Just when you’re in a full state of reverence thinking about all the feast days and the remembrance of God’s blessings and the proper dispensing of justice from brother to brother, Exodus 23:13 hits you with a seemingly random command:
“You are not to boil a young goat in the milk of its mother.”
I’ll admit, that’s a doozy. Not only does it come straight out of left field, but it’s a sharp departure from the first half of Exodus 23:19, which talks about bringing the first fruits to God. Why did the guy who inserted chapters and verses see fit to share that sentiment with one about boiling baby goats?
Like I said…a doozy.
Commentators have done more than their share of mental gymnastics trying to unravel this mystery. Some have chalked it up to an unknown pagan ritual that supposedly increases crop yield from year to year, while others have used it as a statement about eating exceptionally young animals (those still consuming their mother’s milk). The more common idea is that it’s a prohibition against animal cruelty.
But none of those explain its insertion into a section about feast days and conquering the land. Moreover, this idea isn’t just stated once, but three times (Exodus 23:19; Exodus 34:26; Deut. 14:21).
Thanks to the internet, I found a compelling argument for this verse that places the verse where it should belong—its own context. In Exodus, the thoughts immediately before this verse reference first fruits; in Deuteronomy, it references tithing all the seed from year to year. Could that be the key to understanding this verse?
The article I linked to above puts forth the idea that this is a Hebrew idiom (a saying, in other words) that teaches a general truth. In this situation, not boiling a kid in it’s mother’s milk would be like saying “don’t mix the next generation with the previous generation.” The kid and it’s mother should not be sacrificed together, but separately. Give the first fruits from every year, and don’t mix the young goat with the mother’s milk. Offer each in their own time.
Of all the research I did on this article, this seems to be the most logical explanation of the Text, but I’m curious to hear what you think. Does this reasoning make sense to you? Or is there another idea that’s not mentioned? Let me know at brady@coffeeandaBible.com!
