1 If there be a controversy between men, and they come to judgment, and (the judges) judge them; then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked;
*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.
Inasmuch as moderation and humanity are here enjoined, it is a Supplement of the Sixth Commandment. The sum is, that, if any one is judicially condemned to be beaten with stripes, the chastisement should not be excessive. The question, however, is as to a punishment, which by lawyers is called a moderate correction, and which ought to be such, as that the body torn by the whip should not be maimed or disfigured. Since, therefore, God has so far spared the guilty, as to repress even just severity, much more would He have regard paid to innocent blood; and since He prohibits the judge from using too great rigor, much less will He tolerate the violence of a private individual, if he shall employ it against his brother. But it was necessary that zeal should be thus restrained, because judges, in other respects not unjust, are often as severe against lesser offenses (delicta) as against crimes. An equal measure of punishment is not indeed prescribed, as if all were to be beaten alike; it is only prohibited that the judges should order more than forty stripes in all to be inflicted for an offense. Thus the culprits were beaten deliberately, and not in such an indiscriminate manner as when it was not requisite to count the stripes; besides, they were not so injured for the future as to be deprived of the use of any of their limbs. With the same intent God would have the judges themselves to be present, that by their authority they may prevent any excess: and the reason is added, lest "thy brother should seem vile unto thee," because he had been beaten immoderately. This may be explained in two ways, either, lest his body should be disfigured by the blows, and so he should be rendered unsightly; or, lest, being stained for ever with ignominy and disgrace, he should be discouraged in mind; for we know how grievous and bitter it is to be mocked and insulted. A third sense, [1] which some prefer, is too far-fetched, viz., lest he should die like some vile and contemptible beast; for God only provides that the wretched man should be improved by his chastisement, and not that he should grow callous from his infamy. As the Jews were always ostentatious of their zeal in trifling matters, they invented a childish precaution, in order that they might more strictly observe this law; for they were scrupulous in not proceeding to the fortieth stripe, but, by deducting one, they sought after an empty reputation for clemency, as if they were wiser than God Himself, and superior to Him in kindness. Into such folly do men fall, when they dare out of their own heads to invent anything in opposition to God's word! This superstition already prevailed in Paul's time, as we gather from his words, where he reports that "five times he received forty stripes save one." (2-Corinthians 11:24.)
1 - This exposition is attributed to Vatablus in Poole's Synopsis.
Render it:
(1) If there be a controversy between men, and they come to judgment, and the judges judge them, and justify the righteous and condemn the wicked (compare the marginal reference. and Exodus 23:7; Proverbs 17:15);
(2) then it shall be, etc.
They shall justify the righteous - This is a very important passage, and is a key to several others. The word צדק tsadak is used here precisely in the same sense in which St. Paul sometimes uses the corresponding word δικαιοω, not to justify or make just, but to acquit, declare innocent, to remit punishment, or give reasons why such a one should not be punished; so here the magistrates הצדיקו hitsdiku, shall acquit, the righteous - declare him innocent, because he is found to be righteous and not wicked: so the Septuagint: και δικαιωσουσιν τον δικαιον they shall make righteous the righteous - declare him free from blame, not liable to punishment, acquitted; using the same word with St. Paul when he speaks of a sinner's justification, i. e., his acquittance from blame and punishment, because of the death of Christ in his stead.
If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, (a) that [the judges] may judge them; then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked.
(a) Whether there is a plaintiff or not, the magistrates should try our faults, and punish according to the crime.
If there be a controversy between men,.... Between two or more:
and they come unto judgment; into a court of judicature, bring their cause thither:
that the judges may judge them; who were never less than three; the great sanhedrim at Jerusalem consisted of seventy one, the lesser court was of twenty three, and the least of all three only:
then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked: acquit the one, whose cause is good, and condemn the other to punishment, who is guilty of a crime, and as that deserves; which is to do righteous judgment; the contrary to this is an abomination to the Lord, Proverbs 17:15.
Every punishment should be with solemnity, that those who see it may be filled with dread, and be warned not to offend in like manner. And though the criminals must be shamed as well as put to pain, for their warning and disgrace, yet care should be taken that they do not appear totally vile. Happy those who are chastened of the Lord to humble them, that they should not be condemned with the world to destruction.
Corporal Punishment. - The rule respecting the corporal punishment to be inflicted upon a guilty man is introduced in Deuteronomy 25:1 with the general law, that in a dispute between two men the court was to give right to the man who was right, and to pronounce the guilty man guilty (cf. Exodus 22:8 and Exodus 23:7).
Justify - Acquit him from guilt and false accusations, and free him from punishment.
*More commentary available at chapter level.