TRV
- English
- King James KJV
- Complete Jewish CJB
- World English WEBM
- Berean Standard BSB
- American Standard ASV
- Geneva GNV
- Young's Literal YLT
- Douay-Rheims DRC
- International
- Shqip ALB
- العربية SVD
- বাংলা BN-IRV
- မြန်မာ Judson
- 简体文 CUV-S
- 繁體中文 CUV-T
- Čeština BKR
- Nederlands STVE
- Français LSG
- Deutsch SCH
- Ελληνικά Vamvas
- ગુજરાતી GU-IRV
- Hausa HCB
- עברית Hebrew
- हिन्दी HCV
- Magyar KAROLI
- Bahasa Indonesia INDO-TB
- Italiano Diodati
- 日本語 Kougo
- 한국어 Korean
- മലയാളം MAL
- मराठी MRCV
- Norsk DNB
- فارسی OPV
- Polski BG
- Português Almeida
- Română Cornilescu
- Русский Synodal
- Español RVG
- Kiswahili Neno
- Svenska SV1917
- Tagalog TAG-ADB
- தமிழ் TCV
- తెలుగు TSA
- ภาษาไทย THAI-KJV
- Українська Ohienko
- Tiếng Việt CADMAN
- Yorùbá YCB
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Leviticus 24:10–23. His two-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
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!
Continue studying Leviticus 24:19 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
SefariaThe Hebrew text with Rashi and centuries of Jewish commentary.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Leviticus 24:19 articulates a foundational principle of justice within the Mosaic Law, commonly known as lex talionis, or "the law of retaliation." This verse establishes a standard of proportionate punishment for physical harm, ensuring that the penalty precisely corresponds to the injury inflicted. Far from promoting personal vengeance, this divine mandate served as a judicial ceiling, designed to limit excessive retribution, maintain social order, and uphold the sanctity of life by demanding an equitable response to wrongdoing.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is situated within a broader section of Leviticus (chapter 24) that transitions from laws concerning sacred offerings and the Tabernacle service to various judicial and civil matters. Immediately preceding Leviticus 24:19 is the account of a man who blasphemed the Lord's name and was subsequently put to death, underscoring the severity of offenses against God and the community (Leviticus 24:10-16). Following this judgment, the text pivots to laws governing murder, personal injury, and damage to property (Leviticus 24:17-21). Leviticus 24:19, along with Leviticus 24:20, specifically details the application of lex talionis for physical harm. The entire chapter culminates in the declaration that these laws of justice apply equally to both native-born Israelites and foreigners residing among them, emphasizing God's impartial standard of righteousness for all within the covenant community (Leviticus 24:22).
Historical & Cultural Context
The principle of lex talionis ("eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth") was not unique to Israel, with similar concepts appearing in other ancient Near Eastern law codes, such as the Code of Hammurabi. However, the Israelite application of this law possessed distinct characteristics. Unlike some contemporary codes where penalties varied based on social status, the Mosaic Law insisted on equal application for all, regardless of social standing, as highlighted in Leviticus 24:22. Crucially, lex talionis in Israel was not a license for personal revenge but a judicial principle administered by appointed judges. Its primary purpose was to limit vengeance, preventing an escalating cycle of retribution where a minor injury could lead to disproportionate retaliation or a full-blown blood feud. By establishing a strict ceiling on punishment—that it should not exceed the original offense—it served as a powerful mechanism for maintaining social stability and ensuring a just, ordered society under God's divine law.
Key Themes
Leviticus 24:19 contributes significantly to several key themes pervasive throughout the book of Leviticus and the Pentateuch. Foremost is the theme of Divine Justice and Righteousness, showcasing God as the ultimate standard of fairness and equity, demanding that His people reflect His character in their legal system. This verse also underscores the Sanctity of Human Life and the Body, created in God's image, implying that harm to another is a grave offense against God's design. The principle of lex talionis further highlights the theme of Social Order and Stability, as it provides a mechanism to prevent chaos and blood feuds by establishing clear, proportionate penalties. It emphasizes Accountability for one's actions and the Impartiality of the Law, ensuring that justice is applied equally to all members of the community, whether native-born or sojourner, a principle reiterated in Leviticus 24:22. Ultimately, it serves as a divine Limitation of Vengeance, channeling retribution through a judicial process rather than individual retaliation, thereby fostering a more just and peaceful society.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This term (H376) refers to an individual, a male person, or any human being. In this context, it emphasizes the personal responsibility of the perpetrator. The law applies to any "man" who causes harm, highlighting the universal application of justice within the community, regardless of social standing, as it pertains to individual actions.
This primitive root (H5414) means "to give," but is used with the greatest latitude of application, including "to put," "to make," or "to inflict." Here, it denotes the active role of the individual in bringing about the injury. It signifies the direct action of the perpetrator in "giving" or "inflicting" a blemish upon another, establishing the causal link necessary for the law's application.
This term (H3971) refers to a physical defect, injury, or disfigurement, often implying a lasting mark or impairment. In Leviticus, mʼûwm is frequently used to describe physical imperfections that would disqualify an animal for sacrifice or a priest from service. Here, it signifies a tangible, often permanent, physical injury inflicted upon a person, underscoring the severity and physical nature of the harm being addressed by the law.
Verse Breakdown
"And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour;"
This initial clause sets the premise for the legal principle. It describes an act of physical harm inflicted by one individual ("a man") upon another ("his neighbour"). The term "neighbour" (Hebrew, ʻâmîyth) in this legal context encompasses any fellow member of the community, including both Israelites and resident aliens, as confirmed by the broader context of Leviticus 24. The focus is on the direct responsibility of the perpetrator for the physical injury caused, emphasizing that the action is a deliberate or negligent act resulting in a tangible "blemish."
"as he hath done, so shall it be done to him;"
This second clause dictates the consequence for the aforementioned act, articulating the core principle of lex talionis. It mandates a proportionate response, ensuring that the penalty mirrors the offense. This is the essence of "an eye for an eye," signifying that the legal system would impose a penalty equivalent in kind or value to the injury. This principle, further elaborated in Leviticus 24:20 with examples like "fracture for fracture," was designed to be a judicial limit, preventing disproportionate revenge and upholding a standard of equitable justice within the community.
Literary Devices
Leviticus 24:19 effectively employs several literary devices to convey its legal and ethical weight. Primarily, it functions as a Legal Maxim or Aphorism, a concise and authoritative statement of a fundamental legal principle. Its brevity and directness make it memorable and easily applicable. The phrase "as he hath done, so shall it be done to him" demonstrates clear Parallelism, specifically a form of Syntactic Parallelism (also known as Antithetic Parallelism in its reciprocal nature) where the structure of the first clause ("as he hath done") is mirrored by the second ("so shall it be done to him"). This exact mirroring emphasizes the direct and reciprocal relationship between the action and its consequence, reinforcing the concept of Retributive Justice, where punishment is directly linked to the offense. Furthermore, the term "blemish" can be interpreted as a form of Synecdoche, where a part (the physical mark or injury) represents the whole act of physical harm or disfigurement, encapsulating the broader scope of physical injury the law addresses.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Leviticus 24:19, with its declaration of proportionate justice, profoundly reflects God's character as a righteous and just Judge who demands fairness and accountability within His covenant community. This principle underscores the sanctity of human life and the human body, created in God's image, implying that harm to another is a serious offense against both the individual and God's established order. Far from promoting personal vengeance, lex talionis was a divine safeguard against escalating cycles of retribution, setting a clear, impartial standard for judicial punishment and thereby fostering a stable and equitable society. It established a framework where justice was administered by the community's legal system, not by individual retaliation, ensuring that the penalty fit the crime and preventing excessive or arbitrary punishment.
Reflection and Application
While the literal application of "an eye for an eye" is not practiced in modern legal systems, which typically employ fines, imprisonment, or other forms of restitution, the underlying principle of proportionate justice remains profoundly relevant. Leviticus 24:19 reminds us that actions have consequences and that society has a divine mandate to administer justice fairly. It highlights God's demand for accountability and His desire for a righteous social order that prevents chaos and ensures that victims receive appropriate redress, and perpetrators face suitable penalties. For believers, this verse also prompts reflection on the tension between societal justice and personal forgiveness. While governments are ordained by God to administer justice and are "God's servant, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who does evil" (Romans 13:4), the New Testament calls individuals to a higher standard of mercy and forgiveness, particularly in personal interactions, as exemplified by Jesus' teaching on turning the other cheek. This challenges us to seek justice in the public square while cultivating a spirit of grace and reconciliation in our private lives, trusting God for ultimate justice and recognizing that true justice is ultimately found in Him.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
What is lex talionis and how does Leviticus 24:19 relate to it?
Lex talionis is a Latin term meaning "the law of retaliation," often summarized by the phrase "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." It is a legal principle that dictates that the punishment should be equivalent to the harm caused. Leviticus 24:19 is a direct articulation of this principle, stating, "And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him." This verse establishes the core idea that the penalty for physical injury must precisely match the injury inflicted, ensuring a proportionate and equitable judicial response. Its purpose was not to encourage personal vengeance but to set a strict limit on punishment, preventing excessive retaliation and promoting a just legal system.
Was this law intended for personal revenge or judicial application?
This law was unequivocally intended for judicial application by the courts, not for personal revenge. The context of Leviticus 24 and other passages like Deuteronomy 19:18-21 clearly show that these were legal statutes to be administered by judges and elders, not by individuals seeking personal retribution. The purpose of lex talionis was to provide a ceiling for punishment, ensuring that penalties did not exceed the original offense, thereby preventing blood feuds and cycles of escalating violence. It was a mechanism for maintaining social order and fairness under divine law, administered by the community's legal system.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
Leviticus 24:19, articulating the principle of proportionate justice, finds profound Christ-centered fulfillment in multiple dimensions. First, Jesus perfectly embodies divine justice, upholding the righteous standards of God's law. He is the one who will ultimately execute perfect justice, as all judgment has been committed to Him by the Father (John 5:22). Second, Jesus fulfills the demand of lex talionis not by inflicting harm, but by receiving it on behalf of humanity. He took upon Himself the "blemish" of our sin and its just consequences, bearing the wounds and suffering that were due to us, thereby satisfying the demands of divine justice (Isaiah 53:5; 2 Corinthians 5:21). He became sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God. Furthermore, while the Old Testament law established a judicial standard for society, Jesus reorients its personal application in the New Testament, teaching His followers to "turn the other cheek" and to love their enemies (Matthew 5:38-39), shifting the focus from personal retaliation to sacrificial love, forgiveness, and trust in God's ultimate justice. In Christ, both the righteous demands of the law are met through His atoning sacrifice, and a higher call to grace and mercy is extended to those who follow Him, transforming the heart from vengeance to reconciliation.