And the land shall not be sold for ever; for the land is mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with me.
Leviticus 25 sets out how Israel was to hold the country God was giving them. The whole arrangement rests on one claim: the land is His. That fact decides what may be sold, what must come back, and how the people were to see themselves.
The chapter gives its laws first. Verse 23 gives the reason behind them.
Leviticus 25 introduces a fresh subject. The earlier chapters dealt mainly with matters that especially concerned the priests, and God spoke them "out of the tabernacle" (chapter 1:1). This chapter concerns right government in Israel once they had come into the land, so God spoke it "in Mount Sinai." Here the basic fact they had to remember comes in verse 23 — "the land is Mine." So Israel had to handle the land, once they had it, in the way the earlier verses set out.
Because the title stays with God, no failure of Israel's can transfer it to anyone else.
The Land — "My Land," whatever its state or divisions. It is Jehovah's Land, and if the people fail in every way, it falls into His hands. He only entrusted it to Israel. The Gentiles have no right except through Israel's sin, and no right at all against the Lord.
The Owner never changed, so a sale could only pass on the use of a field for a while. That built in two safeguards at once.
One thing is very plain. The land was God's, so those to whom He gave it could only let it go on lease. They sold it until the jubilee came, and the value of the lease dropped as the jubilee drew near. So each inheritance could never pass for good out of the family that first had it. In this way grasping men could not pile up land. More important still, Israel had a constant reminder that all they held, they held from the Lord, and that they depended on Him.
Under such a landlord, being a tenant was a privilege. It also set Canaan apart from every other land.
Happy, highly privileged tenants! What an honour to hold directly under Jehovah! No rent! No taxes! No burdens!… "The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine." What does this mean, except that Canaan belongs specially to Jehovah, and that He will hold it through the tribes of Israel? True, "the earth is the Lord's," but that is quite another thing.
The word "stranger" had a history for Israel. They had been strangers in Egypt, and God told them to love strangers because of it. Then He gave them that same name at home.
Israel themselves had known "the heart of a stranger" by bitter experience, and God declared Himself to them as One who "loves the sojourner, giving him food and clothing." He urges them, "Love the sojourner, therefore, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt" (Deuteronomy 10:18-19). More than that, He taught them to count themselves strangers even in their own land, and so to prove to themselves that love of His toward strangers… The Israelite, even if born in the land, could still say that he lived there as God's guest, in weakness and dependence.
The relationship this creates is not one of insecurity but of hospitality.
The land of Israel was God's, and they were His guests — "strangers and sojourners with Me," He says.
Later history put the verse to the test, when a king asked a man to hand over his family's ground.
Ahab's proposal to Naboth meant far more than it looks at first. It would have given away this God-fearing Israelite's inheritance for good. An Israelite who feared God could not accept such terms. When he sold his land, he sold only its harvests, since the jubilee would give his possession back to him… The Israelite who feared God would keep the inheritance of his fathers because they had received it from the Lord. But there was a reason even more decisive than that. In reality the land, the ground itself, did not belong to the people, but to the Lord.
God never let ownership pass out of His hands, so whatever went wrong could still be undone. Commentators read the land of Israel as a sample of the whole earth.
The Lord of Israel kept in His own hand the means of restoring all things. He acted as Lord of the soil, and said the Land was His… And so with this earth, of which the land of Israel was the sample. Man may take it into his own hand for a time, and by greed or idleness disturb God's order in it. But a day is coming — the promised and expected jubilee, the time of the restoring of all things. Then the earth will come back to God.
The same principle reaches believers today. What they hold was also given.
Solomon had no right to give away the least part of the land, for it did not belong to him: it belongs to God. Can we today give away any part of the inheritance God has given to believers "in heavenly places"? Primarily the inheritance belongs to the Lord Jesus, who graciously shares it with us (Ephesians 1:9-11). We have no liberty to give up any part of it.
- Owner — "The land is Mine" stands behind every rule in the chapter. Israel held a trust, never the ownership.
- Tenant — The Owner never changed, so land could only be leased until the jubilee. That blocked land-grabbing and kept Israel aware that they depended on Him.
- Guest — "Strangers and sojourners with Me" gives Israel the same name as the strangers God told them to love. They lived in their own land as His guests.
- Test — Naboth shows the verse in real life. A God-fearing man could not sell his family's inheritance for good, because it was not his to sell.
- Restoration — God kept the title, so He kept the power to put everything back. The jubilee points on to the restoring of all things for the whole earth.
And in all the land of your possession ye shall grant a redemption for the land.
God tells Israel that the land is His, and then adds a rule for every field they hold: an owner must always be able to buy his land back. Two questions follow: why God keeps ownership in His own hands, and what a lasting "right of redemption" was meant to picture.
The rule about redemption rests on a statement of ownership made one verse earlier. One writer places the whole chapter in the setting of Israel's life in the land.
Here is a matter that concerned right government in Israel, once they had come into the land, and so God spoke it "in Mount Sinai." Verse 23 states the basic fact they had to remember — "the land is mine." So Israel had to handle the land, once they held it, in the way the earlier verses laid down.
Since the land stayed God's, Israel held it as tenants. That shaped how they were to treat the outsiders living among them.
Israel themselves had known "the heart of a stranger" by bitter experience. God declared Himself to them as One who "loves the sojourner, giving him food and clothing." The word to them is, "Love the sojourner, therefore, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt." More than that, they were taught to keep counting themselves strangers, even in their own land, and so to prove to themselves that love of His towards strangers.
A buyer never got the ground itself. The price told him how long his claim would last.
When he sold his land, he sold only its harvests. His possession would return to him in the year of jubilee, so the price depended on how many years the buyer would harvest its produce. The seller even had the right to redeem his land at any time. He refunded the buyer the amount above the value of the crops for the years that had passed since the sale.
The right belonged to the seller, but it did not stop with him. Another writer names the one reason a man could sell, and who else could buy the land back.
If poverty made him sell part of his possession — and that is the only ground stated here for parting with his family estate — he kept the right of redemption before the Jubilee arrived, and so did his relatives. If a relative came forward to carry it out, this law gave him the power to do it. If he had no relative, the liberty to redeem it stayed with him, though that depended on what he could afford. The inheritance was to be prized, and no one should have thought lightly of it, for it was God's provision for His people. Naboth had not fallen into poverty, and he refused to sell his vineyard even at the king's personal request: "The LORD forbid that I should give you the inheritance of my fathers."
A man might have no relative able or willing to help. The law still did not leave him without hope.
If no relative proved able or willing to redeem the inheritance, it returned to the heir in the Jubilee. So the Lord of Israel kept in His own hand the means of restoring all things. He acted as Lord of the soil, and said the land was His.
Commentators read this arrangement as a picture. The redeemer had to be a relative, and he had to pay.
If an Israelite or his possession had been sold, his kinsman had both the duty and the right to ransom him and it. Now Jesus has shown Himself our kinsman in both ways. The Son of God became the Son of man, and so showed His kinsman nature. He died to buy us and our inheritance by blood, and so showed His kinsman love.
This right also has a future. One writer sees it now held by God Himself, kept for the moment He chooses.
The Lord will vindicate His rights in that day… The men of Israel had been strangers and sojourners with Him. But from then on He will hide His face from them no more. They were responsible to grant the right of redemption in all the land they held. He keeps that right for the fit moment, and will proclaim it in triumph to their everlasting joy.
- Owner. The command stands on one fact stated just before it: the land is God's, so Israel had to handle it on His terms.
- Tenants. They held God's land as guests. So they kept counting themselves strangers, and showed strangers the love God showed them.
- Price. A sale passed on only the harvests left until the jubilee. The seller could buy back at any time by refunding the balance.
- Redeemer. Poverty was the one ground for selling. A relative could redeem what a man could not — and Christ is that kinsman, by nature and by blood.
- Restoration. Where no redeemer came, the jubilee restored the inheritance. God kept that right in His own hand, and still does.
If thy brother grow poor, and sell of his possession, then shall his redeemer, his nearest relation, come and redeem that which his brother sold.
A man in Israel grows poor and sells part of the family land God gave him. The law's answer is not charity but kinship: his nearest relative comes and buys it back.
The law guards the family's land. Poverty is the only reason it gives for selling, and the right to buy the land back stays open.
If poverty forced him to sell part of his property, he kept the right to buy it back before the Jubilee, and so did his relatives. Poverty is the only reason the law gives here for parting with the family estate. If a relative came forward to do it, this law gave him the power. If he had no relative to do it, the freedom to redeem it stayed with him. But redeeming it himself depended on what he could afford. The inheritance was to be prized. No one should have thought lightly of it, for it was God's provision for His people.
Redemption here was not open to just anyone. The right belonged to a relative, and it came with a duty.
Only a near relative could act as the kinsman-redeemer. In other words, he first had to be related to the one needing redemption — a brother (Lev. 25:25), an uncle, or an uncle's son (Lev. 25:49). When disaster and difficulty came, the kinsman-redeemer was to step in. He bought back the property or the persons, or both, of relatives who had sold themselves or their possessions to a stranger. More than that, he could not shelve or evade the responsibility laid on him. The kinsman-redeemer who refused to do his part was to be in disgrace in Israel.
Kinship is the qualification. Commentators draw a straight line from that rule to Christ.
In verse 25 we learn that, if a man stayed poor and could not buy it back himself, "any of his kin" might step in and redeem it for him. Boaz does this in the Book of Ruth. That picture shows how necessary it was that the Lord Jesus should take up perfect Manhood, sin apart. So He shared in flesh and blood, as Hebrews 2:14 says, so that by death He might break the devil's power over us. If He had taken hold of angels only, He could not have fulfilled the picture as our Kinsman-Redeemer, or paid the price that was needed.
One phrase runs through this chapter: "if your brother becomes poor." Commentators say the repetition is deliberate.
Redemption by buying back is the subject of Lev. 25, and the expression comes four times in the chapter. "If your brother becomes poor" is not mere repetition of words. Each time it is used it suggests a different condition of misery, and each one goes deeper than the last. This was instruction for the guidance of the people of Israel in the first place. Even so, it had nothing to do with law as a principle — keeping strict righteousness and demanding it from others. It points instead to the principle of grace on which God had dealt with Israel, and on which He expected His people to act towards others. It begins where law ends.
Commentators also read the poor brother as a picture of Israel. The nation lost its land through unfaithfulness, and grace will give it back.
Grace will count the time of suffering over, and sin pardoned through Him who loved His people and suffered for their sins... We hear of a brother who lost his possession through unfaithfulness and got it back through grace that overcame every difficulty. And Israel will be the standing, public witness both of the loss through evil and of the gain through grace. Yet the credit is not theirs in any way, but only Jesus'.
The chapter offers the impoverished man two routes home: a relative pays, or the Jubilee arrives and the land returns free. Commentators see both fulfilled in one Redeemer.
The ordinance of the Jubilee seems to set out this twofold redemption — by price and by power. That chapter teaches us that at any time during forty-nine years, a relative of the heir could buy back the lost possession of an Israelite. The land was redeemed, or brought back to the family to which, under God, it had belonged. But if that were not done, it would return to the heir in the fiftieth year, the Jubilee, with nothing paid.
- Poverty. The brother has lost what God gave him. Only poverty could make him sell it, and he cannot win it back alone.
- Kinship. The redeemer's qualification is relationship. Without blood ties there is no right to redeem, only a right to buy.
- Price. Because kinship qualifies, the Son of God took flesh and blood, and paid what redemption cost.
- Power. The chapter joins the price to the Jubilee. What money buys back, power alone restores when the Jubilee comes.
- Possession. The inheritance returns. It was lost through failure and regained through grace, and the credit belongs to the Redeemer, not the redeemed.
And if the man have no one having right of redemption, and his hand have acquired and found what sufficeth for its redemption,
Leviticus 25 rests on one claim: the land was God's, not the family's. Verse 26 covers a single case under that law — the man with no relative to buy back his land, who later earns enough to redeem it himself.
The rules for buying land back rest on who owned it. One writer borrows a legal phrase for God's claim — "eminent domain", the final right over all land:
In brief, the law declared the divine right of "eminent domain." The land was God's. It could never pass for good out of the hands of those to whom His grace had given it. All was to go free in the year of Jubilee, or a near relative could buy it back.
Verse 26 assumes the man has already sold. One writer sets out the one reason the law allowed it, and who could buy the land back:
If poverty made him sell any of his possession, he or his kin kept the right to redeem it before the Jubilee arrived. Poverty is the only ground stated here for letting him part with his family estate. If a kinsman came forward, this law gave him the power to do it. If he had no kinsman, he kept the freedom to redeem it himself. But for him, redeeming it depended on his ability. The inheritance was worth prizing, and no one should have thought lightly of it, for it was God's provision for His people.
"Sufficient means" was a set sum, worked out from the calendar:
In time the seller himself might have enough funds to redeem his possession. If so, he was to count the years since the sale, and of course the time left till the year of Jubilee, and pay according to this. Suppose the buyer had use of the property for 20 years, and ten years were left before the Jubilee. He was to work out the price on that basis. For in the year of Jubilee the first owner would pay nothing to have his property returned (v. 28).
Verse 26 applies only when the option in verse 25 has failed. Commentators see a picture of Christ in that earlier option — a relative stepping in:
Some who had done this might later have money enough to redeem it themselves. Verse 26 considers such a case, and verse 27 states fair terms of redemption. But in verse 25 we learn that, if a man remained poor and unable for this, "any of his kin" might step in and redeem it for him. Boaz shows us this in action in the book of Ruth. That picture shows why the Lord Jesus had to take perfect Manhood, sin apart.
Everything here hangs on conditions the man may never meet. One commentator reads that small word as the story of human failure — and names the Redeemer who answers it:
"If" is a serious word for man. No doubt it is righteous. But the fact is that the first man breaks down and fails in his responsibility… Jesus will be owned as the Kinsman Redeemer. And He will indeed come to redeem. The right is His, and He will not fail to recognise and apply it, in everlasting mercy… Otherwise their kin will have failed, and their own hand will not have found enough. But grace will count the time of suffering over, and iniquity pardoned through Him who loved His people and suffered for their sins.
Kelly also quotes another writer, who marks the limit of this law:
The law of Moses allowed anyone who was able to redeem himself. But that was impossible for us. We owe God absolute obedience in all our actions, so no act of ours can make any satisfaction for the least offence.
What if the man finds no kinsman and never gains the means? The Jubilee still answers, and it costs him nothing:
The kinsman might redeem with money. The Jubilee would redeem without money, by its own title. Its force and authority came from Him who was the God of Israel and the Lord of the soil.
- Owner — The land was God's, so a poor man's sale was temporary, never a final loss.
- Right — The right to buy the land back stayed in the family: a kinsman, or the man himself. The inheritance was God's provision, and worth prizing.
- Reckoning — The calendar fixed the price: count the years since the sale, then pay by the years left to the Jubilee.
- Kinsman — The relative who buys the land back pictures Christ, who took perfect Manhood so He could come as the Kinsman Redeemer.
- Jubilee — The kinsman redeemed with money; the Jubilee redeemed without it. The law let a man buy himself back, but no one can do that with sin.
then shall he reckon the years since the sale thereof, and restore the overplus unto the man to whom he sold it; and so return unto his possession.
Verse 27 assumes a sale that was never permanent. Because the land itself belonged to God, an Israelite could only hand over the use of it for a stretch of years, and the closer the year of jubilee came, the less that stretch was worth.
One thing is made very plain. The land was God's. So those to whom He gave it could only lease it out. They sold it until the jubilee came, and the value of the lease dropped as the jubilee drew near. In this way no family lost its inheritance for good. It also stopped grasping men from piling up land. More important still, it kept reminding Israel that all they would have, they held from the Lord, and they depended on Him.
The refund in this verse is arithmetic, not haggling.
The seller himself might in time have enough money to redeem his possession. If so, he was to count the years since the sale, and the time left till the year of Jubilee, and pay on that basis. Say the buyer had use of the property for 20 years, and ten years were left before the Jubilee. The price had to follow those numbers. For in the year of Jubilee the first owner would pay nothing to have his property returned (v. 28).
A sale like this was forced on a man. He never chose it as a business move, and so he kept the right to buy the land back.
He might sell part of his possession because of poverty. That is the only reason given here for letting a man part with his family estate. He kept the right to buy it back before the Jubilee came, and so did his relatives... The inheritance was to be prized, and no one should have thought lightly of it, for it was God's provision for His people. Naboth had not fallen into poverty. He refused to sell his vineyard even when the king himself asked: "The Lord forbid that I should give you the inheritance of my fathers" (1 Kings 21:3).
The right, however, depended on ability. Whether a man could act on verse 27 came down to whether his own hand had found enough.
Verse 27 is the happier case. Behind it stands verse 25, where a poor man's relative steps in and pays instead — and commentators read that arrangement as pointing forward.
Some who had done this might later have the means to redeem it themselves. Verse 26 has that case in view, and verse 27 gives fair terms of redemption. But in verse 25 we learn that if a man stayed poor and unable to do this, "any of his kin" might step in and redeem it for him. Boaz acts this out in the Book of Ruth. The picture shows how necessary it was that the Lord Jesus should take up perfect Manhood, yet without sin. So He "took part" of "flesh and blood," as Hebrews 2:14 says, that by death He might undo the power of the devil over us. If He had taken hold of angels only, He could not have filled out the picture as our Kinsman-Redeemer, and He could not have paid the price.
The whole section reads as God legislating in advance for people He knows will fail. One writer puts the sequence plainly: the inheritance is lost through sin and given back at a time God has already fixed.
A brother who grew poor and sold part of his possession was in a terrible condition, and one that should have spoken to his conscience... His inheritance had passed out of his hands because of sin. It would come back to him at the set time appointed by God, which the jubilee points to (Lev. 25:10). So it has been with the nation of Israel. Even so, the coming thousand-year kingdom will see them restored to their possession. They will live in safety and rest under the peaceful reign of the Son of David.
Israel's own recovery, one writer says, will not come from a full purse.
Relatives will have failed, and their own hand will not have found enough. But grace will count the time of suffering finished, and their sin pardoned through Him who loved His people and suffered for their sins... We hear of a brother who lost his possession through unfaithfulness, and got it back through grace that overcame every difficulty.
- Possession — the land was God's, held from Him, so a sale transferred only years of use, never ownership.
- Poverty — only poverty could put family land on the market; the inheritance was to be prized, not traded.
- Price — redemption is exact and fair: count the years since the sale, then pay for the years left.
- Provision — if his own hand cannot reach the price, a relative pays; the Lord Jesus took flesh and blood to act as Kinsman-Redeemer.
- Return — by his own money, by a relative, or by the jubilee itself, the man goes back to his land. It pictures an inheritance lost through unfaithfulness and restored by grace.
And if his hand have not found what sufficeth for him to restore it to him, then that which is sold shall remain in the hand of the purchaser, until the year of jubilee; and in the jubilee it shall go out, and he shall return unto his possession.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
And if any one sell a dwelling-house in a walled city, then he shall have the right of redemption up to the end of the year of the sale thereof; for a full year shall he have the right of redemption.
Leviticus 25 has just ruled that land in Israel could never be sold for good, because the land belonged to God and Israel only held it from Him. Verse 29 then makes an exception: a house inside a walled city could be bought back only within one year of the sale — so why is a house treated unlike a field?
The next verse says what happens when the year runs out.
There was an interesting exception for a man who owned a house in a walled city. If he sold it, he could redeem it within one year (v. 29). If he did not redeem it in that time, the house became the buyer's property for good: it did not go free in the year of Jubilee (v. 30).
From the seller's side, that year is a kindness — though no kinsman is named to redeem a house for him.
Still, the rule about the house was kind. No one was to be taken advantage of, or tricked into giving up his house in a walled town with no power to think again. Yet with a house, as with land, the seller needed the means to buy back what he had sold. If his land was in question, a kinsman could redeem it. If it was a house, it seems the law provided no kinsman to redeem it.
A field and a town house differ at the root: God gave the land, but human hands built the house.
The seller had the right to buy it back during a full year from the sale. After that, if he did not buy it back, it belonged to the buyer for ever. It stood on land God gave the Israelites, but widespread human failure spoiled its standing as a gift from God... "For every house is built by someone." It is only man that builds it. But the God that built all things claimed the land as His and gave it to His people as their landlord... But the house that each man built, or took from the Canaanites, was not God's gift in the way the promised land was.
Another writer sets the village house beside the one inside the walls.
Houses in villages were to be treated as land but not if the house stood in a walled city. Such could only be redeemed within a year of the original transaction. Such houses were more clearly man's own work. They lacked the simple character of God's work in the countryside.
The verse does not say "a house in a city" but a house in a walled city. One writer reads that wall as a sign that Israel did not yet live in safety.
This is made sharper still by the added words "in a walled city." Here man's hand does not just show everywhere in his house; even more, the "walled city" marks the presence, if not the dominance, of the enemy's power. So the Israelite falls back on a human means of protection. That tells how little he yet enjoys His full privilege — the day when every man shall sit under his vine and under his fig tree, and none shall make them afraid, for the mouth of the LORD has spoken it.
The next two verses reverse the ruling for houses that stand without walls, and that reversal is taken as a picture of where security really lies.
So the house in the country, with no such protection, fell under the same rule as the land. It kept the right of redemption and went free in the Jubilee. In that day man's strength and shield must fall, and the defenceless who trust in Him will triumph, when He brings down the strongholds of men's high walls, lays them low, and brings them to the ground, into the dust.
The one exception makes the main rule stand out. What God gave stays His to give back.
The LORD will vindicate His rights in that day. "The land shall not be sold in perpetuity," whatever the proud claims of the nations may say. "For the land is Mine." ... They were responsible to grant the right of redemption everywhere in the land they held. He keeps that same right for the right moment, and will proclaim it in triumph, to their everlasting joy.
The Levites, the tribe set apart for God's service, were a further exception: their houses stayed open to redemption at any time.
Their cities or houses could be sold, but the right to redeem them stayed open at any time, and they were sure to go free at the Jubilee... So those set apart for God's service could never be completely stripped of the possessions the LORD had secured for them.
- Gift — what God gave could never be lost for good; the land was His, and the Jubilee existed to return it.
- Build — a house in a walled city was man's own work, and so it fell outside that guarantee.
- Wall — a wall admits an enemy is near. It is man's protection, not the safety God promises.
- Year — even so, the law gave twelve months to think again, so no one was trapped by a hasty sale.
- Servants — the Levites, set apart for God's service, could redeem at any time. What God secures, He never lets slip.
But if it be not redeemed until a whole year is complete, then the house that is in the walled city shall be established for ever to him that bought it, throughout his generations it shall not go out in the jubilee.
In the year of jubilee, land sold in Israel went back to the family that first owned it. This verse names the exception. A house inside a walled city stayed with the buyer for good, once the year for buying it back had run out.
The exception is narrow. It covers one kind of house, and houses outside the walls follow a different rule.
There was an interesting exception for a man who owned a house in a walled city. If he sold it, he could redeem it within one year (v. 29). If he did not redeem it in that time, the house became the permanent property of the buyer (v. 30). But houses in unwalled towns or villages counted as those in the country. The owner could redeem them at any time, and in the year of Jubilee they returned to him (v. 31).
The twelve months protect the seller, not the buyer. They give him time to think again before the loss becomes permanent. One writer also notes a gap in this law: the seller's family cannot help him here as they could with land.
The Israelite who owned it could sell it, subject to his right to redeem it within one year from the date of sale. If he failed for any reason to use his right within that time, the sale stood. Nothing could then overturn the buyer's title to hold it permanently. Yet this law about the house was gracious. No one was to be taken advantage of, or talked into parting with his house in a walled town, without the power to think again about what he had done… When his land was in question, a relative could redeem it. When it was a house, the help of a relative is not, it seems, provided for.
Why treat a house differently from a field? The field was God's gift to Israel. The house was not. Man built it with his own hands.
The house was built on the land which God gave the Israelites. But the spread of man's failure spoiled its privilege of being a gift from God… "For every house is built by someone." It is only man that builds it. But the God who built all things claimed the land as His. He gave it to His people as their landlord, to make it all the surer. He will prove it so in the great jubilee, when every intruder vanishes and He puts His people back in their place… But the dwelling-place which each man built, or took from the Canaanite, was no such gift of God as the land of promise.
Another writer draws the same contrast with the houses in the villages:
Houses in villages counted as land, but not a house that stood in a walled city… A house inside the walls was more clearly man's handiwork. It lacked the simplicity that belongs to God's handiwork in the countryside.
The wall around the city matters as much as the house inside it. A wall means there is still an enemy to keep out.
Here man's hand is not only visible everywhere in his own house. Even more, the "walled city" marks the presence, if not the prevalence, of the enemy's power. So the Israelite turns to a human means of protection. That tells the story of how little he yet enjoys his full privilege, when they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree, and no one shall make them afraid.
The unwalled house, defenceless and undefended, keeps the promise the walled one forfeits:
So the house in the country had no such protection. It fell under the principle of the land, kept the right of redemption, and was to go out in the jubilee. The strength and shield of man must fall in that day, and the defenceless who trust in Him shall triumph.
The exception shows what the rule was for. The land could never be sold for good, because it belonged to God.
Of that land the LORD has said, "IT IS MINE." Who shall take it from Him?… God has not cast away His people, or the land which He swore to give them as an everlasting possession. The twelve loaves of Leviticus 24 bear witness to the first; and the jubilee of Leviticus 25 bears witness to the second. The memorial of the twelve tribes of Israel is always before the Lord. The moment is fast approaching when the trumpet of jubilee will sound on the mountains of Palestine.
- Sale — A house in a walled city could be sold outright; unlike land, it never came back at the jubilee once the year ran out.
- Year — The twelve months were mercy, not red tape. No one should lose a home to a hasty decision. After that, the buyer's title could not be shaken.
- Builder — The exception turns on who made it. The land was God's gift; the house was man's handiwork, and what man builds he can lose for good.
- Wall — The wall itself confesses the enemy is still near. Where man must build his own defence, the promised peace has not yet come.
- Jubilee — The country house and the field come back, because the jubilee restores what God gave. What God gives is never lost for good.
But the houses in villages that have no wall round about them shall be reckoned as the fields of the country they may be redeemed, and they shall go out in the jubilee.
Earlier in this chapter God rules that land in Israel can never be sold for good. A house inside a walled city is the one exception — the seller can lose it for ever. This verse draws the line. A house in an open village counts as a field: the owner can always buy it back, and the jubilee returns it to him.
One writer sets the two rules side by side:
There was an interesting exception for someone who owned a house in a walled city. If he sold it, he could buy it back within one year (v. 29). If he did not buy it back in that time, the house became the buyer's permanent property. The Jubilee year did not release it (v. 30). But houses in unwalled towns or villages counted as houses in the country. They could be redeemed at any time, and in the year of Jubilee they went back to the original owner (v. 31).
Why should a wall change the standing of a house? One writer points to the difference between man's work and God's:
Houses in villages were to be treated as land, but not if the house stood in a walled city... Houses in a walled city were more clearly man's own handiwork. They lacked the simplicity that belongs to God's handiwork in the countryside.
The same contrast goes deeper. God gave the land, but a man built the house.
The house stood on the land God gave the Israelites. But man's failure was everywhere, and it spoiled the house's standing as a divine gift. Two witnesses may show us this. "For every house is built by someone." It is only man that builds it. But the God who built all things claimed the land as His own. He gave it to His people as their landlord, to make their holding all the surer. He will prove it so in the great jubilee, when every intruder vanishes and He restores His people — the people who had lost the land over and over again by turning away from Him.
A house with no wall had no human protection. That is why it kept its claim:
So the house out in the country had no such protection. It came under the rule that governed the land. It kept the right of redemption, and it was to go out in the jubilee. In that day man's strength and shield must fall, and the defenceless who trust in Him will triumph. He will bring down the strongholds of men's high walls, lay them low, and bring them to the ground, into the dust.
The words about villages with no wall come back later in the Bible. One writer traces them to Ezekiel 38, where a people living without walls is attacked:
Being "in a walled city" makes this sharper. Man's hand shows everywhere in his own house, but the walled city marks something more: the presence, if not the prevalence, of the enemy's power. So man turns to his own means of protection, and that shows how little the Israelite yet enjoys the full privilege God has promised him... So, when the work of dealing with Israel's enemies is under way but not yet finished, Ezekiel 38 tells us that Israel will be gathered out of many peoples into the land bought back from the sword. But this last enemy hopes to become overlord of the earth by coming down on Israel while it lies unprotected. "I will go up against the land of unwalled villages. I will fall upon the quiet people who dwell securely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having no bars or gates." But Jehovah will prove Himself the true and glorious defence of His people... Their walled cities, their fortifications, and their powerful navies will be useless.
This verse rests on one claim: the land belongs to God, so no sale can be final. One writer takes that as a standing guarantee for Israel's future:
Of that land Jehovah has said, "IT IS MINE." Who shall take it from Him?... God has not cast away His people, or the land which He swore to give to them for an everlasting possession. "The twelve loaves" of Leviticus 24 bear witness to the former; and "the jubilee" of Leviticus 25 bears witness to the latter... the moment is coming fast when the trumpet of jubilee will sound on the mountains of Palestine. Then the captive will really throw off the shameful chain that has bound him for ages.
- Owner. God says of Canaan, "It is mine" — every rule about selling and redeeming flows from that single fact.
- Gift. The land was God's gift. So the village house that stands on it shares the land's privilege: always redeemable, always returned.
- Wall. A wall marks man's own building and man's own protection. A walled-city house is the one property the jubilee does not release.
- Defenceless. The house without a wall keeps its claim. The unprotected who trust God are the ones kept safe, while high walls come down to the dust.
- Jubilee. Ezekiel 38 carries the picture forward. The last enemy attacks a people living without walls, God Himself becomes their defence, and the jubilee trumpet gives the captive back his own.
But as to the cities of the Levites, the houses in the cities of their possession, the Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption.
Leviticus 25 gives Israel the jubilee: every fiftieth year, sold land went back to the family that first owned it. Houses inside walled cities were the exception — and the Levites, the tribe that served at God's sanctuary, were the exception to that.
The right to buy back had no deadline, and the reason lies in how little the Levites owned.
But the Levites could buy back the houses in their cities at any time. Those houses returned to the original owner at the Jubilee (vv. 32-33). That is because the Levites held property only in their own cities. So they kept the right to buy their property back.
The priests and the Levites were supported in different ways, but from one source.
The priests had all the offerings and sacrifices that a man might share in. The Levites had the tithes from all Israel. The priests were fed from within, the Levites from without. But both received from the Lord, for He was their inheritance. Otherwise they were miserable. What else did they have?
So these houses were not spare property beside a family estate. They were part of the little the Levites held, and the law guarded it.
As for the Levites, the law was different. They had no tribal land, as their brothers had. God assigned them their cities and the fields around them. Their cities or houses could be sold, but the right to buy them back stayed open at any time, and they would certainly go out free at the Jubilee. The fields around their cities could never be sold at all. They were a perpetual possession (32-34). So the men set apart to serve God could never lose all that the Lord had secured for them.
Verse 32 gets its force from the case just before it. A house inside city walls could be lost for good, because such a house is man's work, not God's gift.
It was the dwelling-house in a walled city that lost its claim to redemption at the jubilee. The seller had the right to buy it back for a full year after the sale. After that, if he did not buy it back, it passed for ever to the buyer. It was built on the land God gave the Israelites, yet widespread human failure spoiled its privilege of being a gift from God... But the house each man built, or took from the Canaanite, was not God's gift in the way the promised land was.
The Levite's house also stood in a city, yet it never fell under that rule. What made the difference was whose it was.
The law also gave special protection to the Levites and their possessions, since they were in a special way God's possession.
So why is this one house never lost for good? The answer is in who its owner serves — and in what God still means to do.
On the same principle, the house of the Levites fell under the care of Him who calls them to be His servants. It had a perpetual right of redemption. Even if sold in the city of his possession, it had to go out at the jubilee. On the other hand, their fields around their cities could not be sold. They had to remain their perpetual possession, as God's sacred gift to them. And He will see to this. The One whose right it is will come to repair all wrongs and failures for His own who wait for Him.
Levi's cities were scattered through the land, and that scattering started as a penalty.
In these Levite cities, scattered through the land, we see the prophecy about Levi fulfilled: "I will divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel." Yet how differently it was fulfilled from what we would have expected! Grace shows itself in absolute sovereignty over all the sin. What seemed to be only a penalty has become blessing. And this fits God's way in grace completely: the one who had been under that penalty becomes a blessing to others... Seed must not lie in a heap, or it does not do its work. Levi must be God's witness in Israel, and the seal that the whole land is set apart to God — a people whose portion is God alone.
- Portion. Levi received no tribal land. The Lord was their inheritance, and their cities were all they held.
- Protection. That portion was small, so the law guarded it strongly. They could buy their houses back at any time, with no one-year deadline.
- Ownership. A walled-city house was man's own work, so it could be lost for ever. The Levite's house could not, because the Levites were God's own.
- Reach. Those cities lay scattered through the land, so keeping them in Levite hands kept God's witness everywhere.
- Restoration. The jubilee returned the Levite to his house. Commentators point on to the day when God repairs every wrong for those who wait for Him.
And if any one redeem from one of the Levites, then the house that was sold, in the city of his possession, shall go out in the jubilee; for the houses of the cities of the Levites are their possession among the children of Israel.
This verse sits inside the laws about selling property. It sets out a rule for one tribe alone: the Levites, the family set apart to serve God. Their houses could be sold, but never lost — and the reason given is that these houses were all the possession they had.
Every other seller faced a deadline or a limit. For the Levites, the door stayed open.
The houses of the Levites in their cities could be redeemed at any time, and would return to the original owner at the time of Jubilee (vv. 32-33). The Levites were given property only in their own cities. They therefore had the right to the redemption of their property. In these cities, however, there was common land, belonging to all the Levites, and that was never to be sold (v. 34).
The other tribes each received a share of the land. Levi did not, so the law protected them another way.
As regards the Levites, the law was different. They had no tribal share of land, as their brothers had. God assigned them their cities and the open land around them. They could sell their cities or houses, but the right to buy them back stayed open at any time, and the property was certain to go out free at the Jubilee. The fields around their cities, though, could never be sold. They were a perpetual possession (32-34). So those set apart to serve God could never lose all the possessions Jehovah had secured for them.
Just a few verses earlier, a house inside a walled city became the buyer's forever if no one bought it back within a year. This verse runs the other way.
Verses 29-34 deal with exceptions to the above. Houses in villages were to be treated as land, but not if the house stood in a walled city. Such a house could be bought back only within a year of the sale. City houses were more clearly man's own work. They lacked the simplicity that belongs to God's work in the countryside. God also ordered special protection for the Levites and their possessions, because they were His own possession in a special way.
One writer traces the difference to who built what. Man builds the house; God gave the land:
The house stood on land God gave the Israelites. But man's failure was everywhere, and it spoiled the house's privilege of being a divine gift... It is only man that builds it. But the God who built all things claimed the land as His. He gave it to His people as their landlord, to make it all the surer. He will prove it so in the great jubilee, when every intruder vanishes and He puts His people back in it.
The verse gives its own reason: these houses are the Levites' possession among the people. Their security rests on the One who called them.
In the same way, the house of the Levites fell under the care of the One who calls them to be His servants. So they had a perpetual right of redemption. Even if sold in the city of his possession, it had to go out at the jubilee. On the other hand, they could not sell their fields in the open land around their cities. Those fields had to stay their perpetual possession, as God's sacred gift to them. He will see to this when the One whose right it is comes to repair every wrong and failure for His own who wait for Him.
That arrangement asked something back from the Levites: trust that God would keep them.
God gave the Levites no inheritance in the land. The sacrifices of Jehovah God of Israel — yes, Jehovah Himself — were their inheritance, as He told them. The Lord's workmen stood on different ground from the rest of His people. He called them to a special confidence in His provision for them and in His word about them. If they failed in this, could they wonder that their words had little power?
The verse names both routes back: someone may redeem the house, or the jubilee brings it out. One writer finds a picture of redemption in that pairing.
The law of the Jubilee seems to set out this twofold redemption — by price and by power. (See Lev. 25) That chapter teaches us that at any time during the forty-nine years, a relative of the heir could buy back an Israelite's lost property. It was redeemed, and it came back to the family it had belonged to under God. If no one did that, it still returned to the heir in the fiftieth year, the Jubilee, with no price paid.
- Possession. The Levites held no tribal land. Their houses in their own cities were their whole portion — and the verse itself gives that as the reason.
- Protection. Because that was all they had, God shielded it. They could buy it back at any time, and the fields around their cities could never be sold.
- Contrast. A house in a walled city was lost for good after a year. A Levite's house never was. Commentators tie this to the difference between what man builds and what God gives.
- Provider. The rule flows from the One who called them to serve, and it asked of them a special confidence in His provision.
- Return. Two roads brought the property home: a price paid to redeem it, or release at the jubilee by God's own act. The Levite had both.
And the field of the suburbs of their cities shall not be sold; for it is their perpetual possession.
Leviticus 25 sets out how land in Israel could be sold, redeemed, and released at the jubilee. Verse 34 fences off one field from sale — so why were the Levites' towns treated this way, and what does it show about how God provides for those who serve Him?
The chapter has already allowed land and houses to change hands under set conditions. For the Levites, the terms were not the same:
As regards the Levites, the law was different. They had no tribal possession of land, as their brothers had; but God assigned them their cities with the open land around them. Of these, their cities or houses could be sold. The seller kept the right of redemption at any time, and the property would certainly go out free at the Jubilee. But the fields of open land around their cities could never be sold. They were a perpetual possession. So those set apart to serve God could never be wholly stripped of the possessions the Lord had secured for them. They were always to have their portion of the tithes, and to enjoy the produce of the fields of their possession.
The fields in question were not scattered farmland but a measured belt of ground wrapped around each Levite town.
They were to receive forty-eight cities, scattered through the portions given to the other tribes. They were also to hold land around each of these cities, reaching out 2,000 cubits — at least 1,000 yards, and probably a little more. This land was to be for their cattle and for their goods; that is, we suppose, for their support by cultivation.
A Levite could sell his house, but not this field. The field was never his alone:
The Levites were given property only in their own cities. They therefore had the right to the redemption of their property. In these cities, however, there was common land, belonging to all the Levites, and that was not ever to be sold (v. 34).
God left this tribe without a share in the land, and gave them something better:
The Lord's servants were wholly cast upon Him for their portion. They had no inheritance or possession except Himself. Blessed inheritance! Precious portion! None like it, in the judgement of faith. Blessed are all those who can truly say to the Lord, "You are my chosen portion and my cup; you hold my lot." God took care of His dependent servants. He also let the whole congregation of Israel taste a holy privilege — and it most certainly was one. They were His co-workers in providing for those who had gladly given themselves to His work, leaving all else behind.
The extra safeguard rests on who the Levites belonged to:
There was special protection ordered for the Levites and their possessions, since they belonged to God in a special way.
God Himself stands behind a perpetual possession. He will repair every loss along the way:
On a similar principle, the house of a Levite came under the care of the One who calls them to be His servants. It carried a perpetual right of redemption. Even if sold in the city of his possession, it must go out at the jubilee. On the other hand, their fields in the suburbs of their cities could not be sold. They must remain their perpetual possession, God's sacred gift to them. The One whose right it is will see to this when He comes. He will repair all wrongs and failures for His own who wait for Him.
Commentators read the same pattern — no inheritance, God Himself instead — as a picture of believers now:
The priests, the Levites, were the servants of the Lord. They had no inheritance with Israel, but the Lord Himself was their inheritance. Moses now commands how the people are to provide for them. They were both dependent on the Lord and closely identified with Him. And this is true of us, who are in Christ made priests and called to the Levite service.
- No portion. The Levites had no tribal share of land at all, so their towns and the ground around them came to them straight from God.
- God as portion. With no inheritance of their own, they leaned on Him alone — a portion faith counts better than any field.
- Given portion. God still supplied them: a belt of land at least 1,000 yards deep around each town, plus their share of the tithes.
- Guarded portion. Houses could be sold and redeemed. The common field could not be sold at all, because the Levites belonged to God.
- Kept portion. God secures what He calls a perpetual possession. He will repair every wrong when He comes for those who wait for Him.