VAYIKRA

And [He] called

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When a man shall make a singular vow, the persons shall be for Yahweh by thy estimation.

A man might make "a singular vow" concerning anything not already under divine claim. He might "sanctify to God" anything under his control: himself; an animal (clean or unclean); a house; a field; or part of a field...

He might not consecrate the firstborn of any beast, because that was already the Lord's, nor for the same reason could he consecrate "the tithe of the land, whether seed or fruit", Any object lawfully consecrated to God might be purchased back again on payment of a sum to be fixed according to what might be called the tariff of the tabernacle.

In that case, the money paid was reckoned as the thing that had been consecrated. This was a convenient arrangement both for the man making the vow, and the priests into whose hands the consecrated things might come for administration. It might often happen that a thing given to God might be essential to the proper working of a man's affairs; or that it might not be capable of being turned to any use in the hands of the priests. A commutation in money relieved the transaction in such cases from its embarrassments, while at the same time preserving the principle of the inviolability of vows.

The same merciful adjustability was shown in carrying out the assessment of the value made by the priests in cases of commutation. If it happened in the redemption of a man's own person that the priest put a higher value on him than the man could pay, the priest was directed to reduce the assessment in harmony with what he might ascertain to be the man's ability to pay.

Law of Moses Ch 31.

10 He shall not alter it, nor change it, a good for a bad, or a bad for a good: and if he shall at all change beast for beast, then it and the exchange thereof shall be holy.

If the consecrated thing was "a beast, whereof men bring an offering to the Lord", it was to be neither altered, changed, nor redeemed. In case of any attempt to substitute the consecrated thing by an inferior animal, both the consecrated thing and the exchange were to be impounded.

Law of Moses Ch 31.

21 But the field, when it goeth out in the jubile, shall be holy unto Yahweh, as a field devoted; the possession thereof shall be the priest's.

But an unclean beast [v11-13], or a house [v14, could be redeemed by paying a fifth over and above the valuation put upon them by the priest; or if it was a field or part of a field dedicated after the year of jubilee: if not redeemed before the next jubilee, or if sold to another man, then at the next jubilee, it went into the hands of the priests, as a field holy to the Lord for ever. But if redeemed, it was to be resumed by the original possessor at the year of jubilee.

Law of Moses Ch 31.

34 These are the commandments, which Yahweh commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai.

On the face of it, it might seem as if the special consecrations sanctioned and almost invited under the law we have been considering, implied that, apart from these "singular vows" [v2], Israel were at liberty to live purely secular lives like the Gentile communities of modern "civilization", and that only persons under these "singular vows" were holy or religious persons. How far this was from being the case is well known to those who know the Scriptures. Israel as a whole was "an holy people unto the Lord their God" (Deut. 7:6).

How often is this urged in the course of the law as a reason for the various observances prescribed. "Thou art an holy people. Be ye holy, for I am holy" (Lev. 11:44-45). The life of every Israelite was" holy to the Lord" from the first moment of his existence. He was introduced to the national covenant with God by circumcision on the eighth day. He was presented to the Lord on the day of his mother's ceremonial cleansing.

He was to be instructed daily from his earliest childhood in the history of their origin, and in the divine commandments and institutions, upon their conformity to which the continuance of God's favour depended. He required no special dedication to come under the obligation of holiness. He was to keep himself aloof from all the practices of the surrounding nations, and to make no alliances with them for fear of infection with their principles and their ways, which would lead Israel away from God...

...The individual sanctifications, therefore, which we have been considering in connection with "singular vows" were in the nature of special holiness, supplemental to the general holiness of the nation: like the introduction of special plants into an already well-kept garden. The nation was a typical nation in this respect--a prophecy of things to come, as well as a teacher for the time then present. God's purpose is that human life upon earth should be a thing of holiness and therefore of beauty and joy in all lands.

The Gospel is the glad tidings that He will bring this about.

Law of Moses Ch 31.

28 Notwithstanding no devoted thing, that a man shall devote unto Yahweh of all that he hath, both of man and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy unto Yahweh.

That which was devoted belonged exclusively to Yahweh...most holy ie typifying the incorruptible state, total absorption into the divine will.

This at first sight appears to be inconsistent with the liberty of redemption provided in the other cases. The inconsistency disappears when the difference between the two words--"sanctify" or consecrate and "devoted"--is realized. They are different terms in the Hebrew--KODESH (sanctify), meaning to separate or set apart; and CHARAM (devote), to hand over without reservation.

It would seem as if a man, in the ardour of his loyalty, was at liberty, if he chose, to surrender the option of redemption, in the act of giving a thing to God. This appears to be the difference between sanctifying and devoting a thing to God.

A separated thing might be redeemed, but a devoted thing was God's for ever.

Law of Moses Ch 31.