The Law Concerning Vows

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Numbers 30:1) And Moses spoke to the heads of the tribes concerning the children of Israel, saying, “This is the thing which the LORD has commanded:"

In the last two chapters the Lord had reviewed the law of sacrifices and commanded Moses to tell the children of Israel all He had said, which Moses did.  Now he spoke to the heads of the tribes to tell them something else which the Lord had commanded which follows:

(2) “If a man makes a vow to the LORD, or swears an oath to bind his soul with a bond, he shall not break his word; he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth."

A vow made to the Lord had to be one in a thing that was lawful to be done, and he might vow to dedicate something to the Lord, give to the poor, or accomplish some other work for the Lord.  Vows might be made in the heat of a zealous holy moment, in humility for some sin committed or for the prevention of sin, or in the pursuit of some mercy desired or in gratitude for some mercy received.  Most of the commentaries I study agree in varying degrees that swearing an oath to bind one's soul with a bond was just another way of stating that he made a vow to the Lord.  Matthew Henry, in his Commentary on the Whole Bible, wrote, "It is a vow to God, who is a spirit, and to him the soul, with all its powers, must be bound. A promise to man is a bond upon the estate, but a promise to God is a bond upon the soul."  Dr. John Gill, in his Exposition of the Entire Bible, suggested it was something additional to the vow.  Swearing "an oath to bind his soul with a bond; to his vow adds an oath for the greater confirmation of it, and to lay himself under the greater obligation to perform it."  However, Albert Barnes, in his Notes on the Bible, saw these as two different sorts of promises:  "The 'vow' was positive; the 'bond' negative or restrictive. By a vow a man engaged to dedicate something to God, or to accomplish some work for Him: by a bond he debarred himself from some privilege or enjoyment. A vow involved an obligation to do: a bond, an obligation to forbear doing."  Regardless of the exact meaning, vowing a vow and swearing an oath were serious matters and were to be done just as vowed or sworn; they were not to be broken.

(3) "If a woman also vows a vow to the LORD, and binds herself by a bond while in her father’s house in her youth, (4) And her father hears her vow and her bond by which she has bound her soul, and her father holds his peace, then all her vows shall stand, and every bond with which she has bound her soul shall stand."

If a young woman vowed a vow to the Lord and bound herself by a bond while she still resided in her father's house, it was up to her father to intervene if necessary.  If he heard her vow and held his peace, then her vow and bond would stand.  Note that in this verse it does seem that a vow and a bond are one in the same.

Since I neglected it up to this point, now is a good time to study the original words used for vow and bond.  A vow, "neder" is a promise to God.  A bond, "esar" is a binding obligation, says Brown-Driver-Briggs' Hebrew Definitions.  Strong's agrees it's an obligation or vow, but then adds a parenthetical "of abstinence".  Seems like we're back to the beginning of not knowing exactly the difference (or similarity) in the two types of promises, but either way, when they are made to the Lord, they are not to be taken in vain.

(5) “But if her father disallows her in the day that he hears, not any of her vows or of her bonds by which she has bound her soul, shall stand; and the LORD shall forgive her because her father disallowed her."

Back to the young woman who vowed a vow while living in her father's house, if her father heard her vow and overruled her, then her vow would not stand, and the Lord would forgive her for making a vow and not following through because her father had not allowed it.

(6) "And if she had at all a husband when she vowed, or uttered ought out of her lips, by which she bound her soul, (7) And her husband heard it, and held his peace at her in the day that he heard it, then her vows shall stand, and her bonds by which she bound her soul shall stand. (8) But if her husband disallowed her on the day that he heard it, then he shall make her vow which she vowed, and that which she uttered with her lips, by which she bound her soul, of none effect; and the LORD shall forgive her."

Likewise, if a woman had a husband when she made a vow or rashly uttered an obligation in which she bound her soul, it was up to her husband to decide if the vow was to stand.  If he held his peace when he heard it, it would stand; if he disallowed her, then her vow would not stand, and the Lord would forgive her for not fulfilling her vow because her husband had not allowed it.  I can hear the screams of protest about how a woman was not allowed to make her own vows if a man did not allow it, but it really makes sense that a woman couldn't vow to give household money to the poor that her husband knew they couldn't afford, or she couldn't dedicate something that belonged to the household.  The Lord knew her heart and would forgive her, but she was to submit to the head of the household.

(9) "But every vow of a widow and of her who is divorced, by which they have bound their souls, shall stand against them."

If the woman was a widow or divorced, then she was responsible for her vows, as she had no man to disallow her, and her vows would stand.

(10) "And if she vowed in her husband's house, or bound her soul by a bond with an oath; (11) And her husband heard it, and held his peace at her, and did not disallow her, then all her vows shall stand, and every bond by which she bound her soul shall stand."

I believe the meaning is that if she vowed the vow before her husband died or before she was divorced, and her husband had heard it and held his peace, then her vows and bonds would stand even after he was gone from the household, by death or divorce.

(12) "But if her husband has utterly made them void on the day he heard them, whatever proceeded out of her lips concerning her vows, or concerning the bond of her soul, shall not stand; her husband has made them void, and the LORD shall forgive her."

Likewise, if a woman vowed a vow before her husband died or divorced her and he had disallowed the vow and made it void, then the vow would not stand even after the husband was gone from the household.  Her husband had made the vow void before his departure by death or divorce, and the Lord would forgive her for making and not fulfilling a vow.

(13) "Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may establish it, or her husband may make it void."

For every vow or bond to afflict her soul that a woman might make, it was up to her husband to establish and confirm it, or to make it void and nonbinding.

(14) "But if her husband altogether holds his peace at her from day to day; then he establishes all her vows, or all her bonds, which are upon her; he confirms them because he held his peace at her in the day that he heard them."

Even if he did not verbally confirm her vows, if her husband continually holds his peace and says nothing about her vows, then he confirmed them because he held his peace and did not object to her vows when he heard them, and to not contradict them was to confirm them.

(15) "But if he shall in anyway make them void after that he had heard them, then he shall bear her iniquity."

However, if the man who had held his peace when he heard the woman's vows, later tried to make them void, he would bear the iniquity of breaking a vow to the Lord.

(16) These are the statutes which the LORD commanded Moses, between a man and his wife and between the father and his daughter in her youth in her father's house.

The preceding verses were the statutes that the Lord commanded Moses were to be concerning vows as it related to a man and his wife and between a father and his young daughter still in her father's house.

It has already been noted that vows were serious business, but Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on the Bible, took it a step further, suggesting, "Making vows, in almost any case, is a dangerous business; they seldom do any good, and often much evil. He who does not feel himself bound to do what is fit, right, and just, from the standing testimony of God’s word, is not likely to do it from any obligation he may lay upon his own conscience. If God’s word lack weight with him, his own will prove lighter than vanity."  That is an interesting point of view.  Perhaps just as God provided for divorce although He hated it, He provided for other vows even though He did not desire them.  Vows to the Lord were very serious business and not to be done in vain.