Peace in the Neighborhood
Chapter 4
“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
These statutes clearly amplify the law of love for one’s neighbor. See Leviticus 19:18 for this “New Commandment” which reads, Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself: I am the Lord.
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?
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.
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).
"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.
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.
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.
/ 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 7th 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).
Today the principles of these statutes governing greed and promoting generosity are still witnessed in the lives of God's own. No announcement is made; no recognition is appropriate. No plaque mounted on the wall will reward those who give from the pure motive of "love thy neighbor as thyself."
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.
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.
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, how- /
ever; 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.
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.