The Pulpit Commentary — Exodus — Volume 2 — Section 173

wrong-doing in chaps. xxi., xxii., we notice thflt they are divi~ible into tw 0 great classes. Some offences fire punished by death, and others by some Hort of ci>mpcns,iti,,n for the injury done. '£he gmduated terms of imprisonment with which we are familiar, were not of course possible to the Israelites, and if posRible, perhaps woulrl not hflve seemed desirable. We notice that in this chapter five capital offences are speci- fied; there were doubtlees many besides; but these are enough to show the principles on which Jehovah acted in taking away the life of the offender. I. THE MURDERER PROPER. In chap. xx. we find the general command not to kill ; and ht1re is the instruction for the Israelites what to do with the man who deliberately 1112d mnliciously took away the life of a fellow-man. This, it is plain, was done under special authority and for special reasons. It was Jehovah's regulation for his people in their then circumstances; but we must not quote it as applicable to the punishment of the murderer generally. If on the authority of this passage we are bound to punish the murderer by death, obviously we a.re bound to punish him who reviles his parents, in the same way. 'l'here were reasons then for putting the murderer to death which <l<> not now apply. The principle underlying the enactment seems to be that murder is one of the crimes which must be followed by the severest penalty man is di~posed to. in.ftic6. So long as the infliction of a death penalty at all harmon.ises with the general consciousness of men, it is plain that any lesser penalty for murder is inade- quate. But if once we !!let to the position-and it is \o be hoped we are ever gettin:;; nearer to it--tha.t only the sternest necessity justifies taking human life away, we shall then substitute perpetual imprisonment as the extreme penalty. We shall all feel then that murder is assuredly a. crime which should condemn the perpetrator to life-long seclusion from the society of his fellow-men. II. THE SllllTER OF FATHER OR MOTHER. Here we see bow different are the principles underlying Divine law from those underlying human law. In a modem English court of justice the smiting of a. parent might pethaps receive the highest penalty incurred for the commission of an assault; but it would never be exalted into a special offence. But God in his government of Israel makes an offence against a parent to be one of the first magnitude. The severe penalty specified here corresponds with the position occupied in the Decalogue by the commandment to honour parents. God we see is ever saying and doing things to set great honour on the family, and indicate great expecta- tions from it. It has been a boldly proclaimed principle in all ages, never more pro- claimed than now, and often with great arrogance and intolerance, that individuals and families exist for the State. But here in the state that is under God's special go,ern- ance provision is made that, in its punishments, that state shall honour parental authority and dignity. And of course when once smiting a parent was made into such a serious offenoe, it was but carrying the principle out to a logical and necessary con- clusion to make the curse as great an offence.. Generally, indeed, the rebellious reviling word of the lips would do more injury, inflict more pain, and be more promotive of insubordination than the blow of the hand.. In the light of this enactment we see how much God expects from the parental relation. One, who in the Divine order of things, stood so high that smiting or cursinl!I hlm was made a capital offence, must have been a. man to whom Jehovah looked for great services, great contrihu.tioru; to the Divine glory, and to the prosperity of Israel. III. Tm: MAN-BTEALEB. Within the compass of the same chapter we find provision made for recognised and openly pracUsed customs of ssrvitud.e, and al.,o for a kind of slavery which by the penalty attached to the procuring of it is indicated as one of the worst of crimes. There was slavery and slavery. There wa.5 the buying of men in such sort as is indicated in verse 2 ; there was a.lso such stealing and selling as we find an actual instance of in Gen. xx..xvii. 28. Such crimes were evidently only too possible, and once committed, it might be very hard io discover the criminal or restore _the captive to liberty. There was perhaps many a Joseph-and when we consider his sufferings, and the sufferings of his father, we shall not wonder at the penalty attached to the crime. 1'hen suppose an Israelite were to sell a brother lsraeiite to some band of Midian merchantmen, who would take him into a far country, what would the upshot. be? Not only would he be lost to loving kindred, and shut out from the sight. of his dear native land, but excluded from religious privileges. God had brought out hraelfrom the house of bondage, that in freedom, necessary freedom, they might find  THE BOOK OF EXODUS. (en. ~u 22-25,