EXODUS
Lesson 22 - Chapters 21 and 22
Last week, a lot of you walked out with headaches and puzzled looks as we started our study
of “The Law” with an extensive expose’ on Exodus 21:1. You’ll be relieved to know that this
week isn’t going to be nearly so intense. However, it is my hope that you gained some
understanding of why Hebrews have, since Moses, sought so diligently to follow God’s
instructions to them; and, that we need to be very careful how we characterize His rules of
living that God set out before man prior to the advent of Christ. We saw last week that what
Hebrews and Christians alike term “the Law”, God refers to as His Mishpat; and mishpat in no
way means law, it means justice. Further we saw that Mishpat, when referring to
God’s mishpat, is speaking of His overall system of justice. And, today, we are about to begin
looking at the specifics of God’s justice system…..God’s detailed standard of right…….individual
rules and regulations that were set down in the Mosaic Covenant. To put an even finer point on
it, what we are getting ready to study is the development of the Gospel: quite literally, The
Gospel, Act One.
Let’s quickly review a few things from last week:
1.Man’s righteousness and God’s righteousness, our tzedek and His tzedek, are not the
same. Actually, that shouldn’t be difficult to swallow, because God is not a man. Man
can’t develop or work to achieve the type of righteousness God has. God’s
righteousness, even if we’re not really able to fully grasp all that it entails, is primarily
about the salvation of mankind. God’s righteousness (His tzedek) refers to His saving
will, His saving purposes and goals, and all that happens at His direction to create a
people set-apart for Himself.
2.Accordingly, Man is the OBJECT of God’s saving will, God’s righteousness; Man’s
righteousness is achieved when a human being has accepted God’s saving will,
Yehoveh’s saving plan, for his own life. Since the coming of Christ a righteous man is
one who is a Believer in the Christ.
3.The Gospel is generally defined as “the revealed Word of God’s plan of salvation for
all mankind”. That is, the Gospel is simply the name or title we have given to a body of
information in the Bible that makes known God’s incredible plan of salvation for US,
AND, our need for it.
4.However, over the centuries, the term Gospel has been so narrowed down by many
theologians and the Institutional Church, as to make the term simply refer to the story
and purpose of Christ…..His birth, life, death and resurrection, and nothing else. That is
completely wrong and unscriptural. Christ certainly is the center-point, the focus, and
the cornerstone of God’s plan of salvation. But as we saw last week the first
awareness of the plan of salvation by man was given to Abraham, and much had to
happen in the Salvation process before Yeshua came, and much has to happen before
1 / 9

He comes again. And all of it, not just the NT part, forms the Gospel. In reality, the OT
is where the Gospel is found. The NT simply identifies who the Messiah of the OT
Gospel is, and it gives us some teaching on what this means for us now that the
Messiah has come. We need to remember that Jesus and all the Apostles taught the
Gospel using ONLY the O.T., for there was no such thing as a N.T. until decades after
their deaths.
5.And finally as we begin to look at the laws in the Covenant of Moses let’s remember
that the Israelites intended with fierce dedication to be obedient to God’s instructions
and principles. The Hebrews had no articulated sense of an afterlife in those ancient
times, or of living an eternal life with God. In fact, they thought that life ended at the
grave, Sheol, and that death permanently separated them from the Almighty. So in their
minds their physical lives were their ONLY time to show their gratitude to Yehoveh for
His grace towards them at making them a member of the set-apart people. The
Hebrews may not have fully grasped what true Salvation is, or what the full purpose of
the Law was; but for Christians today to accuse Hebrews of legalism simply for doing
what God commanded is nonsense. We, as Christians, have forgotten that in addition
to our saving relationship with Yehoveh we also have the duty to be obedient. If you
have any doubt about that fact read the book of James, Jesus’ brother. Though
obedience is not a condition of our attaining OR keeping our Salvation, nor should
obedience take the focus off of our relationship with God, it absolutely must be our
response. Obedience to God’s system of justice is NOT legalism, unless we misuse it
as a system of self-justification.
READ EXODUS CHAPTER 21 all
What we have read here is Yehoveh’s ordering of the new Hebrew society. But we need to
also recognize (and it will become obvious as we move through Exodus and Leviticus) that
while there are many rules and ordinances contained within these passages, this is hardly a
comprehensive legal code such as the Code of Hammurabi. In other words not every area of
life is covered in detail by these ordinances. Marriage, commerce, inheritance and how
property is transferred is either only barely touched on or not mentioned directly at all. Rather
most of these so-called “laws” were examples that tended to amend previous practices of the
Hebrews or they were new concepts altogether. No matter their purpose they were ALWAYS
extensions of the first 10 laws that we call the 10 Commandments. Therefore Israel’s leaders
necessarily devised practices and rules that both covered areas the Law did not address or it
filled in gaps of very broad principles. These practices and rules were called Oral Tradition, or
later, just Tradition.
And, while this chapter begins with a practice we find abhorrent in our nation, it was obviously
permitted in ancient days: slavery. Now one human owning another is not God’s ideal. Yet for
His own reasons Yehoveh has permitted slavery to exist and here he sets out its boundaries.
As we go through the next 3 chapters there will be many Biblical practices that seem primitive,
harsh, barbarian, or just plain unfair to our minds. While we might have occasion to discuss
some of these individual laws, what I intend to do is look at these rules and regulations more
from a standpoint of the God-principle they embody because, as Believers, it is not necessarily
our duty to follow Hebrew cultural traditions and rituals that were developed by Sages and
2 / 9

Rabbis over the centuries; but it IS our duty to follow the principles BEHIND those traditions
and rituals, and to obey plainly written Torah commands that are timeless.
Let’s begin by noting that, using the 10 Words as the foundation, the first group of laws given
to Israel are contained in Exodus 21, 22, and 23. And, they are divided into two fundamental
categories: first, the civil and social position of all Israelites as they relate to one another, that
is, human to human interaction; and second, Israel’s position as they are to relate to Yehoveh.
So category one, which is delineated in Ex.21: 2 through Ex. 23:12, has to do with how the
Israelites are to deal justly (do mishpat) with their fellow man. Category two, in Ex. 23:13-19,
speaks of how the Israelites are to deal righteously with GOD.
And what we should take immediate notice of is that God has just turned the common world
social ladder upside down. Unlike any civil and social system ever devised by man, the one
given to Israel by Yehoveh BEGINS by its concern with dealing fairly with those who are the
lowest on the social scale: slaves. God lays down rights for these slaves, male and female;
people who are totally dependent upon the mercy of their masters. Slaves were but property in
the ancient world, tools and beasts of burden, as it still is in many places on this earth today.
But by ordaining sacred personal rights upon this lowest social class God changed the very
dynamic by which slavery could even exist. Hebrew slaves were given the position of
PEOPLE…..not animals or possessions. Underline the word HEBREW, for that is the key. We
must understand that Hebrews held two classes of slaves: Hebrew and foreigner (gentiles).
These rules are made for Hebrew slaves. They do NOT apply to foreign slaves that Hebrews
might own. However later on in the Torah instructions will be issued by Yehoveh that foreign
slaves who wish to give up their gentile tribal or national identity and become Israelites should
be allowed to do so. The act of changing loyalties did NOT set them free, but it certainly DID
make them Hebrew slaves and gave them a bill of rights that they did not have previously as a
“foreigner”. Even more Yehoveh makes it clear that any foreigner who joins Israel and
becomes a Hebrew by choice is not to be considered a second-class citizen. Therefore if a
foreign slave owned by a Hebrew declares his desire to join Israel and he goes on to become
a Hebrew… he also becomes equal in status and rights to a natural-born Hebrew slave. Once
that naturalized slave becomes free he is a Hebrew freeman with rights and status equal to
natural born Hebrew freemen.
By the way, notice Ex.21:6; this is where a male slave gets his ear pierced, and although it
doesn’t say it, he also has a ring of some sort put into it. This is an indication that this man, as
a head of his family, has voluntarily committed himself and his family to lifelong servitude to his
earthly master. The master of this slave family is NOT obligated to free them after 6 years,
which was Hebrew law. Although, by mercy, a master could free a slave whenever he chose.
Verses 7-11 deals with a man who sells his daughter as a house servant, but with the idea that
if she pleases her master, he will marry her; she is not to be considered among the “slave”
class even during her time as a handmaiden. The first thing we should note is that this must
have been a common occurrence to be so directly and specifically addressed by God. Now,
the girl could well become a concubine of her master….. that is, she is NOT a wife, but holds a
status similar to a wife. The main difference is that there would not have been a Chethubah, a
marriage contract, drawn up, so therefore there was no legal betrothal. A Hebrew would NOT
3 / 9

sell his own wife; but he WOULD sell a handmaid, and on occasion a concubine. But, Yehoveh
says under no circumstances may the master sell this woman to anyone outside of the tribes of
Israel. And, if he chooses to make her a concubine or a wife, regardless of the fact that he had
quite literally acquired her through purchase, he cannot treat her poorly should he marry
another women. Of course, we’re talking about polygamy, here. His penalty for wronging this
woman is that she gains her freedom. While it may not seem so to us in this cultural setting,
what is really happening here is that Yehoveh is making clear that in the paternalistic society of
Israel, typical of the ancient world, women have rights, they have value to God, and they are
to be treated fairly and with consideration among His set-apart people.
The next thing to be addressed, after slaves and women’s rights, is the sanctity of life. Life is
so important to God that He lists the crimes of man against man for which God orders the
destruction of the offender, in order that the criminal might not harm another innocent person
or degrade Israel society in general. Part of this list of capital crimes we might expect, but other
parts are kind of a surprise. Yehoveh sets on the same level of seriousness a) premeditated
murder, b) attacking and harming (but not necessary killing) your parents, c) kidnapping,
whether the victim is harmed or not, and d) even cursing your parents. That is, in His Holy
eyes, all of these deserve the death penalty. God offers no mercy for these perpetrators; He
offers no possibility of rehabilitation; this is punishment, pure, swift, and non-retractable.
Now just so we understand what it means to “curse” your parents: there are several words
used for curse or cursing in Hebrew. They are quite specific in their meaning and range from
meaning swearing an oath against someone, to being menacing and threatening. The word
used for curse in the instance of Ex. 21:17 is “qalal”; and it is used in the sense of a son
insulting or of being an embarrassment to his parents because he is of no account. This would
include not performing his son-ly duty of caring for them if they needed his help. So for a son
who humiliates his parents by his behavior or shows his parents disrespect or is simply a
deadbeat or a bum, Yehoveh says to put him to death. Whoa. And, yet, God sees this as
actually GUARDING life, because the people who do these things STEAL life from those whom
Yehoveh sees as innocent and upright.
We also see the principle of INTENTION validated by God. That is, the intention of one’s heart
has everything to do with the consequences of his actions, in God’s eyes. For instance if
someone unintentionally kills another person, then the perpetrator is given a place to go and
no one is allowed to violate that place to apprehend him. This is the principle of sanctuary. But,
premeditated murder, the INTENTION to kill, offers NO such sanctuary and the perpetrator
may be captured even in the holiest of places, even if he is in the midst of sacrificing at the
altar of God.
These last few verses, and a couple of the following, answered the question that was raised
when we studied the 6th Word….. “Thou shall not murder”: and the question was, ‘ what is just
versus Unjust killing of man’?
Next, in verses 18-27, ordinances are set down to deal with PROTECTION of life; dealing first
with bodily harm to man, then dealing with harming animals. This reinforces the love and
concern Yehoveh has for ALL living creatures, and so when one of His animals, in their
4 / 9

innocence, has to be sacrificed to atone for a transgression committed by a man against God,
it grieves our Lord for this animal to die. All those millions upon millions of animal sacrifices
that would follow, century after century, were no small thing for Yehoveh…..each and every one
of those sacrificed lives mattered a great deal to Him.
Now what I hope you noticed is that another key principle God is showing us in these verses is
“recompense”. That is, each offense is to have an equal and fair compensation as the
consequence. See, God views compensation as better than incarceration for the offender.
Compensation from the perpetrator makes some progress towards making the victim whole; it
even allows the offender to go on with their life while being taught a valuable lesson.
Imprisonment simply punishes the offender, and the victim’s only satisfaction is knowing that
the perpetrator is being punished. Notice how, in verse 18, that if 2 men get into a fight, and
one seriously injures the other, then the one who did the harm is obligated to care for the other
and bear all his expenses and make up any lost wages…. but there is no further obligation
because the fight was a mutual attempt to harm one another in the first place. In our modern
legal system we would call this the principle of shared liability.
Notice also that verse 20 deals with the matter of a Master beating his slave to death. Again,
due to God’s value of life, the slave Master can be punished…..the dead slave’s owner can be
killed…..that’s the meaning, in this instance, of the term “avenged”. But if the slave lives a
couple of days before he dies then because the slave owner would be simply throwing his own
money down the drain by killing this paid-for slave there is to be no punishment. The idea here
is that if a slave dies immediately from the punishment the Master is inflicting, then there is no
doubt that the Master intended to kill; this is murder. But if the Master punishes a slave and the
slave is gravely harmed as a result but does not immediately die (that’s the idea of his living a
few days), but then the slave dies later, there is doubt as to the Master’s intent to kill, and
there is even doubt as to whether the punishment the Master inflicted is actually the cause of
death. Therefore the loss of the valuable slave is considered sufficient punishment in itself and
no further consequences to the Master are ordered.
Next is what happens if a pregnant woman loses her unborn child as a result of her being
harmed. And, in verses 23-25 we get the statement which just about every literate person,
believer or pagan, on the face of our planet likes to quote: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a
tooth, and so on. Its too bad people don’t read the several paragraphs before and after that
statement because it would be much better understood if they did.
The God-principle behind the eye for an eye formula set forth is this: the consequences of
accidental or unlawful actions still require equity and fairness. If someone knocks out
somebody’s tooth, then equitable compensation is to be rendered. This in NO WAY indicates
that the offender’s tooth is to be knocked out. Or if an eye is damaged, the offender’s eye is
not to be damaged in return, but there is to be proper compensation. What’s happening in
verses 23-25 is that God is saying in essence, “look, it would be a never ending law code if I
took every possible way and circumstance that one person could harm another and gave a
prescribed verdict containing a precise amount of compensation. Therefore HERE is the
principle you are to use to decide on compensation.” And of course this principle is tied to the
entire context of Exodus 21, whereby God gives only a few reasons for a death sentence, and
5 / 9

NONE whereby a person is mutilated as punishment (such as gouging out their eye). Again,
the eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, and bruise for a bruise idea is fair and equitable
COMPENSATION…. One should get more compensation for losing a tooth, than just being
bruised. Even greater compensation should be paid for losing an eye than for losing a tooth
because the effect is greater on the victim. Too much compensation is as wrong as too little.
Life for a life does NOT necessarily mean the death penalty…. it simply means a VERY high
amount of compensation, probably to be accompanied with a harsh punishment. God lists very
clearly the capital offenses; all other punishments are to revolve around fair and just
compensation. Notice the all-important context of this eye-for-an-eye principle: it has to do with
the circumstance of accidental homicide or manslaughter. It speaks of two men fighting and
then an innocent bystander, a pregnant woman, somehow winds up getting knocked down.
First is what happens if her unborn baby dies; but then (verse 23) says “but if other damage
ensues” then the principle shall be “life for life, eye for eye, etc.”. It is key to understand that
the death penalty for the taking of a human life is (according to the Torah) only to be exacted
when the killing is intentional. The scenario offered here is obviously an unintended killing;
therefore this absolutely is NOT suggesting the death penalty when it says “life for life”.
One more comment: as I mentioned mutilation was NOT a permitted punishment; it was NOT
part of the Hebrew justice system. Now this is not to say that it didn’t happen at all or that
tyrannical Hebrew kings and princes didn’t capriciously apply the death penalty from time to
time. But it was NOT authorized by God and was generally seen by the common people as evil
and wicked.
Islam loves to claim that Christians, Hebrews, and Muslims all share the same god and
therefore Islam is simply scrupulously following Allah’s instructions when they mutilate the
offenders of the Islamic Sharia Law; that is, they cut off hands, fingers, and feet…..gouge out
eyes, cut out tongues, and so on. The Bible teaches against such things while the Quran, the
Muslim Holy Book, commands mutilations. This is just further proof that Allah is in no way just
another culture’s name for Yehoveh. Enough said.
Verse 26 once again deals with slaves; and the price for harsh treatment of a slave, even
simply knocking out a slaves tooth, is immediate freedom for the slave…male or female.
Verse 28 begins to deal with harm that animals might cause. And we get God’s view of justice
in this regard: an animal that kills a human must die. God makes it clear, here, that humans are
above animals in inherent worth to Him (which is apparently news to several animal rights
groups). But the animal’s owner is NOT to be blamed or punished UNLESS that owner knew
his animal had a propensity to harm humans. If the negligent owner’s animal kills someone,
then the owner must be put to death for such gross negligence, along with the animal itself of
course. The idea is that the owner is guilty of gross disregard the life of others and therefore he
pays the ultimate penalty. However there is a provision that, depending on the circumstances,
if the animal’s negligent owner (or kin) pays a ransom to the family of the dead person, then
that can suffice as his punishment. The implication is not only as regards the exact
circumstances of the situation, but that it is the judgment of the aggrieved family whether to
accept money as compensation, or the offenders life as punishment. Murder can NEVER be
allowed to pass without the execution of the murderer; however, strictly speaking, wanton
6 / 9

negligence is NOT quite the same as murder so a loophole……an expensive “out”…. is added.
Conversely if someone’s negligence causes the death of another’s animal then the one who
caused the problem is liable to pay compensation. The example given here is leaving the cover
off of a water well, and an animal falls in and dies. Interestingly, the negligent person gets to
KEEP the dead animal if he has to pay out compensation.
The last verse covers what happens if someone steals from another: again, the idea is
compensation…..but not at an equitable level; instead, at a punitive level. Here, again, is
intention at work. Stealing doesn’t occur accidentally…..except perhaps in America if you
listen to some of our more liberal politicians and lawyers. Someone who causes loss, harm, or
death to another person and does so intentionally is dealt with MUCH more harshly than if it
was unintentional or even negligent.
READ EXODUS 22 all
Depending on your version, the first verse of Ex. 22 is sometimes the LAST verse of Ex.
21….so don’t worry about it. In reality this NEVER should have been used as a chapter
division. It is but the same thought, context, and scene continuing.
In any case we continue here with the crime of thievery. And the idea surrounding these
ordinances against thievery is the protection of property. Personally, I really wish the United
States would adopt the Mosaic Covenant’s way of dealing with a thief. Notice how if you catch
a thief in the act during darkness, you can legally kill him on the spot. However, if its daylight,
you cannot. The practical reason being in the dark, you can’t evaluate the overall situation
very well; whether it’s one thief, or more; whether or not he has a weapon; whether this man
may be a known murderer on the loose. But, in daylight you CAN tell. So, if you can
reasonably see that you are only in danger of losing property but not being harmed, then to kill
in that instance is murder.
The part I like the best though is the restitution aspect that a thief has to replace what he’s
taken and often it must be several times over. And if he refuses or will NOT follow through his
promise to do so, then he can be taken into custody and sold as a slave with the money given
to the person who was robbed. I say that tongue-in-cheek as I am certainly not advocating the
return of slavery; although I suspect such a system would significantly slow to a trickle the
epidemic of robberies and burglaries throughout the Western World if the perpetrator was
subject to spending the rest of his life, if necessary, compensating his victims.
Interesting, isn’t it, that imprisonment was simply not part of Yehoveh’s justice system.
Certainly one could understand how having a prison out in the Wilderness would be difficult.
But this concept of recompense instead of incarceration continued right on through the time of
Christ. The idea of prison was abhorrent to Jews; it was a pagan way of dealing with crime and
punishment. Not that Jews didn’t eventually adopt the practice to a degree but since it was not
part of God’s justice system it was never widely used. I think it’s instructional that the use of
prisons has never seemed to stem the tide of crime to any degree at all. In fact we are all too
7 / 9

aware that people who’ve already been in prison today commit most crime. Even our feeble
attempt to rehabilitate prisoners via schooling and knowledge during their time of imprisonment
has had little success. That’s because it’s not the way Yehoveh created the universe to
operate; God’s system of justice was designed to rehabilitate the criminal by means of his
compensating his victim.
It’s always important in reading Scripture to see the order of things; this usually gives us
God’s sense of priorities. So first, as regards theft among herders, we get rules regarding the
pilfering of animals. Next we see God’s justice as concerns damage to fields and then the
formula that animal life carries higher value to God than plant life. As of the time Israel was
given these laws they were in the Wilderness and so they were NOT farmers, but they were
herdsmen. In time they would need laws concerning agriculture because once they settled in
the land of Canaan many WOULD become farmers.
Next, in verse 6, comes instruction regarding what has been given to others for safekeeping
and what happens if those items are stolen.
Up to this point you might have noticed that there has been this interesting “if, then” structure
as Yehoveh has taught His law. “If” this happens, “If someone does this”, “Then” this is what
you are to do. The idea here is that these things are going to arise within the body of God’s
set-apart people, and they are going to have to be dealt with as part of ordinary every day life
and society. It also sets up the dynamic of action and consequence: IF you do this, THEN this
is what will happen to you. The point is that these are practical matters that are being dealt
with; these are not theoretical possibilities. Further, societal law codes were normal for that
day…The Law of Moses was not the first. The Israelites fully expected to HAVE a law code. And
these law codes were all quite similar even if they didn’t agree on every point. It’s a bit like in
modern Western Society: Europe and North America share similar philosophies of justice. We
have courts of law, legal experts as representatives of the defendants, and the view that
generally a person cannot be physically harmed for an offense that only involves property.
Sanctioned mutilation of criminals is not allowed. The death penalty is withheld except for the
most horrific of circumstances when murder is involved. What constituted a crime was
generally the same for Israel as it was in all the other ancient Middle Eastern societies; and
more often than not the punishments were similar. However Israel’s law involved far more
mercy and compassion and where it was the norm in other societies to do physical harm to a
common thief, in Israel it was forbidden. Israel’s law insisted on establishing that humans were
more important than animals, and that animals were more important than other kinds of
property.
Now we begin to encounter some laws that have an entirely different character. Beginning in
either verse 17 or 18 (depending on your Bible version), starts a series of regulations stating
what must NEVER occur within the family of God. That is these acts are so out of character for
one who would suppose him or herself to be a part of God’s set apart people that most of
these laws involve the immediate destruction of that person. These are matters of morality and
of the conscience rather than crimes that are committed against a fellow man.
Notice that the previous laws took circumstances and intent into consideration when deciding
8 / 9

what, if any, consequence should result from violation of these commands. In those listed from
Ex.22: 17(18) to 30 (except perhaps for the verses about loaning money), intent and
circumstance play almost no role.
So, in verse17 the matter of sorcery is addressed; no magic of any kind is to occur among
God’s people. Therefore a witch (a female sorcerer) is to be summarily exterminated when
found out. Sorcery, by definition, is the invoking of the names of gods and demons to do your
bidding; and since monotheism recognized but ONE God, and rejects any catering to evil
spirits, this was a most serious offense against the Lord. It was also dangerous because
sorcery was virtually universal in ancient times and so people were easily drawn to and
deceived by a sorcerer. That magic was outlawed in Israel was known far and wide in the
region and thought to be most peculiar. In fact in the famous episode of Balaam and King
Balak that we’ll look at in the book of Numbers in a few months we’ll find this statement from
Balaam when he discovers this strange prohibition against occult practices among the
Hebrews: “Lo, there is NO augury in Jacob, no divining in Israel…..”
The next prohibition is against the practice of bestiality; this horrible perversion of a human
having sexual intercourse with an animal is not some fanciful product of a vivid imagination…….
it was widespread throughout the inhabitants of Canaan. Even the Hittites found this practice
an abomination and we have the records of their law codes demanding the death of anyone
who would do such a thing.
In verse 19 the instruction that Israel is never to worship other gods is fleshed out a bit in that
Israel is never to sacrifice to another god. Sacrifice was at the heart of idolatry. So, to sacrifice
upon the altar of a heathen god is here defined as deserving of complete annihilation of the
one committing such an apostasy. What is informative (at least to me) is the need the Lord
(and Moses) seems to have to even SAY not to sacrifice to a pagan god after it has already
been made clear that one is not to worship or even acknowledge these other gods. What’s the
difference between worshipping other gods and sacrificing to other gods? Nothing unless
you’re looking for a reason to do what you want. The reason the issue is discussed in this
way is quite simple: the Israelites were always looking for loopholes and exceptions to the rule
against idolatry. Some Israelites would sacrifice to a pagan god and say, “well, I’m not
WORSHIPPING another god, I’m just offering an animal sacrifice and that’s not quite the
same thing…” They liked their idolatry; they wanted to keep their idolatry and operate like the
rest of the world. The Bible is LOADED with examples of Israel constantly falling back into idol
worship and practically every time one of God’s prophets called them on the carpet for doing
it, they denied that what they were doing was actually idolatry until AFTER His wrath fell upon
them. These Hebrews thought that what they wee doing may have been CLOSE to idolatry…..
maybe even right up to the line…… but their hearts were in the right place (according to their way
of thinking). Well, God labeled it as idolatry and He eventually killed thousands of Israelites for
it and exiled the rest from the Holy Lands.
We’ll end here are finish up chapter 22 next week.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
9 / 9