What is the context?

The people and officials covenant to release their Hebrew servants and initially do so. They then reverse the release and force the freed people back into bondage.

The Lord recalls bringing Israel out of slavery and commanding the release of a fellow Hebrew after six years’ service. Their public promise had briefly moved toward that command.

The reversal profanes His name because the covenant was made before Him in His house. The threatened freedom to sword, plague, and famine turns their own proclamation against them.

Those who passed between the divided calf will face the fate represented by that covenant act. Babylon’s temporary withdrawal will end, and the city will be captured and burned.

How is this passage commonly understood?

Wesley interprets passing between the calf’s pieces as accepting the penalty of being treated like it if the covenant is broken. His explanation links the enacted oath with the judgment; the people’s coercive reversal remains the explicit offense.

What is our position?

We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.

Where can I study this further?

No deeper study linked yet.