Numbers 15:34

15:34 Though there was no question about the man’s guilt, it is possible that the community was uncertain how to punish him. The death sentence was an appropriate penalty, because disregard of the Sabbath signaled a rejection of God’s gracious covenant with Israel (Exod 31:12-17) and was akin to blasphemy (Num 15:30; Lev 24:10-16; cp. 1 Tim 1:20).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

34. It had been declared in Exo_31:14 f., Num_35:2 (both P ) that Sabbath-breaking must be punished with death, but the method of execution had not been laid down. If, however, the meaning is that they did not know what the man’s punishment should be, the present passage is independent of those in Exodus. The Jews who laid down this law in the period after the exile were sternly acting in accordance with the dictates of their conscience. But (though in early days stern punishments may have been salutary) no Christian is compelled to believe that because the law stands in the Bible it is now in accordance with the mind of God. One effect of Christian civilization has been to confine the death penalty to murderers.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And the Lord said unto Moses,.... Who consulted the Lord upon this affair, in the tabernacle, even at the most holy place, from above the mercy seat, where he promised to meet him, and commune with him about whatsoever he should consult him, Exo 25:22,

the man shall surely be put to death; for as no fire was to be made throughout their habitations on a sabbath day, gathering sticks for such a purpose was a work that was a violation of the sabbath, punishable with death, Exo 35:2; and the kind of death follows:

all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp; as afterwards without the city: of the place and manner of stoning; see Gill on Act 7:58.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Death had indeed been assigned as the penalty Exo 31:14; Exo 35:2; but it had not been determined how that death was to be inflicted.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

i.e. Moses and Aaron, and the seventy rulers last mentioned.

What should be done to him, i.e. in what manner he was to be cut off, or by what kind of death he was to die, which therefore God here particularly determines; otherwise it was known in general that sabbath-breakers were to be put to death, from Exo 31:14; 35:2.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

34. In ward — In custody as a prisoner.

It was not declared — The boundary line between remissible and irremissible sins is too narrow for the unaided eye of man to discover, hence God’s verdict is sought.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

They put him in ward, (cf. Lev_24:12) because it was not declared what should be done to him. This is perplexing, because the punishment of death had been decreed in Exo_31:14, Exo_31:15, and Exo_35:2. It seems an evasion to say that although death had been decreed, the mode of death had not been fixed; for

(1) it was clearly part of the Divine answer that the offence was really capital (see verse 35), and

(2) it was understood that in such cases death was to be inflicted by stoning. (see Lev_20:2 Lev_24:14 Jos_7:25; in the last case the command was to bum the delinquents with fire, yet it was rightly taken for granted that they were to be stoned to death first) There are only two explanations which are satisfactory because they are honest.

1. The incident may possibly have occurred between the first institution of the sabbath (Exo_16:23, Exo_16:29) and the decree of death to those that broke it. There is nothing in the record as it stands here to contradict such an assumption.

2. It is more likely that it occurred after the departure from Sinai, and that the hesitation in dealing with the criminal was duo not to any real uncertainty as to the law, but to unwillingness to inflict so extreme and so (apparently) disproportioned a punishment for such an offence without a further appeal. If it be said that such unwillingness to carry out a plain command would have been sinful, it is sufficient to answer that Moses and Aaron and the elders were human beings, and must have shrunk from visiting with a cruel death the trivial breach of a purely arbitrary commandment.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

They - That is, Moses and Aaron, and the seventy rulers. What should be done - That is, in what manner he was to be cut off, or by what kind of death he was to die, which therefore God here particularly determines: otherwise it was known in general that sabbath-breakers were to be put to death.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

כי לא פרש מה יעשה לו [AND, THEY PLACED HIM IN WARD] BECAUSE IT WAS NOT EXPLAINED WHAT SHOULD BE DONE WITH HIM — i.e. what kind of death penalty he was to die had not yet been explained, but they were fully aware that one who desecrates the Sabbath is punishable by some death penalty (Sifrei Bamidbar 114; Sanhedrin 78b; cf. Rashi on Leviticus 24:12).

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.