Deuteronomy 25:10

KJV

And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.

KJV (with Strong's)

And his name {H8034} shall be called {H7121} in Israel {H3478}, The house {H1004} of him that hath his shoe {H5275} loosed {H2502}.

Complete Jewish Bible

From that time on, his family is to be known in Isra'el as 'the family of the man who had his sandal pulled off.'

Berean Standard Bible

And his family name in Israel will be called “The House of the Unsandaled.”

American Standard Version

And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.

Commentary

### SUMMARY
Deuteronomy 25:10 concludes the specific Mosaic Law concerning levirate marriage, detailing the severe and lasting public disgrace inflicted upon a man who refuses to fulfill his familial duty to marry his deceased brother's widow and raise an heir. This verse enshrines the ignominious title, "The house of him that hath his shoe loosed," as a perpetual mark of shame, ensuring that the man's failure to uphold his covenantal and social obligations would be remembered throughout generations in Israel.

### CONTEXT
* **Literary Context:** Deuteronomy 25:10 is the culmination of a specific legal section (Deuteronomy 25:5-10) within the broader Deuteronomic code, which outlines various civil and social laws for Israel. This particular statute, known as the levirate marriage law (*yibbum*), addresses the critical issue of family continuity and inheritance. It stipulates that if a man dies without a male heir, his brother is obligated to marry the widow and father a son who will be legally considered the deceased's heir, thereby preserving the family name and property. The preceding verses detail the procedure for this marriage and the severe consequences if the brother refuses. Verse 9 describes the public shaming ritual: the widow is to bring the reluctant brother before the elders at the city gate, pull off his sandal, and spit in his face. Verse 10 then pronounces the lasting public epithet that would be attached to his household, serving as a permanent reminder of his dereliction of duty. This law underscores the profound importance of familial responsibility and the preservation of lineage within the covenant community.
* **Historical & Cultural Context:** In ancient Israelite society, the preservation of a family's name, lineage, and land inheritance was paramount. A man dying without an heir meant the potential extinction of his line and the loss of his portion of the tribal land, which was considered a divine gift and an enduring legacy (cf. [Numbers 27:1-11](/numbers/27-1-11 "Numbers 27:1-11 - The Daughters of Zelophehad")). The levirate marriage law was a social safety net designed to protect childless widows, who were particularly vulnerable in a patriarchal society, by ensuring their provision and continuity through the deceased husband's family. The city gate served as the central public square, where legal proceedings, commercial transactions, and community gatherings took place, making it the ideal location for such a public shaming ritual. The removal of a sandal was a symbolic act often associated with legal transactions, particularly the transfer or relinquishing of rights or property, as seen in [Ruth 4:7-8](/ruth/4-7-8 "Ruth 4:7-8 - The Custom of the Sandal"). In this context, it signified the brother's public renunciation of his duty and, by extension, his rights and honor within the community. Spitting in the face was a profound act of contempt and humiliation, designed to inflict maximum social disgrace.
* **Key Themes:** Deuteronomy 25:10 contributes significantly to several overarching themes within Deuteronomy and the broader Old Testament. Firstly, it highlights the **importance of family obligation and continuity**, emphasizing the preservation of lineage and inheritance as fundamental to Israelite identity and the fulfillment of God's promises to Abraham regarding numerous descendants and land (e.g., [Genesis 12:2](/genesis/12-2 "Genesis 12:2 - God's Promise to Abraham")). Secondly, the verse powerfully illustrates the theme of **social shame and disgrace** as a mechanism for enforcing communal norms and divine law. The lasting epithet serves as a severe deterrent against shirking one's responsibilities, underscoring the value placed on honor and reputation in Israelite society (cf. [Proverbs 22:1](/proverbs/22-1 "Proverbs 22:1 - A Good Name")). Thirdly, it reinforces the theme of **justice and consequences**, demonstrating that neglecting one's duties, particularly those designed to protect the vulnerable, carries significant and enduring repercussions. Finally, the underlying spirit of the law, though harsh in its penalty, reflects God's profound **concern for the vulnerable**, specifically the childless widow, ensuring her provision and place within the community, a theme echoed throughout the Torah's laws concerning the poor, the sojourner, and the orphan (e.g., [Deuteronomy 10:18](/deuteronomy/10-18 "Deuteronomy 10:18 - God's Love for the Vulnerable")).

### EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
#### Key Word Analysis
* **Shoe Loosed (Hebrew, _chalutz na'al'_):** This phrase refers to the physical act of removing a sandal, which in ancient Israel had significant legal and symbolic weight. While in [Ruth 4:7-8](/ruth/4-7-8 "Ruth 4:7-8 - The Custom of the Sandal") it signifies the transfer of rights or property, here it denotes the relinquishing of a duty or obligation, specifically the levirate responsibility. The public removal of the shoe, combined with spitting, was a potent non-verbal communication of public dishonor and the repudiation of a man's standing and rights within the community due to his refusal to act righteously. It symbolized his unworthiness to "walk" in the path of duty and honor.
* **Name (Hebrew, _shem'_):** In biblical thought, a "name" is far more than a mere label; it encapsulates a person's character, reputation, legacy, and even their essence. To have one's "name called" in a particular way implies a public and lasting identification. Here, the name given to the household is not just a descriptor but a perpetual mark of ignominy, ensuring that the man's failure would be remembered and associated with his descendants, impacting their social standing and reputation within the community for generations.
* **House (Hebrew, _bayit'_):** The term "house" refers not merely to a physical dwelling but to the entire household, including the family line, descendants, and reputation. The judgment pronounced in Deuteronomy 25:10 extends beyond the individual man to his entire lineage. It signifies that the shame of his refusal would attach itself to his entire family, becoming a permanent part of their identity and legacy in Israel. This emphasizes the communal nature of honor and shame in ancient Israelite society, where an individual's actions could profoundly affect their entire family unit.

#### Verse Breakdown
* **"And his name shall be called in Israel,"**: This clause emphasizes the public and communal nature of the judgment. The "name" refers to the man's reputation and legacy, which will be permanently altered by his refusal. "In Israel" signifies that this designation will be known and remembered throughout the entire community, not just within his immediate family or village. It is a formal, community-wide declaration of his disgrace.
* **"The house of him that hath his shoe loosed."**: This is the specific epithet or title that will be permanently affixed to the man's household. It serves as a constant, public reminder of his failure to fulfill the levirate duty. The phrase encapsulates the entire shaming ritual—the removal of the shoe (symbolizing his relinquishing of duty and honor) and the associated public humiliation. This "name" becomes a lasting badge of shame, ensuring that his dereliction of duty is never forgotten by future generations in Israel.

#### Literary Devices
Deuteronomy 25:10 employs several potent literary devices to convey its message of lasting disgrace. **Symbolism** is central, particularly with the "shoe loosed." The shoe, a common item, becomes imbued with profound meaning, representing duty, rights, and honor. Its removal symbolizes the public renunciation of these, transforming a simple act into a powerful statement of shame. The entire ritual, including the spitting, functions as a form of **public shaming**, a powerful social control mechanism designed to deter disobedience through the threat of communal ostracization and loss of reputation. The verse also utilizes an **epithet** or a **proverbial saying** ("The house of him that hath his shoe loosed"). This concise, memorable phrase functions as a permanent, derogatory label, ensuring that the man's failure is encapsulated in a universally understood and enduring term that will be passed down through generations, effectively making his shame perpetual. This use of a memorable phrase underscores the lasting impact of his actions on his family's legacy.

### THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
Deuteronomy 25:10, while describing a specific legal consequence, resonates with broader theological themes concerning covenant faithfulness, social responsibility, and the consequences of disobedience. God's law, as revealed in Deuteronomy, is not merely a set of rules but a framework for a righteous and flourishing society, reflecting His character of justice and care for the vulnerable. The severe penalty for refusing levirate duty highlights the seriousness with which God views the preservation of family and the protection of the marginalized. It underscores the principle that actions, especially those that neglect one's God-given responsibilities, have profound and lasting implications, not only for the individual but also for their lineage and community. This law serves as a stark reminder that neglecting one's duty, particularly when it impacts the well-being of others, can lead to a loss of honor and a lasting stain on one's legacy within the covenant community.

* [Ruth 4:7-8](/ruth/4-7-8 "Ruth 4:7-8 - The Custom of the Sandal and Redemption")
* [Proverbs 22:1](/proverbs/22-1 "Proverbs 22:1 - A Good Name is More Desirable Than Great Riches")
* [Leviticus 19:18](/leviticus/19-18 "Leviticus 19:18 - Love Your Neighbor as Yourself")

### REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
While the specific practice of levirate marriage is not part of contemporary society, the underlying principles embedded in Deuteronomy 25:10 remain profoundly relevant for believers today. This passage challenges us to consider the weight of our commitments and the lasting impact of our actions, or inactions, on our families, communities, and personal legacies. It underscores the spiritual and social consequences of neglecting our God-given responsibilities, especially those related to caring for the vulnerable and upholding justice. We are called to be people of integrity, honoring our word and fulfilling our duties, recognizing that our reputation and the "name" we leave behind are valuable, not just for ourselves but for those who come after us. This passage also reminds us of God's enduring concern for the marginalized and the expectation that His people will reflect His heart by actively protecting and providing for those in need, lest we incur a spiritual "shame" for our indifference or neglect.

#### Questions for Reflection
* **What commitments or responsibilities, particularly to family or community, might I be neglecting that require my attention?**
* **How do my actions (or inactions) contribute to or detract from my "name" or reputation, and what kind of legacy am I building for my family?**
* **In what ways can I actively demonstrate God's concern for the vulnerable in my sphere of influence today?**
* **What are the spiritual consequences of failing to uphold my duties as a follower of Christ?**

### FAQ
**What was the primary purpose of the levirate marriage law in ancient Israel?**

Answer: The primary purpose of the levirate marriage law was twofold: to preserve the deceased man's family lineage and name, ensuring that his inheritance (especially his land) remained within his family, and to provide for the childless widow, who would otherwise be left vulnerable and destitute in a society where women's economic security was largely tied to male relatives. It was a social safety net designed to maintain family continuity and protect the marginalized, reflecting God's concern for justice and the well-being of His people.

**Why was the removal of a shoe and spitting involved in the shaming ritual described in Deuteronomy 25:9-10?**

Answer: The removal of a shoe was a symbolic act with legal connotations in ancient Israel, often signifying the relinquishing or transfer of rights, as seen in [Ruth 4:7-8](/ruth/4-7-8 "Ruth 4:7-8 - The Custom of the Sandal"). In this context, it symbolized the brother's public renunciation of his duty and, by extension, his honor and standing. Spitting in the face was a profoundly humiliating and contemptuous act, designed to inflict maximum public disgrace and shame upon the man for his refusal to fulfill his familial and communal obligation. Together, these acts served as a powerful, non-verbal declaration of his dereliction of duty and the community's judgment against him.

**Is the specific practice of levirate marriage or the shaming ritual still relevant or practiced today?**

Answer: The specific practice of levirate marriage and the associated shaming ritual are not practiced in modern society, nor are they part of Christian ethical requirements. However, the underlying principles of the law remain highly relevant. These include the importance of fulfilling one's commitments, the weight of a good reputation, the accountability for neglecting duties (especially towards the vulnerable), and God's enduring concern for the marginalized. While the cultural expression has changed, the divine expectation for believers to act responsibly, honorably, and compassionately endures, finding its ultimate fulfillment in Christ.

### CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
Deuteronomy 25:10, with its stark portrayal of duty, shame, and the preservation of a name, finds profound Christ-centered fulfillment not in the perpetuation of a legalistic shaming ritual, but in the radical reversal and ultimate redemption offered by Jesus Christ. While the law condemned those who refused their duty, Christ, the ultimate Kinsman-Redeemer, willingly embraced the ultimate duty and took upon Himself the shame and curse of humanity. He did not refuse to "raise up a name" for us, but rather, through His perfect obedience and sacrificial death, He secured for us an eternal inheritance and a new name as children of God (cf. [Galatians 3:13](/galatians/3-13 "Galatians 3:13 - Christ Redeemed Us from the Curse")). Unlike the brother who was shamed for refusing to preserve a lineage, Jesus, "for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame" ([Hebrews 12:2](/hebrews/12-2 "Hebrews 12:2 - Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of Our Faith")), becoming a curse for us so that we might receive the blessing of Abraham. He entered into our destitution, not to condemn us, but to provide for us an imperishable inheritance ([1 Peter 1:4](/1_peter/1-4 "1 Peter 1:4 - An Inheritance That Is Imperishable")). Through His redemptive work, we are not left without an heir or a name; instead, we are adopted into God's family, becoming co-heirs with Christ ([Romans 8:17](/romans/8-17 "Romans 8:17 - Heirs with Christ")) and receiving a new identity in Him ([John 1:12](/john/1-12 "John 1:12 - Children of God")). The lasting "name" in Deuteronomy 25:10 signifies disgrace, but the "name" of Christ signifies salvation, honor, and eternal life, transforming our shame into glory.

Note: Commentary is generated by AI with a directive for Biblical fidelity. Always rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. The Scripture text and cross-references are from verified, non-AI sources.