Live Like Who You Are

 16 “If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed and lies with her, he shall give the bride-price for her and make her his wife. 17 If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money equal to the bride-price for virgins.

18 “You shall not permit a sorceress to live.

19 “Whoever lies with an animal shall be put to death.

20 “Whoever sacrifices to any god, other than the Lord alone, shall be devoted to destruction.

21 “You shall not wrong a sojourner or oppress him, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt. 22 You shall not mistreat any widow or fatherless child. 23 If you do mistreat them, and they cry out to me, I will surely hear their cry, 24 and my wrath will burn, and I will kill you with the sword, and your wives shall become widows and your children fatherless.

25 “If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you shall not be like a moneylender to him, and you shall not exact interest from him. 26 If ever you take your neighbor’s cloak in pledge, you shall return it to him before the sun goes down, 27 for that is his only covering, and it is his cloak for his body; in what else shall he sleep? And if he cries to me, I will hear, for I am compassionate.

28 “You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people.

29 “You shall not delay to offer from the fullness of your harvest and from the outflow of your presses. The firstborn of your sons you shall give to me. 30 You shall do the same with your oxen and with your sheep: seven days it shall be with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to me.

31 “You shall be consecrated to me. Therefore you shall not eat any flesh that is torn by beasts in the field; you shall throw it to the dogs. – Exodus 22:16-31 ESV

When we view these laws from our modern vantage point, they appear to be rather random, a bit disjointed, and difficult to apply to our current context. Their heavy emphasis on an agrarian economy and their seeming endorsement of slavery makes them sound antiquated and no longer applicable. They come across as nothing more than a list of ancient legal codes from a bygone era.

But these laws are the divine directives passed down from Yahweh to His people and, as such, they provide important insight into His character. These civil laws were meant to direct the daily interactions of His people. He was leaving nothing to chance. The level of detail and specificity found in these laws reveals that God cared deeply about every area of His people’s lives. It was not enough that they refrain from worshiping false gods. Their love for Him must be reflected in their care for one another. It was together that they formed His treasured possession. It was as a community that they would best reflect His character and display His glory among the nations. These rather arbitrary-sounding laws were meant to dictate and determine their interactions with one another. He wanted them to love one another well. 

The apostle Paul picks up on this communal context in his first letter to the believers in Corinth. He used the analogy of the human body to drive home the God-ordained interdependency of the members of the body of Christ. Each Christ-follower has been carefully placed within the context of a local church body and it is within that communal atmosphere that the life-transforming power of God is best displayed.

…our bodies have many parts, and God has put each part just where he wants it. How strange a body would be if it had only one part! Yes, there are many parts, but only one body. The eye can never say to the hand, “I don’t need you.” The head can’t say to the feet, “I don’t need you.”

In fact, some parts of the body that seem weakest and least important are actually the most necessary. And the parts we regard as less honorable are those we clothe with the greatest care. So we carefully protect those parts that should not be seen, while the more honorable parts do not require this special care. So God has put the body together such that extra honor and care are given to those parts that have less dignity. This makes for harmony among the members, so that all the members care for each other. If one part suffers, all the parts suffer with it, and if one part is honored, all the parts are glad.

All of you together are Christ’s body, and each of you is a part of it. – 1 Corinthians 12:18-27 NLT

So, in reading these civil codes of conduct, it is important to see the timeless principles they contain. They were meant to guide the Israelites into greater godliness – so that they might better reflect the character of the Lawgiver. He is holy and He expects the people who bear His name to model their lives after His example – not perfectly, but faithfully. The fact that they would fail is built into these laws. These civil codes reveal what was to happen when someone fell short of God’s righteous standard. There were to be consequences. Penalties were to be enforced. Restitution was to be made.  Relationships were to be restored. God was to be honored.

Verse 15 contains rules about borrowing. Then, as if out of nowhere, verse 16 abruptly shifts to rules about premarital sex. But there is actually a vital link between these two verses. The Hebrew word translated as “borrows” is שָׁאַל (šā'al), and it can also be translated as “to ask for.”

In verse 16, the Hebrew word translated as “seduces” is פָּתָה (pāṯâ), and it means “to persuade.” In both cases, words play a critical role. One man “asks for” something he wants to borrow. Another man “persuades” a young woman in order to get what he wants – her hand in marriage. This is not about rape, but about premarital sex. The man loves the young woman and wants to marry her but fails to keep things in their proper and appropriate order. 

“…in this case the couple’s intercourse was consensual. It was a seduction in the true sense of the word. The woman was receptive to the man’s advances, for when the Bible says the man ‘seduces’ (Exodus 22:16), it means “he persuades the girl and she consents,’” – Philip Graham Ryken, Exodus: Saved For God’s Glory   

This law was intended to deal with the inevitable cases of sexual promiscuity among young people within the community. Driven by their hormones, they would be tempted to forego God’s plan for courtship, marriage, and sex, and rearrange the order to meet their out-of-control passions. When that happened, there were rules to follow. The father of the girl could either refuse or accept the young man’s request to marry her. Either way, the young man was required to pay the bride-price. Through his actions, he had “bought” the young girl and made her his own – now he had to pay the price. 

With her virginity taken from her, the young girl was in a precarious position. She would be considered “damaged goods” by other men in the community, making it virtually impossible for her to find a husband. So, if the man who “persuaded” her to have sex with him refused to marry her, he was obligated to set her up financially for the future. If he chose to go through with the marriage, he also had to make a financial commitment to prove his intentions. God expected this young man, who had done the wrong thing, to follow it up by doing the right thing. He was to take responsibility.

The next three verses take another abrupt turn, dealing with witchcraft, bestiality, and idolatry. While they appear to be completely disconnected, these three crimes all demand the death penalty because they all involve false worship. A sorcerous was someone who communicated with the dead in order to cast spells and tell fortunes. They claimed to possess supernatural powers that allowed them to foretell the future and control the fates of others. They were pretending to be like God and leading the people away from His will.

The prohibition against bestiality was a direct indictment of the pagan practices of the other nations that occupied the land of Canaan. Because of their emphasis on false gods, these cultures actually celebrated this form of deviancy by incorporating it into their worship. The Canaanites actually depicted their god, Baal, as having intercourse with a cow. And worshipers were encouraged to emulate the actions of their sacred deity.  So this law was not out of place or unnecessary. It was a direct indictment of the nations that occupied the land God had promised to Israel, and He wanted them to understand that this kind of behavior was completely off-limits and deserving of death.

In fact, God makes it clear that anyone who makes any kind of sacrifice to a false god is worthy of death. He would not tolerate unfaithfulness among His people.

The remaining verses of chapter 22 focus on God’s compassion for the helpless and hopeless within the covenant community. These laws target the treatment of strangers, widows, orphans, and the poor. God would not tolerate the mistreatment of the disenfranchised and disadvantaged. He knew it would be easy to take advantage of the less fortunate because they had no means of defending themselves. So, He placed strict guidelines on all interactions with these individuals. They were to be seen as a protected class and treated with compassion. And failure to do so would result in dire consequences.

“If you exploit them in any way and they cry out to me, then I will certainly hear their cry. My anger will blaze against you, and I will kill you with the sword. Then your wives will be widows and your children fatherless.” – Exodus 22:23-24 NLT

Even allowing a neighbor to suffer discomfort by refusing to return his coat would bring down the wrath of God.

“If you do not return it and your neighbor cries out to me for help, then I will hear, for I am merciful.” – Exodus 22:27 NLT

Ultimately, all their actions were to be seen as evidence of their relationship with God. If they mistreated and abused one another, they were demonstrating their lack of regard for God’s law and their disregard for His character. Even their refusal to treat His appointed leaders with respect was nothing less than a refusal to honor Him as God.

God deserved their honor. He had earned it through His gracious redemption of them from slavery in Egypt. He expected them to keep their covenant commitments, including the dedication of their firstborn. At the Passover, He had spared all the firstborns of Israel. Now, he expected them to honor their commitment by dedicating the firstborns to Him.

God had consecrated the people of Israel as His own possession. They belonged to Him and expected them to live in keeping with their new identity. They were to be a holy people, living distinctively different lives from all their pagan neighbors.

“Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” – Exodus 19:5-6 ESV

Their actions were to match their identity. Their behavior was to reflect their new ownership. They were God’s chosen people and they were to act like it.

English Standard Version (ESV) The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. ESV® Permanent Text Edition® (2016). Copyright © 2001

New Living Translation (NLT) Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright © 1996, 2004, 2015 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.

Integrity and Personal Responsibility

 2  If a thief is found breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there shall be no bloodguilt for him, 3 but if the sun has risen on him, there shall be bloodguilt for him. He shall surely pay. If he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. 4 If the stolen beast is found alive in his possession, whether it is an ox or a donkey or a sheep, he shall pay double.

5 “If a man causes a field or vineyard to be grazed over, or lets his beast loose and it feeds in another man’s field, he shall make restitution from the best in his own field and in his own vineyard.

6 “If fire breaks out and catches in thorns so that the stacked grain or the standing grain or the field is consumed, he who started the fire shall make full restitution.

7 “If a man gives to his neighbor money or goods to keep safe, and it is stolen from the man’s house, then, if the thief is found, he shall pay double. 8 If the thief is not found, the owner of the house shall come near to God to show whether or not he has put his hand to his neighbor’s property. 9 For every breach of trust, whether it is for an ox, for a donkey, for a sheep, for a cloak, or for any kind of lost thing, of which one says, ‘This is it,’ the case of both parties shall come before God. The one whom God condemns shall pay double to his neighbor.

10 “If a man gives to his neighbor a donkey or an ox or a sheep or any beast to keep safe, and it dies or is injured or is driven away, without anyone seeing it, 11 an oath by the Lord shall be between them both to see whether or not he has put his hand to his neighbor’s property. The owner shall accept the oath, and he shall not make restitution. 12 But if it is stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its owner. 13 If it is torn by beasts, let him bring it as evidence. He shall not make restitution for what has been torn.

14 “If a man borrows anything of his neighbor, and it is injured or dies, the owner not being with it, he shall make full restitution. 15 If the owner was with it, he shall not make restitution; if it was hired, it came for its hiring fee.” – Exodus 22:2-15 ESV

These laws could be summed up with the simple adage: Honesty is the best policy. When it comes to human relationships, God puts a high priority on integrity and morality. He expects His people to do the right thing and, when they don’t, He demands that they make amends. God created human beings to live in a communal environment that requires close interaction and a sense of interdependency. The behavior of one affects all. So, when crafting the code of conduct that would regulate life within His covenant community, God included laws that would encourage honesty and mutual accountability. In His covenant community, no man was to be an island. Everyone’s individual behavior had corporate implications.

In giving the Decalogue, God covered the moral law concerning theft.

“You shall not steal.” – Exodus 20:15 ESV

This eighth commandment prohibited theft. Even within the communal context of the nation of Israel, people were allowed to own private property. It was not a collective, where everyone shared all things in common. Instead, individuals could own their own homes, possess flocks and herds, and enjoy the benefits and rights of ownership. But God knew this arrangement, in conjunction with the effects of the fall, would result in inequities that produced coveteousness and jealousy. The have-nots would become envious of the haves and be tempted to resort to theft to balance the playing field.

So, these commands are examples of the moral law (Don’t steal) applied as civil law. What were the people of Israel to do when someone was caught in the act of stealing? How were they supposed to respond when an individual damaged property belonging to someone else? The prohibition against stealing had to be nuanced and parsed out so that it made sense in a variety of different scenarios because human beings have an uncanny ability to justify their actions – even the bad ones. 

The first case involves someone who breaks into a house with the intent to steal. But if the homeowner catches the intruder in the act and kills him, it is to be considered an act of self-defense. He will be considered innocent of murder. But the outcome is quite different if the homeowner kills the thief in broad daylight. In that case, the claim of self-defense is waived and replaced with a conviction of murder. There is no explanation given for this variance in outcomes, but it would appear that the difference has to do with the threat of bodily harm. A homeowner who catches someone breaking and entering in the middle of the night has no way of knowing the intentions of the intruder. Fearing the threat of personal harm, the homeowner has the right to defend himself, his family, and his property. But with the rising of the sun, a different light is shed on the very same scenario. It becomes easier to discern the perpetrator’s intentions. Theft does not justify murder. The threat of stolen property does not give the homeowner the right to take another man’s life.

Another way of interpreting this law is that if a man is killed in the act of breaking and entering, he will not be found guilty of theft. And there will be no restitution required because he has paid with his life. But if the thief accomplishes his mission and lives to see the next day, he will be held accountable. He will be required to pay for his crime. If he is unable to make restitution, he is to be sold and the proceeds used to reimburse his victim. If he is caught with the stolen property in hand, he will be required to compensate the aggrieved party at double its value. 

Verses 5 and 6 deal with cases of criminal negligence. These two scenarios cover inadvertent and unintentional damage done to someone else’s property. In the first case, an individual is guilty of allowing his flocks or herds to damage another individual’s property. They have overgrazed the land of a neighbor. Since there were no fences in those days, it was easy for these kinds of accidents to happen. But this did not excuse one man from respecting the rights of another. If damage was done, the guilty party was expected to make restitution.

If a man started a fire to clear his own land, but it spread to a neighbor’s field, destroying his harvested and stacked grain, he was to be held accountable.

“…he who started the fire shall make full restitution.” – Exodus 22:6 ESV

An apology would not suffice. An admission of guilt was to be accompanied by an exchange of compensation. Harm was done and payment must be made. 

The commands that follow have to do with cases of personal liability and responsibility. In a day when banks were non-existent, people were forced to depend upon others for the safekeeping of their valuables. So, if a man placed his personal property in the care of a friend and those goods were stolen, what was the proper protocol to follow? Who was responsible? There was no FDIC to cover the loss. So, what was the aggrieved party to do?

If the thief who stole the goods was caught, he was to make restitution. But if there was no one to pin the crime on, the matter was to be brought before God. In a case like this, it would only be natural for suspicion to arise concerning the trustworthiness of the one who had been entrusted with the goods. If the valuables disappeared while under his watch, should he be held responsible for the victim’s compensation?

In these kinds of cases, the matter was to be brought before God.

“…the owner of the house shall come near to God to show whether or not he has put his hand to his neighbor's property.” – Exodus 22:8 ESV

The Hebrew word used here is ha’elohim and it can be translated as “the gods.” It is most likely a reference to the elders within the community who were assigned the task of judging these kinds of situations. This was the protocol established by Moses on the advice of Jethro, his father-in-law.

“…look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. And let them judge the people at all times. Every great matter they shall bring to you, but any small matter they shall decide themselves.” – Exodus 18:21-22 ESV

These trustworthy men were to assess the situation and determine the guilt or innocence of the one from whose home the goods were taken. If the judges arrive at a guilty verdict, the neighbor was to make restitution, paying the victim double the value of the stolen property.

If the missing property happened to be an ox, sheep, or goat, the same criteria were to be applied. If the judges deemed the neighbor did nothing wrong, the owner of the property was to accept their verdict as final and binding. But if they determined the neighbor to be guilty of theft, he was expected to make full restitution.

The final case involves responsibility for borrowed goods. If a man borrows anything of value from a neighbor, he will be held responsible for its care and ultimate return. If it is stolen, he will compensate his neighbor for its value. If it is damaged, he will make restitution. But God provides an important caveat. If the owner of the object is present when the item is damaged, the borrower is not to be held accountable. If it involves the case of an animal being rented out and the animal is injured or killed, the owner will receive compensation from the rental price he charged. Any loss he suffers is to be written off as the cost of doing business.

These laws, while quite specific, are not intended to be exhaustive in nature. They provide practical principles for dealing with the myriad of scenarios that might come up in daily life. Communal living can be difficult. Living in close proximity to others can lead to all kinds of conflicts and create a perfect storm of controversies that can do damage to the community and bring dishonor to the name of God. So, the Almighty went out of His way to establish clear criteria for how to live with integrity in the midst of community.

English Standard Version (ESV) The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. ESV® Permanent Text Edition® (2016). Copyright © 2001

New Living Translation (NLT) Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright © 1996, 2004, 2015 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.

Take Ownership

33 “When a man opens a pit, or when a man digs a pit and does not cover it, and an ox or a donkey falls into it, 34 the owner of the pit shall make restoration. He shall give money to its owner, and the dead beast shall be his.

35 “When one man’s ox butts another’s, so that it dies, then they shall sell the live ox and share its price, and the dead beast also they shall share. 36 Or if it is known that the ox has been accustomed to gore in the past, and its owner has not kept it in, he shall repay ox for ox, and the dead beast shall be his.

1 “If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills it or sells it, he shall repay five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.” – Exodus 21:33-22:1 ESV

In these verses, the focus of the commandments shifts to the topic of restitution but particularly in cases involving domesticated animals. In an agrarian culture, animals were a daily part of life. They were a source of food and labor but were also prone to unpredictable behavior. Tens of thousands of goats, sheep, and oxen accompanied the Israelite community as they made their way from Egypt to Canaan and, as personal property, the responsibility for these animals fell to their rightful owners. While domesticated, these creatures could still cause property damage or personal injuries.

God has already dealt with the rare case of an ox goring someone to death. At first glance, this seems like such an unlikely scenario, but it provides a principle regarding the need for personal responsibility. The owner of the ox must take ownership of its actions. In this case, the ox is to be stoned to death. This supports the overall legal principle known as lex talionis.

“…if there is further injury, the punishment must match the injury: a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot, a burn for a burn, a wound for a wound, a bruise for a bruise.” – Exodus 21:23-25 NLT

In Latin, lex talionis means “law of retaliation.” Essentially, it was a law designed to regulate retaliation. Its primary goal was to ensure that the punishment fit the crime and to prevent an unbalanced response in the form of revenge. People were not to take matters into their own hands and mete out a disproportionate degree of justice. God’s law demanded that all penalties for crimes committed be equitable rather than excessive.

God even provided details concerning an ox that was a repeat offender. If an ox was prone to violent behavior, it was the responsibility of the owner to protect his neighbors from any harm. If he failed to do so and the ox ended up killing again, both the ox and the owner would be condemned to death. But God provided a way for the owner to escape death by redeeming himself through the payment of a ransom.

“However, the dead person’s relatives may accept payment to compensate for the loss of life. The owner of the ox may redeem his life by paying whatever is demanded.” – Exodus 21:30 NLT

To our modern sensibilities, these cases seem strange and unnecessary. But to the Israelites, these kinds of scenarios were a regular part of daily life. These laws made sense and provided much-needed guidelines for how to deal with the inevitable conflicts that accompanied life in a fallen world.

God wanted His people to take personal responsibility for their actions. Their behavior was important and there was no excuse for negligence. Sins of commission and omission were equally wrong and had to be dealt with properly. If a man dug a pit and someone else’s ox or donkey fell into it, he was responsible for the outcome.

“The owner of the pit must pay full compensation to the owner of the animal, but then he gets to keep the dead animal.” – Exodus 21:34 NLT

He couldn’t just write it off as bad luck. He was not free to excuse his liability by saying, “Accidents will happen.” Justice must be served. Compensation must be made. Legal liability is a biblical principle that is intended to regulate human behavior. In a world where everyone wants to dismiss their culpability and avoid any and all liability for their actions, God inserted a non-negotiable principle of personal responsibility. We are to own our actions. If the tree I planted falls on my neighbor’s house, I am to take responsibility for it and make restitution. If my dog bites a child, I am not free to excuse its actions by saying, “Dogs will be dogs.” God expects me to do the right thing.

All of these laws are intended to help God’s people reflect God’s character. He is a God of justice, mercy, and grace. He always does what is right and good, and He expects His covenant people to mirror His ways. But because sin has infected our world and heavily influenced our hearts, He has given us His law to show us how to do the good and right thing. Left to our own devices, we would naturally deflect blame and deny responsibility, but God will not allow us to do so.

In a sense, God is stating that personal property is an extension of the individual. An ox that kills is the responsibility of its owner. A man who steals a sheep or goat is actually committing a crime against the animal’s owner. He is dishonoring and devaluing that individual by his actions, and God expects him to make restitution.

“…the thief must pay back five oxen for each ox stolen, and four sheep for each sheep stolen.” – Exodus 22:1 NLT

No excuses accepted. No justification allowed. Each individual was expected to make things right; to do the right thing. God was attempting to create a community where justice prevailed and love permeated every interaction. God expected His people to live holy, set-apart lives that were distinctively different than their neighbors. They were to be a light to the world, living together in an atmosphere of unity and mutual accountability. As the psalmist said, “How wonderful and pleasant it is when brothers live together in harmony!” (Psalm 133:1 NLT).

And that was God’s desire for His people.

English Standard Version (ESV) The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. ESV® Permanent Text Edition® (2016). Copyright © 2001

New Living Translation (NLT) Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright © 1996, 2004, 2015 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.