Blood
Thus we see that consanguinity is really the guiding principle on the man's side, whether as regards his blood relations, or those relations in law, which were forbidden on the ground that they had been the wives of relations in blood. This last is an important point, and casts light on a question where men have added restrictions unknown to the principle laid down in God's word. And we see how needful it is to come to the book to learn God's mind in the matter, instead of drawing our own deductions, and putting relations in law as such, on the same ground as relations in blood. The reader may see by comparing 20: 12 with 20:20, 21 how needful it was to learn God's mind from His own written word.
Coming now to the wife relations, with whom the man is not at liberty to contract a marriage, her own direct line is positively forbidden him. This we can all understand. But here we have left the ground of consanguinity, for between a man and his wife there is, unless he marries his cousin, no blood relationship, and their union does not make it. They are one flesh, but between them there is no tie of consanguinity. Hence, besides the wife's direct line, no collateral branch on her side is forbidden the man, except her sister during her lifetime. The Lord in mercy to the wife would preserve her by this law from the sorrow incident to her husband, following the example of Jacob. Beyond this God's word does not go.
The simplicity, the order, the rational character of these directions we learn as we study them; and this, too, we learn, that the wife's blood relations, her direct line excepted, are not viewed in the same light as the husband's own near of kin. Consanguinity, we repeat, is really the guiding principle on his side, whether it be as regards his blood relations, or his relations in law, On his wife's side he was not to marry her sister during her life. Now were his relations in law simply as such forbidden him, his wife's sister would be barred to him as much as his brother's wife. Bu'-, it was not so. The brother's widow, except to fulfill the peculiar condition of the levirate law, he never was to make his wife, but his wife's sister he was free to marry after his wife's death. Again, relations in law, even on his side, are not by God viewed in the same light as relations in blood, as we have already pointed out. Further, the man and the woman are not in the Old Testament placed by God on equal ground. A man was permitted to have two wives (Deut. 21:1515If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: (Deuteronomy 21:15)) by the law, but no woman was ever allowed to have two husbands. These simple facts kept in mind, we shall be preserved from drawing deductions, and imposing limitations on the creature's freedom in the matter of marriage, which God's word neither authorizes not countenances.
But human law on this subject is not always in harmony with God's revealed will. Restrictions which God has not imposed have been introduced, extending the prohibited degree of consanguinity beyond the limits laid down in the Word; and men have argued, and legislated as if relations in law, simply as such, were to be viewed in the same light as relations by blood. Were this in accordance with the word of God, the wife's sister must be forbidden to the man as much as his own sister. Now to go in to the latter was wickedness (20:17), and public execution was the punishment awarded to both. To marry the wife's sister was only forbidden to the man during the lifetime of the former, and no punishment is even hinted at if he married her subsequent to her sister's death. We cannot, therefore, argue that the wife's relations are placed on the same ground as the man's own.
In saying this, however, we would make it plain that we are not in the least advocating the advisability of such unions. It may not be expedient for first cousins to marry, but that is no reason why such unions should be forbidden by the Church of Rome, unless the parties get a dispensation from the Pope. It may not be expedient for a man to marry his deceased wife's sister, but that does not justify the promulgation of a law which prohibits it, by regarding it as a nullity, refusing to own the wife's status, and treating the children as bastards.
Are we, then, at liberty to disregard human law on such a matter, because it may go beyond the requirements of God's word? No Christian should accept such a proposition for a moment. We are to “be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God.
The powers that be are ordained of God" (Rom. 13:11Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. (Romans 13:1)) We are to be obedient to rule (Titus 3:11Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work, (Titus 3:1)); and to submit ourselves to every human institution for the Lord's sake, as Peter (1 Peter 2:1313Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; (1 Peter 2:13)) exhorts us. Are we, then, advocating a blind subjection to earthly rule?' By no means. For when human commands conflict with the divine word this same apostle has taught us how to act, as he, with the other apostles boldly told the Sanhedrin. “We ought to obey God rather than men “(Acts 5:2929Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. (Acts 5:29)). But in this matter there is no conflict of authority—God's word does not enjoin on us the contracting of such unions as those of which we write, though it permits them. No one, therefore, is under divine obligation to do in this matter what the law of the land will not sanction. The Christian is clearly bound to respect such an enactment, though it may curtail the freedom allowed him by God's word. For the Lord's sake this law of the land should be respected by the child of God.
Obedience having been insisted on in chapters 17 and 18 because Jehovah was Israel's God, we come in chapters 19 and 20 to a fresh section of the law, the thirtieth according to the masora, which appeals to Israel to be holy, as the Lord was holy, who had separated them to be a people unto Himself. In chapter 19 we have drawn out somewhat in detail what they should exhibit, and in chapter 20 we read of the impurities which they were to avoid. In the former of these chapters we see the inculcation of holiness applied to the every day circumstances of the Israelite in his home life, in his worship, in his intercourse with his neighbors, in his cultivation of the ground, and in his behavior towards the stranger. Starting with a reminder to cherish filial fear, and to keep Jehovah's sabbaths, two lessons which would have been practiced had the fall never been known, the law-giver goes on to warn against idolatry, and treats of the, spirit of worship, apart from which the Lord would not allow them to have communion with Himself by sacrifice (4-8). Then due care for the neighbor is dwelt upon (9-18), and the principle of separation which was to be carried out in various matters connected with the cultivation of the ground. Besides that, reverence for the aged is insisted on, just dealing with everyone is enjoined, and the showing kindliness to the stranger is impressed on them. To be Jehovah's people was a privilege. They were to value it, and to exhibit by their ways what became them as such. Very useful, then, was this portion to them, and to us it is not without interest, since the Lord drew from it (5:18) part of His answer to the scribe about the great commandment in the law (Matt. 22:3939And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. (Matthew 22:39); Mark 12:3131And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. (Mark 12:31)); and Peter it would seem referred to it when he wrote, " As He which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation, because it is written, Be ye holy, for I am holy " (1 Peter 1:15,1615But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; 16Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. (1 Peter 1:15‑16)). And the " all manner of conversation," of which he writes is well illustrated by the details of that chapter of the law.
In chapter 20 we have the avoidance of gross impurities insisted upon by all in the land, for it contemplates the people in the possession of Canaan. A peat deal of what is here forbidden was forbidden in chapter 18, yet chapter 20. is no vain repetition of it, for it tells us what the other did not—the penalties attaching to the various acts of impurity against which they are here solemnly warned. That men could practice such vileness was bad enough, and shows the degradation into which they got, the consequences of sin. But the warnings vouchsafed to Israel show us into what uncleannesses they were in danger of falling, if left to themselves, and that without a revelation from God they had really no right standard by which to regulate their conduct in that which so intimately affected their happiness and the purity of family life.
Another sin against which they are warned is that of turning to those who had familiar spirits, or wizards, to go a whoring after them. Against such the Lord would set His face, and cut them off; and the wizard, or the person who had a familiar spirit was to be put to death by being stoned with stones (9:6, 27). God's word does not become obsolete. Saul had put down such in accordance with this law by executing the judgment here laid down (1 Sam. 28:99And the woman said unto him, Behold, thou knowest what Saul hath done, how he hath cut off those that have familiar spirits, and the wizards, out of the land: wherefore then layest thou a snare for my life, to cause me to die? (1 Samuel 28:9)), but he himself came under it, as set forth in verse 6 of our chapter, and the Lord in fulfillment of His warning executed the judgment on him. " Saul died," we read, " for his transgression which he committed against the Lord, even against the word of the Lord which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit to inquire of it; and he inquired not of the Lord, therefore he slew him" (1 Chron. 10:13,1413So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the Lord, even against the word of the Lord, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to inquire of it; 14And inquired not of the Lord: therefore he slew him, and turned the kingdom unto David the son of Jesse. (1 Chronicles 10:13‑14)). None, not even the king, was exempt from the punishment threatened. “I will set my face against that soul, and cut him off from among his people," the Lord had said by the hand of Moses, and Saul proved the truth of it in his own death. There were sins for which under the law no sacrifice could be brought, and in this chapter we have some of them.
Yes, He is leading and watching every individual sheep. Not one lock of wool taken from a single sheep, that He does not see. Does He see rolling through my mind thoughts of Himself, and the glory awaiting me? My heart dwelling up there, and my walk corresponding? or like Jacob, halting on the thigh, because the flesh needs crippling.
ACCEPTED in the Beloved. Eph. 1:66To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. (Ephesians 1:6). God's delight in us is connected with Christ and redemption. The blood of Christ has washed all my sins away. All my guilt and misery were judged on the cross. It sinks me into insignificance to be nothing, and Christ everything. God looking on His Son with ever the same delight, seeing His members, and loving them, as such. It is pure grace from first to last.