Now fuch being the coherence of the words, it feems unreasonable to pretend that they speak, not of a devotement by man, but merely of a devotement by God, through which these perfons, that were the objects of it, were invariably to be cut off, as the Canaanites, in the event of obftinacy, Deut. vii. 2. Josh. vi. 17. the Amalekites, Exod. xvii. 14. 1 Sam. xv. 2, 3. Deut. xxv. 17. and others. Thus indeed, there would be a commodious sense of the ordinance, and no handle left for faying, that it licensed the wanton flaughter of men; fince the mean, ing would only be, No man who shall be separated by God's order and appointment, unto deftruction, shall be redeemed or bought off, but shall surely be put to death. But then it is fo wholly unsuitable to the series of the chapter, which is filled with regulations about humane vows, to fuppofe no interpofal of human devotement here described, that this glofs cannot, I think, upon any plausible grounds, gain our approbation,

Is there then any explication, which, while it is more agreeable to the context, by making a human devotement intervene, does not countenance a man's killing another after such devotement, as inclination or intereft might dictate, in order to be rid of him, and is at the fame time, in other refpects, unexceptionable?

In this view fome have interpreted the ordinance

It may be urged, I am aware, for this interpretation, that the clause, Asher ish iehharim Lahovah, which a man shall devote to the Lord, is not here inferted, as in the preceding verfe. But the omiflion does not carry fuch weight as to justify that interpretation against the difficulties with which it is pressed.

as follows,

No devoted beaft, which fhall be devoted by men, fhall be redeemed; but shall furely be put to death.' But their interpretation appears inadmiffible for these reasons. First, there is no term in the Hebrew text, to which that of beast, in this tranflation, correfponds; that running without any limitation or restriction, None devoted, which shall be devoted-fhall be redeemed;' or, according to the most strict verfion, Every devoted, which shall

be devoted-fhall not be redeemed, &c. Secondly, although it be true that D1 min haadam, (by us turned, of man) absolutely confidered, may fignify the agency of a man, both according to the analogy of the Hebrew language, and according to the acceptation of the phrase itself elsewhere, it is extremely violent and ftrained to understand it with relation to the author, and not the fubject of the devotement here, when it occurs in the verse immediately preceding, beyond all dispute, concerning the matter thereof; and there is no other term in the original, to ascertain and specify what the fame is, unless it be this. Since, therefore, the ftatute cannot be fuppofed, with any probability, to treat of a brute animal, but of a human creature as the subI lay no ftrefs upon a remark which hath been made by fome against the interpretation here rejected, That if min haadam related to the maker of the devotement, and not to the matter of it, the ' words would be fuperfluous; forafmuch as the lawgiver cannot be ⚫ thought to treat of any other vows of this kind, than vows made by ' man.' For it is obvious to reply, that fuch an unneceffary claufe, to judge by this criterion or teft, is to be met with frequently, and even in the foregoing verfe, 'No devoted thing, which a man shall devote

unto the Lord,' &c But on the other hand, as to the argument from the Vulgate and Seventy tranflations in its behalf, befides that

ject of deyotement, we muft try whether we can, upon this hypothefis, find out any expofition which does not make the law give every Jew power to kill a neighbour, not even a master to kill his flave, and much less a parent to flay his child on a previous arbitrary devotement, and yet afcribes to it a fenfe free from other objections, fuch, at leaft, as are of fufficient force to difcredit and overthrow it.

The late Dr. Sykes explains the meaning of it to be no more than this, That every person who is * devoted or confecrated to the fpecial fervice of God irreversibly, or for ever, by one having a right to do so, instead of being redeemed, fhall die in f that devoted ftate;' or, as he expreffes it more fully, Shall not be facrificed, nor be put to death in an unusual and unnatural manner, by any method ' of violence, but shall only continue in that condition, till death, in the courfe of nature, put a period to his life.' In favour of this fenfe, he also offers thefe arguments, which being fo fpecious, and proceeding from a writer of fo diftinguished abilities, well deferve our careful attention.

First, he observes, That bherem fignifies only an abfolute giving to God for ever, a donation of a thing their authority is no way decifive, there appears to be no fure foundation for it, because the expreffions which they ufe in rendering min baadam, are ambiguous, and may fignify man's being the fubject of the devotement, as well as its author. Thus, the Vulgate hath here, * Omnis confecratio quae offertur ab homine,' while, for the same Hebrew phrafe, it has, Ex homine,' in the 28th verse. And the Seventy have here, Ano arpwawr, which is ufed by them undeniably in that other verfe, to declare a man's being the fubject of the vow.

See his Connection of Natural and Revealed Religion, chap. 13. efpecially pages 313, 318.

or perfon to him, with an intention that the fame. fhould never return to be a part of his own proper ty, or employed for his own ufes, but be God's in perpetuity. This he concludes from verse 20. of this fame chapter, If he that fanctified or vowed the field, ⚫ will not redeem it, or, if he hath fold it to another C man, it shall not be redeemed any more; but the < field, when it goeth out in the jubilee, fhall be holy unto the Lord, as a field devoted, D

kefadeh bherem, the poffeffion thereof shall be the priests.' Likewise from Numb. xviii. 14. where it is faid, Every devoted thing in Ifrael fhall be the ' priests,' that is, fhall be irrecoverably fet apart for the benefit of the facerdotal order. Nor may more be included in the expreffion of the matter of the hherem or devotements being holy to the Lord, in the 28th verfe of this chapter, fince tithes are ftiled holy which were affigned for the maintenance of the priests and Levites, Levit. xxvii. 30, 31. The reader, moreover, may compare Ezek. xliv. 29. together with Micah, iv. 14. where we have the full phrase of confecrating or devoting substance unto the Lord; for, fays God, in predicting the fuccefs of the Jews against the nations that should be gathered to annoy them, and their pious care to expend the spoils they fhould feize from them in his fervice, Arife, thresh,

O daughter of Zion, for I will make thine horn ́ iron, and I will make thy hoofs brass, and thou fhalt beat in pieces many people: and I will confecrate, Vehebbaramti, their gain unto the 'Lord,' &c.

Secondly, he remarks, That there is no word in the original answering to the adverfative particle but, in

our verfion; while, through this fupplement of our tranflators, the words which follow, are readily fupposed to stand in way of contrast or oppofition, and to denote the taking away of the life of the perfon devoted, in a hostile and forcible manner. For the Hebrew runs fimply, 'Every one devoted, who fhall be devoted of men,shall not be redeemed; dying he shall die.'

Thirdly and finally, he contends, That though there were a word in the original, anfwering to the particle but, yet the Hebrew expreffion in the last claufe, doth not neceffarily fignify a death by human agency and inftrumentality, but is applied to the extinction, or lofs of life, in a natural way, upon different occafions; its import being no more than, dying he shall die; or, he shall surely die. And to establish this use of the phrase, he appeals to these paffages of Scripture, as containing examples of it, Gen. ii. 17. where God declares to Adam, In the

day thou eateft thereof, thou shalt surely die.' Num. xxvi, 65. where he denounces to Mofes concerning the rebellious Ifraelites, who had arrived to twenty years of age and upwards, They fhall furely die.' 2 Kings, viii. 10. where he returns this answer by the prophet Elifha to Hazael, whom the fick Benhadad had fent to enquire whether he fhould recover of his disease, He fhall furely die.' To which he also adds his threatnings against the wicked by Ezekiel, iii. 18. xxxiii. 8. xviii. 1 3. For in all these places, according to him, the fame form of expreffion which occurs here, does not stand for being put to death, but for dying a natural death through disease or cafualty.

See Numb. xiv. 23.