of rectitude, be called to support it. In Ireland the larger part of the nation was antagonistic to the Church, for which tithes were, through many generations, levied, and the impost was resented as an affront and injustice. In England a half of the population dissents from the Established Church, and both rears and maintains its own sanctuaries, and also sustains Noncomformist worship; on these adherents of English Free Churches the tithe is an oppression made in unrighteousness. In Wales, where the tithe-sustained Church has a vastly smaller proportional attachment, the enforcement of the law is even a greater breach of equity. The only law of equity in such ecclesiastical questions is—they who use a Church should pay for its support.
2. The genius and teaching of Christianity is violated. Christianity enforces no demand by law, it makes appeal to love. It asks willinghood. It states this principle: “That as there was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance” (2Co_8:11). And it limits the acceptableness of what is offered by this law: “If there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath,” etc. (2Co_8:12). If exaction and impost were to cease, there would be good hope that all sections of Christ’s Church in our land would conbine to maintain the historic sanctuaries of Episcopalianism, and prove that charity and willinghood have yet a deep root in the Christian heart of England.
3. The sacred persuasives to generosity in Church maintenance are:
(a) That as the gospel is superior to the law, and Christ to Moses, so should Christian generosity surpass Jewish.
(b) That as to Jews Zion was dear, and for her they lavished vast wealth, so should Christians bring, with yet grander bouutifulness, of their substance to the cause and Church of their blessed Lord.
(c) That it is beyond question a New Testament obligation on all believers to support the ministry and maintain the ordinances of the gospel (1Co_9:13-14).
(d) That while the Gospel supplies motives to love and consecration and sacrifice, it leaves Christians to apply these to themselves, and work out sacred principles in beautiful performances.
Note.—The Jew devoted nearly one-third of his income to religious purposes, by the command of the law; a tenth for the Levites, in property (Num_18:20, etc.); another tenth for the Sanctuary, chiefly in cattle and grain (Deu_14:22, etc.); and every third year a tenth to the poor.
Christian: “How much owest thou unto my Lord? Take thy bill and write down quickly.”
Topic: EPILOGUE.—THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL
Leviticus, like the Tabernacle, may present to the cursory observer, a rough and uninviting exterior; but within are found priceless blessings for those who devoutly draw near, and reverently worship. The Law may seem cumbrously elaborate, needlessly exacting; but sanctified intelligence and patient investigation will discover mercy in its purposes, and evangelical doctrines in its statutes. The letter may sometimes kill, but the spirit invariably gives life. In their sublime ends, the old and the new dispensations are indissolubly linked together, thus suggesting—
I. THE POINTS UPON WHICH THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL ESSENTIALLY AGREE.
1. Both proclaim the spotless holiness and inflexible justice of Jehovah. The law allows no connivance at, or compromise with sin; so the gospel shows no weakness or flaw in the inflexibility of justice, for Christ fulfilled the law and satisfied the utmost claims of Divine justice. Perfect holiness is exhibited in His blameless life, enforced in His immaculate example.
2. Both proclaim the extent and heinousness of sin. For all sins, even those of ignorance, sacrifices were provided. The high priest, with the whole nation, needed forgiveness. Many and costly oblations taught how universal, inveterate and deep-dyed is sin. The Cross teaches that the sins of the world can only be washed away by the precious blood of Christ.
3. Both proclaimed the necessity of mediation and vicarious sacrifice in order to reconciliation to God. Priests introduced men to God, interceded for them. The sacrifices offered were in the offerer’s stead. The gospel reveals one Mediator between God and man, one offering of the sins of the whole world.
4. Both proclaimed the necessity of faith and obedience in order to salvation. The offerer of Jewish sacrifices identified himself with the victim, and appropriated the promised blessing. Sanctification and consecration were to accompany the application for forgiveness. Sacrifices were only efficacious when associated with holiness, the adoption of a new life. So, in the gospel believers are saved from, not in, their sins. Without holiness no man can see the Lord. All who bear the name of Christ and believe on Him must depart from iniquity.
II. THE POINTS UPON WHICH THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL PROGRESSIVELY DIFFER.
1. The Law enforced authoritative commands; the Gospel exhibits gracious constraints. The former appealed to fear, the latter appeals to love. Thunders peal from Sinai, music rings from Calvary.
2. The Law seemed to limit its legislation to time; the Gospel discloses immortality, and points to eternity. The Israelites met with retribution at the hands of Moses, wrong-doers are now reminded of the final account, “the judgment seat of Christ.”
3. The Law revealed God as man’s Sovereign King; the Gospel reveals Him as man’s loving Father. Revelations at Sinia were august, awe-inspiring: made God known as Sovereign and Governor. Christ revealed the Fatherhood of God; that man, though fallen and profligate, is His child; that for him there are many mansions and unfading joys.
4. The Law took main cognizance of overt acts; the Gospel has primary respect to motives and intentions of the heart. Thus, the morality of the New Testament is exceedingly pure and absolutely perfect; a transcript of the holiness of the Divine nature.
5. The Law was to be supplanted by some better thing; the Gospel is final, conclusive, and complete. We look back to the law and see the foregleaming of the gospel; we look forward through Apocalyptic visions to the glorious consummation, when the redeemed universe will echo with the song of Moses and the Lamb, “Hallelujah! For the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth.”—F.W.B.
Topic: “COMMANDMENTS WHICH THE LORD COMMANDED MOSES” (Lev_27:34)
The Divine regulations and requirements of Leviticus are to be classified as—
1. Ceremonial: and consequently special to the Jewish nation; not binding upon or applicable to this Christian age.
2. Moral: for precepts and teachings intermingle with the ceremonies, whose relevancy and urgency are not to be restricted to any nation or period; there are Divine directions for us as for Israel.
3. Spiritual: A foreshadowing of gospel doctrines and of the better covenant of grace, and of the privileges of the Christian life, runs through the Levitical institutes. In these types and premonitions Christ and His work are prefigured; and, therefore, we read our inheritance in these Jewish signs.
I. SACRIFICE AND INCENSE. These have found their verification in the substitutionary death of Jesus.
II. TABERNACLE SANCTITIES AND SOLEMNITIES. These have become glorified in the incarnation of Christ which they predicted, and the indwelling of the Spirit in the believer which they pourtrayed.
III. CAMP DUTIES AND PURIFYINGS. These find their sacred realization in those obligations, responsibilities, and services, which now distinguish believers who form the community of Christ’s living Church.
IV. HOLY FEASTS AND CONVOCATIONS. These proclaim the spiritual fulness and delights with which the redeemed in Christ are now enriched; and those “times of refreshing” with which the Spirit gladdens humble hearts in which Emmanuel dwells.
V. ALTAR OFFERINGS AND VOWS. These mark that consecration of life and love which all who know the Lord should yield to Him, and which both distinguish the Christian character and dignify the Christian name.
“Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father; to Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever, Amen.”
ILLUSTRATIVE ADDENDA TO CHAPTER 27
VOWS UNPAID
“Praise should always follow answered prayer. It was thus with one man; he was very ill; a great, strong man in his day; yet disease shrivelled him up, laid him upon a lowly bed, made him pray to the humblest creature in his house for favours hour by hour. As he lay there, in his lowliness and weakness, he said, “If God would raise me up I would be a new man, I would be a devout worshipper in the sanctuary. I would live to His glory.” And God gathered him up again; didn’t break the bruised reed; did not quench the smoking flax, but permitted the man to regain his faculties. And he was not well one month till he became as worldly as he was before his affliction. He prayed as if his heart loved God; and when he got his health back again he was a practical atheist, he was virtually the basest of blasphemers.”
Joseph Parker, D.D.
“Call to thy God for grace to keep
Thy vows; and if thou break them weep;
Weep for thy broken vows, and vow again;
Vows made with tears cannot be made in vain.
Then once again
I vow to mend my ways;
Lord, say Amen,
And Thine be all the praise.”
G. Herbert.
“It is the purpose that makes strong the vow;
But vows to every purpose must not hold.”
Shakespeare.
‘Unheedful vows may heedfully be broken.”
Ibid.
TITHENS
“I know of two men who started business with this view: ‘We will give to God one-tenth of our profits.’ The first year the profits were considerable; the tithe was consequently considerable. The next year there was increase in the profits, and, of course, increase in the tithe. In a few years the profits became very, very large indeed, so that the partners said one to another: ‘Is not a tenth of this rather too much to give away? Suppose we say now we will give a twentieth?” And they gave a twentieth; and the next year the profits had fallen down; the year after they fell down again, and the men said to one another as Christians should say in such a case, ‘Have not we broken our vow? Have we not robbed God?’ And in no spirit of selfish calculation, but with humility of soul, self-reproach and bitter contrition they went back to God and told Him how the matter stood, prayed His forgiveness, renewed their vow, and God opened the windows of heaven and came back to them and all the old prosperity,”—Joseph Parker, D D.
“Restore to God His due in tithe and time;
A tithe purloined cankers the whole estate.”
G. Herbert.
“I cannot love Thee as I would,
Yet pardon me, O Highest God!
My life, and all I call my own,
I lay before Thy mercy throne:
And if a thousand lives were mine,
O sweetest Lord, they should be Thine,
And scanty would the offering be,
So richly hast Thou loved me.”
From the German.
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.
J. R. Dummelow 1909 · Public Domain On v1 Vows and Tithes and their Redemption
Vows and Tithes and their Redemption
1-29. Law of vows and their redemption.
Read full note →
The making of vows is a very ancient and universal practice connected with prayer. In order to secure his desire the suppliant adds a vow to his prayer. Vows may be either positive or negative. A man may promise either to devote something to God, or to abstain from some comfort or necessary of life. Instances of the latter, vows of abstinence, are to be found in Num_6:1-21; Numbers 30; 1Sa_14:24; Psa_132:2-5, and of the former in Gen_28:20-22; Jdg_11:30-31; Num_21:1-3. The present chapter deals with positive vows. The votive offering may be a human being (Lev_27:2-8), an animal (Lev_27:9-13), a house (Lev_27:14-15), or a piece of land (Lev_27:16-25).
2-8. Human beings vowed to Jehovah must not be offered to Him in sacrifice. They must be redeemed, a certain sum of money being paid into the sanctuary as an equivalent.
2. Singular vow] a special vow devoting himself or any of his family to God.
3. Fifty shekels] about £6 10s: see on Lev_5:15.
9-13. If a man dedicates an animal and wishes to redeem it, he must pay its estimated value and one-fifth more.
9. Whereof men bring an offering] i.e. one of the sacrificial animals, a bullock, sheep, or goat.
10. See Mal_1:14.
11. As it is unlawful to sacrifice unclean animals they must be redeemed and the equivalent value plus a fifth paid into the sanetuary.
14, 15. The redemption of a dedicated house follows the same rule.
16-25. The redemption of a dedicated piece of land is complicated by the law of Jubilee (Leviticus 25). Its value is reckoned according to the amount of seed required to sow it (Lev_27:16), and a reduction made in proportion to the number of years till the next Year of Jubilee (Lev_27:18). The owner may redeem it at this price plus one fifth. If he does not, it goes to the sanctuary at the Year of Jubilee (Lev_27:20-21). But if the dedicant of the land has himself bought it from a third person, then at the Jubilee it reverts to the latter, and the dedicant must recompense the sanctuary by paying its redemption value calculated as before (Lev_27:22-24).
16. Homer] ten ephahs, or nearly eleven bushels. The value of barley is here stated to be about £6 10s.
23. In that day] The estimated value of a purchased piece of land must be paid in a lump sum. The estimated value of a hereditary possession, it would appear, was paid in yearly instalments. This practically meant that, till the Jubilee, the dedicant paid to the sanctuary a yearly rent of one shekel per homer of seed that he used.
26-29. Exception to the Law of Bedemption of Vows.
26. Firstlings, which already belong to God (Exo_13:2), cannot be vowed again without mockery.
27. Firstlings of unclean animals must be redeemed in the usual manner. In Exo_13:13; Exo_34:20 the law is that such must either be redeemed with a lamb or killed. The law seems to have varied at different times.
28. Devoted things are those consecrated to God by an extreme form of vow, the ban or curse, requiring their destruction or inalienable devotion to the sanctuary: see Num_18:14; Deu_13:17; Jos_6:17, Jos_6:21; 1Sa_15:3, 1Sa_15:9, 1Sa_15:20. This form of vow is specially laid upon the spoil of conquered nations. The NT. equivalent is the 'anathema' or excommunication: see Rom_9:3; 1Co_5:5; 1Co_16:22; 1Ti_1:20.
29. Devoted of men] see Exo_22:20, where the Hebrew is 'shall be devoted.' There the 'devotion of men 'is the solemn judicial penalty of idolatry. This was probably the only ground of devoting human beings. The case of Jephthah's daughter is doubtful: see Jdg_11:30-40.
30-33. The Law of Tithes and their Redemption. Tithes belong to God as the real owner of the land: see on Lev_25:1-7. They are a kind of rent paid by the people as His tenants. Being already God's, tithes cannot be made the subject of vows. Tithes of agricultural produce may be commuted for their money value plus one fifth (Lev_27:31). The tithe of cattle cannot be redeemed (Lev_27:32-33).
32. Passetti under the rod] of the owner as he counts his cattle. Every tenth beast as it comes, whether good or bad, is to be set apart as belonging to God: cp. Lev_25:10. The tithes were given to the Levites for their maintenance, and they in turn tithed their own tithes: see Num_18:20-32.
J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v13 Heb. "goel," Redemp. (Kinsman type). (See Scofield "Isa 59:20").
redeemed
Heb. "goel," Redemp. (Kinsman type). (See Scofield "Isa 59:20").
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Arno C. Gaebelein 1922 · Public Domain On v1 The Claims of Jehovah Realized
VII. CONCERNING VOWS
The Claims of Jehovah Realized
Read full note →
CHAPTER 27
1. The singular vow (Lev 27:1-8)
2. The sacrifice (Lev 27:9-13)
3. Concerning the house (Lev 27:14-15)
4. Concerning the land (Lev 27:16-25)
5. Concerning the firstling (Lev 27:26-27)
6. Devoted things (Lev 27:28-29)
7. All holy to Jehovah (Lev 27:30-34)
This last chapter in Leviticus concerns vows and devoted things. Israel is still in view here. At Horeb they had made their vow of being obedient and devoted to the Lord, but they could not meet the claims of what that vow meant. The sanctification as demanded in this book they could not fulfill. But grace is seen connected with it. The grace which is yet to flow out to Israel, the chosen nation. Sanctification by law is impossible; grace alone can sanctify. All mentioned is connected with the people. The house to be holy to Jehovah (verse 14) is Israel. The land too is mentioned, as well as the year of jubilee. The house, Israel, becomes Jehovah’s; and the land also belongeth then to Him. The thought which runs through this final chapter of Leviticus is that Jehovah will have His own and God finally will be all in all.
May God’s Spirit lead us into these blessed types and may we, as His bloodbought people, sanctified in Christ, walk in sanctification in the power of His Spirit.
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 Of Men and Beasts
Of Men and Beasts
v. 1. And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
Read full note →
v. 2. Speak unto the children of Israel and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow, an exceptional, unusual, special promise to the Lord, which involved the offering of his own body to the Lord for some service in His worship, the persons shall be for the Lord by thy estimation; the redemption from the obligations of the promise had to be made in accordance with the estimate given out, first by Moses and later by the priest in charge. The fulfillment of the vow consisted in this, that the person concerned paid the price of the estimation to the Sanctuary.
v. 3. And thy estimation shall be of the male, in the case of a man, from twenty years old even unto sixty years old; even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the Sanctuary (about $32).
v. 4. And if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels (about $19. 20).
v. 5. And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels (about $12. 80)and for the female ten shekels (about $6. 40).
v. 6. And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver (about $3. 20),and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver (about $1. 92).
v. 7. And if it be from sixty years old and above, at the time of life when the bodily strength usually will not permit strenuous service; if it be a male, then thy estimation shall be fifteen shekels (about $9. 60)and for the female ten shekels (about $6. 40).
v. 8. And if he be poorer than thy estimation, if he cannot afford the price of redemption according to the priest’s estimate, then he shall present himself before the priest, and the priest shall value him, fix the price of redemption in proportion to the person’s ability to pay; according to his ability that vowed shall the priest value him. This special ordinance made it possible even for the very poor to dedicate themselves to the Lord by a vow; for the Lord’s mercy and kindness at all times stands out with special force.
v. 9. And if it be a beast whereof men bring an offering unto the Lord, that is, if the vow concerns such an animal, all that any man giveth of such unto the Lord shall be holy, dedicated to Him, set aside subject to His orders.
v. 10. He shall not alter it, nor change it, a good for a bad or a bad for a good; for the vow, having once been made, could not be recalled; and if he shall at all change beast for beast, then it and the exchange thereof shall be holy, both of them devoted to the Lord, subject to His disposal, those without blemish being used for sacrifices, those not perfect being allotted to the priest.
v. 11. And if it be any unclean beast, of which they do not offer a sacrifice unto the Lord, then he shall present the beast before the priest;
v. 12. and the priest shall value it, whether it be good or bad; as thou valuest it, who art the priest, so shall it be. The priest was to fix a medium price, neither too high nor too low, for the proceeds of the sale were used in the interest of the Sanctuary.
v. 13. But if he will at all redeem it, for his own use, then he shall add a fifth part thereof unto thy estimation, as a sort of compensation for his act in taking the animal back for his own use.
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 vv1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 If anyone makes a special vow to Yahweh
If anyone makes a special vow to Yahweh
In this case the vow would involve giving oneself or another person to God. This can be stated clearly. AT: "If anyone vows to give someone to Yahweh" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
Read full note →
use the following valuations
Instead of giving the person, he would give the Lord a certain amount of silver. AT "use the following values as your gift to the Lord in place of the person" or "give the Lord the following amounts of silver instead of the person" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
translationWords
Yahweh
Moses
people group
Israel
vow
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, 3, 8, 9, 11 27:1-34 As a conclusion to the book, this chapter…
27:1-34 As a conclusion to the book, this chapter discusses various types of vows and ends with a provision for redeeming one’s tithes (see also ch 25). Under certain circumstances, such as an emergency, an individual might make a vow promising something to God, usually in exchange for God’s answering his or her prayer (see Jon 2:9). Once the prayer is answered, the individual might be tempted to discount the vow. Scripture requires that vows be made carefully (see Lev 5:4; Eccl 5:4-6) and then carried out. Jesus taught that oaths should not be commonly or carelessly made (Matt 5:33-37; 23:16-22).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.