<\/p>
Why did Naboth refuse to sell his vineyard to Ahab? Ray Dillard pointed to Leviticus 25 for the answer: \u201cBecause the land represented the fruit of the nation\u2019s redemption, God commanded that it remain in the hands of the families to whom it was originally allotted. The land had been provided by God as part of his grace toward Israel; therefore, no one was to take the land of another away from him. The law provided that the land could be leased for a period, but that it could never be sold outright (Leviticus 25:13-15).\u201d <\/p>\n
Leviticus 25 is right, but there are some complexities. The Jubilee law makes a distinction between property in the land, property in unwalled villages, property in walled cities, and property in Levitical cities (cf. vv. 29, 31, 32). Since Naboth\u2019s vineyard was in Jezreel, it was presumably within a walled city. It seems that the rules of Leviticus 25:29-30 would apply: \u201cif a man sells a dwelling house in a walled city, then his redemption right remains valid until a full year from its sale; his right of redemption lasts a full year. But if it is not bought back for him within the space of a full year, then the house that is in the walled city passes permanently to its purchaser throughout his generations; it does not revert in the jubilee.\u201d This rule is stated with respect to \u201cdwelling houses\u201d in walled cities, and does not explicitly apply to land within walled cities. Would that same rule apply to landed property within a walled city? Or would that be treated as \u201cland\u201d that could not be sold in perpetuity? <\/p>\n
It appears to me that a productive field or vineyard located within a walled city would be treated as \u201cland,\u201d and thus could not be sold in perpetuity. The distinction between \u201cland\u201d and \u201ccity-property\u201d seems to be one of productivity. If the property produces an annual harvest, it is counted as land, and any \u201csale\u201d is actually a sale of a certain number of harvests (25:15). <\/p>\n
If this is the case, why didn\u2019t Naboth go ahead and lease his vineyard, and just wait for the next Jubilee to get his vineyard back? Leviticus 25 assumes that a landed Israelite would be willing to part with his property only in extreme circumstances, as a last resort (v. 25). The land was Yahweh\u2019s (v. 23), and Naboth was not free to dispense with it simply at his whim. <\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Why did Naboth refuse to sell his vineyard to Ahab? Ray Dillard pointed to Leviticus 25 for the answer: \u201cBecause the land represented the fruit of the nation\u2019s redemption, God commanded that it remain in the hands of the families to whom it was originally allotted. The land had been provided by God as part […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3021,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19227","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bible-ot-kings"],"yoast_head":"\n