Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadMatthew Poole Commentary - Deuteronomy 17:9 - 17:9
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Unto the priests the Levites, i.e. unto the great council, which it is here denominated from, because it consisted chiefly of the priests and Levites, as being the best expositors of the laws of God, by which all those controversies mentioned Deu_17:8 were to be decided. And the high priest was commonly one of that number, and may seem to be understood here under the priests, whereof he was the chief.
Unto the judge: this judge here is either,
1. The supreme civil magistrate, who was made by God the keeper of both tables, and was by his office to take care of the right administration both of justice and of religion, who was to determine causes and suits by his own skill and authority in civil matters, and by the priests’ direction in spiritual or sacred causes. But this seems obnoxious to some difficulties, because,
1. This judge was obliged to dwell in the place of God’s worship, which the civil magistrate was not, and ofttimes did not.
2. This judge was one whose office it was to expound and teach others the law of God, as it here follows, Deu_17:11, therefore not the civil magistrate. Or,
2. The high priest, who was obliged to live in this place, to whom it belonged to determine some at least of those controversies mentioned Deu_17:8, and to teach and expound the law of God. And he may be distinctly named, though he be one of the priests, partly because of his eminency and superiority over the rest of them, as after
all David’s enemies Saul is particularly mentioned, Psa_18:1; and partly to show that amongst the priests he especially was to be consulted in such cases. But this also seems liable to objections.
1. That he seems to be included under that general expression of the
priests and Levites.
2. That the high priest is never in all the Scripture called simply the judge, but generally called the priest, or the high priest, or chief priest, or the like; and it is most probable if Moses had meant him here, he would have expressed him by some of his usual names and titles, and not by a strange title which was not likely to be understood.
3. That divers controversies between blood and blood, plea and plea, stroke and stroke, were not to be determined by the high priest, but by other persons, as appears by Exo_18:22 Deu_1:16,17. Or,
3. The sanhedrim or supreme council, which, as was said before, consisted partly of priests, and partly of wise and learned persons of other tribes, as is confessed by all the Jewish and most other writers. And so this is added by way of explication, partly to show that the priests and Levites here mentioned, as the persons to whom all hard controversies are to be referred, are not all the priests and Levites which should reside in Jerusalem, but only such of them as were or should be members of that great council by whom, together with their fellow-members of other tribes, these causes were to be decided; partly to intimate that that great council, which had the chief and final determination of all the above-said controversies, was a mixed assembly, consisting of wise and good men, some ecclesiastical, and some secular; as it was most meet it should be, because many of the causes which were brought unto them were mixed causes. As for the conjunctive particle and, that may be taken either disjunctively for or, as it is Exo_21:15,17, compared with Mat_15:4; and Num_35:5,6, compared with Mat_12:37 Lev_6:3,5 2Sa_2:19,21; or exegetically, for that is, or to wit, as Jud_7:24 1Sa_17:40 1Sa_28:3 2Ch_35:14; and so the sense may be, the priests, the Levites, or the judge, as it is Deu_17:12; or, the priests, the Levites, that is, the judge, or the judges appointed for this work. And though the word judge be in the singular number, and may seem to denote one person, yet it is only an enallage, or change of the number, the singular for the plural, judges, which is most frequent, as Gen_3:2,7 49:6 1Sa_31:1 1Ki_10:22 2Ki_11:10, compared with 2Ch_9:21 23:9 and in the Hebrew, 1Ch_4:42, where divers officers are called one head. And so it is most probably here,
1. Because the following words Which belong to this run altogether in the plural number, they, they, they, &c., here and Deu_17:10,11.
2. Because here is the same enallage in the other branch, the same person or persons being called the priests here, and the priest Deu_17:12.
3. Because for the judge here is put the judges, Deu_19:17, where we have the same phrase used upon the same or a like occasion, the men between whom the controversy is shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days. Nor is it strange, but very fit and reasonable, that so many persons being all united in one body, and to give judgment or sentence by the consent of all, or the greatest part, should be here called by the name of one judge, as indeed they were; and for that reason the priests are spoken of in the plural number, because they were many, as also the other members of that assembly were, and the judge in the singular number, because they all constituted but one judge. The sentence of judgment, Heb. the word or matter of judgment, i.e. the true state and right of the cause, and what judgment or sentence ought to be given in it.