Commentary - Deuteronomy 25:5-10

Bird's-eye view

This passage lays out the law of levirate marriage, a practice designed to preserve the name and inheritance of a man who dies childless. In the agrarian, covenantal society of ancient Israel, a name was not just a label and land was not just property. A name represented a man's entire legacy, and the land was his stake in the promise God made to Abraham. For a man's name to be "blotted out" was for his line to be extinguished and his portion in the promised land to be lost forever, a true covenantal tragedy. This law therefore provides a gracious, familial remedy. It places a solemn duty on the deceased's brother to marry the widow and raise up a son who would be the legal heir of the dead man. This is not primarily about romance; it is about piety, loyalty, and covenant faithfulness. The law also anticipates the possibility of selfish refusal and prescribes a ceremony of public shaming, demonstrating that the failure to perform this duty was not a private affair but a public offense against one's brother, family, and the whole covenant community.

At its heart, this law is a beautiful illustration of kinsman redemption. It is about a near relative stepping in to rescue a lost inheritance and a forgotten name. As such, it points powerfully forward to the Lord Jesus Christ, our ultimate Kinsman Redeemer. He is the brother who was not ashamed to take our flesh, marry His bride the Church, and raise up spiritual offspring to secure an eternal inheritance for those of us who were dead in our sins, with no name and no hope in the world. This earthy, robust law is shot through with gospel light.

Outline

Context In Deuteronomy

Deuteronomy is Moses' final address to the generation of Israelites poised to enter the Promised Land. It is a renewal of the covenant made at Sinai, tailored for their new life as a settled, landed people. The laws in this section of the book (often called the Deuteronomic Code) are intensely practical, dealing with the nitty-gritty of civil and domestic life. Chapter 25 is a collection of such laws, covering everything from judicial punishments and fair treatment of animals to the ordinance before us. This law of levirate marriage fits perfectly within Deuteronomy's overarching concern for maintaining justice, protecting the vulnerable (in this case, a childless widow), and, most importantly, preserving the integrity of the tribal allotments of land. The inheritance of the land was a physical sign of God's covenant promise, and each family's "name" and portion had to be guarded jealously as a matter of faithfulness to Yahweh.

Key Issues

A Name Not Erased

In our individualistic age, we tend to think of our legacy in terms of personal achievements or the memories we leave in the minds of our friends. The biblical mindset is far more robust, corporate, and generational. To have your name "blotted out from Israel" was a terror. It meant you were a dead end, a terminated branch on the family tree of God's people. It meant your share in the inheritance of God's promises was forfeit. This law is God's gracious provision to prevent such a catastrophe. It is a call for brothers to act like brothers, to understand that their family's well-being is a shared responsibility. The refusal to do so is not treated as a simple personal preference, but as a profound act of selfishness, a failure of love that rips a hole in the fabric of the covenant community. The public ceremony of humiliation is designed to make the stakes clear: building up your brother's house is a sacred duty, and to refuse it is to invite a shame that will cling to your own house for generations.

Verse by Verse Commentary

5 “If brothers live together and one of them dies and has no son, then the wife of the one who died shall not be married outside the family to a strange man. Her husband’s brother shall go in to her and take her to himself as wife and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her.

The scenario is specific: "brothers live together," which likely means they live in the same vicinity on their ancestral land. One dies without a son, the heir who would carry on his name and inherit his property. The widow is now in a precarious position. The law's first concern is to keep the inheritance within the family. She is not to marry a "strange man," that is, someone from outside the clan. The duty falls to the surviving brother. He is to "go in to her," a straightforward Hebrew idiom for sexual relations, and "take her to himself as wife." The text is clear that this is a full marriage. He is to "perform the duty" of a brother-in-law. This was not an optional act of charity; it was a prescribed, covenantal obligation.

6 And it will be that the firstborn whom she bears shall assume the name of his dead brother, so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel.

Here is the central purpose of the law. The first son born from this new union is not legally considered the son of the living brother, but of the dead one. He will "assume the name" of the deceased. This means he becomes the heir to the dead brother's property and legacy. The living brother, the biological father, acts as a steward, a trustee for his brother's future. His reward is the satisfaction of having done his duty before God and his people. The goal is explicitly stated: "so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel." This is about the preservation of a covenant line. Every family in Israel was a thread in the great tapestry that would one day produce the Messiah, and no thread was to be carelessly broken.

7 But if the man does not desire to take his brother’s wife, then his brother’s wife shall go up to the gate to the elders and say, ‘My husband’s brother refuses to raise up a name for his brother in Israel; he is not willing to perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.’

The law anticipates human weakness and selfishness. A man might not "desire" to do this. Perhaps he did not like the woman, or perhaps he did not want the economic burden of raising a son who would not be his own heir. The law does not compel him to act against his will, because a forced marriage would be a miserable affair. But his refusal is not a private matter. The widow has recourse. She is to go "to the gate," the place of public assembly and legal judgment, and bring a formal charge before the elders. Her accusation is precise: he is refusing to build up his brother's house and is allowing his brother's name to be extinguished. This is a public, covenantal failure.

8 Then the elders of his city shall summon him and speak to him. And if he stands and says, ‘I do not desire to take her,’

The elders, acting as the city's judiciary, summon the man. They are to reason with him, likely reminding him of his duty and the honor of fulfilling it. This is his opportunity to repent and do the right thing. But if he is obstinate, if he publicly "stands and says, 'I do not desire to take her,'" then his decision is final. He has made his choice, and now he must face the public consequences of that choice.

9 then his brother’s wife shall come to him in the sight of the elders and pull his sandal off his foot and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, ‘Thus it is done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.’

This is a ceremony of ritualized contempt. It must happen "in the sight of the elders," as a formal legal proceeding. First, she pulls his sandal from his foot. This is a powerful symbol seen again in the book of Ruth. A sandal had to do with walking on and possessing land. By removing his sandal, she is symbolically stripping him of his right and responsibility in this matter. He has forfeited his standing as the kinsman. Second, she is to "spit in his face." In that culture, and in any culture really, this was an act of ultimate disdain. It was a visceral expression of disgust for his selfishness. She then pronounces the verdict: this is what happens to a man who refuses to build his brother's house. He has chosen himself over his brother, and he is publicly marked for it.

10 And in Israel his name shall be called, ‘The house of him whose sandal is removed.’

The shame is not fleeting. It results in a new, derogatory name for his entire household. He wanted to avoid perpetuating his brother's name, and the result is that his own name is now permanently stained with dishonor. Whenever people would refer to his family, they would call them, "The house of the unsandaled one." It was a perpetual reminder, passed down through generations, of a foundational failure in covenant loyalty. In a world built on honor and shame, this was a severe and lasting punishment.

Application

This law, in its specifics, belonged to the civil code of ancient Israel. We are not required to practice levirate marriage today. But as with all of God's law, the underlying principle, the general equity, remains. And that principle points us in two directions: toward our duty to one another, and toward our salvation in Christ.

First, we have a duty to build one another's houses. We are to be a people who look not only to our own interests, but also to the interests of others. We are to care for the vulnerable among us, particularly the widows and the fatherless. A selfish, individualistic Christian is a contradiction in terms. We are to bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. To refuse this duty, to say "I do not desire to," is to invite shame upon ourselves in the church, which is the household of God.

But more profoundly, this passage shows us our need for a Redeemer. We were all like that dead brother, without a name, without an heir, and without an inheritance. We were spiritually dead, and our line was blotted out. But Jesus Christ is our true elder brother, our ultimate Kinsman Redeemer. He was not ashamed to call us brethren. When it came time to perform the duty of a kinsman, He did not say, "I do not desire to." He willingly took on our flesh, our "sandal," and went to the cross. He took our shame, He was spit upon for us, so that He might raise up a name for us. Through His death and resurrection, He has secured for us an inheritance that can never be lost. He has married His bride, the Church, and is bringing many sons to glory. Unlike the selfish brother who received a name of shame, Christ, for His selfless obedience, has received the name that is above every name. Our response is to give Him all honor and to live as grateful members of the house that He, our faithful brother, has built.