position, though such is the fact, as from the design of the Lawgiver to attach to blood a peculiar sacredness from its uses in religious worship. This we find expressly declared Lev. 17. 10, 11, 'Whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.' The full force of this language cannot be appreciated without bearing in mind that the original word ( nephesh) or life and soul is the same; so that in saying that the life of the flesh is in the blood, and that it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul (i. e. the life), it is virtually said that life goes for life in the great scheme of expiation. Accordingly we find it prophetically af firmed of Christ in undoubted allusion to this very language, Is. 53. 12, that he should pour out his soul (Heb. Gr.vn) unto death;' i. e. should shed his vital blood, give his life. The same original Greek term occurs John, 10. 11, 17, 'I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life (or soul—terpreted of the punishment which was vxn) for the sheep.' As to the question whether this precept of abstaining from blood be at present binding upon Christians, see Barnes on Acts 15. 29.

danger of being counteracted from this source, and the Most High accordingly here utters a decree well calculated to allay his apprehensions. The phraseology of the original is very peculiar, and our translation we think fails in giving its precise import. The Hel,. for your blood of your lives (WB:) DAT)' perhaps more properly signifies 'your blood for your lives ;' i. e. your blood in return for the life-blood which you have shed. He says 'for your lives,' to intimate the close relation and identity, as it were, between men, as if in taking away the life of a brother they took that which was their own; so representing homicide as but another form of suicide, for he hath made of one blood all nations of men,' &c. Acts, 17. 26. The term require (N) implies a vindictive seeking or searching out, and consequently involves the idea of punishment. Thus Gen. 42. 22, 'Therefore behold also his blood is required. For this reason God is called Ps. 9. 12 (13), 7 seeker out of bloods, i, e. avenger; and when Moses says Deut. 18. 19, 'I will require it of him,' Peter in quoting and applying the sentence, Acts, 3. 23, says, 'He shall be destroyed from among the people.'-¶ At the hand of every beast will Irequire it. This is generally in

to be inflicted upon a beast that had in any way killed a man; and it is certain that a law was afterwards ordained requiring such a beast to be put to death, Ex. 21. 28, probably to inspire greater horror of every species of bloodshedding. And this may be the prima

5. And surely your blood of your lives will I require. God having in the preceding verses given security to Noah and his posterity against any appre-ry and most genuine sense of the hended obstacle to their increase and multiplication from the ravages of wild beasts, comes now to make provision against another possible evil, viz. the violence of men towards each oth

words. At least, we would not exclude it from the scope of the sacred writer; at the same time we cannot avoid the impression that this does not exhaust the whole meaning of the words. The phrase 'at the hand of' sometimes signifies 'by means of;' and a secondary idea, we are persuaded, is

will I require the soul (or life) of man.' That the idea here expressed is really conveyed by the words of the sacred writer we are not disposed to question; nor that they carry with them the clear implication that every man is to consider every other man as his brother, and to be as tender of his life as he would be of that of one who acknowledges the same immediate parents as himself. But the passage contains, we conceive, much more than this. We here see, if we mistake not, the origin of the institution of Goëlism, or that feature of the patriarchal polity which provided for the punishment of crimes of blood. By the Goël (38 goël) is to be understood the nearest relation of a person murdered, whose right and duty it was, to avenge his kinsman's death with his own hand.

The etymology of the

that the shedding of human blood should be avenged by the agency or instrumentality, not only of every murdered man's brother, but even by that of the very beasts of the field. The whole creation, as it were, should be armed against him who had violated the sanctity of human life. It is probable indeed that this ordinance contemplated primarily a state of society in which the institution of laws and magistracy had obtained but a very imperfect establishment, and therefore amounts to a pledge on the part of the Most High that he would in some way, and by the employment of such ministers as he saw fit, take the work of vengeance into his own hands. How agreeable such extraordinary judgments were to the general sense of mankind we may learn from the striking incident Acts, 28. 4, where the barbarians, when word in this sense is not very well asthey observed the viper (the venomous certained, but as the root has the beast) hanging to the hand of Paul, at import not only of ransoming or reonce concluded that the man was a deeming, but also of polluting or stainmurderer, whom, though he had escap-ing, Michaelis suggests that the Goël ed the perils of the sea, justice would was so called from his being considernot suffer to live. In like manner ined as stained with the blood of his murthe book of Job, which contains a pic-dered relative till he had washed it ture of society in its earliest and rudest away by avenging his death; and in stages, we find clear intimations of the this very light do the Arabs still regard same thing. Speaking of the favoured the kinsman of a person murdered. lot of the good man it is said, ch. 5. 22, The term, however, was afterwards 23, 'At destruction and famine thou extended to signify the nearest relation shalt laugh; neither shall thou be afraid in general, although there was no murof the beasts of the earth. For thou der in the case, as may be seen in the shalt be in league with the stones of notes on Ruth, 4. 1. In Arabic, this the field; and the beasts of the field personage is called Tair or Tsair, i. e. shall be at peace with thee.' While, survivor, implying the surviving relatherefore, we admit that the phrase 'to tive, who was bound to avenge the require the blood at the hand of beast death of a murdered person; and in the or brother,' implies primarily inflicting writings of this people the mention of vengeance on the perpetrator, it involves the blood-avenger occurs far oftener also the secondary sense of enlisting than it does in Hebrew; no doubt for such executioners in the work as to di- the reason, that the usages of a rude vine wisdom might seem good. This is and primitive state of society have left confirmed by what follows. At more permanent traces among them the hand of every man's brother will I than among the Hebrews, though even require it. Chal. At the hand of the among them the relics of this system man who shall spill his brother's blood of retribution are still discoverable in

6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed for in the image of God made he man.

:

k Ex. 21. 12, 14. Lev. 24. 17. Matt. 26. 52. Rev. 13. 10. 1 ch. 1. 27.

m

7 And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.

m ver. 1, 19. & ch. 1. 28.

the laws respecting the cities of refuge, that such a means of severity is liable Deut. 19. The following remarks of to great abuses, and could never be so Michaelis on the subject of Goëlism effectual nor so free from objections, as will make the reader still better ac- the laws by which a magistrate punquainted with its nature and design.ishes a murderer after instituting a ju'Let us figure to ourselves a people dicial investigation of his guilt. Still without magistrates, and where every we can easily see that it might have father of a family is still his own mas-been adopted in those early ages as a ter. In such a state men's lives would temporary expedient of Providence, of necessity be in the highest degree in- though not perhaps appointed as a possecure, were there no such blood-aven-itive divine institution carrying with it ger as we have above described. Magis- the express authority of Heaven. God trate, or public judicial tribunal, to pun-in his providence often avails himself ish murder, there is none; of course of many things which at the same time acts of murder might be daily perpetra- exist rather by his sufferance than by ted, were there no reason to dread pun- his approbation. ishment of another description. For their own security, the people would be forced to constitute the avengement of blood an indispensable duty, and not only to consider the murderer as an outlaw, but actually to endeavour to put him to death, and whithersoever he might flee, never to cease pursuing him until he became the victim of vengeance. As, however, every one would not choose to undertake the dangerous office of thus avenging a murder, the nearest relations of the unfortunate sufferer would find it necessary to under-larly that of murder, would devolve take it themselves. It would natural- more immediately upon the avenging ly be deemed a noble deed, and the interpositions of God's providence. The neglect of it, of course, highly disgrace- drift of that verse accordingly is to ful and justly productive of such infa- convey the assurance that he would acmy and reproach as blood alone could tually take it upon him to see to the wash away.' Comment. on Laws of maintaining of the interests of justice Moses, vol. 2. p. 195. It is, we suppose, among his creatures in the lack of those to such a provisional expedient as this institutions which would otherwise enthat the words before us refer, one! able them to do it. But in the present which God was pleased to sanction for | passage, we consider the divine Lawthe time being till more perfect systems giver as having his eye upon a someof laws and government should be in- what different and higher state of polittroduced among men; as it is evidentical society. Instead of being a mere

6. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, &c. That is, wilfully and unwarrantably, for there are two exceptions to this law, (1.) Casual or unintentional murder, Deut. 19. 4. (2.) Death by the hand of the magistrate for capital crimes, to which the present rule has direct reference. The enactment contained in the preceding verse has, as we have endeavoured to show, a leading reference to the rude and less organized states of society, where the punishment of flagrant crimes, particu

8 And God spake unto Noah, my covenant with you, and with and to his sons with him, saying, your seed after you; 9 And I, "behold, I establish

n ch. 6. 18.

o is. 54.9.

repetition of the leading idea of the former verse, the words seem to carry with them the implication of the existence of law and settled government, and that their prominent drift is to invest the magistrate with a divine warrant for inflicting capital punishment upon the wilful murderer. This will probably be still more evident from what follows.- -¶ By man shall his blood be shed. Chal. 'With witnesses by the sentence of the judges shall his blood be shed.' The welfare of society evidently requires that capital punishments should be inflicted, not by the stroke of private revenge, but by the arm of the authorized magistrate, and through the medium of a judicial sentence, Rom. 13. 1. This ordinance, therefore, may be considered as a virtual institution of magistracy, which perhaps affords us the most legitimate interpretation of the clause; 'for in the image of God made he man,' i. e. in the constitution of civil society, as emanating from the will of the Most High, men are to be appointed as the executive organs of the social body for the administration of justice; and a magistrate thus armed with authority bears a visible impress of the Divine image in the legal sovereignty with which he is invested. Still this sense need not exclude the usual construction, that a murderer obliterates the image of his Maker in the extinction of human life, and therefore deserves to die. This is in itself true, and may perhaps be intended to be taught in the genuine im-lowed to prevent the execution of the port of the verse, though the former is its more legitimate scope. It is indeed sometimes maintained that this sentence is to be understood, not as a precept authorizing capital punishments,

but merely as a prediction, intimating that the murderer will usually die a violent death. But such a consequence would follow the commission of this crime only as the result of the ordering of Divine Providence, and the course of Providence is but another name for the expression of the will of God; so that it virtually amounts to the same thing, whether we consider it as a prediction or a precept.—¶ For in the image of God made he man. In addition to what is said above, it may be well in this connection to remark that the celebrated Belgic commentator, Venema, has proposed the following rendering of these words, which he labours to support with great acuteness and ingenuity, viz. 'whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed, although in the image of God created he him;' i. e. the fact of his bearing the image of his Maker is to constitute no impediment in the way of the sentence of death being pronounced and executed upon the murderer. He supposes the words to be virtually a reply to the tacit objection, that inasmuch as the image of God is common to all men, and in all is to be held sacred and inviolable, therefore the putting to death a murderer was as real an invasion and extinction of this image as was the act of the culprit himself, and so was unlawful. But this scruple is directly met and removed in these words by the divine declaration, that this circumstance is not to be al

appointed sentence. That the literal rendering of the original will admit this construction there is no doubt, for we have already shown that such is the true import of the Heb. for in ch.

r

10 P And with every living | shall there any more be a flood to creature that is with you, of the destroy the earth. fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you, from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth.

8. 21, to which numerous other instances might be added. But still from a view of the whole context we prefer the interpretation given above, which makes the image of God here to consist in man's representing his Maker in the exercise of authority and the administration of justice.

12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant which 1 make between me and you, and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations.

13 I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.

r ch. 17. 11. 8 Rev. 4. 3.

to set their minds at rest on this score, gives Noah an assurance that he would never again destroy all his creatures with a flood, and this promise he has himself taught us to consider in the light of an oath. Is. 54. 9, 'For this is as the waters of Noah unto me; for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.' Thus also he deals with us in his Son. Being willing that the heirs of promise should have strong consolation, he confirms his word by an oath, Heb.

11. Neither shall there be any more a flood to destroy the earth. Heb. to corrupt. This has the air of being a mere repetition of what is said just before, but by referring to ch. 6. 13, it appears that there was a twofold threat ening, viz. against 'all flesh' and against 'the earth;' so here is a corresponding twofold promise.

9. 1 establish my covenant with you. Heb. berithi. A covenant, as remarked in the note on Gen. 6 18, usually signifies a mutual compact, but here, as occasionally elsewhere, it imports mainly a solemn promise. It is merely an amplification of what was said at the altar, where the Lord smel-6. 17, 18. led a sweet savour, and indeed the first seventeen verses of this chapter are a continuation of that subject. The goodness of God in this transaction is very remarkable. As man has no claims upon his Maker, he might have determined to exempt the world from the calamity of a second deluge, and yet not have acquainted them with his purpose. But he was pleased in this instance, as in many others, to lay himself under voluntary engagements with his creatures, that they might know how gracious he is, and be encouraged to serve him with more lively gratitude. Knowing that the severe judgment which he had inflicted upon the human race would, for a time at least, strike terror into succeeding generations, and perhaps deter them from cultivating the earth, he here, in order

12. This is the token of the covenant which I make, &c. Heb. 18 a sign. On the import of this word see note on Gen. 4. 15.—¶ Every living creature that is with you. Because the benefits of this covenant were to extend to all the animal creation, as well as to man, for whose sake they were created. Every living thing, not excepting even the meanest reptiles, was interested in it; so comprehensive is the beneficence of

Heaven. The phrase 'with you, х