My Stuff

Exodus 22: 1-15

Here are laws dealing with property.

If someone steals oxen or sheep- and they sell them or kill them- they must repay five head of cattle for each ox and four for each sheep. I'm not sure why a distinction is made between animals- if stealing oxen was more taboo- or more highly discouraged.

So let's say a thief breaks into your house- and you fight back and kill him- the defender is not guilty of bloodhshed unless it's after daybreak. After that he is guilty. This is a little puzzling too. So if it's during the day they would have more access to less violent defense? Maybe they wouldn't have been awakened from sleep and should be in more control of their faculties and better able to prevent killing the intruder? Seems totally arbitrary.

The thief must make restitution (I'm assuming if he doesn't die) - but if he doesn't have anything, he may be sold to make up for it.

If a stolen animal is found alive- you repay double. Why the distinction here? If the thief reconsiders before sale or slaughter he gets off a little easier?

If your animals graze in someone else's field- you pay them from the best of your field.

If a fire burns grain, the person who started the fire pays for the grain.

If you're holding silver or valuables for your neighbor and a thief steals these valuables from your home- the thief pays back double, but if he's not caught, you have to go before the court to make sure you weren't in on it.

If there's a squabble about who owns an ox, donkey, sheep, garment, or any other property- go before the court. Whoever is wrong pays double to the rightful owner.

Now if you're caring for a neighbor's animal and he dies, is injured or "taken away while no one is looking"- the neighbor takes an oath saying "I didn't do it"-and the owner is to accept it and get over it. If the animal was stolen (different than taken away...?) the neighbor makes restitution.
If he was torn to pieces by a wild animal, the owner brings in the torn carcass as evidence (what a lovely trip to the courthouse) and he doesn't have to repay.

If a man borrows an animal and the animal dies or is injured- the borrower repays for it- unless the owner is present- in which case, nothing is required in repayment. If the animal was hired out, the cost of the rental covers the damage.

These laws seem pretty harsh- not a lot of grace. The guy who didn't have money for the ox in the first place has to find money for four of them to repay for his mistake. It seems like one indiscretion could lead you down a path that was hard to recover from. Which maybe is the point- without Christ- we can't get back to ok.

Under this law, I'm doomed. How would a recovering thief remember how much to pay back to each person? How could a wayward youth turn his life around? Seems like the poor would stay poor and the rich would stay rich.

These laws puzzle me a little. Are these laws from the perspective of God? You pay back four times or you stand condemned before Me? Or are they from simply a legal standpoint- ok citizen x, you've been wronged, you're entitled to so much if you're so inclined...

And what does all of this mean for us? Is it supposed to signal the need to make more than amends for everything we do wrong? If so, how do you do it? Or is it supposed to contrast with the grace and forgiveness of Christ's sacrifice.

I'm hoping for the second. And Christ's mercy toward the woman caught in adultery may suggest the same. He still doesn't want us to sin- but the way to be ok with him is not to be stoned to death or repay fourfold, or bring in the torn carcass- but to change your ways and be merciful to each other.