DEUTERONOMY 12 COMMENTARY

EDITED BY GLENN PEASE

The One Place of Worship

1 These are the decrees and laws you must be

careful to follow in the land that the Lord, the

God of your ancestors, has given you to

possess—as long as you live in the land.

BARNES, "Moses now passes on to apply Deut. 12–26 the leading principles of the Decalogue to the ecclesiastical, civil, and social life of the people. Particulars will be noticed which are unique to the Law as given in Deuteronomy; and even in laws repeated from the earlier books various new circumstances and details are introduced. This is only natural. The Sinaitic legislation was nearly 40 years old and had been given under conditions of time, place, and circumstance different and distant from those now present. Yet the Sinaitic system, far from being set aside or in any way abrogated, is on the contrary throughout presupposed and assumed. Its existence and authority are taken as the starting-point for what is here prescribed, and an accurate acquaintance with it on the part of the people is taken for granted.

GILL, "These are the statutes and judgments which ye shall observe to do,.... Which are recorded in this and the following chapters; here a new discourse begins, and which perhaps was delivered at another time, and respects things that were to be observed:

in the land which the Lord God of thy fathers giveth thee to possess it; the land of Canaan, often described by this circumlocution, to put them in mind that it was promised to their fathers by their covenant God, was his gift to them, and which they would quickly be in the possession of; and therefore when in it should be careful to observe the statutes and judgments of God constantly:

even all the days that ye live upon the earth; or land, the land of Canaan; for though there were some laws binding upon them, live where they would, there were others peculiar to the land of Canaan, which they were to observe as long as they and their posterity lived there; see 1Ki_8:40.

HENRY, "From those great original truths, That there is a God, and that there is but

1

one God, arise those great fundamental laws, That that God is to be worshipped, and

he only, and that therefore we are to have no other God before him: this is the first

commandment, and the second is a guard upon it, or a hedge about it. To prevent a

revolt to false gods, we are forbidden to worship the true God in such a way and

manner as the false gods were worshipped in, and are commanded to observe the

instituted ordinances of worship that we may adhere to the proper object of worship.

For this reason Moses is very large in his exposition of the second commandment.

What is contained in this and the four following chapters mostly refers to that. These

are statutes and judgments which they must observe to do (Deu_12:1), 1. In the days

of their rest and prosperity, when they should be masters of Canaan. We must not

think that our religion is instituted only to be our work in the years of our servitude,

our entertainment in the places of our solitude, and our consolation in affliction; no,

when we come to possess a good land, still we must keep up the worship of God in

Canaan as well as in a wilderness, when we have grown up as well as when we are

children, when we are full of business as well as when we have nothing else to do. 2.

All the days, as long as you live upon the earth. While we are here in our state of trial,

we must continue in our obedience, even to the end, and never leave our duty, nor

grow weary of well-doing.

JAMISON, "

COFFMAN, "Here we come to a major division in our study of Deuteronomy.

Wright stated that Deuteronomy 12:1 "is the title of this section (Deuteronomy

12:12-28), and we do not encounter another major title until we come to

Deuteronomy 29:1."[1] This strongly indicates that Moses considered this rather

long section as a unit. Any orderly progression of the topics here considered is

difficult to see, but, as Dummelow remarked: "As far as any orderly

arrangement can be discovered, Deuteronomy 12-16 deals with strictly religious

duties; Deuteronomy 17-20 is concerned with duties; and the rest of the section

(Deuteronomy 21-28) discusses social and domestic regulations."[2]

As for what connection all this has with previous parts of Deuteronomy, Kline

stated that, "It resumes that part of the mandate of conquest which required the

obliteration of Canaanite cultic centers and installations (Deuteronomy 7:5,25;

Exodus 23:24; 34:13)."[3]

Moses' application of the Law of God as previously given at Sinai is

characterized by certain modifications and relaxations due to the changed

circumstances which were about to be brought in by Israel's possession of the

land. However, "The authority of the Sinaitic system, far from being set aside or

in any way abrogated, is taken as the starting point for all that is here

prescribed; and an accurate acquaintance with it on the part of the people is

taken for granted."[4]

CRITICAL USE OF THIS CHAPTER

2

Of course, this chapter is the focal point of the critical attacks against

Deuteronomy. The theory is that Moses had nothing to do with writing

Deuteronomy; it was a forgery fraudulently passed off as Moses' book by priests

of the eighth or ninth century B.C. who initiated a campaign to "eradicate the

evils of syncretistic worship at the high places, which up until that time (in their

view) was perfectly legitimate."[5] This theory is as irresponsible and

complicated as any barrel of scorpions ever opened, but some of the features of it

assert: (1) that the priests then hid this forgery in the temple and had it

"discovered" during the reign of Josiah; and (2) that it was this book that really

was the first of the Pentateuch! Note the very noble and commendable motives

assigned to these unscrupulous, crooked priests. They were trying to purify

God's worship! Did any bitter fountain ever send forth sweet waters? In the halls

of criticism, it is only the bitter fountains that produce the sweet waters. The

theory also is credited with establishing Jerusalem as the only place where God

could be worshipped.

Now we simply don't have time or space to explore all of the ramifications of this

crooked little fairy tale, but we shall include this excellent summary of a

reputable and dependable scholar writing in 1979 and giving a few of the dozens

of reasons why it is impossible to believe any of the allegations of this crooked

theory:

(1) This passage, and indeed the whole Book of Deuteronomy, has not a single

reference to "Jerusalem."

(2) The emphasis in Deuteronomy 12 is not on having only one place of worship,

but upon purity of worship.

(3) There is no specific reference to worship at the high places (supposedly their

chief concern).

(4) Deuteronomy assumes a plurality of altars.

(5) God specifically commanded that an altar be erected on Mount Ebal

(Deuteronomy 27:1-8), NOT at Jerusalem.

(6) The view that God in any sense whatever ever approved of any syncretistic

worship at the high places is nonsense. The minor prophets remove any question

whatever about this. God never approved of His worship being mixed with the

rites of the Canaanites.

(7) Contrary to critical opinion, there is visible in Deuteronomy no indication

whatever that the author had any intention of "centralizing the cultus." Of

course the critics need such an "intention," so they get it in Deuteronomy 12:5,

where "the place" is mentioned! But can that mean there is only one place? NO!

Look at Deuteronomy 23:16, where "the place" a slave may choose to live is

3

mentioned. Subsequent references show that it simply means "any place" a slave

may choose, and so the reference to "the place" God may choose to record His

name means "any place" He may choose.[6]

"These are the statutes and the ordinances which ye shall observe to do in the

land which Jehovah, the God of thy fathers, hath given thee to possess it, all the

days that ye live upon the earth. Ye shall surely destroy all the places wherein the

nations that ye shall dispossess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and

upon the hills, and under every green tree: and ye shall break down their altars,

and dash in pieces their pillars, and burn their Asherim with fire; and ye shall

hew down the graven images of their gods; and ye shall destroy their name out of

that place. Ye shall not do so unto Jehovah your God. But unto the place which

Jehovah your God shall choose out of all your tribes, to put his name there, even

unto his habitation shall ye seek, and thither shalt thou come; and thither shalt

thou bring your burnt-offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and the

heave-offering of your hand, and your vows, and your freewill-offering, and the

firstlings of your herds and of your flock: and there ye shall eat before Jehovah

your God, and ye shall rejoice in all that ye put your hand unto, ye and your

households, wherein Jehovah thy God hath blessed thee."

"High mountains ... hills ... under every green tree ..." (Deuteronomy 12:2). "The

choice of such places for worship by most of the heathen nations was due to the

widespread belief that men were closer to Deity in such places."[7] Also, the awe

inspired by deep shade, as well as the privacy such places afforded, were

probably other factors entering in to such choices.

"Ye shall not do so unto Jehovah your God ... (Deuteronomy 12:4). Keil says this

means, "Ye shall not build altars and offer sacrifices in any place you choose."[8]

Many scholars have pointed out the significant corollary that worshippers today

should derive from these instructions. "The possession of our inheritance

necessitates the most rigid dealing with idolatry."[9] "The idea that we may

worship God any way we like is refuted here, for worship to be worship it must

conform to God's wishes and instructions."[10] No more serious indictment

against modern Christianity is possible than that which derives from "the

traditions and teachings of men" which churches have adopted instead of and

contrary to the doctrine of Christ (Matthew 15:9).

"But unto the place ... (Deuteronomy 12:5). Here is where the critics find all that

nonsense about this meaning Jerusalem and nowhere else! God had already

spoken on this subject, and all of the people already knew that God's name was

recorded in many, many places. How could any people have followed the

moveable tabernacle for forty years, giving the demonstration that God's name

had been recorded in at least the "forty-two stations" of the wilderness

wanderings! Moreover, there is the strongest statement in Exodus 20:24 on this

4

subject, "In every place where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will

bless thee." The obvious meaning of "the place" in this passage is "any place."

(See the chapter introduction for more on this.) It is simply untrue that

Deuteronomy here designated Jerusalem as the ONLY place to worship God.

Harrison pointed out that Ebal, Shiloh, Shechem, etc, were other places where

God had authorized His worship to be conducted.[11]

It was NEVER any part of God's intention that His Holy Name should be known

and associated with only one place on earth! What a ridiculous assertion! "As

God of the whole earth, wherever it might be necessary for the preservation and

promotion of his kingdom, God could and did make his presence known."[12]

Therefore, "to understand `the place which Jehovah shall choose' as relating

exclusively to Jerusalem is a perfectly arbitrary assumption."[13] We might add

that it is a totally false and unjustifiable assumption.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 12:1. These are the statutes — Moses, being still

deeply impressed with a sense of the great danger his nation would be in of

falling into idolatrous practices, after their settlement in the promised land, in

the neighbourhood of so many superstitious nations, begins here a new

exhortation to them, reminding them of the laws provided against it, as the

indispensable conditions of their happy and peaceful enjoyment of that fruitful

country.

HAWKER, "Verse 1

CONTENTS

This chapter differs in some degree from what went before. It is certainly the

continuation of Moses' Sermon, but is not so much in a way of exhortation as in

precept. He here directs to the observance of certain duties which the LORD had

appointed to be regarded in Canaan; such as the throwing down all the

idolatrous monuments the people should find in the land; appointing a certain

spot to be peculiarly dedicated to the service of the LORD cautiously abstaining

from the use of blood in their sacrifices; and eating them, holy things in the

precise place which the LORD had commanded; together with observing due

attention to the person of the Levite; and being so exceedingly tenacious of their

attachment to the GOD of their Fathers, as not even to enquire after the mode of

worship which the idolaters of Canaan followed.

Deuteronomy 12:1

Sweet thought arising out of this verse, that our religion founded in JESUS the

chief corner stone, is of daily obligation and of never ceasing importance. If

JESUS be the statute of my soul this day, so is he tomorrow, and so will he be

forever. Hebrews 13:8.

5

CONSTABLE, "The central sanctuary 12:1-14

When Israel entered the land the people were to destroy all the places and

objects used in pagan worship by the Canaanites (Deuteronomy 12:2-4). Pagan

peoples generally have felt that worshipping on elevated sites brings them into

closer contact with their gods than is the case when they worship in low-lying

places, unless those places had been the sites of supernatural events. The

Canaanites typically visualized their gods as being above them.

"'Places' (hammeqomot) is a quasi-technical term referring to sites thought to be

holy because of a special visitation by deity. These were usually in groves of trees

(representing fertility) and on high hills, esteemed by the very height to be in

closer proximity to the gods. In contrast to such 'places' would be the 'place'

where the Lord must be worshipped. Seven times (Deuteronomy 12:5;

Deuteronomy 12:11; Deuteronomy 12:13-14; Deuteronomy 12:18; Deuteronomy

12:21; Deuteronomy 12:26) this single place (maqom) is mentioned in this

passage in which the exclusiveness of the Lord is emphasized." [Note: Merrill,

Deuteronomy, p. 220.]

"The centralization requirement must also be understood in terms of

Deuteronomy's nature as a suzerainty treaty. Such treaties prohibited the

vassal's engaging in any independent diplomacy with a foreign power other than

the covenant suzerain. In particular, the vassal must not pay tribute to any other

lord. Similarly, all the requirements and prohibitions of Deuteronomy 12 were

calculated to secure for the Lord all Israel's tributary sacrifice and offering.

Israel must not pay any sacrificial tribute to other gods, for such an impossible

attempt to serve two masters would be rebellion against the great commandment

of God's covenant." [Note: Kline, "Deuteronomy," p. 171.]

Israel was only to worship Yahweh at the one central sanctuary that He had

appointed, the tabernacle, and later the temple (Deuteronomy 12:5-14).

"The emphasis is not upon one place so much as it is upon the place the Lord

chooses.... The central activity of Israel's life, the worship of the Lord, is fully

shaped and determined by the Lord." [Note: Miller, pp. 131-32.]

This law governed public worship. Israelites could, of course, pray to God

anywhere. This restriction distinguished Yahweh worship from Canaanite

worship that was polytheistic and pantheistic. Later in Israel's history the people

broke this law and worshipped God at various "high places." The "high places"

were sites of pagan worship or places modeled after them (1 Kings 14:23; 1

Kings 15:14; 1 Kings 22:43; et al.).

"The contrast with Canaanite worship, with its multitude of temples and open-

air shrines (Deuteronomy 12:2), is enormous. It is a very common pattern for

6

conquerors and invaders of a country to take over old shrines for their own

forms of worship..." [Note: David F. Payne, Deuteronomy, p. 79.]

The tabernacle was to be the place of Israel's national worship because God's

name was there (Deuteronomy 12:5). That is, God manifested His immediate

presence there as nowhere else in Israel. When the Israelites came to the

tabernacle, they came to God. The Israelites erected the tabernacle first in the

land at Gilgal (Joshua 4:19; Joshua 5:10; Joshua 9:6; et al.). [Note: See Daniel I.

Block, "The Joy of Worship: The Mosaic Invitation to the Presence of God

(Deuteronomy 12:1-14)," Bibliotheca Sacra 162:646 (April-June 2005):131-49.]

LANGE, "1. Deuteronomy 12:1-14. The connection with the foregoing

( Deuteronomy 11:32) as Deuteronomy 6:1. Deuteronomy 12:1 serves as a title to

introduce what follows. Comp. Deuteronomy 4:5; Deuteronomy 4:10;

Deuteronomy 5:29. We feel that we have reached a new topic, hence the absence

of the ו, as Deuteronomy 6:4. Deuteronomy 12:2 refers back substantially to what

was said upon the first command, with this difference, that the places of the false

worship of God are here prominent, and thus the connection with the second

command is made apparent. Utterly destroy, i.e., destroy utterly and entirely as

places of the cultus (Knobel), mountains, especially high mountains, but also hills

in which they believed themselves nearer the heavenly powers, as upon the

natural altars of the earth. Green trees are at the same time leafy, as this lies in

the radical signification of the word רען, and is rejected erroneously by Schultz.

They represent the oaks with their dense shade, ( Ezekiel 6:13; Ezekiel 20:28). It

is not truly the vivid fulness of color, but the mysterious rustling of the foliage

which comes into view here, as in the high places it is the all-overpowering

elements of air and light. Upon Deuteronomy 12:3 comp. Deuteronomy 7:5;

Deuteronomy 7:25. The destruction of theirnames, i.e., that the places of the

cultus should no longer be named after the idols previously honored in them,

shows already, since it brings out the connection of the places with the idol

images, and thus connects it with the second command, that Moses now passes

over to the third command, that chap 12 treats of the name of Jehovah, before

which all other names of the deities mast retire ( Acts 4:12). Comp. Deuteronomy

7:24. Hence Deuteronomy 12:4 ( Deuteronomy 12:31) introductory: Since you

cannot rest in the places and names of a false cultus, you should not especially

take examples from them of the true worship of God. For as Jehovah is the one

only in opposition to these many, so also the place of His only name should be

freed from all subjective arbitrariness (Intro, § 4, 123). Deuteronomy 12:5.

Which Jehovah shall choose. The manner and method how all will-worship

reveals itself in opposition to this choice of Jehovah, is fixed by that choice,

whether it is effected in some extraordinary way, or by the mere arrangement of

circumstances. It is enough that he will select and define the place, and indeed

one place, as the addition, out of all your tribes, shows, (the unity of all in the

7

Lord) and thus certainly with reference to Leviticus 17:3 sq, namely, to the

oneness of the tabernacle. But at the same time the mention of the name of

Jehovah in the destination of the place in question, touches upon the more

general and indefinite passage, Exodus 20:24, which however for the usual

arrangement of things must be more closely limited by לשום and לשכנו. Upon the

name comp. Deuteronomy 5:11. The heathen deity abides in nature, Jehovah, on

the contrary, is Spirit, manifest in word and deed, which personal revelation

embraces and constitutes His name, by which He calls Himself among His

people, which He makes for and in His people. To put there, i.e., to take, order,

to settle it there; for that which is customary (the discourse indeed is of the usual

cultus), without any allusion to extraordinary cases ( Exodus 20), but also

without excluding them. To his habitation—שכן to settle, dwell. The infinitive

separated by the accent from the foregoing, although it may define it more

closely ( Exodus 25:8; Exodus 29:44 sq.) and in Deuteronomy 12:11, לשבן stands

for לשום. But just precisely on account of this latter (and לשבן is to permit to

dwell), the connection with תדרשו pointed out by the accents is to be preferred. ל

resumes in an abbreviated form the אל at the beginning. Understanding the

infinitive thus substantively of the place, which represents the dwelling of

Jehovah or of His name, with a clear reference to the Shechinah since the

erection of the tabernacle, over which the pillar of cloud tarried or dwelt, when

Israel rested in the march, it is neither Jerusalem nor the temple which is the

dwelling in view, (Knobel) but the infinitive rather leaves the locality

undetermined, provided only that some one permanent position is kept in view.

[The fixing of one place is not, as Schroeder intimates, entirely new. It is implied

in Exodus 20:24, and was actually observed during the wanderings in the desert,

Leviticus 17:1 sq. It is precisely in accordance with the object in Deuteronomy,

which regards the future of Israel, and especially when scattered through the

land of promise, that this revelation should be insisted upon with so much

definiteness and stringency. The command does not conflict with the worship of

God in those places in which the worshippers had express divine authority. As

e.g., the offerings of Gideon, Manoah, David.—Wordsworth well asks: “If

Deuteronomy is not the work of Moses, how is it possible that it could have been

received when all the kings of Israel, and often those of Judah, were living in

violation of this command? If it had been a forgery, they would surely have

exposed it.”—A. G.]. דרש ( Deuteronomy 11:12), the idea of something urgent lies

in the root, perhaps with reference to the difficulties (out of all the tribes) when

the people dwelt scattered in Canaan: to seek, to search after, to turn one’s self

thither, to keep, abide there, as directed for the ordinary cultus, public and

individual, hence shall ye seek, and thou shalt come, ye and thou. Deuteronomy

12:6. Brings up the altar instituted with the tabernacle ( Exodus 29:44; Exodus

20:24). [As to the difficulties in bringing the offerings from the distance, they are

partly met by the provision in Numbers 25-14:24 , and partly by the mere

statement of the fact that the distance at the greatest was less than a hundred

8

miles; so that what was required was nothing impossible. Moreover, we must

bear in mind here the whole spirit of the law. God always required mercy and

not sacrifice. Obviously the sick, and those detained by any special providences,

would be regarded as fulfilling the law, if they brought their offerings at other

than the stated times. They could not present it at any but the chosen place, but

they might reserve it until they could bring it there. The time is not fixed, except

at the three great feasts. And even then there must have been exceptions

provided for, in the spirit if not in the letter, of the law.—A. G.] Bring, generally,

under the presumption that whatever concerns the time, procedure, etc., was

already known from the law and customs (comp. chap, 16). The offerings as a

whole are embraced in the number seven. Beginning with the burnt-offering and

“sacrifices” as the principal ( Leviticus 17:8; Exodus 10:25; Numbers 15:3).

Comp. Leviticus 1:3 sq. זבח, especially praise and thank-offerings, Leviticus 3:7;

Leviticus 3:12; Numbers 15:4 sq. (perfect concession and joy of salvation, שלמים

”Upon the tithe comp. Introd. § 4, I:19. [“These supposed discrepancies .(זבח

(Wordsworth) are evidences of the unity of plan of the Pentateuch. The author

takes for granted here that his hearers were familiar with what had been said by

him in the earlier parts of his work, and what had become a usage among them

(as the sacred feast, Deuteronomy 12:17-18), and does not repeat it, but proceeds

at once to speak of the tithes he had in view. Distingue tempora et concordabis

Scripturas is a sound maxim.”—A. G.] Heave what the hand takes up as a free

gift to Jehovah from the fruits of the ground, besides the tithes and the first-

born. Vows and free-will [gifts] offerings, Leviticus 7:16. Upon the first-born

comp. Exodus 13; Numbers 18 (and upon Deuteronomy 15:19). Deuteronomy

12:7. Thus sacred and joyful meals ( Exodus 18:12). All that you put your hand

unto.—Concrete (comp. Isaiah 11:14) for every thing which they could put their

hand to, which was proper and due to them. The gains, acquisitions (Knobel,

Keil) made through the hand cannot well be alluded to here, since it is precisely

with reference to these that the blessing of God is spoken of. Since Moses

includes himself, Deuteronomy 12:8, he cannot refer here to unlawful courses,

but intends those procedures namely, in opposition to the oneness of the

sanctuary, perhaps still more particularly what concerns the meals, as

Deuteronomy 12:9 expressly excuses these on the ground that the wanderers had

not yet come to their rest. Upon Deuteronomy 12:10 comp. Exodus 34:23-24.

Upon Deuteronomy 12:11 comp. Deuteronomy 12:5-6. המקום—placed first here

for the emphasis. וכל מבחר—a comprehensive term, as they must then be selected

or chosen. On the other hand, Deuteronomy 12:12 more in detail than

Deuteronomy 12:7 ( Exodus 20:10; Deuteronomy 5:14; comp. Deuteronomy 10:9.

See Introd. § 4, I:21). The wives as evidently included are not mentioned

(Knobel). Deuteronomy 12:13-14. A final inculcation of the oneness of the

sanctuary, with regard to the burnt-offering, as instar omnium.

2. [Bib. Com.: This caution is based upon the notion generally entertained in the

9

ancient heathen world that each country had its own tutelary deities, whom it

would be perilous to neglect, 1 Kings 20:23; 2 Kings 17:26. Hence even in

conquered districts the worship of the local deities was wont to be scrupulously

maintained. But Israel was to shun such superstitions.—A. G.]

BI 1-3, "If there arise among you a prophet.

On the criterion of a false miracle

I. The evidence drawn from miracles, in favour of any Divine revelation, rests in general on the testimony of those who saw the miracles performed. But in addition to this, it is important to inquire, whether some consideration may not be at the same time due to the nature and tendency of the doctrines themselves, and whether there may not be in them some internal marks, which, in some cases at least, may enable us to distinguish false miracles from true. That such a criterion was given to the Jews appears plain from the words of the text, according to which, though a miracle should actually be performed, yet if its intention was to teach the doctrine of idolatry, it was not to be considered as a miracle authorised by God.

II. Yet the text does not appear to be confined merely to fictitious miracles of human contrivance, but to extend to real miracles actually performed, either by men permitted so to act, or by the agency of superior intellectual beings, with the permission indeed of God, but not by His authority. Not only no human art or deception, but also no superior, or supernatural power should undermine our faith, or draw us from the allegiance which we owe to God.

III. I cannot dismiss the subject without taking notice of a difficulty which may possibly be thought to attend the foregoing theory. It relates to the assertion that no internal doctrine can be brought in proof of a miracle. For it may be said, that there are certain doctrines conveyed by the help of miracles, which no human reason could ever have discovered; such are, that God on certain conditions will freely forgive sins, and that to the sincere, penitent, and faithful believer in Jesus Christ, He will grant life eternal. The answer is, that though the truth of these things be beyond the reach of the human reason to discover, yet the things themselves are not beyond the reach of the human imagination to conceive. Their truth therefore must depend on the evidence of the miracles which were wrought in their support, and the miracles must first be distinctly proved, before we can give an admission to the doctrines. (W. Pearce, D. D.)

The objection of the Jews to Christianity, as founded on this passage, answered

It has commonly, and with justice, been thought, that the two great pillars on which a revelation from God must stand, are miracles and prophecies. Without these we cannot be assured that any discovery which may have been made in man is really Divine. We must, indeed, inspect the matter of the thing revealed to see whether it be worthy of Him from whom it is said to come; and from its internal evidence our faith will derive great strength; but still in the first instance we look rather to external proofs. But the Jews imagine that they are precluded from judging of Christianity on such grounds as these, since Moses, in this passage, guards them against any such inferences as we are led to draw from the prophecies and miracles on which our religion is founded. He concedes that some prophecies may be uttered, and some miracles be wrought in favour of a false religion; and that, even if that should be the case, the Jews are not to regard any evidences arising from those sources, but to hold

10

fast their religion in opposition to them. First, mark the supposition here made, namely, that God may permit miraculous and prophetic powers to be exercised even in support of a false religion. We are not indeed to imagine that God Himself will work miracles in order to deceive His people and to lead them astray; nor are we to imagine that He will suffer Satan to work them in such an unlimited way as to be a counterbalance to the miracles by which God has confirmed His own religion; but He will, for reasons which we shall presently consider, permit some to be wrought, and some prophecies to come to pass, notwithstanding they are designed to uphold an imposture. The magicians of Pharaoh, we must confess, wrought real miracles. They were permitted to do so much as should give Pharaoh an occasion for hardening his own heart, but not sufficient to show that they could at all come in competition with Moses. In every age there were also false prophets, who endeavoured to draw the people from their allegiance to God; and in the multitude of prophecies that they would utter, it must be naturally supposed that some would be verified in the event. Now then, in the next place, let us notice the injunction given to the Jews notwithstanding this supposition. God commands them not to give heed to that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, even though his predictions should be verified, if his object be to turn them from Him; for that He Himself suffers these illusions to be practised upon them in order that their fidelity to Him may be tried, and their love to Him approved. It may seem strange that God should suffer such stumbling blocks to be cast in the way of His people; but it is not for us to say what Jehovah mayor may not do; we are sure that “He tempteth no man,” so as to lead him into sin (Jas_1:13), and that the “Judge of all the earth will do nothing but what is right.” But it is a fact that He thus permitted Job to be tried, in order that he might approve himself a perfect man; and in like manner He tried Abraham, in order that it might appear, whether his regard for God’s authority and his confidence in God’s Word were sufficient to induce him to sacrifice his Isaac, the child of promise (Gen_22:1-2; Gen_22:12). It was for similar ends that God permitted His people to be tried for forty years in the wilderness (Deu_8:2), and in the same way He has tried His Church in every period of the world. It is God’s express design in the whole constitution of our religion to discover the secret bent of men’s minds; and whilst to the humble He gives abundant evidence for their conviction, He has left to the proud sufficient difficulties to call forth their latent animosity, and to justify in their own apprehensions their obstinate unbelief (Luk_2:34-35). He gave originally to the Jews, as He has also given to us, sufficient evidence to satisfy any candid mind; and this is all that we have any right to expect. The argument founded on this injunction comes now before us with all the force that can be given to it. A Jew will say, “You Christians found your faith on prophecies and on miracles; and admitting that Jesus did work some miracles, and did foretell some events which afterwards came to pass, God permitted it only to try us, and to prove cur fidelity to Him. He has cautioned us beforehand not to be led astray from Him by any such things as these; and therefore, however specious your reasonings appear, we dare not listen to them or regard them.” Having thus given to the objection all the force that the most hostile Jew can wish, I now come, in the second place, to offer what we hope will prove a satisfactory answer to it. It cannot but have struck the attentive reader that in this objection there are two things taken for granted; namely, that in calling Jews to Christianity we are calling them from Jehovah; and that our authority for calling them to Christianity is founded on such miracles as an impostor might work, and such prophecies as an impostor might expect to see verified. But in answer to these two points we declare, first, that we do not call them from Jehovah but to Him; and next, that our authority is not founded on such miracles and prophecies as might have issued from an impostor, but such as it was impossible for an impostor to produce; and lastly, that, in calling them to Christ, we have the express command of God Himself.

11

1. We do not call our Jewish brethren from Jehovah, but to Him. We worship the very same God whom the Jews worship; and we maintain His unity as strongly as any Jew in the universe can maintain it. As for idols of every kind, we abhor them as much as Moses himself abhorred them. Moreover, we consider the law which was written on the two tables of stone as binding upon us, precisely as much as if it were again promulgated by an audible voice from heaven. With respect to the ceremonial law, we do indeed call you from the observance of that; and we have good reason so to do; for you yourselves know that all the essential part of your religion existed before the ceremonial law was given; and that Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, who lived hundreds of years before the ceremonial law was given, were saved simply and entirely by faith in that promised seed, in whom all the nations of the earth are blessed. If you ask, Why then was the ceremonial law given? I answer, To shadow forth your Messiah, and to lead you to Him; and when He should come and fulfil it in all its parts, it was then to cease; and you yourselves know that it was intended by God Himself to cease at that appointed time. If then we call you from the outward observances of the law, it is not from disrespect to that law, but from a conviction that it has been fulfilled and abrogated by the Lord Jesus. We call you only from shadows to the substance. We call you to Christ as uniting in Himself all that the ceremonial law was intended to shadow forth. I am aware that in calling you to worship the Lord Jesus Christ we appear to you to be transferring to Him the honour due to God alone. But if you will look into your own Scriptures you will find that the person who was foretold as your Messiah is no other than God Himself. Receive Him in the character in which the prophet Isaiah foretold His advent, as “the Child born, the Son given, the wonderful Counsellor, the mighty God, the Prince of peace.” Call Him, as another prophet instructs you, “Jehovah our Righteousness,” and know that in thus “honouring Christ you will honour the Father who sent Him.”

2. The next thing which we proposed to show was, that our authority for calling you thus to Christ is not founded on such prophecies or miracles as might have issued from an impostor, but on such as it was impossible for an impostor to produce. Consider the prophecies; they were not some few dark predictions of mysterious import and of doubtful issue, uttered by our Lord Himself; but a continued series of prophecies from the very fall of Adam to the time of Christ; of prophecies comprehending an almost infinite variety of subjects, and those so minute, as to defy all concert either in those who uttered, or those who fulfilled them. Consider the miracles also; these were beyond all comparison greater and more numerous than Moses ever wrought. The whole creation, men, devils, fishes, elements, all obeyed His voice; and at His command the dead arose to life again. But there is one miracle alone which in particular we will mention. Jesus said, “I have power to lay down My life, and I have power to take it again”; and the former of these He proved by speaking with a loud voice the very instant He gave up the ghost, showing thereby that He did not die in consequence of His nature being exhausted, but by a voluntary surrender of His life into His Father’s hands. And at the appointed time He proved the latter also, notwithstanding all the preparations made to defeat His purpose, all which proved in the issue the strongest testimonies to the truth of His word. We therefore confidently call you to believe in Him, and to embrace the salvation which He offers you in the Gospel. But there is one great argument which we have reserved till now, in order that it may bear upon you with the greater weight.

3. We declare to you, then, in the last place, that in calling you to Christ we have the express command of God Himself. Moses, in chap. 13, bids you, as we have seen, not to listen to any false prophet; but in Deu_18:18-19, he most explicitly

12

declares that a prophet should arise, to whom you should attend. Now I ask you, who is the prophet here spoken of Where was there ever, besides Moses, a prophet that was a Mediator, a Lawgiver, a Ruler, a Deliverer? Was there ever such an one except Jesus? And was not Jesus such an one in all respects? Yes; He has wrought for yell not a mere temporal deliverance like Moses, but a spiritual and eternal deliverance from sin and Satan, death and hell; He has redeemed you, not by power only, but by price also, even the inestimable price of His own blood. When therefore you plead the authority of Moses, we join issue with you, and say, Be consistent. Renounce false prophets, because he bids you; but believe in the true Prophet, whom God, according to His Word, has raised up to you, because He bids you. Let His authority weigh equally with you in both cases; and then we shall not fear, but that you will embrace the salvation offered you in the Gospel, and be the spiritual children, as ye already are the natural descendants of believing Abraham. (C. Simeon, M. A.)

The only pulpit worth having

I. That no instrumentality is of any real service to man, as man, that does not promote in him a right sovereign affection.

1. Every man is under some one dominant affection. Love of—

(1) Pleasure.

(2) Money.

(3) Power.

(4) Knowledge. Man’s loves are his sovereign laws.

2. A wrong dominant affection in a man will neutralise the highest services that may be rendered to him.

II. That the only right sovereign affection is supreme love for the supremely good. All goodness streams from God as all light from the sun. Ought He not, then, to be extremely loved?

III. That the only pulpit that is of any real service to man is that which generates and fosters this sovereign affection.

1. It is the pulpit that works into man the conviction that God loves men, though sinners.

2. It is the pulpit that exhibits God as essentially good and benevolent in Himself. (Homilist.)

Danger and security

This passage, by the inspiration of God, touches upon all the possible points of danger in a religious course.

I. What are the points of danger?

1. The first may be described as being somewhat after a philosophical sort. There is nothing rude in the assault, nothing violent or startling, from a merely physical point of view; it is a very delicate encroachment upon religious thought; it is impalpable as a dream. Surely this is harmless: it is more than harmless; it is instructive: it may be a lesson in the deeper philosophy; it may be the beginning

13

of a widening revelation. The mischief is this, that a man who would listen to such a dreamer, or seer of visions, and allow his religion to be affected by the nightmare, would turn the man out of his presence if he attempted to offer him a single idea upon any practical subject under heaven. We are easily beguiled from the religious point. “O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you?” It would seem as if it were easier to murder the soul than to kill the body. The first point of danger, therefore, is thus clouded in a golden veil; and the man who may be said to be preparing for that danger is dreamy, hazy-minded, speculative, always looking into a mist if, haply, he may find a star; such a gentle, dozing creature, so harmless, and really so very attractive in many qualities of his character.

2. What is the second point of danger? It is not at all philosophical; it may be ranked among the social forces that are constantly operating upon life (verse 6). Social influences are constantly operating upon our faith. The youngest member of the family has been reading a book, and has invited the head of the house to go and listen to some new speaker of theories, speculations, and dreams; the service is so beautiful; the idea is so novel; a great deal of the rush and tumult common to elementary religious life is totally escaped; the intellectual brother—the man supposed to have all the brains of the family—has got a new idea—an idea which in nowise associates itself with historical churches and traditional creeds, but a brand new idea, altogether sparkling and daring, and whosoever professes it will at once take his place in the synagogue of genius; or the darling friend has caught a voice down some byway, and he will have his other self go with him in the evening to hear this speaker of anti-Christian ideas—a man who has undertaken to reconstruct so much of the universe as will allow him to touch it; a person of exquisite mind, of dainty taste, and of quiet latent power. The subtle purpose is to draw men away from the old altar, the old Book, the God of deliverance and beneficence, of mercy and redemption, to another God who will condescend to be measured for a creed, and who is not above sitting for his portrait. Do not follow a multitude to do evil. Do not always be at the string end, led about by those who are of more forceful and energetic will than yourselves. Be sure as to what they are taking you to; have a clear understanding before you begin. You would not allow those persons to interfere with anything practical: when the discussion of commercial questions arises, you stand at the front and say, There I can bear testimony, and there I ought to be heard. Why claim such a solemn responsibility in the settlement of nothing, and allow anybody to settle for you the great questions of religious truth and personal destroy?

3. What is the third point of danger? It is not philosophical; it is not, in the narrow sense of the term, social; it is a point of” danger which may be characterised as public sentiment, public opinion—a general turning round, and a wholesale abandonment of old theologies and old forms of worship (verses 12, 13). Some men may have courage to laugh at the dreamer; others may have virtue enough to resist the blandishments of the nearest friend; but who can resist the current or tendency of public opinion?

II. What is the course to be taken under circumstances of danger? Moses had no difficulty about his reply: let us see what it was, and consider whether we can adopt it. “And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death” (verse 5). The seducer in the family brings upon himself this penalty. “Neither shall thine eye pity him neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: but thou shalt surely kill him” (verses 8, 9); “thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die” (verse 10). And as for the city—representative of public opinion—“Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword,” etc. (verses 15-17). That was a drastic course; there is no touch of compromise in that stern provision; there is no

14

line of toleration in that tremendous answer. The same course is to be taken today, as to its spiritual meaning. Physical violence there must be none; the day of physical pains and penalties for spiritual offences has closed; but the great lesson of destruction remains forever. What penalty, then, shall we inflict upon men who seek to destroy our faith? I hesitate not in my reply: Avoid them; pass by them; they would injure your soul. (J. Parker, D. D.)

True tests are unfailing discoverers

Every substance is discoverable by some “test,” which usually neutralises it, or rather, by uniting with it, forms a new compound. The whole fabric of chemistry rests upon this wonderful principle as one of its cornerstones. Thus if the least fragment of copper be dissolved in acid, and the fluid be then diluted with water until no trace of colour remains, so potent, nevertheless, is the affinity of the well-known fluid called “ammonia” for the copper, that a single drop of the latter fluid will immediately reveal the presence of the metal by uniting with it and forming a new substance of the loveliest violet colour. Similarly, if a morsel of lead be dissolved in acid, and the acid be then diluted with water, a single drop of a solution of iodide of potassium will turn the whole to a brilliant crocus-yellow. The presence of iron, after the same manner, is discovered by the least drop of tincture of galls, which blackens it upon contact; that of silver by a little solution of common salt, which causes flakes of imitative snow to make their appearance; that of mercury again with iodide of potassium, which turns the fluid containing it to a beautiful red. (Scientific Illustrations.)

Deuteronomy 12:2

Destroy all the places.

Destruction of evil

The first thing Israel had to do appears to be a work of violence. All idols were to be destroyed. Israel could understand no other language. This is not the language of today; but the thing inculcated upon Israel is the lesson for the present time: words change, but duties remain. Violence was the only method that could commend itself to infantile Israel. The hand was the reasoner; the breaking hammer was the instrument of logic in days so remote and so unfavoured. Forgetting this, how many people misunderstand instructions given to the ancient Church; they speak of the violence of those instructions, the bloodthirstiness even of Him who gave the instructions to Israel. Hostile critics select such expressions and hold them up as if in mid-air, that the sunlight may get well round about them; and attention is called to the barbarity, the brutality, the revolting violence of so-called Divine commandments. It is false reasoning on the part of the hostile critic. We must think ourselves back to the exact period of time and the particular circumstances at which and under which the instructions were delivered. But all the words of violence have dropped away. “Destroy,” “overthrow,” “burn,” “hew down,” are words which are not found in the instructions given to Christian evangelists. Has the law then passed away? Not a jot or tittle of it. Is there still to be a work of this kind accomplished in heathen nations? That is the very work that must first be done. This is the work that is aimed at by the humblest and meekest teacher who shoulders the Gospel yoke and proceeds to Christianise the nations. Now we destroy by reasoning, and that is a far

15

more terrible destruction than the supposed annihilation that can be wrought by manual violence. You cannot conquer an enemy by the arm, the rod, or the weapon of war; you subdue him, overpower him, or impose some momentary restraint upon him; fear of you takes possession of his heart, and he sues for peace because he is afraid. That is not conquest; there is nothing eternal in such an issue. How, then, to destroy an enemy? By converting him—by changing his motive, by penetrating into his most secret life, and accomplishing the mystery of regeneration in his affections. That mystery accomplished, the conquest is complete and everlasting; the work of destruction has been accomplished; burning and hewing down, and all actions indicative of mere violence have disappeared. (J. Parker D. D.)

PETT, "Introduction

The Covenant Stipulations, Covenant Making at Shechem, Blessings and Cursings (Deuteronomy 12:1 to Deuteronomy 29:1).

In this section of Deuteronomy we first have a description of specific requirements that Yahweh laid down for His people. These make up the second part of the covenant stipulations for the covenant expressed in Deuteronomy 4:45 to Deuteronomy 29:1 and also for the covenant which makes up the whole book. They are found in chapters 12-26. As we have seen Deuteronomy 1:1 to Deuteronomy 4:44 provide the preamble and historical prologue for the overall covenant, followed by the general stipulations in chapters 5-11. There now, therefore, in 12-26 follow the detailed stipulations which complete the main body of the covenant. These also continue the second speech of Moses which began in Deuteronomy 5:1.

Overall in this speech Moses is concerned to connect with the people. It is to the people that his words are spoken rather than the priests so that much of the priestly legislation is simply assumed. Indeed it is remarkably absent in Deuteronomy except where it directly touches on the people. Anyone who read Deuteronomy on its own would wonder at the lack of cultic material it contained, and at how much the people were involved. It concentrates on their interests, and not those of the priests and Levites, while acknowledging the responsibility that they had towards both priests and Levites.

And even where the cultic legislation more specifically connects with the people, necessary detail is not given, simply because he was aware that they already had it in writing elsewhere. Their knowledge of it is assumed. Deuteronomy is building on a foundation already laid. In it Moses was more concerned to get over special aspects of the legislation as it was specifically affected by entry into the land, with the interests of the people especially in mind. The suggestion that it was later written in order to bring home a new law connected with the Temple does not fit in with the facts. Without the remainder of the covenant legislation in Exodus/Leviticus/Numbers to back it up, its presentation often does not make sense from a cultic point of view.

16

This is especially brought home by the fact that when he refers to their approach to God he speaks of it in terms of where they themselves stood or will stand when they do approach Him. They stand not on Sinai but in Horeb. They stand not in the Sanctuary but in ‘the place’, the site of the Sanctuary. That is why he emphasises Horeb, which included the area before the Mount, and not just Sinai itself (which he does not mention). And why he speaks of ‘the place’ which Yahweh chose, which includes where the Tabernacle is sited and where they gather together around the Tabernacle, and not of the Sanctuary itself. He wants them to feel that they have their full part in the whole.

These detailed stipulations in chapters 12-26 will then be followed by the details of the covenant ceremony to take place at the place which Yahweh has chosen at Shechem (Deuteronomy 27), followed by blessings and cursings to do with the observance or breach of the covenant (Deuteronomy 28).

I. INSTRUCTION WITH REGARD TO WORSHIP AND RIGHTNESS BEFORE YAHWEH (Deuteronomy 12:1 to Deuteronomy 16:17).

In this first group of regulations in Deuteronomy 12:1 to Deuteronomy 16:7 emphasis is laid on proper worship and rightness before Yahweh, looked at from the people’s point of view. They include:

· Regulations with regard to the Central Sanctuary as the one place where Yahweh is to be officially worshipped with emphasis on the people’s side of things and their participation. They are to worship there joyfully (Deuteronomy 12).

· Regulations with regard to avoidance of idolatry as it affects the people lest they lose their cause for joy (Deuteronomy 13).

· Regulations for the people with regard to ritual wholeness and cleanness so that they might reveal themselves as suited to worship joyfully in the place which Yahweh would choose (Deuteronomy 14:1-21).

· Regulations for the people with regard to tithing mainly ignoring levitical aspects (Deuteronomy 14:22-27). Here they were to share their joy with others who would thus be able to rejoice with them.

· Regulations with regard to poverty as a slur on Yahweh (Deuteronomy 14:28 to Deuteronomy 15:11). This was to be allayed by a special use of the tithe every third year and a release from debt every seventh year. To allow unrelieved poverty in the land would prevent their being able to approach Yahweh with joy and to enjoy His prosperity.

· Regulations with regard to Israelite Habiru bondsmen and bondswomen and how they were to be their treated (Deuteronomy 15:12-18). Again the emphasis is on generosity towards those whose need was greatest.

17

· Regulations with regard to firstlings, who represented their own relief from bondage, with the emphasis on their being Yahweh’s and thus to be royally treated, and to be eaten joyfully in the place which Yahweh would choose. The emphasis is on the people’s participation (Deuteronomy 15:19-23).

· Regulations with regard to the three main feasts, with emphasis on the fact that they must be eaten at the place which Yahweh will choose and that the last two of them must be celebrated joyfully, again with the emphasis on the people’s participation throughout (Deuteronomy 16:1-17).

But central to it all is the Central Sanctuary, the place where Yahweh sets His name. The place where He meets with His people, and they with Him, and the need for them to be in the right spirit so as to do so joyfully.

Chapter 12 One Place of Worship To Be Chosen By Yahweh Himself - The Central Sanctuary.

The contents of this chapter are crucial. It basically deals with the fact that Israel was to worship at one sanctuary, and one sanctuary only, in contrast with the many altars and the many sanctuaries of the Canaanites. For Yahweh was One and could not be divided up (Deuteronomy 6:4). As we have seen in the introduction, the only legitimate exception to this was when the Ark left the tabernacle for specific purposes, and thus Yahweh was seen as travelling with it, or when Yahweh actually appeared in a theophany, and was thus clearly there in the place where the offering was offered.

And even more importantly (and constantly emphasised) was that the place in which that sanctuary would be set up was to be one chosen by Yahweh. Unlike the gods of the nations He controlled His own destiny. He was not subject to the will of men or of priests, but brought about all in accordance with His own will, and chose where He would reveal Himself and where He should be officially worshipped. While He was over all He could not be found on every high hill and in every green tree. He could not be so limited. He was not a part of nature but above it.

The concept of ‘the place which He shall choose’ is a magnificent one. All was to be seen as under His sovereign control and when He dwelt among men it was because He chose to do so, and where He chose to do so. And He revealed Himself as He chose to do so. The glory went not to the place but to the One Who chose it.

This dwelling among men did not in any way limit Yahweh. Moses has shown earlier, especially in Egypt and in the wilderness, that He could act where He would, He could speak where He would, and He knew all that happened everywhere even to the extent of knowing people’s minds. Thus men could pray to Him wherever they were and He would hear them. But it stressed that there

18

was only one physical place of approach to Him by men, not through nature but in the place that He chose, where He came to them in His invisible presence, the heavenly coming in contact with the earthly. This emphasised His distinctiveness. We could see this chapter as based on the first commandment, ‘you shall have no other gods before My face’.

That is one reason why Moses here speaks of ‘the place which Yahweh your God will choose’. The term ‘the place (maqom)’ was sanctified by ancient usage for the site at which worship took place. When Abraham himself came to Canaan he set up an altar in ‘the place (maqom) of Shechem’ (Deuteronomy 12:6). It is surely from this no coincidence that in Deuteronomy, on entering the land, Israel were to gather at Shechem (Deuteronomy 27). Later in Genesis 13 Abraham returned to ‘the place (maqom) of the altar which he had made there (at Bethel) at the first’ (Deuteronomy 13:4). It was in ‘the place (maqom) of which Yahweh had told him’ (the place of Yahweh’s choice) that Abraham prepared to offer Isaac (Genesis 22:3), a ‘place’ which became known as Yahweh yireh, ‘in the Mount of Yahweh it will be provided’ (Genesis 22:14). And Jacob when he had had his first awesome experience of Yahweh could say, ‘Yahweh is in this place (maqom), and I knew it not -- how awesome is this place (maqom)’ (Genesis 28:16-17). Again it was a place that Yahweh had chosen. Compare also Genesis 32:2; Genesis 32:30; Genesis 35:7; Genesis 35:14. The word ‘place’ (maqom) thus had a firm and sacred connection with patriarchal ‘holy places’ and with treasured experiences of Yahweh and the idea of a place chosen by Yahweh. That was why it was a very suitable term to use in connection with the site of His ‘dwellingplace’ (of His mishkan, often translated ‘Tabernacle’) in the land which was being given to their descendants for their sakes. Like the patriarchs they would have a ‘place’ which Yahweh their God had chosen. The court of the Tabernacle was also regularly described as a holy ‘place’ (Leviticus 6:16; Leviticus 6:25 and often).

Thus the people who were fully familiar with these ancient traditions would tie themselves in with their fathers in recognition of the chosen ‘place’ as a holy place of worship. And they would in the light of Deuteronomy 11 and Deuteronomy 27 see themselves as following in Abraham’s footsteps to ‘the place (maqom) of Shechem’. Yet Moses does not mention Shechem here (although he does later by inference), for here it was not necessarily Shechem that was in mind but ‘the place’ that Yahweh would choose, wherever it might be, which might vary from time to time, and was dependent on His will.

We should note with regard to this that what follows was not just guidance given. Note the constant repetition of ‘you shall’ and ‘you shall not’. It was apodictic law. It was imperative that it be obeyed.

That there was one and one only ‘place’ for worship signified the Oneness of God. We too worship One God, although we do not come through one place but through One Lord Jesus Christ, the One Mediator between God and man (1

19

Timothy 2:5), our One Lord. As the sanctuary united Israel, so does Christ today unite His people as one. We may therefore apply the teaching about the one sanctuary to our One Saviour. It is to Him, and to Him alone that we must look, and we all find our unity in His oneness.

This chapter is carefully constructed on a chiastic pattern, (a to e then e to a), stressing its unity:

a These are the statutes and the judgments which you shall observe to do (Deuteronomy 12:1).

b All idolatrous places to be destroyed - shall not do so to Yahweh my God (Deuteronomy 12:2-4).

c Must seek to the place ‘which Yahweh your God will choose’ and bring whole burnt offerings, sacrifices, tithes etc. (Deuteronomy 12:5-6).

d Shall eat before Yahweh and rejoice in all they put their hand to in which Yahweh has blessed them, not doing what they do now, doing what is right in their own eyes (Deuteronomy 12:7-9).

e When they go over Jordan and dwell in the land which ‘Yahweh your God’ causes them to inherit -- they shall bring whole burnt offering and sacrifices etc. to ‘the place which Yahweh your God shall choose’ and rejoice before Yahweh (Deuteronomy 12:10-12).

f Must ‘take heed’ not to offer whole burnt offerings anywhere but only in the place which Yahweh their God chooses (Deuteronomy 12:13-14).

g May kill and eat flesh within their gates as they desire but must not eat the blood (15-16).

g Must eat their tithes before Yahweh their God in the place which Yahweh their God chooses and rejoice befor Him (Deuteronomy 12:17-18). (Note how g is the reversal of e).

f Must ‘take heed’ that they do not forsake the Levite as long as they live (Deuteronomy 12:19).

e When ‘Yahweh your God’ enlarges their borders as He has promised -- if ‘the place which Yahweh your God shall choose’ be too far they may eat within their gates all that they desire (Deuteronomy 12:20-22).

d Must not eat the blood but must pour it on the ground (Deuteronomy 12:23-25)

c Must take holy things and vows to the place ‘which Yahweh your God will choose’ and offer whole burnt offerings and pour out blood before altar, and observe His commandments (Deuteronomy 12:26-28).

b Idols not to be sought to once they have been destroyed - shall not do so to Yahweh your God (Deuteronomy 12:29-31).

a Whatever I command, you will observe to do (Deuteronomy 12:32).

20

In ‘a’ and its parallel they must ‘observe to do’ what He commands. In ‘b’ and its parallel all idolatrous places to be destroyed and not sought for - they shall not do so to Yahweh their God. In ‘c’ and its parallel they are to offer whole burnt offerings etc. at the place which Yahweh chooses. In ‘d’ they must eat before Yahweh and not do what is right in their own eyes, and in the parallel they must not eat the blood but must pour it on the ground. In ‘e’ when they inherit they must offer whole burnt offerings and rejoice (and therefore eat) before Yahweh at the place which He will choose, but in the parallel when their borders are enlarged they may eat within their gates if the place which Yahweh has chosen is too far off. In ‘f’ they must ‘take heed’ that they only make offerings at the place which Yahweh chooses, and in the parallel they must ‘take heed’ that they do not forsake the Levites as long as they live. Thus they must centralise their worship and look to the Levites constantly for guidance. In ‘g’ we have a reversal of ‘e’.

2 Destroy completely all the places on the high

mountains, on the hills and under every

spreading tree, where the nations you are

dispossessing worship their gods.

GILL, "Ye shall utterly destroy all the places wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods,.... The temples erected for the worship of them by the Canaanites, of which there were many, as appears by the various names of places given them from the temples in them, as Bethshemesh, Bethbaalmeon, Bethpeor, and others:

upon the high mountains and upon the hills: which they chose to worship on, being nearer the heavens, and which they thought most acceptable to their gods; and some of them had their names from hence, as Baalpeor, in like manner as Jupiter Olympius was called by the Greeks; see Jer_2:20,

and under every green tree; which being shady and solitary, and pleasant to the sight, they fancied their gods delighted in, and this notion prevailed among other nations; and there is scarcely any deity but what had some tree or another devoted to it; as the oak to Jupiter, the laurel to Apollo, the ivy to Bacchus, the olive to Minerva, the myrtle to Venus, &c. see Jer_2:20.

HENRY 2-3, "I. They are here charged to abolish and extirpate all those things that the Canaanites had served their idol-gods with, Deu_12:2, Deu_12:3. Here is no mention of idol-temples, which countenances the opinion some have, that the

21

tabernacle Moses reared in the wilderness was the first habitation that ever was made for religious uses, and that from it temples took their rise. But the places that had been used, and were now to be levelled, were enclosures for their worship on mountains and hills (as if the height of the ground would give advantage to the ascent of their devotions), and under green trees, either because pleasant or because awful: whatever makes the mind easy and reverent, contracts and composes it, was thought to befriend devotion. The solemn shade and silence of a grove are still admired by those that are disposed to contemplation. But the advantage which these retirements gave to the Gentiles in the worship of their idols was that they concealed those works of darkness which could not bear the light; and therefore they must all be destroyed, with the altars, pillars, and images, that had been used by the natives in the worship of their gods, so as that the very names of them might be buried in oblivion, and not only not be remembered with respect, but not remembered at all. They must thus consult, 1. The reputation of their land; let it never be said of this holy land that it had been thus polluted, but let all these dunghills be carried away, as things they were ashamed of. 2. The safety of their religion; let none be left remaining, lest profane unthinking people, especially in degenerate ages, should make use of them in the service of the God of Israel. Let these pest-houses be demolished, as things they were afraid of. He begins the statutes that relate to divine worship with this, because there must first be an abhorrence of that which is evil before there can be a steady adherence to that which is good, Rom_12:9. The kingdom of God must be set up, both in persons and places, upon the ruins of the devil's kingdom; for they cannot stand together, nor can there be any communion between Christ and Belial.

JAMISON, "Ye shall utterly destroy all the places, wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods — This divine command was founded on the tendencies of human nature; for to remove out of sight everything that had been associated with idolatry, that it might never be spoken of and no vestige of it remain, was the only effectual way to keep the Israelites from temptations to it. It is observable that Moses does not make any mention of temples, for such buildings were not in existence at that early period. The “places” chosen as the scene of heathen worship were situated either on the summit of a lofty mountain, or on some artificial mound, or in a grove, planted with particular trees, such as oaks, poplars, and elms (Isa_57:5-7; Hos_4:13). The reason for the selection of such sites was both to secure retirement and to direct the attention upward to heaven; and the “place” was nothing else than a consecrated enclosure, or at most, a canopy or screen from the weather.

ELLICOTT, "(2) Ye shall utterly destroy.—First of all these requirements is the

destruction of every vestige of idolatry. In the land of Jehovah there must be no

trace of any other god but Him. The non-fulfilment of this command in the early

history of Israel has led some to suppose that the command itself belongs to later

times. But it must be observed that the destruction of these things is inextricably

connected with the conquest of the country in detail. It was part of the work

assigned to the several tribes of Israel when the land had been divided by

Joshua. His work was to conquer the Canaanitish armies, and give Israel

possession of their chief cities. He then assigned the land to the several tribes, to

make it their own throughout. Obviously, if every tribe had insisted upon

22

destroying all monuments of idolatry in its own territory, one of two results must

have followed: either the remnant of the Canaanitish nations must have been

excited to fresh acts of rebellion and hostility, resulting in their extermination, or

else they must have yielded themselves entirely to the worship of Jehovah. But

Israel disobeyed the order. They did not themselves yield to idolatry in Joshua’s

time. The disturbance made respecting the altar Ed (see Joshua 22) is quite

sufficient of itself to prove the strictness of the law against strange altars. But the

Canaanites being left undisturbed after they ceased to resist openly, and their

objects of worship being left unmolested, there were constant temptations to

idolatry, to which Israel yielded. And thus it was not until the times of Heze-kiah

and Josiah that these laws were carried out. But this does not prove the law to

have come into existence then, any more than the present condition of the human

race proves that man was not made in God’s image in Paradise.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 12:2. Ye shall destroy all the places — Temples,

chapels, altars, groves, as appears from other scriptures. Green tree — As the

Gentiles consecrated divers trees to their false gods, so they worshipped these

under them. Pillars — Upon which their images were set. Names — That is, all

the memorials of them, and the very names given to the places from the idols.

Not do so — That is, not worship him in several places, mountains, and groves.

COKE, "Ver. 2. And under every green tree— The use of sacred groves for the

celebration of mysteries is of very great antiquity, and, perhaps, of all others, the

most universal. At first, there were in these groves neither temples nor altars;

they were simple retreats, to which there was no access for the profane, i.e. such

as were not devoted to the service of the gods. Afterwards they built chapels and

temples in them: in future times they became extremely frequented on holidays;

and, after the celebration of the mysteries, public entertainments, accompanied

with dancing, were held in them. See Tibullus, lib. 1: Elegy 11: ver. 51. They

decked these groves with flowers, chaplets, garlands, and nosegays, and hung

them about with donations and offerings, most lavishly, says Abbe Banier, in his

Mythol. b. 3: ch. 7 on the sacred groves. See also Callimachus's Hymn to Diana,

ver. 200 and Spanheim's note.

3 Break down their altars, smash their sacred

stones and burn their Asherah poles in the fire;

cut down the idols of their gods and wipe out

23

their names from those places.

CLARKE, "Ye shall overthrow their altars - Where unholy sacrifices have been offered; and break their pillars, probably meaning statues and representations of their gods cut out of stone; and burn their groves, such as those about the temple of Ashtaroth, the Canaanitish Venus, whose impure rites were practiced in different parts of the enclosures or groves round her temples; and ye shall hew down the graven images, probably implying all images carved out of wood; and destroy the names of them, which were no doubt at first graven on the stones, and carved on the trees, and then applied to the surrounding districts. In various instances the names of whole mountains, valleys, and districts were borrowed from the gods worshipped there.

GILL, "And you shall overthrow their altars,.... Which were of stone, as Jarchi observes; whereas the altar ordered to be made by the Lord, before the altar of burnt offering in the tabernacle was made, was of earth, Exo_20:24 these were to be demolished, lest the Israelites should be tempted to make use of them; and besides, the Lord would not have any remains of idolatry in the land where his tabernacle and worship were, as being abominable to him:

and break down their pillars; or statues erected to the honour of their idols; according to Jarchi it was a single stone hewed out at first for the basis of a statue (y); perhaps such as were called Baetulia, in imitation of the stone Jacob set up for a pillar at Bethel, Gen_28:18.

and burn their groves with fire; which were planted about their temples, and under which also their idols were placed, and where they privately committed the most abominable lewdness under the notion of religion. The Targum of Jonathan renders the word "abominations", meaning idols; and so Jarchi interprets it by a tree that is worshipped; See Gill on Deu_7:5.

and you shall hew down the graven images of their gods; which were made of wood:

and destroy the names of them out of the place; by never making any mention of them in common discourse, and by changing the names of places called from them; and especially by destroying all the relics of them, and whatever appertained to them, which might lead to the mention of them; see Hos_2:17.

JAMISON, "And ye shall overthrow their altars — piles of turf or small stones.

and break their pillars — Before the art of sculpture was known, the statues of idols were only rude blocks of colored stones.

24

ELLICOTT, "(3) Destroy the names.—The substitution in later times of bosheth

for baal in the names Jerubbaal (Jerubbesheth), Eshbaal (Ishbosheth),

Meribbaal (Mephibosheth), is a curious example of the literal fulfilment of this

command, or, perhaps, rather of the command in Exodus 23:13, of which the

spirit and purport agree with this.

K&D, "Deu_12:2-3

Ye shall destroy all the places where the Canaanites worship their gods, upon the high mountains, upon the hills, and under every green tree (cf. Jer_2:20; Jer_3:6; Jer_17:2; 2Ki_16:4; 2Ki_17:10). The choice of mountains and hills for places of worship by most of the heathen nations, had its origin in the wide-spread belief, that men were nearer to the Deity and to heaven there. The green trees are connected with the holy groves, of which the heathen nations were so fond, and the shady gloom of which filled the soul with holy awe at the nearness of the Deity. In the absence of groves, they chose green trees with thick foliage (Eze_6:13; Eze_20:28), such as the vigorous oak, which attains a great age, the evergreen terebinth (Isa_1:29-30; Isa_57:5), and the poplar or osier, which continues green even in the heat of summer (Hos_4:13), and whose deep shade is adapted to dispose the mind to devotion.

Deu_12:3

Beside the place of worship, they were also to destroy all the idols of the Canaanitish worship, as had already been commanded in Deu_7:5, and to blot out even their names, i.e., every trace of their existence (cf. Deu_7:24).

4 You must not worship the Lord your God in

their way.

BARNES, "i. e., “The idolaters set up their altars and images on any high hill, and under every green tree at their pleasure, but ye shall not do so; the Lord Himself shall determine the spot for your worship, and there only shall ye seek Him.” The religion of the Canaanites was human; its modes of worship were of man’s devising. It fixed its holy places on the hills in the vain thought of being nearer heaven, or in deep groves where the silence and gloom might overawe the worshipper. But such superstitious appliances were not worthy of the true religion. God had revealed Himself to people in it, and manifested among them His immediate presence and power. He would Himself assign the sanctuary and the ritual of His own service.

25

GILL, "Ye shall not do so unto the Lord your God. Not sacrifice to him on hills and mountains, and under green trees; though the Jews commonly refer this to the destruction of the names of God, and of any thing appertaining to the temple; that though the temples and the altars of the Heathens were to be overthrown, yet not a stone was to be taken from the house of God, or that belonged to it, nor any of his names to be blotted out; so the Targum of Jonathan and Maimonides (z), who also observes (a), that whoever removes a stone by way of destruction from the altar, or from the temple, or from the court, is to be beaten; so he that burns the holy wood.

HENRY, "II. They are charged not to transfer the rites and usages of idolaters into he worship of God; no, not under colour of beautifying and improving it (Deu_12:4): You shall not do so to the Lord your god, that is, “you must not think to do honour to him by offering sacrifices on mountains and hills, erecting pillars, planting groves, and setting up images; no, you must not indulge a luxurious fancy in your worship, nor think that whatever pleases that will please God: he is above all gods,and will not be worshipped as other gods are.”

CALVIN, "4Ye shall not do so unto the Lord your God. The principal

distinction, as far as regards the external exercises of devotion, is here laid down

between the legitimate worship of God, and all the fictitious rites which the

Gentiles have invented; viz., that God would have but one sanctuary and one

altar, which might be a symbol of the difference between Himself and all idols;

and thus that true religion should have no affinity to superstitions. To this refers

the prohibition, that the Israelites should not conduct themselves towards God as

the Gentiles did towards their idols; but that a barrier should be raised, which

would separate (103) them from the whole world. The whole external profession

of God’s worship is fitly annexed to the Second Commandment, because upon

that it depends, and has no other object than its due observation. But when I

begin to speak of the tabernacle, the priesthood, and the sacrifices, I am entering

on a deep and vast ocean, in which many interpreters, whilst indulging their

curiosity, have pursued a wild and wandering course. Admonished, therefore, by

their example, I will take in my sails, and only touch upon a few points which

tend to edification in the faith. But my readers must now be requested, not only

to pardon me for abstaining from subtle speculations, but also themselves

willingly to keep within the bounds of simplicity. Many have itching ears; and in

our natural vanity, most men are more delighted by foolish allegories, than by

solid erudition. But let those who shall desire to profit in God’s school, learn to

restrain this perverse desire of knowing more than is good for them, although it

may tickle their minds. Now let us consider the words of Moses.

COKE, "Ver. 4. Ye shall not do so unto the Lord your God— That is, "Ye shall

not adore him upon mountains, upon hills, and under every green tree; but you

shall serve him publicly in one place which he shall choose." That this is the

26

sense, appears from the following verse. Notwithstanding this prohibition, the

sacred history shews us how prone the Israelites were to choose mountains and

groves for the places of their worship, and therein to set up images, after the

example of their heathen neighbours. 2 Kings 17:10-11. Ezekiel 20:28. Hosea

4:13.

K&D 4-5, "Deu_12:4-5

“Ye shall not do so to Jehovah your God,” i.e., not build altars and offer sacrifices

to Him in any place you choose, but (Deu_12:5.) shall only keep yourselves (אל (�רש

to the place “which He shall choose out of all the tribes to put His name there for His dwelling.” Whereas the heathen seeks and worships his nature-gods, wherever he thinks he can discern in nature any trace of Divinity, the true God has not only revealed His eternal power and Godhead in the works of creation, but His personal being, which unfolds itself to the world in love and holiness, in grace and righteousness, He has made known to man, who was created in His image, in the words and works of salvation; and in these testimonies of His saving presence He has fixed for Himself a name, in which He dwells among His people. This name presents His personality, as comprehended in the word Jehovah, in a visible sign, the tangible pledge of His essential presence. During the journeying of the Israelites this was effected by the pillar of cloud and fire; and after the erection of the tabernacle, by the cloud in the most holy place, above the ark of the covenant, with the cherubim uon it, in which Jehovah had promised to appear to the high priest as the representative of the covenant nation. Through this, the tabernacle, and afterwards Solomon's temple, which took its place, became the dwelling-place of the name of the Lord. But if the knowledge of the true God rested upon direct manifestations of the divine nature, -and the Lord God had for that very reason made Himself known to His people in words and deeds as their God-then as a matter of course the mode of His worship could not be dependent upon any appointment of men, but must be determined exclusively by God Himself. The place of His worship depended upon the choice which God Himself should make, and which would be made known by the fact that He “put His name,” i.e., actually manifested His own immediate presence, in one definite spot. By the building of the tabernacle, which the Lord Himself prescribed as the true spot for the revelation of His presence among His people, the place where His name was to dwell among the Israelites was already so far determined, that only the particular town or locality among the tribes of Israel where the tabernacle was to be set up after the conquest of Canaan remained to be decided. At the same time, Moses not only speaks of the Lord choosing the place among all the tribes for the erection of His sanctuary, but also of His choosing the place where He would put His

name, that He might dwell there (לשכנו from שכן, for שכנו from שכן). For the presence

of the Lord was not, and was not intended, to be exclusively confined to the tabernacle (or the temple). As God of the whole earth, wherever it might be necessary, for the preservation and promotion of His kingdom, He could make known His presence, and accept the sacrifices of His people in other places, independently of this sanctuary; and there were times when this was really done. The unity of the worship, therefore, which Moses here enjoined, was not to consist in the fact that the people of Israel brought all their sacrificial offerings to the tabernacle, but in their offering them only in the spot where the Lord made His name (that is to say, His presence) known.

What Moses commanded here, was only an explanation and more emphatic repetition of the divine command in Exo_20:23-24 (Deu_12:21 and Deu_12:22); and to understand “the place which Jehovah would choose” as relating exclusively to

27

Jerusalem or the temple-hill, is a perfectly arbitrary assumption. Shiloh, the place where the tabernacle was set up after the conquest of the land (Jos_18:1), and where it stood during the whole of the times of the judges, was also chosen by the Lord (cf. Jer_7:12). It was not till after David had set up a tent for the ark of the covenant upon Zion, in the city of Jerusalem, which he had chosen as the capital of his kingdom, and had erected an altar for sacrifice there (2Sa_6:17; 1Ch_16:1), that the will of the Lord was made known to him by the prophet Gad, that he should build an altar upon the threshing-floor of Araunah, where the angel of the Lord had appeared to him; and through this command the place was fixed for the future temple (2Sa_

24:18; 1Ch_21:18). �רש withאל�, to turn in a certain direction, to inquire or to seek. את־

שמו to put His name,” i.e., to make known His presence, is still further defined“ ,שום

by the following word לשכנו, as signifying that His presence was to be of permanent

duration. It is true that this word is separated by an athnach from the previous clause;

but it certainly cannot be connected with תדרשו (ye shall seek), not only because of the

standing phrase, שם שמו לש ן (“to cause His name to dwell there,” Deu_12:11; Deu_

14:23; Deu_16:2, Deu_16:6, etc.), but also because this connection would give no

fitting sense, as the infinitive שכן does not mean “a dwelling-place.”

PETT, "They Must Be Obedient to His Covenant and Destroy All That Is Related To Idolatry (Deuteronomy 12:1-4).

Deuteronomy 12:1

‘These are the statutes and the ordinances which you (ye) shall observe to do in the land which Yahweh, the God of your (thy) fathers, has given you (thee) to possess it, all the days that you (ye) live on the earth.’

(Note the combination of ‘ye’ and ‘thee, thy’ in the one virtually indivisible sentence. The ‘ye’ stresses their plurality, the ‘thee’ their oneness as a nation which has been given the land and with a special emphasis on each individual’s need to respond to Yahweh. This will be followed by ‘ye’ in Deuteronomy 12:2-12, and ‘thou’ in Deuteronomy 12:13-31, with the exception of Deuteronomy 12:16 where in MT ‘none of ye’ is required. Deuteronomy 12:32 reverts to ‘ye’. The subtle distinctions continue).

Here Moses introduces the whole section. It continues on from the previous chapter. He had closed off chapter 11 with ‘you (ye) shall observe to do all the statutes and ordinances which I set before you this day’, now he says, ‘these are the statutes and ordinances which you (ye) shall observe to do --’. In pursuance of what had gone before he will now outline the statutes and ordinances, the written regulations and the judgments based on them, which they must ‘observe to do’ in the land which Yahweh, the God of their fathers has given them. Here we again have the main basis of their entry. It is Yahweh’s land. He is giving it to them for the sake of their fathers. They must therefore hear His voice and walk in His ways by their obedience to His statutes and ordinances. Thus will it be theirs (and their children’s) as long as they remain on the earth. Conditional on obedience, possession will be permanent, but it is conditional on obedience. They are entering under the kingly rule of Yahweh in His land, from which all that is evil will be spued out.

28

For us it is the Kingly Rule of God that is at stake. If we would be permanently under His kingly rule, we must obey Him, for that is what being ‘in His kingdom’ is all about. In fact whenever we read the words ‘the land’ we can for our part read ‘the kingly rule of God’, for that is what the land represented.

Destruction of All Canaanite Sanctuaries And The Setting Up Of The One Sanctuary (Deuteronomy 12:2-14).

Deuteronomy 12:2-3

‘You shall surely destroy (‘destroying you shall destroy’) all the places in which the nations that you will dispossess served their gods, on the high mountains, and on the hills, and under every green tree, and you shall break down their altars, and dash in pieces their pillars, and burn their Asherim with fire, and you shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and you shall destroy their name out of that place.’

Possession of the land for Yahweh was to be ensured by their total destruction from the land of all traces of the false and depraved religion of the Canaanites. All areas must have their idolatry removed and be put under Yahweh’s control. They must destroy all ‘the places’ (meqomoth - plural of maqom). This is probably a technical term for holy places which later became replaced by ‘high places’ (bamoth ) to distinguish them from Yahweh’s ‘holy place’. There they served their gods, whether on the high mountains (a favourite place for idolatrous worship for they were seen as abodes of the gods), on the hills (ditto), or under every green tree (certain living trees were seen in themselves to possess a kind of divinity and as promoting fertility. This included green trees with thick foliage (Ezekiel 6:13; Ezekiel 20:28), like the vigorous oak which attains a great age (Isaiah 1:29; Isaiah 57:5), and the poplar or terebinth, which continues green even in the heat of summer (Hosea 4:13)). The threefold description expressed completeness, covering all abodes of the gods.

The altars built up in such places were to be broken down, their pillars (stones set up to represent the divine for worship) were to be smashed to pieces, their Asherah-images burned with fire (these were images or poles made of wood, set up next to the altars and the pillars, evidence for which has been found in many places), their graven images to be cut down, and the very name of the gods was to be destroyed from each of those places. ‘Destroying the name of their gods’ indicated that the places were not to be seen as having any remnants of ‘holiness’ or association with these gods left. Each ‘place’ was to be emptied of significance so that they would become ‘common’ places, not revered by men. It is noteworthy that no instruction is given that they should be ‘defiled’. That idea comes later (2 Kings 23:8; 2 Kings 23:10; 2 Kings 23:13). Here the gods were to be removed as nonentities and had not been worshipped by Israel.

The ‘pillars’ (matstseboth) that were to be condemned were those set up that men might worship before them, examples of which have been discovered in a number of Canaanite cities, especially at Hazor. Jacob in contrast set up memorial pillars to Yahweh (Genesis 28:18; Genesis 31:13; Genesis 31:45; although gratitude could be expressed at them by pouring a libation over them - Genesis 35:14) and Isaiah spoke of a similar memorial pillar being set up on the borders of Egypt when Egypt had begun to seek Yahweh (Isaiah 19:19), both of which were acceptable. We can compare with this the memorial altar in Joshua 22:26-27 on the border of

29

Transjordan. Memorial pillars were common (Genesis 31:45-54; Genesis 35:20; Exodus 24:4; Joshua 4:1-9; Joshua 24:26-27; 2 Samuel 18:18). But men were not to worship before them.

For us the gods to be rejected may be different ones. Our ‘gods’ are anything that comes between us and God. Let us but find something that hinders our worship of Him and our joyful service for Him and that is our false god that must be destroyed. Beware especially of covetousness, says Paul, for that is idolatry of the worst kind (Colossians 3:5). Those who come under the Kingly Rule of God must avoid all covetousness.

Deuteronomy 12:4

‘You shall not do so to Yahweh your God.’

It was to be very different with the worship of Yahweh. That is not how they were to worship Him, at hundreds of different ‘places’ spread throughout the land wherever they desired. He could only be officially worshipped in one ‘place’.

5 But you are to seek the place the Lord your

God will choose from among all your tribes to

put his Name there for his dwelling. To that

place you must go;

GILL, "But unto the place which the Lord your God,.... The Targum of Jonathan is, that the Word of the Lord your God:

shall choose out of all your tribes to put his name there; to place his tabernacle, set up his worship, take up his residence, and cause the Shechinah, or his divine Majesty, to dwell there, as the next clause explains it; out of what tribe it should be chosen, and where it should be, is not said. Maimomides (b) gives three reasons for it; he says there are three great mysteries why the place is not clearly, but obscurely mentioned;1) lest the Gentiles should seize upon it, and make war for the sake of it, supposing this place to be the end of the law; 2) lest they in whose hands the place then was should by all means waste and destroy it; 3) which is the chief, lest every tribe should desire to have it in its own lot and jurisdiction; and so strifes might arise among them on account of it, as happened to the priesthood:

even unto his habitation shall ye seek; the temple at Jerusalem is meant, where the Lord took up his dwelling, and whither men were to come and seek unto him by prayer and supplication for whatsoever they needed, and to inquire of him in matters

30

doubtful, and they wanted counsel in:

and thither thou shall come: with sacrifices of every sort, where they were to be slain and offered to the Lord, and become acceptable to him, as is more largely declared in the following part of this chapter.

HENRY, "There is not any one particular precept (as I remember) in all the law of Moses so largely pressed and inculcated as this, by which they are all tied to bring their sacrifices to that one altar which was set up in the court of the tabernacle, and there to perform all the rituals of their religion; for, as to moral services, then, no doubt, as now, men might pray every where, as they did in their synagogues. The command to do this, and the prohibition of the contrary, are here repeated again and again, as we teach children: and yet we are sure that there is in scripture no vain repetition; but all this stress is laid upon it, 1. Because of the strange proneness there was in the hearts of the people to idolatry and superstition, and the danger of their being seduced by the many temptations which they would be surrounded with. 2. Because of the great use which the observance of this appointment would be of to them, both to prevent the introducing of corrupt customs into their worship and to preserve among them unity and brotherly love, that, meeting all in one place, they might continue both of one way and of one heart. 3. Because of the significancy of this appointment. They must keep to one place, in token of their belief of those two great truths, which we find together (1Ti_2:5), That there is one God, and one Mediator between God and man. It not only served to keep up the notion of the unity of the Godhead, but was an intimation to them (though they could not stedfastly discern it) of the one only way of approach to God and communion with him, in and by the Messiah.

JAMISON, "unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose ... to put his name there ... thou shalt come — They were forbidden to worship either in the impure superstitious manner of the heathen, or in any of the places frequented by them. A particular place for the general rendezvous of all the tribes would be chosen by God Himself; and the choice of one common place for the solemn rites of religion was an act of divine wisdom, for the security of the true religion. It was admirably calculated to prevent the corruption which would otherwise have crept in from their frequenting groves and high hills - to preserve uniformity of worship and keep alive their faith in Him to whom all their sacrifices pointed. The place was successively Mizpeh, Shiloh, and especially Jerusalem. But in all the references made to it by Moses, the name is never mentioned. This studied silence was maintained partly lest the Canaanites within whose territories it lay might have concentrated their forces to frustrate all hopes of obtaining it; partly lest the desire of possessing a place of such importance might have become a cause of strife or rivalry amongst the Hebrew tribes, as about the appointment to the priesthood (Num_16:1-30).

CALVIN, "5But unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose. It is

asked why God would have sacrifices offered to Him only on one altar? Besides

the reason which I have lately advanced, it is not to be doubted but that He in

this way had regard to believers, that He might cherish in them an agreement in

the unity of the faith. This place, then, was like a standard to gather together the

31

people, lest their religion should be torn by divisions, and lest any diversities

should insinuate themselves. Moreover, God, by claiming His right and authority

to choose the place, commends obedience, on which also the purity of worship

depends. But, again, another question arises; because, before the time of David,

the Ark had nowhere a fixed resting-place, but traveled about, as it were, to

various lodgings, therefore, if the chosen place is understood to be Mount Zion,

the people were free in the intermediate time to perform the sacrifices wherever

they pleased. I reply, that the place was not, chosen until the Ark was placed in

Zion; for not till then was fulfilled what is said in the Psalm,

"I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the Lord;

our feet shall stand within thy gates, O Jerusalem,”

(Psalms 122:1;)

in which words the Prophet intimates that there was before no resting-place,

because God had not yet pointed out the place in which He would be

worshipped. Therefore it is expressly said, “out of all your tribes,” or “in one of

your tribes,” whereby a special privilege is referred to, which was to be

conferred on one of their tribes, to the exclusion of the others. And to this relates

what is said in another Psalm,

"Moreover he refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of

Ephraim, but chose the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which he loved: and he

built his sanctuary like high palaces, like the earth, which he hath established for

ever.”

(Psalms 78:67)

To the same effect the faithful elsewhere congratulate themselves, after the Ark

was deposited with David, “We will go into his tabernacles, we will worship at

his footstool;” and, on the other hand, the Spirit declares,

"The Lord hath chosen Zion; he hath desired it for his habitation. This is my

rest for ever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it ” (Psalms 132:13.)

32

Similar statements everywhere occur, confirming the opinion that the Ark never

rested in its true home until it was deposited on Zion; and God, in my judgment,

in order that He might keep the hope of His people in suspense, promised,

although the Ark changed its place from time to time, that He had still

determined on a perpetual abode in which it should rest. Yet it does not

therefore follow that, up to that period, a free permission was given to the people

to sacrifice wherever they would. For, wherever the sanctuary was, there was

also a temporary choice of the place, until the legitimate resting-place was shewn

them. Therefore God, chastising by Jeremiah the foolish confidence by which the

Jews were puffed up, said,

"Go ye now unto my place, which was in Shiloh,

and see what I did to it,” etc., (Jeremiah 7:12;)

in which words he implies that Shiloh had been highly honored for a season, but

had now been deprived of its honor, because the sacrifices had there been

unworthily polluted.

Although, then, there is a special promise here concerning Zion, still there is no

doubt but that God in the meantime confines the Jews to His sanctuary, lest any

one should erect a private altar for himself, or build for himself other cities and

other temples. The phrase is worthy of observation, “to put his name there;” and

again, “his habitation.” The gross imaginations of men are thus obviated, lest the

people should enclose God within walls, as they are wont to circumscribe His

infinite essence, or to draw Him down from heaven, and to place Him beneath

the elements of the world. But God’s name is said to inhabit a place, not in His

own nature, but with reference to man; whilst, in deference to their ignorance,

He sets before their eyes a visible symbol of His presence. Thus He is often said

to “come down,” not as if He, who fills heaven and earth, actually moved, but

because the familiar knowledge of Him brings Him near to men. But although

He allows Himself to be invoked on earth, yet He would not have the minds of

men rest there, but rather lifts them up on high as if by steps. Therefore, by

Isaiah, He harshly chides them, because, although enwrapped in their sins, they

still thought that He was under obligation to them because His temple was in

their sight, (Isaiah 66:1,) whereas it is our business to approach Him by faith and

with serious feelings when He extends His hand to us. The Ark of the Covenant

indeed is often called “His face;” but, lest men should form any gross or earthly

33

conceptions of Him, the sanctuary is also called “His footstool."

The various kinds of oblations which are here enumerated will be hereafter more

clearly explained. I will only briefly remind you that the burnt-offerings are

included in the sacrifices, as a part is taken for the whole. The Hebrew word,

which we have translated “the elevating of the hand,” is, תרומה, therumah, (104)

to which another word, תנופה, thenuphah, is often added; but, although both are

derived from the act of elevating, still they seem to differ, and those skilled in the

language thus distinguish them, viz., that תרומה, therumah, is to be lifted up, and

then brought down; and, תנופה, thanuphah, to be turned at the same time to the

right and left, although others think it means to be turned round to the four

quarters of the globe. There is a difference between vows and freewill-offerings;

for although a vow is at first freely made, yet we may offer things which we have

not vowed. I have already spoken of the firstlings.

ELLICOTT, "(5) But unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose out

of all your tribes.—The very form of the order proves its antiquity. No one who

was acquainted with the removal of that “place” from Shiloh to Nob, from Nob

to Gibeon, from Gibeon to Jerusalem, could have written with such utter

unconsciousness of later history as these words imply. It is noticeable that in the

reading of this precept in the times of our Lord, the Jews seem to have arrived at

the came state of unconsciousness. They could not conseive of the presence or

worship of Jehovah anywhere but at Jerusalem. (See on this topic St. Stephen’s

speech in Acts 7, and the incidental proofs it contains of God’s presence with

Israel in many places, in reply to the accusation made against Stephen of

preaching the destruction of the one idolized seat of worship at Jerusalem.)

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 12:5. To put his name there — That is, to set up his

worship there, and which he shall call by his name, as his house, or his dwelling-

place; namely, where the ark should be, the tabernacle, or temple: which was

first Shiloh, and then Jerusalem. There is not one precept in all the law of Moses

so largely inculcated as this, to bring all their sacrifices to that one altar. And

how significant was this appointment! They must keep to one place, in token of

their belief, that there is one God, and one Mediator between God and man. It

not only served to keep up the notion of the unity of the Godhead, but the one

only way of approach to God, and communion with him in and by his Son.

COKE, "Ver. 5-7. But unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose—

We meet with no clear or exact determination of the place; but only such general

expressions as this, which the Lord your God shall choose: which, Maimonides

supposes, was intended for these three reasons. 1. Lest the Gentiles might

endeavour to seize on the place, or at any time enter into a war upon account of

it, when they imagined that the taking of it would put a final period to the law. 2.

34

Lest the people, in whose hand it was at the delivery of these precepts, should use

their utmost endeavours to demolish and lay it waste. And, 3. Lest each of the

tribes should be desirous of having it within the compass of their lot; and so it

might occasion discontent and disagreement among them, as it happened in the

priesthood. More Nev. part 3: ch. 45. However, in opposition to these customs of

the heathens, and to preserve the Israelites from idolatry, the stated public

worship of the one true God was to be fixed to one certain place, where God

would put his name; i.e. make it the peculiar seat of his divine presence: on

account of which Jerusalem was afterwards called the city of Jehovah, Psalms

1:6; Psalms 87:3. To this place they were to bring their burnt-offerings;—and

their sacrifices, ver. 6 whereby are meant peace-offerings, which were always

annexed to burnt-offerings; that so the owners, when they offered to God, might

also feast upon the sacrifices, ver. 27. And their tithes; what the Jews call the

second tithe, which was to be set aside after that of the Levites was paid. See ver.

17 and ch. Deuteronomy 14:22. And the heave-offerings of their hands; i.e.

according to the LXX and Vulgate, the first-fruits of the earth, which are called

the heave-offerings of their hand, because they were heaved, or lifted up, in

token of their being consecrated to God. See Numbers 18:11-12. We may

consider these precepts to be addressed to the priests, as well as to the people;

and so understand the words in their utmost latitude: that whatever holy things

were eaten by the priests, or people, they were to be eaten at the place of the

peculiar Divine Presence, ver. 7 before the Lord their God; i.e. not in the

tabernacle, or temple, where only the priests might eat the most holy things;

Numbers 18:10 but in the court of the tabernacle, or in some place adjacent to

the sanctuary. And ye shall rejoice in all that you put your hand unto; i.e. you

and your family shall rejoice together, at these feasts, in the goodness of God,

who has blessed the labour of your hands; for this phrase, all that you put your

hand unto, signifies all your possessions, and all the labours of your hand

whatsoever. See ch. Deuteronomy 15:10, Deuteronomy 23:20, Deuteronomy 28:8;

Deuteronomy 28:20. Upon this passage we observe, 1. That the command to

worship and sacrifice only at the place which the Lord shall choose was

eminently calculated to prevent idolatry; not only as it hindered the Israelites

from carrying their sacrifices to the idolatrous altars, but as it rendered more

certain the law which enjoined the destruction of the monuments of idolatry. For

these, and many other reasons of the same kind, see Spencer de Leg. Heb. vol. 1:

p. 142. 2. We observe, that had the Jews been bound, as often as there was

occasion, to bring their offerings to one certain place, suppose Jerusalem,

however distant it might be from them, this would have been an insupportable

expence to devout people. Therefore their doctors understand the precept, that

they were bound to offer such sacrifices as were either for offences committed, or

mercies received, &c. at the next national fear at furthest. See Lightfoot, de

Templi Minist. 3. We observe, that it was an ancient and general custom, even

before the law of Moses, for the people to feast upon part of the sacrifices of

35

peace-offerings, as appears from Exodus 18:12; Exodus 34:15. By the law of

Moses, the laity were not to keep there sacred feasts in the tabernacle or temple,

but in some place near it; but the heathens feasted on the sacrifices of peace-

offerings in the very temples of their idols: to which practice the apostle alludes,

1 Corinthians 8:10. If any man see thee, who hast knowledge, sit at meat in the

idol's temple, &c. By this rite they owned themselves idolaters, and to have

communion with false gods: and, on the other hand, by eating their sacrifices

before Jehovah at his sanctuary, and no where else, they declared they had

communion with him, and not with idols; for there could be no need of their

eating there, but only to signify their adherence to, and to secure them in, the

religion of the true God, by feasting in his presence, and thereby owning

themselves to belong to him. This is very often repeated in the present book; as

ver. 18 of this chapter, ch. Deuteronomy 14:23; Deuteronomy 14:26;

Deuteronomy 15:20 and especially Deuteronomy 27:6-7. See Cudworth's

discourse on the Lord's Supper, and Elmenhorstius's notes upon Minutius Felix,

p. 108. We observe, 4 from Bishop Warburton, (Julian, p. 4.) that when God

communicated himself to the Israelites, as the Maker and Governor of the

universe, it pleased him to adopt them as his peculiar people, under the idea of

their tutelary Deity; and, the better to secure the great end of their separation,

assumed likewise the title and office of their king, or civil governor. Hence their

religion came under the idea of a law, and their law was in the strictest sense

religion. From this account of the Hebrew government one natural consequence

ariseth, that the principal rites of their religion and law were to be performed

and celebrated in some determined place. This, the object and subject of their

ceremonial seemed equally to require; for their idea of a tutelary God and king

implied a local residence: and a national act, created by the relations arising

from them, required a fixed and certain place for its celebration; and both

together seemed to mark out the capital of the country for that purpose. This

consequent practice, which the nature and reason of things so evidently point

out, these institutes of the Hebrew constitution order and enjoin. During the

early and unsettled times of the Jewish state, the sacrifices prescribed by their

ritual were directed to be offered up before the door of an ambulatory

tabernacle; but when they had gained the establishment decreed for them, and a

magnificent temple was erected for religious worship, then all the sacrifices were

to be offered at Jerusalem only. Now, sacrifices constituting the substance of

their national worship, their religion could not be said to subsist longer than the

continuance of that celebration: but sacrifices could be performed only in one

appointed temple; so that when this was finally destroyed, the institution itself

became abolished.

BI 5-6, "Unto His habitation shall ye seek.

The Gospel of the holy places

I. God was pleased to choose out certain places to stand in a special relation of

36

holiness unto himself under the Old Testament. This holiness of places was two-fold, either transient and merely for the present time, or else more permanent.

1. The transient holiness of places was where the Lord gave visible appearances of Himself in His glorious majesty to the eyes of His servants; such places were holy during the time of such Divine appearances (Exo_3:5; Exo_19:11-25; Jos_5:152Pe_1:18).

2. There was also a more abiding holiness of places under the law.

(1) The land of Canaan (Zec_2:12).

(2) The cities of refuge.

(3) The tabernacle, the temple, the ark, and all the places where they came (2Ch_8:11).

(4) Jerusalem was very eminent as being the place of the temple, and ark, and all the public worship thereunto belonging (Psa_76:2; Psa_87:2).

II. What is the ground of this holiness of these places, and how are we to conceive of it?

1. The Lord is said to choose these places to set His name there, and therefore they are called His habitation.

(1) Here were the standing symbols and tokens of His presence.

(2) In these places were visible appearances of His glory upon special occasions (Exo_40:34; Num_12:5; 1Ki_8:10-11; Isa_6:1).

(3) These places had their typical significations of Christ and Gospel mysteries.

(4) These places were appointed by God to be parts, yea, principal parts, of His worship (Exo_20:24; Eze_20:40).

(5) They were, by God’s appointment, the seat of all the public church worship of those times.

2. “Thither shalt thou seek,” i.e. for answers and oracles from the holy places, and from the priest by Urim and Thummim (Exo_25:22; Num_7:8-9; Num_27:21).

3. “Thither shalt thou come,” i.e. at all the appointed festivals, three times a year (Exo_23:14; Exo_23:17), and whensoever they offered sacrifice (Deu_12:6).

Lessons:

1. The cessation of this holiness of places under the New Testament (Joh_4:21-23; Mat_18:22; 1Ti_2:8; Mal_1:11). Every place is now a Judaea, every house a Jerusalem, every congregation a Zion.

2. Learn to present your worship unto God by Jesus Christ, for He is the true Temple and Tabernacle (Heb_7:25; 1Pe_1:21; Joh_14:6; Col_3:17).

3. Remember that there is a church worship (Act_2:42; Act_20:7).

4. Labour everyone, that his soul may be a habitation for the Lord, a temple of the Holy Ghost. (S. Mather.)

PETT 5-7, "They Must Establish Their Worship At The Place Where He Chooses To Set His Name (Deuteronomy 12:5-9).

37

Deuteronomy 12:5-7

‘But to the place which Yahweh your God shall choose out of all your tribes, to put his name there, even to his habitation, shall you choose to seek, and to there you shall come, and to there you shall bring your whole burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and the heave-offering of your hand (literally ‘what is lifted up in the hand’), and your vows, and your freewill-offerings, and the firstlings of your herd and of your flock, and there you shall eat before Yahweh your God, and you shall rejoice in all that you put your hand to, you and your households, in which Yahweh your God has blessed you.’

So rather they were to come to the place which Yahweh ‘chose to put His name there’. All that is basic to Israel was seen as occurring through Yahweh’s choice. And that choice was not just arbitrary. It was the positive act of Yahweh. The idea behind the word is of God’s positive action by which He works on behalf of His people, but which is His doing because it cannot be left to man. In choosing He is exercising His sovereign will and acting for their good. And when they worship Him it must be where He chooses to reveal Himself and to be present. He is not subject to their choices.

Thus they were on their part to choose to worship Him in one place only, ‘the place that He will choose’, the place where He has determined to be present among them and no other, the place where He will put His name. Their choice must be subject to His choice. So their public worship must always be in ‘the place’ which Yahweh their God ‘chooses out of all their tribes to set His name there’, which while His name was set there would become a sacred ‘place’ in a similar way to the patriarchal ‘places’ (Genesis 12:6; Genesis 13:4; Genesis 22:3; Genesis 22:14; Genesis 28:16-17; Genesis 32:2; Genesis 32:30; Genesis 35:7; Genesis 35:14). The setting of His name there reveals His genuine but invisible presence.

The ‘setting of His name there’ may refer to the placing there of the Ark of the covenant of Yahweh, for the Ark was ‘called by His Name’. Thus in 2 Samuel 6:2 we read of ‘the Ark of God whose name is called by the name of Yahweh of hosts Who dwells between the cherubim’. But if this is so it is because as His throne it declares His invisible presence described in terms of His name. His presence was indicated by His name. Thus it could be said of the angel that He would send before them that ‘My name is in him’ (Exodus 23:21), meaning that Yahweh would go forward in His angel. It signifies that it was where He was to be seen as present. Compare Exodus 20:24, where ‘recording His name’ indicates some special manifestation of His presence. ‘The place which He chose’ would thus be His habitation, His dwellingplace, in the place where in His sovereignty He chose it to be, and to that alone should they choose to seek (compare Deuteronomy 12:14).

And in the end the name that was set there was the name whose full significance was revealed to Moses. When Yahweh sent Moses to Israel in order to deliver them He did it by revealing Himself as the ‘I am’ (ehyeh), or more strictly the ‘I will be’, the One Who will be whatever He wants to be, the One Who is always

38

there and present among them (Exodus 3:14). So among them, dwelling in the place that He has chosen, will be the powerful Fulfiller of His own will. And because they are a part of that will they can be confident of His continual support and protection.

“The place which Yahweh your God shall choose.” This idea is repeated again and again by Moses in one way or another throughout Deuteronomy, demonstrating the importance of the idea (Deuteronomy 12 six times; Deuteronomy 14:23; Deuteronomy 14:25; Deuteronomy 15:20; Deuteronomy 16 six times; Deuteronomy 17:8; Deuteronomy 17:10; Deuteronomy 18:6; Deuteronomy 23:16; Deuteronomy 26:2-3). Repetition in different ways in speeches is a way of fixing ideas in the memory. Each time the phrase comes up the listener responds. Yahweh is there because He has chosen to be among them, and in the place which He chose, not the place that they chose. Such repetition was also common in ancient literature which was designed to be read out. The hearer loved to be able to think along with the narrative. There was after all for Israel nothing more important than the place that God would choose for His dwellingplace. But its importance lay in the fact that He had chosen it so as to be among them. More important than the place was that Yahweh Himself chose it (compare Deuteronomy 17:15 where the choosing was more important than the king. See also Deuteronomy 18:5) There He would be among them as Lord and Protector by His own will. For us the place where God has chosen to reveal Himself is in Jesus Christ. He is our sanctuary to which we belong when we become His, built up on Him (Ephesians 2:19-22).

Note the contrast between Deuteronomy 12:3, ‘you shall destroy their name out of that place’, with ‘the place which Yahweh your God shall choose out of all your tribes, to put his name there’. His name was to replace their name in the land at the place that He chose, not in the places where they were worshipped. Their name (the idea of their presence there and their reputation) was to be destroyed from each ‘place’ where they were, the sacred places to which people went. They were to be no longer worshipped there or remembered. The sacred places must be desacralised. But His name, His very recognised presence in all that He is, was to be established in the one place that He chose, the place where He wanted His people to come, but which was in His own purview. There they would worship Him, there they would recognise His presence, there they would acknowledge His right to His own will, and there they would remember Him, invisible though He was. Even though they could not see Him His name, and therefore His very self, was there, as evidenced by the Ark.

In entering a new land where many gods were worshipped and where there were many sacred places, such a move was in fact the only way to prevent syncretism. God wanted to ensure that none of the sacred places were connected with Him. He would choose His own sacred place, then there would be no ambivalence in their minds. This may be why Moses does not actually mention Shechem. He did not want it thought that this was taking place at ‘the ancient Sanctuary of Shechem’.

“To the place which Yahweh your God shall choose.” Choice was central to what Yahweh was as Lord over all. As the Sovereign God He had chosen the people

39

(Deuteronomy 7:6-7; Deuteronomy 14:2; Deuteronomy 4:37; Deuteronomy 10:15); He had chosen Aaron and his sons (Deuteronomy 18:5; Deuteronomy 21:5); He had chosen the land (Genesis 12:1-3); He would choose any king that they might have in the future (Deuteronomy 17:15). Now He chose the place where He would dwell, as He would later choose the place where the temple described by Ezekiel would descend on a high mountain well away from Jerusalem (Ezekiel 40-48). This last confirms once for all that the place of His choosing was not tied to Jerusalem.

They were well aware that Yahweh had chosen ‘places’ for the patriarchs in which they might worship and honour Him in one place after another (Genesis 22:2-3; Genesis 22:14; Genesis 32:30; Genesis 35:13-15) but not all at the same time. And it was in similar ‘places’ that Yahweh would record His name (Exodus 20:24). Thus while the word maqom could simply mean any place, it was also one connected with sacred ‘places’, and was a fit one to use because it denoted the site, not just the sanctuary itself. The people as a whole were always more familiar with the site around the Tabernacle than the Tabernacle itself which many only saw at a distance. The whole site was holy, and guarded by the Levites (Numbers 1:53), and was where the people as a whole came to worship Him, in the place where He had set His name.

“The place which Yahweh your God shall choose” was never to be seen as a monotonous repetition, or a cryptic puzzle. Rather it was a glorious reality, and an important distinction. It represented Yahweh’s right to choose, and will to choose, and as chosen by Yahweh it was a sacred place while He was there, as had been the place of the burning bush (Exodus 3:4-5) and as had been Mount Sinai (Exodus 19:11-14), which He had also chosen. For now Yahweh had chosen to come and live among His chosen people as One settled in the land, and at any time it would be at one place that He chose at that time, His chosen place set in the chosen land. To limit it to one earthly city, however much it came to be revered, is to miss what lies at the heart of the idea, that Yahweh would be there because He chose to be so, and though history might to some extent affect the place, there would always be a place where He chose to be where men could seek Him. And it would never be at one of the places that men or gods had chosen. It would be the place of His covenant. The future was secure as long as the covenant was maintained. For although all was under His sovereign control, it was required that the people respond to His covenant with them, and to each thing that He had chosen, in obedience, at the place which He chose.

It is interesting that He speaks constantly of ‘the place’ and not of ‘the sanctuary’ or of ‘the dwellingplace’ (Tabernacle). While the ‘dwellingplace’ (Tabernacle) would be the focal point to which they would look and where the priesthood would operate, it was ‘the place’ where it was, its wider site, which was most familiar to the people, the site where they stood when they worshipped. This section of Deuteronomy is very much centred on worship, and being suitable for it. The point was that there would be only one sacred ‘place’ for them to come to. It was the one and only place ‘chosen out of all their tribes’. Compare for the latter phrase Deuteronomy 18:5 where we have ‘has chosen him out of all your tribes’ where the reference was to the one and only Priest (Deuteronomy 18:5). This too then is one, the one and only place. It was there that they must stand to have open dealings with God. They all knew what would be at that place, for the

40

Tabernacle as Yahweh’s dwellingplace had been in their midst for almost forty years. At present it moved from place to place on a short term basis, and yet it was always at the place that God had chosen, for His pillar of cloud indicated where it was to be. One day, however, there would be one sacred place where it would be sited more permanently, and that would then be where they were to come. God would have settled among them ‘permanently’, although not tied to one place, only to ‘the place that He shall choose’ at any time.

Moses was not here speaking to the theologians, or the priests, or even the Levites, he was speaking to the ordinary people. He was not so much giving revelatory teaching (although he was doing that) as much as wanting them to understand and respond to the One Who had chosen them. He was reaching out to their hearts. So the theological words were put to one side and he wanted them to face up to the plain and simple reality. Many would after all rarely enter ‘the sanctuary’ itself. Others would bear that responsibility for them. But all would come to ‘the place’ where it was at some time or another. Had he said sanctuary or Tabernacle they would have been filled with awe but they would not have seen it as personal. Only the chosen could enter the inner sanctuary, and space in the courtyard was limited. But here the offer was of ‘the place’, and that was open to all, men, women and children. Later writers would not have put that on Moses’ lips. Rather the opposite. They had tunnel vision. It was only a Moses, confident in what the people knew, who could speak like this.

It may also be, as some have suggested, that ‘the place’ (maqom) was spoken of in order to connect it with ‘the land’ in which they would dwell, which was the wider ‘place’ (Genesis 13:14). Yahweh had constantly sought out a place (maqom) for them (Deuteronomy 1:33), and He had brought them to this place (Deuteronomy 1:31; Deuteronomy 9:7; Deuteronomy 11:5), and every ‘place’ that the soul of their foot trod on in the land would be theirs (Deuteronomy 11:24). They would have their place, chosen for them by Him (Exodus 23:20), so also would He choose, within their place, a place for Himself. All was chosen by Him. They were there at His behest. He was there by His own will as Lord over all. Moses also almost certainly had in mind (see above) that when Abraham himself came to Canaan he set up an altar in ‘the place of Shechem’ (Deuteronomy 12:6), and returned to ‘the place of the altar which he had made there at the first’ in Bethel (Deuteronomy 13:4). It was in ‘the place of which Yahweh had told him’ that he prepared to offer Isaac (Genesis 22:3), a ‘place’ which became known as Yahweh yireh, ‘in the Mount of Yahweh it will be provided’ (Genesis 22:14 - any connection with Jerusalem is totally speculative). And Jacob could say, ‘Yahweh is in this place, and I knew it not -- how awesome is this place’ (Genesis 28:16-17) of Bethel, the place where Yahweh revealed Himself to him. Compare also Genesis 35:7; Genesis 35:14. The word ‘place’ thus had a firm and sacred connection with the original entry into the land, the sacred sites of the patriarchs and with treasured experiences of Yahweh. The court of the tabernacle was also a holy ‘place’ (Leviticus 6:16; Leviticus 6:25 and often).

And to that sacred ‘place’ that He had chosen they were to come, and there they were to offer their whole burnt offerings, their sacrifices, their tithes, the heave-offering from their hand, their vows, their freewill offerings, and the firstlings of their herd and of their flock. And there they were to feast before Yahweh and rejoice in all that they put their hand to which Yahweh had blessed, and this

41

included their households with them. And there they would eat before Him.

Note here how the emphasis is on what the people bring. The priests would have their part in it (not emphasised in Deuteronomy) but it was basically the gifts of the people that Yahweh was interested in, and their participation in them before Him.

Eating before Yahweh was an important aspect of worship in which all could participate, and that would not be in the Tabernacle, not even in its courtyard, except for the favoured few (compare Exodus 24:11). It would be at ‘the place’ surrounding the tabernacle, a large area around the Tabernacle. That would be ‘the place’ to which they would come. Provision was there to be made for this feasting out of the overabundance of tithes, that which was specifically set apart to Yahweh, which would be available as a result of the coming prosperity of the land. They would eat of Yahweh’s fare, of the tithes, food set apart as His, which was previously mainly for the consumption of the priests and Levites. As well as the tithes the priests would also eat of the heave offerings and the people of their peace offerings. Both would eat of the firstlings (see Deuteronomy 12:17). All was Yahweh’s. (Nothing of the whole burnt offerings was eaten).

As we have seen ‘the place’ is in contrast to the many ‘places’ which were Canaanite sanctuaries. It does not necessarily indicate that in future there will only ever be one permanent place on one single site which could not be changed, which excluded all others (e.g. Shiloh or Jerusalem). The Hebrew definite article is not always too specific. It regularly simply means ‘the one I am talking about’. Thus He might decide to choose one place after another in which to record His name. This is certainly the suggestion in Exodus 20:24, ‘in every place where I record my name I will come to you and I will bless you’. Yahweh did not see Himself as bound to one permanent place for ever. But He would only be there at one place at a time, and it was always to be at the place that He chose (in Ezekiel 40 it was on a high mountain well away from Jerusalem). No place should be set up that He had not chosen. Note also 1 Kings 8:16, ‘Since the day that I brought forth my people Israel out of Egypt, I chose no city out of all the tribes of Israel to build an house, that my name might be therein; but I chose David to be over my people Israel.’ Yahweh was emphasising that He had not had in mind the choosing of one city in which to establish a permanent sanctuary. His only permanent choice was of the Davidic house from which Christ would come. Indeed when such a seemingly permanent sanctuary was built at Jerusalem He would have to destroy it again and again until He had finished with it for ever, just as He had had to destroy the seemingly permanent sanctuary at Shiloh when it had become corrupted.

Some have therefore considered that Yahweh was to choose a place in each of the twelve tribes. But there is no real evidence for this later, and it is contrary to His clear purpose. When two further places over and above the one place were chosen by Jeroboam he was for ever condemned for it (1 Kings 12:28-33). He was condemned by the ‘man of God’ because of the altar he had set up, not specifically because of the images (1 Kings 13:4).

42

All this would make sense to them because they would recognise that Moses was emphasising the centrality of the one Central Sanctuary, the Tabernacle (dwellingplace) of Yahweh, which must be established in ‘the place’ which He chose, whether the one place or many places in succession, but none at the same time. And they would personally come to that ‘place’, even though not all would enter the courtyard of the Tabernacle. It was not for them to choose where to worship Him, in the way that the Canaanites did, so that they proliferated worship sites and made Him a local god. It was a matter for Him solely to decide. He would determine the site where the tabernacle would be established at any time, which would then become sacred while it was there and honoured by Him (as Sinai became sacred once He chose to reveal Himself there). By this His oneness and His sovereignty were stressed, and His welcome to ‘the place’ where it was.

Thus where the Tabernacle, with the Ark of the Covenant of Yahweh, was set up was always to be the decision of Yahweh (determined initially by where the pillar of cloud and fire stopped, and later possibly by Urim and Thummim). Once in the land and at rest the place was to be semi-permanent. Initially it was probably near Shechem (Deuteronomy 27:1-8), as with Abraham on his first entry into the land. ‘Into the land of Canaan they came, and Abram passed through the land to the "place" of Shechem’ where he built an altar (Genesis 12:6). So all Israel on its arrival in the land would pass through the land to the place of Shechem (chapter 27). But it soon became Shiloh where it remained for over a hundred years (Joshua 18:1; Joshua 18:8-10; Joshua 19:51; Joshua 21:2; Joshua 22:9; Joshua 22:12; Judges 18:31; 1 Samuel 1:3; 1 Samuel 1:9; 1 Samuel 1:24; 1 Samuel 2:14; 1 Samuel 3:21; 1 Samuel 4:3-4; 1 Samuel 4:12; Psalms 78:60; Jeremiah 7:12; Jeremiah 7:14; Jeremiah 26:6; Jeremiah 26:9). That is how later writers saw it. Psalms 78:60 speaks of ‘the Tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent that He placed among men’, while Jeremiah 7:12 speaks of it in the words of Yahweh as ‘My place which was in Shiloh where I set My name at the first’. So it was in Shiloh that Yahweh set His name, and had Israel remained faithful perhaps it would have stayed there ‘for ever’. After the destruction of Shiloh when Yahweh forsook it (Psalms 78:60) it would much later become Jerusalem (1 Kings 11:13), but only in the time of Solomon, and only because Yahweh had forsaken Shiloh. While David placed the Ark in a tent in Jerusalem, the place for the Tabernacle at that time was seemingly Hebron and then Gibeon (2 Chronicles 1:3 - see introduction for further details of this). And in the ideal period it would be on a high mountain away from Jerusalem (Ezekiel 40-48), in an unidentified holy place. It was to be at the place that He chose.

Note also in this verse the easy way in which Moses mentions a whole host of ordinances through which they may express their worship which he expects the people to recognise immediately, demonstrating that he expects them to already have a knowledge of the contents of the Law. He is not here bringing a new Law before them but expounding an old one. These ordinances are sevenfold and as such therefore represented in themselves all offerings. The first two are offerings and sacrifices, covering offerings and sacrifices generally; the second two, tithes (Numbers 18:24-28; Leviticus 27:30-33) and heave (or ‘contribution’) offerings (Exodus 29:27-28; Leviticus 7:14; Leviticus 7:32; Numbers 18:8; Numbers 18:19), which represent what is set aside for Yahweh, mainly for the sustenance of the priests and Levites, but which once they are abundant they will share with the people in sacred meals (see later where the tithes, although still set aside for

43

Yahweh, are also usable for general worship at the sanctuary and for the poor); the third two are peace offerings, both votive and freewill (Leviticus 7:16; Leviticus 22:21; Leviticus 23:38; Numbers 15:3; Numbers 29:39), of which part would go to the priests and the remainder would be eaten by the offerer and his household and friends; the final one is the firstlings of their domestic animals which were especially devoted to Yahweh as a result of the deliverance at the Passover. They were holy to Yahweh and were at the disposal of the priests (Exodus 13:2; Exodus 13:12; Numbers 18:15; Numbers 18:17).

Note On The Use of The Term ‘The Place’ (maqom).

For using this term Moses had a number of reasons;

1) It was in contrast to ‘the places’ where the gods were worshipped (Deuteronomy 12:2-3). In our view this was probably a technical term for such places (prior to the term ‘high place’) applied also to the ‘place’ of Yahweh. See 2.

2) It was a reminder of, and connection with, the sacred ‘places’ at which the Patriarchs had worshipped. They had moved from place to place, but at each place they had a ‘place’ (maqom) for Yahweh where they built an altar to Him or worshipped Him. See Genesis 12:6; Genesis 13:4; Genesis 22:3; Genesis 22:14; Genesis 28:16-17; Genesis 32:2; Genesis 32:30; Genesis 35:7; Genesis 35:13-15; Exodus 3:5). Israel were now following in their footsteps.

3). It can be compared with Exodus 15:17, where the songwriter says, “You shall bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of your inheritance, the place, O Yahweh which You have made for You to dwell in, the Sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established.” Here Sanctuary (miqdash) and Place (macon) are in parallel, although it should be noted that the latter term is a different one from maqom, although similar, and is only ever used of God’s ‘place’ where He dwells (Psalms 33:14; Psalms 89:14 etc.) apart from in Psalms 104:5 where it refers to the foundations of the earth. An interesting example of its use is Ezra 2:68 ‘they came to the house of Yahweh which is in Jerusalem, offered willingly for the house of God to set it up in its place (macon)’. Here the site of the house of God is its ‘place’ (macon), which may assist in understanding the use of ‘place’ (maqom) here in Deuteronomy as the site in which the Sanctuary was set up.

4) We can hardly doubt that Moses in his mystical encounters with Yahweh (Exodus 33:11) would bring up the question as to whether when they were in the land he should arrange for the building of a temple to Yahweh (it would be more than incredible if the idea had not dawned on him). That would have been gently rebuffed by Yahweh (see 2 Samuel 7:6-7). All He wanted was a simple place where He could dwell among His people, one that was not so imposing that it made Him seem afar off, while being such that it protected His holiness. One that reminded them that He was not permanently connected with the earth. These ideas may well have implanted itself in Moses’ mind.

5) It connected Yahweh’s ‘place’ with the places which the Israelites themselves would step on and conquer, in His land (Deuteronomy 1:33; Deuteronomy 11:24). His place was in the centre of their place.

6) It probably spoke of a larger area than just the Tabernacle and its courtyard. It spoke of the whole ‘place’ where the multitude of Israelites would amass around

44

the Tabernacle, including among them at times all their households and many resident aliens. The Israelites were already aware of this difference within the camp. The space around the Tabernacle in which they gathered whenever the call went out differed from the court of the Tabernacle, and as a whole they were more familiar with it. It was guarded by the Levites. While not having the holiness of the Sanctuary it was still holy. Thus a space always had to be reserved around the Ark when it moved (Joshua 3:4).

7) The word maqom could also be used within the Sanctuary itself where reference is constantly made to ‘a holy place’.

8) Isaiah spoke of ‘the place (maqom) of the name of Yahweh of Hosts’ to which gifts would be brought for Yahweh. By that time it had become Mount Zion (Isaiah 18:7).

9). But the glory of the use here of ‘place’ is that it does not limit it to any specific earthly site, except at a particular time when he chose to be there. We too come to the ‘place’ that He has chosen as we approach His heavenly throne, and the Tabernacle in the heavens (Hebrews 8:2). Jesus entered, not a holy place on earth, but the holy place in heaven (Deuteronomy 9:24) to appear before the face of God for us.

Alternatively, if we do not see ‘the place’ as indicating a special place, but rather as deliberately vague terminology, we would argue that it was used so as to take the emphasis away from the place itself and put it on His choice and the One Who chose it, honouring not the place but Yahweh.

6 there bring your burnt offerings and

sacrifices, your tithes and special gifts, what you

have vowed to give and your freewill offerings,

and the firstborn of your herds and flocks.

BARNES, "Some have objected that this command cannot possibly have been ever carried out, at all events until in later (lays the territory which owned obedience to it was narrowed to the little kingdom of Judah. But in these and in other precepts Moses doubtless takes much for granted. He is here, as elsewhere, regulating and defining more precisely institutions which had long been in existence, as to many details of which custom superseded the necessity of specific enactment. No doubt the people well understood what Maimonides expressly tells us in reference to the matter, namely, that where immediate payment could not be made, the debt to God was to be reserved until the next great Feast, and then duly discharged. The thing especially to be observed was that no kind of sacrifice was to be offered except at the sacred spot fixed by God for its acceptance.

45

GILL, "And thither ye shall bring your burnt offerings,.... For the daily sacrifice, and upon any other account whatsoever; this was before ordered to be brought to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and now to the place where that should be fixed, Lev_17:8.

and your sacrifices: all other distinct from burnt offerings, as sin offerings, trespass offerings, and peace offerings, especially the latter. Jarchi interprets them of peace offerings of debt, such as a man was obliged to bring; but as the distance of some persons from Jerusalem was very great, and it was troublesome and expensive, they might, according to the Jewish writers, bring them the next grand festival, when all the males were obliged to appear there; so says Maimonides (c), all offerings of a man, whether by obligation (such as he was bound to bring) or freewill offerings, he must bring at the first feast that comes; and another of their writers observes (d), that if only one feast has passed, and he has not brought his vow, he transgresses an affirmative precept, Deu_12:6 the first feast on which thou comest thither, thou must needs bring it; and if three have passed, he transgresses a negative precept, Deu_23:21.

and your tithes; tithes of beasts, and the second tithes, according to Jarchi:

and heave offerings of your hand; these according to the same writer were the firstfruits, and so it is rendered in the Septuagint version; and thus Maimonides (e)says, the firstfruits are called Trumot, or heave offerings; see Exo_22:29.

and your vows and your freewill offerings; which were a type of peace offerings, Lev_7:16.

and the firstlings of your herds and of your flocks; which were sanctified and devoted to the Lord, Exo_13:2.

HENRY 6-7, "II. They are commanded to bring all their burnt-offerings and sacrifices to this place that God would choose (Deu_12:6 and again Deu_12:11): Thither shall you bring all that I command you; and (Deu_12:14), There thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings; and (Deu_12:27), The flesh and the blood must be offered upon the altar of the Lord thy God. And of their peace-offerings, here called their sacrifices, though they were to eat the flesh, yet the blood was to be poured out upon the altar. By this they were taught that sacrifices and offerings God did not desire, nor accept, for their own sake, nor for any intrinsic worth in them, as natural expressions of homage and adoration; but that they received their virtue purely from that altar on which they were offered, as it typified Christ; whereas prayers and praises, as much more necessary and valuable, were to be offered every day by the people of God wherever they were. A devout Israelite might honour God, and keep up communion with him, and obtain mercy from him, though he had not an opportunity, perhaps, for many months together, of bringing a sacrifice to his altar. But this signified the obligation we Christians are under to offer up all our spiritual sacrifices to God in the name of Jesus Christ, hoping for acceptance only upon the score of his mediation, 1Pe_2:5.

III. They are commanded to feast upon their hallowed things before the Lord, with holy joy. They must not only bring to the altar the sacrifices which were to be offered to God, but hey must bring to the place of the altar all those things which they were appointed by the law to eat and drink, to the honour of God, in token of their communion with him, Deu_12:6. Their, tithes, and heave-offerings of their hand,

46

that is, their first-fruits, their vows, and free-will-offerings, and firstlings, all those things which were to be religiously made use of either by themselves or by the priests and Levites, must be brought to the place which God would choose; as all the revenues of the crown, from all parts of the kingdom, are brought into the exchequer. And (Deu_12:7): There you shall eat before the Lord, and rejoice in all that you put your hands unto; and again (Deu_12:12), You shall rejoice before the Lord, you, and your sons, and your daughters. Observe here, 1. That what we do in the service of God and to his glory redounds to our benefit, if it be not our own fault. Those that sacrifice to God are welcome to eat before him, and to feast upon their sacrifices: he sups with us, and we with him, Rev_3:20. If we glorify God, we edify ourselves, and cultivate our own minds, through the grace of God, by the increase of our knowledge and faith, the enlivening of devout affections, and the confirming of gracious habits and resolutions: thus is the soul nourished. 2. That work for God should be done with holy joy and cheerfulness. You shall eat and rejoice, Deu_12:7, and again, Deu_12:12and Deu_12:18. (1.) Now while they were before the Lord they must rejoice, Deu_12:12. It is the will of God that we should serve him with gladness; none displeased him more than those that covered his altar with tears. Mal_2:13. See what a good Master we serve, who has made it our duty to sing at our work. Even the children and servants must rejoice with them before God, that the services of religion might be a pleasure to them, and not a task or drudgery. (2.) They must carry away with themthe grateful relish of that delight which they found in communion with God; they must rejoice in all that they put their hands unto, Deu_12:7. Some of the comfort which they must take with them into their common employments; and, being thus strengthened in soul, whatever they did they must do it heartily and cheerfully. And this holy pious joy in God and his goodness, with which we are to rejoice evermore, would be the best preservative against the sin and snare of vain and carnal mirthand a relief against the sorrows of the world.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 12:6. Thither bring your burnt-offerings — Which

were wisely appropriated to that one place, for the security of the true religion,

and for the prevention of idolatry and superstition, which might otherwise more

easily have crept in; and to signify that their sacrifices were not accepted for

their own worth, but by God’s gracious appointment, and for the sake of God’s

altar, by which they were sanctified, and for the sake of Christ, whom the altar

manifestly represented. Your heave-offerings — That is, your first-fruits of corn,

and wine, and oil, and other fruits. And these are called the heave-offerings of

their hand, because the offerer was first to take these into his hands, and to

heave them before the Lord, and then to give them to the priest. Your free-will-

offerings — Even your voluntary oblations, which were not due by my

prescription, but only by your own choice: you may choose what kind of

offerings you please to offer, but not the place where you shall offer them.

47

7 There, in the presence of the Lord your God,

you and your families shall eat and shall rejoice

in everything you have put your hand to,

because the Lord your God has blessed you.

BARNES, "An injunction that the feasts which accompanied certain offerings (not specified) were to be also held in the same place.\

GILL, "And there ye shall eat before the Lord your God,.... The priests and the Levites, what was their portion, so Aben Ezra; but the people also are included, and by what follows seem chiefly designed, who were to eat their part of the sacrifices, particularly of the tithes and peace offerings, in the holy place that should be chosen and appointed; see Deu_14:22.

and ye shall rejoice in all that ye put your hand unto; in all the labours of their hands, and what they got thereby, which they were cheerfully to enjoy, and express their thankfulness for it in this way; see Ecc_5:18.

ye and your households; their wives, sons, daughters, men and maid servants; yea, with them Levites, strangers, fatherless, and widows, were to partake of some of their freewill offerings, Deu_16:10.

wherein the Lord thy God hath blessed thee; and these offerings were eucharistical, and by way of thanksgiving for the blessing of God upon their labours, for it is that which maketh rich, Pro_10:22.

JAMISON, "there ye shall eat before the Lord — of the things mentioned (Deu_12:6); but of course, none of the parts assigned to the priests before the Lord -in the place where the sanctuary should be established, and in those parts of the Holy City which the people were at liberty to frequent and inhabit.

CALVIN, "7And there shall ye eat. We see that the sanctuary in which God

manifested Himself is called His face; (105) for, although believers are taught

that always, wherever they dwell, they walk before God; yet they placed

themselves nearer, and in some special manner in His sight, when they

approached His sanctuary. By this mode of speaking God also stimulates the

laziness or tardiness of the people, lest it should be irksome to them to come to

the Ark of the Covenant for the purpose of sacrificing, inasmuch as this

inestimable benefit would compensate for the labor and expense of the journey. I

have elsewhere shewn that, when men are said to feast before the Lord, sacred

feasts are thus distinguished from our daily meals. For this was as it were an

48

accessory to the sacrifices, to eat what remained of the victims; and in this way

the guests were made partakers of the offering, which custom even heathen

nations imitated, though improperly. Again, God kindly invites them when He

says, “ye shall rejoice in all that thou puttest thine hands unto,” for which some

translate it, “in everything to which you shall have sent your hand;” literally it is,

“in the sending forth of the land.” There is no ambiguity in the sense, for it refers

to those works which require the motion and application of the hands. A little

below, where I have translated it, “which he hath blessed,” (quibus benedixerit,)

some insert the proposition in, and supply the pronoun you, (i.e., in which he

hath blessed you;) but it is quite appropriate to say, that God blesses their works,

although it may be understood of their families also. As to the command that the

tithes should be eaten in the holy place, I do not extend it to tithes in general,

(106) for it was hardly probable that the food of those who were dispersed

through various cities should be transferred to another place, so that they would

perish (at home) (107) from hunger; but I understand it of the second tithes,

which the Levites separated to be a special and peculiar oblation; for we shall see

elsewhere that what remained over passed into the nature of ordinary produce,

as if the Levites ate of the fruits of their own possessions.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 12:7. There — Not in the tabernacle or temple, where

only the priests might eat the most holy things, (Numbers 18:10,) but in the court

of the tabernacle, or in some place adjacent to the sanctuary. Ye shall eat —

Your part of the things mentioned Deuteronomy 12:6; before the Lord — In the

place of his peculiar presence, where his sanctuary shall be. And ye shall

rejoice — For God is to be served with delight and gladness, and his worship

ought to be a source of consolation to us, and it will be such if we worship him in

spirit and truth. In all that you put your hand unto — In all your possessions

and labours whatsoever, which shall otherwise be accursed to you.

8 You are not to do as we do here today,

everyone doing as they see fit,

BARNES, "Moses points out that heretofore they had not observed the prescribed order in their worship, because during their migratory life in the wilderness it had been impossible to do so. During their wanderings there were doubtless times when the tabernacle was not set up for days together, and when the daily sacrifice Num_28:3, together with many other ordinances, were necessarily omitted (compare Jos_

49

5:5). This consideration must be carefully borne in mind throughout Deuteronomy. It illustrates the necessity for a repetition of very much of the Sinaitic legislation, and suggests the reason why some parts are so urgently reiterated and impressed, while others are left unnoticed. Moses now warns the people that as they were about to quit their unsettled mode of life, God’s purpose of choosing for Himself a place to set His Name there would be executed, and the whole of the sacred ritual would consequently become obligatory. The “rest and safety” of Canaan is significantly laid down Deu_12:10-11 as the indispensable condition and basis for an entire fulfillment of the Law: the perfection of righteousness coinciding thus with the cessation of wanderings, dangers, and toils.

GILL, "Ye shall not do after all the things that we do here,.... In the wilderness, where they had no abiding, but were continually removing from place to place, and could not always observe punctually and precisely the exact order and time of their sacrifices and other things, nor offer them at any certain place, and many were doubtless neglected by them; see Amo_5:25.

every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes; that did he, brought the above things when and where he pleased; not that there was no regard had to the laws and rules given, as if there was no priest in Israel; but they were not so exactly in all circumstances conformed to as they would be obliged to when they came into the land of Canaan, and had a certain place to bring their offerings to; so some in Aben Ezra observe, that one would give the firstling, another not, because it depended on the land, or was what they were obliged to only when they came into the land of Canaan; see Exo_13:11 but he thinks the sense is, that they did not all fear God, and so did not do their duty.

HENRY 8-9, "VI. They are forbidden to keep up either their own corrupt usages in the wilderness or the corrupt usages of their predecessors in the land of Canaan.

1. They must not keep up those improper customs which they had got into in the wilderness, and which were connived at in consideration of the present unsettledness of their condition (Deu_12:8, Deu_12:9): You shall not do after all the things that we do here this day. Never was there a better governor than Moses, and one would think never a better opportunity of keeping up good order and discipline than now among the people of Israel, when they lay so closely encamped under the eye of their governor; and yet it seems there was much amiss and many irregularities had crept in among them. We must never expect to see any society perfectly pure and right, and as it should be till we come to the heavenly Canaan. They had sacrifices and religious worship, courts of justice and civil government, and, by the stoning of the man that gathered sticks on the sabbath day, it appears there was great strictness used in guarding the most weighty matters of the law; but being frequently upon the remove, and always at uncertainty, (1.) They could none of them observe the solemn feasts, and the rites of cleansing, with the exactness that the law required. And, (2.) Those among them that were disposed to do amiss had opportunity given them to do it unobserved by the frequent interruptions which their removals gave to the administration of justice. But (says Moses) when you come to Canaan, you shall not do as we do here. Note, When the people of God are in an unsettled condition, that may be tolerated and dispensed with which would by no means be allowed at another time. Cases of necessity are to be considered while the necessity continues; but that must not be done in Canaan which was done in the wilderness. While a house is in the building a great deal of dirt and rubbish are suffered to lie by it, which must all be

50

taken away when the house is built. Moses was now about to lay down his life and government, and it was a comfort to him to foresee that Israel would be better in the next reign than they had been in his.

CALVIN, "8Ye shall not do after all. Even then they observed the rite of

sacrifice handed down to them from the fathers; but since as yet they were

wandering in the desert, it was lawful for them to build altars anywhere, until an

end should be put to their journeyings. And this Moses expressly declares,

adding the reason, viz., that they had not yet entered into the rest which the Lord

had promised them. He shews them, then, that when they shall have attained the

tranquil possession of the land, there would be no further room for excuse if they

should sacrifice wheresoever it pleased them. When, therefore, it is said that they

then did “every man whatsoever was right in his own eyes,” it does not extend to

any of the inventions which men devise for themselves in the worship of God, but

only points out a freer system and form in the exercise of devotion, before the

place was shewn them in which they must stay their foot. (108)

COFFMAN, "Deuteronomy 12:8-12 here are the second pronouncement of what

some have called "The law of the one altar." There are three such

pronouncements in this chapter:

(1) Deuteronomy 12:2-7

(2) Deuteronomy 12:8-12

(3) Deuteronomy 12:13-19

The law of the one altar, however, actually should be read as "one altar at a

time," and not that any place, wheresoever, should be honored as "the ONLY

altar." Shiloh and Shechem were just as legitimately "the place God chose," as

Jerusalem was. In fact, God himself made the change to Jerusalem through His

prophet David. "In patriarchal times, when a succession of altars was built in the

course of the patriarchs' journeyings, there was apparently but one central

family altar at any given time."[14] Thus, all Israel was familiar with what was

meant by "the place which God would choose." From Exodus 20:24, we must

conclude that "the place" always meant at "at any place," where God revealed

His glorious nature by some special, supernatural theophany, "the place of God's

51

symbolical dwelling place in the midst of His people."[15]

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 12:8. That we do here — Where the inconvenience of

the place, and the uncertainty of their abode, would not permit exact order in

sacrifices, and feasts, and ceremonies, which therefore God was then pleased to

dispense with; but, saith he, he will not do so there. Right in his own eyes — Not

that universal liberty was given to all persons to worship how they listed: but in

many things their unsettled condition gave opportunity to do so.

COKE, "Ver. 8. Every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes— While the

Israelites in the wilderness were destitute of many things requisite to the exact

performance of all their sacred rites, and not yet sufficiently accustomed to the

yoke of their new laws, they were excused from the observance of many of them.

We have several proofs of this, particularly the total neglect of circumcision

during the whole space of the forty years in the wilderness, though it had been

carefully observed in Egypt: but that, in all the parts of their conduct, they were

left every man to do what was right in his own eyes, is sufficiently contradicted

from the former part of this history. Thus we find blasphemy, and a violation of

the sabbath, punished, Lev. 35:23. Numbers 15:32 no less than the mutinous

attempt to wrest the priesthood from Aaron's family. Moses, therefore, as the

context abundantly proves, has an immediate regard, in these words, to the

performance of their duties at the place which God should choose, to the

payment of tithes, and such other things as belonged to the priests and Levites.

In a word, the meaning is, that, in their present ambulatory and uncertain state,

they could not practise those precepts which were annexed to the land, and

required a settled condition. See Calmet and Le Clerc. In which view of the text,

one cannot help reading, with astonishment, the very absurd deduction and false

quotation made by Voltaire in the 12th chapter of his Treatise on Toleration.

SBC 8-9, "Moses warns the Israelites here in the text that it would be a great mistake if they supposed themselves more at their ease and liberty when they were in Canaan than when they were in the wilderness. He mentions it as one of the advantages of Canaan that they would there be able to live by a stricter and more exact rule than they could possibly do in the desert. In the same way, our Saviour, inviting us to the blessings of the Gospel, describes them as a yoke and a burden, easy, indeed, and light, yet still a yoke and a burden.

I. We see, then, that both the law and the Gospel consider it a great blessing to be kept under strict rules. This way of thinking is by no means the way of the world. People in general like nothing so much as having their own choice in all things. We see this: (1) in the eagerness of children to get out of the state of childhood; (2) in our unwillingness to take advice, even from the wisest; (3) in our unwillingness to let God choose for us, and our impatience under the burdens He lays upon us.

II. To have this thought of being overruled and guided at every step firmly fixed within us will prove the greatest of all blessings both as to our rest in this world and our inheritance in that which is to come. It helps us greatly in the performance of our duty, because, in truth, it leaves us nothing else to do. It prepares and trains us for everlasting happiness in heaven. For the very secret of our enjoyment there will be

52

that God’s will shall be ours. It shows the high and noble uses to which we may turn all our worst disappointments. They are so many lessons in God’s school, each intended to make us more perfect in that Divine art of having the same will that He has.

Plain Sermons by Contributors to "Tracts for the Times" vol. ii., p. 104 (see also Keble, Sermons for the Christian Year: Ascension Day to Trinity Sunday, p. 53).

PETT 8-9, "Deuteronomy 12:8-9

‘You shall not do after all the things that we do here this day, every man whatever is right in his own eyes, for you are not as yet come to the rest and to the inheritance, which Yahweh your God gives you,’

Having described what they are to do in the future he now confirms that it must be in accordance with all the instruction that has previously been given them. Deuteronomy constantly emphasises such previous instruction. Moses accepted that at the present time the ordinances were not being fulfilled exactly as required. The contrast with this verse is the setting up of the Central Sanctuary and its worship as prescribed. ‘Every man doing what is right in his own eyes’ signifies men making their own personal judgments, not necessarily just a free for all. We must not assume that all of the people of God chose to sin when they ‘did what was right in their own eyes’. It simply means that each did what he thought was right, that the Law was not strictly followed. In the difficult conditions of the wilderness, and even here in the plains of Moab, breaches of the strict requirements would be necessary due to unavoidable circumstances, judgments would have to be made on them, and these were seemingly acceptable where carried out from a sincere heart. God was not unreasonable. Being on the march sometimes interfered with their ability to fulfil the Law exactly. For example there would be difficulty in offering the daily offerings, lighting and trimming the lamps and so on. But it was not to be so once the Tabernacle was in a settled place. Then they were to be careful to fulfil all His instruction.

There may, however, also be a reference to various forms of disobedience, with Moses being aware of how often they broke Yahweh’s statutes and ordinances. For that is certainly one inference of the phrase in Judges 17:6; Judges 21:25; compare Proverbs 16:2; Proverbs 21:2. And he has previously referred to ‘all that you put your hand to’ (Deuteronomy 12:7). For a period this was being tolerated. But the expectancy was that when they entered into the rest and inheritance which Yahweh was to give them such spasmodic disobedience would definitely cease. Then they must more perfectly come under His rule.

How like many of us they were. We too think that we can stretch God’s commandments to suit ourselves, and for a time we too get away with it. But we should beware. We should remember those who died in the wilderness did so because they were disobedient. We too may ‘die in the wilderness’.

53

9 since you have not yet reached the resting

place and the inheritance the Lord your God is

giving you.

GILL, "For ye are not yet come to the rest,.... The land of Canaan, which was typical of the rest which remains for the people of God in heaven; for though they now enter into a spiritual rest in Christ, they are not yet come to their eternal rest; they are in a world of trouble, through sin, Satan, and wicked men; but they shall come to it, as Israel did to Canaan; for God has promised and prepared it, and it remains for them; Christ prayed for it, is also gone to prepare it, and the Spirit is the seal and earnest of it, and works up the saints, and makes them meet for it:

and to the inheritance which the Lord your God giveth you; and the land of Canaan being an inheritance, and the gift of God, was also a type of the heavenly inheritance; which saints are now born unto, and have both a right unto, and meetness for, through the righteousness of Christ, and grace of God; but as yet are not entered on it, but that is reserved for them in heaven, and they are preserved and kept for that; and ere long shall inherit it, as the free gift of God their Father to them, and which is peculiar to them as children. Jarchi and Ben Melech by the "rest" understand Shiloh, and by the inheritance Jerusalem; so in the Misnah (f); see 1Ch_23:25 the Targum of Jonathan is,"ye are not come to the house of the sanctuary, which is the house of rest, and to the inheritance of the land.''

10 But you will cross the Jordan and settle in

the land the Lord your God is giving you as an

inheritance, and he will give you rest from all

your enemies around you so that you will live in

safety.

54

GILL, "But when ye go over Jordan,.... Which lay between the place where they now were, and the land of Canaan, and which they would quickly go over:

and dwell in the land which the Lord your God giveth you to inherit; the land of Canaan, and which shows that that is meant by the inheritance: and when

he giveth you rest from all your enemies round about: which was done when the land was subdued, and divided among the tribes of Israel, Jos_22:4 and which confirms the sense of Canaan being the rest; though this was more completely fulfilled in the days of David, when he and Israel had rest from all their enemies round about, 2Sa_7:1 and who brought the ark of the Lord to Jerusalem; and into whose heart the Lord put it to prepare to build a temple at Jerusalem for him, and which was erected and finished in the days of his son Solomon:

so that ye dwell in safety; from their enemies, as they more especially did in the reigns of David and Solomon; which seems plainly to describe the time when the place not named should appear to be chosen by the Lord to put his name in, as follows.

HENRY 10-11, "Let us now reduce this long charge to its proper heads.

I. It is here promised that when they were settled in Canaan, when they had rest from their enemies, and dwelt in safety, God would choose a certain place, which he would appoint to be the centre of their unity, to which they should bring all their offerings, Deu_12:10, Deu_12:11. Observe, 1. If they just be tied to one place, they should not be left in doubt concerning it, but should certainly know what place it was. Had Christ intended, under the gospel, to make any one place such a seat of power as Rome pretends to be, we should not have been left so destitute of instruction as we are concerning the appointed place. 2. God does not leave it to them to choose the place, lest the tribes should have quarrelled about it, each striving, for their secular advantage, to have it among them; but he reserves the choice to himself, as he does the designation of the Redeemer and the institution of holy ordinances. 3. He does not appoint the place now, as he had appointed mounts Gerizim and Ebal, for the pronouncing of the blessings and curses (Deu_11:29), but reserves the doing of it till hereafter, that hereby they might be made to expect further directions from heaven, and a divine conduct, after Moses should be removed. The place which God would choose is said to be the place where he would put his name, that is, which he would have to be called his, where his honour should dwell, where he would manifest himself to his people, and make himself known, as men do by their names, and where he would receive addresses, by which his name is both praised and called upon. It was to be his habitation, where, as King of Israel, he would keep court, and be found by all those that reverently sought him. The ark was the token of God's presence, and where that was put there God put his name, and that was his habitation. It contained the tables of the law; for none must expect to receive favours from God's hand but those that are willing to receive the law from his mouth. The place which God first chose for the ark to reside in was Shiloh; and, after that place had sinned away its honours, we find the ark at Kirjath-jearim and other places; but at length, in David's time, it was fixed at Jerusalem, and God said concerning Solomon's temple, more expressly than ever he had said concerning any other place, This I have chosen for a house of sacrifice, 2Ch_7:12. Compare 2Ch_6:5.

55

Now, under the gospel, we have no temple that sanctifies the gold, no altar that sanctifies the gift, but Christ only; and, as to the places of worship, the prophets foretold that in every place the spiritual incense should be offered, Mal_1:11. And our Saviour has declared that those are accepted as true worshippers who worship God in sincerity and truth, without regard either to this mountain or Jerusalem, Joh_4:23.

CALVIN, "10.But when ye go over Jordan. This verse confirms what I have

before said, that the Jews were constrained to a certain rule as soon as they

should have reached the promised land; and yet that the place in which the Ark

was perpetually to rest, would not be immediately manifested to them; for what

is declared at the end of the verse, that God would give them rest round about, so

that they should dwell in safety, was not in fact perfectly exhibited before the

time of David. Still God would have them, as soon as they were in enjoyment of

the land, come together even from their remotest boundaries to the sanctuary.

He omits certain kinds of offerings of which he had lately spoken, and puts,

instead of “vows, ” (109) “the choice vows,” which some translate “very choice

vows,” or “the chief things in your vows.” I do not reject this; but the other sense

is more simple, that all the vows were comprised which every one had made of

his own free judgment and choice. Soon afterwards he more fully expresses his

meaning, when he prohibits them from offering sacrifices of their own accord in

any places that might please them; for, “to see a place, ” here, is equivalent to

being carried away by the sight, so as to connect religion and holiness with

elegance and beauty.

K&D 10-14, "Deu_12:10-14

But when the Israelites had crossed over the Jordan, and dwelt peaceably in Canaan, secured against their enemies round about, these irregularities were not to occur any more; but all the sacrifices were to be offered at the place chosen by the Lord for the dwelling-place of His name, and there the sacrificial meals were to be held with joy before the Lord. “The choice of your vows,” equivalent to your chosen

vows, inasmuch as every vow was something special, as the standing phrase נדר "!א(Lev_22:21, and Num_15:3, Num_15:8) distinctly shows. - “Rejoicing before the Lord,” which is the phrase applied in Lev_23:40 to the celebration of the feast of Tabernacles, was to be the distinctive feature of all the sacrificial meals held by the people at the sanctuary, as is repeatedly affirmed (Deu_14:26; Deu_16:11; Deu_26:11; Deu_27:7). This holy joy in the participation of the blessing bestowed by the Lord was to be shared not only by sons and daughters, but also by salve (men-servants and maid-servants), that they too might taste the friendliness of their God, and also by “the Levite that is in your gates” (i.e., your towns and hamlets; see at Exo_20:10). This frequently recurring description of the Levites (cf. Deu_12:18; Deu_14:27; Deu_16:11, Deu_16:14; Deu_18:6; Deu_26:12) does not assume that they were homeless, which would be at variance with the allotment of towns for them to dwell in (Num 35); but simply implies what is frequently added in explanation, that the Levites had “no part nor inheritance,” no share of the land as their hereditary property, and in this respect resembled strangers (Deu_14:21, Deu_14:29; Deu_16:11, etc.).

(Note: The explanation given by De Wette, and adopted by Riehm, of the

56

expression, “the Levite that is within thy gates,” is perfectly arbitrary and unfounded: viz., that “the Levites did not live any longer in the towns assigned them by the earlier laws, but were scattered about in the different towns of the other tribes.”)

And the repeated injunction to invite the Levites to the sacrificial meals is not at variance with Num_18:21, where the tithes are assigned to the tribe of Levi for their maintenance. For however ample this revenue may have been according to the law, it was so entirely dependent, upon the honesty and conscientiousness of the people, that the Levites might very easily be brought into a straitened condition, if indifference towards the Lord and His servants should prevail throughout the nation. - In Deu_12:13, Deu_12:14, Moses concludes by once more summing up these instructions in the admonition to beware of offering sacrifices in every place that they might choose, the burnt-offering, as the leading sacrifice, being mentioned instar omnium.

PETT 10-12, "Verses 10-12

When They Dwell In The Land Of Their Inheritance They Must Worship At the Place Which Yahweh Their God Chooses (Deuteronomy 12:10-12).

Deuteronomy 12:10-11

‘But when you go over the Jordan, and dwell in the land which Yahweh your God causes you to inherit, and he gives you rest from all your enemies round about, so that you dwell in safety, then it shall come about that to the place which Yahweh your God shall choose, to cause his name to dwell there, to there shall you bring all that I command you: your burnt-offerings, and your sacrifices, your tithes, and the heave-offering (or ‘contribution offering’) of your hand, and all your choice vows which you vow to Yahweh.’

But once they have crossed over Jordan into the land, and they are finally settled, and have rest from all their enemies round about (seen as fulfilled in Joshua 23:1, still many years hence), so that they dwell in safety, and a safe place has been set up for the Tabernacle, a permanent place in the place where Yahweh their God has chosen to cause His name to dwell there (Jeremiah 7:12; 2 Samuel 7:13; compare Psalms 74:7), then they shall come with their offerings and gifts and tithes and make their vows. Then the statutes and ordinances must be followed precisely. And then their lives must be in tune with His requirements.

This certainly does not mean that during this intermediate period no one brought offerings and gifts to the Tabernacle. The point is rather that not all would be able to, as they would be involved in fighting or defending the places that they had won. It was only when full safety and rest had been achieved that they would therefore be finally fully bound by all the covenant requirements.

Note that strictly speaking it was not the setting up of the Tabernacle in its ‘place’ that was to be delayed until then, but the carrying out of the full ritual and ordinances, especially as they related to the people. Yahweh set His ‘place’ in

57

the land from the very beginning, even though it moved around. But once they were settled in the land and at peace they would be free to worship Him fully in accordance with His requirements.

11 Then to the place the Lord your God will

choose as a dwelling for his Name—there you

are to bring everything I command you: your

burnt offerings and sacrifices, your tithes and

special gifts, and all the choice possessions you

have vowed to the Lord.

GILL, "Then there shall be a place,.... Fixed and settled, and will be known to be the place:

which the Lord your God shall choose, to cause his name to dwell there: where he himself would dwell, and where his name would be called, and he would be worshipped:

thither shall ye bring all that I command you, your burnt offerings and your sacrifices, your tithes, and the heave offerings of your hands; of which See Gill on Deu_12:6.

and all your choice vows which ye vow unto the Lord; or, "the choice of your vows" (g); which, as Jarchi observes, was brought of their choicest things, as they ought to be; see Mal_1:14.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 12:11. His name — His majesty and glory, his worship

and service, his special and gracious presence. Your choice vows — Hebrew, the

choice of your vows; that is, your select or chosen vows; so called, because things

offered for vows were to be perfect, whereas defective creatures were accepted in

free-will-offerings. Your daughters — Hence it appears, that though the males

only were obliged to appear before God in their solemn feasts, yet the women

also were permitted to come.

COKE, "Ver. 11. Thither shall ye bring all that I command— Maimonides

58

observes, that one design of this institution was, to teach the Israelites not to have

too high an opinion of sacrifices, since they were not of such account in the sight

of God as to be accepted everywhere; but were limited to one place, and to be

offered only by one family. Prayers and praises, which were the essentials of

religion, might be offered up everywhere; but sacrifices, and other ceremonies of

worship, being appointed, not for any good in themselves, but only to reclaim the

people from idolatry, and to establish the belief of the unity of God, were only

acceptable when offered at the sanctuary of Jehovah. Hence the prophets are so

zealous in reproving the Jews for their laying a stress upon sacrifices, as, of

themselves, available toward procuring the favour of God; whilst they neglect

the study of real holiness, which is the end of all those institutions. 1 Samuel

15:22. Isaiah 1:11. Jeremiah 7:22-23. See More Nevoch. pars 3: cap. 32.

12 And there rejoice before the Lord your

God—you, your sons and daughters, your male

and female servants, and the Levites from your

towns who have no allotment or inheritance of

their own.

GILL, "And ye shall rejoice before the Lord your God,.... In the place chosen and fixed, where a temple would be built for him, and he would take up his residence; eating with joy and gladness that part of the offerings which belonged to them, keeping as it were a feast before the Lord, in token of gratitude for what they had received from him:

ye and your sons, and your daughters, and your menservants, and your maidservants; which explains what is meant by their household, Deu_12:7 wives are not mentioned, because it could not be thought they would eat and rejoice, or keep such a feast, without them, and therefore needless to name them:

and the Levite that is within your gates; such also were to partake of this entertainment, who were useful in instructing their families in the knowledge of divine things, and serviceable to them on many accounts in the worship of God:

59

forasmuch as he hath no part nor inheritance with you; in the division of the land, and so having nothing to manure and cultivate, was destitute of the fruits of the earth, and could make no improvement and increase of his substance, as they could.

HENRY, "IV. They are commanded to be kind to the Levites. Did they feast with joy? The Levites must feast with them, and rejoice with them, Deu_12:12, and again, Deu_12:18; and a general caution (Deu_12:19), Take heed that thou forsake not the Levite as long as thou livest. There were Levites that attended the altar as assistants to the priests, and these must not be forsaken, that is, the service they performed must be constantly adhered to; no other altar must be set up than that which God appointed; for that would be to forsake the Levites. But this seems to be spoken of the Levites that were dispersed in the country to instruct the people in the law of God, and to assist them in their devotions; for it is the Levite within their gates that they are here commanded to make much of. It is a great mercy to have Levites near us, within our gates, that we may ask the law at their mouth, and at our feasts to be a check upon us, to restrain excesses. And it is the duty of people to be kind to their ministers that give them good instructions and set them good examples. As long as we live we shall need their assistance, till we come to that world where ordinances will be superseded; and therefore as long as we live we must not forsake the Levites. The reason given (Deu_12:12) is because the Levite has no part nor inheritance with you, so that he cannot grow rich by husbandry or trade; let him therefore share with you in the comfort of your riches. They must give the Levites their tithes and offerings, settled on them by the law, because they had no other maintenance.

JAMISON, "ye shall rejoice before the Lord your God, ye, and your sons, and your daughters, etc. — Hence it appears that, although males only were commanded to appear before God at the annual solemn feasts (Exo_23:17), the women were allowed to accompany them (1Sa_1:3-23).

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:12

‘And you shall rejoice before Yahweh your God, you, and your sons, and your daughters, and your men-servants, and your maid-servants, and the Levite who is within your gates, forasmuch as he has no portion nor inheritance with you.’

And having come into rest it was at this place that all Israel were to rejoice before Yahweh. They would have received the rest and security that He had promised them and their fathers (compare Deuteronomy 12:9). The promises would finally have been fulfilled. All would take part in the rejoicing. The idea of ‘rejoicing’ in this way included the partaking of ritual meals in fellowship before Yahweh. At Sinai that had been for the favoured, here it was for all (Exodus 24:11). This included their menservants and their maidservants, and the Levites who sojourned among them and were spread out over the whole of Israel. This description ‘within your gates’, (that is living among them) is never used specifically of ‘the levitical priests’ (the priests the Levites), only of ‘the Levites’. (See Deuteronomy 12:18; Deuteronomy 14:27; Deuteronomy 16:11; Deuteronomy 16:14; Deuteronomy 18:6; Deuteronomy 26:12). While they mainly dwelt in their own cities, some moved about in the cities and towns of Israel, and some bought residences there.

60

The Levites were seemingly guides as to the Law (Deuteronomy 33:10; 2 Chronicles 17:8-9; 2 Chronicles 30:22; 2 Chronicles 35:3) and presumably supervisors of the tithes, for dealing with one tenth of all produce and births of domestic animals would require close assistance and supervision, and the Levites had been given responsibility to account for one tenth of that tenth to the priests (Numbers 18:26-28). This confirms that they were appointed to look after the collection of the tithes, for they could not do this if they did not supervise them. They had no inheritance (no specific allocation of land to each individual) in the land, because Yahweh (Joshua 13:33) and the tithes (Numbers 18:26) and the priesthood (Joshua 18:7) and the offerings by fire (’ishshah, or possibly ‘gifts’, compare Ugaritic ’usn) were their inheritance (Joshua 13:14). They were therefore looked to with great reverence by the godly, and even by such as Micah (Judges 17:13 - but it should be noted that Micah had been ready to appoint his son as a priest. What he did finally do did not mean that Levites were authorised to be priests, simply that he saw them as a large step up from his son because of their special status).

“You shall rejoice before Yahweh your God.” Compare Deuteronomy 12:7. This phrase is applied in Leviticus 23:40 to the celebration of the feast of Tabernacles, and was to be the distinctive feature of all the sacrificial meals held by the people at the sanctuary, as is repeatedly affirmed (Deuteronomy 14:26; Deuteronomy 16:11; Deuteronomy 16:14; Deuteronomy 26:11; Deuteronomy 27:7). Coming to Yahweh, once their sins were forgiven, was normally a matter for rejoicing, for then they celebrated all that Yahweh had given them in their harvests, and they would have special rejoicing because they had rest and security in their land. This aspect of rejoicing is one of the special emphases of Deuteronomy, coming from the fact that it is not a solemn announcing of the Law but a speech to the people describing among other things their worship. As with the use of ‘the place’, so with the response of joyful worship, the idea is concentrated on the response of the ordinary people (‘you and your households - verse 7) in overall worship rather than representing the limitation to sanctuary and ordinances. While the latter were certainly assumed, He did not want the people to see their involvement as just to be in a ritual which could become empty. All were to be involved in joyous worship, and joyous eating before Yahweh in the very place chosen by Yahweh, and this included men and women, menservants and maidservants, and resident aliens, and was to be in ‘the place’ in which the sanctuary was set up.

How great then should be our rejoicing who come to a better Tabernacle, the heavenly Tabernacle, through our Lord Jesus Christ (Hebrews 9:11-12; Hebrews 10:19-25), to gather with Him at the throne of God, the throne of grace.

The picture here in Deuteronomy goes beyond what turned out to be the actuality. It is a picture of the final goal achieved, it is of the kingly rule of God established and total blessing. It is looking to the time when all are at rest, all are secure, and all look to the One Who dwells among them in His chosen place. In the final analysis it could only be achieved in eternity. For similar idyllic pictures see Isaiah 4:5-6; Isaiah 11:1-9; Ezekiel 37:23-28).

It found partial fulfilment after the initial conquest, it found partial fulfilment in the time of David, it has found partial fulfilment in a spiritual sense in the true church of Christ under His rule, but its final fulfilment awaits the everlasting kingdom.

61

13 Be careful not to sacrifice your burnt

offerings anywhere you please.

GILL, "Take heed to thyself, that thou offer not thy burnt offerings,.... And so any other, this is put for all the rest:

in every place that thou seest; which might take with their fancy, seem pleasant, and so a proper and suitable place to sacrifice in, as on high places, and under green trees; but they were not to indulge their own fancies and imaginations, or follow the customs of others, but keep to the rules prescribed them by the Lord, and to the place fixed by him for his worship.

HENRY, "V. They are allowed to eat common flesh, but not the flesh of their

offerings, in their own houses, wherever they dwelt. What was any way devoted to

God they must not eat at home, Deu_12:13, Deu_12:17. But what was not so devoted

they might kill and eat of at their pleasure, Deu_12:15. And this permission is again

repeated, Deu_12:20-22. It should seem that while they were in the wilderness they

did not eat the flesh of any of those kinds of beasts that were used in sacrifice, but

what was killed at the door of the tabernacle, and part of it presented to God as a

peace-offering, Lev_17:3, Lev_17:4. But when they came to Canaan, where they must

live at a great distance from the tabernacle, they might kill what they pleased for their

own use of their flocks and herds, without bringing part to the altar. This allowance is

very express, and repeated, lest Satan should take occasion from that law which

forbade the eating of their sacrifices at their own houses to suggest to them, as he did

to our first parents, hard thoughts of God, as if he grudged them: Thou mayest eat

whatsoever thy soul lusteth after. There is a natural regular appetite, which it is

lawful to gratify with temperance and sobriety, not taking too great a pleasure in the

gratification, nor being uneasy if it be crossed. The unclean, who might not eat of the

holy things, yet might eat of the same sort of flesh when it was only used as common

food. The distinction between clean persons and unclean was sacred, and designed

for the preserving of the honour of their holy feasts, and therefore must not be

brought into their ordinary meals. This permission has a double restriction

ELLICOTT, "(13, 14) Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt

offerings in every place that thou seest: But in the place which the Lord shall

choose.—An attempt is made by some modern writers to establish a

contradiction between this precept and the one in Exodus 20:24 : “In all places

where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee.” But they

62

are not really contradictory. The choice of Jehovah makes the place of

acceptance. He need not always choose the same spot-Either this law in

Deuteronomy was written by Moses or it was not. If it was, it must be taken in

the same sense as Exodus 20:24. If it was the work of later times, the writer must

have known perfectly that Jehovah had varied His choice from time to time, and

therefore the injunction must still have the same sense. Rashi remarks upon the

words “Take heed that thou offer not . . . in every place that thou seest”—i.e.

which comes into thy mind—“but thou must offer at the command of a prophet,

as, for instance, Elijah on Mount Carmel.” It seems clear that the general

principle inculcated here is the same with that of Exodus 20 and of Leviticus 17.

The choice of Jehovah makes the place of worship. Details may safely be left to

the direction of the authorised Divine representatives at any given time. If the

Jews themselves saw no difficulty or discrepancy in these Scriptures, is it any

proof of wisdom for us to make difficulties? Do we not rather prove the

imperfection of our own understanding?

PETT, "Verse 13-14

Restrictions on Offering Whole Burnt Offerings (Deuteronomy 12:13-14).

At this point the narrative changes to ‘thou, thee’. What is required is required

of the nation as a whole and of each individual.

Deuteronomy 12:13-14

‘Take heed to yourself (thyself) that you do not offer your whole burnt offerings

in every place that you see, but in the place which Yahweh shall choose in one of

your tribes, there you shall offer your whole burnt offerings, and there you shall

do all that I command you.’

Again the emphasis comes that they may not make their offerings ‘in every place

that you shall see’. It was not for them to choose where they could approach

Yahweh and make their offerings to Him. It was to be done in the place that He

chose. The ritual was restricted to the place of Yahweh’s choosing. For the ritual

was important and therefore all whole burnt offerings, that most central of

offerings which summed up all others, were to be offered only at the Central

Sanctuary, and nowhere else. They were to ‘take heed’ that this was so. They

would all be responsible for any failures. ‘In every place that you see’ might

primarily indicate Canaanite sanctuaries. Under no circumstances were whole

burnt offerings to be offered there. But it also indicates the fact that Israel could

63

not use their own judgment in deciding on places in which to offer whole burnt

offerings, but must only do so at the place that Yahweh Himself decided on. The

whole burnt offering was the prime offering. It was totally offered to Yahweh in

dedication and worship, and to make atonement, and included the daily offering.

It could therefore only be offered at His ‘place’ where His dwellingplace was by

His own choice.

“And there you shall do all that I command you.” But at the place which was His

choice they must ensure the carrying out of all that He commanded. Those

commands had been given in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers, and they would be

on tablets stored in the Sanctuary. It was important that they were carried out.

They were what He commands them. But Moses does not go into any details

about them in Deuteronomy.

“The place which Yahweh shall choose in one of your tribes.” This might, if it

stood alone, be stretched to translate as ‘in each one of your tribes’, but the

history of the Central Sanctuary and the total lack of mention of such

sanctuaries and the other use of ‘out of all your tribes’ (Deuteronomy 12:5,

compare Deuteronomy 18:5) is against it. The idea would seem to be of the one

place and thus to be set in one of the tribal sections. The choosing might have

been done by the Urim and Thummim.

Nothing is more important for all men than that they approach God through the

true way. There are many false ways but only one true one. That is what is

emphasised here. Today that is through Jesus Christ. As Peter said, ‘There is no

other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved’ (Acts

4:12). Today He is the place which God has chosen and it is only through Him

that we can offer acceptable worship.

14 Offer them only at the place the Lord will

choose in one of your tribes, and there observe

everything I command you.

64

CLARKE, "The place which the Lord shall choose - To prevent idolatry and bring about a perfect uniformity in the Divine worship, which at that time was essentially necessary; because every rite and ceremony had a determinate meaning, and pointed out the good things which were to come, therefore one place must be established where those rites and ceremonies should be carefully and punctually observed. Had it not been so, every man would have formed his worship according to his own mind, and the whole beauty and importance of the grand representative system would have been destroyed, and the Messiah and the glories of his kingdom could not have been seen through the medium of the Jewish ritual. For uniformity in every part of the Divine worship the same necessity does not now exist; because that which was typified is come, and the shadows have all fled away. Yet, when it can be obtained, how desirable is it that all sincere Christians should with one mouth, as well as with one heart, glorify their common Lord and Savior!

GILL, "But in the place which the Lord shall choose in one of thy tribes,.... Which tribe is not named, nor what place in that tribe; See Gill on Deu_12:5,

there thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings; on the altar of burnt offering there placed:

and there shalt thou do all that I command thee; respecting sanctuary service, and particularly those things observed in Deu_12:6.

15 Nevertheless, you may slaughter your

animals in any of your towns and eat as much of

the meat as you want, as if it were gazelle or

deer, according to the blessing the Lord your

God gives you. Both the ceremonially unclean

and the clean may eat it.

BARNES, "While a stringent injunction is laid down that the old rule (compare

65

Lev_17:3, etc.) must be adhered to as regards animals slain in sacrifice, yet permission is now given to slaughter at home what was necessary for the table. The ceremonial distinctions did not apply in such cases, anymore than to “the roebuck” (or gazelle) “and hart,” animals allowed for food but not for sacrifice.

CLARKE, "Thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates - With the proviso that the blood be poured out on the ground.

1. The blood should not be eaten.

2. It should be poured out by way of sacrifice. I think this is the meaning; and not that they should pour out the blood with as little ceremony and respect as they poured water upon the ground, which is the meaning according to Calmet and others.

The roebuck, and - the hart - It is very likely that by צבי tsebi the antelope is

meant; and by איל aiyal, the hart or deer. This is the opinion of Dr. Shaw; and from

the report of travelers we learn that both these animals are found in that desert to the present day. See Harmer, vol. iv., p. 25, etc. Of the propriety of eating clean animals there could be no question, but the blood must be poured out; yet there were cases in which they might kill and eat in all their gates, cities, and dwellings - such as the roebuck and the hart, or all clean wild beasts, for these being taken in hunting, and frequently shot by arrows, their blood could not be poured out at the altar. Therefore the command appears to take in only such tame beasts as were used for food.

GILL, "Notwithstanding, thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates,.... They might kill such cattle that were allowed for food, and eat the flesh of them in theie own cities and houses in which they dwelt; they were not obliged to bring these to the place God should choose, and kill them there, as they had been wont to bring them to the tabernacle while in the wilderness:

whatsoever thy soul lusteth after; whatever they had a mind to, or their appetite craved, and were desirous of, provided it was not any thing forbidden, but was allowed to be eaten:

according to the blessing of the Lord thy God which he hath given thee; which it was in the power of their hands to procure for themselves; they might live according to their abilities, and keep a table answerable to what God had blessed them with; from which they were so far from being restrained, that it was rather commendable in them so to do, provided they did not indulge to luxury and intemperance:

the clean and the unclean may eat thereof; that is, such in their families who laboured under any ceremonial uncleanness by the touch of a dead body, or by reason of issues and menstrues; these, as well as those who were free from anything of this kind, might eat of common food in their houses, though they might not eat of the holy things; see Lev_7:20.

as of the roebuck, and as of the hart; that is, as those were clean creatures, and

66

allowed for food, Deu_14:5 so they might eat of oxen or sheep, or lambs or rams, and goats, though they were creatures used in sacrifice.

HENRY, "They must eat according to the blessing which God had given them, Deu_

12:15. Note, It is not only our wisdom, but our duty, to live according to our estates,

and not to spend above what we have. As it is unjust on the one hand to hoard what

should be laid out, so it is much more unjust to lay out more than we have; for what

is not our own must needs be another's, who is thereby robbed and defrauded. And

this, I say, is much more unjust, because it is easier afterwards to distribute what has

been unduly spared, and so to make a sort of restitution for the wrong, than it is to

repay to wife, and children, and creditors, what has been unduly spent. Between

these two extremes let wisdom find the mean, and then let watchfulness and

resolution keep it.

JAMISON, "Notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates — Every animal designed for food, whether ox, goat, or lamb, was during the abode in the wilderness ordered to be slain as a peace offering at the door of the tabernacle; its blood to be sprinkled, and its fat burnt upon the altar by the priest. The encampment, being then round about the altar, made this practice, appointed to prevent idolatry, easy and practicable. But on the settlement in the promised land, the obligation to slay at the tabernacle was dispensed with. The people were left at liberty to prepare their meat in their cities or homes.

according to the blessing of the Lord thy God which he hath given thee — The style of living should be accommodated to one’s condition and means -profuse and riotous indulgence can never secure the divine blessing.

the unclean and the clean may eat thereof — The unclean here are those who were under some slight defilement, which, without excluding them from society, yet debarred them from eating any of the sacred meats (Lev_7:20). They were at liberty freely to partake of common articles of food.

of the roebuck — the gazelle.

and as of the hart — The Syrian deer (Cervus barbatus) is a species between our red and fallow deer, distinguished by the want of a bis-antler, or second branch on the horns, reckoning from below, and for a spotted livery which is effaced only in the third or fourth year.

K&D, "But if these instructions were really to be observed by the people in Canaan, it was necessary that the law which had been given with reference to the journey through the wilderness, viz., that no animal should be slain anywhere else than at the tabernacle in the same manner as a slain-offering (Lev_17:3-6), should be abolished. This is done in Deu_12:15, where Moses, in direct connection with what goes before,

allows the people, as an exception (רק, only) to the rules laid down in Deu_12:4-14, to

kill and eat flesh for their own food according to all their soul's desire. Flesh that was slaughtered for food could be eaten by both clean and unclean, such for example as the roebuck and the hart, animals which could not be offered in sacrifice, and in which, therefore, the distinction between clean and unclean on the part of the eaters did not come into consideration at all.

67

CALVIN, "Deuteronomy 12:15.Notwithstanding thou mayest kill. What

precedes I have introduced in its proper place, viz., that they should not kill the

sacrifices anywhere but in the sanctuary, of which there was only one in Judea.

Here the permission to eat meat is given, provided that they do not offer the

animals to God, but eat of them as of wild beasts. By way of example, two kinds

are mentioned, the roe-buck and the hart, of which no offering was made. They

are, therefore, freely allowed to eat meat wheresoever they pleased, with this

exception, that they should not taste the blood; for, although this was observed

by their forefathers before the giving of the Law, God ratifies it anew when He

would gather a peculiar people to Himself. We know that immediately after the

deluge, Noah and his posterity were commanded to abstain from blood; but,

inasmuch as the greater part of mankind soon degenerated, it is probable that all

nations neglected God’s command, and permitted to themselves a universal

license on this point; and it is even questionable whether this observance, which

was everywhere fallen into desuetude, prevailed among the family of Shem.

Certainly it may be conjectured from the renewed promulgation of the law, that

it was altogether obsolete; at any rate, God would have His chosen people

distinguished by this mark of separation from heathen nations.

The reason of the prohibition which is now mentioned had already been

declared, (18) viz., because the blood is the seat of life. But although it, was

allowable to kill an animal for food, yet, was it a useful restraint to prevent

inhumanity, that they should not touch the blood; for if they abstained from the

blood of beasts, much more necessary was it to spare human blood. After God,

therefore, has forbidden blood to be eaten, He immediately proceeds to speak of

men themselves: “Whose sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed:

for in the image of God made he man.” (19) (Genesis 9:4.) Hence I have deemed

it appropriate to annex all the passages in which God commands the people to

abstain from blood, to the Sixth Commandment. In itself, indeed, the eating of

blood was a thing of no great importance: since, therefore, God so often

inculcates a point of so little weight, it may be inferred that the law has some

further object. To this may be added the severity of the punishment, for surely it

was not a crime worthy of death to taste the blood of some little bird; and hence,

also, it is manifested that the prohibition had another meaning, viz., that cruelty

might be abhorred. And the words of Moses show that the eating of blood is not

forbidden because it infected man with its uncleanness, but that they might

account the life of man to be precious; for it is said, “the blood is the life,” which,

in the opinion of Augustine, (20) is equivalent to its being “the sign of life;“ but

Moses rather means that animal life is contained in the blood. Wherefore, blood,

which represents the life, was not interdicted without reason, nor was it only

sinful to eat the blood by itself, but also together with the flesh, as is expressly

68

declared both in Deuteronomy and in the last passage from Leviticus.

COFFMAN, "As Israel was about to enter Canaan with the resulting scattering

of the people, and when the difficulty of killing all their meat at the central

sanctuary was considered, Moses, here, upon Divine authority altered the

regulations given at Sinai so that they could kill whatever animals were required

for food at any convenient location, only with the proviso that the blood not be

eaten, but poured out like water upon the ground. It is a gross mistake to

suppose that we have here a new set of laws. The Sinaitic covenant still stands, as

always, and only in certain specific instances would there be any changes, and

those for very good reasons. "Deuteronomy was never intended to be a repetition

of the whole law."[16] "All of the supposed discrepancies between Deuteronomy

and Exodus-Leviticus (concerning the tithes and firstlings) vanish into mere

appearance when Deuteronomy is thus properly understood."[17]

"After all the desire of thy soul ..." (Deuteronomy 12:15). In the KJV, this reads,

"Whatsoever thy soul lusteth after"; however, "In Old English, `to lust' meant

simply to will, to choose, to desire, and did not at that time, as now, imply

anything evil."[18]

"The place which Jehovah thy God shall choose ..." (Deuteronomy 12:18). The

critics must have a "Jerusalem" in this chapter, so how do they get it? Here is

the way Davies got it: "Although Jerusalem is not mentioned here (nor anywhere

else in the whole Book of Deuteronomy - parenthesis mine J.B.C.), it is fairly

evident that no other place can be intended by, `the place which Jehovah shall

choose.'"[19] Once more we have the fantastic affirmation of the critics that they

know what the holy writer "intended to say," which is radically different from

what he said!

ELLICOTT, "(15) Notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat flesh.—This may

very possibly be intended as a slight modification of a law made for the

wilderness journey (Leviticus 17:3-4). There the “killing” of an ox, or lamb, or

goat is forbidden anywhere except at the door of the tabernacle. The word “kill,”

though often used sacrificially, cannot be limited to sacrifice in that place,

although the animals mentioned are all sacrificial animals. It would seem that

the practice of sacrificing those animals elsewhere, very possibly for the sake of

the feast which followed, had become so common that it was necessary to forbid

the killing of them anywhere but at the door of the tabernacle. But the

continuance of this precept in Canaan would stop the eating of flesh altogether.

Hence the exception made here.

69

As of the roebuck, and as of the hart.—The frequent mention of these animals in

this connection suggests the idea that the hunting and catching of them may not

have been an uncommon thing in the wilderness.

COKE, "Ver. 15. Notwithstanding, thou mayest kill and eat flesh, &c.— During

their encampments and travels in the wilderness, it was enacted, that all the

beasts that were to be slain by any Israelite, for the use of his family, should be

first presented to God at the tabernacle, by way of peace-offering, and there

slain; Leviticus 22:1; Leviticus 22:33 which was no inconvenience to them, as the

tabernacle was very near: but it is here allowed, that, after their settlement in

Canaan, every householder may kill provision for his family at home, and in any

place, without being obliged to bring any part of it to the altar; for, when their

border was enlarged, the tabernacle must have been at so great a distance from

some of them, that it would have been too heavy a burden to oblige them to kill

every thing they ate at the tabernacle. They are, therefore, permitted to kill and

eat flesh as they please, according to the blessing of the Lord: i.e. in a manner

suitable to their state, and to the blessings which God had given them.

As of the roe-buck, and as of the hart— Why not as of an ox, or a lamb, for they

were of more familiar use? The reason is plain; because, (Leviticus 12.) to

prevent idolatry, in offering of the blood to other gods, they were commanded to

kill all the cattle they ate, at the door of the tabernacle, as a peace-offering, and

sprinkle the blood on the altar. But wild beasts which were clean might be eaten,

though their blood was not offered to God, ver. 13 because, being commonly

killed before they were taken, their blood could not be sprinkled on the altar;

and therefore it sufficed, in such cases, to pour out their blood wherever they

were killed, and cover it with dust. And, for the same reason, when the camp was

broken up, wherein all the people were in the neighbourhood of the tabernacle,

and when they were scattered in their habitations through all the land of

Canaan, those who were too far off from the temple were excused from killing

their tame cattle at Jerusalem, and sprinkling their blood on the altar: no more

was required of them than was required in killing a roe-buck, or any other clean

wild beast.

PETT 15-16, "Verse 15-16

The Slaughter of Animals Other Than As Sacrifices (Deuteronomy 12:15-16).

But once Israel were established throughout the land and the sanctuary was at

some considerable distance from many of the people (as it never was in the

wilderness) some provision had to be made for the slaughter of animals for food

70

other than by bringing them to the door of the tabernacle (Leviticus 17:1-9). This

is now provided for here.

Deuteronomy 12:15

‘Notwithstanding, you (thou) may kill and eat flesh within all your gates, after all

the desire of your soul, according to the blessing of Yahweh your God which he

has given you. The unclean and the clean may eat of it, as of the gazelle, and as of

the hart.’

While all ‘offerings and sacrifices’ must be offered at the one sanctuary, clean

sacrificial-type animals not slain as offerings and sacrifices, but slaughtered for

food, would, once they entered the land (and some were already in their portion

of the land), not require to be brought to the Central Sanctuary, as had

previously been the case (Leviticus 17:3-9). It was, of course, always recognised

that game animals like the gazelle and the hart could be slain and eaten

anywhere, as long as the blood was poured away. While being clean beasts they

were not sacrificial beasts. But now in the same way all clean animals could be

treated in the same way, even sacrificial-type animals, if they were not being

offered as an offering or sacrifice. Within their towns as they needed them, they

could kill and eat flesh with Yahweh’s given blessing. And both those in a state

of ritual cleanness, and those not so, could then eat of them for they had not been

offered in the sanctuary. Ritual cleanness mainly affected things connected with

the sanctuary.

There is a reminder here for us that there are parts of our lives which, while of

concern to God, are not strictly to do with His service. They are more to do with

our physical sustenance. Jesus taught us that we were to learn to trust God for

these without constantly having to ask Him for them. Our prayers should be

concentrated on worthier objects (Matthew 6:7-13; Matthew 6:31-32). It is babes

in Christ who are always asking for things for themselves. The mature Christian

leaves his needs with God and concentrates his prayers on extending the kingly

rule of God as Jesus taught.

71

16 But you must not eat the blood; pour it out

on the ground like water.

GILL, "Only ye shall not eat the blood,.... All manner of blood being forbidden, of fowl or of beasts, whether slain for sacrifice or for common food:

ye shall pour it out upon the earth as water; which cannot be gathered up again for use, but is swallowed up in the earth.

HENRY, "They must not eat blood (Deu_12:16, and again, Deu_12:23): Only be sure that thou eat not the blood (Deu_12:24), Thou shalt not eat it; and (Deu_12:25), Thou shalt not eat it, that it may go well with thee. When they could not bring the blood to the altar, to pour it out there before the Lord, as belonging to him, they must pour it out upon the earth, as not belonging to them, because it was the life, and therefore, as an acknowledgment, belonged to him who gives life, and, as an atonement, belonged to him to whom life is forfeited. Bishop Patrick thinks one reason why they were forbidden thus strictly the eating of blood was to prevent the superstitions of the old idolaters about the blood of their sacrifices, which they thought their demons delighted in, and by eating of which they imagined that they had communion with them.

JAMISON, "Deu_12:16-25. Blood prohibited.

ye shall not eat the blood; ye shall pour it upon the earth as water — The prohibition against eating or drinking blood as an unnatural custom accompanied the announcement of the divine grant of animal flesh for food (Gen_9:4), and the prohibition was repeatedly renewed by Moses with reference to the great objects of the law (Lev_17:12), the prevention of idolatry, and the consecration of the sacrificial blood to God. In regard, however, to the blood of animals slain for food, it might be shed without ceremony and poured on the ground as a common thing like water -only for the sake of decency, as well as for preventing all risk of idolatry, it was to be covered over with earth (Lev_17:13), in opposition to the practice of heathen sportsmen, who left it exposed as an offering to the god of the chase.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:16

‘Only you (ye) shall not eat the blood. You (thou) shall pour it out on the earth as water.’

The only exception to this permission to eat the flesh of animals was that they were not to eat the blood. That represented the animal’s life and belonged solely to Yahweh, the Giver of life. Through this prohibition His continual sovereignty over all things was revealed (as it was with the tree of knowing good and evil). This exception of the blood is recognised throughout Scripture (see especially Leviticus 17:10-14) and covers all slain animals that were eaten. Not eating the

72

blood acknowledged Yahweh’s sovereignty, and that all life belonged to Him. The pouring out of the blood was also probably to be seen as an act of worship. See on Deuteronomy 12:24.

17 You must not eat in your own towns the tithe

of your grain and new wine and olive oil, or the

firstborn of your herds and flocks, or whatever

you have vowed to give, or your freewill

offerings or special gifts.

GILL, "Thou mayest not eat within thy gates the tithe of thy corn, or of thy wine, or of thy oil,.... This cannot be understood of the tithe given to the Levites, or of that which the Levites out of theirs gave to the priests, for that was only eaten by them; but of the tithe which every three years they were to lay up within their gates, and which they were to eat with their families and others; but the other two years they were to carry it to the place the Lord chose, or turn it into money, and when they came thither purchase with it what they pleased, and eat it, they and their household, and others with them, before the Lord; see Deu_14:22,

the firstlings of thy herds or of thy flocks; these also the firstborn males belonged to the Lord, and so to the priests, and could not be eaten by the people any where; and must be understood either of the next firstlings, which were the people's, or of the female firstlings, which they might devote to the Lord, and so not allowed to eat at home, but in the chosen place:

nor any of thy vows which thou vowest, nor thy freewill offerings; which were species of peace offerings, and so to be eaten not in their own cities, but in the place appointed:

or heave offerings of thine hand; the firstfruits; see Deu_26:1 these were such they were not bound to bring, but brought them freely.

ELLICOTT, "(16) Ye shall pour it upon the earth.—This act was a necessary

part of every slaughter of an animal for food. The blood, which is the life, must

be poured upon the earth for God, whether the victim was consigned to the altar

or not. It was a continual reminder of the necessity for the sacrifice of the death

73

of Christ, to be continued until He should come. Thus the act was, in a sense,

sacramental.

COKE, "Ver. 17. Thou mayest not eat within thy gates— A free dispensation

being given them to eat their common food without religious ceremonies, it is

here enjoined what they were to eat with such ceremonies. The tithe here means,

as in the 2nd verse, the second tithe. As the firstlings of their cattle were to be

given to the priests, Numbers 18:15 and of course might not be eaten by the

owners, anywhere, interpreters are of opinion, that firstlings here must mean,

either 1. Females; for the males only are offered to God: or, 2. Such as, after

setting aside their first-born, were then by the owner dedicated to God; for, as

the tithe here is to be understood of the second tithe, so may the firstlings be

understood in a like sense: or, 3. The word, which we render firstlings, may

signify the fattest and best; for it sometimes denotes the most excellent in its

kind; as the first-born of death is a very great and incurable disease: Job 18:13

so the poorest of all mortals are called the first-born of the poor; Isaiah 14:30.

See Calmet and Le Clerc.

PETT 17-19, "Verses 17-19

The Law of Tithes, Firstlings, Votive and Freewill Offerings, and Heave-

offerings (Deuteronomy 12:17-19).

But this exception of being allowed to eat in their own cities in the case of

animals was not to apply to tithes, firstlings, peace offerings or heave-offerings

(contribution offerings). These all had to be brought to the sanctuary to be

offered before Yahweh, because they were distinctively His. They were set apart

for Him. The first thing to recognise here is that Moses expects his listeners to

know precisely what these ordinances refer to and to accept it without quibble.

No explanations are yet given. And this is in fact because all had earlier been

revealed through him as things that were to be offered to Yahweh and belonged

to Him (in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers). They were holy to Him. Thus they

may only be used in accordance with His dispensing. They were as follows:

1). Tithes. These represented one tenth of all produce, both animal and

vegetable, including here especially the grain, oil and vintage. This one tenth had

to be separated off and dedicated to Yahweh. It was seen as holy to Him and

therefore at His disposal. It was His. The principle was clear. However, the

practise now became far more complicated, for now Yahweh sought to dispose of

the tithe. Previously it had been the inheritance of the Levites. Now tithes were to

be in such abundance that He would allocate them to provide for ritual meals for

74

worshippers at the Sanctuary, by providing for the Levites everywhere, and by

providing for the poor of the land.

The principle of tithing had already been declared in Leviticus 27:30-33 and

Numbers 18:21-24. There the principle was that one tenth of all produce, both

animal and vegetable, was Yahweh’s and holy to Him. That was the basic

principle. But Numbers 18:21-24 adds that it was to go to the Levites. Thus while

they were in the wilderness it was all passed over to the Levites for their use, it

was their inheritance (Numbers 18:21), and they were responsible to ensure that

the priests received one tenth of what they received, a tithe of the tithe (Numbers

18:23-31). This was reasonable. Grain, vegetable produce and vintage

productivity would be limited in the wilderness and there were many Levites,

and at this stage they had no levitical cities with their productive land. The tithe

therefore had as far as possible to be sufficient, along with the manna, to satisfy

their ample numbers, and the priests’ households had to be catered for as well.

There would be little or no surplus of the one tenth of grain, vegetables and

vintage. All would be needed for their use.

Thus when Moses spoke of tithes here he knew that the principle was ingrained

within them that the tithe was the inheritance of the Levites. And for much of the

time in the wilderness vegetable and grain tithes would be small, and sometimes

non-existent. Indeed all Israel regularly depended on the manna, both people

and Levites. Thus the Levites’ tenth of these would all usually be required for

their consumption.

But the introduction in Moses’ speech of the fact that part of these tithes which

had been sanctified to Yahweh could now be partaken of by those who offered

them, as though it were regular practise, suggests that even in the wilderness the

quantity of the tithes had proved too much for the Levites so that they had

regularly arranged for the offerers to join them in their ritual meals before

Yahweh at the different feasts. This excess would probably mainly have been of

the one tenth of the animals, which would have been continually bearing, and

this had seemingly become the custom. For there was no restriction placed on

what the Levites did with their tithes at the sanctuary. In conditions like the

wilderness, where all shared the hardships, camaraderie would be at its highest.

Sharing their good things during feasts would be seen as a part of life. But

because the tithes were sacred to Yahweh that could only be at the Sanctuary,

and only the Levites could partake of tithes away from the Sanctuary, (apart

from the three year tithe to be described later).

However, attention now turned to when they entered the land. Once there the

produce would increase hugely and as Yahweh blessed them so the tenth portion

would also expand hugely, especially the vegetable and grain tithes. There would

be far more than the Levites, who would also possess, as a group, places in many

75

cities (levitical cities), and the land around them with what they could produce,

could possibly require. So the practise of sharing, which had grown up, was now

approved of, with the condition that it all be eaten at the sanctuary because it

was Yahweh’s. The principle was not to change. The tenth portion was still

Yahweh’s and holy to Him, and one tenth of that had to go to the priests. But

now part of the tithe could also be partaken of by the offerer and his household

in a ritual meal at the sanctuary before Yahweh as an act of worship

(Deuteronomy 14:22-27), as something being received from Yahweh. Yahweh

was to be seen as dispensing His gracious gifts to them at His holy place out of

what they had given Him.

There would still necessarily be large amounts over, which, it would be

understood, were then to go to the Levites, whose interests had to be protected

(they were not to be forsaken). The amount of produce in Israel would in good

years be huge, and just one tenth would be huge. And it is probable that all these

arrangements for the tenth would be watched over by the Levites, for they had

the responsibility of ensuring that the priests received their tenth of the tenth.

The tithe of the whole year was far more than could be eaten at ritual meals even

of the most generous proportions, thus the Levites would still be well provided

for, and it should be noted that the Levites, as Yahweh’s inheritance, could

partake of their tithe anywhere (Numbers 18:31), ‘you shall eat it in every place’.

The management and checking of the tithes, and the giving of advice in respect

to them, together with the apportioning of a tenth to the priests, would be a huge

task. Many of the people would be innumerate, and not well acquainted with the

Law, and would find that they needed help and guidance. The oversight of this

was clearly the responsibility of the Levites.

It is noteworthy that of the tithes only the vegetable and grain tithes are

mentioned here. This is probably because the meat element of the ritual meals

would be provided for out of the firstlings, the votive offerings and the freewill

offerings. The general tithe of domestic animals born would thus not be

required. But it still belonged to Yahweh. If this be the case that would therefore

all go to the Levites’ households, with the priests’ households receiving their

portion. It may be that many of the animals would be kept alive to provide

animals to graze on the joint land owned by the Levites/priests around their

cities, and to provide them with milk, etc. Leviticus 13:32, which speaks of

‘whatever passes under the rod’, may be seen as confirming that these tithes

were supervised, presumably by the Levites.

However, a new principle is also later described in Deuteronomy 14:28-29;

Deuteronomy 26:12-14 for every third year. In that year the whole tithe, (still

sanctified to Yahweh), will be given by the people to the Levites and stored in the

people’s cities to be used to assist the poor and needy, the resident alien, and the

76

Levites themselves. Indeed the offerers were to take pride in the fact before

Yahweh that they had handed it over as commanded (Deuteronomy 26:13). This

would be stored and dispensed over the three years that followed, presumably by

the Levites. (Someone would need to be responsible for this huge and important

task throughout the country). The inclusion of the Levites here as also possible

recipients, in spite of their receiving their parts of the regular tithes in the other

two years, would cater for bad periods when there had been shortages. Unlike

the offerers they were not to be excluded in the third year.

(This storing in their cities may simply refer to the whole of the tithe which was

not partaken of in the ritual meals, otherwise there would be no ritual meals that

year, thus by it making provision for the poor. But more probably it means that

in that year the people were to provide for their ritual meals out of their own

share of their produce as an act of kindness to the poor and needy. We can take

it that this third year tithe did not have to be brought to the sanctuary first, for it

was to be available in its original form, not turned into silver - contrast

Deuteronomy 14:25).

So the law of tithing, the setting apart of one tenth to Yahweh, has now expanded

so that the tithe was used as follows:

a). A proportion of the tithe could be consumed by the people at sacred feasts at

the Dwellingplace of Yahweh.

b). Every third year the tithe would be set apart for the Levites, the orphans, the

widows and the resident aliens.

c). The remainder of the tithes would go to the Levites.

d). One tenth of all tithes was to go to the priests.

2) Firstlings. All the firstborn (those male animals which first opened the womb)

were Yahweh’s because He had delivered them from Egypt, and must thus be

dedicated to Yahweh (Exodus 13:1; Exodus 13:11-13; Exodus 22:29-30; Exodus

34:19; Numbers 3:13; Numbers 8:16-17) and as such they were for the priests to

dispose of, sharing them with their families, once they had been slaughtered and

the necessary parts sacrificed on the altar (Numbers 18:15-18). And all firstlings

of the flocks and herds which were firstfruits were to be for the Levites and

priests (the new crop of each season). It seems here also that such was the

abundance of these that the custom had grown up that the offerer and his

household could also partake of parts of them in ritual meals at the Sanctuary

(Deuteronomy 15:19-22). Otherwise Aaron and his sons and the Levites would

not have known what to do with the abundance. Unlike some offerings no

restriction is ever laid on the firstlings as forbidding them to be eaten by any who

are clean.

77

3) Votive offerings and freewill offerings. These were peace (wellbeing) offerings,

the former offered in respect of vows, the latter simply a freewill offering to

Yahweh. They were to be slaughtered in the court of the Sanctuary, the blood

applied to the altar, a part offered on the altar (including the fat and vital parts),

portions given to the priests, and the remainder to be eaten by the offerer and his

household and friends (compare Leviticus 7:11-21).

4) The heave offering of their hand (‘the offering that is lifted up in the hand’).

For this compare Deuteronomy 18:4; Deuteronomy 26:2; Exodus 29:27-28;

Leviticus 7:14; Leviticus 7:32; Leviticus 10:14-15; Numbers 5:9; Numbers 6:20;

Numbers 15:19-21; Numbers 18:8-29; Numbers 31:29; Numbers 31:41. The

heave offering (or ‘contribution’ offering) was a part of an offering which was

set apart for the priests. It was possibly presented before Yahweh by being lifted

up before Him and was for the consumption of the priests and their families in a

clean place. The heave/contribution offering of a peace offering comprised the

thigh, which went to the officiating priest (Leviticus 7:30-34). (The priests also

received the shoulder as a ‘wave offering’). A further heave/contribution offering

was of unleavened cakes mingled with oil and unleavened wafers anointed with

oil, and cakes mingled with oil of fine flour soaked. This was taken from among

the offerings of the same which were made with the peace offerings, and was

again for the priests (Leviticus 7:14). Once they were in the land a

heave/contribution offering was also to be made of the first of the dough

(Numbers 15:19-21). A heave/contribution offering could further be made for the

priests of a proportion of spoils gained in battle (Numbers 31:29; Numbers

31:41). These heave offerings (or ‘contributions’) were specifically for the priests.

Deuteronomy 12:17-18

‘You (thou) may not eat within your gates the tithe of your grain, or of your new

wine, or of your oil, or the firstlings of your herd or of your flock, nor any of

your vows which you vow, nor your freewill-offerings, nor the heave-offering of

your hand, but you shall eat them before Yahweh your God in the place which

Yahweh your God shall choose, you, and your son, and your daughter, and your

man-servant, and your maid-servant, and the Levite who is within your gates,

and you shall rejoice before Yahweh your God in all that you put your hand to.’

All these offerings were holy to Yahweh. They belonged to Him. Thus they could

only be eaten at the appointed place, the site in which the Tabernacle was

situated in the presence of Yahweh (‘before Yahweh’). These words were spoken

to all Israel. It is not saying that all Israel could eat all that is mentioned. ‘All

Israel’ included overall the priests and the Levites. The point here is thus not to

say that all could eat of any of these offerings, but that whoever had the right to

eat of them should only do so at the place that Yahweh had chosen to set His

78

name and dwelling there and in His presence. They were not to be eaten in their

own cities and towns (‘within their gates’). The details of these offerings are

given above. All are to participate in one or the other, including servants and

bondspeople, and Levites. Care was to be taken to ensure that the Levites did not

go short. This command was to the people as a whole. The Levite was permitted

to eat the tithe anywhere.

The point for us from all this is that we too should have certain things that we do

which are sacred to Yahweh and which we must seek His presence about. The

first is our prayer life, for thereby we make our offering of praise and

thanksgiving (Hebrews 13:15). The next is the giving of our lives as we present

our bodies to Him as a living sacrifice to be transformed to do His will (Romans

12:1-2). The next is our Christian giving, our ‘tithes’, for by how we give we

demonstrate how much we love God (Mark 12:41-44; Luke 12:31-48). And so we

could go on. In all these we must come to God’s presence and seek His will

concerning them.

18 Instead, you are to eat them in the presence

of the Lord your God at the place the Lord your

God will choose—you, your sons and daughters,

your male and female servants, and the Levites

from your towns—and you are to rejoice before

the Lord your God in everything you put your

hand to.

GILL, "But thou must eat them before the Lord thy God, in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose,.... Which may be said to be eaten before him, being eaten in the place where his sanctuary stood, in which he dwelt:

thou, and thy son, and thy daughter, and thy manservant, and thy maidservant, and the Levite that is within thy gates; who were all to come with him to this place; See Gill on Deu_12:12.

79

and thou shalt rejoice before the Lord thy God in all that thou puttest thine hand unto; cheerfully make and keep this feast in the manner directed to, rejoicing with his family and his friends, with the Levites and with the poor, expressing his thankfulness to God for his blessing on his labour.

ELLICOTT, "(18) The Levite that is within thy gates.—The distribution of the

Levites throughout the several tribes (ordered in Numbers 35:1-8), and carried

out by Joshua (Deuteronomy 21), is here anticipated. The Levites had this

provision in Israel until Jeroboam and his sons cast them off, when they

migrated to the kingdom of Judah (2 Chronicles 11:13-14).

MACLAREN, "THE EATING OF THE PEACE-OFFERING

There were three bloody sacrifices, the sin-offering, the burnt-offering, and the peace-offering. In all three expiation was the first idea, but in the second of them the act of burning symbolised a further thought, namely, that of offering to God, while in the third, the peace-offering, there was added to both of these the still further thought of the offerer’s participation with God, as symbolised by the eating of the sacrifice. So we have great verities of the most spiritual religion adumbrated in this external rite. The rind is hard and forbidding, the kernel is juicy and sweet.

I. Communion with God based on atonement.

II. Feeding on Christ.

What was sacrifice becomes food. The same Person and facts, apprehended by faith, are, in regard to their bearing on the divine government, the ground of pardon, and in regard to their operation within us, the source of spiritual sustenance. Christ for us is our pardon; Christ in us is our life.

III. The restoration to the offerer of all which he lays on God’s altar.

The sacrifice was transformed and elevated into a sacrament. By being offered the sacrifice was ennobled. The offerer did not lose what he laid on the altar, but it came back to him, far more precious than before. It was no longer mere food for the body, and to eat it became not an ordinary meal, but a sacrament and means of union with God. It was a hundredfold more the offerer’s even in this life. All its savour was more savoury, all its nutritive qualities were more nutritious. It had suffered a fiery change, and was turned into something more rich and rare.

That is blessedly true as to all which we lay on God’s altar. It is far more ours than it ever was or could be, while we kept it for ourselves, and our enjoyment of, and nourishment from, our good things, when offered as sacrifices, are greater than when we eat our morsel alone. If we make earthly joys and possessions the materials of our sacrifice, they will not only become more joyful and richer, but they will become means of closer union with Him, instead of parting us from Him, as they do when used in selfish disregard of Him.

Nor must we forget the wonderful thought, also mirrored in this piece of ancient ritual, that God delights in men’s sacrifices and surrenders and services. ‘If I were hungry, I would not tell thee,’ said the Psalmist in God’s name in regard to outward sacrifices; ‘Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?’ But he does ‘eat’ the better sacrifices that loving hearts or obedient wills lay on His altar. He seeks for these, and delights when they are offered to Him. ‘He hungered, and seeing a fig tree

80

by the wayside, He came to it.’ He still hungers for the fruit that we can yield to Him, and if we will, He will enter in and sup with us, not disdaining to sit at the poor table which we can spread for Him, nor to partake of the humble fare which we can lay upon it, but mending the banquet by what He brings for our nourishment, and hallowing the hour by His presence.

19 Be careful not to neglect the Levites as long

as you live in your land.

CLARKE, "Forsake not the Levite - These had no inheritance, and were to live by the sanctuary: if therefore the offerings were withheld by which the Levites were supported, they of course must perish. Those who have devoted themselves to the service of God in ministering to the salvation of the souls of men, should certainly be furnished at least with all the necessaries of life. Those who withhold this from them sin against their own mercies, and that ordinance of God by which a ministry is established for the salvation of souls.

GILL, "Take heed to thyself that thou forsake not the Levite,.... By withholding from him the tithes appointed for his maintenance; or rather by neglecting to take him with him in order to partake of the feast or entertainment before spoken of:

as long as thou livest upon the earth; so that it was not one time only, but always; whenever he ate these holy things before the Lord, as long as he lived, he was to be careful he had the Levite with him, for a reason given, Deu_12:12.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:19

‘Take heed to yourself that you do not forsake the Levite as long as you live in your land.’But the warning comes that the Levites were to be the constant concern of the people. They were to ensure that, as Yahweh’s servants, they never went short. They were often in different parts of the land as they carried out their responsibilities, and while tithes and firstlings may have been abundant, they may not have been easily available to individual Levites in the particular place where they were. Thus the people must ensure that their needs were provided for wherever they were, for they were holy to Yahweh. Hospitality was an important part of Israelite life, especially in welcoming Levites who were Yahweh’s servants, which was why the sin committed against the Levite in Judges 19 was so great. To allow a Levite to go short of food would be to dishonour God Whose servant he was. It would be a slur on His name. Even a cup of

81

cold water given to a Levite out of love for Yahweh would no doubt have its reward.

For the Christian there should be equal concern for those who have been called to serve God in ministry, whether at home or abroad. We must take heed to ourselves that we do not forsake them as long as we live, but are faithful in our genuine and true support so that they do not go short.

20 When the Lord your God has enlarged your

territory as he promised you, and you crave

meat and say, “I would like some meat,” then

you may eat as much of it as you want.

GILL, "When the Lord thy God shall enlarge thy border, as he hath promised thee,.... Brought them into the land of Canaan, where they should have large and good pastures for the feeding of their cattle, which they had not in the wilderness, and so a greater increase of them:

and thou shalt say, I will eat flesh; which they were shorts of, or ate but little of in the wilderness, lest their herds and their flocks should be consumed; but now having room to feed them, and an increase of them, they would give themselves a greater liberty of eating flesh:

because thy soul longeth to eat flesh; would have a craving appetite unto it, having so long ate none, or very little:

thou mayest eat flesh, whatsoever thy soul lusteth after; of any sort that is clean, and allowed to be eaten, and as much of it as is craved, only intemperance must be guarded against.

K&D 20-21, "These rules were still to remain in force, even when God should extend the borders of the land in accordance with His promise. This extension relates partly to the gradual but complete extermination of the Canaanites (Deu_7:22, comp. with Exo_23:27-33), and partly to the extension of the territory of the Israelites beyond the limits of Canaan Proper, in accordance with the divine promise in Gen_15:18. The words “as He hath spoken to thee” refer primarily to Exo_23:27-33. (On Deu_12:20, see Deu_12:15). - In Deu_12:21, “if the place...be too far from thee,” supplies the reason for the repeal of the law in Lev_17:3, which restricted all slaughtering to the place of the sanctuary. The words “kill...as I have commanded thee” refer back to Deu_12:15.

82

COFFMAN, ""Thou mayest eat flesh ..." (Deuteronomy 12:20). Cousins pointed

out that, "In Israel, meat was rarely eaten except by the rich. Animals were kept

for their produce, not for their flesh. Meat was a luxury."[20]

"Even as the gazelle, and as the hart ..." (Deuteronomy 12:21). "This means that

the ceremonial distinctions did not apply in such cases, any more than to the

gazelle or the hart, animals allowed for food but not for sacrifice."[21]

All of this is supplementary to what Moses previously wrote in the other books of

the Pentateuch. The prohibition against eating blood, according to the view held

by this writer, is indeed brought over and made binding in the New Testament as

well as in the Old Testament. The Jewish insistence on Kosher meats is founded

partially upon the Divine commandment here.

ELLICOTT, "(20) When the Lord thy God shall enlarge thy border. . . .—This

and the following verses (20-25) are perfectly intelligible as an expansion of

Deuteronomy 12:15-16, and a modification of the strict rule introduced in

Leviticus 18:2, &c. The distance from the central place of worship to the borders

of the land would be manifestly too great for all feasting to be limited to that one

spot.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 12:20-21. Enlarge thy border — Which will make it

impossible to bring all the cattle thou usest to the tabernacle. If the place be too

far — Being obliged to carry their sacrifices to the place of worship, they might

think themselves obliged to carry their other cattle thither to be killed. They are

therefore released from all such obligations, and left at liberty to kill them at

home whether they lived nearer that place, or farther from it; only the latter is

here mentioned, as being the matter of the scruple. As I have commanded — In

such a manner as the blood may be poured forth.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:20

‘When Yahweh your God shall enlarge your border, as he has promised you, and

you shall say, “I will eat flesh,” because your soul desires to eat flesh, you may

eat flesh, after all the desire of your soul.’

Compare Deuteronomy 12:15, which is now expanded on. Once they were in the

land and sometimes far from the Sanctuary, because Yahweh had enlarged their

borders (given them land over a wide area and spread them widely) in

accordance with His promise, then whenever Israelites desired to eat meat they

did not have to worry about taking it to the tabernacle, if it was too far from

them, but could eat as much as they desired of what belonged to them where they

83

were. This would, however, only be a commonplace situation for the wealthy.

The average persons would want to preserve their herds and flocks to provide

milk and wool and would only kill them on special occasions (e.g. the fatted calf,

especially fed well for the purpose).

21 If the place where the Lord your God

chooses to put his Name is too far away from

you, you may slaughter animals from the herds

and flocks the Lord has given you, as I have

commanded you, and in your own towns you

may eat as much of them as you want.

BARNES, "If the place ... - Rather, “Because, or since, the place will be too far from thee.” The permission given in Deu_12:15-16 is repeated, and the reason of it assigned.

GILL, "If the place which the Lord thy God hath chosen to put his name be too far from thee,.... Or rather "for" (h), or "seeing" the place will be too far from thee; for it is allowed before that they might kill and eat flesh for common food in their gates, Deu_12:15.

then thou shalt kill of thy herd and of thy flock; of thy oxen and of thy sheep, creatures used in sacrifice; but this was no bar to the use of them for common food also:

which the Lord hath given thee, as I have commanded thee; Deu_12:15.

and thou shalt eat in thy gates whatsoever thy soul lusteth after; flesh of any sort, lawful to be eaten.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:21

‘If the place which Yahweh your God shall choose, to put his name there, be too far from you, then you shall kill of your herd and of your flock, which Yahweh has given

84

you, as I have commanded you, and you may eat within your gates, after all the desire of your soul.’If they were near the site of the Sanctuary, ‘the place which Yahweh your God has chosen to put His name there’, then they should bring their sheep, goats and cattle as offerings to the Sanctuary, but if they were too far from it for it to be feasible they could slay them within their towns to their heart’s desire. This new condition applied because once in the land things had to be seen from a new perspective. Whether ‘within your gates’ was to be applied strictly is not said, but note Leviticus 17:5-7. The idea may be in order to prevent such surreptitious sacrifices to false divinities.

22 Eat them as you would gazelle or deer. Both

the ceremonially unclean and the clean may eat.

GILL, "Even as the roebuck and the hart is eaten,.... Which were not only clean creatures, as before observed, but were commonly and frequently eaten, there being plenty of them in those parts:

so thou shalt eat them; their oxen and calves, their sheep and lambs, their goats and their kids:

the unclean and the clean shall eat of them alike; no difference being to be made on that account, with respect to common food; See Gill on Deu_12:15 which all alike might partake of, notwithstanding any ceremonial uncleanness that any might be attended with.

JAMISON 22-28, "Even as the roebuck and the hart is eaten, so shalt thou eat them, etc. — Game when procured in the wilderness had not been required to be brought to the door of the tabernacle. The people were now to be as free in the killing of domestic cattle as of wild animals. The permission to hunt and use venison for food was doubtless a great boon to the Israelites, not only in the wilderness, but on their settlement in Canaan, as the mountainous ranges of Lebanon, Carmel, and Gilead, on which deer abounded in vast numbers, would thus furnish them with a plentiful and luxuriant repast.

K&D, "Only the flesh that was slaughtered was to be eaten as the hart and the

roebuck (cf. Deu_12:15), i.e., was not to be made into a sacrifice. יח�ו, together, i.e.,

the one just the same as the other, as in Isa_10:8, without the clean necessarily eating along with the unclean.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:22

85

‘Even as the gazelle and as the hart is eaten, so you shall eat of it. The unclean and the clean may eat of it alike.’

They would be able to treat them as though they were clean game animals like the hart and the gazelle, killing them and eating them. And it would not matter whether the eaters were ritually clean or unclean, for they would not be eating sacrificial meat, which only the clean were permitted to eat. Probable examples of this are 1 Samuel 14:33-34; 1 Kings 1:9.

23 But be sure you do not eat the blood, because

the blood is the life, and you must not eat the life

with the meat.

CLARKE, "For the blood is the life - And the life being offered as an atonement, consequently the blood should not be eaten. See the notes on Lev_17:11, where the subject of the vitality of the blood is largely considered.

GILL, "Only be sure that thou eat not the blood,.... This is repeated again, that they might be careful to observe the law concerning that:

for the blood is the life: which is the reason given for the prohibition of it; see Gill on Lev_17:11,

and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh: by which it seems that the meaning of the law was, that the blood might not be eaten in or with the flesh, but to be let out of it, or the fish not to be eaten raw, but dressed; for there were various laws about eating of blood, which are differently expressed.

K&D, "The law relating to the blood, as in Deu_12:16. - “Be strong not to eat the blood,” i.e., stedfastly resist the temptation to eat it.

CALVIN, "23.Only be (21) sure that thou eat not. It is not without cause that he

earnestly exhorts them to inflexible firmness, because it was both a matter

trifling in appearance, and its observation troublesome, whilst it was easy to

decline from it on account of the universal example of the Gentiles. For if they

86

considered within themselves that it contributed not to holiness that they should

not touch blood, hence a snare to indulgence might easily have arisen.

COKE, "Ver. 23. Eat not the blood— This is, says Mr. Locke, in opposition to

the Zabii: for though, continues he, as Dr. Cudworth has remarked, blood was

very impure and unclean in the sight of the Zabii, yet, notwithstanding, it was

eaten by them, because they thought it to be the food of the daemons, and that he

who ate it, had, by that means, some communication with those daemons; so that

they conversed more familiarly with them, and shewed them future things.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:23

‘Only be sure that you do not eat the blood: for the blood is the life; and you

shall not eat the life with the flesh.’

But under no circumstances was the blood to be eaten, for the blood is the life

and it was forbidden to eat the life of an animal along with its flesh. Some other

peoples ate the blood of animals seeking to gain some of their life force and

ferocity, but Israel were not permitted to do so. Men were not to seek to turn

themselves into animals, for men were made in the image of God. Furthermore

all life, even animal life, belongs to God, therefore even when permitted to slay

an animal for food, the life must be given back to Him. So did they constantly

learn the lesson of the sovereignty of God and under Him the sacredness of life.

24 You must not eat the blood; pour it out on

the ground like water.

GILL, "Thou shalt not eat it,.... Neither with the flesh, nor separately:

thou shall pour it upon the earth as water; as the blood of sacrifices was poured upon the altar, the blood of common flesh was to be poured upon the earth, signifying it was not to be used, and no account to be made of it; See Gill on Deu_12:16

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:24

87

‘You shall not eat it. You shall pour it out on the earth as water.’The blood must rather be poured out on the ground like water. This would be an act of worship and gratitude. It avoided the danger of them pouring it on some pagan altar, or of storing it or using it for some illicit purpose (e.g. to drink secretly or to sell or give to foreigners who may desire it). If the blood was not offered directly to Yahweh at His altar, it must be poured into the ground that He had made where He would receive it. When Abel’s blood had been spilt on that ground He had heard its cry (Genesis 4:10). So would Yahweh be aware of this blood being received by the ground. The ground was His. The blood was thus being given back to Him. For ‘as water’ compare 1 Samuel 7:6; 2 Samuel 23:16 where such were offerings to Yahweh.

25 Do not eat it, so that it may go well with you

and your children after you, because you will be

doing what is right in the eyes of the Lord.

GILL, "Thou shall not eat it, that it may be well with thee, and with thy children after thee,.... That they and their posterity might be spared, and continue long, and enjoy much prosperity; for those that eat blood, contrary to this command of God, it is threatened that he would set his face against them, and they should be cut off, Lev_7:27,

when thou shall do that which is right in the sight of the Lord; not only observe this command, but all others.

K&D 25-27, "On the promise for doing what was right in the eyes of the Lord, see Deu_6:18. - In Deu_12:26, Deu_12:27, the command to offer all the holy gifts at the place chosen by the Lord is enforced once more, as in Deu_12:6, Deu_12:11, Deu_

12:17, Deu_12:18; also to prepare the sacrifices at His altar. קדשים, the holy offerings

prescribed in the law, as in Num_18:8; see at Lev_21:22. The “votive offerings” are mentioned in connection with these, because vows proceeded from a spontaneous

impulse. לך� יהיו which are to thee,” are binding upon thee. In v. 27, “the flesh“ ,אשר

and the blood” are in opposition to “thy burnt-offerings:” “thy burnt-offerings, namely the flesh and blood of them,” thou shalt prepare at the altar of Jehovah; i.e., the flesh and blood of the burnt-offerings were to be placed upon and against the

altar (see at Lev_1:5-9). Of the slain-offerings, i.e., the shelamim, the blood was to be

poured out against the altar (Lev_3:2, Lev_3:8, Lev_3:13); “the flesh thou canst eat”

(cf. Lev_7:11.). There is no ground for seeking an antithesis in י3פך�, as Knobel does,

to the זרק in the sacrificial ritual. The indefinite expression may be explained from the

retrospective allusion to Deu_12:24 and the purely suggestive character of the whole passage, the thing itself being supposed to be sufficiently known from the previous

88

laws.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:25

‘You shall not eat it, that it may go well with you, and with your children after you, when you will do that which is right in the eyes of Yahweh.’

By not eating the blood they would be doing right in the sight of Yahweh, and thus it would go well with them for doing right in His eyes, and the same applied to their children. This was a permanent requirement. If we would have things go well with us, we too must be equally obedient to Him in what He requires of us.

26 But take your consecrated things and

whatever you have vowed to give, and go to the

place the Lord will choose.

GILL, "Only thy holy things which thou hast,.... Which the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan interpret of the tithe of their holy things, and Aben Ezra of their burnt offerings and peace offerings; they seem to include all in Deu_12:17.

and thy vows thou shalt take, and go unto the place which the Lord shall choose; so often referred to, but not named; see Deu_12:5.

CALVIN, "26Only thy holy things. This passage more clearly explains what was

meant by the foregoing precepts, viz., that but one place was set apart for the

performance of their sacred rites, lest, if each should offer wherever it pleased

him, religion should be corrupted, and by degrees the various altars should beget

as many gods. He therefore commands that all the victims should be sacrificed

on one altar, with a provision that the blood should be poured out.

ELLICOTT, "(26) Only thy holy things . . . and thy vows.—The holy things

probably mean the firstlings, which were necessarily holy, and must be made

burnt offerings (Deuteronomy 12:6). The second tithe was also considered holy.

The first tithe, or ordinary provision for the Levites (see Numbers 18), was not

considered holy. The vows might be either burnt offerings or peace offerings.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:26

‘Only your holy things which you have, and your vows, you shall take, and go to

89

the place which Yahweh shall choose,’

The holy things are those which God has appointed to be set apart for Himself.

They also include votive offerings, which by their very nature have become

separated to God. These they must take and go with them to the place which

Yahweh chooses, the sacred place where He is pleased to dwell, and which He

has appointed (except when He directs otherwise). Everything is under His

direction.

27 Present your burnt offerings on the altar of

the Lord your God, both the meat and the

blood. The blood of your sacrifices must be

poured beside the altar of the Lord your God,

but you may eat the meat.

GILL, "And thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood, upon the altar of the Lord thy God,.... And on that only, even the altar of burnt offering:

and the blood of thy sacrifices; one as well as another, not only of the burnt offerings, but of the sin offerings, trespass offerings, and peace offerings:

shall be poured out upon the altar of the Lord thy God: either sprinkled on it, or poured out at the bottom of it; see Lev_1:1,

and thou shalt eat the flesh; that is, of the peace offerings, for of them only might the people eat, and that only before the Lord.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:27

‘And you shall offer your whole burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood, on the altar of Yahweh your God, and the blood of your sacrifices shall be poured out on the altar of Yahweh your God, and you shall eat the flesh.’Here whole burnt offerings are distinguished from sacrifices. The whole of the whole burnt offerings must be offered on the altar, in one way or another, both flesh and blood. But of the sacrifices the blood must be poured on the altar, but the flesh could be eaten, some only by the priest, other by both the priest and the offerer, depending on the nature of the sacrifices, and in accordance with the requirements laid down.

90

This was a summarised generalisation. There were also some sacrifices which had to be completely burnt. See for all this Leviticus 1-7.

Once again we are reminded that there are certain things that must come first in our lives. There are too many Christians who are happy to seek full physical satisfaction, because ‘their souls desire to eat flesh’, but come short in wholehearted dedication and commitment to God of their time, their money and their lives. If we do not honour God in the holy things, that is, in our spiritual lives, or if we do not offer Him the whole burnt offering of ourselves, we need to question whether we are really His at all.

28 Be careful to obey all these regulations I am

giving you, so that it may always go well with

you and your children after you, because you

will be doing what is good and right in the eyes

of the Lord your God.

GILL, "Observe and hear all these words which I command thee,.... Respecting the demolition of all monuments of idolatry, and bringing all holy things to the place the Lord should choose to dwell in; and eating common flesh in their own houses, only to be careful not to eat blood:

that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee for ever; for, as has been often observed, their continuance in the land of Canaan, and enjoyment of all good things in it, depended upon their obedience to the commands of God; see Isa_1:19.

when thou doest that which is good and right in the sight of the Lord thy God; which is to do all his commandments; for these are what are good and right in his sight, and it is for the good of men to do them.

CALVIN, "Here, again, God invites the obedience of the people by the promise

of reward; not that the hope of reward at all avails in itself to arouse men, but

because He would thus keep all under the conviction of their just condemnation:

for how will it help them to answer that they are not sufficient to perform what

God requires, when it appears that they are thus wretched through their own

fault? But, as has been said before, it is profitable by indulgence to believers that

the reward of obedience should be promised them when they have kept the Law,

91

since their innumerable defects are not imputed to them. Still this doctrine

remains sure, that if men devote themselves to the keeping of the Law, God,

although He owes them nothing, will nevertheless faithfully reward them.

K&D 28-30, "The closing admonition is a further expansion of Deu_12:25 (see at Deu_11:21). - In Deu_12:29-31, the exhortation goes back to the beginning again, viz., to a warning against the Canaanitish idolatry (cf. Deu_12:2.). When the Lord had cut off the nations of Canaan from before the Israelites, they were to take heed that they did not get into the snare behind them, i.e., into the sin of idolatry, which had plunged the Canaanites into destruction (cf. Deu_7:16, Deu_7:25). The clause “after they be destroyed from before thee” is not mere tautology, but serves to depict the danger of the snare most vividly before their eyes. The second clause, “that thou inquire not after them” (their gods), etc., explains more fully to the Israelites the danger which threatened them. This danger was so far a pressing one, that the whole of the heathen world was animated with the conviction, that to neglect the gods of a land would be sure to bring misfortune (cf. 2Ki_17:26).

BI, "That it may go well with thee.

Blessings for the obedient

Though salvation is not by the works of the law, yet the blessings which are promised to obedience are not denied to the faithful servants of God. The curses our Lord took away when He was made a curse for us, but no clause of blessing has been abrogated. We are to note the revealed will of the Lord, giving our attention not to portions of it, but to “all these words.” There must be no picking and choosing, but an impartial respect to all that God has commanded. This is the road of blessedness for the father and for his children. The Lord’s blessing is upon His chosen to the third and fourth generation. If they walk uprightly before Him, He will make all men know that they are a seed which the Lord hath blessed. No blessing can come to us or ours through dishonesty or double dealing. The ways of worldly conformity and unholiness cannot bring good to us or ours. It will go well with us when we go well before God. If integrity does not make us prosper, knavery will not. That which gives pleasure to God will bring pleasure to us. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

And with thy children after thee.

Care for posterity

God is concerned for posterity. We may mock the suggestion, and put foolish questions concerning the generations yet to come, but the Book of God is as careful about the child unborn as about the old pilgrim born into the higher spaces. God does not insulate Himself by the little present; He contemplates the end from the beginning. All souls are His. He also puts it into our care to regard the welfare of our successors. There is a sense in which we all have a posterity—some in a narrower, some in a larger sense; but we all have a succession: we are influencing tomorrow by our spirit and action today. How mad are they, and how guilty of the cruellest murder, who go on indulging every desire, sating every appetite, satisfying every wish, forgetting that they are involving the yet unborn to pain, weakness, incapacity, and dooming them to lifelong suffering and distress. Here is the greatness of the Bible, the noble condescension of God, the infinite solicitude of the eternal Father. His speech runs to this effect: take care: not only are you involved, but your child and child’s child, for generation upon generation: your drunkenness will reappear in the

92

disease of ages yet to come; your bad conduct will repeat itself in a long succession of evil-minded men; your behaviour appears at present to be agreeable, to have some aspects that might be called delightful, but things are not what they seem: actions do not end in themselves; every bad thought you think takes out some spark of vitality from your brain—robs you, depletes you; be careful; have some regard for those who have to succeed you; learn from those who went before you how evil a thing it is to have sown bad seed, and by what you have learned from them conduct yourself aright; if you are true, wise, pure, generous, well-conducted altogether, generations will arise to bless you; if you take care of the poor, if any of your succession be doomed to poverty, with what measure you mete it shall be measured to you and them again; blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy; with what judgment ye judge ye shall be judged. Life is one: touch it where we may, we send a thrill, a vibration, along all the vital lines. The law is two-fold: sow evil, and reap evil; sow good, and reap good. This is no partial law, dealing with penalty and shame only: it is an impartial righteousness, dealing with reward and glory, and promising delight vast and tender as the heaven of God. (J. Parker, D. D.)

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:28

‘Observe and hear all these words which I command you, that it may go well with you, and with your children after you for ever, when you do what is good and right in the eyes of Yahweh your God.’

Compare Deuteronomy 12:25. Moses again reiterates that they must observe and hear all the words that He commands them, as their future blessing and wellbeing, and that of their children, will depend on it. In one way or another this is constantly repeated (for ‘observe’ and ‘hear’ see Deuteronomy 6:3; Deuteronomy 15:5; Deuteronomy 18:14; but the general idea is multiplied e.g. Deuteronomy 4:1; Deuteronomy 5:1; and often). They must be in no doubt about the fact that all the blessings that they will receive are gifts from Yahweh, and are therefore dependent on obedience to the covenant in all its aspects (which included making themselves aware of what was required, which is where the Levites could help).

29 The Lord your God will cut off before you

the nations you are about to invade and

dispossess. But when you have driven them out

and settled in their land,

GILL, "When the Lord thy God shall cut off the nations from before thee,.... The seven nations of the land of Canaan, Deu_7:1,

93

whither thou goest to possess them, and thou succeedest them, and dwellest in their land; or to inherit them, and thou dost inherit them, by dwelling in their land.

HENRY 29-32, "2. They must not worship the Lord by any of those rites or ceremonies which the notions of Canaan had made use of in the service of their gods, Deu_12:29-32. They must not so much as enquire into the modes and forms of idolatrous worship. What good would it do to them to know those depths of Satan?Rev_2:24. It is best to be ignorant of that which there is danger of being infected by. They must not introduce the customs of idolaters, (1.) Because it would be absurd to make those their patterns whom God had made their slaves and captives, cut off, and destroyed from before them. The Canaanites had not flourished and prospered so much in the service of their gods as that the Israelites should be invited to take up their customs. Those are wretchedly besotted indeed who will walk in the way of sinners, after they have seen their end. (2.) Because some of their customs were most barbarous and inhuman, and such as trampled, not only upon the light and law of nature, but upon natural affection itself, as burning their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods (Deu_12:31), the very mention of which is sufficient to make it odious, and possess us with a horror of it. (3.) Because their idolatrous customs were an abomination to the Lord, and the translating of them into his worship would make even that an abomination and an affront to him by which they should give him honour, and by which they hoped to obtain his favour. The case is bad indeed when the sacrifice itself has become an abomination, Pro_15:8. He therefore concludes (Deu_12:32) with the same caution concerning the worship of God which he had before given concerning the word of God (Deu_4:2): “You shall not add thereto any inventions of your own, under pretence of making the ordinance either more significant or more magnificent, nor diminish from it, under pretence of making it more easy and practicable, or of setting aside that which may be spared; but observe to do all that, and that only, which God has commanded.” We may then hope in our religious worship to obtain the divine acceptance when we observe the divine appointment. God will have his own work done in his own way.

JAMISON 29-30, "Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them ... saying, How did these nations serve their gods? — The Israelites, influenced by superstitious fear, too often endeavored to propitiate the deities of Canaan. Their Egyptian education had early impressed that bugbear notion of a set of local deities, who expected their dues of all who came to inhabit the country which they honored with their protection, and severely resented the neglect of payment in all newcomers [Warburton]. Taking into consideration the prevalence of this idea among them, we see that against an Egyptian influence was directed the full force of the wholesome caution with which this chapter closes.

CALVIN, "29.When the Lord thy God shall cut off. This passage has some

affinity to that in the eighteenth chapter of Deuteronomy, which we have already

remarked on. For inasmuch as it was easy for the people to lapse into the

imitation of the Gentiles, and to worship their false gods, under whose protection

the inhabitants boasted their land to be, all inquiry respecting them is also

strictly forbidden. (305) For this is the origin of idolatry, when the genuine

94

simplicity of God’s worship is known, that people begin to be dissatisfied with it,

and curiously to inquire whether there is anything worthy of belief in the

figments of men; for men’s minds are soon attracted by the snares of novelty, so

as to pollute, with various kinds of leaven, what has been delivered in God’s

word. Nor does he only withdraw and restrain them from the desire of inquiry,

but expressly commands them to “take heed to” themselves, or to keep

themselves; because men are naturally disposed to this wanton curiosity, and

take much delight in it. Therefore God encloses His people with barriers, which

may keep them back from all hurtful desires; nay, He would have them so

abominate the practice of superstitions, as to fly even from the infection of

hearing of them. We must briefly observe respecting the words, which we have

translated “to possess the nations,” that Moses does not mean that they were to

become their prey, so as to be their slaves by right of capture, but that he refers

to the land. Therefore he says, “thou shalt possess them before thy face;” i.e.,

when they are destroyed, the land will be vacant for you to possess it. In the

Hiphil conjugation this word signifies to expel, as we have already seen; and to

this meaning Moses perhaps makes allusion. The word (306) which I have

translated “illa-queare,” to snare, some interpreters render to stumble, and

others to be carried away, which would be more agreeable to the construction,

“lest you should be carried away after them;” yet I have been unwilling to depart

from the generally received opinion, when the metaphor of “ensnaring” is very

appropriate; as if he had said, that all the perversities of the Gentiles were so

many nets or snares to entrap men, if they come too near them; for it presently

follows, “after that they be destroyed,” which some also thus render, “lest you

should perish after them,” as if He would awaken their fears by holding forth the

example of their destruction.

Pol. Syn. gives “aberres,” as the Syriac version, and “ne captarts,” as that of

Malvenda.

COFFMAN, ""This paragraph is an emphatic repeat of the warning given in the

first four verses of the chapter."[22] Even the countless repetitions of the Old

Testament were not enough to deter Israel from falling into the same

"abominations" practiced by their heathen predecessors in Canaan.

Cousins warned against the tendency of men to look with favor and appreciation

upon the religious practices that God has not authorized, saying, "God's people

in all ages have created appalling problems for themselves and distorted their

own faith by incorporating alien practices and concepts."[23]

"Take heed to thyself ..." It seems incredible to us that an intelligent people like

the Israelites would have been seduced to wallow in the debaucheries of the

pagan Canaanites, but there was a near universal conception in those ages that

every land had a whole family of local deities who required the adoration of any

95

who occupied the land. Any failure to honor those "gods of the land" was

supposed to bring disaster. "Now the Israelites themselves were well schooled in

this old bug-bear notion of such deities who severely resented their neglect by all

new-comers."[24] Even the king of Assyria who left many Israelites in Canaan,

learned that the wild beasts were making ravages against the few who remained

in the land concluded that it was because they had not properly "honored the

gods of the land," that being the king of Assyria's estimate of who Jehovah really

is! 2 Kings 17:25ff. That accounts for the fact that priests were sent back to

Samaria, having only the Books of Moses, which became known in time as "The

Samaritan Pentateuch." Thus, it was that God, in these verses, warned that all

such "deities" were to be ignored, their shrines, altars, pillars, and groves be

demonlished, and that their very names be obliterated from the face of the earth.

Scott paraphrased the larger paragraph above, as follows: "Neither curiosity nor

self-interested desire must lead the Israelites to traffic with Canaanite gods and

ritual. All such is intolerable to Jehovah, for (to take an extreme instance) even

children are sacrificed."[25]

"Even their sons and their daughters have they burnt in the fire to their gods ..."

(Deuteronomy 12:31). At other places in the Old Testament, this horrible

practice is referred to as `making a child to pass through the the fire to Molech,'

(Deuteronomy 18:10), or simply, `pass through to Molech' (Leviticus 18:21;

Jeremiah 32:35). "This has led some to allege that the ceremony referred to here

was not an actual burning of children, but some kind of a `symbolical' passing of

the child to Molech!"[26] The stark and ugly truth shines here. Child sacrifice

was widely practiced in Canaan, as "Archeology has dramatically proved."[27]

"Every abomination ... which Jehovah hateth ... have they done ..." Here is the

reason for God's removal of the Canaanites: It was due to their depravity, their

unconscionable debauchery, and their shameful indulgence in every evil and

licentious conduct, all of which things they did as "sacrifices to their gods."

In the final verse of this chapter (Deuteronomy 13:1 in the Hebrew Bible), we

have "essentially a repeat of Deuteronomy 4:2. Moses here again delivers the

only true standard of ethics and godly service, the revealed will of God; no more;

no less!"[28]

CONSTABLE, "Pagan gods 12:29-31

The Israelites were not to investigate the pagan religious practices of the

Canaanites with a view to worshipping their gods or following their example in

the worship of Yahweh (Deuteronomy 12:30; cf. Romans 16:19; Ephesians 5:12).

Moses developed this idea further in the next chapter. This pericope is

96

transitional, moving from the worship of Yahweh (ch. 12) to the worship of idols

(ch. 13). Chapter 12 opens and closes with warnings against pagan religion.

How does God want His people to worship Him? His people should worship Him

exclusively and only as He has instructed us (cf. Matthew 28:19-20; Luke 22:19;

John 4:20-23).

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:29-30

‘When Yahweh your God shall cut off the nations from before you, in the place

where you go in to dispossess them, and you dispossess them, and dwell in their

land, take heed to yourself that you be not ensnared to follow them, after that

they are destroyed from before you, and that you enquire not after their gods,

saying, “How do these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise.” ’

The initial thoughts of the chapter are now taken up again. When they enter into

the land and cut off the nations that are in it and dispossess them, they must

remember that it is Yahweh their God Who has done it. They must therefore

beware of being ensnared by the gods of those nations. They must not seek to

those gods. They must not enquire about them. They must be loyal to Yahweh

and reject His enemies. One of the important emphases in all treaties was the

requirement of loyalty to the Suzerain and rejection of his enemies.

In those days it was common belief that different lands had different gods, so

that if you wanted to prosper in a land you must show concern for the local gods.

But God here points out that the gods in mind are not the gods of the land but

the gods of ‘the nations’. The land is His land. Thus such ideas are not to be

entertained for a moment. They must seek only to Yahweh about Yahweh’s land

and are to reject and ignore the gods of the nations who at present dwell in it.

This is another claim by Yahweh to sovereignty in everything.

This is the negative of which the place chosen by Yahweh in which He would set

His name was the positive. They must not be diverted from Him in any way.

They must positively love Him with all their being, and they must abjure

anything that would interfere with that love.

97

30 and after they have been destroyed before

you, be careful not to be ensnared by inquiring

about their gods, saying, “How do these nations

serve their gods? We will do the same.”

BARNES, "This caution is based upon the notion generally entertained in the ancient pagan world, that each country had its own tutelary deities whom it would be perilous to neglect; compare 1Ki_20:23; 2Ki_17:26. Israel was to shun such superstitions as unworthy of the elect people of God.

GILL, "Take heed to thyself, that thou be not snared by following them,.... Their examples and customs, and so be drawn into the same idolatrous practices; see Psa_106:35, after that they be destroyed from before thee; for their idolatries and other sins:

and that thou inquire not after their gods; what they were, their names, forms, and figures:

saying, how did these nations serve their gods? what was the manner of worship they gave them? what rites, customs, and ceremonies did they use in their adoration of them?

even so will I do likewise; or however, if this was not determined on when the inquiries were made, there was danger that this would be the result of them, and therefore the caution is given.

BI, "Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following after them.

Danger of a conquered foe

It is a remarkable fact, and is proved by Dr. Bell (in his History of British Insects), that the poison of the rattlesnake is even secreted after death. Dr. Bell, in his dissections of the rattlesnakes which have been dead many hours, has found that the poison continued to be secreted so fast as to require to be dried up occasionally with sponge or rag. The immoral author, like these rattlesnakes, not only poisons during his lifetime, but after death: because his books possess the subtle power of secreting the venom to a horrible degree. A moral sponge is constantly called into requisition to obliterate his poison for many years after he himself has been dead. (Scientific Illustrations.)

Revival of a conquered sin

As the bough of a tree bent from its usual course returns to its old position as soon as the force by which it had yielded is removed; so do men return to their old habits as

98

soon as the motives, whether of interest or fear, which had influenced them, are done away. “Nature,” says Lord Bacon, “is often hidden, sometimes overcome, seldom extinguished. Let not a man trust his victory over his nature too far, for nature will lie buried a great time, and yet revive upon the occasion or temptation; like as it was with AEsop’s damsel, turned from a cat to a woman, who sat very demurely at the board’s end till a mouse ran before her.” The same philosopher gives the following admirable caution:—“A man’s nature runs either to herbs or weeds; therefore let him seasonably water the one and destroy the other.”

Need for watchfulness

None are so likely to maintain watchful guard over their hearts and lives as those who know the comfort of living in near communion with God. They feel their privilege and will fear losing it. They will dread failing from their high estate, and marring their own comfort by bringing clouds between themselves and Christ. He that goes on a journey with little money about him takes little thought of danger, and cares little how late he travels. He, on the contrary, that carries gold and jewels, will be a cautious traveller; he will look well to his roads, his horses, and his company, and run no risks. The fixed stars are those that tremble most. The man that most fully enjoys the light of God’s countenance, will be a man tremblingly afraid of losing its blessed consolations, and jealously fearful of doing anything to grieve the Holy Ghost. (Bp. Ryle.).

COKE, "Ver. 30. Enquire not after their gods, &c.— The pretentious of the

heathen deities, as Bishop Warburton observes, being mutually acknowledged by

their distinct and proper followers; and some, by the fortunate circumstances of

these followers, being risen into superior same, the rites used in their worship

were eagerly sought for and imitated. It was likewise a general principle, that the

local god was to have a necessary share in the worship of all who settled in the

country; and those who were loth to leave their paternal gods when they sought

new settlements, at least held themselves obliged to worship them with the rites,

and according to the usages of the country which they came to inhabit. Against

this more qualified principle of paganism, Moses thinks fit to caution the

Israelites in this and the subsequent verses. Div. Leg. vol. 4: p. 40.

31 You must not worship the Lord your God in

their way, because in worshiping their gods,

they do all kinds of detestable things the Lord

hates. They even burn their sons and daughters

99

in the fire as sacrifices to their gods.

CLARKE, "Their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire -Almost all the nations in the world agreed in offering human victims to their gods on extraordinary occasions, by which it is evident that none of those nations had any right notion of the Divine nature. How necessary, then, was the volume of revelation, to teach men what that religion is with which God can be well pleased! The Hindoos to this day offer human victims to their goddess Cali, and at the temple of Jaggernaut; and yet, notwithstanding this, there are found certain persons who, while they profess Christianity, are absolutely unwilling to send the Hindoos the Gospel of Christ, because they think it would not be politically wise! But the wisdom of this world has ever been foolishness with God; and in spite of all this infidel policy, the word of the Lord shall have free course and be glorified.

GILL, "Thou shalt not do so unto the Lord thy God,.... Not serve and worship him after the manner of the Gentiles, nor introduce their rites and customs into his service, used by them in the worship of their gods:

for every abomination which he hateth have they done unto their gods; as murder, adultery, &c. which God has expressed his aversion to, and indignation at; one instance of the former sort is given here:

for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods; not only men have they sacrificed to them, but such near relations; and not only caused them to pass through the fire, but burnt them in it; so the Carthaginians are said to do, who learned this inhuman practice from the Phoenicians; they were a colony of the inhabitants of this land of Canaan. Of the Phoenicians Porphyry says (i), that in great calamities, as war or pestilence, they sacrificed to Saturn some one of those that were dearest to them, appointed by suffrage. The Phoenician history, adds he, is full of such sacrifices, which Sanchoniatho wrote in the Phoenician language; and Curtius says (k), this custom of sacrificing a fine boy to Saturn was received by the Carthaginians from their founders (the Tyrians and Phoenicians), and which they continued even to the destruction of their city.

K&D, "Deu_12:31, like Deu_12:4, with the reason assigned in Deu_12:31 : “for

the Canaanites prepare (עשה, as in Deu_12:27) all kinds of abominations for their

gods,” i.e., present offerings to these, which Jehovah hates and abhors; they even burn their children to their idols-for example, to Moloch (see at Lev_18:21).

CALVIN, "31.Thou shalt not do so. From these words we may gather what it is

not to make to one’s self the gods of others, viz., to bid farewell to all the

inventions of men, and to pay attention to this one thing — what God commands.

100

For why does God desire to be worshipped by His elect people, otherwise than

the nations were in the habit of serving their gods, except because there ought to

be a notable distinction, so that religion may not be confused? And surely unless

men cleave to God’s word, so as resolutely to determine that nothing else is

permitted to them except what is there taught, they will not only be vacillating,

but. they will receive indiscriminately whatever comes in their way. We must

then hold fast to this, “Thou shalt not do so;” and our minds must be restrained

by this curb, lest any superstition which may defile the service of God should

insinuate or establish itself. He adds, that God not only repudiates these strange

worships, but even abominates them; and in order to impress this the more, he

adduces one form of superstition, in which its absurdity was unusually manifest;

for it is a foul barbarity that innocent children should be burnt by their parents.

COKE, "Ver. 31. Their sons and their daughters they have burnt, &c.— To

what we have said of this horrid custom on Leviticus 20:1; Leviticus 20:27 we

shall only add, that it was notoriously practised by the Carthaginians, who, it is

certain, derived it from the Phoenicians, the ancient inhabitants of Canaan; and

at last it overspread all nations, and prevailed even among the refined Greeks

themselves. See Banier's Mythol. book 3: ch. 10. But what is more surprising, we

find the Israelites themselves, notwithstanding this admonition, seduced to

commit the same abomination; Psalms 106:37-38. Ezekiel 37:28. Dr. Chandler, in

his Vindication, justly observes, that though several instances of such inhuman

offerings are to be found among the Phoenicians, Greeks, and others, yet they do

not appear to have been sacrifices freely made, but with the utmost horror and

reluctance, by the order of their priests, or the supposed command of their gods,

or through the compulsion of some extreme necessity, and to avoid some

dreadful calamity. Thus the king of Moab, in the distress of a grievous war, took

his eldest son, and offered him for a burnt-offering upon the wall. 2 Kings 3:27.

See Jac. Gensius, de Victim. Human. pars i. c. 11. et alibi.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:31

‘You shall not do so to Yahweh your God, for every abomination to Yahweh,

which he hates, have they done to their gods, for even their sons and their

daughters do they burn in the fire to their gods.’

This is especially so because of the behaviour of these nations with regard to

their gods. They have committed every abomination which Yahweh hates. These

included perverted sex, and especially that they burned their sons and their

daughters in the fire to their gods. This last mainly referred to the worship of the

Ammonite god Molech which was clearly also worshipped in parts of Canaan

(Jeremiah 32:35). But Jeremiah also connects this practise with the worship of

Baal (Jeremiah 19:5), and ‘their gods’ would seem to suggest that it was

connected with more than one god. Child sacrifice was probably not widely

101

practised in Canaan, but it was certainly practised. It is also attested from

documents discovered in Syria. It was, however, here simply seen as the worst of

a number of abominations (‘every abomination’) that disfigured Canaanite

religion. This was why it was justifiable for Yahweh to have them destroyed or

driven out. They were constantly defiling the land.

32 See that you do all I command you; do not

add to it or take away from it.[a]

GILL, "What thing soever I command you, observe to do it,.... In the manner it is commanded and directed to; the laws of God, both as to matter and manner, were to be obeyed just as they were delivered: thou shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it; neither add any customs and rites of the Heathens to them, nor neglect anything enjoined on them, see Pro_30:6.

K&D, "The admonition to observe the whole law, without adding to it or taking from it (cf. Deu_4:2), is regarded by many commentators as the conclusion of the previous chapter. But it is more correct to understand it as an intermediate link, closing what goes before, and introductory to what follows. Strictly speaking, the warning against inclining to the idolatry of the Canaanites (Deu_12:29-31) forms a transition from the enforcement of the true mode of worshipping Jehovah to the laws relating to tempters to idolatry and worshippers of idols (ch. 13). The Israelites were to cut off not only the tempters to idolatry, but those who had been led astray to idolatry also. Three different cases are mentioned.

CALVIN, "32.What thing soever I command. In this brief clause he teaches that

no other service of God is lawful, except that of which He has testified His

approval in His word, and that obedience is as it were the mother of piety; as if

he had said that all modes of devotion are absurd and infected with superstition,

which are not directed by this rule. Hence we gather, that in order to the keeping

of the First Commandment, a knowledge of the true God is required, derived

from His word, and mixed with faith. By forbidding the addition, or diminishing

of anything, he plainly condemns as illegitimate whatever men invent of their

own imagination; whence it follows that they, who in worshipping God are

guided by any rule save that which He Himself has prescribed, make to

themselves false gods; and, therefore, horrible vengeance is denounced by Him

102

against those who are guilty of this temerity, through Isaiah,

“Forasmuch as this people draw near me, etc., by the precept of men; therefore,

behold I will proceed to do a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of

their wise men shall perish,” etc. (Isaiah 29:13.)

Now, since all the ceremonies of the Papal worship are a mass of superstitions, no

wonder that all her chief rulers and ministers should be blinded with that

stupidity wherewith God has threatened them. (307)

PETT, "Deuteronomy 12:32

‘Whatever thing I command you, that you shall observe to do. You shall not add

thereto, nor diminish from it.’

Note the change to ‘ye’ which connects this verse more with the following chapter

(which is a mixture of both), although it does also clearly connect with what

precedes. It is a transitional verse.

Compare here Deuteronomy 4:2. Finally Moses again asserts the importance of

observing all that he commands them. They were not to add to it or diminish it.

They were to accept it and obey it exactly as it came to them, for it was a part of

the covenant of Yahweh. Such clauses against altering the covenant were a

common feature of treaties, but here there is a deeper significance in that he

refers to words that have come from God. Moses will now in chapter 13 deal with

different persons who might seek to lead them astray from that word into

idolatry.

There are important things that result from these words. Firstly they indicate

that Moses expected there to be a clear body of truth preserved which could be

referred to, otherwise his point was meaningless. Secondly it counts strongly

against this being written by an honest man other than Moses. To write in this

way pretending to be Moses and putting divine sanction on the words would be

duplicity of an extreme kind, not pious faith. Can we really believe that a book of

the moral quality of Deuteronomy arose from such duplicity?

HAWKER, "Verse 32

REFLECTIONS

HOLY and Eternal SPIRIT! be graciously pleased of thine infinite mercy so to

write thy statutes and judgments upon my mind and in my heart, that I may live

to JESUS in the enjoyment of them all the days of my pilgrimage upon the earth.

103

Thou, dearest LORD, art both the lawgiver and the law-fulfiller of thine own

sacred will. Oh! may I behold thee as the end of the law for righteousness to me,

and to everyone that believeth; and while, through the influences of the blessed

SPIRIT, I live a life of faith to GOD and upon GOD, may I feel an holy jealousy

to throw down all the idols of the heart wherever I find them.

Dearest LORD! make that place peculiarly sacred to my soul, which hath JESUS

for its object. Here would I dwell, forever dwell, under the shining of thy divine

countenance! Here would I bring my poor offerings, and here alone present my

sacrifices, seeking the acceptance both of my person and offering in him and his

precious righteousness, who is the altar, the offering, and the high priest of all

His people. And as I am not yet come to that rest which is thyself, blessed JESUS,

in glory, and only behold thee now by faith; LORD, help me until the vail be

removed, to walk more by faith and less by sight, that I may not do according to

what the world is doing, whatsoever seemeth right in a man's own eyes; but that

forgetting things that are behind, and reaching forth to those which are before, I

may press toward the mark of the prize of the high calling of GOD in CHRIST

JESUS. Return to thy rest, to thy JESUS, O my soul, for the LORD hath dealt

bountifully with thee!

COKE, "Ver. 32. Thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it— See on

chap. Deuteronomy 4:2. One would wonder, says Bishop Patrick, that so learned

a man as Maimonides should have laboured to prove from this the immutability

of the law of Moses. It is strange that he could not see, what some of his brethren

have seen, that though God did not permit the Israelites to alter these laws, he

bound not up Himself from changing them; this another Jewish writer very well

illustrates: "A physician prescribes a diet to his patient for such a time as he

judges convenient, which he does not declare to the sick man; but when the time

comes that the physician hath obtained his end, he changes the diet, permits the

patient what he formerly forbade, and prohibits that which he formerly

permitted." This exactly agrees with what our Blessed Saviour has done.

REFLECTIONS.—As nothing would preserve them more effectually from

idolatry than forbidding all sacrifices and public offerings, except in one place

under the immediate eye of God's ministers, we have this again and again

inculcated. 1. God's promises, when they were in quiet possession of the land, to

choose the place where he would put his name, erect his tabernacle, and manifest

his presence in the divine Shechinah. He left not the place to their option, lest

they should dispute about the choice; nor mentions it as yet, because it was

enough for them to know his pleasure now, and they should have farther

direction when it was needful. Blessed be God! all distinctions of place in Christ

Jesus are now destroyed; every where we may have access to a throne of grace,

104

and find our services accepted in the Redeemer. 2. When the place was fixed,

they must there offer their sacrifices; and all their holy things must be eaten

there, before the Lord, with joy and gladness of heart, by them and their

families. God's service is delightful: to be melancholy, is to dishonour it. Religion

was designed to be our pleasure, not our burden. 3. Though all their devoted

things might only be eaten before the Lord, no restraint is said upon them

respecting common and allowed meats: they might kill and eat without reserve,

and both the unclean and the clean might eat them alike; with this proviso, that

they lived according to the blessing of God upon them, neither luxuriously

extravagant, nor penuriously saving. Excess and covetousness are alike

dishonourable to God. He gives us his blessings richly to enjoy; and whilst he

would have us eat our bread and drink our wine with a cheerful heart, he wills

that we should use his gifts with that sobriety and temperance, which may satisfy

our natural appetite, without making provision for our sinful lusts.

CONSTABLE, "Verse 32

The prophet or receiver of a dream 12:32-13:5

The last verse of chapter 12 in the English Bible is the first verse of chapter 13 in

the Hebrew Bible. It introduces what follows.

God permitted some prophets (people who claimed to have direct revelation

from God, or to speak for God, or who praised God) to arise in Israel and

perform miracles (Deuteronomy 12:1), even though they advocated apostasy

from Yahweh. The primary meaning of "prophet" (Heb. nabi') is "proclaimer"

or "forth-teller" (cf. Exodus 4:15-16; Exodus 7:1) [Note: J. Blenkinsopp, A

History of Prophecy in Israel, pp. 36-38.] A prophet was, then, a spokesman for

God who represented Him before other people. [Note: Merrill, Deuteronomy, p.

230.] God permitted prophets to utter false prophecies to test His people's love

(Deuteronomy 12:3), specifically, to see if they would remain loyal to Him. The

acid test of a false prophet was his or her fidelity to the Mosaic Covenant. If he

led the people away from God, the civil authorities were to put him to death

(Deuteronomy 12:5). Some false prophets would foretell the future since they

received this information from the evil spirit world (e.g., diviners, soothsayers,

etc.). Some of them could even perform signs and wonders (supernatural acts),

which would appear to substantiate their claim that their power came from God.

Enticement to idolatry was a very serious crime in Israel. [Note: See Leon J.

Wood, The Prophets of Israel, ch. 7: "False Prophecy in Israel," for a good

discussion of this subject.]

Verse 32

105

2. Laws arising from the second commandment 12:32-13:18

The second commandment is, "You shall not make for yourself an image or any

likeness ... [to] worship them or serve them ..." (Deuteronomy 5:8-10). The writer

mentioned three different cases in this section.

"In the ancient suzerainty treaties it was required of the vassal that he must not

connive at evil words spoken against the suzerain, whether they amounted to an

affront or to a conspiracy. The vassal must report the insult or the fomenting of

revolt. In case of active rebellion, he must undertake military measures against

the offenders. Moreover, he must manifest fidelity to his lord in such cases no

matter who the rebel might be, whether prince or nearest relative. All of this

finds its formal counterpart in Deuteronomy 13." [Note: Kline, "Deuteronomy,"

p. 172.]

LANGE, "Verse 32

Deuteronomy 12:32 to Deuteronomy 13:18

Deuteronomy 12:32 What thing soever [The whole word] I command you,

observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Deuteronomy 13:1. If there arise [stand up] among you a prophet, or a dreamer

of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, 2And the sign or [and] the wonder

come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods

[follow other gods] which thou hast not known, and let us serve them: 3Thou

shalt not hearken unto the words of that [this] prophet, or that dreamer of

dreams: for the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord

your God with all your heart and with all your soul 4 Ye shall walk [go] after the

Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice,

and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him 5 And that prophet, or that dreamer

of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away

[spoken, revolt against] from the Lord your God, which brought you out of the

land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage [servants] to thrust

thee [seduce] out of the way which the Lord thy God commanded thee to walk in.

So shalt thou [And thou shalt] put the evil away from the midst of thee 6 If thy

brother, the son of thy mother, or thy Song of Solomon, or thy daughter, or the

wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly,

saying, Let us go and serve other gods, 7which thou hast not known, thou, nor

thy fathers: Namely [om. namely] of the gods of the people which are round

about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth

even unto the other end of the earth; 8Thou shalt not consent [yield] unto him,

106

nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare,

neither shalt thou conceal him: 9But thou shalt surely [by all means, utterly] kill

him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the

hand of all the people 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones that he die;

because he has sought to thrust thee away [to seduce thee]1 from the Lord thy

God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt from the house of bondage

[bondmen], 11And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such

wickedness as this is [such evil word] among you 12 If thou shalt hear say in one

of thy cities, which the Lord thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying,

13Certain men, the children of Belial,2 are gone out from among you, and have

withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods,

which 14 ye have not known; Then [And] shalt thou inquire, and make search,

and ask diligently [well]; and behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain [truth is

it, certain the word] that such abomination is wrought among you; 15Thou shalt

surely smite [sternly, without mercy] the inhabitants of that city with the edge of

the sword, destroying it utterly [laying it under a bann] and all that is therein,

and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword 16 And thou shalt gather all the

spoil [made in it] of it into the midst of the street [gate, plaza]3 thereof, and shalt

burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit,4 for the Lord thy

God: and it shall be an heap [heap of ruins] forever; it shall not be built again 17

And there shall cleave nought of the cursed thing [banned thing] to thine hand:

that the Lord may turn from the fierceness of his anger, and shew [give] thee

mercy, and have compassion upon thee, and multiply thee, as he hath sworn unto

thy fathers; 18When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep

all his commandments [commandment] which I command thee this day, to do

that which is right in the eyes of the Lord thy God.

107