What is the context?
The person who acts defiantly is described as blaspheming the Lord, despising His word, and breaking His command. The rule again addresses native and foreigner alike.
The guilt remains and the person is to be cut off. These sentences explain the attitude at issue through rejection and contempt, setting it apart from the preceding case of someone who has erred unintentionally.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Wesley reads the offense as setting God at defiance and exposing His authority to contempt. The contrast is more precise than saying every wrong action has exactly the same circumstances. It also does not authorize readers to declare every person who later repents beyond God’s mercy.
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.