Leviticus 27:26-27
“But a firstborn of animals, which as a firstborn belongs to the LORD, no man may dedicate; whether ox or sheep, it is the LORD’s. And if it is an unclean animal, then he shall buy it back at the valuation, and add a fifth to it; or, if it is not redeemed, it shall be sold at the valuation.
English Standard Version (ESV)
This page isn't yet indexed by search engines.
This verse highlights that God isn't impressed by us "giving" Him what is already His. The firstborn animal, by its very nature, belonged to the Lord before anyone could even think of vowing it, making any attempt to vow it a kind of empty gesture, or even a way of trying to gain credit for something not truly ours.
This passage appears at the end of Leviticus 27, which details rules for vows and dedicating property to God. After explaining how people, animals, houses, and land can be vowed, this verse and the next two address specific exceptions: firstborn animals, already "devoted things," and tithes. These items are declared off-limits for new vows because they already belong to the Lord by divine law or a prior consecration.
Why would the law prohibit dedicating something that seems like a generous gift to God? It turns out, the 'gift' wasn't ours to give in the first place.
In Leviticus 27, we're learning about vows and dedicating possessions to the Lord. Most things a person owned could be vowed. However, there are specific exceptions, and the firstborn of animals is one of them.
Not Your Property to Give
This verse states clearly: 'no man may dedicate' the firstborn animal. The reason? 'it is the LORD’s.' This isn't a new offering or a special dedication; it's a recognition of God's ownership that existed before any vow could even be considered. Think of it like trying to 'gift' a public park back to the city – it's already theirs!
This principle was established back in Exodus 13, where God declared the firstborn of both people and animals were His. For clean animals, they were to be sacrificed. For unclean animals, there was a redemption process, but the ultimate claim belonged to God.
Vowing something that's already God's sounds like a mistake, but the Bible calls it something much more serious. What's at stake?
The prohibition against vowing the firstborn isn't just about following rules; it's about protecting the integrity of our worship and our relationship with God.
A Mockery of Divine Rights
Several commentators highlight that attempting to 'dedicate' what is already God's is essentially a mockery. It's pretending to give a gift while offering something you don't truly possess and can't withhold. This kind of 'generosity' doesn't impress God; it insults Him.
It's like saying, 'Lord, I give you this animal that you already claimed by law!' This is a false piety, an empty gesture that bypasses genuine devotion and disrespects God's established rights. It's a way of appearing devout without actually relinquishing anything truly yours to Him.
Understand the original words
bekor · Hebrew Noun
Refers to the first male offspring of humans or animals, which was considered the property of God under the Mosaic Law. This concept emphasizes God's ownership and claim over all life, particularly following the deliverance from Egypt.
YHWH · Hebrew Proper Noun
The covenant God of Israel, the personal name revealed to Moses. It signifies the self-existent, eternal, and faithful One who enters into a covenant relationship with His people.
tame · Hebrew Adjective
Ritually unfit for ceremonial use in the sanctuary or for consumption by the people under the law. It represents a state of separation from the holy because of physical defects or prescribed religious categories.
padah · Hebrew Verb
This passage establishes the foundational law that the firstborn of every womb among both animals and humans belongs to the LORD, setting the stage for why such firstborn couldn't be vowed again.
Numbers 18:17This verse reiterates God's claim on the firstborn of cattle, specifying that their blood is to be sprinkled on the altar, directly connecting to the sanctity of these firstborn animals.
1 Samuel 1:11Hannah's vow to give her son Samuel to the LORD highlights a crucial distinction: while firstborn animals were un-vowable because they already belonged to God, firstborn humans could be dedicated, often through redemption, showcasing a nuanced application of God's ownership.
Matthew 22:21Jesus' teaching to 'render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's' echoes the principle in Leviticus 27:26, reminding us that some things inherently belong to God and cannot be 'given' as if they were our own to offer.
ellicottLeviticus 27:26: "Only the firstling of the beasts, which should be the LORD'S firstling, no man shall sanctify it; whether it be ox, or sheep: it is the LORD'S."
(26) Only the firstling of the beasts. —Better, nevertheless the firstlings, &c, as this rendering also suits Leviticus 27:28 , which begins with the same particle, and which is translated in the Authorised Version, “not withstanding.” Having laid down the regulations about the four classes of objects which may be vowed to the Lord—vi…
gillLeviticus 27:26: "Only the firstling of the beasts, which should be the LORD'S firstling, no man shall sanctify it; whether it be ox, or sheep: it is the LORD'S."
Only the firstlings of the beasts,.... These are excepted from being sanctified, or set apart for sacred uses, for a very good reason, suggested in the next clause: which should be the Lord's firstling, no man shall sanctify it; it being what he has a claim upon, and ordered to be sanctified to him by a law previous to this, Exodus 13…
This verse highlights that God isn't impressed by us "giving" Him what is already His. The firstborn animal, by its very nature, belonged to the Lord before anyone could even think of vowing it, making any attempt to vow it a kind of empty gesture, or even a way of trying to gain credit for something not truly ours.
This passage appears at the end of Leviticus 27, which details rules for vows and dedicating property to God. After explaining how people, animals, houses, and land can be vowed, this verse and the next two address specific exceptions: firstborn animals, already "devoted things," and tithes. These items are declared off-limits for new vows because they already belong to the Lord by divine law or a prior consecration.
This passage appears at the end of Leviticus 27, which details rules for vows and dedicating property to God. After explaining how people, animals, houses, and land can be vowed, this verse and the next two address specific exceptions: firstborn animals, already "devoted things," and tithes. These items are declared off-limits for new vows because they already belong to the Lord by divine law or a prior consecration.
Get the original Greek and Hebrew, verse-by-verse context, and related passages inside the app.
Ask a follow-up
Ask Sola things like:
Live chat about Leviticus 27:26-27 is available in the Sola app.
The act of recovering property or a person by paying a price, symbolizing the restoration of what was under obligation or bondage back to its original owner or status.
"“But a firstborn of animals, which as a firstborn belongs to the LORD, no man may dedicate; whether ox or sheep, it is the LORD’s. And if it is an unclean animal, then he shall buy it back at the valuation, and add a fifth to it; or, if it…" — This verse highlights that God isn't impressed by us "giving" Him what is already His. The firstborn animal, by its very nature, belonged to the Lord before anyone could even think of vowing it, maki…
