Leviticus 24:11

My Notes

What Does Leviticus 24:11 Mean?

"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:)" A man of MIXED heritage — Israelite mother, Egyptian father (verse 10) — BLASPHEMES God's name and CURSES. The community brings him to MOSES for judgment. The narrator records the mother's name (SHELOMITH — 'peaceful'), her father (DIBRI — 'my word'), and her tribe (DAN). The specificity says: this is a REAL person, from a REAL family, and the case becomes PRECEDENT LAW for all of Israel.

The phrase "blasphemed the name of the LORD, and cursed" (vayyiqqov et hashShem vayeqallel — he pierced/blasphemed the Name and cursed) uses TWO verbs: BLASPHEMED (naqav — to pierce, to bore through, to profane by pronouncing) the NAME (hashShem — THE Name, the divine name YHWH), and CURSED (qillel — to make light of, to treat as worthless, to revile). The double action is both specific (profaning the divine NAME) and general (cursing broadly). The piercing of the Name and the cursing are connected: profaning the sacred name IS the cursing.

The parenthetical — "his mother's name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan" — provides IDENTITY details that serve the LEGAL record: the case is DOCUMENTED. The mother is NAMED. The family is IDENTIFIED. The tribe is SPECIFIED. The record-keeping says: this case matters. The identity of the parties is preserved because the judgment will become PRECEDENT (verses 15-16 — the death penalty for blasphemy becomes permanent law).

Reflection Questions

• 1.What name or sacred thing are you treating with contempt?
• 2.What does the case being brought to Moses (not mob justice) teach about due process even for blasphemy?
• 3.How does the law applying to EVERYONE (stranger and native) describe universal accountability?
• 4.What does the specificity of the record (names, tribe, family) teach about precedent-cases needing documentation?

Devotional

He blasphemed the Name. He cursed. They brought him to Moses. His mother was Shelomith, daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan. The specificity is the RECORD — a real person, a real family, a real tribe. The case that becomes permanent law starts with a specific individual. The precedent has a name.

The 'blasphemed the name and cursed' is the DOUBLE offense: the Name (hashShem — the divine name YHWH, so sacred that later tradition avoids speaking it entirely) was PIERCED — profaned, treated with contempt, used to CURSE rather than to bless. The Name that should be HALLOWED (Matthew 6:9) was BLASPHEMED. The Name that should produce WORSHIP produced CURSING. The mouth that should have honored the Name WEAPONIZED it.

The 'Israelitish woman's son' identifies the offender as MIXED-HERITAGE: Israelite mother, Egyptian father (verse 10). The mixed identity matters for the LEGAL question: does the blasphemy-law apply to someone who is only HALF Israelite? The answer (verse 16 — 'as well the stranger as he that is born in the land') will be: YES. The law applies to EVERYONE within the community — full Israelite, mixed heritage, or stranger. The blasphemy-law doesn't check your genealogy.

The 'brought him unto Moses' makes the case JUDICIAL: the community doesn't execute the man on the spot. They bring him to MOSES — the legal authority, the judge, the one who consults with God. The mob-impulse is restrained by the LEGAL PROCESS. The community waits for the VERDICT rather than acting on the OUTRAGE. The bringing to Moses IS the due process.

What 'name' are you treating with contempt — and does the seriousness of the offense match what you assumed?

Commentary

Trusted original commentary from respected historical Bible scholars and theologians.

Cross References

Related passages throughout Scripture