Deuteronomy · Chapter 21

V. 1. The field-Or, in the city, or any place: only the field is named, as the place where such murders are most commonly committed.

Verses 1-3. Lying in the field — Or, in the city, or any place: only the field is named as the place where such murders are most commonly committed. Thy elders and judges — Those of thy elders who are judges: the judges or rulers of all the neighbouring cities. Measure — Unless it be evident which city is nearest; for then measuring was superfluous. Which hath not drawn in the yoke — A fit representation of the murderer, in whose stead it was killed, who would not bear the yoke of God’s laws. A type also of Christ, who was under no yoke but what he had voluntarily taken upon himself.

V. 2. Thy elders and judges-Those of thy elders who are judges: the judges or rulers of all the neighbouring cities. Measure-Unless it be evident which city is nearest; for then measuring was superfluous.

Verses 1-3. Lying in the field — Or, in the city, or any place: only the field is named as the place where such murders are most commonly committed. Thy elders and judges — Those of thy elders who are judges: the judges or rulers of all the neighbouring cities. Measure — Unless it be evident which city is nearest; for then measuring was superfluous. Which hath not drawn in the yoke — A fit representation of the murderer, in whose stead it was killed, who would not bear the yoke of God’s laws. A type also of Christ, who was under no yoke but what he had voluntarily taken upon himself.

2. Thy elders and thy judges shall come forth — These are understood to be the elders and judges of the adjacent places. The elders represented the people, the judges the magistracy. It was their first duty to find which city was nearest to the corpse that had been found.

V. 3. Which hath not drawn in the yoke-A fit representative of the murderer, in whose stead it was killed, who would not bear the yoke of God’s laws. A type also of Christ, who was under the yoke, but what he had voluntarily taken upon himself.

Verses 1-3. Lying in the field — Or, in the city, or any place: only the field is named as the place where such murders are most commonly committed. Thy elders and judges — Those of thy elders who are judges: the judges or rulers of all the neighbouring cities. Measure — Unless it be evident which city is nearest; for then measuring was superfluous. Which hath not drawn in the yoke — A fit representation of the murderer, in whose stead it was killed, who would not bear the yoke of God’s laws. A type also of Christ, who was under no yoke but what he had voluntarily taken upon himself.

3. The city which is next unto the slain man — The nearest city was to expiate the bloodguiltiness. A heifer, which hath not been wrought with — The victim that was to be immolated must be one that had never been applied to common use. Comp. Exodus 20:25; Numbers 19:2. Among the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans such a victim was deemed more suitable for sacrifice.

V. 4. A rough valley-That such a desert and horrid place might beget an horror of murder and of the murderer. Strike off the neck-To shew what they would and should have done to the murderer if they had found him.

Verse 4. Shall bring down the heifer unto a rough valley] איתנ נחל nachal eythan might be translated a rapid stream, probably passing through a piece of uncultivated ground where the elders of the city were to strike off the head of the heifer, and to wash their hands over her in token of their innocence. The spot of ground on which this sacrifice was made must be uncultivated, because it was considered to be a sacrifice to make atonement for the murder, and consequently would pollute the land. This regulation was calculated to keep murder in abhorrence, and to make the magistrates alert in their office, that delinquents might be discovered and punished, and thus public expense saved.

Verse 4. Unto a rough valley — The Hebrew word ljn, nachal, here used, signifies either a valley or a torrent; and most probably is here meant of a valley with a brook running through it. For (verse 6) the elders are required to wash their hands over the heifer, which seems to intimate that there was running water in the place. Which is neither eared nor sown — Rough, uncultivated ground, fitly representing the horribleness of the murder. The Jews say, that unless, after this, the murderer was found, this valley was never to be tilled nor sown, which made the owners of the ground employ their utmost diligence to find out the murderer, that their land might not be waste for ever. But it is more natural to suppose, that such a rough and waste place was chosen partly that the horridness of it might beget a horror of the murder, and of the murderer, and partly because the blood of the victim would have polluted cultivated ground. For, though not slain at the altar, this was a kind of expiatory sacrifice, whereby the land was to be purged from the legal pollution contracted by the murder; and such sacrifices rendered every person or thing unclean that touched them. Shall strike off the heifer’s neck — To show what they should and would have done to the murderer, if they had found him.

Verse 4. A rough valley. The guilt being transferred to the heifer, the slaying it in a cultivated field would have polluted the ground. The Hebrew altar allowed of no victim to be offered there, when the law sentenced it to die. How blasphemous then is the Irish priest, who hears a confession of murder, and for five shillings conceals the sin!

4. A rough valley — The Hebrew term which is here rendered valley also means a stream, and many critics have rendered the expression a perennial stream. Neither eared nor sown — Eared is the old term for ploughed. The heifer was to be brought to a valley through which flowed a perennial stream, a valley that had never been cultivated, and here be slain. This putting to death of the heifer was not, properly speaking, expiatory. It was symbolical, and calculated to impress upon the people the sacredness of human life.

V. 5. Every controversy-Of this kind: every controversy which shall rise about any stroke, whether such a mortal stroke as is here spoken of, or any other stroke or wound given by one man to another.

Verses 5, 6. By their word shall every controversy be tried — That is, every one of this kind, every one that shall arise about any stroke, whether such a mortal stroke as is here spoken of, or any other, or wound given by one man to another. In these matters they shall give sentence, being consulted by the elders or judges of the cities, Deuteronomy 17:9-12. The elders shall wash their hands — Protesting their innocence, says a learned Jewish writer, (Chazkuni,) in these words: “As our hands are now clean, so are we innocent of the blood which has been shed.” See an allusion to this, Psalm 26:6; Matthew 27:24.

5. And the priests… shall come near — The priests were not to take part in the matter, but were present to see that all things were done in accordance with law.

Verse 6. Shall wash their hands over the heifer] Washing the hands, in reference to such a subject as this, was a rite anciently used to signify that the persons thus washing were innocent of the crime in question. It was probably from the Jews that Pilate learned this symbolical method of expressing his innocence.

Verses 5, 6. By their word shall every controversy be tried — That is, every one of this kind, every one that shall arise about any stroke, whether such a mortal stroke as is here spoken of, or any other, or wound given by one man to another. In these matters they shall give sentence, being consulted by the elders or judges of the cities, Deuteronomy 17:9-12. The elders shall wash their hands — Protesting their innocence, says a learned Jewish writer, (Chazkuni,) in these words: “As our hands are now clean, so are we innocent of the blood which has been shed.” See an allusion to this, Psalm 26:6; Matthew 27:24.

Ver. 6, 7. All the elders shall wash their hands, and say, Our hands have not shed this blood. The custom of ablution after the shedding of blood seems to have been universal in former ages. See on Genesis 31:19. If a heathen had slain a robber, he purified himself before he entered a temple.

6-8. The elders… shall wash their hands — The elders were to wash their hands over the slain heifer, to indicate that the guilt of the blood of the murdered man was not to rest upon the place they represented. DIRECTIONS RESPECTING FEMALE WAR-CAPTIVES, 10-14.

The directions that follow must refer to captives that might be taken in war with the neighbouring nations after the Canaanites have been extirpated. The law was designed for the protection of the female captive, and was far in advance of the usages of the other nations of antiquity.

V. 7. They shall answer-To the priests who shall examine them. This blood-This about which the present enquiry is made: or this which is here present: for it is thought the corps of the slain man was brought into the same place where the heifer was slain. Nor have we seen or understood how or by whom this was done.

Verses 7, 8. They shall answer — To the priests who shall examine them. This blood — This about which the present inquiry is made; or this which is here present: for it is thought the corpse of the slain man was brought into the same place where the heifer was slain. Nor have we seen or understood how or by whom this was done. Forgiven — Though there was no moral guilt in this people, yet there was a ceremonial uncleanness in the land, which was to be expiated and forgiven.

Ver. 6, 7. All the elders shall wash their hands, and say, Our hands have not shed this blood. The custom of ablution after the shedding of blood seems to have been universal in former ages. See on Genesis 31:19. If a heathen had slain a robber, he purified himself before he entered a temple.

6-8. The elders… shall wash their hands — The elders were to wash their hands over the slain heifer, to indicate that the guilt of the blood of the murdered man was not to rest upon the place they represented. DIRECTIONS RESPECTING FEMALE WAR-CAPTIVES, 10-14.

The directions that follow must refer to captives that might be taken in war with the neighbouring nations after the Canaanites have been extirpated. The law was designed for the protection of the female captive, and was far in advance of the usages of the other nations of antiquity.

V. 8. Forgiven-Though there was no mortal guilt in this people, yet there was a ceremonial uncleanness in the land, which was to be expiated and forgiven.

Verses 7, 8. They shall answer — To the priests who shall examine them. This blood — This about which the present inquiry is made; or this which is here present: for it is thought the corpse of the slain man was brought into the same place where the heifer was slain. Nor have we seen or understood how or by whom this was done. Forgiven — Though there was no moral guilt in this people, yet there was a ceremonial uncleanness in the land, which was to be expiated and forgiven.

6-8. The elders… shall wash their hands — The elders were to wash their hands over the slain heifer, to indicate that the guilt of the blood of the murdered man was not to rest upon the place they represented. DIRECTIONS RESPECTING FEMALE WAR-CAPTIVES, 10-14.

The directions that follow must refer to captives that might be taken in war with the neighbouring nations after the Canaanites have been extirpated. The law was designed for the protection of the female captive, and was far in advance of the usages of the other nations of antiquity.

Verse 9. So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood — Till this was done, the guilt was to be looked upon as national; but upon this being solemnly performed, the government was deemed to have done its duty, and the nation cleared of all guilt in this matter. No doubt the chief end of the appointment of this ceremony was to beget and preserve in the minds of men an abhorrence of murder, and a care to prevent or detect it.

V. 10. Enemies-Of other nations, but not of the Canaanites.

V. 11. Hast a desire unto her-Or, hast taken delight in her: which may be a modest expression for lying with her, and seems probable, because it is said, Deuteronomy 21:14, that he had humbled her. And here seem to be two cases supposed, and direction given what to do in both of them, 1. that he did desire to marry her, of which he speaks, Deuteronomy 21:11-13. 2. that he did not desire this, of which he speaks, Deuteronomy 21:14.

Verse 11. And seest-a beautiful woman] No forcible possession was allowed even in this case, when the woman was taken in war, and was, by the general consent of ancient nations, adjudged as a part of the spoils. The person to whose lot or share such a woman as is here described fell, might, if he chose, have her for a wife on certain conditions; but he was not permitted to use her under any inferior character.

Verse 11. And hast a desire unto her — Moses here returning to the case of war with the neighbouring nations, directs that, if a Hebrew soldier conceived a peculiar regard for a captive woman, and desired to marry her, he must not do it immediately after she became his prisoner, it being of dangerous consequence for the Israelites to marry Gentile wives. He was first to keep the woman in his house for a month, at least, where she was to live in the retirement and habit of a mourner, for the loss of her parents and her country; as also to give her time to be instructed in the knowledge of the true God and his will, and renounce her idolatrous worship, and to allow him sufficient space to try whether his affection for her was calm and steady, or might cool and wear off. If this interval caused no abatement of his love, but, upon her turning proselyte, he still desired to make her his wife, he might then lawfully do it.

Ver. 11. Seest among the captives a beautiful woman—that thou wouldst have for a wife. Moses did not allow her to be touched, without first being lawfully married at a fixed time: and though he allowed of divorce, and of having two wives, ver. 15, it was merely Lex custorum, the law of customs, and nowhere a divine injunction. Divorces, except for adultery, proceeded from “the hardness of their hearts.”

V. 12. She shall shave her head-In token of her renouncing her heathenish idolatry and superstition, and of her becoming a new woman, and embracing the true religion.

Verse 12. She shall shave her head] This was in token of her renouncing her religion, and becoming a proselyte to that of the Jews. This is still a custom in the East; when a Christian turns Mohammedan his head is shaven, and he is carried through the city crying, [Arabic] la alahila allah we Mohammed resooli Allah; “There is no God but God, and Mohammed is the prophet of God.”

Pare her nails] hynrpx ta htc[w veasethah eth tsipporneyha, “she shall make her nails.” Now whether this signifies paring or letting them grow, is greatly doubted among learned men. Possibly it means neither, but colouring the nails, staining them red with the hennah, which is much practised in India to the present day, and which was undoubtedly practised among the ancient Egyptians, as is evident from the nails of mummies which are found thus stained. The hennah, according to Hasselquist, grows in India, and in Upper and Lower Egypt; it flowers from May to August. The manner of using it is this: the leaves are powdered, and made into a paste with water: they bind this paste on the nails of their fingers and toes, and let it stand on all night; in the morning they are found to be of a beautiful reddish yellow, and this lasts three weeks or a month, after which they renew the application. They often stain the palms of their hands and the soles of their feet in the same way, as appears from many paintings of eastern ladies done in India and Persia, which now lie before me. This staining the soles of the feet with the hennah is probably meant in 2 Samuel 19:24: Mephibosheth had not dressed (literally made) his feet-they had not been thus coloured.

Verses 12, 13. She shall shave her head — This was one of the external signs of mourning, Leviticus 19:27, and 21:5. Shall pare her nails — This also seems to have been done in mourning. In the original it is, Shall make her nails, which may be understood of letting her nails grow, which to us seems more suitable to a state of mourning. But this is to be resolved entirely into the fashion of countries. Poole thinks that both of these things were rather to be done in token of her renouncing her heathenish idolatry and superstition, and of her becoming a new woman, and embracing the true religion. She shall put the raiment of her captivity off from her — That is, as the French renders the words more clearly, the raiment which she wore when she was taken captive. Instead of the fine clothes wherein she had been taken captive, she was to put on sordid apparel, which was the habit of mourners. And shall bewail her father and her mother — Either their death, or, which was in effect the same, her final separation from them, being now to forget all her former relations.

12. She shall shave her head, and pare her nails — These were signs of purification to be understood, as Keil expresses it, as “symbols of her passing out of the state of a slave and her reception into the fellowship of the covenant nation.” Comp. Leviticus 14:8; Numbers 8:7.

V. 13. Raiment of captivity-Those sordid raiments which were put upon her when she was taken captive. Bewail her father and mother-Either their death, or which was in effect the same, her final separation from them.

Verses 12, 13. She shall shave her head — This was one of the external signs of mourning, Leviticus 19:27, and 21:5. Shall pare her nails — This also seems to have been done in mourning. In the original it is, Shall make her nails, which may be understood of letting her nails grow, which to us seems more suitable to a state of mourning. But this is to be resolved entirely into the fashion of countries. Poole thinks that both of these things were rather to be done in token of her renouncing her heathenish idolatry and superstition, and of her becoming a new woman, and embracing the true religion. She shall put the raiment of her captivity off from her — That is, as the French renders the words more clearly, the raiment which she wore when she was taken captive. Instead of the fine clothes wherein she had been taken captive, she was to put on sordid apparel, which was the habit of mourners. And shall bewail her father and her mother — Either their death, or, which was in effect the same, her final separation from them, being now to forget all her former relations.

V. 14. If thou have no delight in her-If thou dost not chuse to marry her. Thou shalt not make merchandise of her-Make gain of her, either by using her to thy own servile works, or by prostituting her to the lusts or to the service of others.

Verse 14. If thou have no delight in her — The sense may either be, 1st, If, after he had afflicted her, by making her shave her head, change her garments, &c., and keeping her a full month in hope of marriage, he should change his mind and refuse to marry her: or, 2d, If, after he had married her, and she had been his wife some time, he should conceive a dislike to her, and resolve to part with her; in either of these cases it was not to be in his power to use her as a prisoner of war, by either selling her for money, or making her a slave, but he was to give her her liberty, and let her dispose or herself as she pleased. “The wisdom and humanity of Moses,” says Philo, “are very remarkable in this law, whereby the soldiers are forbidden to indulge a hasty and brutal passion, are kept a whole month in abstinence, and thereby have an opportunity given them of knowing the temper and disposition of the woman, for whose misfortune in captivity a compassionate provision is made, by allowing her so long a time of separation and mourning.”

14. Thou shalt not make merchandise of her — Better translated, thou shalt not lay hands upon her — that is, to treat her as a slave.

V. 15. Two wives-This practice, though tolerated, is not hereby made lawful; but only provision is made for the children in this case. Hated-Comparatively, that is, less loved.

Verse 15. One beloved, and another hated] That is, one loved less than the other. This is the true notion of the word hate in Scripture. So Jacob HATED Leah, that is, he loved her less than he did Rachel; and Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I HATED, that is, I have shown a more particular affection to the posterity of Jacob than I have to the posterity of Esau. See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 29:31”. From this verse we see that polygamy did exist under the Mosaic laws, and that it was put under certain regulations; but it was not enjoined, Moses merely suffered it, because of the hardness of their hearts, as our Lord justly remarks Matthew 19:8.

Verse 15. If a man have two wives — This practice, though tolerated, is not hereby made lawful; but only provision is made for the children in that case. Hated — Comparatively, that is, less loved.

THE RIGHT OF THE FIRSTBORN, 15-17.

Moses did not institute the right of primogeniture. He here lays down a direction to prevent the abuse of the father’s authority in favour of the son of a favourite wife.

15. Hated — The less beloved. Comp. Genesis 29:31, 33, where the same term is applied to Leah.

THE RIGHT OF THE FIRSTBORN, 15-17.

Moses did not institute the right of primogeniture. He here lays down a direction to prevent the abuse of the father’s authority in favour of the son of a favourite wife.

15. Hated — The less beloved. Comp. Genesis 29:31, 33, where the same term is applied to Leah.

THE RIGHT OF THE FIRSTBORN, 15-17.

Moses did not institute the right of primogeniture. He here lays down a direction to prevent the abuse of the father’s authority in favour of the son of a favourite wife.

15. Hated — The less beloved. Comp. Genesis 29:31, 33, where the same term is applied to Leah.

Verses 18. - 21. The stubborn, rebellious, gluttonous, and drunken son is to be stoned to death.-This law, severe as it may seem, must have acted as a powerful preventive of crime. If such a law were in force now, and duly executed, how many deaths of disobedient and profligate children would there be in all corners of the land!

THE PUNISHMENT OF AN INCORRIGIBLE SON, 18-21.

18. A stubborn and rebellious son — The directions given are intended to assert and also limit the authority of the parents. If the son was refractory — no longer obedient — provision was made for his punishment. From our point of view the law seems severe. But it must be borne in mind that in some ancient nations the power over the life of the child was absolutely in the father’s hand. Moses provides that both parents should consent to the infliction of the penalty, the matter having first been brought before the whole community. In the Gemara, Rabbi Simon is represented as saving that the law concerning a stubborn and rebellious son has never been, and never can be, practically applied.

V. 19. His father and mother-The consent of both is required to prevent the abuse of this law to cruelty. And it cannot reasonably be supposed that both would agree without the son’s abominable and incorrigible wickedness, in which case it seems a righteous law, because the crime of rebellion against his own parents did so fully signify what a pernicious member he would be in the commonwealth of Israel, who had dissolved all his natural obligations. Unto the elders-Which was a sufficient caution to preserve children from the malice of any hard-hearted parents, because these elders were first to examine the cause with all exactness, and then to pronounce the sentence.

Verses 18. - 21. The stubborn, rebellious, gluttonous, and drunken son is to be stoned to death.-This law, severe as it may seem, must have acted as a powerful preventive of crime. If such a law were in force now, and duly executed, how many deaths of disobedient and profligate children would there be in all corners of the land!

Verse 19. His father and mother — The consent of both is required, to prevent the abuse of this law to cruelty. And it cannot reasonably be supposed that both would agree without the son’s abominable and incorrigible wickedness, in which case it seems a righteous law, because the crime of rebellion against his own parents did so fully signify what a pernicious member he would be in the commonwealth of Israel, who had dissolved all his natural obligations. Unto the elders — Which was a sufficient caution to preserve children from the malice of any hard-hearted parents, because these elders were first to examine the cause with all exactness, and then to pronounce the sentence.

19. Bring him out unto the elders of his city — The elders are the representatives of the whole community, and are to act as magistrates. Unto the gate of his place — The gate of the Eastern city was the place for the transaction of business and for the administration of justice.

V. 20. A glutton and a drunkard-Under which two offences others of a like or worse nature are comprehended.

Verses 18. - 21. The stubborn, rebellious, gluttonous, and drunken son is to be stoned to death.-This law, severe as it may seem, must have acted as a powerful preventive of crime. If such a law were in force now, and duly executed, how many deaths of disobedient and profligate children would there be in all corners of the land!

Verse 20. A glutton and a drunkard — Under which two offences others of a like or worse nature are comprehended.

THE PUNISHMENT OF AN INCORRIGIBLE SON, 18-21.

18. A stubborn and rebellious son — The directions given are intended to assert and also limit the authority of the parents. If the son was refractory — no longer obedient — provision was made for his punishment. From our point of view the law seems severe. But it must be borne in mind that in some ancient nations the power over the life of the child was absolutely in the father’s hand. Moses provides that both parents should consent to the infliction of the penalty, the matter having first been brought before the whole community. In the Gemara, Rabbi Simon is represented as saving that the law concerning a stubborn and rebellious son has never been, and never can be, practically applied.

Verses 18. - 21. The stubborn, rebellious, gluttonous, and drunken son is to be stoned to death.-This law, severe as it may seem, must have acted as a powerful preventive of crime. If such a law were in force now, and duly executed, how many deaths of disobedient and profligate children would there be in all corners of the land!

Ver. 21. All the men of the city shall stone him. Thousands of parents, yea cities and nations, would have survived, if guilty sons, committing crimes worthy of death, had been stoned. The rape of Helen, as that of the Levite’s concubine, and other crimes, which slowly murder parents, ought in common justice to have been punished with death. It proved very tragic when Eli spared his sons, and David his Amnon.

21. All the men of his city shall stone him — Only the whole community could inflict the penalty of death. The law was much more merciful in its provisions than the usages of most of the ancient nations.

V. 22. On a tree-Which was done after the malefactor was put to death some other way, this publick shame being added to his former punishment.

Verse 22. On a tree — Which was done after the malefactor was put to death some other way; this public shame being added to his former punishment.

22. If a man… be put to death — Capital punishment among the Hebrews was usually inflicted by stoning. See Exodus 17:4; Deuteronomy 13:10; John 10:31; Acts 14:5. Burning, in early times, was the punishment for unchastity. Genesis 38:24. In Leviticus 21:9, it is made the penalty for this sin in the case of a priest’s daughter. It was also the punishment for incest. Death by the sword or spear is mentioned in Exodus 19:13; 32:27; Numbers 25:7, 8. According to the rabbins strangling was the most common method of capital punishment. Hang him on a tree — That is, after he has been put to death his body is to be ignominiously exposed to public view.

V. 23. He is accursed of God-He is in a singular manner cursed and punished by God’s appointment with a most shameful kind of punishment, as this was held among the Jews and all nations; and therefore this punishment may suffice for him, and there shall not be added to it that of lying unburied. And this curse is here appropriated to those that are hanged, to so signify that Christ should undergo this execrable punishment, and be made a curse for us, Galatians 3:13, which though it was to come in respect to men, yet was present unto God. Defiled-Either by inhumanity towards the dead: or by suffering the monument of the man’s wickedness, and of God’s curse, to remain publick a longer time than God would have it, whereas it should be put out of sight, and buried in oblivion.

Verse 23. His body shall not remain all night upon the tree] Its exposure for the space of one day was judged sufficient. The law which required this answered all the ends of public justice, exposed the shame and infamy of the conduct, but did not put to torture the feelings of humanity by requiring a perpetual exhibition of a human being, a slow prey to the most loathsome process of putrefaction. Did ever the spiking of the heads of state criminals prevent high treason? or the gibbeting of a thief or a murderer, prevent either murder or robbery? These questions may be safely answered in the negative; and the remains of the ancient barbarism which requires these disgusting and abominable exhibitions, and which are deplored by every feeling heart, should be banished with all possible speed. In the case given in the text, God considers the land as defiled while the body of the executed criminal lay exposed, hence it was enjoined, Thou shalt in any wise bury him that day.

For he that is hanged is accursed of God] That is, he has forfeited his life to the law; for it is written, Cursed is every one who continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them; and on his body, in the execution of the sentence of the law, the curse was considered as alighting; hence the necessity of removing the accursed thing out of sight. How excellent are all these laws! How wondrously well calculated to repress crimes by showing the enormity of sin! It is worthy of remark that in the infliction of punishment prescribed by the Mosaic law, we ever find that Mercy walks hand in hand with Judgment.

DEUTERONOMY

Verse 23. He is accursed of God — He is in a singular manner cursed and punished by God’s appointment with a most shameful kind of punishment, as this was held among the Jews and all nations; and therefore this punishment may suffice for him, and there shall not be added to it that of lying unburied. And this curse is here appropriated to those that are hanged, to signify beforehand that Christ should undergo this execrable punishment, and be made a curse for us, (Galatians 3:13,) which, though it was future in respect to men, yet was present unto God. Defiled — Either by inhumanity toward the dead, or by suffering the monument of the man’s wickedness, and of God’s curse, to remain public a longer time than God would have it; whereas, it ought to be put out of sight, and buried in oblivion.

23. His body shall not remain all night upon the tree — The exposed dead body defiled the land. Comp. Joshua 8:29; 10:26. For he that is hanged is accursed of God — The translation given in the version is the one most generally accepted. The Jewish commentators have rendered it: “He that is hanged is a curse to God — that is, an insult or mockery.” We prefer the former. The whole passage would be equivalent to this: “Let not the body hang on the tree after sunset, for the hanging body of a malefactor defiles the land, since the curse of God rests upon it.” For the application of the passage, “He that is hanged is accursed of God,” to Jesus Christ, see Galatians 3:13.