Sinai, and in this character he was, with equal solemnity, accepted by their united voice, Ex. 19.4-8. This polity was doubtless adopted with the design that the obedience which they rendered him as King might become in some measure identified with the reverence due to him as God; as while they yielded the former, they would be less likely to withhold the latter. And it is to be noticed, that it was not till after the transaction recorded Ex. 19. 7-9, in which God was recognised in his character of immediate Ruler of that people, that he proceeded to promulgate from the clouds of Mount Sinai the system of laws and ordinances designed for them as a religious community. In this system, however, the moral code of the Decalogue, which was both uttered and recorded in a different manner from the rest, is to be considered as given, not in his character of national king of the Israelites, but in that of the Creator and Lawgiver of the universe. A like distinction is occasionally to be made elsewhere; but it is clear that in the chapters before us nearly every ordinance and statute can be referred to some one of the ten commandments, and is to be considered as merely a developement of its sense and spirit. Yet as they are termed emphatically 'judgments,' they undoubtedly belonged more especially to the civil government, and formed a kind of common law, very analogous to the common law of other lands, having respect to matters at issue between man and man, which became the subject of judicial decision. Though of a temporal character in themselves, they still involved moral considerations, and were for the most part based upon some express precept of the Decalogue. Since then the Jewish polity was strictly a Theocracy, in which Jehovah appeared as the immediate sovereign and the people of Israel as his immediate subjects, this relation would naturally give rise to certain important results, in the administration of that economy, which well deserve our notice. In the first place, no authority was vested, by the Mosaic constitution, in any one man or body men, nor even in the whole nation assembled, to make new laws or alter old ones; their sovereign Jehovah reserving this power exclusively to himself. On the same grounds, the Hebrew constitution recognized no one hereditary chief magistrate, nor gave any power, even to the whole nation, to elect a supreme governor. It was the especial prerogative of Jehovah to appoint whomsoever he pleased to preside over the people under the title of judge, as his own immediate vicegerent. And such men, we know, were from time to time raised up as the exigencies of the state required them, and, under a special commission from heaven, wrought the most signal deliverances for their countrymen. Another important consequence of the Theocratic polity was, that idolatry be. came not only the transgression of a moral precept of most aggravated character, but also an act of treason against the state. It was a virtual rejection of the authority of their acknowledged Ruler. It was a breach of the original compact, an open rebellion against God, a positive casting off of sworn allegiance, and therefore, on the established principles of all governments, justly meriting capital punishment. We are not to be surprised, therefore, to find idolatry, with witchcraft, magic, necromancy, and other kindred practices connected with it, treated as a crime equal to that of murder, and subjecting all those who were guilty of committing or abetting it, to the utmost penalty of the law. The punishment of an idolatrous city was the irrevocable ban or anathema called herem, followed by complete destruction, Lev. 19. 31; 20. 6. Deut. 17, 2— 6. Nay, so strict was the prohibition on this subject, that the inciter to idolatry was never to be pardoned, even though he should claim the character of a prophet, and utter predictions which should be exactly fulfilled, Deut. 13. 2-12. The nearest relations and the dearest friends were to be delivered up to just punishment if they enticed to idolatry; and the accuser, as the first witness, was required to cast the first stone at the convicted traitor. Even a foreigner who dwelt among the Hebrews, could not be exempted from capital punishment if he practised idolatry himself, or tempted others to practise it; for by so doing he became a rebel, and a leader of rebellion, against the king, and against the whole civil government. Again, if it be admitted that God sustained the character of temporal prince and legislator to the Israelites, nothing is more natural than that what may be termed the civil or political laws enacted by him in that character should be enforced by temporal sanctions. Accordingly, as it is beyond a doubt that the rewards and punishments annexed to the Jewish civil code were mainly temporal, we find in this view of the subject a sufficient explanation of the fact. The absence in the books of Moses of any very explicit notice of the future existence of the soul, or of a future state of rewards and punishments, has indeed afforded ground of cavil to the skeptic, but there is certainly something inconsistent in the position, that God acted as the temporal sovereign of Israel, and yet that while thus acting he administered the laws of the land, not by the sanction of temporal rewards and punishments in this world, but by the sanction of future rewards and punishments in another world. Accordingly, any one has only to turn to the declarations of the law itself in Deut. 11. 26-28; 28. 1—45, to be convinced that such is not the character of its sanctions. It is not, however, to be inferred from this, as Warburton has done, that the fact of a future existence, and of future rewards and punishments, was unknown either to Moses or to the nation of Israel. Although the doctrine of future retribution is taught rather by incidental reference than by authoritative declaration, yet the evidence that it was known and believed under the Mosaic economy is abundant and conclusive, as has been shown by Graves (Lect. on the Pentateuch), Faber (on the Three Dispensations), and others. Certain it is, that we cannot suppose the nation of Israel to have enjoyed less of the revelation of a future state than the patriarchs from whom they were descended, and of these the Apostle expressly assures us, that 'they died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth, seeking and desiring a better country, even an heavenly.' But the main purpose for which the Jewish economy was established did not require, that any other than temporal sanctions should be explicitly propounded under it. The laws of the Theocracy were to be enforced by an extraordinary providence, and in accordance with this, the grand motives placed before the Hebrews to pursue the good and to avoid the evil were those which were derived from the benefits and calamities, the rewards and punishments of this life. The distinct and prominent exhibition of the doctrine of future awards was reserved for the developements of that more spiritual system, which we enjoy in the gospel of Him who 'has brought life and immortality to light.' Once more, it is to be remarked, that in conformity with the peculiar genius of that polity, and in order that the Hebrews might have their relation to God kept constantly before their eyes, the Most High, as their King, caused a royal tent to be erected in the centre of the encampment, where the pavilions of all kings and chiefs were usually erected, and to be fitted up with all the splendor of royalty, as a moveable palace. It was divided into three apartments, in the innermost of which was the royal throne, supported by golden cherubs; and the footstool of the throne, a gilded ark containing the tables of the law, the Magna Charta of church and state. In the ante-room a gilded table was spread with bread and wine, as the royal table, and precious incense was burned. The exterior room or court, might be considered the royal culinary apartment, and there music was performed, like the music at the festive tables of eastern monarchs. (Lev. 21. 6, 8, 17. Num. 28. 2. Deut. 23. 4. Ezek. 44. 7.) God made choice of the Levites for his courtiers, state-officers, and palace guards; and Aaron for the chief officer of the court and first minister of state. For the maintenance of these officers, he assigned one of the tithes which the Hebrews were to pay as rent for the use of the land. He finally required all the Hebrew males, of a suit able age, to repair to his palace every year, on the three great annual festivals, with presents, to render homage to their king; and as these days of renewing their homage were to be celebrated with festivity and joy, the second tithe was expended in providing the entertainments necessary for those occasions. In short, every religious duty was made a matter of political obligation; and all the civil regulations, even the most minute, were so founded upon the relation of the people to God, and so interwoven with their religious duties, that the Hebrew could not separate his God and his king, and in every law was reminded equally of both. Consequently the nation, so long as it had a national existence, could not entirely lose the knowledge, or discontinue the worship of the true God. The succeeding notes will show that this view of the drift and design of this remarkable structure is by no means inconsistent with its having been framed throughout with a typical import, and designed to shadow forth the leading spiritual mysteries of the gospel. But that it actually sustained the character here ascribed to it, we think there can be no doubt. THE BOOK OF EXODUS. CHAPTER XXI. NOW OW these are the judgments | 2 bIf thou buy an Hebrew serwhich thou shalt a set before vant, six years he shall serve: and them. a ch. 24. 3, 4. Deut. 4. 14. & 6. 1. b Lev. 25. 39, 40, 41. Deut. 15. 12. Jer. 34. 14. As statutes, judicial laws, or rules of judg- 2. Laws respecting Servants. CHAPTER XXI. This and the two following chapters contain the record of what God spake to Moses when he drew near to the thick darkness,' after the people had retired from their close vicinity to the sacred mount. Their contents relate, for the most part, to the judicial or political regulations which God, as the Theocratical sovereign of the chosen people, was pleased now to enact and impose upon them. These 'judgments,' however, though in themselves mainly of a temporal character, having respect to matters between man and man, which might become the subject of judicial decision, still involved moral consider. ations, and were in fact based upon some one or other of the express precepts of the Decalogue. They are, therefore, very properly introduced in this connexion, immediately after the moral code, to which they have continual reference. In our estimate of the polity of which these laws form a part, we must have regard to the circumstances of the people, and the period for which they were designed, and though we may admit that it would be very possible for God to have given a code intrinsically more excellent and holy, yet we shall be ready to conclude that no bet-'I have gotten ( kanithi) a man ter one could have been given in the from the Lord.' And she accordingly then circumstances of the Jewish race. named him Cain (kayin), that is, 1. These are the judgments, &c. Heb. gotten, acquired. Prov. 15. 32, 'He that mishpotim; from sha- heareth reproof getteth ( koneh) phat, to judge, and here signifying the understanding.' Is. 11. 11, 'The Lord If thou buy an Hebrew servant, &c. Heb. pki tikneh, when thou shalt purchase, procure, acquire; a term of which the general import is that of acquisition or possession in whatever manner obtained. See Notes on Gen. 4. 1.-14. 19. The following instances of the use of the term will go to show that its sense is modified by the subjects to which it is applied, and that it does not by any means necessarily convey the idea of Hebrew servants' being bought and sold as goods and chattels, as they are under the system of modern slavery, especially in our own country. Eve said, Gen. 4. 1, in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. abad, 3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were possessed of a brother Hebrew, so as to have a right to command his services (in consequence of which right alone he becomes a 'servant'), retain him not in a state of servitude more that six from the time when the servant was bought. Maimonides was of the latter opinion, and this appears on the whole the most probable; for Moses uniformly calls it 'the seventh year,' without using the term 'sabbatical year,' or ap shall set his hand again to recover (liknoth) the remnant of his people.' Ps. 78. 54, 'He brought them to this mountain which his right hand had purchased (p kanethah). Neh. 5. 8, 'We of our ability have redeemed | years.'————¶ In the seventh year. In ( kaninu) our brethren the Jews, what sense 'the seventh year' is to be that were sold unto the heathen.' Prov. understood here is not obvious; whether 8. 22, The Lord possessed me (as the sabbatical year, in which the kanani) in the beginning of his way.' | land lay fallow, or as the seventh year Here, as the service among the Hebrews was for the most part voluntary, the 'buying an Hebrew servant' may as legitimately imply the buying him from himself, that is, buying his services, as any other mode of purchase. Indeed, as there is no positive proof that He-parently at all alluding to it. And bebrew servants were ever made such or kept in that condition by force, against their own consent, except as a punishment for crime, the decided presumption is, that such is the kind of 'buying' here spoken of. As to the term obed, servant, it comes from 7 to serve, which is applied variously to the serving of worshippers, of tributaries, of domestics, of Levites, of sons to a father, of subjects to a ruler, of hirelings, of soldiers, of public officers, &c. With similar latitude, the derivative noun is applied to all persons doing service for others, irrespective of the ground or principle on which that service was rendered. Accordingly it embraces in its range of application, tributaries, worshippers, domestics, subjects of government, magistrates, public officers, younger sons, prophets, kings, and the Messiah himself. To interpret it 'slave,' or to argue, from the fact of the word's being used to designate domestic servants, that they were made servants by force, worked without pay, and held as articles of property, would be a gross and gratuitous assumption. The meaning of the present passage undoubtedly is, 'If thou dost in any way become sides, when he describes the sabbatical |