TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Exodus 21:22–36. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Observe here,
I.The particular care which the law took of women with child, that no hurt should be done them which might occasion their mis-carrying.
The law of nature obliges us to be very tender in that case, lest the tree and fruit be destroyed together, Exo 21:22, Exo 21:23. Women with child, who are thus taken under the special protection of the law of God, if they live in his fear, may still believe themselves under the special protection of the providence of God, and hope that they shall be saved in child-bearing. On this occasion comes in that general law of retaliation which our Saviour refers to, Mat 5:38, An eye for an eye. Now,
1.The execution of this law is not hereby put into the hands of private persons, as if every man might avenge himself, which would introduce universal confusion, and make men like the fishes of the sea. The tradition of the elders seems to have put this corrupt gloss upon it, in opposition to which our Saviour commands us to forgive injuries, and not to meditate revenge, Mat 5:39.
2.God often executes it in the course of his providence, making the punishment, in many cases, to answer to the sin, as Jdg 1:7; Isa 33:1; Hab 2:13; Mat 26:52.
3.Magistrates ought to have an eye to this rule in punishing offenders, and doing right to those that are injured. Consideration must be had of the nature, quality, and degree of the wrong done, that reparation may be made to the party injured, and others deterred from doing the like; either an eye shall go for an eye, or the forfeited eye shall be redeemed by a sum of money. Note, He that does wrong must expect one way or other to receive according to the wrong he has done, Col 3:25. God sometimes brings men's violent dealings upon their own heads (Psa 7:16); and magistrates are in this the ministers of the justice, that they are avengers (Rom 13:4), and they shall not bear the sword in vain.
II.The care God took of servants.
If their masters maimed them, though it was only striking out a tooth, that should be their discharge, Exo 21:26, Exo 21:27. This was intended,
1.To prevent their being abused; masters would be careful not to offer them any violence, lest they should lose their service.
2.To comfort them if they were abused; the loss of a limb should be the gaining of their liberty, which would do something towards balancing both the pain and disgrace they underwent. Nay,
III.Does God take care for oxen? Yes, it appears by the following laws in this chapter that he does, for our sakes, Co1 9:9, Co1 9:10. The Israelites are here directed what to do,
1.In case of hurt done by oxen, or any other brute-creature; for the law, doubtless, was designed to extend to all parallel cases.
(1.)As an instance of God's care of the life of man (though forfeited a thousand times into the hands of divine justice), and in token of his detestation of the sin of murder. If an ox killed any man, woman, or child, the ox was to be stoned (Exo 21:28); and, because the greatest honour of the inferior creatures is to be serviceable to man, the criminal is denied that honour: his flesh shall not be eaten. Thus God would keep up in the minds of his people a rooted abhorrence of the sin of murder and every thing that was barbarous.
(2.)To make men careful that none of their cattle might do hurt, but that, by all means possible, mischief might be prevented. If the owner of the beast knew that he was mischievous, he must answer for the hurt done, and, according as the circumstances of the case proved him to be more or less accessory, he must either be put to death or ransom his life with a sum of money, Exo 21:29-32. Some of our ancient books make this felony, by the common law of England, and give this reason, "The owner, by suffering his beast to go at liberty when he knew it to be mischievous, shows that he was very willing that hurt should be done." Note, It is not enough for us not to do mischief ourselves, but we must take care that no mischief be done by those whom it is in our power to restrain, whether man or beast.
2.In case of hurt done to oxen, or other cattle.
(1.)If they fall into a pit, and perish there, he that opened the pit must make good the loss, Exo 21:33, Exo 21:34. Note, We must take heed not only of doing that which will be hurtful, but of doing that which may be so. It is not enough not to design and devise mischief, but we must contrive to prevent mischief, else we become accessory to our neighbours' damage. Mischief done in malice is the great transgression; but mischief done through negligence, and for want of due care and consideration, is not without fault, but ought to be reflected upon with great regret, according as the degree of the mischief is: especially we must be careful that we do nothing to make ourselves accessory to the sins of others, by laying an occasion of offence in our brother's way, Rom 14:13.
(2.)If cattle fight, and one kill another, the owners shall equally share in the loss, Exo 21:35. Only if the beast that had done the harm was known to the owner to have been mischievous he shall answer for the damage, because he ought either to have killed him or kept him up, Exo 21:36. The determinations of these cases carry with them the evidence of their own equity, and give such rules of justice as were then, and are still, in use, for the decision of similar controversies that arise between man and man. But I conjecture that these cases might be specified, rather than others (though some of them seem minute), because they were then cases in fact actually depending before Moses; for in the wilderness where they lay closely encamped, and had their flocks and herds among them, such mischiefs as these last mentioned were likely enough to occur. That which we are taught by these laws is that we should be very careful to do no wrong, either directly or indirectly; and that, if we have done wrong, we must be very willing to make satisfaction, and desirous that nobody may lose by us.
Continue studying Exodus 21:35 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Exodus 21:35 presents a specific civil statute within the Mosaic Law, addressing an accidental scenario where one man's ox causes the death of another's. This law mandates an equitable division of loss: the live, offending ox is to be sold, its monetary proceeds shared between both parties, and the carcass of the dead ox also divided. This meticulous regulation highlights God's concern for proportional justice, shared responsibility in unforeseen accidents, and the preservation of economic stability within the Israelite community, recognizing livestock as vital assets.
Context
Literary Context
Exodus 21:35 is nestled within the "Book of the Covenant" (Exodus 21:1-23:33), a foundational collection of casuistic laws delivered by God to Moses immediately following the Decalogue. This section meticulously details civil and criminal statutes designed to govern the daily life, property rights, and interpersonal relationships of the nascent Israelite nation. Specifically, this verse falls within a series of laws concerning damage caused by animals, particularly oxen. It is crucial to distinguish this statute from the preceding law concerning a goring ox that was "wont to push with his horn" (a known dangerous animal), as outlined in Exodus 21:28-32. While the latter imposes severe penalties due to the owner's negligence or prior knowledge of the animal's viciousness, Exodus 21:35 addresses an unforeseen, accidental incident, thereby prescribing a different, more equitable form of restitution that emphasizes shared misfortune rather than punitive liability. The progression of laws in Exodus 21 demonstrates a sophisticated legal framework distinguishing between intent, negligence, and accident.
Historical & Cultural Context
In ancient Israel, an agrarian society, livestock—especially oxen—represented substantial wealth, labor, and sustenance. Oxen were indispensable for plowing fields, threshing grain, and served as a source of meat and hides. The loss of an ox, whether through accident or theft, could devastate a family's livelihood and economic stability. Consequently, detailed laws governing animal ownership, responsibility for damage, and methods of restitution were vital for maintaining social order, preventing escalating feuds, and ensuring community cohesion. These laws reflect a highly developed legal system designed to ensure fairness and prevent undue hardship. The principle of shared loss in accidental death, rather than full compensation by the owner of the offending animal, demonstrates a nuanced understanding of culpability in a society where such accidents were likely common. This approach contrasts with some other ancient Near Eastern law codes (e.g., portions of the Code of Hammurabi) which sometimes imposed stricter liability, highlighting the distinctive ethical and communal framework of the Mosaic Law, which often prioritized restorative justice and the well-being of the community over strict punitive measures.
Key Themes
Exodus 21:35 contributes significantly to several key themes within the Book of the Covenant and the broader Pentateuch. Firstly, it underscores the theme of Divine Justice and Equity. God's law is presented as comprehensive and fair, addressing even seemingly minor property disputes with wisdom and impartiality. Secondly, it highlights the theme of Communal Responsibility and Shared Burden. In an accidental misfortune, the law prescribes a solution that distributes the loss, fostering a sense of mutual support rather than placing the entire burden on one party. This reflects a societal ideal where the community's well-being is prioritized. Thirdly, it speaks to the theme of Economic Stability and Preservation of Livelihood. By providing clear guidelines for restitution that prevent total ruin for either party, the law protects the economic foundations of Israelite families, recognizing the vital role of livestock. This concern for practical, everyday justice is a hallmark of God's covenant relationship with His people, ensuring that even the most mundane aspects of life are governed by divine principles, as seen in the repeated emphasis on impartial judgment throughout the Torah, such as in Deuteronomy 16:18-20.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This verb (H5062) means "to strike," "to smite," or "to wound," often implying a forceful, injurious blow. In this context, it specifically refers to a fatal injury inflicted by one ox upon another. The use of nagaph here emphasizes the accidental or unforeseen nature of the encounter, distinguishing it from intentional harm or a pre-existing condition of viciousness. It denotes a calamitous event that occurred without prior warning or negligence, setting the stage for a specific type of legal resolution.
This adjective (H2416) means "alive" or "living." In the context of "the live ox," it specifies the offending animal that survived the encounter. The fact that this ox is still alive is crucial, as its continued existence allows for its sale and the subsequent division of its value, which forms the core of the prescribed restitution. This word highlights the practical, economic aspect of the solution, focusing on the tangible asset that remains.
This primitive root (H2673) means "to cut or split in two" or "to halve." The repeated command to "divide" (both the money from the live ox and the dead ox itself) is central to the prescribed resolution. It signifies a principle of mutual burden-bearing and equitable sharing of loss in an accidental misfortune. This concept ensures that neither party is completely ruined by an event that was not due to clear negligence or malicious intent, embodying the balanced justice inherent in the Book of the Covenant.
Verse Breakdown
"And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die;"
This initial clause establishes the precise scenario for which the law applies: an accidental, fatal injury inflicted by one ox upon another. The phrasing implies an unforeseen event, not a situation where the offending ox was known to be dangerous or where its owner was negligent. The focus is on the outcome—the death of the animal—as the trigger for the prescribed legal action, clearly delineating the scope of this particular statute.
"then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money of it;"
This outlines the primary remedy. The offending ox, which survived the incident, is to be sold. The proceeds from its sale are then to be equally divided between the owner of the live ox and the owner of the dead ox. This mechanism ensures that both parties share in the financial loss, reflecting the accidental nature of the incident and preventing one party from bearing the entire burden. It is a pragmatic and equitable solution for restitution in a society where such assets were critical.
"and the dead [ox] also they shall divide."
This final clause further emphasizes the principle of shared loss and meticulous fairness. Even the carcass of the dead ox, which would still possess some value (e.g., for hide, or possibly limited meat, though ritual purity laws would apply), is to be divided between the two parties. This reinforces the idea that the misfortune is a shared one, and any residual value or burden associated with the incident is to be equitably distributed, demonstrating the comprehensive nature of the Mosaic law in ensuring balanced justice.
Literary Devices
The primary literary device at play in Exodus 21:35 is Casuistic Law. This form of legal expression, prevalent in ancient Near Eastern legal codes, is characterized by its "if...then..." structure. It presents a specific case or scenario ("And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die") and then prescribes the precise legal consequence or resolution ("then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money of it; and the dead [ox] also they shall divide"). This case-by-case approach provides clear, unambiguous guidelines for judicial decisions and dispute resolution, ensuring consistency, predictability, and fairness within the legal system. The verse also employs Repetition of the concept of "divide," emphasizing the central principle of shared loss and equitable distribution of both the burden and any residual value. This repetition reinforces the divine commitment to balanced justice and communal harmony, even in accidental circumstances.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Exodus 21:35 profoundly illustrates God's meticulous concern for justice, equity, and the practical well-being of His people, even extending to the mundane details of property law. It teaches that even in accidental circumstances, there is a degree of shared responsibility and a need for fair resolution to prevent undue hardship and maintain communal harmony. This law, by prescribing an equitable division of loss rather than full liability, underscores a nuanced understanding of culpability, distinguishing clearly between negligence and unforeseen accidents. It reflects a divine emphasis on restorative justice, aiming to mitigate the impact of misfortune on both parties and preserve the economic stability of the Israelite family unit, where livestock was often their primary capital. This principle of balanced justice, where both parties bear a portion of an accidental burden, serves to foster a more compassionate and cohesive community, reflecting the character of a God who is just in all His ways.
Reflection and Application
While the specific scenario of oxen goring each other may seem remote to modern life, the underlying principles of Exodus 21:35 remain profoundly relevant for navigating conflicts and responsibilities in contemporary society. This law compels us to consider our accountability for the impact of our possessions or actions, even when harm is unintended. It calls for a spirit of fairness and a willingness to share burdens in accidental misfortunes, rather than seeking to place blame entirely on one party. In a world often driven by litigation, individualistic pursuits, and a desire to avoid any responsibility, this ancient statute reminds us of the communal imperative to seek equitable resolutions that promote healing and preserve relationships, rather than exacerbating division. It encourages us to cultivate a mindset of empathy, practical wisdom, and a commitment to balanced justice in resolving disputes, reflecting God's own character of righteousness and mercy. This principle can be applied to various modern contexts, from car accidents to business partnerships, urging us towards solutions that acknowledge shared humanity and mitigate total loss for any single party.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
How does Exodus 21:35 differ from the law concerning a goring ox in Exodus 21:28-32?
The fundamental distinction lies in the owner's prior knowledge and negligence. Exodus 21:28-32 addresses a scenario where an ox was "wont to push with his horn in time past," meaning its owner knew it was dangerous but failed to take adequate measures to restrain it. If such an ox killed a person, the ox was to be stoned, and the owner could face the death penalty or pay a substantial ransom, indicating severe culpability due to negligence. Exodus 21:35, conversely, deals with an accidental death where there was no prior knowledge of the ox's viciousness. It's an unforeseen misfortune, leading to a shared financial burden rather than punitive measures, highlighting the Mosaic Law's nuanced approach to culpability.
Why did they have to sell the live ox and divide the money, as well as the dead ox? Why not just have the owner of the live ox pay compensation?
This specific method of restitution—selling the live ox and dividing its proceeds, along with the carcass of the dead ox—emphasizes the principle of shared loss in an accidental event. If the owner of the live ox had to pay full compensation for an unforeseen accident, it might impose an undue and potentially ruinous burden, especially in an agrarian society where an ox was a primary asset. By sharing the value of the live ox and the dead ox, the law ensured that neither party was completely ruined by the misfortune. It reflects a balanced approach to justice, acknowledging that while one's property caused harm, the incident was not due to negligence, thus promoting fairness and economic stability for both households. This pragmatic solution is consistent with the broader emphasis on communal well-being found throughout Exodus 21.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
While Exodus 21:35 is a civil law governing property damage in ancient Israel, its underlying principles of justice, equity, and shared burden find profound resonance and ultimate fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ. The law's careful distinction between accidental harm and culpable negligence points to God's perfect justice, which is fully embodied in Christ, who "committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth" (1 Peter 2:22). Furthermore, the concept of shared loss, where both parties bear a portion of the burden, foreshadows the radical solidarity of Christ, who, though innocent, bore the full weight of humanity's sin—both our intentional transgressions and the unintended consequences of a fallen world. He became the ultimate "live ox" sold, not for money, but for the redemption of humanity, dividing the spoils of victory over sin and death with those who believe (Colossians 2:14-15). Through His atoning sacrifice on the cross, Jesus takes upon Himself the "hurt" of our brokenness, reconciling us to God and to one another, offering a perfect, divine "restitution" that far surpasses any earthly legal code (2 Corinthians 5:18-19). He is the one who perfectly fulfills the law's demand for justice while simultaneously extending grace, ensuring that the ultimate burden of our spiritual "death" is borne by Him, leading to our eternal life and reconciliation with God (Romans 5:8).