Devotions on the Hebrew Bible 2019th

Edition Milton Eng Lee M Fields

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/devotions-on-the-hebrew-bible-2019th-edition-milton-
eng-lee-m-fields/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Devotions on the Hebrew Bible 2019th Edition Milton Eng

Lee M Fields

https://ebookmeta.com/product/devotions-on-the-hebrew-
bible-2019th-edition-milton-eng-lee-m-fields-2/

Is There Theology in the Hebrew Bible Critical Studies

in the Hebrew Bible 1st Edition Schmid

https://ebookmeta.com/product/is-there-theology-in-the-hebrew-
bible-critical-studies-in-the-hebrew-bible-1st-edition-schmid/

Bible Sisters A Year of Devotions with the Women of the

Bible 1st Edition Gennifer Benjamin Brooks

https://ebookmeta.com/product/bible-sisters-a-year-of-devotions-
with-the-women-of-the-bible-1st-edition-gennifer-benjamin-brooks/

Reading the Hebrew Bible with Animal Studies 1st

Edition Ken Stone

https://ebookmeta.com/product/reading-the-hebrew-bible-with-
animal-studies-1st-edition-ken-stone/
The Hebrew Bible: A Contemporary Introduction to the
Christian Old Testament and the Jewish Tanakh 2nd
Edition David M. Carr

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-hebrew-bible-a-contemporary-
introduction-to-the-christian-old-testament-and-the-jewish-
tanakh-2nd-edition-david-m-carr/

Word Concordance of the Tanakh or the Hebrew Bible

Hebrew Old Testament 1st Edition Muhammad Wolfgang G.
A. Schmidt

https://ebookmeta.com/product/word-concordance-of-the-tanakh-or-
the-hebrew-bible-hebrew-old-testament-1st-edition-muhammad-
wolfgang-g-a-schmidt/

Bialik, the Hebrew Bible and the Literature of

Nationalism 1st Edition David Aberbach

https://ebookmeta.com/product/bialik-the-hebrew-bible-and-the-
literature-of-nationalism-1st-edition-david-aberbach/

The Cambridge Companion To The Hebrew Bible And Ethics

1st Edition C L Crouch

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-cambridge-companion-to-the-
hebrew-bible-and-ethics-1st-edition-c-l-crouch/

La Violencia and the Hebrew Bible The Politics and

Histories of Biblical Hermeneutics on the America 1st
Edition Pablo R. Andiñach

https://ebookmeta.com/product/la-violencia-and-the-hebrew-bible-
the-politics-and-histories-of-biblical-hermeneutics-on-the-
america-1st-edition-pablo-r-andinach/
ZONDERVAN

Devotions on the Hebrew Bible

Copyright © 2015 by Milton Eng and Lee M. Fields

Requests for information should be addressed to:

Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546

ePub Edition © January 2019: ISBN 978-0-3105-2455-7

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Devotions on the Hebrew Bible : 53 reflections to inspire and instruct / edited by Milton Eng and Lee
M. Fields.
pages cm
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-310-49453-9 (softcover)
1. Bible. Old Testament. Hebrew — Versions. 2. Bible. Old Testament — Meditations. I. Eng, Milton,
editor.
BS718.D47 2015
242'.5 — dc23 2015020811

All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from The Holy Bible, New International
Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights
reserved worldwide.

Any Internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource.
They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch
for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means — electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other — except for brief
quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Cover design: Mark Novelli, www.imagocreative.com

Cover photo: The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, www.csntm.org
Interior design: Matthew Van Zomeren & Kait Lamphere

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 /DCI/ 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
 Information about External Hyperlinks in this ebook

Please note that footnotes in this ebook may contain hyperlinks to

external websites as part of bibliographic citations. These hyperlinks
have not been activated by the publisher, who cannot verify the
accuracy of these links beyond the date of publication.
Table of Contents*
Chart: Arrangement of Old Testament Books in the Hebrew Bible
Introduction

GENESIS 15:6
A Faith That Grows
Randall Buth

GENESIS 37:30b
Emotional Meltdown: Stuttering in Hebrew
Hélène Dallaire

EXODUS 4:11
God Prepares His Messengers
David Deuel

EXODUS 20:4
You, Who, Me?
Milton Eng

LEVITICUS 18:4
How’s Your Walk?
Lee M. Fields

NUMBERS 17:23 [ENGLISH 17:8]

Productive and Protected Ministry
Roy E. Gane

DEUTERONOMY 6:4 – 9
All Your Lēbāb
Brian L. Webster
DEUTERONOMY 7:14a AND PSALM 128:1
Blessed ( ) or Blessed ( ) or Both?
Hélène Dallaire

JOSHUA 1:7
A Challenging Commission
Mark Ziese

JOSHUA 2:18
Rahab’s Hope
George Schwab

JUDGES 3:9
Who Saved Israel, Othniel or Yahweh?
Miles V. Van Pelt

1 SAMUEL 1:28
Hannah’s Request
Chloe Sun

1 SAMUEL 17:1
A Fresh Look at the David and Goliath Story
Bryan Beyer

2 SAMUEL 11:15
So He Will Be Struck Down and Die
Robert B. Chisholm Jr.

1 KINGS 3:25 – 26
Understanding a Mother’s Heart
Paul D. Wegner

2 KINGS 5:14
Turned Like a Little Child
George Schwab
ISAIAH 5:7
So Near, Yet So Far
Verlyn D. Verbrugge

ISAIAH 21:11 – 12
The Silent Question and Answer
Barbara M. Leung Lai

ISAIAH 30:18
Taking a Conjunction Seriously . . . Twice
John C. Beckman

ISAIAH 53:3 – 5
The Suffering Servant
Jennifer E. Noonan

JEREMIAH 1:5
The Call of Jeremiah
Chloe Sun

JEREMIAH 25:15, 26b

Universal Guilt, Unlimited Grace
Michael J. Williams

EZEKIEL 34:16
God Feeds His Sheep with Justice
Beth M. Stovell

HOSEA 1:9
I Am Not I Am
Bo H. Lim

JOEL 2:13b – 14a

Who Knows? Those Who Repent!
Brian Schultz
AMOS 4:4 – 5
Sacrificing to Sin
Kevin Chau

OBADIAH 21
The Kingship Belongs to YHWH!
Daniel I. Block

JONAH 1:5, 9, 16
“I Fear Yahweh”
Sara Fudge

MICAH 1:9
A Prophetic Landscape
Mark Mangano

NAHUM 1:8a; 3:19c

How Will God’s Judgment Pass over You?
Michael J. Williams

HABAKKUK 2:4
By Faith
Lee M. Fields

ZEPHANIAH 3:17
A Reversal of Fortunes: What Comfort!
Brian L. Webster

ZEPHANIAH 3:20
Made for Praise
Jason S. DeRouchie

HAGGAI 1:9
Running to Our Own Houses
Beth M. Stovell
ZECHARIAH 6:11 – 12
Crown Him with How Many Crowns?
Andrew E. Hill

MALACHI 3:1
Startled by a Visitor
Paul D. Wegner

PSALM 1
Entering the Holy Place
Tremper Longman III

PSALM 33:1 – 5
Worthy to Be Praised
Benjamin J. Noonan

PSALM 51:3 – 4 [ENGLISH 51:1 – 2]

A Penitential Devotional
Bruce Waltke

JOB 42:7b
Speak Truth
Nancy L. Erickson

PROVERBS 1:1 – 7
For Gaining Wisdom
Tremper Longman III

PROVERBS 25:15
Warning: Seduction at Work!
Frederic Clarke Putnam

PROVERBS 30:1
Agur’s Hebrew Words for “Words”
Bruce Waltke
PROVERBS 30:24 – 28
A Lesson and Exercise in Wisdom through the Animal World
Kevin Chau

RUTH 1:16
The Faith Commitment of a Moabite
Peter Vogt

SONG OF SONGS 1:2; 5:1b

The Plural of Love
Miles V. Van Pelt

ECCLESIASTES 1:2
Breathe In. Breathe Out. Repeat As Needed.
Frederic Clarke Putnam

LAMENTATIONS 3:22 – 24
A Rhythm of Grief and Hope
Bo H. Lim

ESTHER 4:14b
A Purposeful Life
Karen H. Jobes

DANIEL 1:5
Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin?
Milton Eng

EZRA 7:10
Preparing to Teach
David Deuel

NEHEMIAH 7:5a
God Put It into My Heart
Mark J. Boda
1 CHRONICLES 29:20b
Is the Position Important?
Martha L. Wade

2 CHRONICLES 7:14
Hope
August H. Konkel

Contributors
Grammatical Terms Index
Hebrew Words Index

* Please note that the devotions are arranged in Hebrew

canonical order. See page 11 for a chart delineating the Hebrew
canonical arrangement with English translation.
Arrangement of Old Testament
Books in the Hebrew Bible

LAW
Hebrew Name English Name
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy

WRITINGS
Hebrew Name English Name
Psalms
Job
Song of Songs
Ruth
Song of Songs
Ecclesiastes
Lamentations
Esther
Daniel
 Ezra
Nehemiah
1–2 Chronicles

PROPHETS
Hebrew Name English Name
Joshua
Judges
1 – 2 Samuel
1 – 2 Kings
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Ezekiel
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi
To Verlyn D. Verbrugge, editor, author, scholar,
friend
Introduction

In 2012 Zondervan published Devotions on the Greek New

Testament. Independently and unbeknownst to each other, Milton
and Lee approached Verlyn Verbrugge about doing a companion
volume for the Hebrew Old Testament. Verlyn then asked if we
would co-edit such a volume. What a blessing and surprise to learn
that we two old friends would be working on this project together!
Soli Deo Gloria.
The aim of this book is twofold: (1) to encourage students and
pastors to continue (or to resume!) using their Hebrew knowledge in
their devotions and sermon preparation and (2) to demonstrate that
a knowledge of the original languages can and should be a spiritually
rewarding exercise. Consequently, each devotion is designed to bring
out some grammatical or lexical insight which cannot be gained in
English translation alone along with some point of spiritual
application. As Lee often says in his classes, “Bible study is never
complete until it results in worship.”
There is both unity and diversity among the contributors. All hold
a doctorate degree and are evangelical in theology. However, they
also represent a diversity of backgrounds. There are men and
women representing various denominations. Some live in countries
outside the United States. Some are highly published, while others
are not. Most are professors, but there is also a Bible translator. All
have a clear call to ministry. No one has contributed more than two
devotions.
The devotions are arranged in biblical order following the Hebrew
arrangement — an opportunity for teaching. Thankfully, we have
been able to provide a devotion for each of the thirty-nine books of
the Old Testament. Of course, some books have attracted more
devotions than others (i.e., Genesis, Isaiah, and Psalms) but we
have covered all the genres and divisions of the Hebrew Bible.
Authors were asked to start their devotion with a standard English
translation (e.g., NIV, NRSV, ESV) but were encouraged to use other
translations or even their own translation thereafter. The reader will
find a variety of linguistic features highlighted among these fifty-four
devotions, including wordplays, word studies, and literary and
grammatical analyses. References to the Septuagint and implications
for the New Testament are also noted. All this in devotions of
approximately 600 words and limited footnotes! We have included
indices of Grammatical Terms and Hebrew Words to help Hebrew
teachers find that perfect illustration for their teaching.
Milton and Lee wish to thank all the contributors who took time
out of their busy schedules to write. It is especially gratifying to have
former teachers, current mentors, and fellow classmates contribute
to this project. In reading through their devotions, we have been
deeply humbled by the faith and spirituality of our colleagues in the
field. Their own enthusiasm for the project was especially
encouraging. Thanks are due also to Zondervan for agreeing to
produce this work and to Verlyn Verbrugge and Nancy Erickson, who
guided two novices through the ins and outs of editing. Their
encouragement and wise counsel made this work a joy and
immeasurably better. In fact, without them, this could not have been
completed.
Finally, we have indeed dedicated this volume to Verlyn. During
the final stages of this project, he was diagnosed with pancreatic
cancer and fell asleep in the Lord on Father’s Day, June 21, 2015.
We grieve deeply over the loss of his grace and Christian presence
that made us feel special in a big world — just as Jesus would do.
“Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his faithful
servants.” (Ps 116:15)
As we present this volume, DHB, our hope and prayer is that
readers would be drawn to a deeper love for, understanding of, and
adherence to the Scriptures and the God who gave them, and that
God himself might be glorified thereby.

Milton Eng and Lee Fields, editors

and contributors
A Faith That Grows
GENESIS 15:6

MT ESV
And he believed the Lord, and he counted
it to him as righteousness.

Genesis 15:6 was an important verse for Paul (Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6)
and James (2:23). There are distinctions in the Hebrew text that
help us understand their different emphases.
The first word in Hebrew is (“and he was believing”), not
(“and he believed”), as the ESV and most English versions read.
The verb is an open-ended tense in Hebrew that is not used
very often. Typically, in past contexts this tense is used when
repetition is involved, like in Genesis 29:2–3. (This observation
applies to both weqatal and yiqtol.) More rarely this tense is used to
mark open-endedness, as in Genesis 2:25, , “they were not
ashamed ...” [not ]. The tense is used to provocatively
present an open-ended stage for the following story of Genesis 3.
(See 1 Sam 1:10 “was crying,” 1:12 “while it was happening,” and
1:13 “was not being heard” for more examples of the open-ended
use of this tense.)
The Hebrew verb looks at the process of believing without
looking at the beginning or end of the “believing.” The tense does
not imply that Abram first believed God at this point. Nor does it
present Abram’s faith as complete at this point. Abram had started
to trust Yahweh’s promises when he travelled to Canaan in Genesis
12. And the author’s choice of this tense at 15:6 forces the reader to
think about ongoing implications. In a real sense, Abram’s faith was
a lifelong “walk.” His faith matured and was tested. The most
climactic test comes later in Genesis 22 with the command to
sacrifice Isaac. James specifically makes the link between Genesis 15
and Genesis 22. James may have been aware of the open-ended
nature of , and he certainly interpreted Abraham’s life
accordingly. Paul, on the other hand, linked Abram’s faith to the
second clause in Genesis 15:6 “and he considered it for
him righteousness.” This crediting is a simple past wayyiqtol, a
complete act, including the endpoint. That was Paul’s point, and his
application of this verse fits the Hebrew, too.
There is another ambiguity with the word “him.” Did Abram
consider God’s promise “righteous,” or did God consider Abram’s
faithfulness “righteous”? There is a hint in Hebrew that God
responded to Abram’s faithfulness by considering it “righteousness.”
The language choices appear to track Abram as the main participant
on stage. There is a little helping word “to him” that weaves through
the story. In v. 1 the word of Yahweh comes “to Abram.” In both
15:4 and 15:7 when Yahweh speaks to Abram, an extra pronoun is
added for Abram, (“to him”). The author was using Abram as the
point of reference. This makes it probable that the phrase “to him” in
15:6 was referring to Abram: “and [the Lord] considered it [Abram’s
faithfulness] for him [Abram, a pronominal tracking device]
righteousness.” Incidentally, the medieval commentator Rashi (1040
– 1105) reads Genesis 15:6 similarly:
“the Holy One, blessed be he, considered it
for Abram merit and righteousness because of the faith that he
placed in him.”
Abraham is the father of faith. God is good and his promises are
trustworthy. As we journey through life on earth, we do not always
see God’s perspective on individual situations, just like Abraham did
not see how he was going to have children and a great inheritance.
But Abraham was trusting God. We can be encouraged. Our faith is
not a one-time assertion, but a life of faithfulness. We may look back
and say “we have believed God.” More practically, we learn from this
verse that we please God when we are trusting him. We are
believing that his promises are true and sure in Jesus Christ so that
we do not need to fear the future even if we do not know the future.
We live and grow in faith.

Randall Buth
Emotional Meltdown: Stuttering in
Hebrew
GENESIS 37:30b

MT ESV
The boy is gone, and I, where shall I go?

After convincing his brothers to leave Joseph in the pit, Reuben

steps away from the group and misses the meal at which the
brothers sell Joseph to the traveling Midianites (37:25 – 28). Reuben
had planned to go back to the cistern secretly to rescue his youngest
brother Joseph, but unbeknownst to him, the Midianites had bought
him for twenty pieces of silver and took him down to Egypt to be
sold as a slave. Unaware of these developments, Reuben hurries to
the cistern and finds it empty! Overcome with despair and grief,
Reuben spontaneously tears his clothes and utters a statement that
could be construed as stuttering (involuntary repetitions of sounds),
stammering (involuntary repetitions and hesitations in speech), or
blubbering (uncontrollable noisy sobbing). Reuben no doubt
assumes that Joseph is dead since his brothers had recently
threatened to kill him. Reuben is overcome with grief and breaks out
in a sharp and piercing outcry.
In this passage, the author intentionally combines two sound-
related poetic devices — assonance (repeated vowels) and
alliteration (repeated consonants) — to express the confused and
emotional state of Reuben. The repetition of the vowel “a” and
consonants (aleph) and (nun) engulf the stuttered speech of
Reuben. Although these literary devices are found primarily in poetry
(e.g., Ps 147:13; Song 6:3; Isa 22:5; 24:17), narrative prose
occasionally borrows the features in order to emphasize a point — in
this case, confusion and grief.
Assonance and alliteration join a series of similar-sounding words
int o one key idea. They can also serve as mnemonic devices to
assist in the memorization of a text, especially in an oral culture. By
providing a vivid and sudden shift in the flow of the language, these
two features highlight a critical juncture in the narrative and draw
the reader further into the story. Hebrew pericopes that include
assonance and alliteration are difficult to translate accurately into
modern languages. Consequently, readers of modern translations
often miss the intensity of the Reuben discourse and the emotional
outburst expressed in the Hebrew language.
In our story, Reuben is at a loss for words. He is distraught,
disturbed, confused, and angry. What would he do now that his
brother was gone? What would his father do upon learning of the
disappearance of his favorite son? Modern translators have
attempted to represent the mood of this pericope, but none has
succeeded in expressing the explosion of emotions released by
Reuben, primarily because of the lack of linguistic equivalents
between languages. When the reader of the pericope encounters the
speech of Reuben laden with assonance and alliteration, he/ she is
immediately engulfed into his stuttering and emotional outcry.
Reuben’s utterance is not connected to the question of where he
should go, as found in most modern translations: “The child is not;
and I, whither shall I go?” (KJV); “The boy isn’t there! And I, where
can I go?” (NET); “The boy is gone; and I, where can I turn?”
(NRSV); “The boy isn’t there! Where can I turn now?” (NIV); rather,
it is directly linked to his emotional state: “The boy’s gone! What am
I going to do!” (The Message); “The boy is GONE! Oh no! Oh NO!
NO! What am I going to do now??” (my translation).
Emotional outbursts and passionate feelings are a part of human
nature. It should not surprise us that biblical characters expressed
them vividly in their discourse! Moses (Exod 17:4), Job (3:11 – 16),
David (Ps 42:11), and even Jesus (Matt 21:12) burst out with
emotions. God welcomes our outbursts and assures us that none of
them is beyond his control and sovereign rule over our lives.

Hélène Dallaire
God Prepares His Messengers
EXODUS 4:11

MT ESV
Then the Lord said to him, “Who has made
man’s mouth?
Who makes him mute, or deaf,
or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the Lord?”

Have you ever questioned your ministry ability? Moses, one of

Israel’s greatest leaders, did. The Lord of all creation selected and
sent Moses on a mission to go to God’s people and communicate his
message. But the prophet was not a ready and willing messenger.
Scripture calls God’s servants “messengers” (Mal 2:7) because
God sends them. Moses reasons that he cannot be God’s messenger,
so he declines his assignment. His argument centers on his
perceived inability, that he is unable to speak to his own satisfaction.
Commentators speculate about the cause of Moses’ inability. One
thing is certain; God responds as if Moses’ inability is a disability.
How do we know this? When Yahweh responds to Moses’ refusal,
he chooses words that illustrate his role in disabilities. In Exodus
4:11 the words “deaf,” “mute,” “sighted,” and “blind”
all occur in the piel, indicating physical disabilities.1 Because the four
terms are uniquely inflected, this pattern plays a crucial role in
interpreting this passage. It is particularly significant that the
Hebrew word used here that our Bibles translate “mute” means “able
to understand but not able to speak.”2 Because Moses comprehends
the message, Yahweh challenges Moses to look beyond what he
considers to be his speech limitations. Moses can understand; God
will help him speak.
God patiently responds to Moses’ logic when he asks him two
questions: Who puts man’s mouth in place? Who makes man unable
to speak, hear, or see? Yes, remarkably, who makes those who
cannot speak unable to speak? Wouldn’t we expect God to say,
“Who makes those unable to speak, able to speak?” But God’s
argument for Moses states that if Moses has a disability, God gave it
to him. God should certainly have a fuller understanding of Moses’
limitations than Moses did! This verse not only addresses God’s role
in disabilities, but it also sets the stage for his provision through his
people.
In the prophets, God echoes his role in disability: “In that day,
declares the Lord, I will assemble the lame, and gather the outcasts,
and those whom I have afflicted” (Mic 4:6, ESV). Like Exodus 4:11,
this passage reminds us that God assumes sovereign responsibility
for disability, which includes assuring us that he will one day heal
those who have disabilities. “The Lord gives sight to the blind” (Ps
146:8, NIV). For now, we may choose to say with Job, God’s agent
to assist people with disabilities, “I was eyes to the blind and feet to
the lame” (Job 29:15, NIV).
If God calls us to speak, he will enable us to speak. For those of
us who have a disability, as most of us will as we age, this passage
assures us that God not only gives us our mission assignments, he
also empowers us for the task. Disability should not keep us from
experiencing the joy of serving God. What is more, our greatest joy
in serving God may come from helping others with their disabilities.

Dave Deuel
Notes
1. C. L. Seow, A Grammar for Biblical Hebrew (Nashville: Abingdon,
1995), 21.
2. John I. Durham, Exodus, WBC 3 (Waco, TX: Word, 1987), 50. One
translation renders the passage focusing on Yahweh’s ability to
enable or disable: “The Lord said to him, ‘Who makes a man able
to talk? Who makes him unable to hear or speak? Who makes him
able to see? Who makes him blind? It is I, the Lord’ ” (Exod 4:11,
NIrV).
You, Who, Me?
EXODUS 20:4

MT NIV
You shall not make for yourself an image
in the form of anything in heaven above
or on the earth beneath
or in the waters below.

What is often lost in translation is the real meaning of “you.” In

English, the personal pronoun “you” can be singular or plural. In
other languages, “you-singular” and “you-plural” are clearly
distinguished. In Spanish, for example, we have “usted” and
“ustedes.” In Chinese, we have (nǐ) and (nǐ men). When it
comes to the Ten Commandments, such as “You shall have no other
gods before me,” which “you” do we have?
Surprisingly, all the verbal forms and second person pronominal
suffixes in the Decalogue are masculine singular. That is why Exodus
20:4a says , “You shall not make for yourself an image”
(singular), and not the similar but plural construction as found in
Deuteronomy 4:16a, , “so that you do not
become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol” (NIV). In other
words, the Ten Commandments are not written to “you-plural” but to
“you-singular.” They are not written to “you all” but to “you” as an
individual.
This is unusual in the context of the giving of the law on Mount
Sinai in Exodus 19. The entire nation is gathered at the foot of the
mountain to witness Yahweh speaking to Moses in a theophanic
appearance of thunder, lightning, and smoke. God himself conveys
to the Israelites through Moses, “You yourselves have seen what I
did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought
you to myself” (Exod 19:4), addressing them in the plural. One
would expect the same plural address in the Decalogue.
The fact that the Ten Commandments are addressed to you in
the singular emphasizes their personal and ethical character. It has
long been observed that these statements are not “commandments”
per se or even “laws.” There are no specific punishments spelled out
for breaking these “laws” as in the Book of the Covenant (Exod 21 –
23), and the tenth commandment, “You shall not covet. . .” is not
even a law one can observably break! Rather, the Ten
Commandments are ten principles for personal conduct in daily life,
and they are just as relevant today as they were in the days of
Moses.
As believers, we have not only made a commitment to the gospel
of Christ, but we have made a commitment to a system of personal
ethics inculcated in the eternal moral law of the Decalogue. These
principles include exclusive worship, parental honor, respect for life,
respect for the marriage bond, and respect for the personal property
of others. George Mendenhall has put it well: the Ten
Commandments should really be called the “Ten Commitments.”1
Since the Ten Commitments are really a personal system of
ethics and not corporate law — that is, they speak to the singular
“you,” not the plural “you” — they cannot be applied to corporate
entities. The sixth commandment, “You shall not kill,” for example,
cannot be applied to corporate structures like governments and to
such issues as capital punishment. Rather, the singular “you”
emphasizes the personal nature of these commitments and the fact
that one cannot hide in the shadows of a corporate body like the
church. Our commitments must be singular and personal.
The old-time preachers used to s ay, “God has no grandchildren.”
Each generation must make their own spiritual commitments afresh
and anew. Faith cannot be inherited. Have you-singular made such a
commitment? May our response never be, “Who, me?”
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Horace) whose sides are still discoloured (or burnt)
with the stripes of the Spanish cords[19].’
A number of other instances of this practice of
whipping Slaves, as well as other different names of
instruments used for that purpose, may be found in
the antient Latin Writers, such as Plautus, Terence,
Horace, Martial, &c. So prevalent had the above
practice become, that Slaves were frequently
denominated from that particular kind of flagellation
which they were most commonly made to undergo.
Some were called Restiones, because they were
used to be lashed with cords; others were called
Bucædæ, because they were usually lashed with
thongs of ox-leather; and it is in consequence of this
custom, that a Man is made to say in one of
Plautus’s Plays, ‘They shall be Bucædæ (that is to
say, scourged with leather-thongs) whether they will
or no, before I consent to be Restio,’ or so much as
beaten with cords[20]. And Tertullian, meaning in one
of his Writings to express Slaves in general, uses
words which simply signify ‘those who are used to be
beaten, or to be discoloured with blows[21].’
Nay, so generally were whipping and lashing
considered among the Romans, as being the lot of
Slaves, that a whip, or a scourge, was become
among them the emblem of their condition. Of this
we have an instance in the singular custom
mentioned by Camerarius, which prevailed among
them, of placing in the triumphal car, behind the
Triumpher, a man with a whip in his hand; the
meaning of which was to shew, that it was no
impossible thing for a Man to fall from the highest
pitch of glory into the most abject condition, even into
that of a Slave.
Suetonius also relates a fact which affords another
remarkable instance of this notion of the Romans, of
looking upon a whip as a characteristic mark of
dominion on the one hand, and of slavery on the
other. ‘Cicero (says Suetonius, in the life of
Augustus) having accompanied Cæsar to the
Capitol, related to a few friends whom he met there,
a dream which he had had the night before. It
seemed to him, he said, that a graceful Boy came
down from Heaven, suspended by a golden chain;
that he stopped before the gate of the Capitol, and
that Jupiter gave him a whip (flagellum). Having
afterwards suddenly seen Augustus, whom (as he
was still personally unknown to several of his near
relations) Cæsar had sent for and brought along with
him to be present at the ceremony, he assured his
friends that he was the very person whose figure he
had seen during his sleep.’ Juvenal likewise, in one
of his Satyrs, has spoken of Augustus conformably to
the above notion of the Romans. ‘The same (says
he) who, after conquering the Romans, has
subjected them to his whip[22].’
But, besides all those instruments of flagellation
used for punishing Slaves, which have been
mentioned above, and as if the terrible flagellum had
not been of itself sufficiently so, new contrivances
were used to make the latter a still more cruel
weapon; and the thongs with which that kind of
scourge was made, were frequently armed with nails,
or small hard bones. They also would sometimes
fasten to those thongs small leaden weights: hence
scourges were sometimes called Astragala, as
Hesychius relates, from the name of those kinds of
weights which the Ancients used to wear hanging
about their shoes. Under the tortures which those
different instruments inflicted, it was no wonder that
Slaves should die: indeed this was a frequent case;
and the cruelty, especially of Mistresses towards their
female Slaves, grew at last to such a pitch, that a
provision was made in the Council of Elvira to
restrain it; and it was ordained, that if any Mistress
should cause her Slave to be whipped with so much
cruelty as that she should die, the Mistress should be
suspended from Communion for a certain number of
years. The following are the terms of the above
Ordinance, in the fifth Canon. “If a Mistress, in a fit of
anger and madness, shall lash her female Slave, or
cause her to be lashed, in such a manner that she
expires before the third day, by reason of the torture
she has undergone; inasmuch as it is doubtful
whether it has designedly happened, or by chance; if
it has designedly happened, the Mistress shall be
excommunicated for seven years; if by chance, she
shall be excommunicated for five years only; though,
if she shall fall into sickness, she may receive the
Communion[23].”
 FOOTNOTES:

[17]
—— Adsit
Regula peccatis quæ pœnas irroget æquas,
Nec Scuticâ dignum horribili sectere Flagello;
Nam, ut Ferulâ cædas meritum majora subire
Verbera, non vereor.
Lib. I. Sat. I. v. 117.
[18]
Sectus flagellis hic Triumviralibus
Præconis ad fastidium.
Lib. V. Ode IV. v. 11, 12.

[19]
Ibericis peruste funibus latus.
Lib. V. Ode IV. v. 3.

[20]
Erunt Bucædæ invitò, potius quàm ego sim Restio.
Mostell. Act. IV. Sc. II.

[21] Verberones, Subverbustos.—The latter word

literally signifies, burnt with blows: a figurative
expression commonly used among the Romans, when
they spoke of flagellations: thus, the words flagrum
and flagellum, had been derived from the word
flagrare, which signifies to burn, and Horace, in a
passage that will be quoted in page 66, says, to be
burnt with rods (virgis uri) for, to be lashed.
[22]
Ad sua qui domitos deduxit flagra Quirites.
 Juv. Sat. X. v. 99.
This notion of the Romans, of looking upon a
scourge as a characteristic appendage of dominion,
was so general among them, as is observed above,
that they moreover supposed the gods themselves to
be supplied with whips; and even Venus had also been
thought to be furnished with one. In consequence of
this supposition, Horace, who, as we may conclude
from thence, had cause to be dissatisfied with some
trick his Mistress had played him, or perhaps only with
her impertinence in general, desires Venus to chastise
her with her whip, “Do, Queen, (says he, addressing
Venus) do, for once, give arrogant Chloe a touch with
your sublime whip.”
Regina, sublimi flagello
Tange Chloën semel arrogantem.
Od. 26. Lib. III. ad Ven.
[23] The absolute dominion possessed by Masters
over the persons of their slaves, led them to use a
singular severity in the government of them. So
frequently were flagellations the lot of the latter, that
appellations and words of reproach drawn from that
kind of punishment, were, as hath been above
observed, commonly used to denominate them; and
expressions of this kind occur in the politest writers:
thus, we find in the Plays of Terence, an Author
particularly celebrated for his politeness and strict
observance of decorum, Slaves frequently called by
the words Verberones, Flagriones, or others to the
same effect.
As for Plautus, who had been the Servant of a
Baker, and who was much acquainted with every thing
that related to Slaves, and their flagellations in
particular, he has filled his scenes with nicknames of
Slaves, drawn from this latter circumstance; and they
are almost continually called in his Plays, flagritribæ (a
verbis, flagrum & terere) plagipatidæ, ulmitribæ, &c.
besides the appellations of Bucædæ and Restiones,
above-mentioned.
Sometimes the flagellations of Slaves, or the fear
they entertained of incurring them, served Plautus as
incidents for the conduct of his plots; thus, in his
Epidicus, a Slave who is the principal character in the
Play, concludes upon a certain occasion, that his
Master has discovered his whole scheme, because he
has spied him, in the morning, purchasing a new
scourge at the shop in which they were sold. The
same flagellations in general, have moreover been an
inexhaustible fund of pleasantry for Plautus. In one
place, for instance, a Slave, intending to laugh at a
fellow-slave, asks him how much he thinks he weighs,
when he is suspended naked, by his hands, to the
beam, with an hundred weight (centupondium) tied to
his feet; which was a precaution taken, as
Commentators inform us, in order to prevent the Slave
who was flagellated from kicking the Man (Virgator)
whose office it was to perform the operation. And in
another place, Plautus, alluding to the thongs of ox-
leather with which whips were commonly made,
introduces a Slave engaged in deep reflection on the
surprizing circumstance of “dead bullocks, that make
incursions upon living Men.”
Vivos homines mortui incursant boves!
But it was not always upon their Slaves only that
Masters, among the Romans, inflicted the punishment
of flagellation: they sometimes found means to serve
in the same manner the young Men of free condition,
who insinuated themselves into their houses, with a
design to court their Wives. As the most favourable
disguise on such occasions, was to be dressed in
Slaves clothes, because a Man thus habited was
enabled to get into the house, and go up and down
without being noticed, Rakes engaged in amorous
pursuits, usually chose to make use of it; but, when the
Husband either happened to discover them, or had
had previous information of the appointment given by
his faithful Spouse, he feigned to mistake the Man for
a run-away Slave, or some strange Slave who had got
into his house to commit theft, and treated him
accordingly. Indeed the opportunity was a most
favourable one for revenge; and if to this consideration
we add that of the severe temper of the Romans, and
the jealous disposition that has always prevailed in that
country, we shall easily conclude that such an
opportunity, when obtained, was seldom suffered to
escape, and that many a Roman Spark, caught in the
above disguise, and engaged in the laudable pursuit of
seducing his neighbour’s wife, has, with a
centupondium to his feet, been sadly rewarded for his
ingenuity. A misfortune of that kind actually befell
Sallust the Historian. He was caught in a familiar
intercourse with Faustina, wife to Milo, and daughter of
the Dictator Sylla. The husband caused him to be
soundly lashed (loris bene cæsum); nor did he release
him till he had made him pay a considerable sum of
money. The fact is related by Aulus Gellius, who had
extracted it from Varro. To it was very probably owing
the violent part which Sallust afterwards took against
Milo, while the latter was under prosecution for slaying
the Tribune Clodius, and the tumult he raised on that
occasion, which prevented Cicero from delivering the
speech he had prepared.
An allusion is made to the above practices in one of
Horace’s Satyrs. He supposes in it, that his Slave,
availing himself of the opportunity of the Saturnalia, to
speak his mind freely to him, gives him a lecture on the
bad courses in which he thinks him engaged, and
uses, among others, the following arguments.
‘When you have stripped off the marks of your
dignity, your equestrian ring, and your whole Roman
dress, and from a Man invested with the office of
Judge, shew yourself at once under the appearance of
the Slave Dama; disgraced as you are, and hiding your
perfumed head under your cloak, you are not the Man
whom you feign to be: you are at least introduced full
of terror, and your whole frame shakes through the
struggles of two opposite passions. In fact, what
advantage is it to you, whether you are cut to pieces
with rods, or slaughtered with iron weapons?’
Tu cum projectis insignibus, annulo Equestri
Romanoque habitu, prodis ex judice Dama,
Turpis, odoratum caput obscurante lacernâ
Non es quod simulas; metuens induceris, atque
Altercante libidinibus tremis ossa pavore.
Quid refert uri virgis, ferroque necari?
Lib. II. Sat. 7.

The above uncontrouled power of inflicting

punishments on their Slaves, enjoyed by Masters in
Rome, was at last abused by them to the greatest
degree. The smallest faults committed in their families
by Slaves, such as breaking glasses, seasoning
dishes too much, or the like, exposed them to grievous
punishments; and it even was no unusual thing for
Masters (as we may judge from the description of
Trimalcion’s entertainment in the Satire of Petronius) to
order such of their Slaves as had been guilty of faults
of the above kind, to be stripped, and whipped in the
presence of their guests, when they happened to
entertain any at their houses.
 Women in particular seem to have abused this
power of flagellation in a strange manner; which
caused express provisions to be made, at different
times, in order to restrain them; of which the Canon
above-quoted is an instance. It was often sufficient, to
induce the Roman Ladies to cause their Slaves to be
whipped, that they were dissatisfied with the present
state of their own charms; or, as Juvenal expresses it,
that their nose displeased them: and when they
happened to fancy themselves neglected by their
husbands, then indeed their Slaves fared badly. This
latter observation of Juvenal, Dryden, in his translation
of that Author’s Satires, has expressed by the
following lines:
‘For, if over night the husband has been slack, }
Or counterfeited sleep, or turn’d his back, }
Next day, be sure, the servants go to wrack.’ }

Here follows the literal translation of the passage of

Juvenal, in which he describes in a very lively manner,
the havock which an incensed Woman usually made
on the above occasion. “If her husband has, the night
before, turned his back on her, woe to her waiting
Woman; the dressing Maids lay down their tunicks; the
errand Slave is charged with having returned too late;
the straps break on the back of some; others redden
under the lash of the leather scourge, and others, of
the twisted parchment.”
Si nocte maritus
Aversus jacuit, periit Libraria; ponunt
Cosmetæ tunicas; tardè venisse Liburnus
Dicitur; hic frangit ferulas; rubet ille flagellis,
Hic scuticâ.
Juv. Sat. VI.
The wantonness of power was carried still farther by
the Roman Ladies, if we may credit the same Juvenal.
It was a customary thing with several among them,
when they proposed to have their hair dressed both
with nicety and expedition, to have the dressing Maid
who was charged with that care, stripped naked to the
waist, ready for flagellation, in case she became guilty
of any fault or mistake, in performing her task. The
following is the passage in Juvenal on that subject.
“For, if she has determined to be dressed more nicely
than usual, and is in haste, being expected in the
public gardens, the unfortunate Psechas then dresses
her head, with her own hair in the utmost disorder, and
her shoulders and breasts bare. Why is that ringlet too
high?—The leather-thongs instantly punish the crime
of a hair, and an ill-shaped curl.”
Nam si constituit solitoque decentiùs optat
Ornari & properat, jamque expectatur in hortis,
Componit crinem, laceratis ipsa capillis,
Nuda humeros, Psechas infœlix, nudisque mamillis:
Altior hic quare cicinnus? taurea punit
Continuò flexi crimen, facinusque capilli.
These abuses which Masters, in Rome, made of the
power they possessed over their Slaves, were at last
carried by them to such a pitch, either by making them
wantonly suffer death, or torturing them in numberless
different ways, that, in the beginning of the reign of the
Emperors, it was found necessary to restrain their
licence.
Under the reign of Claudius (for it is not clear
whether any provision to that effect was made under
Augustus) it was ordained, that Masters who forsook
their Slaves when sick, should lose all right over them,
in case they recovered; and that those who
deliberately put them to death, should be banished
from Rome.
 Under the Emperor Adrian, the cruelties exercised
by Umbricia, a Roman Lady, over her female Slaves,
caused new laws to be made on that subject, as well
as the former ones to be put in force, and Umbricia
was, by a rescript of the Emperor, banished for five
years. (l. 2. in fine, Dig. L. I. t. 6.)
New laws to the same ends were likewise made
under the following Emperors, among which Civilians
make particular mention of a constitution of Antonius
Pius (Divus Pius); and in subsequent times, the
Church also employed its authority to prevent the like
excesses, as we may see from the Canon above-
recited (Si quæ domina, &c.) which was framed in the
Council held at Elvira, a small Town in Spain, that has
been since destroyed. But the disorder was of such a
nature as was not to be cured so long as the custom
itself of slavery was allowed to subsist; and it has been
remedied at last, only by the thorough abolition of an
usage which was a continual insult on Humanity: an
advantage which (to be, once at least, very serious in
the course of this learned and useful Work) we are
indebted for, to the establishment of Christianity,
whatever other evils certain Writers may reproach it
with having occasioned.
 C H A P. V.

The subject continued.

THE punishment of flagellation was thought among

the Antient Heathens, as we have just seen, to
possess great efficacy to mend the morals of
persons convicted of offences, and insure the
honesty and diligence of Slaves. Nor were
Schoolmasters behindhand either with Judges or
Masters, in regard to whipping those persons who
were subjected to their authority.
Of this we have an undoubted proof in one of the
Epistles of Horace; and it moreover appears that he
had had, when at school, the bad luck of being
himself under the tuition of one who had strong
inclination to inflict that kind of chastisement [24]. ‘I
remember (says he) that the flogging Orbilius, who
when I was a boy, used to dictate to us the verses of
Livius Andronicus—.’
Quintilian has also mentioned this practice of
Schoolmasters of whipping their Disciples; and the
severity which they used, as well as other
considerations, induced him to disapprove of it
intirely. The following are his expressions on that
subject. ‘With respect to whipping School-boys,
though it be an established practice, and Chrysippus
is not averse to it, yet I do not in any degree approve
it. First, it is a base and slavish treatment; and
certainly if it were not for the youth of those who are
made to suffer, it might be deemed an injury that
might call for redress. Besides, if a Disciple is of such
a mean disposition that he is not mended by
censures, he will, like a bad Slave, grow equally
insensible to blows. Lastly, if Masters acted as they
ought, there would be no occasion for chastisement;
but the negligence of Teachers is now so great, that,
instead of causing their Disciples to do what they
ought, they content themselves with punishing them
for not having done it. Besides, though you may
compel the obedience of a Boy, by using the rod,
what will you do with a young Man, to whom motives
of a quite different nature must be proposed? Not to
add, that several dangerous accidents which are not
fit to be named, may be occasioned either by the fear
or the pain attending such punishments. Indeed, if
great care is not taken in choosing Teachers of
proper dispositions, I am ashamed to say to what
degree they will sometimes abuse their power of
lashing: but I shall dwell no longer on that subject,
concerning which the Public knows already too
much[25].’
After these dismal accounts of Disciples flogged by
their Teachers, and of the cruel severity used by the
latter, the Reader will not certainly be displeased to
read instances of Teachers who were flogged by their
Disciples.
A very remarkable instance of this kind occurs in
the case of that Schoolmaster of the Town of Falerii,
who is mentioned in the fifth Book of the Decad of
Livy. The Town of Falerii being besieged by the
Romans, under the command of the Dictator
Camillus, a Schoolmaster in that Town, thinking he
would be splendidly rewarded for his service, one
day led, by treachery, and under pretence of making
them take a short walk out of the gates of the Town,
the children of the most considerable families, who
had been entrusted to his care, to the Roman camp,
and delivered them up to the Dictator. But the latter,
incensed at his perfidy, ordered him to be stripped
naked, with his hands tied behind his back, and
having supplied the children with rods, gave the
Schoolmaster up to them, to drive him back in that
condition to their Town[26].
Another instance of the like kind is also to be met
with in more modern times. The Tutor’s name was
Sadragesillus, and his Disciple was Dagobert, son of
Clotaire, King of France, who reigned about the year
of Jesus Christ, 526. The transaction is related in the
following manner by Robert Gaguin, in his History of
France. ‘Dagobert (says he) having received from his
Father a Tutor who was to instruct him in the worldly
sciences, and whom the King had made Duke of
Aquitain, the young Man, who did not want parts for
one of his years, soon perceived that Sadragesillus
(such was the Pedagogue’s name) was much elated
with pride on account of his newly-acquired dignity,
so that he began to fail in the respect he owed to
him, and grew remiss in the discharge of his duty.
The Prince having once invited him to dine with him,
and Sadragesillus having not only placed himself at
table opposite the Prince, but also offered to take the
cup from him as if he had been his companion, the
Prince ordered him to be soundly whipped with rods,
and caused his beard, which he wore very long, to be
cut off.’ The above fact is also related by Tilly,
Scrivener of the Parliament of Paris, in his Chronicles
of the Kings of France.
In fine, to the passages above produced
concerning the Flagellations of Children, from which
we find that very great men have much differed in
their opinions in regard to them, we may add, that
King Solomon, that Oracle of Wisdom, has, without
reserve, declared in favour of that mode of
correction. ‘He that spareth the rod, hateth his son;
but he that loves him, chastises him betimes.’ The
Greek Philosopher Chrysippus has afterwards
manifested the same opinion. And Petrarch, who
may be called here a modern Author, has also
adopted the opinion of King Solomon; and,
notwithstanding Quintilian’s arguments on the
subject, has sided with the antient Moralist and Sage:
“Correct your son (says Petrarch) in his tender years,
nor spare the rod: a branch, when young, may easily
be bent at your pleasure[27].”
 FOOTNOTES:

[24]
... Memini quæ plagosum mihi parvo
Orbilium dictare.—Lib. II. Ep. i. v. 70.
[25] ... “Jam si minor in diligendis custodum &
præceptorum moribus fuit cura, pudet dicere in qua
proba nefandi homines isto jure cædendi abutantur;
non morabor in parte hac, nimium est quod
intelligitur.”—Institut. Orat. Lib. I. Cap. 3.
[26] “Denudari deindè, Ludi-magistrum jussit,
eumque pueris tradidit reducendum Falerios, manibus
post tergum illigatis; virgas quoque eis dedit, quibus
proditorem agerent in urbem verberantes.”
The inhabitants of Falerii were so struck with the just
conduct of the Dictator (Livy adds) that a total change
of their dispositions towards the Romans was the
consequence; and the Senate having been assembled
thereupon by the Magistrates, they came to the
resolution of opening their gates, and surrendering to
the Romans; which was soon after effected.
[27] From the above-mentioned passages of king
Solomon, Livy, and other antient authors, down to
Petrarch, we may safely conclude that the practice of
flagellating children has been followed in the world
during a number of successive centuries; and we know
from undoubted authorities, that the same practice
continues in our days to prevail, especially among
Schoolmasters. Nay more, very respectable Writers
inform us, that Schoolmasters still possess the same
strong inclination to exert their authority that way, as
they did in the times of Horace and Quintilian.
Thus, Mr. Henry Fielding, a Writer who, better than
most others, knew the manners of Men, in his History
of a Foundling, represents Thwackum the
Schoolmaster, as having, upon every occasion,
recourse to his rod, and describes him to us as a true
successor of the plagosus Orbilius.
Mr. Gay, another writer, who, too, was deeply versed
in the knowledge of Mankind, expresses himself with
still more precision on that head, and lays it down as
an undoubted maxim, that the delight of a
Schoolmaster is to use his whip. The opinion of that
Author on the subject is contained in a song written by
him: this song was composed in honour of Molly Mog,
an Innkeeper’s daughter, at Oakingham in Berkshire:
the verses are fifteen in all; and the name of Molly Mog
is to be found in each of them, with a rhyme to it.
The School-boy’s desire is a play-day,
The Schoolmaster’s joy is to flog,
The milk-maid’s delights are on May-day;
But mine are in sweet Molly Mog.
However, the researches of our Author on the
present deep subject, as well as mine in my humble
capacity of Commentator, can bear no comparison, I
think, in point of sagaciousness, with the discovery
made by Thomas Perez, the Uncle of Diego, who
relates his own history in the third volume of the
Adventures of Gil Blas, and who takes that occasion to
mention the great abilities of his Uncle as an Antiquary.
“If it had not been for him (says he) we should still be
ignorant that children, in Athens, cried when their
Mothers whipped them.”