Leviticus 24:1–23

Leviticus 24:1-4 1. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 1. Loquutus est autem Jehova ad Mosen, dicendo: 2. Command the children of Israel, that they bring unto thee pure oil olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamps to burn continually. 2. Praecipe filiis Israel ut afferant tibi oleum olivae purum, contusum pro luminari, ad accendendas lucernas semper. 3 Without the vail of the testimony, in the tabernacle of the congregation, shall Aaron order it from the evening unto the morning before the LORD continually: it shall be a statute for ever in your generations. 3. Extra velum testimonii in tabernaculo conventionis disponet eas Aharon a vespera usque ad mane, coram Jehova semper: statutum per-perpetuum erit in generationibus vestris. 4. He shall order the lamps upon the pure candlestick before the LORD continually. 4. Super candelabrum mundum disponet lucernas coram Jehova semper.

Aaron shall order it from the evening unto the morning--The daily presence of the priests was necessary to superintend the cleaning and trimming.

upon the pure candlestick--so called because of pure gold. This was symbolical of the light which ministers are to diffuse through the Church.

And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... After he had delivered to him the laws concerning the purity of the priests, and the perfection of the sacrifices they were to offer, and concerning the feasts the people were to keep, he spoke to Moses of some other things which concerned both people and priests: saying; as follows.

Command the children of Israel,.... Moses was the chief magistrate under God, and being clothed with authority from him, had power to command the children of Israel to do what the Lord required of them: that they bring unto thee pure oil olive, beaten, for the light; this was to be at the public expense, and it belonged to the community to supply the priests with oil for the light of the candlestick in the temple, Exodus 25:6; and this oil was not to be any sort of oil, as train oil, or oil of nuts, almonds, &c. but oil of olives, and not any sort of that, but the purest, which was the first that was taken from them; it seems there were three sorts, the first of which was pure, and this beaten in a mortar, and not ground in a mill; See Gill on Exodus 27:20, to cause the lamps to burn continually; the lamps in the golden candlestick, which were seven, Exodus 25:37; or "the lamp", in the singular number, as it is in the original text; the western lamp, which is said to be always kept lighted, from which the rest were lighted when out; though the oil was undoubtedly for the supply of the lamps, that they might burn always, night and day; or from night tonight, as Jarchi; and both on sabbath days and working days, as the Targum of Jonathan.

Without the vail of the testimony,.... That is, on the outside of the vail which divided between the holy and holy of holies, and which was before the ark in which the testimony or law was: in the tabernacle of the congregation; which the apostle calls the first, namely, the holy place in which the candlestick, with its lamps, stood, Hebrews 9:2, shall Aaron order it from the evening unto the morning, before the Lord continually, that is, the lamp or lamps, or candlestick, in which they were, or the light of them; his business was, and so every priest's that succeeded him, to supply the lamps with oil, to dress, him, and snuff them, that they might burn clear, and burn always, and that before the Lord, in the presence of the Lord: it shall be a statute for ever in your generations; until the Messiah should come, the true light, which would put out all such typical ones, and by his Gospel spread light in all his churches throughout the world; See Gill on Exodus 27:20 and See Gill on Exodus 27:21.

He shall order the lamps on the pure candlestick,.... So called, as Jarchi suggests, for these two reasons, partly because it was made of pure gold, and partly because it was to be kept pure and clean, and free from ashes, by the priest; see Exodus 25:31, before the Lord continually; which both respects the situation of the candlestick, and the work about it, which Aaron was to do continually before and in the presence of the Lord. Jarchi thinks this ordering respects the measure of oil for every night, which he says, according to the wise men, was half a log for every lamp, which was about a quarter of a pint of oil.

Care is here taken, and orders are given, for the decent furnishing of the candlestick and table in God's house. I. The lamps must always be kept burning. The law for this we had before, Exo 27:20, Exo 27:21. It is here repeated, probably because it now began to be put in execution, when other things were settled. 1. The people were to provide oil (Lev 24:2), and this, as every thing else that was to be used in God's service, must be of the best, pure olive-oil, beaten, probably it was double-strained. This was to cause the lamps to burn; all our English copies read it lamps, but in the original it is singular in Lev 24:2 - to cause the lamp to burn; but plural in Lev 24:4 - he shall order the lamps. The seven lamps made all one lamp, in allusion to which the blessed Spirit of grace is represented by seven lamps of fire before the throne (Rev 4:5), for there are diversities of gifts, but one Spirit, Co1 12:4. Ministers are as burning and shining lights in Christ's church, but it is the duty of people to provide comfortably for them, as Israel for the lamps. Scandalous maintenance makes a scandalous ministry. 2. The priests were to tend the lamps; they must snuff them, clean the candlestick, and supply them with oil, morning and evening, Lev 24:3, Lev 24:4. Thus it is the work of the ministers of the gospel to hold forth that word of life, not to set up new lights, but, by expounding and preaching the word, to make the light of it more clear and extensive. This was the ordinary way of keeping the lamps burning; but, when the church was poor and in distress, we find its lamps fed constantly with oil from the good olives immediately, without the ministry of priest or people (Zac 4:2, Zac 4:3); for, though God has tied us to means, he has not tied himself to them, but will take effectual care that his lamp never go out in the world for want of oil. II. The table must always be kept spread. This was appointed before, Exo 25:30. And here also, 1. The table was furnished with bread; not dainties nor varieties to gratify a luxurious palate, but twelve loaves or cakes of bread, Lev 24:5, Lev 24:6. Where there is plenty of bread there is no famine; and where bread is not there is no feast. There was a loaf for every tribe, for in our Father's house there is bread enough. They were all provided for by the divine bounty, and were all welcome to the divine grace. Even after the revolt of the ten tribes this number of loaves was continued (Ch2 13:11), for the sake of those few of each tribe that retained their affection to the temple and continued their attendance on it. 2. A handful of frankincense was put in a golden saucer, upon or by each row, Lev 24:7. When the bread was removed, and given to the priests, this frankincense was burnt upon the golden altar (I suppose) over and above the daily incense: and this was for a memorial instead of the bread, an offering made by fire, as the handful of the meat-offering which was burnt upon the altar is called the memorial thereof, Lev 2:2. Thus a little was accepted as a humble acknowledgment, and all the loaves were consigned to the priests. All God's spiritual Israel, typified by the twelve loaves, are made through Christ a sweet savour to him, and their prayers are said to come up before God for a memorial, Act 10:4. The word is borrowed from the ceremonial law. 3. Every sabbath it was renewed. When the loaves had stood there a week, the priests had them to eat with other holy things that were to be eaten in the holy place (Lev 24:9), and new ones were provided at the public charge, and put in the room of them, Lev 24:8. The Jews say, "The hands of those priests that put on were mixed with theirs that took off, that the table might be never empty, but the bread might be before the Lord continually." God is never unprovided for the entertainment of those that visit him, as men often are, Luk 11:5. Every one of those cakes contained two tenth-deals, that is, two omers of fine flour; just so much manna every Israelite gathered on the sixth day for the sabbath, Exo 16:22. Hence some infer that this show-bread, which was set on the table on the sabbath, was intended as a memorial of the manna wherewith they were fed in the wilderness. Christ's ministers should provide new bread for his house every sabbath day, the production of their fresh studies in the scripture, that their proficiency may appear to all, Ti1 4:1, Ti1 4:5.

Leviticus 24:5-9 5. And thou shalt take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes thereof: two tenth-deals shall be in one cake. 5. Accipies similam, et coques ex ea duodecim placentas: duarum decimarum sit unaquseque placenta. 6. And thou shalt set them in two rows, six on a row, upon the pure table before the LORD. 6. Et pones eas in duobus ordinibus: seni ordines super mensam mundam coram Jehova. 7. And thou shalt put pure frankincense upon each row, that it may be on the bread for a memorial, even an offering made by fire unto the LORD. 7. Pones quoque super ordinem utrunque thus purum, eritque pani in memoriale et incensum Jehovae. 8. Every sabbath he shall set it in order before the LORD continually, being taken from the children of Israel by an everlasting covenant. 8. Per singula sabbatha ordinabit illos coram Jehova semper, a filiis Israel foedere sempiterno. 9. And it shall be Aaron's and his sons'; and they shall eat it in the holy place: for it is most holy unto him of the offerings of the LORD made by fire by a perpetual statute. 9. Et erit Aharonis et filiorum ejus, qui comedent eum in loco sancto: quia sanctitatis sanctitatum est ei ex oblationibus ignitis Jehovae statuto perpetuo. We now come to the third part of the external service of God, which will bring us to the end of our exposition of the Second Commandment. We have, then, now to treat of the sacred oblations, the first place amongst which I have thought it best to give to the loaves, which had their peculiar table opposite the candlestick on the north side, as we saw in the construction of the Tabernacle; for although the mention of them will recur elsewhere, yet, since they were offered separately, and placed before the Ark of the Covenant, as it were in God's sight, they must not be treated of apart from the sacrifices. I have already explained that this was no ordinary symbol of God's favor, when He descended familiarly to them, as if He were their messmate. They were called "the bread of faces," [227] because they were placed before the eyes of God; and thus He made known His special favor, as if coming to banquet with them. Nor can it be doubted but that He commanded them to be twelve in number, with reference to the twelve tribes, as if He would admit to His table the food offered by each of them. The "two tenths" make the fifth part of the epah. And it is plaia indeed that this rite was thus accurately prescribed by God, lest diversity in so serious a matter might gradually give birth to many corruptions. In the word "tenths," He seems to allude to the tax which He had imposed on the people, that thus the holiness of the loaves might be enhanced. But why He required two "tenths" rather than one I know not, nor do I think it any use more curiously to inquire. I refer to the frankincense the words, "that it may be on the bread for a memorial:" as if it were said that the bread, seasoned by the smell of the incense, would renew the memory of the children of Israel, so that they should be of sweet savor before God. Others translate it "a monument" instead of "for a memorial," but with the same meaning. But although some think that the bread itself is called a memorial, it is more applicable to the frankincense; for it is afterwards added, that the incense should be at the same time a burnt sacrifice, viz., because in it the bread was, as it were, offered in burnt sacrifice. Footnotes: [227] lchm-phnym "panes facierum." In Exodus 25:30, as in several other places, the shew-bread of A. V. is a translation of these words. -- W

take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes--for the showbread, as previously appointed (Exo 25:30). Those cakes were baked by the Levites, the flour being furnished by the people (Ch1 9:32; Ch1 23:29), oil, wine, and salt being the other ingredients (Lev 2:13). two tenth deals--that is, of an ephah--thirteen and a half pounds weight each; and on each row or pile of cakes some frankincense was strewed, which, being burnt, led to the showbread being called "an offering made by fire." Every Sabbath a fresh supply was furnished; hot loaves were placed on the altar instead of the stale ones, which, having lain a week, were removed, and eaten only by the priests, except in cases of necessity (Sa1 21:3-6; also Luk 6:3-4).

And thou shalt take fine flour,.... Of wheat, and the finest of it: and bake twelve cakes thereof; answerable to the twelve tribes, as the Targum of Jonathan, which were typical of the spiritual Israel of God: two tenth deals shall be in one cake; that is, two tenth parts of an ephah, which were two omers, one of which was as much as a man could eat in one day of the manna: so that one of these cakes was as much as two men could eat of bread in one day; each cake was ten hands' breadth long, five broad, and seven fingers its horns, or was so high (g). (g) Menachot, c. 11. sect. 4.

And thou shalt set them in two rows,.... The twelve cakes: six on a row; not by the side of each other, but six upon one another: upon the pure table; the shewbread table, so called because overlaid with pure gold, and kept clean and bright, Exodus 25:24, before the Lord; for this stood in the holy place, in the same place as the candlestick did, which has the same position, Leviticus 24:4; of the mystical and typical sense of these cakes; see Gill on Exodus 25:30.

And thou shalt put pure frankincense upon each row,.... Two cups of frankincense, in each of which was an handful of it, and which were set by each row of the cakes, as Jarchi observes: that it may be on the bread for a memorial; or "for the bread", instead of it, for a memorial of it; that being to be eaten by the priests, and this to be burned on the altar to the Lord, as follows: even an offering made by fire unto the Lord; not the bread that was after a time taken away, and eaten by the priests, but the frankincense.

Every sabbath he shall set it in order before the Lord continually,.... That is, the priest or priests then ministering, who should bring new cakes and place them in the above order, having removed the old ones, which was done in this manner; four priests went in, two had in their hands the two rows (of bread), and two had in their hands two cups (of frankincense); four went before these, two to take away the two rows (of the old bread), and two to take away the two cups (of frankincense); and they that carried in stood in the north, and their faces to the south and they that brought out stood in the south, and their faces to the north; these drew away (the old bread) and they put them (the new), and the hand of the one was over against the hand of the other, as it is said, "before me continually", Exodus 25:30 (h); that is, at the same time the hands of the one were employed in taking away, the hands of the other were employed in setting on; so that there was always bread upon the table: being taken from the children of Israel by an everlasting covenant; God requiring it of them, and they agreeing to give it, as they did, either in meal or in money; for this was at the expense of the community. (h) Menachot, c. 11. sect. 7.

And it shall be Aaron's and his sons',.... The twelve cakes of the old bread, when taken off the shewbread table; these were divided between the courses of the priests that carried in and brought out; and the high priest had half from each course, so that the half was for Aaron or the high priest, and the other half for his sons, or the priests that ministered (i): and they shall eat it in the holy place; in the tabernacle or some court of it, and not in their own houses: it is said the shewbread was not eaten sooner than the ninth day, nor after the eleventh; how? it was baked on the evening of the sabbath, and it was eaten on the sabbath, the ninth day; if a feast day happened to be on the eve of the sabbath, it was eaten on the tenth; if the two feast days of the beginning of the year so fell, it was eaten on the eleventh day (k): the reason why it was only eaten in the holy place is: for it is most holy unto him; it was one of the most holy things, which were only to be eaten by males, and in the sanctuary not as the light holy things, which were eaten in the houses and families of the priests, and by their wives and daughters also: of the offerings of the Lord made by fire, by a perpetual statute; not that the bread was a burnt offering, but the frankincense upon it, or by it, and so having a connection with it, the whole is said to be an offering by fire: the one was given to the priests of the Lord to eat, and the other was consumed on the altar; and both were an offering to the Lord; and the frankincense being offered by fire unto the Lord, instead of the bread it was reckoned as if that was so offered. (i) Maimon. Hilchot Tamidin, c. 4. sect. 12, 14. (k) Menachot, c. 11. sect. 9.

Leviticus 24:10-14 10. And the son of an Israelitish woman, whose father was an Egyptian, went out among the children of Israel; and this son of the Israelitish woman and a man of Israel strove together in the camp: 10. Egressus est autem filius mulieris Israelitidis, qui erat filius viri AEgyptii, in medio filiorum Israel, et jurgati sunt in castris ipsis filius Israelitidis et vir Israelita. 11. And the Israelitish woman's son blasphemed the name of the Lord, and cursed. And they brought him unto Moses: (and his mother's name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan:) 11. Et transfixit filius mulieris Israelitidis nomen, et maledixit: ad duxeruntque eum ad Mosen: nomen autem matris ejus erat Selomith filia Dibri, de tribu Dan. 12. And they put him in ward, that the mind of the Lord might be showed them. 12. Et posuerunt eum in custodiam, ut exponeret eis juxta sermonem Jehovse. 13. And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, 13. Loquutus est autem Jehova ad Mosen, dicendo: 14. Bring forth him that hath cursed without the camp, and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation stone him. 14. Educ blasphemum extra castra, et ponant omnes qui audierunt manus suas super caput ejus, et lapidet eum universus coetus. 10. And the son of an Israelitish woman. In what year, and in what station in the desert this occurred, is uncertain. I have, therefore, thought it advisable to couple together two cases, which are not dissimilar. It is probable that between this instance of punishment, and that which will immediately follow, there was an interval of some time: but the connection of two similar occurrences seemed best to preserve the order of the history; one of the persons referred to having been stoned for profaning God's sacred name by wicked blasphemy, and the other for despising and violating the Sabbath. It is to be observed that the crime of the former of these gave occasion to the promulgation of a law, which we have expounded elsewhere: [81] in accordance with the common proverb, Good laws spring from bad habits: for, after punishment had been inflicted on this blasphemer, Moses ordained that none should insult the name of God with impunity. It was providentially ordered by God that the earliest manifestation of this severity should affect the son of an Egyptian: for, inasmuch as God thus harshly avenged the insult of His name upon the offspring of a foreigner and a heathen, far less excusable was impiety in Israelites, whom God had, as it were, taken up from their mothers' womb, and had brought them up in His own bosom. It is true, indeed, that on his mother's side he had sprung from the chosen people, but, being begotten by an Egyptian father, he could not be properly accounted an Israelite. If, then, there had been any room for the exercise of pardon, a specious reason might have been alleged why forgiveness should be more readily extended to a man of an alien and impure origin. The majesty of God's name, however, was ratified by his death. Hence it follows that it is by no means to be permitted that God's name should be exposed with impunity to blasphemies among the sons of the Church. We may learn from this passage that during their tyrannical oppression many young women married into the Egyptian nation, in order that their affinity might protect their relatives from injuries. It might, however, have been the case that love for his wife attracted the father of this blasphemer into voluntary exile, unless, perhaps, his mother might have been a widow before the departure of the people, so as to be at liberty to take her son with her. To proceed, he is said to have "gone out," not outside the camp, but in public, so that he might be convicted by witnesses; for he would not have been brought to trial if his crime had been secretly committed within the walls of his own house. This circumstance is also worthy of remark, that, although the blasphemy had escaped him in a quarrel, punishment was still inflicted upon him; and assuredly it is a frivolous subterfuge to require that blasphemies should be pardoned on the ground that they have been uttered in anger; for nothing is more intolerable than that our wrath should vent itself upon God, when we are angry with one of our fellow-creatures. Still it is usual, when a person is accused of blasphemy, to lay the blame on the ebullition of passion, as if God were to endure the penalty whenever we are provoked. The verb nqv, nakab, which some render to express, is here rather used for to curse, or to transfix; and the metaphor is an appropriate one, that God's name should be said to be transfixed, when it is insultingly abused. [82] 13. And the Lord spoke unto Moses. It must be remembered, then, that this punishment was not inflicted upon the blasphemer by man's caprice, or the headstrong zeal of the people, but that Moses was instructed by Divine revelation what sentence was to be pronounced. It has been elsewhere stated [83] why God would have malefactors slain by the hands of the witnesses. Another ceremony is here added, viz., that they should lay their hands upon his head, as if to throw the whole blame upon him. Footnotes: [81] See [13]vol. 2, p. 431, on Leviticus 24:15, 16. [82] See [14]vol. 2, p. 431, and [15]note. "La similitude de transpercer le nom de Dieu convient tres bien; pource que nous disons deschirer par pieces ou despiter." -- Fr. [83] [16]Vol. 2, p. 83, on Deuteronomy 13:9.

the son of an Israelitish woman, &c.--This passage narrates the enactment of a new law, with a detail of the circumstances which gave rise to it. The "mixed multitude" [Exo 12:38] that accompanied the Israelites in their exodus from Egypt creates a presumption that marriage connections of the kind described were not infrequent. And it was most natural, in the relative circumstances of the two people, that the father should be an Egyptian and the mother an Israelite.

Leviticus 24:15, 16 15. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, Whosoever curseth his God shall bear his sin. 15. Ad filios Israel loqueris, dicendo: Homo qui maledixerit Dec sue, portabit scelus suum. 16. And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the LORD, shall be put to death. 16. Et qui transfixerit nomen Jehovae, morte moriatur: lapidando lapidabit eum universus coetus, sive indigena fuerit, sive peregrinus, quum transfixerit nomen, moriatur. 15. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. Hence it now more clearly appears that the object of the Third Commandment was that God's holy name should be honored with the respect and veneration which it deserves, since the insult whereby it is violated is condemned to capital punishment. By the expression "cursing," Moses designates all profane and impure words which tend to brand it with dishonor; as if any one should accuse God either of injustice or cruelty; or should assail Him with blasphemies; or designedly detract from His glory either in anger or wantonness, since many, when exasperated, launch forth horrible blasphemies, whilst others make a parade of their audacity by scoffing at Him. The second verb, which is twice repeated in the next verse, nqv, nakab, [328] means in Hebrew to hollow out or perforate, and metaphorically to unfold, thus the Latins say that what is thoroughly brought out is "enucleated." The source of the metaphor as applied to contumely is not very dissimilar. The translation "he who shall have expressed," which some give, is lame; to me the word "transfix" seems to be very suitable in the present passage, nor are the Latin phrases proscindere or lacerate very different. As to the meaning there is tolerable agreement, i.e., that God would not have His holy name disrespectfully traduced; and assuredly it is insupportably impious when the tongue of mortal man, which was created to celebrate the praises of God, is employed in insulting Him. The kind of death is also appointed, when He commands the offender to be stoned by the whole people, so that all may learn from the sight that such a monster should be annihilated as contaminating the earth. God also would prove the zeal of His people, by calling them all forth in defense of His glory, and arming them for vengeance. Moreover, He did not subject to this punishment the Jews only, who professed to be His worshippers, but also strangers who were dwelling in the land in the exercise of their business; viz., that they might more severely punish the crime in His own servants who were less excusable. Footnotes: [328] Here C. again gives an opinion as to the best way of rendering nqv in this passage, for which he is not indebted to S.M.; and modern lexicographers have given their sanction to C.'s view. -- W

And the Israelitish woman's son blasphemed the name of the Lord--A youth of this half-blood, having quarrelled with an Israelite [Lev 24:10], vented his rage in some horrid form of impiety. It was a common practice among the Egyptians to curse their idols when disappointed in obtaining the object of their petitions. The Egyptian mind of this youth thought the greatest insult to his opponent was to blaspheme the object of his religious reverence. He spoke disrespectfully of One who sustained the double character of the King as well as the God of the Hebrew people; as the offense was a new one, he was put in ward till the mind of the Lord was ascertained as to his disposal.

Bring forth him that hath cursed without the camp--All executions took place without the camp; and this arrangement probably originated in the idea that, as the Israelites were to be "a holy people" [Deu 7:6; Deu 14:2, Deu 14:21; Deu 26:19; Deu 28:9], all flagrant offenders should be thrust out of their society. let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, &c.--The imposition of hands formed a public and solemn testimony against the crime, and at the same time made the punishment legal.

as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death--Although strangers were not obliged to be circumcised, yet by joining the Israelitish camp, they became amenable to the law, especially that which related to blasphemy.

And the son of an Israelitish woman,.... Whose name, and the name of his mother, are afterwards given: whose father was an Egyptian; Jarchi says, this is the Egyptian whom Moses slew, Exodus 2:12; and so others in Abendana: went out among the children of Israel; went out of Egypt with them, according to the Targum of Jonathan, and so was one of the mixed multitude, which came from thence with them, which is not improbable; some say he went out of Moses's court of judicature; but it is more likely that the meaning is, he went out of his tent, so Aben Ezra, into the midst of the camp, to claim his rank and place among the people of Israel; though the Jewish writers, as Jarchi and Aben Ezra, take this phrase, "among the children of Israel", to signify that he was a proselyte, and became a Jew, or had embraced the Jewish religion in all respects: and this son of the Israelitish woman and a man of Israel strove together in the camp; which man of Israel, according to the Targum of Jonathan, was of the tribe of Dan, as was the mother of the man he strove with; what they strove about is not easy to say; Aben Ezra suggests, because this stands connected with the above laws, as if this man had said some things in a reviling way about the shewbread, the oil, and the offerings, and so a dispute arose between them, concerning them; but Jarchi says, it was about the business of the camp, and it is more commonly received that this man claimed a place to fix his tent on in the tribe of Dan, in right of his mother; but the other urged, that the order of fixing tents was according to the genealogies, and with the ensigns of their father's house, and therefore he had no right to rank with them, his father being an Egyptian, and perhaps from words they came to blows, see Exodus 21:22; though the Jewish writers understand it of their contending, at least of its issuing in a judiciary way, before a court of judicature: so it is said, when Israel dwelt in the wilderness, he (the son of the Egyptian) sought to spread his tent in the midst of the tribe of Dan, and they would not suffer it, because the ranks of the children of Israel were, every man according to his rank, with the ensigns according to the genealogy of their fathers; and they began and contended in the camp, wherefore they went into the court of judicature, the son of the woman of the daughter of Israel, and the man, a son of Israel, who was of the tribe of Dan (l). (l) Targum Jon. in loc.

And the Israelitish woman's son blasphemed the name of the Lord, and cursed,.... As they were striving together, or when the trial was over, he being cast, fell into outrageous blasphemies against God, who made such laws for the civil polity of Israel, and cursed the judges that had given sentence against him; so the Targum of Jonathan; and so the Jews generally understand by the "name" blasphemed, the name Jehovah, which he spake out plainly, and which, they say, is ineffable, and ought not to be pronounced but by the high priest in the sanctuary; but this man expressed it in its proper sound, and made use of it to curse the man that strove with him, or the judge that judged him; so it is said in the Misnah (d),"a blasphemer is not guilty until he expresses the name;''but it undoubtedly means blaspheming God himself, by whatsoever name: and they brought him unto Moses; having heard his blasphemy, to charge him with it before him, or in order to have due punishment inflicted on him: as to the matter of contest between him and the Israelite, that had been decided in a lesser court of judicature, such an one as had been set up by the advice of Jethro; but though there was full proof of his blasphemy and cursing, which, perhaps, were expressed in open court; they might not know what punishment to inflict upon him for so horrid a crime, of which, perhaps, they had never had an instance before, and therefore sent him to Moses, to whom the hearing and decision of weighty matters belonged; see Exodus 18:22, and his mother's name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan; which is observed, as it should seem, to show in what tribe this affair happened, and what the quarrel was first about, even a place and rank in this tribe. (d) Sanhedrin, c. 7. sect. 5.

And they put him in ward,.... In some prison, a place known in the camp, as Aben Ezra observes: that the mind of the Lord might be shewed them; for, though this was a breach of the third command, in which God declares he would not hold such an one guiltless, Exodus 20:7; yet no particular punishment being expressed, it was not a clear case whether the Lord would punish for it himself, by an immediate stroke of his hand, or whether by the civil magistrate; and if by the latter, in what manner; for though it might be concluded, without any hesitation, that he was worthy of death, since cursing father or mother was death, Exodus 21:17; and much more blaspheming God, yet what death to put him to they might be at a loss about; or if that was understood of stoning, they might think this deserved a sorer punishment, and therefore consulted God about it.

And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... From off the mercy seat in the holy of holies, where he had promised to meet him and commune with him about anything he should inquire of him, as he did at this time: saying; as follows.

Bring forth him that hath cursed without the camp,.... To show that he had no part nor lot in Israel, and that he was unworthy to be a member of their civil community, or of their church state; and, besides, the place of stoning, or where malefactors suffered any kind of death, was without the camp, as afterwards without the city, see Hebrews 13:12, let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head; the Targum of Jonathan adds,"and the judges;''so Jarchi remarks, that they that "heard him" are the witnesses, and the word "all" comprehends the judges: Maimonides says (e) the same, and observes that hands were laid on no malefactor but the blasphemer; and this was done to show that the one had bore a faithful testimony, and the other had pronounced a righteous sentence on him; and that he had brought this guilt and punishment upon himself by his sin; wherefore it was usual for them to say, as the same writers observe,"thy blood be upon thine own head, and we not punished for thy death, which thou hast been the cause of to thyself:" and let all the congregation stone him; which Aben Ezra interprets of the great men of Israel; nor can it be thought that every individual of the people could cast a stone at him, but it was to be done by some of them, in the presence of them all, or as many as could conveniently get together to behold it; and this was done to show their detestation of the sin, and to deter from the commission of it: it was the same kind of punishment that was ordered to be inflicted on him that cursed his father or mother, Leviticus 20:9; God, the God of mercy, requiring no sorer punishment, though it deterred a greater, for such a sin against himself, than against a common parent. (e) Hilchot Obede Cochabim, c. 2. sect. 10.

And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel,.... On this occasion, and gave them some laws and rules concerning the above affair, and other things: saying, whosoever curseth his God shall bear his sin; which some understand of anyone of another nation, that cursed the God he used to serve in his own country; but it can hardly be thought that a law should be made by the one only living and true God, to preserve the honour and credit of false gods, when he is so jealous of his own glory; and those are spoken of in Scripture with the greatest contempt, as dunghill deities, and are actually cursed, Jeremiah 10:11; but they are rather to be interpreted of judges and all civil magistrates, who, as Aben Ezra observes, are sometimes called Elohim or gods, Psalm 82:1; and the rather, as it is probable this man had cursed his judges, and so this is a distinct sin from what follows; and not only the manner of expressing it, but the punishment of it, seem to be different; for the phrase, "to bear his sin", is used where the punishment is not expressly declared, and is by Jarchi and others interpreted of cutting off from his people, but in what way is not certain; whereas the punishment of a blasphemer of God is before and after clearly expressed; see Leviticus 20:19.

And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord,.... Or, "but he that blasphemeth", &c. from whence the Jews gather, that the name Jehovah must be expressed, or it is no blasphemy; so Jarchi; but it is not bare using or expressing the word Jehovah that is blasphemy, but speaking ill and contemptuously of God, with respect to any of his names, titles, and epithets, or of any of his perfections, ways, and works: he shall surely be put to death; no mercy shall be shown him, no reprieve or pardon granted him: hence it is said (f), there is no atonement for it, by repentance, or chastisements, or the day of atonement: so blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is not forgiven, neither in this world nor in that which is to come, Matthew 12:31, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him; shall have no pity on him, nor spare him, but stone him till he dies: as well the stranger as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death; even a proselyte of the gate, a Gentile that sojourned among them, uncircumcised, and did not profess the Jewish religion, as well as a proselyte of righteousness, and an Israelite born; yet, if he blasphemed the God of Israel, was to lose his life without any mercy shown him. (f) R. Alphes, par. 1. Yoma, c. 1. fol. 261. 1.

Evil manners, we say, beget good laws. We have here an account of the evil manners of a certain nameless mongrel Israelite, and the good laws occasioned thereby. I. The offender was the son of an Egyptian father and an Israelitish mother (Lev 24:10); his mother was of the tribe of Dan, Lev 24:11. Neither he nor his father is named, but his mother only, who was an Israelite. This notice is taken of his parentage either, 1. To intimate what occasioned the quarrel he was engaged in. The Jews say, "He offered to set up his tent among the Danites in the right of his mother, but was justly opposed by some or other of that tribe, and informed that his father being an Egyptian he had no part nor lot in the matter, but must look upon himself as a stranger." Or, 2. To show the common ill effect of such mixed marriages. When a daughter of Israel would marry an idolatrous malignant Egyptian, what could be the fruit of such a marriage but a blasphemer? For the children will be apt to take after the worse side, whichsoever it is, and will sooner learn of an Egyptian father to blaspheme than of an Israelitish mother to pray and praise. II. The occasion of the offence was contention: He strove with a man of Israel. The mixed multitude of Egyptians that came up with Israel (Exo 12:38) were in many ways hurtful to them, and this was one, they were often the authors of strife. The way to preserve the peace of the church is to preserve the purity of it. In this strife he broke out into ill language. Note, When quarrels begin we know not what mischief they will make before they end, nor how treat a matter a little fire may kindle. When men's passion is up they are apt to forget both their reason and their religion, which is a good reason why we should not be apt either to give or to resent provocation, but leave off strife before it be meddled with, because the beginning of it is as the letting forth of water. III. The offence itself was blasphemy and cursing, Lev 24:11. It is supposed that his cause came to be heard before the judges, who determined that he had no right to the privileges of an Israelite, his father being an Egyptian, and that, being enraged at the sentence, 1. He blasphemed the name of the Lord. He blasphemed the name, that is, he blasphemed God, who is known by his name only, not by his nature, or any similitude. Not as if God were a mere name, but his is a name above every name. The translators add of the Lord, which is implied, but not expressed, in the original, for the greater reverence of the divine Majesty: it is a shame that it should be found on record that the very name of Jehovah should be blasphemed; tell it not in Gath. It is a fond conceit of the superstitious Jews that his blasphemy was in pronouncing the name of Jehovah, which they call ineffable: he that made himself known by that name never forbade the calling of him by that name. It is probable that finding himself aggrieved by the divine appointment, which separated between the Israelites and strangers, he impudently reproached both the law and the Law-maker, and set him at defiance. 2. He cursed either God himself (and then his cursing was the same with blaspheming) or the person with whom he strove. Imprecations of mischief are the hellish language of hasty passion, as well as of rooted malice. Or perhaps he cursed the judges that gave sentence against him; he flew in the face of the court, and ridiculed the processes of it; thus he added sin to sin. IV. The caution with which he was proceeded against for this sin. The witnesses or inferior judges brought him and his case (which was somewhat extraordinary) unto Moses (Lev 24:11), according to the order settled (Exo 18:22), and Moses himself would not give judgment hastily, but committed the offender into custody, till he had consulted the oracle in this case. Note, Judges must deliberate; both those that give the verdict and those that give the sentence must consider diligently what they do, and do nothing rashly, for the judgment is God's (Deu 1:17), and before him there will be a rehearing of the cause. They waited to know what was the mind of the Lord, whether he was to be put to death by the hand of the magistrate or to be left to the judgment of God: or, rather, they wanted to know whether he should be stoned, as those were to be that only cursed their parents (Jdg 20:9), or whether, the crime being so much greater, some sorer punishment should be inflicted on him. Note, Those that sit in judgment should sincerely desire, and by prayer and the use of all good means should endeavour to know the mind of the Lord, because they judge for him (Ch2 19:6) and to him they are accountable. V. Sentence passed upon this offender by the righteous Judge of heaven and earth himself: Let all the congregation stone him, v. 14. God could have cut him off by an immediate stroke from heaven, but he would put this honour upon the institution of magistracy to make use of it for the supporting and vindicating of his own glory in the world. Observe, 1. The place of execution appointed: Bring him forth without the camp. To signify their detestation of the crime, they must thus cast out the criminal as an abominable branch, and separate him from them as an unclean thing and unworthy a place in the camp of Israel. 2. The executioners: Let all the congregation do it, to show their zeal for the honour of God's name. Every man should have a stone to throw at him that blasphemes God, reckoning himself nearly concerned in the reproaches cast on God, Psa 69:9. Thus also the greater terror would be cast upon the congregation; those that once helped to stone a blasphemer would ever after dread every thing that bordered upon blasphemy, that looked like it or looked towards it. 3. The solemnity of the execution; before the congregation stoned him, the witnesses were to lay their hands upon his head. The Jews say that this was used in the execution of no criminals but blasphemers; and that it was done with words to this purport, "Thy blood be upon thy own head, for thou thyself hast occasioned it. Let no blame be laid on the law, judges, juries, or witnesses; if thou scornest, thou alone shalt bear it." VI. A standing law made upon this occasion for the stoning of blasphemers, Lev 24:15, Lev 24:16. Magistrates are the guardians of both tables, and ought to be as jealous for the honour of God against those that speak contemptuously of his being and government as for the public peace and safety against the disturbers of them. 1. A great stress is laid upon this law, as in no case to be dispensed with: He shall surely be put to death; they shall certainly stone him. Those that lightly esteemed God's honour might think it hard to make a man an offender for a word (words are but wind); but God would let them know that they must not make light of such words as these, which come from malice against God in the heart of him that speaks, and must occasion either great guilt or great grief to those that hear. 2. It is made to extend to the strangers that sojourned among them, as well as those that were born in the land. God never made any law to compel strangers to be circumcised and embrace the Jewish religion (proselytes made by force would be no honour to the God of Israel), but he made a law to restrain strangers from speaking evil of the God of Israel. 3. He that was put to death for blasphemy is said to bear his sin, in the punishment of it; no sacrifice being appointed, on the head of which the sin might be transferred, he himself was to bear it upon his own head, as a sacrifice to divine justice. So his own tongue fell upon him (Psa 64:8), and the tongue of a blasphemer will fall heavily. VII. A repetition of some other laws annexed to this new law. 1. That murder should be punished with death (Lev 24:17, and again Lev 24:21), according to an ancient law in Noah's time (Gen 9:6), and the very law of nature, Gen 4:10. 2. That maimers should in like manner be punished by the law of retaliation, Lev 24:19, Lev 24:20. Not that men might in these cases be their own avengers, but they might appeal to the civil magistrate, who should award suffering to the injurious and satisfaction to the injured as should be thought fit in proportion to the hurt done. This law we had before, Exo 22:4, Exo 22:5. And it was more agreeable to that dispensation, in which were revealed the rigour of the law and what sin deserved, than to the dispensation we are under, in which are revealed the grace of the gospel and the remission of sins: and therefore our Saviour has set aside this law (Mat 5:38, Mat 5:39), not to restrain magistrates from executing public justice, but to restrain us all from returning personal injuries and to oblige us to forgive as we are and hope to be forgiven. 3. That hurt done wilfully to a neighbour's cattle should be punished by making good the damage, Lev 24:18, Lev 24:21. Thus the divine law took not only their lives, but their goods also under its protection. Those beasts which belonged to no particular person, but were, as our law speaks, ferae naturae - of a wild nature, it was lawful for them to kill; but not those which any man had a property in. Does God take care for oxen? Yes; for our sakes he does. 4. That strangers, as well as native Israelites, should be both entitled to the benefit of this law, so as not to suffer wrong, and liable to the penalty of this law in case they did wrong. And, it should seem, this is it that brings in these laws here, to show how equitable it was that strangers as well as Israelites should be punished for blasphemy, because strangers as well as Israelites were punishable for other crimes. And there may be this further reason for the recognition of these laws here, God would hereby show what provision he had made for man's safety, in punishing those that were injurious to him, which should be an argument with magistrates to be jealous for his honour, and to punish those that blasphemed his name. If God took care for their comfort, they ought to take care for his glory. VIII. The execution of the blasphemer. Moses did, as it were, sign the warrant or it: He spoke unto the children of Israel to do it, and they did as the Lord commanded Moses, Lev 24:23. This teaches that death is the wages of sin, and that blasphemy in particular is an iniquity to be punished by the judges. But, if those who thus profane the name of God escape punishment from men, yet the Lord our God will not suffer them to escape his righteous judgments. This blasphemer was the first that died by the law of Moses. Stephen, the first that died for the gospel, died by the abuse of this law; the martyr and the malefactor suffered the same death: but how vast the difference between them!

Leviticus 24:17, 19-22 17. And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. 17. Qui percusserit animam hominis, morte moriatur. 19. And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him; 19. Vir qui intulerit maculam proximo suo, secundum quod fecit sic fiat ei. 20. 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 wain 20. Fracturam pro fractura, oculum pro oculo, dentem pro dente: sicut intulerit maculam hominis, sic inferetur ei. 21. And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it; and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death. 21. Qui percusserit animal reddet illud: qui vero percusserit hominem, moriatur. 22. Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the Lord your God. 22. Judicium unum erit vobis, sicut peregrinus sic et indigena erit: quia ego Jehova Deus vester. 17. And he that killeth any man. We now proceed to the confirmation of the Sixth Commandment afforded by the Judicial Law; and first, the punishment of death is awarded to murderers. To "smite the life" [26] is equivalent to wounding mortally, so that death ensues, as Moses more clearly explains himself in Exodus. But although he speaks briefly, like a legislator, there is no doubt but that he would have those whom he adjudges to die put to death by the sentence of the judges; the manner of executing the punishment we shall see in its proper place. Now although God did not carry out to absolute perfection the laws which He enacted, yet in their principle He desired that a clear and unreserved approval of His Commandments should appear. And this was the reason why I commenced with this passage, because it directly corresponds with the Sixth Commandment. [27] 19. And if man cause a blemish in his neighbor, he now also subjects to punishment those who shall have mutilated the body of their neighbor by blows; and this was necessary, because otherwise every very great villain, who might be accomplished in the art of inflicting injury, would have broken his brother's leg or arm, and then would not only have laughed at the poor man himself, but also at God and His Law. If, therefore, a person had injured a member of another, the law of retaliation is enacted, which has also been in use among other nations. [28] But God thus distinctly prescribes when and how the injury was to be retaliated, that the law might not be open at all to the foolish cavils with which Favorinus attacks the law of the Twelve Tables in Gellius. And certainly the words of the Decemvirs were too obscure, "Si membrum fregeris meum, ex pacto talio est." (If you have broken my limb; without agreement made, there must be retaliation.) But God does not command an eye to be plucked out for an eye, or a tooth for a tooth, till He has set forth that this was only to be the case if any one had knowingly and willfully inflicted the injury; thus, He does not bring to justice accidental blows, but only a premeditated crime. It is vain to object that the members of different persons can hardly be broken with exact. equality, for the intention of God was none other than that, being alarmed by the severity of the punishment, men should abstain from injuring others; and therefore these two things were connected together, If one killeth a man, let him die, and if one hath taken away a part of life, let him suffer a similar privation. And the same is the tendency of the distinction, that the loss of an animal may be repaid, but that if a man be killed, there could be no just compensation made by money. 22. Ye shall have one manner of law. That the people of Israel, with their usual arrogance, might not suppose the race of Abraham only to be privileged, the Law is extended also to foreigners; and thus God shows that the whole body of the human race are under His care, so that He would not have those that are farthest off exposed to the licentious violence of the ungodly. In other points tie provided special privileges for His elect people; but here, because He created all men without exception after His own image, He takes them under His care and protection, so that none might injure them with impunity. Footnotes: [26] See margin of A. V. [27] Lat., "quia praecepto respondet quasi antisrophos." [28] This is the earliest account we have of the Lex Talionis, or law of like for like, which afterwards prevailed among the Greeks and Romans. Among the latter it constituted a part of the Twelve Tables, so famous in antiquity; but the punishment was afterwards changed to a pecuniary fine, to be levied at the discretion of the Praetor. It prevails less or more in most civilized countries, and is fully acted upon in the Canon Law in reference to all calumniators: "Clumniator, si in accusatione defecerit, talionem recipiat." Nothing, however, of this kind was left to private revenge; the magistrate awarded the punishment when the fact was proved. Otherwise the Lex Talionis would have utterly destroyed the peace of society, and have sowed the seeds of hatred, revenge, and all uncharitableness." -- Adam Clarke on Exodus 21:24. The enactment of the Twelve Tables to this effect appears from Festus to have been the following: "Si merebrum rupsit, (ruperit,) ni cum eo pacit, (paciscetur,) talio est;" presenting a singular coincidence with the Mosaic provision. See Aul. Gell., lib. 20 c. 1, where the words are given somewhat differently, as in C.'s text. The objection of Favorinus is that it was impossible to be kept; for if the like were inflicted for the like, as one wound for another, they must take care that the like wound in every respect should be made, neither longer nor deeper; if it were, then a new retaliation must arise, and so ad infinitum.

he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death--These verses contain a repetition of some other laws, relating to offenses of a social nature, the penalties for which were to be inflicted, not by the hand of private parties, but through the medium of the judges before whom the cause was brought.

Leviticus 24:18, 21 18. And he that killeth a beast shall make it good; beast for beast. 18. Qui percusserit animam animalis, restituet illud: animam pro anima. 21. And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it; and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death. 21. Qui percusserit animal, reddet illud. God here prescribes, that whosoever has inflicted a loss upon another shall make satisfaction for it, although he may not have turned it to his own profit; for in respect to a theft, its profit is not to be considered, but the intention to injure, or other cause of guilt; for it might happen that he who has killed another's ox should not deliberately desire to do him an injury, but in a fit of passion, or from unpremeditated impulse, should nevertheless have inflicted loss upon him. In whatever way, therefore, a man should have committed an offense, whereby another is made poorer, he is commanded to make good the loss. Whence it is clear, that whosoever do not so restrain themselves as to care for a neighbor's advantage as much as for their own, are accounted guilty of theft before God. The object, however, of the law is, that no one should suffer loss by us, which will be the case if we have regard to the good of our brethren.

the children of Israel did as the Lord's commanded--The chapter closes with the execution of Shelomith's son [Lev 24:14] --and stoning having afterwards become the established punishment in all cases of blasphemy, it illustrates the fate of Stephen, who suffered under a false imputation of that crime [Act 7:58-59]. Next: Leviticus Chapter 25

And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. With the sword, as the Targum of Jonathan adds; which restrains it to any man of the children of Israel, but wrongly; for the original law respects any man whatever, Genesis 9:6; and so it does here; See Gill on Exodus 21:12.

And he that killeth a beast shall make it good,.... Pay for it, give the value of it, or another as good as that instead of it, as follows: beast for beast; or "soul for soul"; life for life, that is, a living one for that the life of which is taken away, and one every way as good as that.

And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour,.... Does him any hurt or mischief, causes any mutilation or deformity in him by striking him: as he hath done, so shall it be done unto him: not that a like damage or hurt should be done to him, but that he should make satisfaction for it in a pecuniary way; pay for the cure of him, and for loss of time, and in consideration of the pain he has endured, and the shame or disgrace brought on him by the deformity or mutilation, or for whatever loss he may sustain thereby; See Gill on Exodus 21:18 and See Gill on Exodus 21:19.

Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth,.... Which is not to be taken strictly or literally, but for the price or value of those, which is to be given in a pecuniary way; See Gill on Exodus 21:24, Exodus 21:25, as he hath caused a blemish in a man, shall it be done to him; unless he gives satisfaction, and pays a valuable consideration for it.

And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it,.... The same as in Leviticus 24:18, which is repeated for the confirmation of it, and that it might be observed, though Jarchi takes it to be a different law; before, he says, it speaks of him that kills a beast, here of him that makes any wound or bruise in it, which he must make good; and it must be allowed that the manner of expression is different; there it is, he that smites the soul of a beast so that it dies, here only he that smites a beast, though it dies not, yet having some damage done it, satisfaction must be made: and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death; or he that smites a man, though he does not kill him, as Jarchi observes, only makes a wound or bruise in him, because it is not said, the soul of a man, as before; but such damages did not require death, but satisfaction in another way, as in Leviticus 24:19.

Ye shall have one manner of law,.... Respecting the above things, blaspheming of the name of God, taking away the life of man, or of any beast, and of doing damage to either: as well for the stranger as for one of your own country; the above laws were binding upon proselytes as well as Israelites, and proselytes of the gate as well as proselytes of righteousness, though the Jews commonly restrain it to the latter: for I am the Lord your God; whose name is holy and reverend, and ought not to be blasphemed; and who is the Maker and preserver of man and beast, and made these laws respecting them, and expected they should be obeyed, especially by the children of Israel, whose covenant God and Father he was, and they under the greatest obligation to serve and obey him.

And Moses spake unto the children of Israel,.... As the Lord had commanded him: that they should bring forth him that had cursed out of the camp, and stone him with stones; which were the instructions God had given to Moses upon inquiring his mind and will about this matter: and the children of Israel did as the Lord commanded Moses; they took the blasphemer, and led him out of the camp, put their hands on him, and stoned him with stones till he died.