Chapter 4

Peace in the Neighborhood

"I counsel you to humble your hearts and confess your wrongs. Consider the solemn charge David gave to Solomon on his dying bed: ‘I go the way of all the earth; be thou strong therefore, and show thyself a man; and keep the charge of the Lord thy God, to walk in His ways, to keep His statutes, and His commandments, and His judgments, and His testimonies, as it is written in the law of Moses, that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest, and whithersoever thou turnest thyself.’ Take this charge to your own heart . Let no one flatter you in wrongdoing. While it is a disgrace to sin, it is no disgrace, but rather an honor, to confess one’s sins… Put away pride, self-conceit, and false dignity; for these can be maintained only at the most terrible consequences to yourself," Testimonies, Vol. 5, p. 509, ( Emphasis supplied).

The statutes for discussion in this chapter have been divided into three categories:

• Those governing greed
• Those controlling carelessness
• Those restricting anger

Statutes Governing Greed

God will surely avenge the evil committed against mankind in every age through abuses of the institution of slavery and its related forms. Serfdom, peonage, forced labor, and debt bondage have all played their crippling parts in dehumanizing individuals, the stronger to use, and often abuse, the weaker. When man lost his dominion over the earth, this disposition to rule soon degenerated into domination over the weaker or gentler among mankind. Slavery was thus brought to this country. Prisoners of war were the prime source of slaves in the ancient world, and every culture in every age has sanctioned some form of slavery. While God permitted servants among His people, He supplied strict rules for their treatment.

For someone to kidnap a free man and, for spite or greed, to sell him into slavery was a grievous and despicable sin. When caught, the perpetrator must himself be sold into slavery as the punishment for such a great evil. This is why Joseph's brothers worried so when his identity was made known. According to their law, really God's law, they expected to become Joseph's slaves. That would have served justice. But Joseph sought no revenge. Well he knew that God had turned their cruelty into great blessing.

During the years just before the Babylonian captivity, Israel and the separated Judah fell away from Jehovah so completely that Amos prophesied their eminent punishment. Hear this word that the Lord hath spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying, You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore, I will punish you for all your iniquities , Amos 3:1. Among those iniquities listed in the book, is the sin of selling their own people for silver and their poor for a pair of shoes, Amos 2:6.

Today, the principle of this statute should guard the Christian from allowing jealousy to take root in the heart. Jealousy is nearly always associated with greed. If not kept out of the heart, jealousy will lead one to carelessly, or spitefully, betray a friend or brother. Was it not jealousy that lead His own countrymen to betray our Saviour?

If a man stole an animal and killed it, or sold it, he must restore four to five times its value, Ex. 22:1; Lev. 24:18.

Again, greed for personal gain would have been the cause behind this statute. A starving brother would not need to steal an animal for a meal; provisions were ample for the care of the poor. So, only greed, or spite, was left as possible motives for stealing someone's poultry or livestock.

To cut the heart out of this temptation, the law demanded that the thief pay four to five times the value of the stolen animal. The severity of the fine must have been effective, as we find no stories recorded in Scripture of animals being stolen by countrymen.

If today, the punishment for stealing property were a fine five times the value of the item stolen, thieves would certainly be less inclined to engage in the sport of car theft, for example.

If a thief was caught breaking into someone’s property and was killed by the homeowner in the act of catching him, the homeowner was without guilt for protecting his property, Ex. 22:2

Perhaps you can remember when the principle of this statute was among your state laws? Few states protect the homeowner any more. Forty years ago a homeowner would be acquitted if it could be proved that he had to kill the intruder to protect his property. Before the next decade was finished, robbers detained in a violent struggle by the master of the house were successfully suing heads of households for injuries and mental stress! Most courts of law now protect the guilty. New search and seizure laws sanction intrusion and theft by governmental agencies today, and homeowners have no recourse. Justice is truly "far off and truth is fallen in the street" (Isa. 59:13).

If the thief were caught before he destroyed or stole any property, he would be sold as a slave, Ex. 22:3,4.

" As a man thinks in his heart, so is he," Proverbs 23:7. If he intended to complete his thievery, he was punished as a thief. There were only three reasons an Israelite could be turned into a slave: 1) extreme poverty, in which case the person would request the bonds in order to be cared for; 2) parental authority, as in the sale of a daughter to become a maidservant; and 3) punishment for theft, making the thief a servant to the landowner who had been victimized.

The servitude could be ended in three ways: 1) the year of Jubilee set all slaves free; 2) the full payment of the pre-determined debt for the attempted crime; and 3) the Sabbatical year which cleared all debts among brethren. To these the rabbis added a fourth: the death of the master, leaving no son to enforce payment.

If the thief, on the other hand, was caught red-handed, he would be ordered to repay double all he had stolen, Ex. 22:4.

While we have little control over the punishment rendered for thievery of our property, we can clearly see that the severity of these specifications, if respected, would have kept the observers from breaking the Ten Commandments; specifically, the eighth and tenth commandments: Thou shalt not steal , and thou shalt not covet , respectively.

Today, the awareness of the severity imposed upon the thief, or want-to-be thief, for breaking these statutes stands as a monument to remind us that God expects us to be honest with others' property and content with what we can afford.

If money or property was placed in the care of a neighbor, and it was stolen, the thief must pay double; but if the thief could not be found, the caretaker would be brought before the judge for questioning to determine if he himself was the thief. He must stand responsible for what was in his care, Ex. 22:7, 8, 13.

There are people today who adhere to a strict code of ethics which demands that they act responsibly in the care of another's property. Without awareness of this statute, some keep it, just because it feels right and ethical. One such experience comes to mind.

A generous lady offered to have my clarinet re-felted so that I might participate in a church orchestra many years ago. While away at church, however, her house was burglarized and this expensive clarinet was part of the loot. Fortunately for me, she thoughtfully reported my loss along with her own. My clarinet was soon replaced by a used one of similar value. I was thankful that this lady's own sense of fairness and responsibility was strong. Thus, was restored to me something I would have otherwise had no way to replace.

Being responsible for what is in our care is a principle of conduct too often ignored. Furthermore, if you, while in the employ of someone, cause damage to his property, you must take responsibility for the replacement or repair of the broken item. This responsibility is yours even if your employer is unaware of the accident.

All cases of embezzlement or theft had to be presented before the judge to determine guilt. The condemned would pay double, Ex. 22:9.

In principle, God was requiring respect for the property of others. Anyone in Israel who did not respect the property of others would end up with less than before the theft. It is clear that stealing was considered a terrible injustice, and it was to be punished proportionately. When enforced, this statute helped to minimized greed, and to form a major deterrent to this evil in society. Leviticus 19:11 added, Do not steal, lie, or deceive one another.

If money was lent to the poor, no interest could be charged; furthermore, requests for financial aid must be granted, even if the 7 th year of release was near so that the money would, undoubtedly, not be paid back, Ex. 22:25. One must be open-handed and open-hearted toward the poor, Deut. 15:7-11; 23:19.

Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (Lev. 19:18; Matt. 19:19; 22:39; Mk. 12:31) is the underlying principle in many of these statutes. In essence, when you find someone in need, help that person without expecting any return. Those who enjoy selfless service here will experience the "interest" later, when the "Well done," is heard from the returning Saviour. Of course, the truly selfless person will not be considering the future interest, or rewards. The joy of service is its own reward.

The Scriptures are silent in this arena. Perhaps this is because there was ample provision made for the care of the poor, so reducing the temptation to take advantage of the neighbor's open-handedness. But that was long ago. By the time Jesus walked the streets of Jerusalem, almsgiving had become a prestigious art. Drawing the minds of His hearers back to the point of this statute, and exposing those leaders who had found a way to reward greed, Jesus cleared away the rubbish from the true intent of this provision:

Take heed that you do not do your charitable deeds before men, to be seen by them. Otherwise you have no reward from your Father in heaven. Therefore, when you do a charitable deed, do not sound a trumpet before you as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory from men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward. But when you do a charitable deed, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, that your charitable deed may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will Himself reward you openly, Matt. 6:1-4, (The New King James Version).

In Luke 12: 34 we are reminded that we already possess the Kingdom, so we are to be generous with what we "own," knowing our real treasure is in heaven:

Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

If a poor man gave away his coat as a pledge for a loan, it had to be returned to him before nightfall so he could keep warm in the night, Deut. 24:6, 12, 13, 17.

An outer garment was given as a vow for two different, but similar, occasions. One was for a life-long commitment, or covenant. The second was a short-term loan. When it was used as a pledge for a loan to a poor man, it must be returned to him before night. The loan might become a gift, if the poor man could not repay the loan by nightfall. Hopefully, he would repay the loan even after his outer garment was returned to him. That was a matter of personal integrity.

The use of the coat, or robe, in the ritual of covenant making was more involved. The first book of Samuel (18:3, 4) tells the items that were exchanged in the making of the covenant between David and Jonathan. The first item traded was the robe, or coat. The above statute, however, refers to a coat as security for a short-term loan. In both functions of the coat, it represented one's character, or pledge, being given as surety.

Our word should be so true that it could rightfully represent our integrity. For centuries the gentleman's word, confirmed by his handshake, stood for his character; no written bond or deed was needed. A man's word was his bond, his deed, and the surety of his character.

God has also made a covenant with His people. The first item of exchange, when we personally enter that covenant is the robe. For our rags, He gives us His Robe of Right-eousness. This exchange is not a loan, however; it represents a lifetime commitment, the Everlasting Covenant.

Looking at the symbolism from the point of view found in this statute, we find the Son of God becoming poor (Isaiah 53) that we might become rich in righteousness. In symbolism, Jesus, the Perfect Debtor (having taken the debt of sin for the whole world) gives us His coat, His Robe of Righteousness, until He restores Life Eternal (the full payment) to the landowner (Adam lost his dominion to Satan when sin entered the human race).

In the analogy, Christ will have made full restitution before "eternal nightfall". This last concept may sound too ethereal, too outlandish to have a spiritual parallel. But astronomers tell us that the way the heavenly bodies are lining up, if Christ does not return in the next few years, the planets in our solar system will soon fully align for the first time. This is significant because the gravitational pull of each planet would be offset during a perfect planetary alignment. Some speculate that this upset could cause the solar system to be thrown out of balance. This could, potentially, result in its self-destruction. The earth would then witness "eternal night"! Scary? Perhaps. But His Word is sure. Full restoration of life eternal and dominion will be delivered before the lights go out!

How may we apply this statute to us today? Nothing today seems similar to the customs and culture in which it was established. Perhaps the only practical lesson for us here is the obvious: We must never allow someone to suffer as a result of our adherence to rules governing our generosity. In fact, generosity that must be regulated is not truly generosity. Furthermore, mercy must always exceed fairness; love must supercede justice when love cannot be expressed through justice. Blessed are the merciful … Matthew 5:7.

One must not take a poor man’s only source of sustenance in order to fulfill a pledge made to someone else. One was not allowed to help oneself to the poor man’s property, nor sell him as a slave in order to pay a bill. That sin of greed was punished by leprosy, Deut. 24:6-9.

The concept of "what's yours is mine" has no place in God's social order, even though the reverse is a truth. "What's mine is yours," reveals the opened-handedness of our Father's ways. This statute was to protect the person and property of the poor from being seized for the wealthier man's personal gain.

In many ways, this statute is violated today. But not only in the secular court system do we see such injustice rendered in favor of money. There are ways in which humanistic and evolutionary maxims ("the survival of the fittest") are employed, even in Christian circles.

One example of the violation of the principle from this statute is the accepted practice –at least it is accepted among university professors- of usurping a graduate student's research for publication. Professors in state universities do it as a standard policy. Does that make it right? This writer believes Christian professors should follow the principle of this statute, rather than be influenced by popular practice in this regard. Thus, they would protect the publishing rights of the student researcher, encouraging and advising the student to share the new insights in print, rather than dubbing his or her own name on the published research.

Better that we wait for the rewards from the Heavenly Father, than to give way to greed. " Others, Lord, Let this my motto be, that I might live for others as Thou has died for me," is a safe rule.

When a tool was lent to the neighbor, the tool’s owner was not allowed to go into the borrower’s house to recover the tool, nor help himself to the borrower’s tools for security to get back his own. Instead, the owner must be generous, patient, and kind to the borrower, Deut. 24:10, 11.

Everything we own belongs to God. Thus, when another member of God’s family has need of something we possess, their need supercedes our ownership. Simply stated, it requires that one be generous with one’s neighbor, but without expectation of any remuneration for it. Do not allow a tool, or anything loaned, to become a source of contention, God’s word implies. Buy another tool, if you need the tool before the borrower is finished using it. Here is a difficult code to follow. When filtered through the code of love, we see that people are more important than things. Materialism takes another hit.

In our social relations with one another, we are to work on Christ’s principles. Honesty, true courtesy, kindness, and gentleness are to be seen in our dealings with one another. But there is more than this. We are to exhort one another daily, while it is called today. True faith is not narrow or selfish. We need to be actuated by a strong, living piety, which draws us to God and leads us to work earnestly to correct our errors (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 18, pages 337, Emphasis supplied).

When someone remembered, and was convicted, that he had wronged someone, he must make restitution with 20% interest added. If the person wronged was deceased, the equivalent payment could be made to a near relative or to the priest, Num. 5:8-11.

This restitution payment was completely voluntary. This was not a fine imposed by the court on behalf of the wronged party. Memory of the wrong was to bring about conviction and restitution. It was the rule of integrity. Paying twenty percent, or $200 on a thousand, revealed the true spirit of unselfishness and complete repentance. If the Holy Spirit moved a person to repay what had been wrongfully taken, perhaps in ignorance when the offense was committed, that was strictly between God and the offender. But when he added 20% to the restitution, the offended knew that the error had not been contrived out of malice or greed. Or, if it had, the guilty was now thoroughly repentant. If we could live by the principle of this statute, our lives would present to the world a clearer statement about the nature of our benevolent God. It would, furthermore, crush the spirit of self and selfishness.

When the landowner harvested his crops, he must not take every bit, but leave some for the poor and the immigrants to glean, Lev. 19:9,10; Deut. 24:19-22.

There are many who urge with great enthusiasm that all men should have an equal share in the temporal blessings of God. But this was not the purpose of the Creator. A diversity of condition is one of the means by which God designs to prove and develop character (Ibid., p. 535).

How can we have "social equality" (PP 534) at the same time with "diversity of conditions" (535) and yet not have "equal share in the temporal blessings of God"? At first reading these phrases may sound contradictory to each other. A careful reading of the context of these opposing statements, however, renders no dichotomy. The "social equality" aims for equal respect and appreciation between the social "diversity of conditions." He is not calling for socialism to be enforced, for it breeds greed and social injustice. But, God calls His people to value every person equally; and, therefore, share with the valued poor.

In the spirit of this statute, farmers still allow gleaning, and gardeners still share produce with those who need. We may all do well to remind ourselves that in the Judgment Day, cases are decided by how we treated Christ in the persons of the poor.

"In as much as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me" (Matt. 25:40), was the criterion then; it is the criterion now.

When a hungry person walked through a field, he could help himself to whatever he could eat; but it was not lawful to fill a pail and take some home to others, or to pick some for another meal, Deut. 23:24, 25.

Centuries later, we see this provision in action when Jesus and His disciples walked through the corn field one Sabbath. Jesus came under censure from the Pharisees, not for breaking this statute, but for breaking the Sabbath commandment. All food preparation must be made before the Sabbath hours. Both Mark and Luke mention the incident when Jesus explained his behavior on that Sabbath day by the well-known text: The Sabbath was made for man; not man for the Sabbath. The Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath . See Mark 2:23-28 and Luke 6:1-5. Jesus was watched closely, the Pharisees hoping to catch Him breaking the statutes or Ten Commandments. Both were the oracles of Yahweh.

"No trespassing" signs may bar the hungry person from some fields and orchards today. But I have never heard of a needy person's request to pick an orange or apple being denied, not in this country.

There was a curse upon anyone who would remove his neighbor’s landmark, Deut. 27:17; Deut. 19:14.

Even in the earliest recorded history, Job called removing landmarks a crime (Job 24:2). Review the entire chapter. It makes a good overview of the numerous ways evil men were breaking God’s statutes. Interestingly enough, most scholars agree that Job was written long before the Exodus, adding evidence to the fact that God's laws, including statutes, were known centuries before they were repeated and written at Sinai.

Solomon likewise, through the Proverbs, reminds God’s people to the end of time that wisdom is following God’s ways and obeying His words. Although the word "statute" does not appear in his collection of wise sayings, it is apparent that his sayings are meant to reinforce these maxims of wisdom repeated through Moses at Sinai. Proverbs 22:28 broadens the meaning of this statute: " Do not remove the ancient landmark which your fathers have set," (Modern Language Version); whereas, Proverbs 23:10, 11 more closely follows the thought in Deuteronomy: "Don’t steal the land of defenseless orphans by moving their ancient boundary marks, for their Redeemer is strong; he himself will accuse you," ( Living Bible Paraphrase).

In a spiritual sense, this statute has an additional application to "casebook" believers of this generation. It is now, more than ever before, that covert efforts seem to be boldly undermining the spiritual landmarks of Christ’s bride, His Church.

Satan is ever on the alert to deceive and mislead. He is using every enchantment to allure men into the broad road of disobedience. He is working to confuse the senses with erroneous sentiments, and remove the landmarks by placing his false inscription on the signposts , which God has established to point the right way. It is because these evil agencies are striving to eclipse every ray of light from the soul that heavenly beings are appointed to do their work of ministry, to guide, guard, and control those who shall be heirs of salvation (Our High Calling, page 92).

Our only safety is in preserving the ancient landmarks . "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isaiah 8:20 Counsels on Health, page 459.

He [Satan] works today as he worked in heaven, to divide the people of God in the very last state of this earth’s history. He seeks to create dissension, and to arouse contention and discussion, and to remove if possible the old landmarks of truth committed to God’s people (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 4, page 145).

Usury, or interest, must not be charged for loans to another Israelite, Lev. 25:36-38.

Interest could only be assessed on loans to foreigners. See Chapter 6 for the statutes regarding business with foreigners. An Israelite was a brother; he should be favored as one. He was not allowed to advance financially at the expense of a brother.

Today, we should observe the same principle. If we make a loan to a church member, no interest may be charged. As pointed out in Chapter 2, God calls us to be generous with those in need. The Lord God, who owns the cattle on a thousand hills, will take care of us as He did the woman of Zarephath (1 Kings 17), and honored her generosity toward the Prophet Elijah.

Every third year a second tithe was collected for the poor, Deut. 14:23, 29.

Every third year…this second tithe was to be used at home, in entertaining the Levite and the poor, as Moses said ‘That they may eat within thy gates, and be filled’ [Deut. 26:12]. This tithe would provide a fund for the uses of charity and hospitality… Although God had promised greatly to bless his people, it was not his design that poverty should be wholly unknown among them…There would ever be those among his people who would call into exercise their sympathy, tenderness, and benevolence. Then, as now, persons were subject to misfortune, sickness, and loss of property; yet so long as they followed the instruction given by God, there were no beggars among them, neither any who suffered for food. (Patriarchs and Prophets, pages 530, 531).

Some have concluded from the Torah that three tithes were collected in the course of a year: The tenth for the teacher’s of Torah , a tenth for the new converts who needed support while they studied Torah , and in the third year this above mentioned tithe for the needy. In this way the work of the priests and mission of the "church" were advanced along with the care of the poor, widows, and orphans.

Israel was expected to love the Lord with all their hearts, and their neighbors as themselves, Lev. 19:18. Some have claimed that this injunction was new to the Jews at the time Jesus told his disciples, "A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another," John 13:34.

The commandment to love one another must not have been what Jesus was referring to when He called the commandment "new," since it had ever been a foundational principle of God’s government, both in heaven and upon earth. It had been repeated to Israel through Moses. The principle of the statutes governing the treatment of one’s neighbor condemned any action other than that born of loving regard.

What was "new" then, must have been the degree of self-sacrificing love that was addressed through God’s demonstration on the cross. This was a completely new and singular event purposed to present to the world a clear revelation of God's character of love. That God sent His son to die for a "neighbor," was truly a new thought. It had been possible for the Jews to treat a neighbor with respect, according to the letter of the statutes. They were proud of their generosity, and could brag about it in public prayers: "I thank thee, that I am not as other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers," (Luke 18:11, 12). The motive of love had been missing. That was then…

This is now… A generous heart with open-handedness has ever been exhibited among God’s people in every age. No greed can harbor in a heart broken by God's love. Today, as anciently, God is calling out a people who will respond to, and restore His covenant.

Love to God must be brought into our daily life. Then, and then only, can we show true love for our fellowmen. When this is done, when Christ is enthroned in our hearts, we manifest by our daily life, by our conversation, by our unselfish interest in one another, by our deep love for souls, that we are doers of the Word of God. The reality of our conversation is marked by a deep earnest piety, which purifies the soul, and works unceasingly for the good of others, (Signs of the Times, March 11,1897).

Statutes Against Carelessness:

How easy it would have been to follow these statutes simply to avoid the consequence. A man with an excellent watch dog would have taken precautions, perhaps keeping the animal tied up, as is often seen today, with a sign posted to alert visitors--a symbol perhaps, since few commoners could read a sign posted: "Beware of Dog." "A life for a life," meant an animal’s owner could not afford to be careless. Not even ignorance was a shelter for the guilty. All must take precautions to protect the neighbor from potential dangers. Truly, we have always been our brother's keepers. It is a cardinal rule in God’s government. This concept is born out, also, in the next two statutes.

If a man left a pit opened and the neighbor’s animal fell into it and was injured or killed by the fall, the owner of the pit must pay for the animal, Ex. 21:33, 34.

If a man’s animal killed another man’s animal, the living animal must be killed and both dead animals sold. The money would be divided between the owners. If, however, the aggressive animal was known to be vicious, the owner would have to kill the vicious animal, but forfeit his portion of the money obtained from the sale of the meat and hide, Ex. 21:35, 36.

God’s children could not afford to be careless with another’s property, nor excuse themselves if his animal caused damage to a life, or another’s possessions, or land. Most of the statutes in this section have carried over into logical consequences today. However, the complication of determining who is right and who is responsible usually ties up our court system, since few today are willing to admit guilt, regardless of the evidence. Those who claim the name of Jehovah must follow a higher standard. There must be no lawsuits between neighbors or brothers. (See Manuscript Releases , Vol. 5, page 420, for a clear perspective on this subject.)

If a man allowed his livestock to graze in another man’s field, he must give the best of his own field or vineyard to the neighbor in restitution, Ex. 22:4.

After reading through the statutes in this section, one may readily see that God expected responsible, thoughtful, and generous behaviors from His people; nothing less, under any circumstance. These qualities of His character are still needed in His Remnant so that God's glory may be perceived in this last generation.

It is better to be taken advantage of, than to take advantage. The Remnant people of God have given their "rights" to the Father above. These will seek peace and pursue it. They believe with the writer of the proverb: When a man's ways please the Lord, he makes even his enemies to be at peace with him , Proverbs 16:7.

If a man accidentally set his neighbor’s field or property on fire, he must pay for all the damage done to the neighbor's property, Ex. 22:5, 6.

If the neighbor was trusted to care-take of an owner’s animals and property while the owner was away, and something bad happened to the property or animals during that time, the caretaker would have to swear by the oath of the Lord that he was not guilty of neglect. If the judge found no neglect on the caretaker’s part, the caretaker would not be required to make restitution, Ex. 22:10, 11, 13.

I saw that if there is anyone on earth who can consistently testify under oath, it is the Christian. He lives in the light of God's countenance…And when matters of importance must be decided by law, there is no one who can so well appeal to God as the Christian. I was bidden by the angel to notice that God swears by Himself (Genesis 22:16; Hebrews 6:13, 17). He swore to Abraham (Genesis 26:3), to Isaac (Psalm 105:9), Jeremiah (11:5), and to David (Psalm 132:11; Acts 2:30). God required of the children of Israel an oath between man and man, Exodus 22:10, 11. Jesus submitted to the oath in the hour of His trial, (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, pages 202, 203).

A borrowed tool that broke must be replaced by the borrower; but if the owner was present during its use, the borrower was relieved of responsibility, Ex. 22:14, 15.

This statute regarding responsibility for a tool that broke while the owner was supervising the use of the equipment being borrowed (Ex. 22:14, 15), may seem lax to some. Most of us would replace or repair the broken item that was in our use, whether the owner was present or not. The exception to this ethical rule would likely be over the cost of repairs, such as for a car that had worn parts. We are without doubt within the "letter of the law" when we make a judgment call over whose responsibility it is to repair worn out equipment, knowing it may have been needing repairs before we borrowed it.

This statute would also cover shared driving responsibility while traveling long distances. The vehicle's owner would assume responsibility for auto repairs needed during the journey, even though someone other than the owner may have been driving when the need arose. But the spirit of this law, that the Jews missed and we must rediscover, will surface by asking the question, "What would Jesus do?" Personal rights were not His priority; they will not be ours either.

Never promise something with an oath without doing it, Lev. 5:4. Never take an oath falsely, Lev. 19:12.

As God's word cannot return unto Him void, so should be the pledge made by one of His children. We must stand true to our word. Our word represents our character. We have read about Jephthah's rash vow (Judges 11:30) and Ananias and Sapphira's deception to secretly break their vow (Acts 5:1-11). The seriousness of making a vow, or promise, is real. Eccl. 5:4, 5 enlarges upon this oracle of Jehovah:

When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou has vowed. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.

In contrast to this bleak reality, God will have a people whose word is straight as an arrow. These value and keep their vows to Him. These keep their promises to others, even when inconvenient to do so. It is better to make no promise than to disregard it.

A railing must be built around a flat roof to keep people from falling off, Deut. 22:8.

As today, homeowners were required by law to keep their property safe for all who lived or visited there. We may be thankful, indeed, that the principle of this statute is still enforced.

Israel was instructed to be careful not to discourage the widow, the orphan, or the strangers. The Israelite must remember that he had been a stranger in Egypt; and, but for the grace of God, would still be in that predicament, Deut. 24:17, 18.

Their memory of abuse at the hand of taskmasters, their scars, their bereaved wives and mothers must never be forgotten. Those memories, and the scenes of judgment on the land of Egypt, kept the Israelites reminded that by grace were they saved; it was a gift unmerited, although pledged to Abraham centuries before. They had been through so much. God's heart was tender to the weakest among them.

Neither in word nor deed was a redeemed child of God to discourage or burden the widow with her load of worries and care. She may have lost her husband, and only means of support, by disease, robbers in ambush, or war. God's people were to rally to her need. The story of Ruth and Naomi gives us insights into this statute in action. Ultimately, it is the story of Christ's redemption of each one of us from a hostile world. We as Christ's representatives in the world are called upon to tend to the burdens of the widows.

The orphan, too, needed security, acceptance, and a sense of hope. Whether from a prolonged disease, or sudden death from animal attack, or the ravages of war, the loss of parents brought on more trauma than a young life should be required to handle.

God's people would be there to locate next of kin, or take in the child as one of their own. More time and attention would be required to assist this tender soul away from anger and bitterness into a useful life. Even the stranger, separated from his own people, needed special care.

What would bring the stranger to their land? Possibly the need for asylum from an oppressor, or fear of a hostile government, or even famine, or pestilence could send the foreigner to Israel. Whatever the cause, the loving child of God was to extend hospitality to the sojourner. The same applies today. Let us be careful to encourage and lighten the load of those within our influence, especially those made vulnerable by the adverse circumstances.

The principles found throughout the statutes were lofty: Never put one’s own wants or needs above another’s. Be truthful, honorable, responsible, attentive, and generous. We are our brother’s keepers. Repeatedly we are reminded, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," (Lev. 19:18; Matt. 19:19; 22:39; Mk 12:31, 33; Rom 13:9, 10; Gal. 5:14; James 2:8). No other principle was illustrated, contrasted, and stressed more throughout scripture than love to one’s fellowmen. None was spoken about more by our Saviour, nor more exemplified in His life, than the directive to love one another unselfishly. One of my favorite prayer songs is called, "Others." Here is the first verse:

Lord, help me live from day to day      In such a self-forgetting way, That even when I kneel to pray,      My prayer shall be for others. Others, Lord; let this my motto be      That I might live for others As Thou hast died for me!

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus amplified many statutes so that His hearers would see that love for God and one’s neighbor is fulfilling the law. Without love in one’s heart for the weak, the user, and the unlovely, keeping the commandments, statutes, and judgments was quite meaningless. In fact, no one could keep them without love as the motive.

It was Christ who had said, "Ye shall do My statutes, and keep My judgments." Christ had presented the same principles on the Mount of Beatitudes as He had on Mount Sinai (Signs of the Times, June 11, 1896).

There the lawyer, absorbed in dogma and mind gymnastics, asked the Saviour a rhetorical question the lawyer thought was a deep theological mystery: "Which is the greatest commandment?" The question implied the legalism shrouding his reasoning. Was he seeking to reduce his devotion to a pragmatic delineation of minimum requirements? Or, was he playing mind games with the Son of God? Sadly, the young lawyer failed to grasp the core issue at stake in his prideful pursuit of excellence. He would not take hold of the condescending love without which his religious fervor was a mere sham.

Paul later wrote, "Love is the fulfilling of the law," in Romans 13:10; and again in Galatians 5:14 he explained that " the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Why did Paul not repeat the two summary words -Love to God and love to mankind?

After His ignominious death on the cross and their own experience with persecution and hardships, the disciples did come to comprehend these words of the Saviour. He had in three-and-one-half years transformed the plans and purposes of eleven friends. They finally saw, and Paul was later taught, no one can love one’s neighbor without first experiencing the transforming love of God, in and through one's life. Therefore, to truly "love thy neighbor as thyself" embodies all the commandments and safeguarding statutes of the Torah . Conversely, one who ignores the principles found in the commandments and statutes of the Torah has but a dim view of that altruistic concern called "Brotherly Love."

The prophets proclaimed it; the priests explained it: Walk with God and love your fellowmen; the theme is consistent throughout Scripture from cover to cover. It is not a New Testament concept alone. It is the whole purpose of all the oracles of God in every age. What does the Lord require of us, his saints?

• Do justly
• Love mercy
• Walk humbly with thy God (Micah 6:8)
• Walk righteously
• Speak uprightly
• Despise gain from oppression
• Refuse a bribe
• Avoid evil reports (Isaiah 33:14, 15)
• Keep the Sabbath
• Hold fast God’s covenant (Isaiah 56:6 lp)
• Learn to do good
• Seek justice
• Reprove the oppressor
• Defend the fatherless
• Plead for the widow (Isaiah 1:17)
• Hate evil
• Love that which is good (Amos 5:15)
• Live by faith (Hab. 2:4; Gal. 3:11)
• Meditate on His name (Mal. 3:16)
• Love your enemies
• Bless those who curse you
• Do good to those who hate you
• Pray for those who persecute you (Matt. 5:44)
• Seek no praise (Matt. 6:3,4)
• Care for little children (Matt. 10:42)
• Forgive others (Matt. 6:14; 18:22)
• Keep the commandments (Matt. 19:17)
• Watch and pray (Matt. 26:41)
• Deny self (Matt. 8:34)
• Serve others (Mark 10:42-45)
• Be merciful (Luke 6:36)
• Pursue humility (Luke 14:11)
• Fear the Lord your God
• Walk in all His ways
• Love the Lord your God with all your heart and soul
• Keep His commandments and statutes (Deut. 10:12)
• Give thanks in everything (1 Thes. 5:18).

Throughout the Scriptures, Bible writers consistently pointed out what is so explicitly expresses in both song and verse: "If you want to be great in God’s kingdom, learn to be a servant of all." By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one to another (John 13:34, 35). The love God sheds in our hearts when we are converted at the cross is the universal thesis of the Old Testament statutes. They may become God’s transforming prohibitions against self-centered, careless living when they spring from a grateful heart.

Statutes Restricting Anger:

According to this law, if two men were fighting and they crashed into the pregnant wife, one or both of them could be held liable, if the blow caused her to abort the fetus. This law hasn't changed, except in the severity of the punishment. Anger is still a destructive emotion, both to the antagonist and the victim. The perpetrator will be held responsible.

There is some evidence that God condescended to allow laws to be enforced, which were not the ideal, but met the needs of the people in a state of moral growth and spiritual development. In Matthew 19:3-8, Christ referred to the law (Deut. 24:1-4) Moses had been instructed to give them allowing divorce. Divorce was never in God's design for His people, then or now. But He allowed it because of the hardness of heart among His people.

The above statute may also have elements of God's condescending in it. It was not God's design that they seek revenge. But they did it, and this statute made provision for the revenge of an injured wife. Like the "avenger of blood" (Num. 35:12; Deut. 19:6, 12) spoken of in Exodus 21:13, this statute allowed that which was imperfect while restricting its boundaries.

If two men fought, the wife must take great care if she were to come to her loosing husband’s aid. Specifically, she could not render the attacker immobile by injuring the bully’s private parts. The penalty for disregarding this statute was to have her hand cut off, Deut. 25:11, 12.

Even in such a dire emergency, a woman was not free to help her husband by an indecent act. To touch a man inappropriately would have moral ramification beyond the wrestling of two men. The moral code must be sacredly guarded.

I have been urged by the Spirit of the Lord to fully warn our people in regard to the undue familiarity of married men with women, and women with men, (Manuscript Releases, Vol. 4, page 63).

If two men fought and one was sent to the hospital, the other man must pay the injured man’s hospital bill and lost wages, Ex. 21:18, 19.

The law did not give license to fighting, but made provisions for the eventuality.

Homicide perpetrators were punished by death, Gen. 9:6; Ex. 21:12; Lev. 24:17. This sin was listed among the curses spoken from Mt. Ebal. The law included undiscovered murder and the taking of money to slay the innocent, Deut. 27:24.

Do you wonder if an Israelite was ever let off a murder charge for insanity? We read of Israel's kings getting away with murder. Otherwise, we have no scriptural record of this command being carried out, or of it being violated.

How carefully God protects the rights of men! He has attached a penalty to willful murder. "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed" (Gen. 9:6). If one murderer were permitted to go unpunished, he would by his evil influence and cruel violence subvert others. This would result in a condition of things similar to that, which existed before the flood. God must punish murderers. He gives life, and He will take life, if that life becomes a terror and a menace. Mercy shown to a willful murderer is cruelty to his fellow men. If a willful murderer thinks that he will find protection by fleeing to the altar of God, he may find that he will be forced from that altar and be slain. But if a man takes life unintentionally, then God declares that He will provide a place of refuge, to which he can flee, (Sermons and Talks, Vol. 2, page 186).

If the murder was not premeditated (manslaughter), the guilty could flee from his avengers to an appointed place for protection until justice could be determined and executed, Ex. 21:13. If, however, the killing was indeed a murder committed in anger, the guilty would be taken from the sanctuary of protection to be slain, Ex. 21:14.

The essence of the statute was: An eye for eye and tooth for tooth , Lev. 24:20. Here is another example of a statute given to Moses, which was less than the perfect ideal God wanted for His people. Yahweh had no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Eze. 33:11) any more then than now. His purpose in giving the "eye for an eye" command is suggested by Ezekiel in the second half of this verse: …but that the wicked turn from his ways and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? Prevention by punishment may have propelled this statute.

Jesus was not giving the people a different standard of behavior when He seemingly contrasted the Law of Moses with His own. He was suggesting a different motive than the people had understood.

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away, (Matt. 5:38-42).

The dichotomy here was not over two opposing laws. The issue was Old Covenant blindness verses Everlasting Covenant comprehension . The difference was the letter of the law verses the spirit of the law. Moses had given the law, if you kill someone you will be killed; if you injure someone, you will be injured. So don't do it. Instead, love one another and put others before yourself. But if you don't do that, consequences will follow. Is that too harsh a picture of God? I think not; for those he loves he disciplines and corrects every son he receives (See Heb. 11:5-7).

What principle may be extracted for us today? On a personal level, don't defend yourself against greedy and evil people. Instead, be generous with all. For, if you become haughty and high-minded, God will deal with you blow for blow. Some readers may see in this extraction too nearly a Pollyanna Syndrome to be practical in today's hostile world. While one should take customary precautions for one's safety; beyond that the Promises (i.e. Is. 54:17) and the Armor (Eph. 6:11-18) are our thorough and adequate defense.

Never mistreat a defenseless widow or fatherless child. God will destroy the disobedient to this statute; He will leave the wife of the guilty as a widow and his children fatherless, Ex. 22:22-24.

Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me (Matt. 25:40).

Again, the law seems to take a severe stance in the expectation that fear of consequences will deter the wrong doer. But, fear cannot motivate loving actions. So why did God couch His requirements in such negative terms?

The obvious answer is that the simple-mindedness of newly freed slaves warranted it. These people were used to acting expediently according to rewards and punishments. God sought to reach them through provisions and power, because our loving God always meets man where he is, and that is where they were in moral development.

Let us not judge the choices of our Elohim harshly or critically for not reaching them sooner with His matchless love. He could not because they would not. Israel could not comprehend love until they were stopped by His power. They could understand military might. They could understand capital punishment. But they couldn't grasp the meaning of selfless love until Calvary displayed the picture painted in blood.

Now we know what Love looks like: raising a child from a funeral bier, wiping away tears from a grieving mother, forgiving sinners, healing the sick, and offering hope. As Lamentations 5:3 reminds us, we were all orphans and widows until the Love of the Father took us in. So, likewise, we are to respond to the weak, the displaced, the homeless.

One must never speak unkindly to or about the person who was handicapped, whether blind or deaf, etc. One must help to make his/her life easier, not harder, Lev. 19:14. To avoid helping a blind person was to incur a curse, Deut. 27:18.

What a rebuke this statute gives to those who do not show sympathy for the life of a handicapped person. Lack of understanding is not a justification for neglect; no, the basis of neglect is rather apathy for that which is not "like me." Selfishness frames the foundation of the disregard for this statute. As love for God increases, one's "understanding" catches up. When we open the heart to the level of caring that His love provides, we will find every bias, every shyness, every self-centered awkwardness dissolve into gentle compassion. That is the power of His love in us to change our careless hearts when we focus on His compassion for the weak.

Never repeat gossip, Lev. 19:16.

This anti-gossip rule is a safeguard for the commandment, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor , Exodus 20:16. By adhering to this policy we are safe from guilt over telling what is not true about someone. Sometimes the facts we hear may be correct; only the tone, or the nuances, suggest attitudes or insinuate meaning not born by the facts. Repeating the unkindness violates the principle of the ninth commandment.

The Tongue "The boneless tongue, so small and weak, Can crush and kill," declares the Greek. "The tongue destroys a greater horde," The Turk asserts, "than does the sword." A Persian proverb wisely saith, "A lengthy tongue—an early death." Or sometimes takes this form instead: "Don’t let your tongue cut off your head." "The tongue can speak a word whose speed," The Chinese say, "outstrips the steed." While Arab sages this impart: "The tongue’s great storehouse is the heart." From Hebrew hath this maxim sprung, "Though feet should slop, ne’er let the tongue." The sacred writer crowns the whole, "Who keeps his tongue doth keep his soul!" (--Philip B. Strong)

In summary, the rule prohibiting gossip is as needed now as in past ages. When we love God supremely, and our neighbor as ourselves, this ancient vice will lose its enjoyment. It seems to come naturally to most of us to enjoy a bad report, especially about someone who has ignored or slighted us. But there will be no revenge, no bitterness, no gossip among those who are uniting their hearts with the gentle, peace-loving Saviour. How foolish to live one’s life like it was a trial run for a second chance. Let’s get off the fence and put on the whole armor or God (Phil. 6:11-18) that we may stand against the darts of negative thinking.

Don’t hate anyone; don’t bear a grudge, nor try to get revenge for any wrong. The child of God must love his neighbor as himself, Lev. 19:18.

As paraphrased, the above statute sounds like it must be from the New Testament. But no; this was the standard toward which Jehovah of the Old Testament urged His adopted family. Here again we add evidence that the Love Commandment was not new after all.

If an enemy’s animal got lost and was found by the neighbor, it must be kindly taken back to the enemy owner, Ex. 23:4. There were to be no "finders keepers" in Israel. Each must help another find that which was lost. But, if a lost item was found and the rightful owner could not be discovered by honest effort, then the item could be claimed by the finder, until the rightful owner came forth, Deut.22:1-4.

When Saul, son of Kish, went out to seek his father's donkeys, he searched three days without success. But others were aware of the lost animals; they followed the directive of this statute helping in the search. Thus, Samuel could assure Saul that he could attend to more serious matters, for the donkeys had been found and taken home (1 Sam. 9:20).

When Abraham returned from his battle with the kings (Gen. 14), he kept nothing for himself (See verses 22-24). He was in another man's territory doing battle to deliver his own property and kin. That is all he was willing to claim. The benefit afforded to the King of Salem (Jerusalem), was part of Abraham's responsibility under God to help a neighbor reclaim that, which had been lost.

Do we volunteer to join the search for a missing child? Do we read the bulletin board notices of missing pets? Do we report money found to the police department? If we do, we may be observing the principle and spirit of this statute.

If an enemy’s animal was in distress, the neighbor must help it. Show mercy toward your enemy was the statute, Ex. 23:5.

Contrary to the custom today, those followers of the Most High God were instructed to help even a distressed animal belonging to an enemy. Today, due to the threat of lawsuits, most people will choose to "not get involved." Jesus, in His Sermon on the Mount, reminded the multitude of this requirement of Heaven, however. Cutting away the distortions of the Pharisees, He declared,

You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, (Matt. 5:43, 44, New King James Version).

"Are we Christians today still trying to weasel out of obligations, duties, and responsibilities found in Scripture? It will not be so among the Remnant. "I delight to do thy will, O my God," declares the Psalmist, "Thy law is within my heart" (40:8).

Show respect when an elderly person enters your presence by standing to your feet, Lev. 19:32.

God called out His people from Egypt to be a holy nation, not because they were already more righteous than other people; not because they were more worthy than other people; but, because He had promised. By setting His place of dwelling in the center of their life-space, and by engaging them in a drama that would teach them His plan to restore the very nature of God lost in Eden, this despised mass of slaves was favored above all others. He made known His ways to Moses, His acts to the people of Israel (Ps. 103:7), yet only a remnant entered His Everlasting Covenant. Commandments, numbers five, six, and eight were by this statute magnified, teaching the rule of self-control, showing honor, dignity, and respect to the aged. That was then…

The principles of the word of God—principles that are as high as heaven, and that compass eternity—we are to understand in their bearing upon our daily life. Every act, every word, every thought, is to be in accord with these principles (The Ministry of Healing, p. 454).

The statute requiring respect for the elderly when they enter your presence has long been forgotten, even in principle, in many cultures today. It would be well for all of us, who have decided to follow Jesus through His oracles, to reinstitute this beautiful courtesy. May the gentle Jesus teach us to honor others as did He. Furthermore, God considers all people older in the family of God to be as parents, thus respected for sage and age. While this relationship is enjoined in Eastern cultures, in the West, it has been ignored, sometimes arrogantly. God is looking for covenant keepers who will reinstate this statute among them. Accordingly, we will live in harmony with the spirit of the fifth commandment.

Honoring others, let us speak with respect in the face of rudeness; with hope, where there is despair; adding joy, where there is sadness; sharing praise, to cover others’ criticism, and expressing forgiveness to quell another’s wrath. How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good tidings, who publish peace (Isa. 52:7). This is the life of the peacemaker, whom Jesus called "the children of God" (Matt. 5:9).

"Why were the saints called 'saints'?" someone has inquired. Because they were cheerful when it was difficult to be cheerful, patient when it was bothersome to be patient; and because they pushed on when they wanted to stand still; and kept silent when they wanted to talk; and were agreeable when they wanted to be disagreeable. The answer is quite simple, but the doing still requires daily surrender.

When we come to realize that we are truly God’s children to uphold His character, and to "go on God’s errands," we will be transformed by contemplating His matchless love –a love that suffers long and is kind, is gentle in spirit, patient and self-controlled. (See 1 Corinthians 13:4-7.)

Christ in the heart, Christ in the life, this is our safety. The atmosphere of His presence will fill the soul with abhorrence of all that is evil. Our spirit may be so identified with His that in thought and aim we shall be one with Him (The Ministry of Healing, p. 510).

The grace of Christ received into the heart, subdues enmity; it allays strife and fills the soul with love. He who is at peace with God and his fellow men cannot be made miserable (Thoughts from the Mount of Blessings, pp. 27, 28).