FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   437   438   439   440   441   442   443   444   445   446   447   448   449   450   451   452   453   454   455   456   457   458   459   460   461  
462   463   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   476   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   >>   >|  
it to shine as the sun in the kingdom of our Father.[B] By this law, the children had secured to them a mother's tender care. If the husband loved his wife and children, he could compel his master to keep him, whether he had any occasion for his services or not. If he did not love them, to be rid of him was a blessing; and in that case, the regulation would prove an act for the relief of an afflicted family. It is not by any means to be inferred, that the release of the servant in the seventh year, either absolved him from the obligations of marriage, or shut him out from the society of his family. He could doubtless procure a service at no great distance from them, and might often do it, to get higher wages, or a kind of employment better suited to his taste and skill. The great number of days on which the law released servants from regular labor, would enable him to spend much more time with his family, than can be spent by most of the agents of our benevolent societies with _their_ families, or by many merchants, editors, artists, &c., whose daily business is in New York, while their families reside from ten to one hundred miles in the country. [Footnote B: Whoever profoundly studies the Mosaic Institutes with a teachable and reverential spirit, will feel the truth and power of that solemn appeal and interrogatory of God to his people Israel, when he had made an end of setting before them all his statutes and ordinances. "What nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments SO RIGHTEOUS, as _all_ this law which I set before you this day." Deut. iv. 8.] We conclude this inquiry by touching upon an objection, which, though not formally stated, has been already set aside by the tenor of the foregoing argument. It is this,--"The slavery of the Canaanites by the Israelites, was appointed by God as a commutation of the punishment of death denounced against them for their sins."[A] If the absurdity of a sentence consigning persons to death, and at the same time to perpetual slavery, did not sufficiently laugh at itself; it would be small self-denial, in a case so tempting, to make up the deficiency by a general contribution. Only _one_ statute was ever given respecting the disposition to be made of the inhabitants of Canaan. If the sentence of death was pronounced against them, and afterwards _commuted_, when? where? by whom? and in what terms was the commutation, and where is it recorded? Grant, for argu
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   437   438   439   440   441   442   443   444   445   446   447   448   449   450   451   452   453   454   455   456   457   458   459   460   461  
462   463   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   471   472   473   474   475   476   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

family

 
slavery
 
commutation
 

sentence

 
statutes
 
families
 
children
 

touching

 

conclude

 

inquiry


formally
 
foregoing
 

stated

 
objection
 
tender
 

setting

 
Israel
 

people

 

solemn

 

appeal


interrogatory

 

husband

 

mother

 

judgments

 

RIGHTEOUS

 

argument

 

secured

 
ordinances
 
nation
 

Israelites


respecting

 

disposition

 
inhabitants
 

statute

 

deficiency

 

general

 

contribution

 

Canaan

 

pronounced

 
recorded

commuted

 

absurdity

 

kingdom

 

denounced

 
appointed
 

Father

 

punishment

 

consigning

 

persons

 

denial