Israel having been reminded that the land, into which they were going, was
Jehovah's, so that they were merely tenants in possession for a time, and therefore
they might not permanently alienate it, they were next instructed as to right
of redemption that was to be observed, if anyone became poor and parted with
his land for a time.
Some who had done this might later be prospered financially and be able themselves
to redeem it. Such a case is contemplated in verse 26, and equitable terms
of redemption are stated in verse 27. But in verse 25 we learn that, if a man
remained poor and unable for this, "any of his kin" might step in
and redeem it for him. This is illustrated for us by the action of Boaz in
the Book of Ruth; and by this type we see how needful it was that the Lord
Jesus should assume perfect Manhood, sin apart. Thus He "took part" of "flesh
and blood," as Hebrews 2: 14 says, that so by death He might annul the
power of the devil over us. Had He taken hold of angels only, He could not
have fulfilled the type as our Kinsman-Redeemer, and paid the necessary price.
Verses 29-34, deal with exceptions to the above. Houses in villages were
to be treated as land but not if the house stood in a wailed city. Such could
only be redeemed within a year of the original transaction. They were more
distinctively man's handiwork, lacking the simplicity connected with God's
handiwork in the countryside. And further there was special protection ordered
for the Levites and their possessions since they were specially God's possession.
In the latter part of our chapter we pass from the laws relating to the land
to those concerning the redemption of persons. The first case considered is
that of the Israelite who becoming poor sold himself for a period of service
to one of his brethren. He was to be treated as a hired servant and not a bondservant
and at the jubilee he was to be free. The case of such was considered fully
when we read Exodus 21.
But then secondly, some of the nations round about might be prepared to sell
themselves into servitude. If so, no redemption was provided for, and their
service would be perpetual. It may be remarked that here we have a form of
slavery permitted: Yes, but it was a form that was accepted for a monetary
consideration by the person concerned, and not something forced on them, or
similar to what was done with African negroes a century or two ago.
Thirdly, there was the case of the Israelite who, becoming poor, sold himself
into servitude to some sojourner or stranger in the land. He would go out free
at the jubilee, but also special arrangements were made for his possible redemption
before the jubilee arrived. But such right of redemption was again limited
to one of his own kin — brother, uncle or cousin. So that the "kinsman-redeemer" comes
into view when persons are in question, and not only in connection with land.
In considering this type, we have to remind ourselves, as indeed with all the
types, that the great Reality that is typified far exceeds the type.
Leviticus 26, which we have now reached, bears an exceedingly
solemn character. Verses 1-13 give a glowing picture of the earthly blessing
and prosperity that would follow their obedience. Verses 14-39 give a terrible
forecast of the evils that would ensue, if disobedience marked them.
Verse 1 prohibits idolatry of any kind. Verse 2 enforces the sanctity of
the sabbath and the sanctuary. Verse 3 sums up all the other laws as "My
statutes" and "My commandments," which were to be carried out.
Lip service was not enough. They were to "do them."
Then follow the details of the prosperity that would follow. But, all was
strictly provisional. It is, "If ye walk . . . then I will give." All
depended upon their obedience and that "If" proved fatal. The blessings
promised were of an earthly and material sort.
They may be summed up as, fruitfulness, peace, victory and the realized presence
of God in their midst. Jehovah had broken the bands of the yoke, imposed on
them in Egypt, so that they went upright instead of being bowed down under
heavy burdens. His presence would be their continued salvation. There is no
mention of heaven or of the life to come. How great the contrast with the Christian's
portion — blessed "with all spiritual blessings
in heavenly places in Christ" (Eph. 1: 3), and that without
the introduction of any "if."
The larger part of the chapter is occupied with warnings as to the dreadful
evils that would be provoked by their disobedience, and which would fall upon
them with sevenfold intensity. In the days of Ezekiel the sad history of Israel's
law-breaking was reaching a climax, and through him the Lord spoke of, "My
four sore judgments . . . the sword, and the famine, and the noisome
beast, and the pestilence" (Ezek. 14: 21). In our chapter the "four
sore judgments" appear, only the sword instead of being mentioned first
comes in the fourth place. Moreover, as verses 36 and 37 disclose, they would
also bring the sword the one upon the other, and thus add to their miseries
and destruction.
Verses 34 and 35 anticipate that they would ignore the commandments as to
the sabbath, particularly as regarded the land, and that consequently God would
give it a long sabbatical rest, when they were driven out and it lay desolate.
We all know how long a rest that land has had until quite recent years.
With verse 40 a ray of light begins to shine. A door of hope is opened, if
two things come to pass. First, there must be the confession of their iniquities.
Second, the acceptance of the punishment that their iniquities have brought
upon them. This second stipulation is mentioned twice, you notice, and evidently
it is a very important matter. Both things are seen in Daniel's prayer (Dan.
9) so he got a speedy answer. A man may confess his sin but, if he still kicks
against the punishment it incurs, it shows that his confession is superficial
only, and lacks depth of real contrition. This is as true for us today as it
was for Israel of old, since God's governmental dealings with His children,
though always in love, are in strict righteousness. Psalm 73 gives evidence
as to this.
It is also made plain in the end of the chapter that though disobedience
would bring upon them such dire consequences, God would never forget His covenant
with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, in which He pledged Himself toward them unconditionally.
To this Paul refers in Galatians 3: 17, pointing out that the law was not given
until four hundred and thirty years after and cannot disannul it. This earlier
covenant was "by promise" and when God fulfils it, Israel will be
blessed on the ground of mercy, as is stated in Romans 11: 31, 32.
One thing more may be said: the woes threatened, like the favours offered
in the earlier verses, are all of an earthly and temporal nature, though described
in terrible terms. No attempt is made to soften down the language; indeed the
very reverse. Just so it is in the New Testament where the dire consequence
of unforgiven sin in eternity are stated. The language, whether of our Lord
or of His apostles, could not be stronger. In this we ought to see clear evidence
of the kindness of God. Those who break human laws may sometimes have ground
for the complaint that had they been told plainly the penalty involved they
would not have transgressed. No such complaint from Israel would have stood
against God. Nor will any such complaint stand from those who, having heard
the Gospel and refused its warnings, pass into a lost eternity.
Leviticus 27 contemplates cases where Israelites might desire to devote under
a vow to the Lord either themselves or their animals, houses, land, etc., on
special occasions. As to persons there was a fixed valuation, as given in the
opening verses. This was in the hands of Moses. Verse 8 contemplates the case
of the poor man, who was permitted to turn from Moses to the priest, who would
value him according to his ability. Now the priest was one who could "have
compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way" (Heb.
5: 2). Pure law itself admits of no flexibility: what is demanded must be paid
in full. The priest represented that measure of grace that was permissible
under the law system.
There seems to be very little reference in the Old Testament to such vows
and offerings to the Lord. It is possible that the vow of Jephthah (Judges
11) so rashly made, came under this heading. So also the vow of Hannah, in
giving Samuel to the Lord. Israel frequently misused, if they did not neglect
these regulations, and of this we have an illustration in Malachi 1: 14. God
was not deceived however, and a curse came on the head of the man who was deceitful
in that which he vowed.
As we pass to the consideration of the Book of Numbers we note that there
is no real division between it and Leviticus, as indicated by the fact that
the first word is, "And."