then it shall be, in the day that he causeth his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved the first-born before the son of the hated, who is the first-born:

And he meaneth to divide his substance among his sons: he may not make the son of the beloved the firstborn, and prefer him before the son of the hated.

then it shall be, in the day that he causeth his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved the firstborn before the son of the hated, which is the firstborn:

Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not prefer the son of the beloved first-born, before the son of the hated, which is indeed the first-born:

then it hath been, in the day of his causing his sons to inherit that which he hath, he is not able to declare first-born the son of the loved one, in the face of the son of the hated one, the first-born.

Then it shall be, when he makes his sons to inherit that which he has, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn:

Then when he gives his property to his sons for their heritage, he is not to put the son of his loved one in the place of the first son, the son of the hated wife:

and if he wishes to divide his substance among his sons: he cannot make the son of the beloved wife the firstborn, and so prefer him before the son of the hated wife.

Die quo haeredes instituet filios suos eorum quae habuerit, non poterit dare jus primogeniturae filio dilectae ante filium exosae primogenitum.

Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath,.... By a will in writing, or byword of mouth, or by a deed of gift, actually bestowing his goods upon them, and dividing among them what he is for the present possessed of; see Luke 15:12,
that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn; that is, when such is the case, that the son of his wife he has the least value for is really his firstborn, he may not, through favour and affection to the wife he loves better, prefer her son, and declare him to be the firstborn, by devising to him or bestowing on him the double portion of his goods; for so to do would not be right, or agreeably to the will and law of God; for though previous to this law the birthright was given to Joseph, the eldest son of Rachel, the most beloved wife of Jacob, before Reuben who was the son of Leah, less beloved by him, and was in fact his firstborn; yet this was owing to the sin of Reuben, and by the appointment of God; see Genesis 49:3.