John Calvin
Deuteronomy 14:21
Deu_14:21.Ye shall not eat of any thing that dieth of itself. The eating of any carcase, or of flesh torn by wild beasts, is reckoned among the causes of defilement; but we must understand it to be the carcase of an animal which has died of hunger or disease, for, from the nature of its death, it contracted impurity, although in itself it were otherwise pure. The end of the precept is gathered from the reason which is immediately subjoined, “for thou art a holy people unto the Lord thy God,” and from the ablution which is prescribed in the passage from Leviticus. The same thing is, secondly, enjoined respecting flesh that has been torn, as before with regard to the carcase, for the deformity of its laceration is counted as uncleanness. The holiness of the people is again referred to, that they may more diligently beware of defilements. Hence it follows that those were contaminated who should eat of torn flesh. Therefore, in the third passage, he confirms it that the Jews were to abstain, and were prohibited from the eating of a carcase or the flesh of an animal torn by beasts, lest they should pollute themselves. Nor is it an objection that the eating of carrion and of blood are here prohibited in conjunction with each other; for we know that Moses does not always arrange his precepts in order, but promiscuously adduces such as appertain to different classes. Therefore, I have thought it well to separate these two prohibitions which have distinct objects, and whose dissimilarity manifestly appears from the difference of their punishment. He who shall have eaten blood shall be cut off from the people; whereas he who shall have eaten carrion, shall wash himself and be unclean till the evening. A question might again arise respecting torn or lacerated flesh; but it seems in my judgment to be plain enough from the context, that flesh torn by beasts is counted amongst unclean meats; for the reason of the law is expressed, viz., because those who were chosen to be a holy people should keep themselves pure and incorrupt. Nor would God command that meat intended for man should be thrown to dogs, unless it were infected with a contagion, which would pollute His holy ones. As to the command, in the first passage, to give it to a stranger, or to sell it to an alien, that he might eat it, it does not appear reasonable, since that would be to supply the materials for sin, as though one should offer a sword to a madman, or transfer illicit goods to others. But the solution of this difficulty is easy: for the Gentiles were permitted to eat indifferently of all sorts of food, since no distinctions were placed between them; but the prohibition of certain meats was a mark of separation between them and the elect people of God. A more difficult question arises from a kind of contradiction, because Moses in another passage binds both the stranger and the home-born by the same law, and declares them to be alike unclean if they shall have tasted of carrion. But we must bear in mind that he sometimes calls those strangers who, although born of heathen parents, had embraced the Law. Circumcision, therefore, connected them with God, just as if they had derived their origin from Abraham; whilst there were other strangers, whom uncircumcision separated from the children of Abraham as profane and excomnmnicate. The sum is, that whosoever allege God’s name, and boast themselves to be His people, are called to cultivate holiness, and to keep themselves pure from every stain.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Deuteronomy 14:21
Ye shall not eat of any thing that dieth of itself — (See on Lev_17:15; see on Lev_22:8).

thou shalt give it unto the stranger that is in thy gates — not a proselyte, for he, as well as an Israelite, was subject to this law; but a heathen traveler or sojourner.

Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk — This is the third place in which the prohibition is repeated [Exo_23:19; Exo_34:26]. It was pointed against an annual pagan ceremony (see on Exo_23:19; Exo_34:26).

Pulpit Commentary
Deu 14:21
cf. Lev_17:15 Exo_23:19 Exo_34:26. The stranger that is in thy gates. “The uncircumcised stranger that is in thy cities” (Targum), i.e. “a heathen who takes upon him that he will serve no idol, with the residue of the commandments which were commanded to the sons of Noah, but is not circumcised nor baptized (Maimonides, “Issure Biah,” Deuteronomy 14. (Ainsworth). Alien; a foreigner, one not resident in the land of Israel.

Seething a kid in its mother”s milk.
This precept, several times repeated in the Law, (Exo_23:16 Exo_34:25) may be connected with magical superstitions, but it is equally probable that the act was condemned as an outrage on the connection naturally subsisting between parent and offspring. It is thus related to the commands forbidding the killing of a cow and a calf on the same day, (Lev_22:28) or the taking a bird with its young, (Deu_22:6) and to the precepts enjoining a scrupulous regard for natural distinctions not sowing a field with mingled seed, etc.. (Lev_19:19) It suggests

I THE DUTY OF CHERISHING THE FINER INSTINCTS OF OUR NATURE. The act here forbidden could hardly be called cruelty, the kid being dead, but it was unnatural. It argued a blunted state of the sympathies. A finer instinct, alive to the tenderness of the relation between parent and offspring, would have disallowed it. It is beautiful to see the ancient Law inculcating this rare and delicate fineness of feeling this considerateness and sympathy even for dead animals. The lesson is that everything is to be avoided which would tend to blunt our moral sensibilities. The act has its analogue in higher relations. Not infrequently has the affection of a parent been used by the ingenuity of cruelty to inflict keener tortures on a child; or, conversely, a child has been betrayed into disclosures afterwards used to injure the parent.

II THE DUTY OF CONSIDERATION IN DEALING WITH IRRATIONAL CREATURES.
1. It is right that irrational creatures should be treated kindly. And if the Law required that this delicate consideration should be shown towards dead animals, how much more does it require of us kindly treatment of them while living!

2. Our behavior towards irrational creatures, as seen above, reacts upon ourselves. In certain cases, this is readily perceived. Most people would shrink from the wanton mutilation of a dead animal, even in sport, and would admit the reactive effect of such an action in deadening humane instincts in him who did it. But it is the same with all cruelty and unfeelingness. Any action which, in human relationships, would be condemned as unsympathetic, will be found, if performed to animals, to have a blunting effect on the sensibilities of the agent. A man”s dog is more to him than a brute. He is a friend. We can carry into our behavior towards the irrational creatures many of the feelings which actuate us in our personal relations, and the more we do it, the better for ourselves. J.O.

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 14:22
22.Thou shalt truly tithe. He repeats in general terms the law before enacted, whereby he claims for God the tithe of all the fruit. He does not, however, immediately declare to whom they are to be paid, but inserts some provisions respecting other offerings, which I have elsewhere explained. But when, soon afterwards, in verse 27, he recommends the Levites to them, he shews what is the proper use to which they are to be applied. He signifies that it would be cruel to defraud the Levites of them, and that they would be wicked and unjust if they were grudgingly to pay them the tithes, which were theirs by hereditary right, since their tribe possessed no inheritance in land.

Adam Clarke
Deuteronomy 14:22
Thou shalt truly tithe – Meaning the second tithe which themselves were to eat, Deu_14:23, for there was a first tithe that was given to the Levites, out of which they paid a tenth part to the priests, Num_18:24-28; Neh_10:37, Neh_10:38. Then of that which remained, the owners separated a second tithe, which they ate before the Lord the first and second year; and in the third year it was given to the Levites and to the poor, Deu_14:28, Deu_14:29. In the fourth and fifth years it was eaten again by the owners, and in the sixth year was given to the poor. The seventh year was a Sabbath to the land, and then all things were common, Exo_23:10, Exo_23:11, where see the notes, Exo_23:11 (note), and see Ainsworth on this verse.

Keil and Delitzsch
Deuteronomy 14:22-23
As the Israelites were to sanctify their food, on the one hand, positively by abstinence from everything unclean, so were they, on the other hand, to do so negatively by delivering the tithes and firstlings at the place where the Lord would cause His name to dwell, and by holding festal meals on the occasion, and rejoicing there before Jehovah their God. This law is introduced with the general precept, “Thou shalt tithe all the produce of thy seed which groweth out of the field (יָצָא construes with an accusative, as in Gen_9:10, etc.) year by year” (שָׁנָה שָׁנָה, i.e., every year; cf. Ewald, §313, a.), which recalls the earlier laws concerning the tithe (Lev_27:30, and Num_18:21, Num_18:26.), without repeating them one by one, for the purpose of linking on the injunction to celebrate sacrificial meals at the sanctuary from the tithes and firstlings. Moses had already directed (Deu_12:6.) that all the sacrificial meals should take place at the sanctuary, and had then alluded to the sacrificial meals to be prepared from the tithes, though only causally, because he intended to speak of them more fully afterwards. This he does here, and includes the firstlings also, inasmuch as the presentation of them was generally associated with that of the tithes, though only causally, as he intends to revert to the firstlings again, which he does in Deu_15:19. The connection between the tithes of the fruits of the ground and the firstlings of the cattle which were devoted to the sacrificial meals, and the tithes and first-fruits which were to be delivered to the Levites and priests, we have already discussed at Deut 12. The sacrificial meals were to be held before the Lord, in the place where He caused His name to dwell (see at Deu_12:5), that Israel might learn to fear Jehovah its God always; not, however, as Schultz supposes, that by the confession of its dependence upon Him it might accustom itself more and more to the feeling of dependence. For the fear of the Lord is not merely a feeling of dependence upon Him, but also includes the notion of divine blessedness, which is the predominant idea here, as the sacrificial meals were to furnish the occasion and object of the rejoicing before the Lord. The true meaning therefore is, that Israel might rejoice with holy reverence in the fellowship of its God.

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 14:23
23.And thou shalt eat before the Lord. He again commands the victims to be brought into the place of the sanctuary; although by the place which God shall choose, he designates Jerusalem, as has been said in the above commentary on chap. 12; for the Ark of the Covenant had no settled resting-place until the time of David, but was received as it were in temporary lodgings. Moses, therefore, now commands, that when God shall have so greatly honored a particular place, and shall have chosen a perpetual rest, in which His name shall dwell, thither are the offerings to be brought. But we know that this place was Jerusalem; and all the oblations were restricted to this one place, lest any corruption should creep in to destroy the unity of the faith. For all strange inventions, as has already been sufficiently seen, are so many profanations of God’s worship. But, whereas in chap. 12, Moses had promiscuously joined the tithes with the firstlings, and had made the same appointment with respect to both, he now relaxes the stringency of that law, by adding an exception, viz, that if the way should be too long, a commutation might be made, and money might be paid instead of corn. He does not, indeed, speak only of the tithes, but unites with them the vows and free-gifts; nay, he refers properly to these alone. But, since as to the latter there is no question, let us only consider whether it was consistent that the tithes should be paid in one place alone. They were given to the Levites for their maintenance, who, as is well known, were dispersed throughout the whole land; either then their residence must have been fixed at Jerusalem, or they must not be deprived of their subsistence, wherever they might dwell. The command, therefore, appears to be absurd, that all the tithes of the whole land should be brought to Jerusalem, for that would have amounted to nothing less than to destroy the poor Levites by famine. This absurdity has compelled the commentators to fabricate a doubtful conjecture; viz., that the people voluntarily set apart certain tithes, which they might carry to Jerusalem at the festivals; but it is not probable that so heavy a burden was imposed upon them, as that they should only keep at home what remained of the fifth part. But a nearer approach to probability would be, that the tithes of the neighboring country, as convenience offered, were carried to Jerusalem; whilst those which were collected in more distant places were set aside there; but that they were accounted for at Jerusalem, so that upon a calculation of the number of their families, an equal distribution might be made to the Levites. Certainly it is by no means probable that the respective tillers of the soil carried up to Jerusalem what the Levites, having received there, were compelled to take back again for the maintenance of their families; for what would have been the advantage of all this expense and trouble of carrying them backwards and forwards? Besides, it would have been useless to command the Levites, and that too with the addition of severe threats, to pay the priests faithfully, if the tithes had been first deposited with the priests themselves, who might easily have provided against all deception, since they had the whole quantity of corn in their own hands. I have, therefore, no doubt but that the Levites collected the tithes each in their own neighborhood, but that another tithing, of which mention will be made presently, was carried up to the sanctuary as a sacred offering, and a profession of service to God. For we have lately seen, that after that part had been withdrawn, the nine parts which remained were assigned to the Levites, as if they had been grown on their own ground. But because it was a subject which might cause complaints, that the first-fruits and other tithes should be collected into one place, God would anticipate this by showing the advantage of it to the whole people, in that there might be food enough for all who should come to the celebration of the festivals; for this is the meaning of the words, “thou shalt eat before the Lord thy God;” as if it had been said, that the place should be sacred to God, to which the worshippers of God might come from the whole land. Yet He commands, in the meanwhile, the pure observation of His worship; lest a diversity of places might draw away the people in various directions to false superstitions.

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 15:7
7.If there be among you a poor man The same word אביון, ebyon, is used, which we have seen just above, verse 4; nor is there any contradiction when He commands them to relieve beggars, whom He had before forbidden to exist among His people; for the object of the prohibition was, that if any were reduced to beggary, they should not be cast out and forsaken. Now, however, He explains the mode of preventing this, viz., that the hands of the rich should be open to assist them. In order to incline them to compassion, he again reminds them of their common brotherhood, and sets before them, as its token and pledge, the land in which by God’s goodness they dwell together. Again, that they may be willing and prompt in their humanity, He forbids them to harden their heart, thereby signifying that avarice is always cruel. Finally, He applies this instruction to the year of release, viz., that they should straightway relieve their poor brethren towards the beginning of that year, just as if they would receive back in a few days the money which the poor man would retain to its end.

Keil and Delitzsch
Deuteronomy 15:7-8
And in general Israel was to be ready to lend to the poor among its brethren, not to harden its heart, to be hard-hearted, but to lend to the poor brother מַחְסֹרֹו דֵּי, “the sufficiency of his need,” whatever he might need to relieve his wants.

Pulpit Commentary
Deu 15:7-11
Vers. 7-11. The reference to the release leads to a prescription regarding readiness to lend to the poor. They were not to harden their hearts against their poorer brethren, nor were they, in the prospect of the year of release, to refuse to lend them what was necessary for their uses, but, on the contrary, were to open their heart and their hand to them according to their need, lest the poor should appeal against them to God, and sin should lie upon them.

Harden thine heart; literally, maize strong, so as to suppress natural compassion and sympathy.

Vers. 7-11. The duty of kindness to the poor.
There seems to be at first sight a discrepancy between the phrase in ver. 4 and that in ver. 11. The former is, “Save when there shall be no poor among you;” the latter, “The poor shall never cease out of the land.” The first phrase is, however, a reason assigned for the injunction which had been given: it is equivalent to, “Simply, that there be no poor among you,” i.e. this or that was an appointment in Israel, in order that the number ofthe poor might be reduced to a minimum, and that those who were poor might not become abjectly so. But no such external law could ever prevent some from falling back in the race. As long as men”s constitutions, capacities, and characters were widely different, so would their measure of success be. A leveling of circumstances could be brought about only through a leveling of men, after all had been brought to a uniform starting-point. Such genial enactments as the one in vers. 1-6 might prevent beggary, but would not do away with poverty. “The poor shall never cease out of the land.” This phrase is not to be regarded as indicating a Divine appointment that it should he so, but as a Divine declaration that it would he so. As long as men are what they are, and the varied features of temperament and ability continue as they are, so long will there be abundant scope for the exercise of sympathy and of kindly help. The points noticeable in this paragraph are five.

1. Year after year fresh claims on the kindly help of the prosperous would be presented by their poorer brethren (ver. 11).

2. These claims were to be generously and even gladly met, as if it were a delight. We need not charge the writer with ministering to idleness and beggary (see reference to Michaelis, in previous Homily). The word for, yea, even the conception of, a beggar, as we now understand it, is entirely absent from the Mosaic statutes. Honest and diligent work is supposed to be universal; though it might not be uniformly skilful or successful.

3. The desire to evade any obligation thus presented, was a wicked violation of the spirit of the Law (ver. 9).

4. The cry of the neglected or oppressed poor would rise up to God, and be heard.

5. The Lord would remember the, sin of cruel neglect and unkindness, or of haughty coldness.

Now, this chapter generally, and therefore this paragraph as a part of it, may be viewed in one of two aspects: either as a section of the Mosaic code of jurisprudence, or as an inculcation of social duty. It would be obviously beyond or beside our province to deal with it in the former aspect; we are concerned solely with the latter. We need not ask whether, in our New Testament standard, kindness to the poor is enjoined? That is understood. Our one query is this

NOW THAT WE ARE UNDER CHRIST, AS OUR LEADER, HOW IS THE DUTY OF KINDNESS TO THE POOR PUT AND ENFORCED?
1. That duty which Moses enjoined as the leader and legislator of Jehovah”s people, our Lord Jesus Christ set on the ground of his own sovereign right, and enforced by his own example. In that wondrous chapter of John”s Gospel, the thirteenth, we are told that, when our Savior had washed his disciples” feet, he told them that he had given them an example that they should do as he had done to them, and also said, “Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master,” etc. We cannot suppose that this one act of kindness and condescension was merely meant to be literally followed. It must have been a kind of representative deed, in which our Lord virtually said, “In whatever way you may comfort or soothe a worn and weary brother by ministering to his wants, do not shrink from doing it, even though it may involve many a lowly, self-sacrificing act.” Surely this covers the ground indicated in this paragraph, and includes the duty of giving to the poor and helping the needy, whatsoever their need may be.

2. Our Lord regards the poor and needy as his poor: all, generally, because he died for them; some, especially, because he lives in them. Hence, whoever would act towards them so as to show them the power and glory of a living Savior”s sympathy, must let the poor feel through him the warm touch era tender Savior”s love. Our Lord said in his intercessory prayer, “As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.” Thus believers are to act in the world in the name and on the behalf of our Lord Jesus Christ, as the friends and benefactors of men.

3. Our Lord reckons a kindness shown to men for his sake, as if it were done to him. Even in the Old Testament we get a thought akin to this. (Isa_63:9) But in the New Testament the truth is more clearly defined (cf. Act_9:4, where it is presented to us in connection with the reverse of kindness) in Mat_25:31 it is shown us more strikingly still. Christ and his people are one; and a kindness done to men, out of love to him, is done to him. Is there not a wondrous touch of nature here? Would not a mother feel a kindness shown to her son, for her sake, as if it were shown to her? If the mother were in England and the son in New Zealand, she would feel the same. And if the son were even base and unworthy, and love did cling to him for the mother”s sake, she could not feel the kindness the less. And we are permitted to take this thought up into the heavenly region, and to read the amazing words, “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these ye have done it unto me.

1. Of so much importance is this kindness to the poor for Christ”s sake to be reckoned by us, that we are to watch for and seize opportunities of doing “good unto all men, specially to them that are of the household of faith;” yea, so laboring, we are even to support the weak, recalling those priceless words which an apostle was mercifully led to save from the peril of unrecorded sayings, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” Whenever and wherever there is presented to us a case of genuine need, there is an opportunity for honoring our Savior which we must not suffer to pass by unimproved.

2. There are New Testament warnings against the neglect of the poor, which are not only not less severe than any in the Old Testaments they are even more so. We may arrange them in three classes, giving one specimen under each.

1Jn_3:17: If a man can knowingly neglect the poor, God”s love isnot in his heart. Where love dwells in the heart, there will be corresponding words on the tongue, and corresponding blessings in the hand.

Jam_2:5-9 Jam_5:1-4: The Apostle James declares that to neglect ordespise the poor is sin against God; and that the cries of oppressed poverty will be heard in heaven.

Mat_25:31-46: Our Lord has explicitly told us that in the dayof judgment, the one test which will be applied to men, and by which their destiny will be decided, will be that of kindness to the poor for his sake! Where that has been, penitence and faith have wrought out in love. Where that has not been, there has been no love, and, consequently, neither faith nor penitent obedience. It is not necessary to be openly wicked and profane, in order to incur rejection by the Great Judge at last. There may have been not a single vice which shocked society or violated outward propriety. Be it so. Even then the absence of the activities of love will be a man”s ruin. He who has not lived to save his brother will not himself be saved. A piety that is known only by negatives will be disowned by our sovereign Lord; while genuine, active, unselfish love, though it may have had but a limited sphere for service, oft shedding a tear that it could do no more, will meet with the holy Master”s loving recognition, and will receive his gracious reward!

Vers. 7-11. Open-handedness.
Having inculcated the forgiveness of a brother”s debts during the sabbatic year, Moses now proceeds to speak of the open-handedness which should precede that year. It might be made a pretext for refusing a poor brother a helping hand that the year was almost on when the debt would be cancelled legally; but to make this a pretext for niggardliness would only betray wickedness of heart. The most beautiful consideration is thus inculcated for the poor; and as “the poor shall never cease out of the land,” there will be the call evermore for this open-handed-ness. Now this poor-law regulation is a most beautiful illustration of what God does for us; and something like it will yet supersede the hard-heartedness of our national systems.

I GENEROSITY SHOULD NOT BE TOO CALCULATING IN ITS TURN. Doubtless, often times it receives a noble return, but this should not be too much regarded, lest the speculative spirit mar the motive altogether. Nor again should we harden our hearts under the persuasion that our generosity is misspent, and that we shall never be repaid in any way. God has himself shown us true generosity in making his sun to shine on the evil as well as on the good, and in sending his rain upon the unjust as well as the just. And hence we are exhorted to “lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil”. (Luk_6:35) There is something noble in an uncalculating generosity.

II IT IS THE NEED OF THE POOR BROTHER WHICH WE ARE BOUND TO SUPPLY. That is, we are asked to supply him not with the luxuries or comforts of life, as if to these he had a right; but with his needs. The open-handedness will be considerate so far as not to encourage unworthy dependence. The brother will be helped in a brotherly way enabled to help himself, and having his needs only supplied. This principle has been urged in connection with our national poor-law system. If it is lost sight of, then a premium is paid to idleness, and the “ne”er-do-wells” become the favorites of fortune. Our Father in heaven acts in the same wholesome fashion. “He supplies all our need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.” He supplies us with salvation because we cannot save ourselves; he supplies us with what enables us to help ourselves. He could keep the whole world in idleness, “ladies and gentlemen at large,” but he prefers to keep the whole world in work. Our reliance on God is for our need.

III OPEN-HANDEDNESS FOR GOD”S SAKE IS SURE OF ITS REWARD, “The liberal soul shall be made fat.” “He that watereth others shall be watered also himself.” “There is that scattereth and yet increaseth.” In this way the Lord showeth in both dispensations how “he loveth a cheerful giver.” When a religious man, acting on principle, lives an openhanded life, he has the finest business stimulus. He works that he may have the more to give, and thus be the more God-like. There is nothing so hallows business in all its ramifications as this desire to be able to help those in need.

IV IT IS A SOLEMN THOUGHT THAT THE POOR ARE NEVER TO CEASE OUT OF THE LAND IN THE PRESENT DISPENSATION. The unequal distribution of wealth, the improvident habits of many, and the pressure of population upon subsistence seem destined to keep the poor always with us. And in consequence our Savior stepped out of his rich condition in the bosom and home of the Father and became poor, that he might call every poor man a brother, and leave the poor his legatees after his departure. We need the spectacle of poverty to move our hard hearts to the generosity required. Were abundance the rule, and no human being wanted bread, the selfishness of the race would know no bounds. But the poor ones call for the sympathy which Jesus so abundantly deserves, and we can now sell our spikenard and give to them with all the careful calculation which a Judas once desired. (Joh 12:l-8)

Let our help to others be systematic, because conscientious, and then shall it prove a perennial rill, benefiting the lives of many as it wends its way down the vale of years to the ocean that engulfs us all. R.M.E.

George Haydock
Deuteronomy 15:8
Need of. The Rabbins understand this of giving freely without any prospect of receiving again, much less of any advantage by usury. They esteem themselves bound also, by the laws of humanity, to assist even idolaters, though they will not beg of such, in public. Some assert, that they never allow public beggars among themselves, and indeed such are seldom to be seen. Yet no law forbids it; and Juvenal (vi. 541,) upbraids them with begging slyly at Rome. Arcanum Judæa tremens mendicat in aurem. (Calmet) — If people be in extreme want, the law requires that necessaries should be given them; but if they be not so far reduced, but that they may be able to pay again in a little time, it may suffice to lend. (Haydock)

Adam Clarke
Deuteronomy 15:9
Beware that there be not a thought in thy wicked heart – לבבך בליעל lebabecha beliyaal, thy belial heart, that is, thy good-for-nothing or unprofitable heart; See on Deu_13:13 (note).

And thine eye be evil – An evil eye signifies a covetous disposition. See the same form of expression used by our Lord in the same sense, Mat_6:23. If thine eye be evil – If thou be a covetous person. Evil eye is by our Lord opposed to single eye, i. e., a person of a liberal, benevolent mind. Covetousness darkens the soul; liberality and benevolence enlighten it.

And he cry unto the Lord against thee – What a consolation to the poor and the oppressed, that they have a sure friend in God, who will hear their cry and redress their grievances!

Keil and Delitzsch
Deuteronomy 15:9-10
Thus they were also to beware “that there was not a word in the heart, worthlessness,” i.e., that a worthless thought did not arise in their hearts (בְּלִיַּעַל is the predicate of the sentence, as the more precise definition of the word that was in the heart); so that one should say, “The seventh year is at hand, the year of release,” sc., when I shall not be able to demand what I have lent, and “that thine eye be evil towards thy poor brother,” i.e., that thou cherishest ill-will towards him (cf. Deu_28:54, Deu_28:56), “and givest him not, and he appeals to Jehovah against thee, and it becomes sin to thee,” sc., which brings down upon thee the wrath of God.

Deu_15:10
Thou shalt give him, and thy heart shall not become evil, i.e., discontented thereat (cf. 2Co_9:7), for Jehovah will bless thee for it (cf. Pro_22:9; Pro_28:27; Psa_41:2; Mat_6:4).

Pulpit Commentary
Deu 15:9
A thought in thy wicked heart; literally, a thing in thy heart worthlessness, i.e. a thing which is worthless and unworthy. The word used is belial (lYliB), which does not denote that which is wicked so much as that which is worthless. Thus, “a man of Belial” is a worthless fellow not necessarily a wicked man. (of Deu_13:13) And it be sin unto thee; i.e. entail guilt upon thee, and so expose thee to the Divine displeasure.

John Wesley
Deuteronomy 15:10
Thine heart shall not be grieved – That is, thou shalt give, not only with an open hand, but with a willing and chearful mind, without which thy very charity is uncharitable, and not accepted by God.

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 15:11
11.For the poor shall never cease out of the land. The notion of those is far fetched who suppose that there would be always poor men among them, because they would not keep the law, and consequently the land would be barren on account of their unrighteousness. I admit that this is true; but God does not here ascribe it to their sins that there would always be some beggars among them, but only reminds them that there would never be wanting matter for their generosity, because He would prove what was in their hearts by setting the poor before them. For, (as I have observed above,) this is why the rich and poor meet together, and the Lord is maker of them all; because otherwise the duties of charity would not be observed unless they put them into exercise by assisting each other. Wherefore God, to stir up the inactivity of the rich, declares that lie prescribes nothing but what continual necessity will require.

George Haydock
Deuteronomy 15:11
Needy. Hebrew expresses the order to be observed in giving alms, “open thy hand wide (give with profusion) to thy brother, (or relations,) to thy needy, (in extreme want,) and to thy poor in the land,” whoever they may be. (Calmet) — To exercise the charity of his people, God suffered some to be poor. (Worthington)

Keil and Delitzsch
Deuteronomy 15:11
For the poor will never cease in the land, even the land that is richly blessed, because poverty is not only the penalty of sin, but is ordained by God for punishment and discipline.

Pulpit Commentary
Deu 15:11
They were to open their hand wide to their poorer brethren, for there should always be such in the land. This statement is not inconsistent with that in ver. 4, for there it is the prevention of poverty by not dealing harshly with the poor that is spoken of; here it is the continuance of occasion for the relief of the poor that is referred to.

The poor in the land.: The meaning is that there will always be greater or less scope for the exercise of the virtues of kindness and liberality, that it is vain to hope for a Utopian condition of society in which there shall be absolutely no poor.

I THIS DOES NOT IMPLY:
1. That many existing causes of poverty cannot be permanently removed.

2. That every attempt ought not to be made to reduce poverty within its narrowest limits. The saying, “Ye have the poor always with you”, (Mat_26:11) is no utterance of fatalism. Much can be done to reduce poverty. With the growth of society, still more as a result of the spread of Christian principles, numbers of the causes of poverty now existing may be expected to disappear (idleness, intemperance, bad laws, merciless competition, class antagonisms, unfavorable sanitary conditions, etc.).

II IT DOES IMPLY:
1. That under the most favorable conditions of existence on earth a residuum of poverty is still to be looked for.

(1) There are diversities of talents. There will always be those whose abilities only fit them for the humblest positions in society. And these may be left friendless, or health may fail them, or they may live to old age, and become dependent.

(2) There are vicissitudes of fortune. These come to the most fortunate of men, reducing them oftentimes to great straits. And it is too much to expect that, even under millennial conditions, the causes of such vicissitudes will altogether cease to operate.

2. That while poverty lasts, it is our duty to help to bear its burden. Poverty, in a state of society such as we anticipate as the goal of history, need never be the painful thing it is now. With loving hearts, and hands ready to help, its sting will be taken away. J.O.

And as  result of working with it, I didn’t nod off at all during the sermon.

See, God still does work miracles….

But now I can have a Zatoichi and 47 Ronin marathons.

Subtitles are cool….

Rick’s tweets have a way of making me go “Wait a minute!” (That’s why I don’t follow him on Twitter.)

In this case, not only is Rick dismissing some serious theological differences, but he’s giving a false impression of Judgment Day. Check Jesus’ Judgment parables out. The Judge doesn’t ask mankind anything, he tells them. Probably because he knows every worthless word (Mat 12:36), every hair on your head (Mat 10:30), and what is done for the least of his brethren (Mat  25:40), to mention a few things.

But then, that sounds like a very *sovereign* God, which adjective is not entirely popular in the SBC.

To the sidebar links these go.

The list of resources available for free, without registration:

English Standard Version
The New International Version (1984)
New Living Translation
The New King James Version
The Holman Christian Standard Bible
King James Version
The NET Bible
GOD’S WORD Translation
Apocrypha of the Old Testament
The Good News Translation
The Message
New Century Version
Podle Puvodního Vydání Kralického
Szent Biblia
Giovanni Diodati Bibbia
Arabic Bible (Smith & Van ***)
Authorized Version
Traducción en lenguaje actual
Stephen’s Textus Receptus (1550)
Scrivener’s Textus Receptus (1881)
1881 Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament
Novum Testamentum Graece
Elzevir Textus Receptus (1624) With Morphology
Stephen’s Textus Receptus (1550) With Morphology
Scrivener’s Textus Receptus (1894) With Morphology
The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform 2005
Novum Testamentum Graece (Tischendorf)
The King James Version Apocrypha
The Revised Standard Version
The New Revised Standard Version
Reina-Valera Actualizada
Louis Segond
Luther Bibel (1545)
Luther Bibel (1912)
American Standard Version
Русский Синодальный Перевод (1876/1956)
La Biblia de las Américas
1890 Darby Bible
New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update
Young’s Literal Translation
The Cambridge Paragraph Bible of the Authorized English Version
The Lexham English Bible
Nueva Biblia de los Hispanos
New International Reader’s Version
The Greek New Testament: SBL Edition
Today’s New International Version
Clementine Vulgate
Apparatus for the Greek New Testament: SBL Edition
Summarized Bible: Complete Summary of the New Testament
Summarized Bible: Complete Summary of the Old Testament

Now add these with simple registration:

The New Testament in the Original Greek (Westcott and Hort)
The Pilgrim’s Progress
Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Morning and Evening
The Imitation of Christ
New Nave’s Topical Bible
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen
Diving For Pearls In God’s Treasure Chest
Sermons, on Several Occasions
Selected Sermons of George Whitefield
Power through Prayer
The Necessity of Prayer
In His Steps
The Training of the Twelve; or, Passages out of the Gospels, Exhibiting the Twelve Disciples of Jesus under Discipline for the Apostleship
Systematic Theology
Why Four Gospels?
Traveling in the Holy Land Through the Stereoscope
Dictionary of the Vulgate New Testament
Holbein’s Bible Woodcuts
An Introduction to Ecclesiastical Latin
Glossary of Morpho-Syntactic Database Terminology
A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible
The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

And of course, your wallet is the limit if you register as a Logos owner.

Definitely worth a bookmark, I think. It’s the best bible study site I’ve come across for use with the browser on my Kindle, so far.

Adam Clarke
Deuteronomy 6:4
Hear, O Israel – שמע ישראל יהוה אלהינו יהוה אחד shema Yisrael, Yehovah Eloheinu, Yehovah achad. These words may be variously rendered into English; but almost all possible verbal varieties in the translation (and there can be none other) amount to the same sense: “Israel, hear! Jehovah, our God, is one Jehovah;” or, “Jehovah is our God, Jehovah is one;” or, “Jehovah is our God, Jehovah alone;” or, “Jehovah is our God, Jehovah who is one;” or, “Jehovah, who is our God, is the one Being.” On this verse the Jews lay great stress; it is one of the four passages which they write on their phylacteries, and they write the last letter in the first and last words very large, for the purpose of exciting attention to the weighty truth it contains. It is perhaps in reference to this custom of the Jews that our blessed Lord alludes, Mat_22:38; Mar_12:29, Mar_12:30, where he says, This is the first and great commandment; and this is nearly the comment that Maimonides gives on this place: “Hear, O Israel; because in these words the property, the love, and the doctrine of God are contained.”

Many think that Moses teaches in these words the doctrine of the Trinity in Unity. It may be so; but if so, it is not more clearly done than in the first verse of Genesis, to which the reader is referred. When this passage occurs in the Sabbath readings in the synagogue, the whole congregation repeat the last word אחד achad for several minutes together with the loudest vociferations: this I suppose they do to vent a little of their spleen against the Christians, for they suppose the latter hold three Gods, because of their doctrine of the Trinity; but all their skill and cunning can never prove that there is not a plurality expressed in the word אלהינו Eloheinu, which is translated our God; and were the Christians, when reading this verse, to vociferate Eloheinu for several minutes as the Jews do achad, it would apply more forcibly in the way of conviction to the Jews of the plurality of persons in the Godhead, than the word achad, of one, against any pretended false tenet of Christianity, as every Christian receives the doctrine of the unity of God in the most conscientious manner. It is because of their rejection of this doctrine that the wrath of God continues to rest on them; for the doctrine of the atonement cannot be received, unless the doctrine of the Godhead of Christ is received too. Some Christians have joined the Jews against this doctrine, and some have even outdone them, and have put themselves to extraordinary pains to prove that אלהים Elohim is a noun of the singular number! This has not yet been proved. It would be as easy to prove that there is no plural in language.

Pulpit Commentary
Vers. 4-25. THE FIRST AND GREAT COMMANDMENT. “In the fear of Jehovah all true obedience is rooted (vers. 2, 3); for this is the first and most intimate fact in the relation of Israel and Jehovah. (Deu_5:26) But where the supreme fear of Jehovah hinders men from allowing self to preponderate in opposition to God, there will be no stopping at this renunciation of self-will, though this comes first as the negative form of the ten commandments also shows, but there will come to be a coalescence of the human with the Divine will; and this is love, which is the proper condition of obedience, as the ten commandments also indicate” (Deu_5:10) (Baumgarten). Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord. This is an affirmation not so much of the moneity as of the unity and simplicity of Jehovah, the alone God. Though Elohim (plu.), he is one. The speaker does not say, “Jehovah is alone God,” but “Jehovah our Elohim is one Jehovah”. (comp. for the force of dja. Exo_26:6, Exo_26:11; Eze_37:16-19) Among the heathen there were many Baals and many Jupiters; and it was believed that the deity might be divided and communicated to many. But the God of Israel, Jehovah, is one, indivisible and incommunicable. He is the Absolute and the Infinite One, who alone is to be worshipped, on whom all depend, and to whose command all must yield obedience. (cf. Zec_14:9) Not only to polytheism, but to pantheism, and to the conception of a localized or national deity, is this declaration of the unity of Jehovah opposed. With these words the Jews begin their daily liturgy, morning and evening; the sentence expresses the essence of their religious belief; and so familiar is it to their thought and speech that, it is said, they were often, during the persecution in Spain, betrayed to their enemies by the involuntary utterance of it.

Pulpit Commentary
Deu 6:5
To the one indivisible Jehovah undivided devotion and love are due. Hence the injunction, Thou shalt love Jehovah thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. The “heart” is the inner nature of the man, including his intellectual, emotional, and cognitive futurities; the “soul” is the personality, the entire self-consciousness; and the” might” is the sum of the energies, bodily and mental. Not by profession merely is Jehovah to be loved; the whole man, body, soul, and spirit, is to be yielded to him in holy and devout affection. (Mat_22:37; Mar_12:33; Luk_10:27; Rom_12:1) The last letter Of the first word, and the last letter of the last word in this verse are larger than the ordinary size (majuscula), and as these two form the word for witness (d), the Jews say that they are written thus “that every one may know, when he professes the unity of God, that his heart ought to be intent and devoid of every other thought, because God is a witness, and knoweth everything” (R. Bechai, fol. 195, quoted by Michaelis, “Bib. Heb,” in loc.).

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 6:6
6.And these words. In these four next verses God again commands (as before) the study of His Law. And first, indeed, He would have it implanted in their hearts, lest forgetfulness of it should ever steal over them; and by the word “heart” He designates the memory and other faculties of the mind; as though He had said that this was so great a treasure, that there was good cause why they should hide it in their hearts, or so fix this doctrine deeply in their minds that it should never escape. Afterwards He enjoins that constant conversation should be held about it with their children, in order that fathers should diligently attend and apply themselves to the duty of instruction. The word שנן shanan, which Moses uses, means properly “to whet.” Commentators think that it is employed metaphorically for “to reiterate,” or “to repeat constantly,” because, when the heavenly doctrine is inculcated, it will scarcely even thus be duly impressed on their hearts; but, since it is here used in the conjugation Piel, its signification may be transitive, viz., that they should cause it to penetrate their minds, as if they should prick them with the point of a sword; for the other translation does not seem consistent. But it is sufficient for me to state my opinion, lest any should be offended by its novelty. Lastly, he exhorts them to exercise themselves in its meditation both publicly and privately, in order to stimulate their want of energy. But, although he may seem to speak hyperbolically, yet if any one will carefully consider how slow and careless men are in learning, and how forgetful they are when they seem to have made some progress, he will readily acknowledge that Moses does not urge them so strongly on insufficient grounds, but that it was highly necessary for him to be thus rigid in exacting their attention. For this reason the Prophet in Psa_1:2, pronounces them to be blessed who meditate in God’s law “day and night.”

He leaves, then, no portion of time unoccupied with meditation on the Law; whether they are at home, or abroad, or when they retire to rest, or when they rise in the morning. To this precept David appears to allude in Psa_119:62, where he says, “At midnight I will rise to give thanks unto thee because of thy righteous judgments;” and again, Psa_119:148, “Mine eyes prevent the night-watches, that I might meditate in thy word.” But still, by the expression “talk of them,” Moses does not urge the people to empty talkativeness, to which many are too much inclined, but he would have them severally thus establish themselves and be teachers of each other. He enumerates these various engagements, lest that change of occupation by which the mind is wont to be distracted should withdraw the godly from the right path, as though he commanded them to make this their chief aim in whatever business they might be engaged. For the same reason he desires bracelets and frontlets to be made of the precepts of the Law, contrasting doubtless this spiritual ornament with chains of gold, as much as to say that they would more properly take delight in the pious recollection of the Law, than in those trifling ornaments which attract men’s senses. The Jews understanding this literally, accounted this external ostentation a mark of holiness, so as to think that they had almost done all they needed, when they wore the Law on their arms and foreheads. Thence their mistaken zeal proceeded still further, so that, as each desired to be thought better than others, they widened their phylacteries in proportion, for so they denominated the borders of their garments, on which were written certain sentences of the Law, as safeguards. This error our Lord severely reproves in the Scribes and Pharisees, ( Mat_23:5,) because it was a mere mockery of this admonition, and a profanation of its doctrine. The intention of God sufficiently appears in the passage from Exodus, which I have subjoined, and in which they are simply commanded to be diligent in keeping the Law. But there is good reason why diligence should be required, not only on account of the matter being highly important, but because, through our vanity, we are apt to relax our exertions, unless our slowness of heart is stimulated.

Adam Clarke
Deuteronomy 6:7
Thou shalt teach them diligently – שננתם shinnantam, from שנן shanan, to repeat, iterate, or do a thing again and again; hence to whet or sharpen any instrument, which is done by reiterated friction or grinding. We see here the spirit of this Divine injunction. God’s testimonies must be taught to our children, and the utmost diligence must be used to make them understand them. This is a most difficult task; and it requires much patience, much prudence, much judgment, and much piety in the parents, to enable them to do this good, this most important work, in the best and most effectual manner. See at the end of this chapter, Deu_6:25 (note).

And shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house – Thou shalt have religion at home, as well as in the temple and tabernacle.

And when thou walkest by the way – Thou shalt be religious abroad as well as at home, and not be ashamed to own God wheresoever thou art.

When thou liest down, and when thou risest up – Thou shalt begin and end the day with God, and thus religion will be the great business of thy life. O how good are these sayings, but how little regarded!

Adam Clarke
Deuteronomy 6:8
Thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thins hand – Is not this an allusion to an ancient and general custom observed in almost every part of the world? When a person wishes to remember a thing of importance, and is afraid to trust to the common operations of memory, he ties a knot on some part of his clothes, or a cord on his hand or finger, or places something out of its usual order, and in view, that his memory may be whetted to recollection, and his eye affect his heart. God, who knows how slow of heart we are to understand, graciously orders us to make use of every help, and through the means of things sensible, to rise to things spiritual.

And they shall be as frontlets – טטפת totaphoth seems to have the same meaning as phylacteries has in the New Testament; and for the meaning and description of these appendages to a Jew’s dress and to his religion, see the notes on Exo_13:9, and Mat_23:5 (note), where a phylactery is particularly described.

Pulpit Commentary
Deu 6:8
The words of God were to be bound for a sign a memorial or directory upon thine hand, the instrument of acting, and to be as frontlets fillets or bands between thine eyes, the organs of direction in walking or moving, and so on the forehead, the chamber of thought and purpose; and they were to inscribe them on the posts of their houses, and on their gates. The purport of this is that they were constantly and everywhere to have these commandments of the Lord in view and in mind, so as to undeviatingly observe them. It seems, however, to have been a custom widely prevalent among the ancient Eastern peoples to carry about their persons slips of parchment or some other material, on which were written sentences of moral or religious import; and such sentences they were also wont to inscribe on conspicuous places of their dwellings; usages still to be found among the Moslems (see Wilkinson, “Ancient Egyptians,” 3:364; Lane, “Modern Egypt,” 1:358; Russell, “Nat. Hist. of Aleppo;” Thomson, “Land and the Book,” 1:216), and the latter of which was not altogether unknown among Western nations (cf. Virgil, “Georg.” lit. 26, etc.), of which traces may still be seen in Switzerland, Germany, and on old houses in both England and Scotland. This custom originated, probably, in a desire to have the sentiments inscribed always in mind; but for the most part these inscriptions came to be regarded as amulets or charms, the presence of which on the person or the house was a safeguard against evil influences, especially such as were supernatural. By the Jews this custom was followed; and they regarded it as authorized by the injunction of Moses in this passage. Taking his words literally, they had their t and their mezuzah, the former of which the phylacteries of the New Testament were strips of parchment, on which passages of the Law (Exo_13:2-10, Exo_13:11-17; Deu_6:4-10, Deu_6:13-22) were written, and these, enclosed in a box, were bound on the forehead and left wrist, and worn at prayers by the worshippers; the latter a slip of parchment, on which were written certain passages of Scripture (vers. 4-9; Deu_11:13-21) and which, enclosed in a reed or cylinder, was fixed on the right-hand doorpost of every room in the house (see arts. “Mezuzah” and “Phylacteries” in Kitto”s “Biblical Cyclopedia,” 3rd edit.).

Albert Barnes
Deuteronomy 6:8-9
By adopting and regulating customary usages (e. g. Egyptian) Moses provides at once a check on superstition and a means of keeping the Divine Law in memory. On the “frontlets,” the “phylacteries” of the New Test. Mat_23:5, see Exo_13:16. On Deu_6:9; Deu_11:20 is based the Jewish usage of the mezuzah. This word denotes properly a door-post, as it is rendered here and in Exo_12:7, Exo_12:22; Exo_21:6 etc. Among the Jews however, it is the name given to the square piece of parchment, inscribed with Deu_6:4-9; Deu_11:13-21, which is rolled up in a small cylinder of wood or metal, and affixed to the right-hand post of every door in a Jewish house. The pious Jew touches the mezuzah on each occasion of passing, or kisses his finger, and speaks Psa_121:8 in the Hebrew language.

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 6:10
10.And it shall be, when the Lord thy God. Since wealth and prosperity for the most part blind men’s minds, so that they do not sufficiently attend to modesty and moderation, but rather grow wanton in their lusts, and intoxicate themselves with pleasures, God prescribes against this error by anticipation. For not without cause does he admonish them to beware lest they forget God, when they shall have been liberally and luxuriously treated by Him, but because he knew this to be a common vice, for abundance to beget arrogance; as afterwards he will say in his song,  “Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked: thou art waxen fat, etc., then he forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation.” (Deu_32:15.)

First of all, he shews how base and unworthy would be their ingratitude, if, when loaded with so many excellent benefits by God, they should cast away the recollection of Him; for, as His goodness was inestimable, in giving them cities built by the hands of others, and in transferring to them whatever others had prepared by their great labor and industry, so would their impiety be the more detestable in neglecting Him, when He daily set Himself before them in this abundant store of blessing. Let us learn, therefore, from this passage, that we are invited by God’s liberality to honor Him, and that whenever He deals kindly by us, He places His glory before our eyes; but, on the other hand, we should remember, that what ought to be as it were vehicles, to lift up our minds on high, are, by our own fault, converted into obstacles and clogs, and that therefore we ought to be the more upon our guard. At the end of verse 12, he reproves their folly by another argument, if being thus suddenly enriched, they should give way to intemperance; as if he had said, that their absurdity would be insupportable, if, when uplifted by God’s bounty, they should not remember their origin; for nothing should have served more to incline them to humility than that wretched state of servitude from whence they had been rescued. Therefore he contrasts with that ample dominion to which God had exalted them, the house of bondmen,” in order that the recollection of their former lot may restrain all frowardness.

Pulpit Commentary
Vers. 10-12. As the Israelites were about to enter upon the possession of a rich and fertile land, where everything for their accommodation and comfort was already provided for them, there was a danger of their being so engrossed with their new possessions as to forget the Lord and his gracious dealings with them. They are, therefore, here warned against the danger to which they would be thus exposed. House of bondage. (Exo_13:3)

Albert Barnes
Deuteronomy 6:10-25
The Israelites were at the point of quitting a normal, life for a fixed and settled abode in the midst of other nations; they were exchanging a condition of comparative poverty for great and goodly cities, houses and vineyards. There was therefore before them a double danger;

(1) a God-forgetting worldliness, and

(2) a false tolerance of the idolatries practiced by those about to become their neighbors.

The former error Moses strives to guard against in the verses before us; the latter in Deu_7:1-11.

Adam Clarke
Deuteronomy 6:12
Beware lest thou forget the Lord – In earthly prosperity men are apt to forget heavenly things. While the animal senses have every thing they can wish, it is difficult for the soul to urge its way to heaven; the animal man is happy, and the desires of the soul are absorbed in those of the flesh. God knows this well; and therefore, in his love to man, makes comparative poverty and frequent affliction his general lot.

Should not every soul therefore magnify God for this lot in life? “Before I was afflicted,” says David, “I went astray;” and had it not been for poverty and affliction, as instruments in the hands of God’s grace, multitudes of souls now happy in heaven would have been wretched in hell. It is not too much to speak thus far; because we ever see that the rich and the affluent are generally negligent of God and the interests of their souls. It must however be granted that extreme poverty is as injurious to religion as excessive affluence. Hence the wisdom as well as piety of Agur’s prayer, Pro_30:7-9 : “Give me neither poverty nor riches, lest I be full and deny thee, or lest I be poor and steal,” etc.

Keil and Delitzsch
Deuteronomy 6:12-13
“House of bondage,” as in Exo_13:3. “Not forgetting” is described from a positive point of view, as fearing God, serving Him, and swearing by His name. Fear is placed first, as the fundamental characteristic of the Israelitish worship of God; it was no slavish fear, but simply the holy awe of a sinner before the holy God, which includes love rather than excludes it. “Fearing” is a matter of the heart; “serving,” a matter of working and striving; and “swearing in His name,” the practical manifestation of the worship of God in word and conversation. It refers not merely to a solemn oath before a judicial court, but rather to asseverations on oath in the ordinary intercourse of life, by which the religious attitude of a man involuntarily reveals itself.

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 6:13
13.Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God. Hence it is more evident why He has just declared that there is One God, viz., that He alone may be undividedly worshipped; for unless our minds are fixed on Him alone, religion is torn, as it were, into divers parts, and this is soon followed by a labyrinth of errors. But, first, he calls for reverence, and then for the worship which may testify and demonstrate it. “Fear” contains in it the idea of subjection, when men devote themselves to God, because His terrible majesty keeps them in their proper place. Hence results worship, which is the proof of piety. But we must observe that the fear enjoined in this passage is voluntary, so that men influenced by it desire nothing more than to obey God. When I stated, therefore, that God brings us under the yoke by a sense of His power and greatness, I did not understand that a violent and servile obedience is extorted from us; I only wished to affirm that men cannot be induced to obey God, before they have been subdued by fear; because their innate corruption always carries with it a contempt for religion, and a spirit of licentiousness. Therefore, in Jeremiah (Jer_5:22), in order to exhort men to fear, He sets forth His terrible power in restraining the strength of the sea; but this fear leads on His true worshippers further. In the other passage which we have subjoined from Deu_10:0, the word cleave again confirms the truth, that as soon as men decline from God in the least degree, His worship is corrupted. For this is the meaning of that union with Himself to which He calls His worshippers, that they should be, as it were, glued to Him, and should not look elsewhere.

Adam Clarke
Deuteronomy 6:13
Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God – Thou shalt respect and reverence him as thy Lawgiver and Judge; as thy Creator, Preserver, and the sole object of thy religious adoration.

And serve him – Our blessed Lord, in Mat_4:10; Luk_4:8, quotes these words thus: And him Only (αυτῳ μονῳ) shalt thou serve. It appears, therefore, that לבדו lebaddo was anciently in the Hebrew text, as it was and is in the Septuagint, (αυτῳ μονῳ), from which our Lord quoted it. The Coptic preserves the same reading; so do also the Vulgate, (illi soli), and the Anglo-Saxon. Dr. Kennicott argues, that without the word only the text would not have been conclusive for the purpose for which our Lord advanced it; for as we learn from Scripture that some men worshipped false gods in conjunction with the true, the quotation here would not have been full to the point without this exclusive word. It may be proper to observe that the omitted word לבדו lebaddo, retained in the above versions, does not exist in the Hebrew printed text, nor in any MS. hitherto discovered.

Shalt swear by his name – תשבע tishshabea, from שבע shaba, he was full, satisfied, or gave that which was full or satisfactory. Hence an oath and swearing, because appealing to God, and taking him for witness in any case of promise, etc., gave full and sufficient security for the performance; and if done in evidence, or to the truth of any particular fact, it gave full security for the truth of that evidence. An oath, therefore, is an appeal to God, who knows all things, of the truth of the matter in question: and when a religious man takes such an oath, he gives full and reasonable satisfaction that the thing is so, as stated; for it is ever to be presumed that no man, unless in a state of the deepest degradation, would make such an appeal falsely, for this would imply an attempt to make God a party in the deception.

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 6:14
14.Ye shall not go after. In this passage Moses commands the people not to turn away from the simple service of God, although examples of superstition may present themselves to their sight on every side. For this was a very destructive temptation, that none could be anywhere found who subscribed to the doctrine of the Law, although the respective nations had some religion, or at any rate the name of it existing among them. Since, therefore, these various forms of worship were so many temptations to forsake the right way, it was needful to provide against the danger betimes, and so to establish the authority of the One God, that the Jews might have courage to despise the common belief of all the Gentiles. A threat is added, that vengeance would not be far off if they should fall away into these superstitions, since God is a jealous God, and dwelling among them. As to the former epithet, I am about to say more under the Second Commandment. Meanwhile, let my readers observe that God is called jealous, because He permits no rivalry which may detract from His glory, nor does He suffer the service which is due to Him alone to be transferred elsewhere. When He reminds the people that he dwells among them, it is partly to inspire terror by reason of His presence, and partly to reprove indirectly their ingratitude, if they should forsake Him, and seek for themselves gods who are afar of.

Keil and Delitzsch
Deuteronomy 6:14-16
The worship of Jehovah not only precludes all idolatry, which the Lord, as a jealous God, will not endure (see at Exo_20:5), but will punish with destruction from the earth (“the face of the ground,” as in Exo_32:12); but it also excludes tempting the Lord by an unbelieving murmuring against God, if He does not remove any kind of distress immediately, as the people had already sinned at Massah, i.e., at Rephidim (Exo_17:1-7).

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 7:6
6.For thou art a holy people. He explains more distinctly what we have lately seen respecting God’s gratuitous love; for the comparison of the fewness of the people with the whole world and all nations, illustrates in no trifling degree the greatness of God’s grace; and this subject is considerably enlarged upon. Almost the same expressions will very soon be repeated, and also in the Song of Moses; but there by way of reproof, whilst here it is directed to a different object, as is plain from the context, viz., that they might be, by so great a blessing, laid under obligation to devote themselves and their services to God. He begins by declaring the end of their election, viz., that God had deigned to bestow this peculiar honor upon them that He might acquire unto Himself a holy people, pure from all pollutions, and then, by adding the circumstance I have adverted to, he magnifies the excellence of the benefit. From his argument drawn from their dignity, that they ought therefore to labor after holiness, we gather, that in proportion to the abundance of grace with which any one is endued, he is solemnly bound to live piously and justly. For God does not wish the gifts he bestows upon us to lie idle, but to produce their appropriate fruits; and we must especially remember that when He adopts us, and gathers us into His Church, we are not “called to uncleanness,” but to purity of life, and to shew forth the praises of him who hath called us out of darkness into his marvellous light.” ( 1Th_4:7, and 1Pe_2:9.) The Hebrew word סגלה, segullah, which we translate “peculiaris,” special, some understand to mean a “treasure,” or a precious and desirable thing, as was stated on Exo_19:0. Undoubtedly it appears from many passages that gold, silver, pearls, and the like, are designated by this word; but substantially it is agreed that this title is given to the elect people, because God delights Himself in them; and herein His incomparable goodness shines forth, that He so highly esteems such miserable and worthless creatures, (homunciones.) Hence, too, it appears that by His holy calling He, as it were, creates out of nothing “things which are not,” that they may excel every earthly being.

Pulpit Commentary
Deu 7:6
A holy people; a people consecrated to God, to be holy as he is holy (cf. Lev_11:43-45 Lev_19:2 Lev_20:26 Lev_21:6 Deu_23:14) A special people unto himself; literally, to be to him for a people of property (hLgus), a people his own, his peculiar property (cf. Deu_14:2 Deu_26:18; and, for the meaning of the word, 1Ch_29:3, “mine own proper good;”; Ecc_2:8, “peculiar treasure of kings LXX, laosiov, applied by St. Paul to Christians as the chosen and special property of Christ. (Tit_2:14) Above all people; rather, out of or from among all the peoples.

Vers. 6-9. Reasons for non-conformity to the world, and for aggression on its evil.

I THE HOLINESS OF OUR CALLING. (Ver. 6.) The believer stands toGod in the relation described in this verse. He is one chosen from the unholy mass to be peculiarly God”s property. He belongs to God in body, soul, and spirit. He is a vessel for the Master”s use. His every power is to be consecrated. What higher dignity could a human being sustain than that? But the obligations are coextensive with the honor. This man is, in virtue of his holiness, summoned to take up an attitude of non-conformity to the. (Rom_12:2) In virtue of the same holiness, he is bound to unite with others in a sacred crusade against its evil.

II THE GRACE OF OUR ELECTION. (Ver. 7.) This puts another powerful weight into the scale. Standing in so close and honorable a relation to God, the believer is bid look to the rock whence he is hewn, and the hole of the pit whence he is digged. Who made him to differ? Whence this mercy shown peculiarly to him? We need not press texts on election in favor of any special theory. Sufficient that every believer is willing to confess, as regards his own salvation, that “it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy”. (Rom_9:16) An elective purpose comes to light in his spiritual history. (Eph_1:4, Eph_1:5) When tracing his salvation to its source, he is constrained to say, “God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ”. (Eph_2:4, Eph_2:5) All this implies special obligation to God”s service.

III THE NIGHT OF OUR REDEMPTION. (Ver. 8.) The redemption from Egypt, with its tragic accompaniments and mighty signs and wonders, was but a faint type of the greater deliverance which God has now wrought for his Israel in Christ. We are entitled to put the greater for the less, and to plead the stronger claimers which the redemption from sin and wrath establishes on the redeemed soul. The cost of our salvation is Christ”s blood. What return can we conceivably make exhaustive of our obligations to Father and Son for so great a sacrifice? J.O.
Vers. 6-8. On the election of rations.

We are here introduced to remarkable words touching the election of, or we might say, selection of the Jews. The leading principles of the Divine administration are here set before us. The following points may be noticed:

I THE JEWS WERE SELECTED NOT ON ACCOUNT OF ANY NATIONAL SUPERIORITY. Moses tells them that, numerically, they were the fewest of all people. It was not numerical strength, nor national advantages of any kind, which induced God to select them.

II THEY WERE SELECTED BECAUSE GOD CHOSE TO SET HIS LOVE UPON THEM. “The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people but because the Lord loved you.” It was sovereign love which is its own reason. And, in the last resort, it is to this we must come. We can give no better account of the matter than that God chose to do it.

III THE DELIVERANCE FROM EGYPT WAS THE PROOF OF HIS SOVEREIGN LOVE. Hereby he kept his promise made to their fathers, and fulfilled his own gracious purpose. The series of judgments, the outcome of his mighty hand, which proved how infinitely stronger it was than the hand of Pharaoh, while severe to Egypt, were love-tokens to Israel.

IV THE CHOICE OF ISRAEL WAS WITH A VIEW TO THEIR BEING A HOLY PEOPLE AND A SPECIAL PEOPLE UNTO THE LORD. Electing love extended to a nation or a people is really a Divine investment. The result is the holiness and consecration of the people. It is this holiness, this sense of consecration, which proves the electing love of God. And this is all the more intense when it is seen clearly that God”s love is manifested, not on the ground of national or personal merit, but as a matter of free grace.

And, doubtless, the Jews proved themselves a special people, although far from a perfect people. They were the custodians of the holy oracles for ages. They showed, and they still show, wonderful linguistic and other qualifications. All this, let us believe, is due to that grace and Divine development through which, as a nation, they were permitted to pass.

The practical application of this subject is surely this:

1. To receive God”s mercy under an abiding sense that it is undeserved.

2. To cultivate the sense of obligation to God for his undeserved mercy, which it is intended to foster.

3. And to realize the consecration of spirit through which all that is noble in human life comes. God saves us that we may serve him. He shows us his loving-kindness that we may become through it “a peculiar people, zealous of good works. R.M.E.

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 7:7
7.The Lord did not set his love upon you. He proves it to be of God’s gratuitous favor, that He has exalted them to such high honor, because He had passed over all other nations, and deigned to embrace them alone. For an equal distribution of God’s gifts generally casts obscurity upon them in our eyes; thus the light of the sun, our common food, and other things, which all equally enjoy, either lose their value, or, at any rate, do not obtain their due honor; whilst what is peculiar is more conspicuous. Moreover, Moses takes it for granted, that there was nothing naturally in the people to cause their condition to be better or more distinguished; and hence infers, that there was no other reason why God should choose them, except His mere choice of them. We have elsewhere observed, that by this His love, whatever men would bring of their own is excluded or annihilated. It follows, therefore, that the Israelites could never be sufficiently grateful to God, since they had been thus liberally dealt with by Him, without any desert of their own.

Pulpit Commentary
Deu 7:7
Set his love upon you. The Hebrew verb meaning primarily to cleave to, to be attached to, is used to express ardent and loving affection. (Gen_34:8; Deu_10:15; Isa_38:17) The fewest of all people . It might have been supposed that, in choosing a people to be his special treasure, the Almighty would have selected some one of the great nations of the world; but, instead of that, he had chosen one of the smallest. They had, indeed, grown till now they were as the stars for multitude; but it was not in prospect of this that they were chosen. The election of Israel was purely of grace.

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 7:8
8.Because he would keep the oath. The love of God is here referred back from the children to the fathers; for he addressed the men of his own generation, when he said that they were therefore God’s treasure, because He loved them; now he adds that God had not just begun to love them for the first time, but that He had originally loved their fathers, when He chose to adopt Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But although he more clearly proves that the descendants of Abraham had deserved nothing of the kind, because they are God’s peculiar people only by right of inheritance, still it must be remarked that God was induced to be kind to Abraham by no other cause than mere generosity. A little further on, therefore, he will say that those who then survived were dear to God, because He had already loved their fathers. But now he still further commends the goodness of God, because He had handed down His covenant from the fathers to the children, to shew that He is faithful and true to His promises. At the end of the verse, he teaches that the deliverance of the people was both an effect and a testimony of that grace.

Pulpit Commentary
Deu 7:8
Because the Lord loved you. Targum Onkelos, “Because he had complacency in you;” Vulgate, quia vobis junctus est. “Instead of saying, He hath chosen you out of love to your fathers, as in Deu_4:37, Moses brings out in this place love to the people of Israel as the Divine motive, not for choosing Israel, but for leading it out and delivering it from the slave-house of Egypt, by which God had practically carried out the election of the people, that he might thereby allure the Israelites to a reciprocity of love”. (Keil)

John Calvin
Deuteronomy 7:9
9.Know therefore that the Lord thy God, he is God. The verb might have been as properly translated in the future tense; and, if this be preferred, an experimental knowledge, as it is called, is referred to, as if he had said that God would practically manifest how faithful a rewarder He is of His servants. But if the other reading is rather approved, Moses exhorts the people to be assured that God sits in heaven as the Judge of men, so that they may be both alarmed by the fear of His vengeance, and also attracted by the hope of reward. This declaration, however, was appended to the Second Commandment, and there expounded; for since it is comprehended in the Decalogue, it was not right to separate it from thence; but since it is now repeated in confirmation of the whole Law, it is fitly inserted in this place. It will not be amiss, nevertheless, slightly to advert to what I there more fully explained. The promise stands first, because God chooses rather to invite His people by kindness than to compel them to obedience from terror. The word mercy is coupled with the covenant, that we may know that the reward which believers must expect, does not depend on the merit of their works, since they have need of God’s mercy. We may, however, thus resolve the phrase — keeping the covenant of mercy — or the covenant founded on mercy — or the mercy which He covenanted.

When it is required of believers that they should love God before they keep His Commandments, we are thus taught that the source and cause of obedience is the love wherewith we embrace God as our Father. With respect to the “thousand generations,” it is better that we should refer to the Second Commandment, because it is a point which cannot be hurried over in a few words.

Keil and Delizsch
Deuteronomy 7:9-10
By this was Israel to know that Jehovah their God was the true God, the faithful God, who keeps His covenant, showing mercy to those who love Him, even to the thousandth generation, but repaying those who hate Him to the face. This development of the nature of God Moses introduces from Exo_20:5-6, as a light warning not to forfeit the mercy of God, or draw upon themselves His holy wrath by falling into idolatry. To this end He emphatically carries out still further the thought of retribution, by adding לְהַאֲבִידֹו, “to destroy him” (the hater), and וגו יִאַהֵר לֹא, “He delays not to His hater (sc., to repay him); He will repay him to his face.” “To the face of every one of them,” i.e., that they may see and feel that they are smitten by God (Rosenmüller).

Alexander MacLaren
Deuteronomy 7:9
‘Faithful,’ like most Hebrew words, has a picture in it. It means something that can be {1} leant on, or {2} builded on.
This leads to a double signification-{1} trustworthy, and that because {2} rigidly observant of obligations. So the word applies to a steward, a friend, or a witness. Its most wonderful and sublime application is to God. It presents to our adoring love-

I. God as coming under obligations to us.
A marvellous and blessed idea. He limits His action, regards Himself as bound to a certain line of conduct.

1. Obligations from His act of creation.
‘A faithful Creator,’ bound to take care of those whom He has made. To supply their necessities. To satisfy their desires. To give to each the possibility of discharging its ideal.

2. Obligations from His past self.
‘God is faithful by whom ye were called,’ therefore He will do all that is imposed on Him by His act of calling.
He cannot begin without completing. There are no abandoned mines. There are no half-hewn stones in His quarries, like the block at Baalbec. And this because the divine nature is inexhaustible in power and unchangeable in purpose.

3. Obligations from His own word.
A revelation is presupposed by the notion of faithfulness. It is not possible in heathenism. ‘Dumb idols,’ which have given their worshippers no promises, cannot be thought of as faithful. By its grand conception of Jehovah as entering into a covenant with Israel, the Old Testament presents Him to our trust as having bound Himself to a known line of action. Thereby He becomes, if we may so phrase it, a constitutional monarch.

That conception of a Covenant is the negation of caprice, of arbitrary sovereignty, of mystery. We know the principles of His government. His majestic ‘I wills’ cover the whole ground of human life and needs for the present and the future. We can go into no region of life but we find that God has defined His conduct to us there by some word spoken to our heart and binding Him.

4. Obligations from His new Covenant and highest word in Jesus Christ.
‘He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.’

II. God as recognising and discharging these obligations.

That He will do so comes from His very nature. With Him there is no change of disposition, no emergence of unseen circumstances, no failure or exhaustion of power.

That He does so is matter of fact. Moses in the preceding context had pointed to facts of history, on which he built the ‘know therefore’ of the text. On the broad scale the whole world’s history is full of illustrations of God’s faithfulness to His promises and His threats. The history of Judaism, the sorrows of nations, and the complications of national events, all illustrate this fact.

The personal history of each of us. The experience of all Christian souls. No man ever trusted in Him and was ashamed. He wills that we should put Him to the proof.

III. God as claiming our trust.
He is faithful, worthy to be trusted, as His deeds show.

Faith is our attitude corresponding to His faithfulness. Faith is the germ of all that He requires from us. How much we need it! How firm it might be! How blessed it would make us!

The thought of God as ‘faithful’ is, like a precious stone, turned in many directions in Scripture, and wherever turned it flashes light. Sometimes it is laid as the foundation for the confidence that even our weakness will be upheld to the end, as when Paul tells the Corinthians that they will be confirmed to the end, because ‘God is faithful, through whom ye were called into the fellowship of His Son’ {1Co_1:9}. Sometimes there is built on it the assurance of complete sanctification, as when he prays for the Thessalonians that their ‘whole spirit and soul and body may be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord’ and finds it in his heart to pray thus because ‘Faithful is He that calleth you, who will also do it’ {1Th_5:24}. Sometimes it is presented as the steadfast stay grasping which faith can expect apparent impossibilities, as when Sara ‘judged Him faithful who had promised’ {Heb_11:11}. Sometimes it is adduced as bringing strong consolation to souls conscious of their own feeble and fluctuating faith, as when Paul tells Timothy that ‘If we are faithless, He abideth faithful; for He cannot deny Himself’ {2Ti_2:13}. Sometimes it is presented as an anodyne to souls disturbed by experience of men’s unreliableness, as when the apostle heartens the Thessalonians and himself to bear human untrustworthiness by the thought that though men are faithless, God ‘is faithful, who shall establish you and keep you from evil’ {2Th_3:2 – 2Th_3:3}. Sometimes it is put forward to breathe patience into tempted spirits, as when the Corinthians are comforted by the assurance that ‘God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able’ {1Co_10:13}. Sometimes it is laid as the firm foundation for our assurance of pardon, as when John tells us that ‘If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins’ {1Jn_1:9}. And sometimes that great attribute of the divine nature is proposed as holding forth a pattern for us to follow, and the faith in it as tending to make us in a measure steadfast like Himself, as when Paul indignantly rebuts his enemies’ charge of levity of purpose and vacillation, and avers that ‘as God is faithful, our word toward you is not yea and nay’ {2Co_1:18}.