- Home
- Bible
- Leviticus
- Chapter 19
- Verse 19
Verse
Context
Keep My Statutes
18Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against any of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.19You are to keep My statutes. You shall not crossbreed two different kinds of livestock; you shall not sow your fields with two kinds of seed; and you shall not wear clothing made of two kinds of material.
Sermons
B.H. Clendennen
Milton GreenSummary
Commentary
- Adam Clarke
- Keil-Delitzsch
- Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
- John Gill
- Matthew Henry
- Tyndale
Adam Clarke Bible Commentary
Gender with a diverse kind - These precepts taken literally seem to imply that they should not permit the horse and the she-ass, nor the he-ass and the cow, (as they do in the East), to couple together; nor sow different kinds of seeds in the same field or garden; nor have garments of silk and woolen, cotton and silk, linen and wool, etc. And if all these were forbidden, there must have been some moral reason for the prohibitions, because domestic economy required several of these mixtures, especially those which relate to seeds and clothing. With respect to heterogeneous mixtures among cattle, there is something very unnatural in it, and it was probably forbidden to prevent excitements to such unnatural lusts as those condemned in the preceding chapter, Lev 18:22, Lev 18:23. As to seeds, in many cases it would be very improper to sow different kinds in the same plot of ground. It would be improvident to sow oats and wheat together: the latter would be injured, the former ruined. The turnip and carrot would not succeed conjointly, where either of them separately would prosper and yield a good crop; so we may say of many other kinds of seeds; and if this be all that is intended, the counsels are prudential agricultural maxims. As to different kinds of garments, such as the linsey woolsey, the prohibition here might be intended as much against pride and vanity as any thing else; for it is certain that both these articles may be so manufactured in conjunction as to minister to pride, though in general the linsey woolsey or drugget is the clothing of the poor. But we really do not know what the original word שעטנז shaatnez, which we translate linen and woolen, means: it is true that in Deu 22:11, where it is again used, it seems to be explained by the words immediately following, Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of linen and woolen together; but this may as well refer to a garment made up of a sort of patchwork differently colored and arranged for pride and for show. A folly of this kind prevailed anciently in this very land, and I shall give a proof of it, taken from a sermon against luxury in dress, composed in the fourteenth century. "As to the first sinne in superfluitie of clothing, soche that maketh it so dere, to the harme of the peple, nat only the cost of enbrauderlng, the disguised endenting, or barring, ounding paling, winding or bending and semblable wast of clothe in vanite. But there is also the costlewe furring in their gounes, so moche pounsing of chesel, to make holes; so moche dagging with sheres foorth; with the superfluitie in length of the forsaied gounes, - to grete dammage of pore folke - And more ouer - they shewe throughe disguising, in departing of ther hosen in white and red, semeth that halfe ther members were slain - They departe ther hosen into other colors, as is white and blewe, or white and blacke, or blacke and red, and so forth; than semeth it as by variaunce of color, that the halfe part of ther members ben corrupt by the fire of Saint Anthony, or by canker, or other suche mischaunce." The Parson's Tale, in Chaucer, p. 198. Urry's edit. The reader will pardon the antiquated spelling. "What could exhibit," says Dr. Henry, "a more fantastical appearance than an English beau of the 14th century? He wore long pointed shoes, fastened to his knees by gold or silver chains; hose of one color on the one leg, and of another color on the other; short breeches which did reach to the middle of his thighs; a coat the one half white, the other half black or blue; a long beard; a silk hood buttoned under his chin, embroidered with grotesque figures of animals, dancing men, etc., and sometimes ornamented with gold and precious stones." This dress was the height of the mode in the reign of King Edward III. Something of the same kind seems to have existed in the patriarchal times; witness the coat of many colors made by Jacob for his son Joseph. See the note on Gen 37:3. Concerning these different mixtures much may be seen in the Mishna, Tract, Kilaim, and in Ainsworth, and Calmet on this place.
Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary
The words, "Ye shall keep My statutes," open the second series of commandments, which make it a duty on the part of the people of God to keep the physical and moral order of the world sacred. This series begins in Lev 19:19 with the commandment not to mix the things which are separated in the creation of God. "Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with two kinds of seed, or put on a garment of mixed stuff." כּלאים, from כּלא separation, signifies duae res diversi generis, heterogeneae, and is a substantive in the accusative, giving a more precise definition. שעטנז is in apposition to כּלאים בּגד, and according to Deu 22:11 refers to cloth or a garment woven of wool and flax, to a mixed fabric therefore. The etymology is obscure, and the rendering given by the lxx, κίβδηλον, i.e., forged, not genuine, is probably merely a conjecture based upon the context. The word is probably derived from the Egyptian; although the attempt to explain it from the Coptic has not been so far satisfactory. In Deu 22:9-11, instead of the field, the vineyard is mentioned, as that which they were not to sow with things of two kinds, i.e., so that a mixed produce should arise; and the threat is added, "that thy fulness (full fruit, Exo 22:28), the seed, and the produce of the vineyard (i.e., the corn and wine grown upon the vineyard) may not become holy" (cf. Lev 27:10, Lev 27:21), i.e., fall to the sanctuary for its servants. It is also forbidden to plough with an ox and ass together, i.e., to yoke them to the same plough. By these laws the observance of the natural order and separation of things is made a duty binding upon the Israelites, the people of Jehovah, as a divine ordinance founded in the creation itself (Gen 1:11-12, Gen 1:21, Gen 1:24-25). All the symbolical, mystical, moral, and utilitarian reasons that have been supposed to lie at the foundation of these commands, are foreign to the spirit of the law. And with regard to the observance of them, the statement of Josephus and the Rabbins, that the dress of the priests, as well as the tapestries and curtains of the tabernacle, consisted of wool and linen, is founded upon the assumption, which cannot be established, that שׁשׁ, βύσσος, is a term applied to linen. The mules frequently mentioned, e.g., in Sa2 13:29; Sa2 18:9; Kg1 1:33, may have been imported from abroad, as we may conclude from Kg1 10:25. Lev 19:20-22 Even the personal rights of slaves were to be upheld; and a maid, though a slave, was not to be degraded to the condition of personal property. If any one lay with a woman who was a slave and betrothed to a man, but neither redeemed nor emancipated, the punishment of death was not to be inflicted, as in the case of adultery (Lev 20:10), or the seduction of a free virgin who was betrothed (Deu 22:23.), because she was not set free; but scourging was to be inflicted, and the guilty person was also to bring a trespass-offering for the expiation of his sin against God (see at Lev 5:15.). נחרפת, from חרף carpere, lit., plucked, i.e., set apart, betrothed to a man, not abandoned or despised. הפדּה redeemed, חפשׁה emancipation without purchase, - the two ways in which a slave could obtain her freedom. בּקּרת, ἁπ. λεγ., from בּקּר to examine (Lev 13:36), lit., investigation, then punishment, chastisement. This referred to both parties, as is evident from the expression, "they shall not be put to death;" though it is not more precisely defined. According to the Mishnah, Kerith. ii. 4, the punishment of the woman consisted of forty stripes. Lev 19:23-25 The garden-fruit was also to be sanctified to the Lord. When the Israelites had planted all kinds of fruit-trees in the land of Canaan, they were to treat the fruit of every tree as uncircumcised for the first three years, i.e., not to eat it, as being uncircumcised. The singular suffix in ערלתו refers to כּל, and the verb ערל is a denom. from ערלה, to make into a foreskin, to treat as uncircumcised, i.e., to throw away as unclean or uneatable. The reason for this command is not to be sought for in the fact, that in the first three years fruit-trees bear only a little fruit, and that somewhat insipid, and that if the blossom or fruit is broken off the first year, the trees will bear all the more plentifully afterwards (Aben Esra, Clericus, J. D. Mich.), though this end would no doubt be thereby attained; but it rests rather upon ethical grounds. Israel was to treat the fruits of horticulture with the most careful regard as a gift of God, and sanctify the enjoyment of them by a thank-offering. In the fourth year the whole of the fruit was to be a holiness of praise for Jehovah, i.e., to be offered to the Lord as a holy sacrificial gift, in praise and thanksgiving for the blessing which He had bestowed upon the fruit-trees. This offering falls into the category of first-fruits, and was no doubt given up entirely to the Lord for the servants of the altar; although the expression הלּוּלים עשׂה (Jdg 9:27) seems to point to sacrificial meals of the first-fruits, that had already been reaped: and this is the way in which Josephus has explained the command (Ant. iv. 8, 19). For (Lev 19:25) they were not to eat the fruits till the fifth year, "to add (increase) its produce to you," viz., by the blessing of God, not by breaking off the fruits that might set in the first years. Lev 19:26-32 The Israelites were to abstain from all unnatural, idolatrous, and heathenish conduct. Lev 19:26 "Ye shall not eat upon blood" (על as in Exo 12:8, referring to the basis of the eating), i.e., no flesh of which blood still lay at the foundation, which was not entirely cleansed from blood (cf. Sa1 14:32). These words were not a mere repetition of the law against eating blood (Lev 17:10), but a strengthening of the law. Not only were they to eat no blood, but no flesh to which any blood adhered. They were also "to practise no kind of incantations." נחשׁ: from נחשׁ to whisper (see Gen 44:5), or, according to some, a denom. verb from נחשׁ a serpent; literally, to prophesy from observing snakes, then to prophesy from auguries generally, augurari. עונן a denom. verb, not from ענן a cloud, with the signification to prophesy from the motion of the clouds, of which there is not the slightest historical trace in Hebrew; but, as the Rabbins maintain, from עין an eye, literally, to ogle, then to bewitch with an evil eye. Lev 19:27 "Ye shall not round the border of your head:" i.e., not cut the hair in a circle from one temple to the other, as some of the Arab tribes did, according to Herodotus (3, 8), in honour of their god Ὀροτάλ, whom he identifies with the Dionysos of the Greeks. In Jer 9:25; Jer 25:23; Jer 49:32, the persons who did this are called פאה קצוּצי, round-cropped, from their peculiar tonsure. "Neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard," sc., by cutting it off (cf. Lev 21:5), which Pliny reports some of the Arabs to have done, barba abraditur, praeterquam in superiore labro, aliis et haec intonsa, whereas the modern Arabs either wear a short moustache, or shave off the beard altogether (Niebuhr, Arab. p. 68). Lev 19:28 "Ye shall not make cuttings on your flesh (body) on account of a soul, i.e., a dead person (נפשׁ = מת נפשׁ, Lev 21:11; Num 6:6, or מת, Deu 14:1; so again in Lev 22:4; Num 5:2; Num 9:6-7, Num 9:10), nor make engraven (or branded) writing upon yourselves." Two prohibitions of an unnatural disfigurement of the body. The first refers to passionate outbursts of mourning, common among the excitable nations of the East, particularly in the southern parts, and to the custom of scratching the arms, hands, and face (Deu 14:1), which is said to have prevailed among the Babylonians and Armenians (Cyrop. iii. 1, 13, iii. 3, 67), the Scythians (Herod. 4, 71), and even the ancient Romans (cf. M. Geier de Ebraeor. luctu, c. 10), and to be still practised by the Arabs (Arvieux Beduinen, p. 153), the Persians (Morier Zweite Reise, p. 189), and the Abyssinians of the present day, and which apparently held its ground among the Israelites notwithstanding the prohibition (cf. Jer 16:6; Jer 41:5; Jer 47:5), - as well as to the custom, which is also forbidden in Lev 21:5 and Deu 14:1, of cutting off the hair of the head and beard (cf. Isa 3:24; Isa 22:12; Micah. Lev 1:16; Amo 8:10; Eze 7:18). It cannot be inferred from the words of Plutarch, quoted by Spencer, δοκοῦντες χαρίζεσθαι τοῖς τετελευκηκόσιν, that the heathen associated with this custom the idea of making an expiation to the dead. The prohibition of קעקע כּתבת, scriptio stigmatis, writing corroded or branded (see Ges. thes. pp. 1207-8), i.e., of tattooing, - a custom not only very common among the savage tribes, but still met with in Arabia (Arvieux Beduinen, p. 155; Burckhardt Beduinen, pp. 40, 41) and in Egypt among both men and women of the lower orders (Lane, Manners and Customs i. pp. 25, 35, iii. p. 169), - had no reference to idolatrous usages, but was intended to inculcate upon the Israelites a proper reverence for God's creation. Lev 19:29 "Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore, lest the land fall to whoredom, and the land become full of vice" (zimmah: see Lev 18:17). The reference is not to spiritual whoredom or idolatry (Exo 34:16), but to fleshly whoredom, the word zimmah being only used in this connection. If a father caused his daughter to become a prostitute, immorality would soon become predominant, and the land (the population of the land) fall away to whoredom. Lev 19:30 The exhortation now returns to the chief point, the observance of the Lord's Sabbaths and reverence for His sanctuary, which embrace the true method of divine worship as laid down in the ritual commandments. When the Lord's day is kept holy, and a holy reverence for the Lord's sanctuary lives in the heart, not only are many sins avoided, but social and domestic life is pervaded by the fear of God and characterized by chasteness and propriety. Lev 19:31 True fear of God, however, awakens confidence in the Lord and His guidance, and excludes all superstitious and idolatrous ways and methods of discovering the future. This thought prepares the way for the warning against turning to familiar spirits, or seeking after wizards. אוב denotes a departed spirit, who was called up to make disclosures with regard to the future, hence a familiar spirit, spiritum malum qui certis artibus eliciebatur ut evocaret mortuorum manes, qui praedicarent quae ab eis petebantur (Cler.). This is the meaning in Isa 29:4, as well as here and in Lev 20:6, as is evident from Lev 20:27, "a man or woman in whom is an ob," and from Sa1 28:7-8, baalath ob, "a woman with such a spirit." The name was then applied to the necromantist himself, by whom the departed were called up (Sa1 28:3; Kg2 23:24). The word is connected with ob, a skin. ידּעני, the knowing, so to speak, "clever man" (Symm. γνώστης, Aq. γνωριστής), is only found in connection with ob, and denotes unquestionably a person acquainted with necromancy, or a conjurer who devoted himself to the invocation of spirits. (For further remarks, see as Sa1 28:7.). Lev 19:32 This series concludes with the moral precept, "Before a hoary head thou shalt rise up (sc., with reverence, Job 29:8), and the countenance (the person) of the old man thou shalt honour and fear before thy God." God is honoured in the old man, and for this reason reverence for age is required. This virtue was cultivated even by the heathen, e.g., the Egyptians (Herod. 2, 80), the Spartans (Plutarch), and the ancient Romans (Gellius, ii. 15). It is still found in the East (Lane, Sitten und Gebr. ii. p. 121).
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind--This prohibition was probably intended to discourage a practice which seemed to infringe upon the economy which God has established in the animal kingdom. thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed--This also was directed against an idolatrous practice, namely, that of the ancient Zabians, or fire-worshippers, who sowed different seeds, accompanying the act with magical rites and invocations; and commentators have generally thought the design of this and the preceding law was to put an end to the unnatural lusts and foolish superstitions which were prevalent among the heathen. But the reason of the prohibition was probably deeper: for those who have studied the diseases of land and vegetables tell us, that the practice of mingling seeds is injurious both to flowers and to grains. "If the various genera of the natural order GramineÃ&brvbr, which includes the grains and the grasses, should be sown in the same field, and flower at the same time, so that the pollen of the two flowers mix, a spurious seed will be the consequence, called by the farmers chess. It is always inferior and unlike either of the two grains that produced it, in size, flavor, and nutritious principles. Independently of contributing to disease the soil, they never fail to produce the same in animals and men that feed on them" [WHITLAW]. neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee--Although this precept, like the other two with which it is associated, was in all probability designed to root out some superstition, it seems to have had a further meaning. The law, it is to be observed, did not prohibit the Israelites wearing many different kinds of cloths together, but only the two specified; and the observations and researches of modern science have proved that "wool, when combined with linen, increases its power of passing off the electricity from the body. In hot climates, it brings on malignant fevers and exhausts the strength; and when passing off from the body, it meets with the heated air, inflames and excoriates like a blister" [WHITLAW]. (See Eze 44:17-18).
John Gill Bible Commentary
Ye shall keep my statutes,.... Those which follow, and which are of a different sort from what are last mentioned, of a moral nature, and are planted in the heart, as Aben Ezra says; are agreeably to the law and light of nature, and part of the work of the law written on the heart, as the apostle calls it, Rom 2:15; but the following are of positive institution, and depend upon the will of the lawgiver, the reasons of which are not so apparent and manifest; and therefore Jarchi calls them the decree of the king, who gives no reason for it; ordinances and appointments of a ceremonial kind, which, though there is a meaning in them, and a reason for them, yet not clear and plain: thou shall not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind; or "cause them to gender" (e) for cattle do not usually of themselves gender with a diverse kind, unless directed and solicited to it, as a male of one kind with a female of another; for instance, an horse with a she ass, or an he ass with a mare, and even creatures that were like one another, yet of different kinds, were not to mix together; as a wolf and a dog, a hound and a fox, goats and roebucks, goats and sheep, a horse and a mule, a mule and an ass, an ass and a wild ass; for though they are like one another, they are of different kinds (f): a creature thus gendered was not forbidden to be used, as a mule; and if a clean creature and gendered of clean ones, though of a different kind, it might be eaten, as Maimonides (g) affirms; for not the creature gendered was unlawful for use, but the act of causing to gender is what is forbidden: the design was to preserve the order of beings, and the nature of creatures as they were at the first creation; that there might be no change among them, or anything taken from or added to what God had made; not to separate what God had joined, or join what God had separated, which to do must reflect upon his wisdom; as also, that men and women, as Philo (h) observes, might abstain from unlawful converse, from unnatural lusts and mixtures; and as Ainsworth thinks, this was to lead Israel to the simplicity and sincerity of religion, and of all the parts and doctrines of the law and Gospel in their distinct kinds, as faith and works, to mingle which together in our justification before God is forbidden; or rather to teach the saints not to mix with the men of the world, in evil conversation, or in superstitious worship; to which may be added, to show that spiritual regeneration is not partly of corruptible and partly of incorruptible seed, nor partly of the will of man, and partly of the will of God; nor partly of the power of man, and partly of the power of God, but wholly of the Spirit and grace of God: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: or seed of divers sorts, as wheat and barley, and which, according to the Jews (i), was not mingled unless there be two grains of wheat and one of barley, or one of wheat and two of barley; or wheat, and barley, and rye: they also include herbs and trees in this law, and make an graft of them a forbidden mixture; hence, they say (k), they do not ingraft one tree in another, nor one herb in another, nor a tree in an herb, nor an herb in a tree, of which they give instances: and there are various sorts of seeds, herbs, roots, and trees, which are and are not of divers kinds, and some that are alike and yet diverse; for they have a whole treatise of such like things, called "Celaim", or divers kinds: as to the mystical sense, the "field" may represent the church of God, which is not an open but an enclosed field, enclosed by the grace of God, and separated from others by it, well manured and cultivated by the Spirit of God, and through the word and ordinances, as means, in which manner of fruit and flowers grow, and is the property of Christ; see Sol 4:12; the seed may signify the word or doctrine of the Gospel, sown by the ministers of it, skilfully and plentifully, which should be pure and unmixed, not contradictory, nor inconsistent, but all of a piece; the doctrines of it, as those of election, justification, peace, pardon, and salvation, are to be represented, not as partly of works and partly of grace, but as entirely of the grace of God through Christ: or good and bad men may be signified by the mingled seed; good men, who are made so by the grace of God, and are the good seed, or the good ground which receives it, which hear the word, understand it, and bring forth fruit; bad men, such as are of bad principles and practices, these are not to be mixed together in a church state; bad men are neither to be received nor retained: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee; for, as Josephus (l) says, none but the priests were allowed to wear such a garment, and with which the Misnah (m) agrees; in which it is asserted, that the priests have no other clothing to minister in, in the sanctuary, but of woollen and linen; which seems to be a better reason of this prohibition than what Maimonides (n) gives, that it was on the account of idolatrous priests, who used to go clothed with such a garment, and a metal ring on their fingers: the Jewish tradition is, nothing is forbidden on account of divers kinds (i.e. in garments) but wool and flax; camels' wool, and sheep's wool, mixed together, if the greater part is camels', it is free, but if the greater part is sheep's wool, it is forbidden, if half and half, it is forbidden; and so flax and hemp mixed together; also that nothing is forbidden on such account but what is spun and wove (o): the design of this, as of the other, seems to be in general to caution against unnatural lusts and impure mixtures, and all communion of good and bad men, and particularly against joining the righteousness of Christ with the works of men, in the business of justification: Christ's righteousness is often compared to a garment, and sometimes to line linen, clean and white; and men's righteousness to filthy rags, Rev 19:8; which are by no means to be put together in the said affair; such who believe in Christ are justified by the obedience of one and not of more, and by faith in that obedience and righteousness, without the works of the law, Rom 5:19 Rom 3:28; to join them together is needless, disagreeable, and dangerous. (e) "non facies coire", V. L. Pagninus, Drusius. (f) Misn. Gelaim, c. 1. sect. 6. (g) Hilchot Gelaim, c. 9. sect. 3. (h) De Special. Leg. p. 784. (i) Misn. ut supra, (f)) sect. 9. (k) Misn. Celaim, c. 1. sect. 7, 8. (l) Antiqu. l. 4. c. 8. sect. 11. (m) Celaim, c. 9. sect. 1. (n) Moreh Nevochim, par. 3. c. 37. (o) Misn. ut supra, (k)) c. 9. sect. 1. 8.
Matthew Henry Bible Commentary
Here is, I. A law against mixtures, Lev 19:19. God in the beginning made the cattle after their kind (Gen 1:25), and we must acquiesce in the order of nature God hath established, believing that is best and sufficient, and not covet monsters. Add thou not unto his works, lest he reprove thee; for it is the excellency of the work of God that nothing can, without making it worse, be either put to it or taken from it, Ecc 3:14. As what God has joined we must not separate, so what he has separated we must not join. The sowing of mingled corn and the wearing of linsey-woolsey garments are forbidden, either as superstitious customs of the heathen or to intimate how careful they should be not to mingle themselves with the heathen nor to weave any of the usages of the Gentiles into God's ordinances. Ainsworth suggests that it was to lead Israel to the simplicity and sincerity of religion, and to all the parts and doctrines of the law and gospel in their distinct kinds. As faith is necessary, good works are necessary, but to mingle these together in the cause of our justification before God is forbidden, Gal 2:16. II. A law for punishing adultery committed with one that was a bondmaid that was espoused, Lev 19:20-22. If she had not been espoused, the law appointed no punishment at all; being espoused, if she had not been a bondmaid, the punishment had been no less than death: but, being as yet a bondmaid (though before the completing of her espousals she must have been made free), the capital punishment is remitted, and they shall both be scourged; or, as some think, the woman only, and the man was to bring a sacrifice. It was for the honour of marriage, though but begun by betrothing, that the crime should be punished; but it was for the honour of freedom that it should not be punished as the debauching of a free woman was, so great was the difference then made between bond and free (Gal 4:30); but the gospel of Christ knows no such distinction, Col 3:11. III. A law concerning fruit-trees, that for the first three years after they were planted, if they should happen to be so forward as to bear in that time, yet no use should be made of the fruit, Lev 19:23-25. It was therefore the practice of the Jews to pluck off the fruit, as soon as they perceived it knit, from their young trees, as gardeners do sometimes, because their early bearing hinders their growing. If any did come to perfection, it was not to be used in the service either of God or man; but what they bore the fourth year was to be holy to the Lord, either given to the priests, or eaten before the Lord with joy, as their second tithe was, and thenceforward it was all their own. Now, 1. Some think this taught them not to follow the custom of the heathen, who, they say, consecrated the very first products of their fruit-trees to their idols, saying that otherwise all the fruits would be blasted. 2. This law in the case of fruit-trees seems to be parallel with that in the case of animals, that no creature should be accepted as an offering till it was past eight days old, nor till that day were children to be circumcised; see Lev 22:27. God would have the first-fruits of their trees, but, because for the first three years they were as inconsiderable as a lamb or a calf under eight days old, therefore God would not have them, for it is fit he should have every thing at its best; and yet he would not allow them to be used, because his first-fruits were not as yet offered: they must therefore be accounted as uncircumcised, that is, as an animal under eight days' old, not fit for any use. 3. We are hereby taught not to be over-hasty in catching at any comfort, but to be willing with patience to wait the time for the enjoyment of it, and particularly to acknowledge ourselves unworthy of the increase of the earth, our right to the fruits of which was forfeited by our first parents eating forbidden fruit, and we are restored to it only by the word of God and prayer, Ti1 4:5. IV. A law against the superstitious usages of the heathen, Lev 19:26-28. 1. Eating upon the blood, as the Gentiles did, who gathered the blood of their sacrifices into a vessel for their demons (as they fancied) to drink, and then sat about it, eating the flesh themselves, signifying their communion with devils by their feasting with them. Let not this custom be used, for the blood of God's sacrifices was to be sprinkled on the altar, and then poured at the foot of it, and conveyed away. 2. Enchantment and divination, and a superstitious observation of the times, some days and hours lucky and others unlucky. Curious arts of this kind, it is likely, had been of late invented by the Egyptian priests, to amuse the people, and support their own credit. The Israelites had seen them practised, but must by no means imitate them. It would be unpardonable in those to whom were committed the oracles of God to ask counsel of the devil, and yet worse in Christians, to whom the Son of God is manifested, who has destroyed the works of the devil. For Christians to have their nativities cast, and their fortunes told them, to use spells and charms for the cure of diseases and the driving away of evil spirits, to be affected with the falling of the salt, a hare crossing the way, cross days, or the like, is an intolerable affront to the Lord Jesus, a support of paganism and idolatry, and a reproach both to themselves and to that worthy name by which they are called: and those must be grossly ignorant, both of the law and the gospel, that ask, "What harm is there in these things?" Is it no harm for those that have fellowship with Christ to have fellowship with devils, or to learn the ways of those that have? Surely we have not so learned Christ. 3. There was a superstition even in trimming themselves used by the heathen, which must not be imitated by the people of God: You shall not round the corners of your heads. Those that worshipped the hosts of heaven, in honour of them, cut their hair so as that their heads might resemble the celestial globe; but, as the custom was foolish itself, so, being done with respect to their false gods, it was idolatrous. 4. The rites and ceremonies by which they expressed their sorrow at their funerals must not be imitated, Lev 19:28. They must not make cuts or prints in their flesh for the dead; for the heathen did so to pacify the infernal deities they dreamt of, and to render them propitious to their deceased friends. Christ by his sufferings has altered the property of death, and made it a true friend to every true Israelite; and now, as there needs nothing to make death propitious to us (for, if God be so, death is so of course), so we sorrow not as those that have no hope. Those whom the God of Israel had set apart for himself must not receive the image and superscription of these dunghill deities. Lastly, The prostituting of their daughters to uncleanness, which is here forbidden (Lev 19:29), seems to have been practised by the heathen in their idolatrous worships, for with such abominations those unclean spirits which they worshipped were well pleased. And when lewdness obtained as a religious rite, and was committed in their temples, no marvel that the land became full of that wickedness, which, when it entered at the temple-doors, overspread the land like a mighty torrent, and bore down all the fences of virtue and modesty. The devil himself could not have brought such abominations into their lives if he had not first brought them into their worships. And justly were those given up to vile affections who forsook the holy God, and gave divine honours to impure spirits. Those that dishonour God are thus suffered to dishonour themselves and their families.
Keep My Statutes
18Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against any of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.19You are to keep My statutes. You shall not crossbreed two different kinds of livestock; you shall not sow your fields with two kinds of seed; and you shall not wear clothing made of two kinds of material.
- Scripture
- Sermons
- Commentary
(Forging the Vessel of Recovery) 5- a Vessel of Glory
By B.H. Clendennen3.6K57:33RecoveryLEV 19:19ZEC 4:1MAT 6:33EPH 5:27REV 3:15In this sermon, the preacher focuses on the scripture from Zechariah chapter 4 verses 1-6. The angel in the scripture tells Zechariah that what he sees cannot be accomplished by human power or might, but only by the spirit of God. The preacher emphasizes that the church is the body of Christ, joined together by one spirit. He explains that the church should not be a religious machine, but a glorious church that operates by the power of the Holy Spirit. The preacher also mentions the importance of discerning between religious fantasy and the true vision of God.
Milton Green - 11
By Milton Green1.1K05:14GEN 3:15EXO 28:42LEV 19:19PSA 23:1PRO 18:21MAT 16:24ACT 2:38In this sermon, the preacher emphasizes the importance of living a righteous and loving life as a reflection of God's truth. He highlights the contrast between the fruit of righteousness, which includes love, joy, peace, and power, and the fruit of the flesh, which leads to death and curses. The preacher encourages listeners to repent and lay down their selfish nature in order to fully embrace the gospel and allow the Holy Spirit to guide their lives. He also acknowledges that believers may face tests and temptations, but assures them that God's grace and protection will never be taken away.
- Adam Clarke
- Keil-Delitzsch
- Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
- John Gill
- Matthew Henry
- Tyndale
Adam Clarke Bible Commentary
Gender with a diverse kind - These precepts taken literally seem to imply that they should not permit the horse and the she-ass, nor the he-ass and the cow, (as they do in the East), to couple together; nor sow different kinds of seeds in the same field or garden; nor have garments of silk and woolen, cotton and silk, linen and wool, etc. And if all these were forbidden, there must have been some moral reason for the prohibitions, because domestic economy required several of these mixtures, especially those which relate to seeds and clothing. With respect to heterogeneous mixtures among cattle, there is something very unnatural in it, and it was probably forbidden to prevent excitements to such unnatural lusts as those condemned in the preceding chapter, Lev 18:22, Lev 18:23. As to seeds, in many cases it would be very improper to sow different kinds in the same plot of ground. It would be improvident to sow oats and wheat together: the latter would be injured, the former ruined. The turnip and carrot would not succeed conjointly, where either of them separately would prosper and yield a good crop; so we may say of many other kinds of seeds; and if this be all that is intended, the counsels are prudential agricultural maxims. As to different kinds of garments, such as the linsey woolsey, the prohibition here might be intended as much against pride and vanity as any thing else; for it is certain that both these articles may be so manufactured in conjunction as to minister to pride, though in general the linsey woolsey or drugget is the clothing of the poor. But we really do not know what the original word שעטנז shaatnez, which we translate linen and woolen, means: it is true that in Deu 22:11, where it is again used, it seems to be explained by the words immediately following, Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of linen and woolen together; but this may as well refer to a garment made up of a sort of patchwork differently colored and arranged for pride and for show. A folly of this kind prevailed anciently in this very land, and I shall give a proof of it, taken from a sermon against luxury in dress, composed in the fourteenth century. "As to the first sinne in superfluitie of clothing, soche that maketh it so dere, to the harme of the peple, nat only the cost of enbrauderlng, the disguised endenting, or barring, ounding paling, winding or bending and semblable wast of clothe in vanite. But there is also the costlewe furring in their gounes, so moche pounsing of chesel, to make holes; so moche dagging with sheres foorth; with the superfluitie in length of the forsaied gounes, - to grete dammage of pore folke - And more ouer - they shewe throughe disguising, in departing of ther hosen in white and red, semeth that halfe ther members were slain - They departe ther hosen into other colors, as is white and blewe, or white and blacke, or blacke and red, and so forth; than semeth it as by variaunce of color, that the halfe part of ther members ben corrupt by the fire of Saint Anthony, or by canker, or other suche mischaunce." The Parson's Tale, in Chaucer, p. 198. Urry's edit. The reader will pardon the antiquated spelling. "What could exhibit," says Dr. Henry, "a more fantastical appearance than an English beau of the 14th century? He wore long pointed shoes, fastened to his knees by gold or silver chains; hose of one color on the one leg, and of another color on the other; short breeches which did reach to the middle of his thighs; a coat the one half white, the other half black or blue; a long beard; a silk hood buttoned under his chin, embroidered with grotesque figures of animals, dancing men, etc., and sometimes ornamented with gold and precious stones." This dress was the height of the mode in the reign of King Edward III. Something of the same kind seems to have existed in the patriarchal times; witness the coat of many colors made by Jacob for his son Joseph. See the note on Gen 37:3. Concerning these different mixtures much may be seen in the Mishna, Tract, Kilaim, and in Ainsworth, and Calmet on this place.
Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch Old Testament Commentary
The words, "Ye shall keep My statutes," open the second series of commandments, which make it a duty on the part of the people of God to keep the physical and moral order of the world sacred. This series begins in Lev 19:19 with the commandment not to mix the things which are separated in the creation of God. "Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with two kinds of seed, or put on a garment of mixed stuff." כּלאים, from כּלא separation, signifies duae res diversi generis, heterogeneae, and is a substantive in the accusative, giving a more precise definition. שעטנז is in apposition to כּלאים בּגד, and according to Deu 22:11 refers to cloth or a garment woven of wool and flax, to a mixed fabric therefore. The etymology is obscure, and the rendering given by the lxx, κίβδηλον, i.e., forged, not genuine, is probably merely a conjecture based upon the context. The word is probably derived from the Egyptian; although the attempt to explain it from the Coptic has not been so far satisfactory. In Deu 22:9-11, instead of the field, the vineyard is mentioned, as that which they were not to sow with things of two kinds, i.e., so that a mixed produce should arise; and the threat is added, "that thy fulness (full fruit, Exo 22:28), the seed, and the produce of the vineyard (i.e., the corn and wine grown upon the vineyard) may not become holy" (cf. Lev 27:10, Lev 27:21), i.e., fall to the sanctuary for its servants. It is also forbidden to plough with an ox and ass together, i.e., to yoke them to the same plough. By these laws the observance of the natural order and separation of things is made a duty binding upon the Israelites, the people of Jehovah, as a divine ordinance founded in the creation itself (Gen 1:11-12, Gen 1:21, Gen 1:24-25). All the symbolical, mystical, moral, and utilitarian reasons that have been supposed to lie at the foundation of these commands, are foreign to the spirit of the law. And with regard to the observance of them, the statement of Josephus and the Rabbins, that the dress of the priests, as well as the tapestries and curtains of the tabernacle, consisted of wool and linen, is founded upon the assumption, which cannot be established, that שׁשׁ, βύσσος, is a term applied to linen. The mules frequently mentioned, e.g., in Sa2 13:29; Sa2 18:9; Kg1 1:33, may have been imported from abroad, as we may conclude from Kg1 10:25. Lev 19:20-22 Even the personal rights of slaves were to be upheld; and a maid, though a slave, was not to be degraded to the condition of personal property. If any one lay with a woman who was a slave and betrothed to a man, but neither redeemed nor emancipated, the punishment of death was not to be inflicted, as in the case of adultery (Lev 20:10), or the seduction of a free virgin who was betrothed (Deu 22:23.), because she was not set free; but scourging was to be inflicted, and the guilty person was also to bring a trespass-offering for the expiation of his sin against God (see at Lev 5:15.). נחרפת, from חרף carpere, lit., plucked, i.e., set apart, betrothed to a man, not abandoned or despised. הפדּה redeemed, חפשׁה emancipation without purchase, - the two ways in which a slave could obtain her freedom. בּקּרת, ἁπ. λεγ., from בּקּר to examine (Lev 13:36), lit., investigation, then punishment, chastisement. This referred to both parties, as is evident from the expression, "they shall not be put to death;" though it is not more precisely defined. According to the Mishnah, Kerith. ii. 4, the punishment of the woman consisted of forty stripes. Lev 19:23-25 The garden-fruit was also to be sanctified to the Lord. When the Israelites had planted all kinds of fruit-trees in the land of Canaan, they were to treat the fruit of every tree as uncircumcised for the first three years, i.e., not to eat it, as being uncircumcised. The singular suffix in ערלתו refers to כּל, and the verb ערל is a denom. from ערלה, to make into a foreskin, to treat as uncircumcised, i.e., to throw away as unclean or uneatable. The reason for this command is not to be sought for in the fact, that in the first three years fruit-trees bear only a little fruit, and that somewhat insipid, and that if the blossom or fruit is broken off the first year, the trees will bear all the more plentifully afterwards (Aben Esra, Clericus, J. D. Mich.), though this end would no doubt be thereby attained; but it rests rather upon ethical grounds. Israel was to treat the fruits of horticulture with the most careful regard as a gift of God, and sanctify the enjoyment of them by a thank-offering. In the fourth year the whole of the fruit was to be a holiness of praise for Jehovah, i.e., to be offered to the Lord as a holy sacrificial gift, in praise and thanksgiving for the blessing which He had bestowed upon the fruit-trees. This offering falls into the category of first-fruits, and was no doubt given up entirely to the Lord for the servants of the altar; although the expression הלּוּלים עשׂה (Jdg 9:27) seems to point to sacrificial meals of the first-fruits, that had already been reaped: and this is the way in which Josephus has explained the command (Ant. iv. 8, 19). For (Lev 19:25) they were not to eat the fruits till the fifth year, "to add (increase) its produce to you," viz., by the blessing of God, not by breaking off the fruits that might set in the first years. Lev 19:26-32 The Israelites were to abstain from all unnatural, idolatrous, and heathenish conduct. Lev 19:26 "Ye shall not eat upon blood" (על as in Exo 12:8, referring to the basis of the eating), i.e., no flesh of which blood still lay at the foundation, which was not entirely cleansed from blood (cf. Sa1 14:32). These words were not a mere repetition of the law against eating blood (Lev 17:10), but a strengthening of the law. Not only were they to eat no blood, but no flesh to which any blood adhered. They were also "to practise no kind of incantations." נחשׁ: from נחשׁ to whisper (see Gen 44:5), or, according to some, a denom. verb from נחשׁ a serpent; literally, to prophesy from observing snakes, then to prophesy from auguries generally, augurari. עונן a denom. verb, not from ענן a cloud, with the signification to prophesy from the motion of the clouds, of which there is not the slightest historical trace in Hebrew; but, as the Rabbins maintain, from עין an eye, literally, to ogle, then to bewitch with an evil eye. Lev 19:27 "Ye shall not round the border of your head:" i.e., not cut the hair in a circle from one temple to the other, as some of the Arab tribes did, according to Herodotus (3, 8), in honour of their god Ὀροτάλ, whom he identifies with the Dionysos of the Greeks. In Jer 9:25; Jer 25:23; Jer 49:32, the persons who did this are called פאה קצוּצי, round-cropped, from their peculiar tonsure. "Neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard," sc., by cutting it off (cf. Lev 21:5), which Pliny reports some of the Arabs to have done, barba abraditur, praeterquam in superiore labro, aliis et haec intonsa, whereas the modern Arabs either wear a short moustache, or shave off the beard altogether (Niebuhr, Arab. p. 68). Lev 19:28 "Ye shall not make cuttings on your flesh (body) on account of a soul, i.e., a dead person (נפשׁ = מת נפשׁ, Lev 21:11; Num 6:6, or מת, Deu 14:1; so again in Lev 22:4; Num 5:2; Num 9:6-7, Num 9:10), nor make engraven (or branded) writing upon yourselves." Two prohibitions of an unnatural disfigurement of the body. The first refers to passionate outbursts of mourning, common among the excitable nations of the East, particularly in the southern parts, and to the custom of scratching the arms, hands, and face (Deu 14:1), which is said to have prevailed among the Babylonians and Armenians (Cyrop. iii. 1, 13, iii. 3, 67), the Scythians (Herod. 4, 71), and even the ancient Romans (cf. M. Geier de Ebraeor. luctu, c. 10), and to be still practised by the Arabs (Arvieux Beduinen, p. 153), the Persians (Morier Zweite Reise, p. 189), and the Abyssinians of the present day, and which apparently held its ground among the Israelites notwithstanding the prohibition (cf. Jer 16:6; Jer 41:5; Jer 47:5), - as well as to the custom, which is also forbidden in Lev 21:5 and Deu 14:1, of cutting off the hair of the head and beard (cf. Isa 3:24; Isa 22:12; Micah. Lev 1:16; Amo 8:10; Eze 7:18). It cannot be inferred from the words of Plutarch, quoted by Spencer, δοκοῦντες χαρίζεσθαι τοῖς τετελευκηκόσιν, that the heathen associated with this custom the idea of making an expiation to the dead. The prohibition of קעקע כּתבת, scriptio stigmatis, writing corroded or branded (see Ges. thes. pp. 1207-8), i.e., of tattooing, - a custom not only very common among the savage tribes, but still met with in Arabia (Arvieux Beduinen, p. 155; Burckhardt Beduinen, pp. 40, 41) and in Egypt among both men and women of the lower orders (Lane, Manners and Customs i. pp. 25, 35, iii. p. 169), - had no reference to idolatrous usages, but was intended to inculcate upon the Israelites a proper reverence for God's creation. Lev 19:29 "Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore, lest the land fall to whoredom, and the land become full of vice" (zimmah: see Lev 18:17). The reference is not to spiritual whoredom or idolatry (Exo 34:16), but to fleshly whoredom, the word zimmah being only used in this connection. If a father caused his daughter to become a prostitute, immorality would soon become predominant, and the land (the population of the land) fall away to whoredom. Lev 19:30 The exhortation now returns to the chief point, the observance of the Lord's Sabbaths and reverence for His sanctuary, which embrace the true method of divine worship as laid down in the ritual commandments. When the Lord's day is kept holy, and a holy reverence for the Lord's sanctuary lives in the heart, not only are many sins avoided, but social and domestic life is pervaded by the fear of God and characterized by chasteness and propriety. Lev 19:31 True fear of God, however, awakens confidence in the Lord and His guidance, and excludes all superstitious and idolatrous ways and methods of discovering the future. This thought prepares the way for the warning against turning to familiar spirits, or seeking after wizards. אוב denotes a departed spirit, who was called up to make disclosures with regard to the future, hence a familiar spirit, spiritum malum qui certis artibus eliciebatur ut evocaret mortuorum manes, qui praedicarent quae ab eis petebantur (Cler.). This is the meaning in Isa 29:4, as well as here and in Lev 20:6, as is evident from Lev 20:27, "a man or woman in whom is an ob," and from Sa1 28:7-8, baalath ob, "a woman with such a spirit." The name was then applied to the necromantist himself, by whom the departed were called up (Sa1 28:3; Kg2 23:24). The word is connected with ob, a skin. ידּעני, the knowing, so to speak, "clever man" (Symm. γνώστης, Aq. γνωριστής), is only found in connection with ob, and denotes unquestionably a person acquainted with necromancy, or a conjurer who devoted himself to the invocation of spirits. (For further remarks, see as Sa1 28:7.). Lev 19:32 This series concludes with the moral precept, "Before a hoary head thou shalt rise up (sc., with reverence, Job 29:8), and the countenance (the person) of the old man thou shalt honour and fear before thy God." God is honoured in the old man, and for this reason reverence for age is required. This virtue was cultivated even by the heathen, e.g., the Egyptians (Herod. 2, 80), the Spartans (Plutarch), and the ancient Romans (Gellius, ii. 15). It is still found in the East (Lane, Sitten und Gebr. ii. p. 121).
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind--This prohibition was probably intended to discourage a practice which seemed to infringe upon the economy which God has established in the animal kingdom. thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed--This also was directed against an idolatrous practice, namely, that of the ancient Zabians, or fire-worshippers, who sowed different seeds, accompanying the act with magical rites and invocations; and commentators have generally thought the design of this and the preceding law was to put an end to the unnatural lusts and foolish superstitions which were prevalent among the heathen. But the reason of the prohibition was probably deeper: for those who have studied the diseases of land and vegetables tell us, that the practice of mingling seeds is injurious both to flowers and to grains. "If the various genera of the natural order GramineÃ&brvbr, which includes the grains and the grasses, should be sown in the same field, and flower at the same time, so that the pollen of the two flowers mix, a spurious seed will be the consequence, called by the farmers chess. It is always inferior and unlike either of the two grains that produced it, in size, flavor, and nutritious principles. Independently of contributing to disease the soil, they never fail to produce the same in animals and men that feed on them" [WHITLAW]. neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee--Although this precept, like the other two with which it is associated, was in all probability designed to root out some superstition, it seems to have had a further meaning. The law, it is to be observed, did not prohibit the Israelites wearing many different kinds of cloths together, but only the two specified; and the observations and researches of modern science have proved that "wool, when combined with linen, increases its power of passing off the electricity from the body. In hot climates, it brings on malignant fevers and exhausts the strength; and when passing off from the body, it meets with the heated air, inflames and excoriates like a blister" [WHITLAW]. (See Eze 44:17-18).
John Gill Bible Commentary
Ye shall keep my statutes,.... Those which follow, and which are of a different sort from what are last mentioned, of a moral nature, and are planted in the heart, as Aben Ezra says; are agreeably to the law and light of nature, and part of the work of the law written on the heart, as the apostle calls it, Rom 2:15; but the following are of positive institution, and depend upon the will of the lawgiver, the reasons of which are not so apparent and manifest; and therefore Jarchi calls them the decree of the king, who gives no reason for it; ordinances and appointments of a ceremonial kind, which, though there is a meaning in them, and a reason for them, yet not clear and plain: thou shall not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind; or "cause them to gender" (e) for cattle do not usually of themselves gender with a diverse kind, unless directed and solicited to it, as a male of one kind with a female of another; for instance, an horse with a she ass, or an he ass with a mare, and even creatures that were like one another, yet of different kinds, were not to mix together; as a wolf and a dog, a hound and a fox, goats and roebucks, goats and sheep, a horse and a mule, a mule and an ass, an ass and a wild ass; for though they are like one another, they are of different kinds (f): a creature thus gendered was not forbidden to be used, as a mule; and if a clean creature and gendered of clean ones, though of a different kind, it might be eaten, as Maimonides (g) affirms; for not the creature gendered was unlawful for use, but the act of causing to gender is what is forbidden: the design was to preserve the order of beings, and the nature of creatures as they were at the first creation; that there might be no change among them, or anything taken from or added to what God had made; not to separate what God had joined, or join what God had separated, which to do must reflect upon his wisdom; as also, that men and women, as Philo (h) observes, might abstain from unlawful converse, from unnatural lusts and mixtures; and as Ainsworth thinks, this was to lead Israel to the simplicity and sincerity of religion, and of all the parts and doctrines of the law and Gospel in their distinct kinds, as faith and works, to mingle which together in our justification before God is forbidden; or rather to teach the saints not to mix with the men of the world, in evil conversation, or in superstitious worship; to which may be added, to show that spiritual regeneration is not partly of corruptible and partly of incorruptible seed, nor partly of the will of man, and partly of the will of God; nor partly of the power of man, and partly of the power of God, but wholly of the Spirit and grace of God: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: or seed of divers sorts, as wheat and barley, and which, according to the Jews (i), was not mingled unless there be two grains of wheat and one of barley, or one of wheat and two of barley; or wheat, and barley, and rye: they also include herbs and trees in this law, and make an graft of them a forbidden mixture; hence, they say (k), they do not ingraft one tree in another, nor one herb in another, nor a tree in an herb, nor an herb in a tree, of which they give instances: and there are various sorts of seeds, herbs, roots, and trees, which are and are not of divers kinds, and some that are alike and yet diverse; for they have a whole treatise of such like things, called "Celaim", or divers kinds: as to the mystical sense, the "field" may represent the church of God, which is not an open but an enclosed field, enclosed by the grace of God, and separated from others by it, well manured and cultivated by the Spirit of God, and through the word and ordinances, as means, in which manner of fruit and flowers grow, and is the property of Christ; see Sol 4:12; the seed may signify the word or doctrine of the Gospel, sown by the ministers of it, skilfully and plentifully, which should be pure and unmixed, not contradictory, nor inconsistent, but all of a piece; the doctrines of it, as those of election, justification, peace, pardon, and salvation, are to be represented, not as partly of works and partly of grace, but as entirely of the grace of God through Christ: or good and bad men may be signified by the mingled seed; good men, who are made so by the grace of God, and are the good seed, or the good ground which receives it, which hear the word, understand it, and bring forth fruit; bad men, such as are of bad principles and practices, these are not to be mixed together in a church state; bad men are neither to be received nor retained: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee; for, as Josephus (l) says, none but the priests were allowed to wear such a garment, and with which the Misnah (m) agrees; in which it is asserted, that the priests have no other clothing to minister in, in the sanctuary, but of woollen and linen; which seems to be a better reason of this prohibition than what Maimonides (n) gives, that it was on the account of idolatrous priests, who used to go clothed with such a garment, and a metal ring on their fingers: the Jewish tradition is, nothing is forbidden on account of divers kinds (i.e. in garments) but wool and flax; camels' wool, and sheep's wool, mixed together, if the greater part is camels', it is free, but if the greater part is sheep's wool, it is forbidden, if half and half, it is forbidden; and so flax and hemp mixed together; also that nothing is forbidden on such account but what is spun and wove (o): the design of this, as of the other, seems to be in general to caution against unnatural lusts and impure mixtures, and all communion of good and bad men, and particularly against joining the righteousness of Christ with the works of men, in the business of justification: Christ's righteousness is often compared to a garment, and sometimes to line linen, clean and white; and men's righteousness to filthy rags, Rev 19:8; which are by no means to be put together in the said affair; such who believe in Christ are justified by the obedience of one and not of more, and by faith in that obedience and righteousness, without the works of the law, Rom 5:19 Rom 3:28; to join them together is needless, disagreeable, and dangerous. (e) "non facies coire", V. L. Pagninus, Drusius. (f) Misn. Gelaim, c. 1. sect. 6. (g) Hilchot Gelaim, c. 9. sect. 3. (h) De Special. Leg. p. 784. (i) Misn. ut supra, (f)) sect. 9. (k) Misn. Celaim, c. 1. sect. 7, 8. (l) Antiqu. l. 4. c. 8. sect. 11. (m) Celaim, c. 9. sect. 1. (n) Moreh Nevochim, par. 3. c. 37. (o) Misn. ut supra, (k)) c. 9. sect. 1. 8.
Matthew Henry Bible Commentary
Here is, I. A law against mixtures, Lev 19:19. God in the beginning made the cattle after their kind (Gen 1:25), and we must acquiesce in the order of nature God hath established, believing that is best and sufficient, and not covet monsters. Add thou not unto his works, lest he reprove thee; for it is the excellency of the work of God that nothing can, without making it worse, be either put to it or taken from it, Ecc 3:14. As what God has joined we must not separate, so what he has separated we must not join. The sowing of mingled corn and the wearing of linsey-woolsey garments are forbidden, either as superstitious customs of the heathen or to intimate how careful they should be not to mingle themselves with the heathen nor to weave any of the usages of the Gentiles into God's ordinances. Ainsworth suggests that it was to lead Israel to the simplicity and sincerity of religion, and to all the parts and doctrines of the law and gospel in their distinct kinds. As faith is necessary, good works are necessary, but to mingle these together in the cause of our justification before God is forbidden, Gal 2:16. II. A law for punishing adultery committed with one that was a bondmaid that was espoused, Lev 19:20-22. If she had not been espoused, the law appointed no punishment at all; being espoused, if she had not been a bondmaid, the punishment had been no less than death: but, being as yet a bondmaid (though before the completing of her espousals she must have been made free), the capital punishment is remitted, and they shall both be scourged; or, as some think, the woman only, and the man was to bring a sacrifice. It was for the honour of marriage, though but begun by betrothing, that the crime should be punished; but it was for the honour of freedom that it should not be punished as the debauching of a free woman was, so great was the difference then made between bond and free (Gal 4:30); but the gospel of Christ knows no such distinction, Col 3:11. III. A law concerning fruit-trees, that for the first three years after they were planted, if they should happen to be so forward as to bear in that time, yet no use should be made of the fruit, Lev 19:23-25. It was therefore the practice of the Jews to pluck off the fruit, as soon as they perceived it knit, from their young trees, as gardeners do sometimes, because their early bearing hinders their growing. If any did come to perfection, it was not to be used in the service either of God or man; but what they bore the fourth year was to be holy to the Lord, either given to the priests, or eaten before the Lord with joy, as their second tithe was, and thenceforward it was all their own. Now, 1. Some think this taught them not to follow the custom of the heathen, who, they say, consecrated the very first products of their fruit-trees to their idols, saying that otherwise all the fruits would be blasted. 2. This law in the case of fruit-trees seems to be parallel with that in the case of animals, that no creature should be accepted as an offering till it was past eight days old, nor till that day were children to be circumcised; see Lev 22:27. God would have the first-fruits of their trees, but, because for the first three years they were as inconsiderable as a lamb or a calf under eight days old, therefore God would not have them, for it is fit he should have every thing at its best; and yet he would not allow them to be used, because his first-fruits were not as yet offered: they must therefore be accounted as uncircumcised, that is, as an animal under eight days' old, not fit for any use. 3. We are hereby taught not to be over-hasty in catching at any comfort, but to be willing with patience to wait the time for the enjoyment of it, and particularly to acknowledge ourselves unworthy of the increase of the earth, our right to the fruits of which was forfeited by our first parents eating forbidden fruit, and we are restored to it only by the word of God and prayer, Ti1 4:5. IV. A law against the superstitious usages of the heathen, Lev 19:26-28. 1. Eating upon the blood, as the Gentiles did, who gathered the blood of their sacrifices into a vessel for their demons (as they fancied) to drink, and then sat about it, eating the flesh themselves, signifying their communion with devils by their feasting with them. Let not this custom be used, for the blood of God's sacrifices was to be sprinkled on the altar, and then poured at the foot of it, and conveyed away. 2. Enchantment and divination, and a superstitious observation of the times, some days and hours lucky and others unlucky. Curious arts of this kind, it is likely, had been of late invented by the Egyptian priests, to amuse the people, and support their own credit. The Israelites had seen them practised, but must by no means imitate them. It would be unpardonable in those to whom were committed the oracles of God to ask counsel of the devil, and yet worse in Christians, to whom the Son of God is manifested, who has destroyed the works of the devil. For Christians to have their nativities cast, and their fortunes told them, to use spells and charms for the cure of diseases and the driving away of evil spirits, to be affected with the falling of the salt, a hare crossing the way, cross days, or the like, is an intolerable affront to the Lord Jesus, a support of paganism and idolatry, and a reproach both to themselves and to that worthy name by which they are called: and those must be grossly ignorant, both of the law and the gospel, that ask, "What harm is there in these things?" Is it no harm for those that have fellowship with Christ to have fellowship with devils, or to learn the ways of those that have? Surely we have not so learned Christ. 3. There was a superstition even in trimming themselves used by the heathen, which must not be imitated by the people of God: You shall not round the corners of your heads. Those that worshipped the hosts of heaven, in honour of them, cut their hair so as that their heads might resemble the celestial globe; but, as the custom was foolish itself, so, being done with respect to their false gods, it was idolatrous. 4. The rites and ceremonies by which they expressed their sorrow at their funerals must not be imitated, Lev 19:28. They must not make cuts or prints in their flesh for the dead; for the heathen did so to pacify the infernal deities they dreamt of, and to render them propitious to their deceased friends. Christ by his sufferings has altered the property of death, and made it a true friend to every true Israelite; and now, as there needs nothing to make death propitious to us (for, if God be so, death is so of course), so we sorrow not as those that have no hope. Those whom the God of Israel had set apart for himself must not receive the image and superscription of these dunghill deities. Lastly, The prostituting of their daughters to uncleanness, which is here forbidden (Lev 19:29), seems to have been practised by the heathen in their idolatrous worships, for with such abominations those unclean spirits which they worshipped were well pleased. And when lewdness obtained as a religious rite, and was committed in their temples, no marvel that the land became full of that wickedness, which, when it entered at the temple-doors, overspread the land like a mighty torrent, and bore down all the fences of virtue and modesty. The devil himself could not have brought such abominations into their lives if he had not first brought them into their worships. And justly were those given up to vile affections who forsook the holy God, and gave divine honours to impure spirits. Those that dishonour God are thus suffered to dishonour themselves and their families.