the quantity of gold in the possession of the Israelites was extraordinary, but that if we were not acquainted with the circumstance narrated in Ex. xii. 35, 36, it would be incredible and inconceivable.

We shall, perhaps, be reminded, however, that according to Num. iv., there were gold and silver dishes, bowls, cups, cans, lamps, snuffers, extinguishers, and oil vessels in the tabernacle, and told that these were probably the "articles" which the Israelites had received from the Egyptians (cf. v. Raumer, Der Zug der Israel. p. 3. 4. Anm.). But this was evidently not the case, for we learn from Ex. xxv. 29, 38, that these dishes, bowls, cans, cups, snuffers, and extinguishers were made in the desert; and in ver. 3 sqq. we read, that they were made from the freewill offerings of ornaments and jewellery, that were brought to Moses by both men and women. We may, perhaps, be also referred to Num. vii., where it is said that every one of the twelve princes of Israel brought as his offering, at the dedication of the altar, a silver dish weighing a hundred and thirty shekels, a silver bowl of seventy shekels, and a golden spoon of ten shekels, in which his meat offering was placed; and these again will probably be pointed out as Egyptian vessels. But let it be observed that every woman, and every man, requested and received the articles of gold and silver; whilst here it was only the twelve princes of Israel, who brought such offerings as these. Moreover, they were not brought till the tabernacle was finished; and therefore the twelve dishes, and bowls, and spoons, had most probably been made in the desert for that purpose, as well as the things already named in Ex. xxv. 29, 38, and Num. iv. 7, 9. The gifts of the Egyptians may possibly have been employed; but if any objection be felt to this, it must be borne in mind, that the offerings were made by the princes of Israel, and as they were the richest and most eminent among the people, they may very well have possessed both gold and silver, and, for aught I know, silver dishes and bowls, as well as golden spoons, among their private property. Still, as the dishes, bowls, and spoons, offered by the twelve princes, were all of exactly the same weight, we are forced to the conclusion, that they had been prepared expressly for the purpose.

The character and drift of the whole narrative are brought out more clearly by this explanation; and on the other hand it

serves to confirm the opinion, that the articles were not obtained by borrowing and purloining, but were spoils which came to the Israelites in the shape of presents, though they were forced from the Egyptians by moral constraint.

After the severe oppression, under which Israel had groaned so long, the resources of a large portion of the nation must necessarily have been considerably reduced, through the loss of the property which they once possessed. Under such circumstances, unless some provision had been made, the departure of the Israelites would have been upon the whole but a very miserable one; and the last impression left by the people of God, on their exodus from Egypt, could only have been that of a wretched and contemptible horde of beggars and of slaves. This would undoubtedly have been opposed to the divine rule of propriety; for the reproach of the people was the reproach of Jehovah, just as in other cases the glory of the people was Jehovah's glory. It was not to be with great difficulty, and with hardly a sound skin, that the Israelites were to depart; but as a victorious and triumphant people, laden with the treasures of Egypt, in festal attire, and adorned with jewels and costly ornaments, and with necklaces and bracelets of gold. They were going to the celebration of a festival, the greatest and most glorious that ever occurred in their history; such a festival demanded festal attire, and this was to be furnished by their bitter and obdurate foes, without (and this was the climax of their triumph) the least external compulsion, and yet without resistance or refusal, on the simple request of the Israelites alone. To such an extent had the pride and intolerance of the Egyptians been broken; so completely were the tables turned, that Egypt now entreated as a favour the very departure, which it had hitherto so obstinately opposed, and it was no longer the Egyptians but the Israelites who prescribed the conditions of their departure, whilst the former assented at once to every condition, however humiliating it might be.

(5). The Old Testament divides the First-born into two classes, the first-born of the father, and the first-born of the mother. The former alone possessed the civil rights of primogeniture, namely, the headship in the family, and the double inheritance, which secured to them the title of primogeniti haereditatis (cf. Deut. xxi. 15-17). The latter, who were called, in distinction

from the others, "every first-born that openeth every womb," had no civil pre-eminence; unless they were also the first-born of the father. In the case before us, the first-born of the mothers are intended; and as they were to be sanctified to Jehovah, they were designated as primogeniti sanctitudinis. (cf. Selden, de success. in bona defunctt. c. 7. p. 26 sqq. and Iken diss. ii. p. 37). The question arises here, what are we to understand by the sanctification of the first-born? That they were not to be set apart to the priesthood is proved most conclusively by Ex. xiii. 2, 13, where the first-born of men are ordered to be sanctified, in exactly the same sense as the first-born of beasts. It was not as sacerdotes, but as sacrificia to the Lord, that the first-born were to be set apart. Sanctify unto me all the firstborn both of man and of beast, for they are mine," are the terms of the command in ver. 2 (cf. Vitringa, observv. ss. ii. 2, p. 272 sqq.). When Jehovah passed through the land and smote all the first-born of the Egyptians, he had passed over all the houses of the Israelites that were marked with the atoning blood of the Paschal lamb, and spared the first-born in them; but notwithstanding this, he had the same claim to the first-born of the Israelites, as to those of the Egyptians. This claim of Jehovah to the possession of all the first-born was founded upon the fact, that He was the Lord and Creator of all things, and that as every created object owed its life to Him, to Him should its life be entirely devoted. The earliest birth is here regarded as the representative of all the births; so that the dedication of the whole family was involved in that of the first-born. The difference between the first-born of Israel and the first-born of Egypt was this: the Egyptians refused to render to Jehovah that which was due, and continued most obstinately to resist his will; Israel, on the other hand, did not draw back from the dedication required, and covered their previous omissions by the atoning blood of the sacrificial lamb. Now the law of the kingdom of God is, that every thing which will not voluntarily consecrate, itself to the Lord, for the purpose of receiving life and blessedness through this self-dedication, is compulsorily dedicated in such a manner as to receive judgment and condemnation. The slaughter of the first-born of the Egyptians is therefore to be regarded as of the nature of a ban (n), an involuntary, compulsory, dedication. But Israel's self-dedication to Jehovah

The necessary compleBy virtue of the atoning

had hitherto been insufficient, and hence the necessity for the expiatory sacrifice to cover the defects. ment of reconciliation is sanctification. Paschal blood the first-born of Israel had been spared; but if they were to continue to be thus spared, the sanctification of the first-born must follow. And as the first-born of Egypt represented the entire nation, and in their fate the whole people were subjected to a compulsory dedication; so was the voluntary dedication of the whole nation of Israel set forth in the sanctification of the Israelitish first-born. It is true that the sparing of the first-born, like the redemption from Egypt, did not occur more than once in history; but future generations reaped the benefit of both events; and therefore in the particular generation which was spared and delivered, every succeeding generation was spared and redeemed at the same time (and it was for the purpose of keeping this in mind that the annual commemoration of the passover was enjoined). Hence it was not sufficient that the first-born of that first generation should be consecrated to the Lord, in order that the protection and deliverance afforded should be subjectively completed; but it was required that the first-born of every succeeding generation should be also sanctified to the Lord, as having been also spared and redeemed. Therefore the command was issued, that this first sanctification of the first-born should be repeated in the case of all the firstborn in every age.

The words "for they are mine," (chap. xiii. 2) show, in the most general terms, in what the consecration of the first-born consisted. The first-born was the Lord's; it was not sui juris, but the property of Jehovah, Jehovah's mancipium. Knowing then, as we do, from the next stages in the development of their history, that Jehovah had determined to fix his abode in the midst of the Israelites, and that his dwelling-place was to be the sanctuary of Israel, the tabernacle of assembly, where they were to meet with their God and serve him; we naturally expect that the consecration of the first-born, that is, their dedication to Jehovah, should take place either in or at this sanctuary, and this expectation was fully realized in the subsequent course of their history (vid. Vol. iii. § 20. 3). But the sanctuary was not yet erected; therefore, the sanctification required here cannot have been anything more than a provisional separation for that

purpose, not the actual realization of it. But Israel was already to be made to understand, that after that solemn night of protection and deliverance, the first-born of its families and the first-born of its cattle were no longer its own, but belonged to God. It was no longer at liberty to dispose of them according to its own pleasure; but must wait submissively, till God in his own time should determine what they were to do. So much, however, was already made known (chap. xiii. 13), that only clean animals, i.e., such as were fit for sacrifice, were to be actually and irredeemably set apart as sacrifices to the Lord; whilst all the rest of the cattle were either to be slain, or redeemed by a clean beast, and the first-born children were also to be redeemed. But it was not declared till a later period, how this was to be done (Num. iii. 8 ; viii. 17; xviii. 14-18). At the same time, they were already made perfectly conscious of the meaning of the whole transaction (vers. 14, 15): "When thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying, what is this? thou shalt say unto him: By strength of hand Jehovah brought us out of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the Lord slew all the first-born of Egypt, therefore I sacrifice to Jehovah all that openeth the matrix, being males; but all the first-born of my children I redeem."

An expression occurs in Ex. xiii. 16, with reference to the sanctification of the first-born, which is similar to that which has already been used in ver. 9 respecting the yearly celebration of the passover: "It shall be for a token upon thine hand, and for a memorial-band (; ver. 16, for a frontlet, iyiya) between thine eyes. The pharisaic custom of later times was founded upon these passages; just as the practice of wearing

or

puxaктýρia (Matt. xxiii. 5), i.e., strips of parchment with passages of Scripture written upon them, which were tied to the forehead and the hand at the time of prayer, was based upon Deut. vi. 8 and xi. 18; whilst others interpret the passages as symbolical only. That the latter is the only admissible explanation of the two passages in the Book of Exodus, must be apparent to every one; but whether the same may be said of the passages in Deuteronomy, is a question that we must reserve for a later occasion. (6). According to Ex. xiii. 18 the children of Israel departed

VOL. II.

Y