And the son of an Israelitish woman -- but withal the son of an Egyptian, -- went out among the children of Israel; and this son of the Israelitess and a man of Israel strove together in the camp;
The chapter has just described the lamps burning before the Lord and the twelve loaves set out in the sanctuary. Now the scene moves outside, to a fight in the camp. Why is such an ugly story placed here, and what does one man's outburst have to do with the whole nation?
Commentators read verse 10 first as a deliberate contrast with the verses before it. Inside the sanctuary all is calm. Outside, among the people, a fight breaks out — and one writer sees in it a warning for the future.
How different the scene inside the sanctuary was from what went on in the camp. Inside, all was calm and quiet... God's purpose was seen to be unchanged and unbreakable. In the camp it was the opposite. There was a fight, and one man was found — only one then, though later it will be the many, the mass — who was an Israelite on his mother's side, and who dared to blaspheme the name of the Lord... His name is unknown to us, but his crime has never been forgotten. It is a warning, and a foreshadowing of what will mark most of the Jewish people when antichrist is their king and turning away from God is their crowning sin.
Another writer sets the blasphemy against the light that was to shine in the sanctuary all night long.
God provided for the full light of Christ to shine without a break in the sanctuary through the night, until the morning without clouds, and He tied it to the pledge of blessing for all Israel. Against that stands the public insult to the Lord, told here along with His judgment on it.
The verse takes care to name the man's parentage twice. Commentators treat that detail as the root of what follows. His mother belonged to the people God had rescued. His father belonged to the nation God rescued them from.
Here, sadly, is the sample: this one man of Israel by natural descent, the son of an Israelite woman and an Egyptian father. It was an unholy union, and its fruit insults the holy Name. True, all flesh is like grass; but Israel was to be holy to the Lord. And marriage is surely the most serious step a woman (a picture of a nation) takes in ordinary life. But Shelomith married an Egyptian, a man of that oppressing world out of which the Lord brought Israel with a strong hand.
Writers see the single blasphemer as a picture of the whole nation's later history. What one man did in the camp, Israel would do to Christ.
Here is the solemn fact. The people who should have brought blessing to everyone else have themselves come under the curse. They have been guilty, in the most painful form, of blaspheming "the name." We know how they treated Him who is the Word of God and made the Father known — the One who was and is the Lord Himself. We know well how Israel gave way to the thinking of the world. As it says here, this was the son of an Israelite woman whose father was an Egyptian. Israel fell completely into worldly wisdom about the Messiah, and so was guilty of rejecting God in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and of blaspheming the name.
One writer applies this to the priests. The men with the highest privilege showed the deepest contempt.
The priests in Israel had a favored place in the temple of God, as verses 1-9 have shown. Yet they showed complete contempt for the Lord of that temple when He came among them. (Luke 22:63-65).
Kelly separates this offence from the one that sent Israel into exile. Idolatry and blasphemy are not the same crime.
This is not the sin of idolatry, for which they were to be swept out of the land into Assyria — and the royal tribe in particular, when it turned away from God, into Babylon. Here it is defiance: cursing the true God, blaspheming the Lord. This came true in the fullest sense when, by then weaned from idols, they despised and blasphemed the Name in the Messiah, who was Himself the Lord their God.
The chapter puts the loaves and the stoning side by side, and one writer refuses to let either cancel the other.
Many passages could be given to prove that although Israel is suffering God's judgment because of sin, "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable" — that although the blasphemer is being stoned outside the camp, the twelve loaves stay undisturbed inside the sanctuary.
- Mixture — the verse names his Israelite mother and Egyptian father first. Commentators trace his blasphemy back to that tie with the world God brought Israel out of.
- Public — the insult to God was open, and His judgment on it is recorded here just as openly.
- One — only one man curses the Name here; later it will be the many. Writers read him as a sample of the nation that would reject Christ.
- Defiance — the sin here is not idolatry. It is open contempt for the true God, and Israel would repeat it against the Messiah.
- Undisturbed — the blasphemer is stoned outside; the twelve loaves stay in place inside. Judgment falls, yet God's promise of blessing for Israel stands.
and the Israelitish woman's son blasphemed the Name, and cursed; and they brought him to Moses. And his mother's name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan.
The chapter has just shown the lamp burning through the night and the twelve loaves set out before the Lord. Then comes a fight in the camp, a man cursing God's name, and the question of why this ugly scene sits right here.
The chapter sets its two halves side by side on purpose.
The sanctuary had provision for the full light of Christ to shine without interruption, through the night, till the morning without clouds. That light was tied to the pledge of blessing for all Israel. In sharp contrast stands the public insult to Jehovah, which this chapter records along with His judgment on it.
Egypt was the land of slavery the Lord had rescued Israel from. Commentators trace what follows back to the marriage itself.
Here is the sample, sadly, in this one man of Israel after the flesh. His mother was an Israelite woman and his father an Egyptian: an unholy union, and its fruit insults the holy Name. It is true that all flesh is as grass; but Israel was to be holy to the Lord... But Shelomith married an Egyptian. He belonged to that oppressing world out of which Jehovah brought Israel with a strong hand.
The verse names his mother, but not the man himself:
An apostate in heart and in act, he turned his back on Jehovah, and blasphemed Him who was Israel's Creator and God. This man was the fruit of an alliance with the world. He has passed away from earth, and his name is unknown to us. But his crime has never been forgotten — a warning, and surely a foreshadowing, of what will mark the mass of the Jews when antichrist is their king and apostasy their crowning sin.
The Hebrew text says simply that he blasphemed "the Name" — that is, God's own name, Jehovah. The word covers more ground in Scripture than modern usage suggests:
In Scripture this does not always refer to speaking evil of God, though the word is now limited to that. The same Greek word appears as 'railing' in 1 Timothy 6:4 and Jude 9, and as 'evil speaking' in Ephesians 4:31, and it could well read that way elsewhere. Under the Jewish system, blaspheming the name of the Lord carried the death penalty.
One writer sets this sin apart from idol worship:
It is not that sin of idolatry for which they were to be swept off the land into Assyria... Here it is defiance, cursing the true God, or blaspheming Jehovah.
The people did not settle the case themselves. They held the man and waited for God to speak.
They charged him with the guilt of cursing the name of Jehovah. They brought him to Moses and put him in custody, until the Lord should make His mind known to them. They did not wait long. Jehovah revealed it to Moses, and they carried it out to the letter.
The single case then brought a new revelation:
This sin required a new revelation. God knew very well that only one man stood convicted of blaspheming that day, but others would be guilty of it later.
One writer sees the whole nation in this one man.
Here is the solemn fact. The people who ought to have been the means of blessing to all others have themselves passed under the curse. They have been guilty, in the most painful form, of blaspheming "the name." We know how this happened. We know how they treated Him who is the Word of God and declared the Father, who was and is Jehovah Himself.
Judgment is real, but it is not the last word. The chapter's own layout shows why.
Many passages prove the same point. Israel is suffering the divine judgment because of sin, yet "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable." The blasphemer is stoned outside the camp, but the twelve loaves stay undisturbed inside the sanctuary. The prophets declare, and the apostles echo, that all Israel will be saved — not because they have not sinned, but because those gifts and that calling can never be revoked.
The sentence belongs to a system of law that Christians are not under. That does not shrink the offence.
The law was absolute. Being under law, there was no alternative. Though today, under grace, we carry out no such sentences, we must not think the evil is any less serious than it was then. Of course God hates the evil just as He did then, but He now patiently bears with it until the time of judgment comes.
- Root — The blasphemer came out of an alliance with the world: an Israelite mother, an Egyptian father from the land of Israel's slavery.
- Act — His sin was not idol worship but open defiance, cursing the true God by His own name.
- Restraint — The people did not act on impulse. They held him until God spoke, and God's answer covered every offender after him.
- Reach — Writers see the nation's own story here. Those meant to bless all others blasphemed the Name when God came among them.
- Hope — The blasphemer was stoned outside. The loaves stayed untouched inside. Judgment is real, but God's gifts and calling stand, and all Israel will be saved.
And they confined him, that they might decide at the mouth of Jehovah.
A fight in the camp ends with a man cursing the name of the LORD. Israel has no ruling that covers the case, so they hold him and wait. This verse is about that pause — and about how closely God guards His own Name.
The chapter opens with lamps kept burning and bread kept fresh before God. Then the scene changes.
Leviticus 24 divides into two parts. In the first we have instructions about keeping the lamps in the holy place and the cakes on the golden table, so that everything was in order before God. In the second part we discover bad disorder in the camp, when it came to the actual state of the people. To view things as God's mind would have them is one thing. To view them as the people really were is quite another. And of course the same is true of us today.
The story names his parents: an Israelite mother, an Egyptian father. One writer reads that detail as part of the explanation.
Here, sadly, is the sample in this one man of Israel by natural descent. He was the son of an Israelite woman and an Egyptian father — an unholy union, and its fruit insults the holy Name. No doubt all flesh is like grass; but Israel was to be holy to Jehovah… Shelomith married an Egyptian. He came from that oppressing world, and Jehovah had brought Israel out of it with a high hand.
They neither released him nor killed him. They shut him up and waited.
They put the offending man in custody, so that they could judge the case calmly and with care.
The same thing happened later with a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath. One writer draws a rule from it: what to do when you have no clear word from God on the case in front of you.
Here comes out a very important principle: what to do when we have no clear word from the Lord, so far as we know. There is always one great safeguard — wait. Never be in a hurry to devise a remedy, or to use discipline, without the word of the Lord. What is done cannot be undone. It is better to wait and take the place of not knowing. But let it be a not knowing that is sure the Lord hears us and cares for us. That is exactly what they did, and they were right… Whatever the solemnity of the sentence, the children of Israel had fresh proof that God entered into their difficulties and took the greatest interest in what concerned them. No soul ever waits on the Lord and is disappointed.
The waiting was short, and the verdict left no room to soften it.
They charged him with the guilt of cursing the name of Jehovah. They brought him to Moses and put him in custody until the Lord should make His mind known to them. They did not wait long. Jehovah revealed it to Moses, and Israel carried it out to the letter. For the apostate there was no mercy.
One writer carries the point across to today.
This was solemn, humiliating work, but the law was absolute. Under law there was no alternative. Today, under grace, we do not carry out such sentences. Yet we must not think the evil is any less serious than it was then. God hates it just as He did then, but He now bears with it patiently until the time of judgment comes.
One writer sees the nation's own story in this single man.
This is not the sin of idolatry, the sin for which they were swept out of the land. Here it is defiance — cursing the true God, or blaspheming Jehovah. This became true in the fullest sense later. By then Israel had left idols behind, yet they scorned and blasphemed the Name in the Messiah, who was Himself also Jehovah their God.
Yet judgment on Israel is not the last word.
Israel is suffering God's judgment because of sin. Yet "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." The blasphemer is being stoned outside the camp, but the twelve loaves stay undisturbed inside the sanctuary. The prophets declare and the apostles echo the glorious truth that "all Israel will be saved" — not because they have not sinned, but because God never takes back His gifts and His calling.
- Contrast — Lamps burning and bread in order show God's mind. The fight in the camp shows the people's real state. Scripture puts both on one page.
- Cause — The blasphemer came from a marriage with Egypt, the world Jehovah brought Israel out of "with a high hand."
- Custody — Israel held him instead of judging on the spot, so the case could be weighed calmly.
- Counsel — With no clear word from the Lord, wait. What is done cannot be undone, and no one who waits on the Lord is ever disappointed.
- Constancy — The word came, and for the apostate there was no mercy. Yet the loaves stayed undisturbed inside while the blasphemer was stoned outside. God's promises outlast the nation's guilt.
And Jehovah spoke to Moses, saying,
A man had cursed the name of the LORD, and Israel held him in custody with no verdict. Verse 13 is where the silence breaks: God Himself gives the answer no one else could give.
Israel's leaders held the offender instead of deciding the case themselves. One writer meets the same pattern in a parallel case, where Israel again held a man until the Lord gave the sentence. He draws out the principle behind the pause:
Here comes out a very important principle — what is to be done where we have not a clear word from the Lord, so far as we know. There is always one great safeguard: wait. Never be in a hurry to devise a remedy, or to exercise discipline, without the word of the Lord. What is done cannot be undone. It is better to wait and take the place of ignorance. But let it be an ignorance that is confident the Lord hears and cares for us... Whatever the solemnity of the sentence, the children of Israel had fresh proof that God entered into their difficulties and took the greatest interest in what concerned them. Never can souls wait upon the Lord and be confounded.
The delay was not indecision but deliberation:
The offending man was put in custody, for there was to be calm deliberation as regards judgment of the case.
Moses had no verdict of his own to give. The Lord supplied one:
He was charged with the guilt of cursing the name of Jehovah. They brought him to Moses and put him in custody, until the Lord should show them His mind. For that they did not wait long. Jehovah revealed it to Moses, and it was accurately carried out. For the apostate there was no mercy.
What God said to Moses here did not stop with one man. The words that begin here run on into a standing law:
But this sin required a new revelation. God knew full well that only one man was convicted of blaspheming that day, but others would later be guilty of it. So the law given here, in verses 15-22, set the punishment for that sin for anyone who offended in the same way.
Scripture takes trouble to tell us the man's parentage — an Israelite mother, an Egyptian father. One writer traces the blasphemy back to that marriage:
Here, sadly, is the sample in this one man of Israel after the flesh. He was the son of an Israelite woman and an Egyptian father — an unholy union, whose fruit insults the holy Name. No doubt all flesh is as grass; but Israel was to be holy to Jehovah... But Shelomith married an Egyptian — one of that oppressing world out of which Jehovah brought Israel with a high hand.
This chapter opened with the lamp and the twelve loaves in the sanctuary. Only then did it turn to the scene in the camp. Both are true at the same moment:
Many more passages could be added to prove the point. Israel is suffering God's judgment because of sin, yet "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable" (older translations read "without repentance"). Though the blasphemer is being stoned outside the camp, the twelve loaves stay undisturbed within the sanctuary.
The sentence God gave Moses was absolute, and Israel carried it out. God deals with such sin differently today, but He has not changed His view of the evil:
This was solemn, humiliating work, but the law was absolute. Being under law, there was no alternative. Today, under grace, no such sentences are to be carried out. Yet we must not think the evil is any less serious than it was then. Of course, God hates the evil just as He did then, but He now patiently bears with it until the time of judgment will come.
- Wait. Where there is no clear word from God, the safeguard is to wait. Do not invent a remedy — what is done cannot be undone.
- Speak. God answered fast. Those who wait on Him are never left without an answer — they find He enters into their difficulties.
- Root. The man who cursed the Name was the fruit of a union with Egypt — the world Israel had been brought out of.
- Reach. The word given for one man became a standing law, because God knew others would sin in the same way.
- Result. Judgment fell outside the camp. Inside, the twelve loaves stayed untouched. God's sentence on sin never cancels His purpose for His people.
Lead the reviler outside the camp; and all that heard [him] shall lay their hands upon his head, and the whole assembly shall stone him.
A quarrel breaks out in the camp. One man, born to an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father, curses the Name. Israel has no rule to cover it, so they hold him until God speaks. God's answer names three things: where he goes, who touches him, and who throws the stones.
The record names his mother and his father before it says what he did.
Here is the sample, sadly, in this one man of natural Israel. He was the son of an Israelite woman and an Egyptian father — an unholy marriage whose child insults the holy Name. No doubt all flesh is as grass; but Israel was to be holy to the Lord. And surely this is the most weighty step a woman takes in this life. But Shelomith married an Egyptian — one of that oppressing world out of which the Lord had brought Israel by His mighty power.
Israel does nothing in the heat of the moment. The delay, the witnesses, and the whole assembly each have a part — and the case still speaks to readers today.
They put the offending man in custody, for the case had to be judged with calm deliberation. Then the Lord told Moses to take him outside the camp. There the witnesses were to lay their hands on his head, as witnesses to what had been done. Then all the congregation had to stone him to death (v. 14)... Today, under grace, we do not carry out such sentences. But we must not think the evil is any less serious than it was then. Of course, God hates the evil just as He did then, but He now patiently bears with it until the time of judgment will come.
Laying hands on a head appears elsewhere in Israel's worship, and it does not always mean the same thing. Set beside the other cases, the gesture here carries its own force.
When someone brought an animal to the altar, he laid his hand on it. With the burnt offering or peace offering, this was a sign that he was identified with the value of the sacrifice. With the sin offering, it was an acknowledgment that the animal stood in his place, and his guilt passed to it. Then hands were laid on people in recognition of the part or lot appointed to them... Again, when the blasphemer (Lev. 24:14) had to die, the witnesses laid their hands on his head. They had fellowship in the execution of the sentence.
The command sends him beyond the camp. Scripture keeps coming back to that ground, and where it leads settles where Christ's people belong.
Once the blood of the sin offering had been taken into the sanctuary, the rest of it was burned outside the camp. So, to feed on Him whose blood has been sprinkled on the mercy seat, we must go outside the camp, for He suffered outside the gate... Outside the camp the blasphemer was to be stoned. Beyond the walls of Jezreel Naboth was murdered. Outside Jerusalem Stephen was killed. Outside the gate the Lord Jesus suffered. So those who confess Him were urged to go out to Him outside the camp, bearing His reproach.
Commentators do not stop with the one man. They see the whole nation in what he did.
A fight takes place between two men. One of them — whose mother was an Israelite, but his father Egyptian — blasphemed the name of the Lord and cursed (vv. 10-11). Though Israel has not even realized it, this is just what the nation has done when they rejected the Lord Jesus. They blasphemed and insulted the Son of God. The priests in Israel had a favored place in the temple of God, as verses 1-9 have shown. Yet they showed utter contempt for the Lord of that temple when He came among them.
Judgment falls, and God's promise still holds. What happens outside the camp does not touch the loaves inside the sanctuary.
More passages could be added to prove the same thing. Israel is suffering God's judgment because of sin, yet "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." The blasphemer is being stoned outside the camp, but the twelve loaves stay undisturbed within the sanctuary... Let Christians beware how they tamper with "the promises made to the fathers."
- Cause. The blasphemer came from an unholy marriage with Egypt, the world Israel had left. That mixture bore fruit against the Name.
- Care. They held him in custody until God spoke, so the case would be judged calmly.
- Consent. The witnesses laid hands on his head. That was not guilt passing to a substitute, but their share in the sentence they had testified to.
- Camp. He died outside the camp. That is the ground where the sin offering was burned, where Naboth and Stephen died, and where the Lord Jesus suffered. His people are called out to Him there.
- Continuity. One man cursed the Name then; the nation did it in rejecting Christ. Yet the loaves stay undisturbed inside the sanctuary while he is stoned outside. God's gifts and calling are irrevocable.
And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Every one when he revileth his God shall bear his sin.
Israel had just stoned a blasphemer outside the camp. God now turns that one case into a standing law for the whole nation, and the wording raises a question: what does it mean for a person to carry his own guilt?
The chapter opens with the lamp burning in the sanctuary and the twelve loaves set out before God. What comes next stands against that scene.
There is the provision for the full light of Christ to shine without interruption in the sanctuary — until the morning without clouds, during the night, and linked to the pledge of blessing for all Israel. In sharp contrast with that stands the public insult to Jehovah, recounted here along with His judgment on it.
One man had cursed. God did not stop at punishing him. He made a law for the offence itself.
But this sin made a new revelation necessary. God knew perfectly well that only one man was convicted of blaspheming that day, yet others would be guilty of it later. So the law given here, in verses 15-22, set the punishment for that sin for anyone who offended in the same way.
The phrase runs right through the law, and it is not vague. One writer gathers the places where it occurs — this verse among them — to settle its force.
Do you want to see the connection between bearing sin in Isaiah 53:12 and the punishment due to it? Then compare Leviticus 5:1, 17; 17:16; 20:19; 24:15; Numbers 5:31 … In all of them you will see it means coming under all the consequences of the sin committed, and being answerable for it before God.
So the man who curses God holds the full account himself.
The verses after this one move from cursing God to killing a man, and on to lesser injuries.
Verse 17 mentions killing a man, and cursing the Lord is as serious a sin as that, for death was the penalty for both. The chapter mentions lesser evils too, and we get the law, "eye for eye, tooth for tooth," which appears in Exodus and Deuteronomy as well. The Lord referred to it in Matthew 5:38, to set off the grace He was beginning to reveal, which would mean His disciples showing grace to others.
Rules about a neighbour's life and rights appear elsewhere in the law. One writer explains why they come in right here.
Elsewhere these commands stand as the witness of the perfectly righteous rule the law set up among them (Exodus 21). But here they come in connection with turning away from God. If a man would deny God His place, or try to rob Him of His rights that way, he might not be careful of his neighbour's life or his neighbour's rights unless he was commanded to be. That neighbour, like himself, was made in the image of God.
The offender was the son of an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father. One writer traces the blasphemy back to that marriage.
Sadly, here is the sample in this one man of Israel after the flesh. He was the son of an Israelite woman and an Egyptian father — an unholy union, whose offspring insults the holy Name. No doubt all flesh is like grass; but Israel was to be holy to Jehovah. Shelomith married an Egyptian, one of that oppressing world out of which Jehovah brought Israel with a high hand.
Commentators read the incident forward. What one man did in the camp, the nation did later on a larger scale.
Here it is defiance, cursing the true God, or blaspheming Jehovah. This became emphatically true later. By then Israel had been weaned from idols, yet they despised and blasphemed the Name in the Messiah, who was Himself also Jehovah their God. So, as a nation, they are given up to something worse than the Babylonian captivity.
Yet the chapter holds both scenes at once, and that is where hope sits.
Many passages prove the same thing. Israel is suffering divine judgment because of sin, yet still "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." The blasphemer is being stoned outside the camp, but the twelve loaves lie undisturbed inside the sanctuary.
- Contrast — The chapter holds two scenes at once: the light and the loaves inside the sanctuary, and the cursing in the camp.
- Case becomes law — God did not stop with one man. He gave a standing rule, because others would sin the same way.
- Bear — To bear your sin is to come under all its consequences. You answer for it before God. Nobody else carries the account.
- Weight — The chapter sets cursing the Lord beside killing a man. Both carried the death penalty, and the verses after grade lesser wrongs down from there.
- Reach — What one man did in the camp, the nation later did to the Messiah. Yet the loaves lie undisturbed: God's gifts and calling are irrevocable.
And he that blasphemeth the name of Jehovah shall certainly be put to death; all the assembly shall certainly stone him; as well the stranger as he that is home-born, when he blasphemeth the Name, shall be put to death.
The sentence on the blasphemer does not stop with one man; it becomes a standing law that binds foreigner and native alike. Why does God treat contempt for His name as a matter of life and death?
The sin here is not turning to other gods. It is turning on the true God.
It is not that sin of idolatry for which they were to be swept off the land into Assyria... Here it is defiance, cursing the true God, or blaspheming Jehovah. This became especially true later. By that time they had left idols behind, yet they despised and blasphemed the Name in the Messiah, who was Himself Jehovah their God.
Later teachers misused this very verse. They built from it a rule that God's name must never be spoken at all.
"Hallowed be Your name": compare Leviticus 24:16. By misusing that verse, the Jews came to treat Yahweh (Jehovah) as a name no one may speak. They used it in the temple services only, and in the synagogues they used Adonai (Lord) alone... In everyday life they spoke of "the Name."
This began as one man's sin. It did not end there.
But this sin required a new revelation. God knew full well that though only one man was convicted of blasphemy that day, others would be guilty of it later. So God gives the law here, in verses 15-22. It sets out the punishment for anyone who commits the same sin.
This is not mob justice. The man waits in custody. The witnesses who heard him act first. Only then does the nation carry out the sentence.
They put the offending man in custody, for the case had to be judged with calm thought. Then the Lord told Moses to take him outside the camp. There the witnesses were to lay their hands on his head, testifying to what had been done. Then all the congregation had to stone him to death. This was solemn, humbling work, but the law was absolute. Being under law, there was no alternative. Today, under grace, we carry out no such sentences. But we must not think the evil is any less serious than it was then.
The verse names the foreigner alongside the native-born. Privilege and accountability travel together.
Any stranger who lived among the Israelites was subject to the same law as all others (v. 22). This should remind us of something. Any stranger who comes to share the privileges of fellowship in an assembly comes under the same discipline as everyone else.
The curse did not stop with the man who earned it. Writers see the whole nation falling under it.
Israel as a whole have fallen under this dreadful curse... The people who should have brought blessing to everyone else have themselves passed under this curse. They have been guilty, in the most painful form, of "blaspheming the Name." We know how this happened. We know how they treated Him who is the Word of God and made the Father known, who was and is Jehovah Himself. Israel gave way to the thinking of the world — as it says here, the son of an Israelite woman whose father was an Egyptian. They fell completely into merely human wisdom about the Messiah, and so were guilty of rejecting God in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and of blaspheming the Name.
The charge against Jesus was the very crime this verse punishes. His accusers knew what claim they were answering.
When He said, "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30), the Jews took up stones to stone Him. Asked why they would stone Him, they answered, "It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God." They understood very well how high His claims were.
Yet at the trial they hid the law's own penalty from the Roman governor.
The Jews hid from Pilate that the punishment set in Leviticus 24:16 was "stoning." They had already tried it several times.
The chapter places this execution right after the lamp and the twelve loaves in the sanctuary. That order matters.
Many passages prove the same thing. Israel is suffering divine judgment because of sin, and yet "the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable." The blasphemer is stoned outside the camp, but the twelve loaves stay undisturbed inside the sanctuary.
- The Name. The crime is not idolatry but open contempt for the true God — defiance aimed straight at Him.
- The law. One man's sin became a lasting law. God knew others would follow him.
- The reach. Foreigner and native fall under one law. Share the privileges and you share the discipline.
- The irony. The nation trusted with that Name broke it. They used this very penalty against Christ, then hid it from Pilate.
- The promise. Judgment falls outside the camp. Inside the sanctuary the twelve loaves are untouched — God's calling stands.
And if any one smiteth any man mortally, he shall certainly be put to death.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And he that smiteth a beast mortally shall make it good, life for life.
Israel has just stoned a man for cursing God's name, and the law that follows sets the price of life. Payment covers a dead animal; nothing but death answers for a dead man.
The Hebrew behind these words is not simply about killing. One writer weighs the exact verb.
The expression here and elsewhere is always "smiting the soul." You find it in Genesis 37:21, Deuteronomy 19:6, 11, Deuteronomy 22:26, and Jeremiah 40:14. The verb is not the true word for killing. Nor would it make sense to speak of killing the life of a person. "Killing" by itself means "taking life," and taking the life of the life would be an unbearable expression.
The penalty here is payment. The animal belonged to someone, and the law measures the loss and makes it good.
If someone killed an animal belonging to another, he had to make it good by giving him an animal of the same value. If someone injured another's body, he had to suffer the same injury himself — "fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth" (vv. 19-20). This is righteous law pure and simple, justice without mercy. A second time the law insists that a killed animal required restitution, but the killing of a human called for the death penalty (v. 21).
Why does an animal's life carry a price at all? One writer traces it to God's own claim on life.
The life of a man killed by a beast — "from every beast I will require it." So we see that God maintains His title to life, even a beast's life. They had to bring the blood and offer it to God. Man had no flesh to eat before God gave it to him.
An animal can be replaced; a man cannot. One writer explains who holds the right over a man's life, and what these rules sit beside in the chapter.
Anyone who took the life of a man was to be put to death. That right belongs only to God, or to those He gives authority to carry out His commands. And anyone who took the life of a beast should make it good, beast for beast… Elsewhere these instructions stand as the witness of the perfectly righteous rule the law set up among them (Exodus 21). But here they come in connection with turning away from God. Suppose a man denies God His place, or tries to rob Him of His rights that way. Unless he is told to be careful, he may think little of his neighbour's life or his neighbour's rights — and that neighbour, like himself, was made in the image of God.
Equal payment for an animal and equal injury for a wound run on one rule: exact measure. Jesus quoted that rule, and one writer shows what He set beside it.
Here we find the true character of law. Grace is absent. It is eye for an eye, and tooth for a tooth. Our blessed Lord especially quotes these provisions to show their contrast with grace. He says, "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew 5:38-39). Law demands an exact equivalent — no more and no less. But grace can cancel every claim. God has dealt with us in grace and cancelled our whole debt, so we must act on the same principle towards one another. But never forget that the foundation of grace itself is laid deep in righteousness.
Grace between people does not end the work of the courts.
A Christian's duty not to take revenge does not clash with God's government through rulers and judges. They get their authority from Him to restrain and punish evil.
- Life is God's. Even an animal's blood belonged to Him, so killing another man's beast was never a small loss.
- Life is repaid. The killed animal is covered by an equal animal — restitution, measured and exact.
- Life is required. No payment replaces a man. He is made in the image of God, and only God — or those He authorises — may take his life.
- Life is ruled. These rules follow the judgment on the man who cursed God's name. Careless about God's rights, a man soon grows careless about his neighbour's.
- Life is released. Law gives the exact equivalent and no more. Grace rests on that same righteousness, and it can cancel the claim altogether. The courts still carry out God's justice.
And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour, as he hath done, so shall it be done to him;
This verse sits inside a real court case. A man had cursed God's name, and as God ruled on it He also set out penalties for injuries people do to each other. The rule is simple: the harm a man causes measures what he gets back. Two questions follow. Who could apply it, and what did Christ later do with it?
The verse belongs to a short list of penalties. One writer reads that list as law in its purest form: the punishment fits the crime, and nothing softens it.
If one killed an animal belonging to another, he must make this good by giving him an animal of the same value. If one injured another's body, he was to receive the same treatment himself: "fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth" (vv. 19-20). This is righteous law pure and simple, justice without mercy. Once again the law insists that a killed animal required repayment, but the killing of a human called for the death penalty (v. 21).
The placing of the rule matters too. It follows the sentence on the blasphemer and on a killer, and Leviticus is not the only book that carries it.
The sin of the man who cursed the name of the Lord stands here as a contrast. The Lord made His mind about him known, and he had to die. Verse 17 mentions killing a man, and cursing the Lord is as grave a sin as that, for death was the penalty for both. Here we also have lesser wrongs, and we get the law "eye for eye, tooth for tooth," which Exodus and Deuteronomy mention too.
Nothing here lets a wounded man go and wound back. The instruction speaks to those who try cases.
The principle of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" ... is not a rule for the conscience of a private individual. It is a legal direction for the authorities and judges of Israel. Exodus 21:22 and Deuteronomy 19:18 make this clear, since they name the judges. The direction rests on complete fairness in repaying the deed, and it was meant to warn the people and hold them back (Deut. 19:20).
Take that away and the rule collapses, because a man judging his own case never stops at equal.
Of course a judge must pass the sentence, not the offended party. If a man takes the law into his own hands, in almost every case he will inflict worse treatment than he received.
Read that way, the words are a ceiling rather than a demand.
Under the old economy we find that the law laid down the principle, in righteousness, "An eye for an eye" (Ex. 21:24), thereby restraining the wrath of man. Otherwise he would have demanded two eyes for one, in vengeance.
One writer asks what taking a man's eye would actually do for the person who lost his.
Of course, taking out a man's eye because he had blinded someone else's eye would not help the injured person. But that person has a right to fair compensation.
The verse also shows what law is, and what law is not.
We find here the true character of law. Grace is absent. It is eye for an eye, and tooth for a tooth ... Law demands an exact equivalent — no more, and no less. Grace can cancel every claim. God has dealt with us in grace and cancelled our whole debt, so we must act on the same principle towards one another. But never forget that grace itself rests on a foundation of righteousness.
In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus takes up this exact wording, and He gives His followers a different rule.
Here the Lord goes far beyond all Jewish, and indeed all human, thought. He tells His disciples to show patient grace under every kind of wrong done to them. He forbids them to resist it. He quotes from the law the principle of retaliation, like for like, and quotes it precisely to abandon it. That rule was wide open to abuse. Even when judges applied it with the strictest justice, and it held back human desire for revenge, how far it stood from the mind of heaven that Christ was showing on earth.
Giving up your own claim does not mean courts should give up theirs.
With the Christian it is quite different: having been dealt with in grace, he must act also in grace towards others. The word to him is "Never avenge yourselves ... for it is written, 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord'" (Rom. 12:19). A Christian's duty not to avenge himself does not clash at all with the way God governs through magistrates. Their authority comes from Him, and they use it to hold back and punish evil.
- Measure — the injury a man causes sets the penalty he receives. That is righteous law: no more, no less, and no mercy in it.
- Judge — God gave the rule to Israel's courts, not to the injured man. A man who judges his own case always goes too far.
- Limit — by fixing the penalty at one eye, the law capped a vengeance that would otherwise have claimed two.
- Grace — Christ quoted these very words to His disciples, and He quoted them to set them aside. He asks for patient grace under wrong instead.
- Government — giving up personal revenge does not touch the authority of judges. God still uses them to punish evil.
breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him.
Leviticus 24:20 closes a set of penalties given after a man in the camp cursed God's name, and it sets the scale for repaying injury. These famous words are also badly misused, so who was meant to apply them, and what did the Lord Jesus do with them?
The verse sits in a short list of rulings that price damage — to property, to a body, and to life itself.
If someone killed an animal belonging to another, he had to make it good by giving him an animal of the same value. If someone harmed another physically, he was to receive the same treatment himself — "fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth" (vv. 19-20). This is righteous law pure and simple, justice without mercy. For a second time the law insists that a killed animal required restitution. But the killing of a human called for the death penalty (v. 21).
But did this mean taking a literal eye? Writing on the same words in Exodus, Grant weighs what the injured man gains.
Of course, plucking out the eye of a man who had blinded someone would not help the injured party. But that injured party is entitled to fair compensation.
Israel's law gave several kinds of directions, and this rule sits in one class in particular.
This law contained moral directions for each Israelite's life. It contained ceremonial directions (the laws of the offerings) for serving God. And it contained legal directions for the daily life of the people. The principle of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" belongs to the last group. It is not a principle for one person's conscience. It is a legal direction for the authorities and judges of Israel. Exodus 21:22 and Deuteronomy 19:18 make this clear, since both name the judges. The direction rested on absolute fairness in repaying the deed. It was also to warn and deter the people (Deut. 19:20).
Grant weighs what happens when the offended man judges his own case.
"An eye for an eye" is fully righteous recompense, expressing the firm inflexibility of the law. Of course a judge must pass the sentence, not the offended party. If someone takes the law into his own hands, he will almost always inflict worse treatment than he received.
When Jesus repeated these words to His disciples, He set them aside as the rule for His own people.
Here the Lord goes beyond all Jewish, and indeed all human, thought. He asks His disciples for patient grace under every wrong done to them. To resist it is forbidden. He quotes the law's principle of talion, as it is called, or retaliation, and He does so precisely to abandon it. It was especially open to abuse. But even when judges applied it with the strictest justice, and even as a strong check on human revenge, how far it stood from the mind of heaven! Christ was showing that mind on earth, and laying it down as the only conduct proper to the sons of His Father.
The contrast between law and grace here is real. It is not a contrast between a harsh God and a kind one.
Here we find the true character of law. Grace is absent. It is eye for an eye, and tooth for a tooth... The law demands an exact equivalent — no more and no less. But grace can remit every claim. Never forget, though, that grace itself is founded deep in righteousness. So it reigns through righteousness (Rom. 5:21), on a basis that lasts forever and cannot change.
Refusing to repay an injury is not the same as saying wrongdoing should go unpunished.
The law of Moses laid down, "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." With the Christian it is quite different. God has dealt with him in grace, so he must also act in grace towards others. The word to him is "Never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord'"... A Christian's duty not to avenge himself does not clash with God's government through magistrates. They get their authority from Him to restrain and punish evil.
- Measure. The penalty had to match the injury exactly — no more and no less. That is law working at its purest, and it is justice without mercy.
- Magistrate. The measure belonged to judges, not to victims. It was a legal direction for Israel's courts, meant as a warning and a deterrent.
- Misuse. A wronged man who applies the measure himself almost always repays worse than he received. That is why the rule belonged to a court.
- Master. Jesus quoted these very words to abandon them as the rule for His disciples. He calls them to patient grace under wrong instead.
- Ministry. Grace frees the Christian from taking revenge. It does not free the state from punishing evil. And grace itself rests on righteousness.
He that smiteth a beast [mortally] shall make it good; and he that smiteth a man [mortally] shall be put to death.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
Ye shall have one law as the stranger, so the home-born; for I am Jehovah your God.
Leviticus 24 breaks off into an ugly scene in the camp. A man curses God's name, and he dies for it. The rules that follow cover murder, injury, and killing an animal. They end with one sentence: the same law holds for the foreigner and the Israelite. Why attach a code of justice to a case of blasphemy? And why name the foreigner first?
The verse refuses to grade people by birth. A foreigner in Israel enjoyed the shelter of the nation. He also carried the nation's accountability.
Any stranger who lived among the Israelites was subject to the same law as all others (v. 22). This reminds us that any stranger who shares the privileges of fellowship in an assembly comes under the same discipline as everyone else.
The case behind the ruling was the borderline one: a man with an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father. His mixed parentage bought him nothing.
Jew or stranger, the guilty in their midst must alike suffer.
Laws about eyes, teeth and life for life appear elsewhere in the law. Here they come right after a man cursed God.
Anyone who injured his neighbour — his eye, his tooth, or anything else — had to suffer the same injury he had caused. Elsewhere these instructions stand as the witness of the perfectly righteous rule that the law set up among them (Ex. 21). But here they come in connection with apostasy — turning away from God. Suppose a man denies God His place, or tries to strip Him of His rights by turning away. Unless he is told to be careful, he may not respect his neighbour's life or his neighbour's rights. Yet God made that neighbour in His own image, just as He made him.
The line runs downward: contempt for God's name produces contempt for the man next to you.
The measure here is exact. The law adds nothing to punish and takes nothing away to soften.
If one harmed another physically, he was to receive the same treatment himself — "fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth" (vv. 19-20). This is righteous law pure and simple, justice without mercy. Again the text insists that killing an animal required restitution, while killing a human called for the death penalty (v. 21).
The injured man never got to enforce that measure himself. The rule spoke to the courts.
The law of Moses gave Israel legal directions to regulate daily life. The principle of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" belongs to that group. It is not a principle for the conscience of a single individual. It is a legal direction for the authorities and judges of Israel. Exodus 21:22 and Deuteronomy 19:18 make this clear, since both name the judges. The direction rested on absolute fairness in repaying the deed, and it served as a warning to hold the people back (Deut. 19:20).
William Kelly sees the blasphemer's story as a picture of Israel itself: mixed with Egypt, then cursing the Name.
We know well how Israel gave way to the thoughts of the world — as the passage says here, the son of an Israelite woman whose father was an Egyptian. Israel fell completely under the power of human reasoning about the Messiah. So they were guilty of rejecting God in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, and of blaspheming the name. As a result they have fallen under the curse. That curse would be final but for the grace of God, who knows how to meet the most desperate case.
The one law that spared no foreigner did not spare Israel either.
Measured repayment is not the last word. Grace changes what God asks of the Christian, yet public justice still stands.
The law of Moses laid down "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." Matt. 5:38; Ex. 21:24. With the Christian it is quite different: having been dealt with in grace, he must act also in grace towards others. The word to him is "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." … A Christian does not avenge himself. That duty in no way clashes with God's government through magistrates. They get their authority from Him to hold back and punish evil.
- One law. The foreigner in Israel stood under the same rule as the native-born. Sharing the privileges meant sharing the discipline.
- One root. These justice laws follow a blasphemy case for a reason. A man who denies God His rights will not respect his neighbour, who also bears God's image.
- One measure. Fracture for fracture, eye for eye. This is righteous law pure and simple, justice without mercy. Even a killed animal had to be paid for.
- One court. Repayment was a direction for Israel's judges, not a licence for the injured man to settle his own score.
- One grace. Israel itself blasphemed the Name in rejecting Jesus, and fell under the curse. Only grace can meet a case that desperate. The Christian who has been met by grace now acts in grace toward others.
And Moses spoke to the children of Israel; and they led the reviler outside the camp and stoned him with stones. And the children of Israel did as Jehovah had commanded Moses.
This verse closes the story of the blasphemer: Moses passes on God's sentence, and Israel carries it out. Three things give the verse its weight — where the man was taken, why the whole congregation had to act, and why this scene follows the picture of unbroken fellowship in the sanctuary.
Israel held the man in custody until God gave His ruling. The answer came quickly, the people matched it point for point, and the case left a standing law behind.
He was charged with cursing the name of the Lord. They brought him to Moses and held him in custody until the Lord made His mind known. They did not wait long. The Lord revealed it to Moses, and they carried it out exactly. For the man who had turned against God there was no mercy. "Bring out of the camp the one who cursed," was the word, "and let all who heard him lay their hands on his head, and let all the congregation stone him" (24:13-14). Thus the people of Israel did as the LORD commanded Moses. The punishment he deserved came on him quickly. But this sin called for a new revelation, because God knew well that although only one man was convicted of blaspheming that day, others would be guilty of it later. So the law given here in verses 15-22 set out the punishment for anyone who sinned in that way.
The witnesses acted first, and then the whole community had to take part.
The Lord told Moses to take him outside the camp. There the witnesses were to lay their hands on his head, giving witness to what had been done. Then the whole congregation had to stone him to death (v. 14). This was solemn, humiliating work, but the law was absolute. Being under law, there was no alternative. Today, under grace, no such sentences are carried out. But the evil is no less serious than it was then. God hates it just as He did then. He now bears with it patiently until the time of judgment comes.
The place chosen for the execution carries its own message. Christ later took that same place.
The camp was made up of a people in outward relationship with God. "Outside the camp" is a place where there is no recognised relationship with God or man. Seen in the light of judgment, it is the place of forsaking — a place without God… Into this place Jesus went. To sanctify His people with His own blood, He suffered outside the camp — or, as Scripture says, "outside the gate."… For us to have the place of blessing within the veil, He had to take our place of judgment outside the camp.
The same rule covered everyone living in the camp, and it still has a plain application.
Any stranger who lived among the Israelites was subject to the same law as all others (v. 22). In the same way, any newcomer who shares the privileges of fellowship in an assembly comes under the same discipline as everyone else.
Commentators see in this man a picture of what Israel would later do. Their sin was not idol worship, but insulting God to His face.
Here it is defiance, cursing the true God, or blaspheming the Lord. This came true in the fullest way later. By then they had given up their idols, yet they scorned and blasphemed the Name in the Messiah, who was Himself the Lord their God. So as a nation they are given up to a captivity worse than the one in Babylon.
But this judgment is not the end of the story.
The blasphemer who blasphemed the Name and cursed foreshadows the sin of Israel… Because they rejected the Lord Jesus Christ, the curse has come upon them. But it will not be permanent. In the coming day the remnant of Israel will be saved. He will come back, and they will welcome Him: "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord."
The chapter opened with twelve loaves set before God, and closes with this stoning. The two scenes belong together.
Israel is suffering God's judgment because of sin. Yet "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." The blasphemer is being stoned outside the camp, but the twelve loaves are undisturbed within the sanctuary.
- Inside first. The chapter opens with twelve loaves kept before God, and only then records the sin.
- Outside is the point. The man was taken outside the camp — the place of no recognised relationship with God. Christ later took that place so we could have the place of blessing.
- Outside for all alike. One law covered foreigner and native. Anyone who shares the privileges shares the discipline.
- Outside, not forever. Israel blasphemed the Name in its Messiah and lies under judgment now. Commentators hold that this judgment will not last.
- Inside, undisturbed. The blasphemer is stoned outside, and the twelve loaves stay untouched within. Judgment is real, and God's calling stands.