They are nowhere described. 2. There is no direction given to Moses or any other how to make them. 3. Whatever they were, they do not appear to have been made on this occasion. 4. If they were the work of man at all, they must have been the articles in the ancient tabernacle, matters used by the patriarchs, and not here particularly described, because well known. 5.

It is probable that nothing material is designed. This is the opinion of some of the Jewish doctors. Rabbi Menachem on this chapter says, "The Urim and Thummim were not the work of the artificer; neither had the artificers or the congregation of Israel in them any work or any voluntary offering; but they were a mystery delivered to Moses from the mouth of God, or they were the work of God himself, or a measure of the Holy Spirit." 6.

That God was often consulted by Urim and Thummim, is sufficiently evident from several scriptures; but how or in what manner he was thus consulted appears in none. 7. This mode of consultation, whatever it was, does not appear to have been in use from the consecration of Solomon's temple to the time of its destruction; and after its destruction it is never once mentioned. Hence the Jews say that the five following things, which were in the first temple, were wanting in the second: "1. The ark with the mercy-seat and cherubim; 2. The fire which came down from heaven; 3.

The shechinah or Divine presence; 4. The Holy Spirit, i.e., the gift of prophecy; and 5. The Urim and Thummim." 8. As the word µyrwa urim signifies LIGHTS, and the word µymt tummim, PERFECTIONS, they were probably designed to point out the light - the abundant information, in spiritual things, afforded by the wonderful revelation which God made of himself by and under the LAW; and the perfection-entire holiness and strict conformity to himself, which this dispensation required, and which are introduced and accomplished by that dispensation of light and truth, the GOSPEL, which was prefigured and pointed out by the law and its sacrifices, &c.; and in this light the subject has been viewed by the Vulgate, where the words are translated doctrina et veritas, doctrine and truth - a system of teaching proceeding from truth itself. The Septuagint translate the original by dhlwsiv kai alhqeia, the manifestation and the truth; meaning probably the manifestation which God made of himself to Moses and the Israelites, and the truth which he had revealed to them, of which this breastplate should be a continual memorial.

All the other versions express nearly the same things, and all refer to intellectual and spiritual subjects, such as light, truth, manifestation, doctrine, perfection, &c., &c., not one of them supposing that any thing material is intended. The Samaritan text is however different; it adds here a whole clause not found in the Hebrew: [Samaritan] veasitha eth haurim veeth hattummim, Thou shalt make the Urim and the Thummim. If this reading be admitted, the Urim and Thummim were manufactured on this occasion as well as the other articles. However it be, they are indescribable and unknown.

The manner in which the Jews suppose that the inquiry was made by Urim and Thummim is the following: "When they inquired the priest stood with his face before the ark, and he that inquired stood behind him with his face to the back of the priest; and the inquirer said, Shall I go up? or, Shall I not go up? And forthwith the Holy Ghost came upon the priest, and he beheld the breastplate, and saw therein by the vision of prophecy, Go up, or Go not up, in the letters which showed forth themselves upon the breastplate before his face." See Num. xxvii. 18, 21; Judg. i. 1; Judg. xx. 18, 28; 1 Sam. xxiii. 9-12; xxviii. 6; and see Ainsworth.

It was the letters that formed the names of the twelve tribes upon the breastplate, which the Jews suppose were used in a miraculous way to give answers to the inquirers. Thus when David consulted the Lord whether he should go into a city of Judea, three letters which constituted the word hl[ aloh, GO, rose up or became prominent in the names on the breastplate; [ ain, from the name of Simeon, l lamed from the name of Levi, and h he from the name of Judah. But this supposition is without proof.

Among the Egyptians, a breastplate something like that of the Jewish high-priest was worn by the president of the courts of justice. Diodourus Siculus has these words: eforei dÆ outov peri ton trachlon ek crushv alusewv hrthmenon zwdion twn polutelwn liqwn o proshgoreuon alhqeian. "He bore about his neck a golden chain, at which hung an image set about with or composed of precious stones, which was called TRuth."-Bib. Hist., lib. i., chap. 75., p. 225. And he farther adds, "that as soon as the president put this gold chain about his neck, the legal proceedings commenced, but not before. And that when the case of the plaintiff and defendant had been fully and fairly heard, the president turned the image of truth, which was hung to the golden chain round his neck, toward the person whose cause was found to be just," by which he seemed to intimate that truth was on his side.

AElian, in his Hist. Var., lib. xxxiv., gives the same account. "The chief justice or president," he says, "was always a priest, of a venerable age and acknowledged probity. eice de kai agalma peri ton aucena ek sapfeirou liqou, kai ekaleito agalma alhqeia. And he had an image which was called TRuth engraved on a sapphire, and hung about his neck with a gold chain." Peter du Val mentions a mummy which he saw at Cairo, in Egypt, round the neck of which was a chain, having a golden plate suspended, which lay on the breast of the person, and on which was engraved the figure of a bird.

This person was supposed to have been one of the supreme judges; and in all likelihood the bird, of what kind he does not mention, was the emblem of truth, justice, or innocence.

I have now before me paintings, taken on the spot by a native Chinese, of the different courts in China where criminal causes were tried. In these the judge always appears with a piece of embroidery on his breast, on which a white bird of the ardea or heron kind is represented, with expanded wings.

All these seem to have been derived from the same source, both among the Hebrews, the Egyptians, and the Chinese. And it is certainly not impossible that the two latter might have borrowed the notion and use of the breastplate of judgment from the Hebrews, as it was in use among them long before we have any account of its use either among the Egyptians or Chinese. The different mandarins have a breast-piece of this kind.

Matthew Henry Commentary

Original Hebrew