The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
Unlawful Sexual Relations
Leviticus 18:1–30 — Unlawful Sexual Relations. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
1Then the LORD said to Moses,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
Yah·weh way·ḏab·bêr ’el- mō·šeh lê·mōr
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And spoke Yahweh to Moses, saying:
Where the English smooths the original
Unlike the preceding Divine communications, which treated of the ritual and ceremonial pollutions, the enactments which Moses is here commanded to communicate direct to the children of Israel, or their representatives, the elders, affect their moral life—precepts which form the basis of domestic purity, and which are the foundation of human happiness.
It is a remarkable thing that, except by implication in connection with the sin offerings and the trespass offerings and the ceremonies of the Day of Atonement, there has not yet been a single moral precept, as such, in the Book of Leviticus, and there has been very little recognition of sin as distinct from pollution. All has been ceremonial. But the ceremonial is typical of the moral, and from the consideration of ceremonial uncleanness and its remedy, we now proceed to the consideration of moral uncleanness and its penalty.Cambridge frames chapters 18–20 as the pivot from pollution to morality in Leviticus.
It being one special design of God to preserve his people from the lewd and idolatrous customs of other nations, Moses now receives particular orders to prohibit the Israelites from many of those unnatural practices which were common among the ancient idolaters.
2“Speak to the Israelites and tell them: I am the LORD your God.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
dab·bêr ’el- bə·nê yiś·rā·’êl wə·’ā·mar·tā ’ă·lê·hem ’ă·nî Yah·weh ’ĕ·lō·hê·ḵem
Literal — word-for-word from the original
Speak to the-sons-of Israel, and-you-shall-say to-them: I [am] Yahweh your-God.
Where the English smooths the original
The Lord is their recognised and sole sovereign, the children of Israel are therefore bound to obey His precepts, and not be led astray by the customs or statutes which prevailed among the people whose country they are to possess. Moreover, as He is holy, the Israelites, by faithfully obeying His sacred laws, will attain to that holiness which will bring them in communion with Him in whose image they were created.
The frequent repetition of this formula in these parts of the Law may be intended to keep the Israelites in mind of their covenant with Yahweh in connection with the common affairs of life, in which they might be tempted to look at legal restrictions in a mere secular light.
Your Sovereign and Lawgiver. This is oft repeated here, because the things here forbidden were practised and allowed by the Gentiles, to whose custom he here opposeth Divine authority, and their obligation to obey his commands.
3You must not follow the practices of the land of Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not follow the practices of the land of Canaan, into which I am bringing you. You must not walk in their customs.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ṯa·‘ă·śū kə·ma·‘ă·śêh ’e·reṣ- miṣ·ra·yim ’ă·šer yə·šaḇ·tem- bāh ū·ḵə·ma·‘ă·śêh ’e·reṣ- kə·na·‘an ’ă·šer ’ă·nî mê·ḇî ’eṯ·ḵem šām·māh ṯa·‘ă·śū lō ṯê·lê·ḵū ū·ḇə·ḥuq·qō·ṯê·hem lō
Literal — word-for-word from the original
Like-the-doings-of the-land-of Egypt, where you-dwelt in-it, you-shall-not do; and-like-the-doings-of the-land-of Canaan, into-which I [am] bringing you there, you-shall-not do; and-in-their-statutes you-shall-not walk.
Where the English smooths the original
As some of “the doings” referred to may have been simple custom, not based upon the law of the country where they obtained, the Lawgiver here emphatically condemns the acts which were legalised, declaring them to have no authority whatever.
Egypt and Canaan: these two nations he mentions, because their habitation and conversation among them made their evil example in the following matters more dangerous. But under them he includes all other nations, as he elsewhere expresseth it. In their ordinances, or statutes; either because their laws did indeed allow such things, or because prevailing customs have the force of laws.
Aben Ezra puts another sense on these words, let no man use himself to walk in this way until it becomes an ordinance or statute unto him; custom is second nature, and in course of time has the force of a law, wherefore bad customs should be strictly guarded against.
4You are to practice My judgments and keep My statutes by walking in them. I am the LORD your God.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
’eṯ- ta·‘ă·śū wə·’eṯ- miš·pā·ṭay tiš·mə·rū ḥuq·qō·ṯay lā·le·ḵeṯ bā·hem ’ă·nî Yah·weh ’ĕ·lō·hê·ḵem
Literal — word-for-word from the original
My-judgments you-shall-do, and My-statutes you-shall-keep, to-walk in-them. I [am] Yahweh your-God.
Where the English smooths the original
The expression “my judgments and mine ordinances” is here used emphatically, in opposition to “their ordinances,” and has here the force of Mine only; just as the phrase “Him shalt thou serve” ( Deuteronomy 6:13 ) is explained by Christ “Him only shalt thou serve” ( Matthew 4:10 ).
My judgments — Though you do not see the particular reason of some of them, and though they be contrary to the laws and usages of the other nations.
I am the Lord your God: who had a right to make what laws he pleased, being their Sovereign, and which they in gratitude as well as in justice ought to obey, he being their God, their covenant God, who had done great and good things for them.
Close and constant adherence to God's ordinances is the most effectual preservative from gross sin. The grace of God only will secure us; that grace is to be expected only in the use of the means of grace.Henry's one note on the whole chapter (his Concise comment spans 18:1–30); placed at the frame, where the contest is which statutes Israel will walk in.
5Keep My statutes and My judgments, for the man who does these things will live by them. I am the LORD.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ū·šə·mar·tem ’eṯ- ḥuq·qō·ṯay wə·’eṯ- miš·pā·ṭay ’ă·šer hā·’ā·ḏām ya·‘ă·śeh ’ō·ṯām wā·ḥay bā·hem ’ă·nî Yah·weh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-you-shall-keep My-statutes and My-judgments, which the-man who-does them, shall-live by-them. I [am] Yahweh.
Where the English smooths the original
The spiritual authorities in the time of the second Temple interpreted this clause to mean that he who obeys these laws shall have eternal life. Hence the ancient Chaldee Versions translate it, “Shall have life eternal.” This passage is quoted both in the Prophets ( Ezekiel 20:11 ; Ezekiel 20:13 ; Ezekiel 20:21 ; Nehemiah 9:29 ) and by St. Paul ( Romans 10:5 ; Galatians 3:12 ), who contrasts this promise made to works with the promise of the Gospel made to faith.Ellicott names every canonical reuse of the clause — the spine of the threads and Christ section below.
"The man who does them (the ordinances of Jehovah) shall live (gain true life) through them"
as for eternal life, that was never intended to be had, nor was it possible it could be had and enjoyed by obedience to the law, which fallen man is unable to keep; but is what was graciously promised and provided the covenant of grace, before the world was, to come through Christ, as a free gift to all that believe in himGill reads the same clause against works-righteousness — the Reformed counter-reading the Sola section weighs.
Obedience to the divine law always, indeed, ensures temporal advantages; and this, doubtless, was the primary meaning of the words, "which if a man do, he shall live in them." But that they had a higher reference to spiritual life is evident from the application made of them by our Lord (Lu 10:28) and the apostle (Ro 10:2).
6None of you are to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. I am the LORD.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
’îš ’îš ’el- ṯiq·rə·ḇū kāl- lō šə·’êr bə·śā·rōw lə·ḡal·lō·wṯ ‘er·wāh ’ă·nî Yah·weh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
Man, man — to any flesh-of his-flesh you-shall-not approach to-uncover nakedness. I [am] Yahweh.
Where the English smooths the original
Literally, man, man, ye shall not approach. It is part of the phrase used in Leviticus 17:3 ; Leviticus 17:8 ; Leviticus 17:13 , and should accordingly be rendered by no man whatsoever shall approach. The absence of the words “of the house of Israel,” which, in the other instances, form part of this phrase, as we are assured by the authorities in the time of Christ, shows that these prohibitions are also binding upon the stranger who took up his abode among the Israelites, lest the land be defiled by his transgressions.
The term was evidently used to denote those only who came within certain limits of consanguinity, together with those who by affinity were regarded in the same relationship. To uncover their nakedness - i. e. to have sexual intercourse. The immediate object of this law was to forbid incest.
The positive law of marriage, as implanted in the human heart, would be simply that any man of full age might marry any woman of full age, provided that both parties were willing. But this liberty is at once controlled by a number of restrictions, the main purpose of which is to prevent incest, which, however much one nation may come to be indifferent to one form of it, and another to another, is yet abhorrent to the feelings and principles of mankind.
"Flesh of his flesh" is a flesh that is of his own flesh, belongs to the same flesh as himself ( Genesis 2:24 ), and is applied to a blood-relation, blood-relationship being called שׁארה (or flesh-kindred) in Hebrew ( Leviticus 18:17 ). Sexual intercourse is called uncovering the nakedness of another ( Ezekiel 16:36 ; Ezekiel 23:18 ).
7You must not expose the nakedness of your father by having sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; you must not have sexual relations with her.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ‘er·waṯ ’ā·ḇî·ḵā wə·‘er·waṯ ṯə·ḡal·lêh ’im·mə·ḵā hî ’im·mə·ḵā lō ṯə·ḡal·leh ‘er·wā·ṯāh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of your-father, even the-nakedness-of your-mother, you-shall-not uncover; your-mother she-[is], you-shall-not uncover her-nakedness.
Where the English smooths the original
This passage may, however, be translated literally, the nakedness of thy father, and the nakedness of thy mother shalt thou not uncover. That is, they being both one flesh, the nakedness of the one is the nakedness of the other. Amongst the Persians and other eastern nations, marriage between son and mother was allowed.
It might be rendered "and", or rather, even; that is, which belongs to both parents as being "one flesh" ( Genesis 2:24 ; compare Leviticus 18:8 , Leviticus 18:14 ). These prohibitions are addressed to men.
Here it notes that the nakedness of the father, and the nakedness of the mother, are one and the same thing, because they two are one flesh, and therefore her nakedness is his also; which further appears, because the mother only is mentioned in the following words, which contain the reason of the law. She is thy mother; and therefore even nature teacheth thee to abhor such incest.
8You must not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; it would dishonor your father.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ‘er·waṯ ṯə·ḡal·lêh ’ā·ḇî·ḵā ’ê·šeṯ- hî ‘er·waṯ ’ā·ḇî·ḵā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of the-wife-of your-father you-shall-not uncover; the-nakedness-of your-father it-[is].
Where the English smooths the original
Whilst the former prohibition refers to the son’s own mother, this law is directed against illicit commerce with his stepmother. Here we have an instance where the phrase “to uncover the nakedness” denotes both illicit commerce and incestuous marriage.
i.e. Thy step-mother. Examples of this are Genesis 35:22 49:4 1 Corinthians 5:1 . It is thy father’s nakedness, by interest and relation; that which he only may uncover.
By the "father's wife" we are probably to understand not merely his full lawful wife, but his concubine also, since the father's bed was defiled in the latter case no less than in the former ( Genesis 49:4 ), and an accursed crime was committed, the punishment of which was death.
9You must not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ṯə·ḡal·leh ‘er·wā·ṯān ‘er·waṯ ’ă·ḥō·wṯ·ḵā ’ā·ḇî·ḵā ḇaṯ- ’ōw ḇaṯ- ’im·me·ḵā mō·w·le·ḏeṯ ba·yiṯ ’ōw mō·w·le·ḏeṯ ḥūṣ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of your-sister, the-daughter-of your-father or the-daughter-of your-mother, born-of [the]-house or born-of [the]-outside — you-shall-not uncover their-nakedness.
Where the English smooths the original
The fact that Adam married “bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh,” and that his sons married their own sisters, encouraged the ancient Hebrew to imitate their example. Hence we find Abraham, the father of the faithful, married his half-sister ( Genesis 20:12 ).
What was here spoken of was the distinguishing offence of the Egyptians.
The clause, "whether born at home or born abroad," does not refer to legitimate or illegitimate birth, but is to be taken as a more precise definition of the words, daughter of thy father or of thy mother
10You must not have sexual relations with your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, for that would shame your family.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ṯə·ḡal·leh ‘er·wā·ṯə·ḵā ‘er·waṯ bin·ḵā baṯ- ’ōw ḇaṯ- bit·tə·ḵā kî hên·nāh ‘er·wā·ṯān
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of the-daughter-of your-son or the-daughter-of your-daughter — you-shall-not uncover their-nakedness, for they-[are] your-[own]-nakedness.
Where the English smooths the original
Still, when the mother is expressly forbidden to the son (see Leviticus 18:7 ), it is strange that the daughter should have been passed over in silence, and be left to inference. It is therefore more than probable that a word has dropped out of the text, and that originally it stood here, “the nakedness of thy daughter and of thy son’s daughter,” &c.Ellicott's strongest text-critical claim in the chapter — weighed in the apparatus.
The prohibition in the case of a daughter was probably omitted accidentally by a copyist from the beginning of this v.
And consequently of all thy children and children’s children, and all downwards; for they are a part of thyself, as coming out of thy loins, and out of thy wife, whose nakedness is thine own.
11You must not have sexual relations with the daughter of your father’s wife, born to your father; she is your sister.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ‘er·waṯ ṯə·ḡal·leh ‘er·wā·ṯāh baṯ- ’ā·ḇî·ḵā ’ê·šeṯ mō·w·le·ḏeṯ ’ā·ḇî·ḵā hî ’ă·ḥō·wṯ·ḵā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of the-daughter-of the-wife-of your-father, born to-your-father — your-sister she-[is] — you-shall-not uncover her-nakedness.
Where the English smooths the original
"The daughter of thy father's wife (i.e., thy step-mother), born to thy father," is the half-sister by a second marriage; and the prohibition refers to the son by a first marriage, whereas Leviticus 18:9 treats of the son by a second marriage. The notion that the man's own mother is also included, and that the prohibition includes marriage with a full sister, is at variance with the usage of the expression "thy father's wife."
Hence to avoid a senseless repetition of the same prohibition we must either regard this clause as having crept into the text from a marginal gloss, or we must correct the first letter of the disjunctive particle in Leviticus 18:9
Begotten of thy father , or, being akin to thy father . He seems to speak of the daughter of the father’s brother by his wife
12You must not have sexual relations with your father’s sister; she is your father’s close relative.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ‘er·waṯ ṯə·ḡal·lêh ’ā·ḇî·ḵā ’ă·ḥō·wṯ- hî ’ā·ḇî·ḵā šə·’êr
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of the-sister-of your-father you-shall-not uncover; the-near-kinswoman-of your-father she-[is].
Where the English smooths the original
The instance of Amram and Jochebed Exodus 6:20 seems to show that marriage with an aunt was not considered wrong by the Israelites when they were in Egypt.
It is remarkable that Moses himself was the offspring of such an alliance, since his father Amram married his own aunt Jochebed, who was the sister of his father. (See Exodus 6:20 .)
Thy father’s near kinswoman, Heb. thy father’s flesh , a member and product of the same flesh from which thy father came.
13You must not have sexual relations with your mother’s sister, for she is your mother’s close relative.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ‘er·waṯ ṯə·ḡal·lêh ’im·mə·ḵā ’ă·ḥō·wṯ- kî- hî ’im·mə·ḵā šə·’êr
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of the-sister-of your-mother you-shall-not uncover, for the-near-kinswoman-of your-mother she-[is].
Where the English smooths the original
Equally forbidden is the aunt by the mother’s side. The law which obtained in the time of Christ also defines this prohibition to extend to a mother’s sister or half-sister by the same father or mother, whether born in wedlock or out of it.
Marriage or conjugal intercourse with the sister of either father or mother (i.e., with either the paternal or maternal aunt) was prohibited, because she was the blood-relation of the father or mother.
by the same rule a woman might not marry her uncle, whether by father or mother's side, the relation being the same, and this reaches to great-uncle and great-aunt
14You must not dishonor your father’s brother by approaching his wife to have sexual relations with her; she is your aunt.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ’ā·ḇî·ḵā ’ă·ḥî- ṯiq·rāḇ ’el- lō ’iš·tōw ṯə·ḡal·lêh ‘er·waṯ hî dō·ḏā·ṯə·ḵā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of the-brother-of your-father you-shall-not uncover; to his-wife you-shall-not approach — your-aunt she-[is].
Where the English smooths the original
That is, according to the ancient legal interpretation, a nephew is to have no commerce with her during her husband’s lifetime, nor marry her when his uncle is dead. Those who transgressed this law had not only to bear their sin, but were doomed to die without issue. (See Leviticus 20:20 .)
And as a man may not marry his aunt, so neither may a woman marry her uncle, there being altogether the same distance in kindred, and the selfsame reason of the law. And for the examples of Abraham, Amram, Othniel, &c., to the contrary, they were before the publication of this law, by which it pleased God to restrain the liberty allowed formerly, when the holy seed was in a narrower compass
So, again, with the wife of the father's brother, because the nakedness of the uncle was thereby uncovered. The threat held out in Leviticus 20:19 and Leviticus 20:20 against the alliances prohibited in Leviticus 18:12-14 , is that the persons concerned should bear their iniquity or sin
15You must not have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law. She is your son’s wife; you are not to have sexual relations with her.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ‘er·waṯ ṯə·ḡal·lêh kal·lā·ṯə·ḵā hî bin·ḵā ’ê·šeṯ lō ṯə·ḡal·leh ‘er·wā·ṯāh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of your-daughter-in-law you-shall-not uncover; the-wife-of your-son she-[is], you-shall-not uncover her-nakedness.
Where the English smooths the original
The legislators in the time of Christ defined this prohibition as applicable not only to cases where marriage between them had actually been consummated, but to cases where the maiden had only been espoused, or when the daughter-in-law had been divorced by the son, or had become a widow. For an offence of this kind both parties were punished with death. (See Leviticus 20:12 .)
Sexual connection with a daughter-in-law, a son's wife, is called תּבל in Leviticus 20:12 , and threatened with death to both the parties concerned. תּבל, from בּלל to mix, to confuse, signifies a sinful mixing up or confusing of the divine ordinances by unnatural unchastity, like the lying of a woman with a beast
thou shall not uncover her nakedness; or have carnal knowledge of her, whether in the life or after the death of his son, even then marriage with her is not lawful.
16You must not have sexual relations with your brother’s wife; that would shame your brother.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ‘er·waṯ ṯə·ḡal·lêh ’ā·ḥî·ḵā ’ê·šeṯ- hî ‘er·waṯ ’ā·ḥî·ḵā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of the-wife-of your-brother you-shall-not uncover; the-nakedness-of your-brother it-[is].
Where the English smooths the original
That is, if she had children. See Deuteronomy 25:5 . The law here expressed was broken by Antipas in his connection with Herodias Matthew 14:3-4 .
Unless he died childless, for in that case God afterward commanded that a man should marry his brother’s widow, Deuteronomy 25:5 .
It has been asked, "How can the same thing be forbidden as immoral in Leviticus, and commanded as a duly in Deuteronomy?" Bishop Wordsworth replies, "In a special case, for a special reason applicable only to the Jews, God was pleased to dispense with that law, and in the plenitude of his omnipotence to change the prohibition into a command.... God cannot command anything that is sinful.Wordsworth, quoted by the Pulpit Commentary, on how Lev 18:16 can forbid what Deut 25:5 commands.
17You must not have sexual relations with both a woman and her daughter. You are not to marry her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter and have sexual relations with her. They are close relatives; it is depraved.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ‘er·waṯ ṯə·ḡal·lêh ’eṯ- ’iš·šāh ū·ḇit·tāh lō ṯiq·qaḥ bə·nāh wə·’eṯ- baṯ- baṯ- bit·tāh lə·ḡal·lō·wṯ ‘er·wā·ṯāh hên·nāh ša·’ă·rāh hī zim·māh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
The-nakedness-of a-woman and-her-daughter you-shall-not uncover; the-daughter-of her-son and the-daughter-of her-daughter you-shall-not take to-uncover her-nakedness — near-kin they-[are]; depravity it-[is].
Where the English smooths the original
That is, if a man marries a widow who has a daughter by a former husband, or if he forms an alliance with a woman who has a daughter out of wedlock, he is forbidden to marry also the daughter. But though this prohibition is directed against a peculiar form of polygamy. there can hardly be any doubt that, as the administrators of the law during the second Temple interpreted it, if he married either of them and she died, he could not marry the other any more
Both of these were crimes against blood-relationship which were to be punished with death in the case of both parties ( Leviticus 20:14 ), because they were "wickedness," זמּה, lit., invention, design, here applied to the crime of licentiousness and whoredom ( Leviticus 19:29 ; Judges 20:6 ; Job 31:11 ).
The expression made use of, Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, covers the case of a man's own daughter, and it is singular that it is only in this incidental manner that it is specifically named. But it has been already disposed of by the general command, None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness.Pulpit answers Ellicott's missing-daughter problem from v. 10 — covered here by inference.
18You must not take your wife’s sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is still alive.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ṯiq·qāḥ wə·’iš·šāh ’el- ’ă·ḥō·ṯāh liṣ·rōr lə·ḡal·lō·wṯ ‘er·wā·ṯāh ‘ā·le·hā bə·ḥay·ye·hā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-a-woman to her-sister you-shall-not take, to-bind, to-uncover her-nakedness beside-her, in-her-life.
Where the English smooths the original
This is clearly right, as against the A.V. mg. ‘ one wife to another.’ It is the marriage of two sisters together that is prohibited. The words that follow (‘in her lifetime’) show that the law, as set down here, does not prohibit marriage with a deceased wife’s sister. However weighty the reasons which may be adduced against such a connexion, scholars are generally agreed that they derive no support from this v.
But Holy Scripture ought not to be made a quarry whence partisans hew arguments for views which they have already adopted, nor is that the light in which a commentator can allow himself to regard it. A reverent and profound study of the passage before us, with its context, leads to the conclusion that the words have no bearing at all on the question of marriage with a deceased wife's sisterThe Pulpit reads the verse against partisan use — a flagged interpretive crux.
Lastly, it was forbidden to take a wife to her sister (עליה upon her, as in Genesis 28:9 ; Genesis 31:50 ) in her life-time, that is to say, to marry two sisters at the same time, לצרר "to pack together, to uncover this nakedness," i.e., to pack both together into one marriage bond, and so place the sisters in carnal union through their common husband
Grotius justly observes, that as the feuds and animosities of brothers are, of all others, the most keen; so are generally the jealousies and emulations between sisters, whereof we have an example in the history of Rachel and Leah.
19You must not approach a woman to have sexual relations with her during her menstrual period.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·’el- lō ṯiq·raḇ ’iš·šāh lə·ḡal·lō·wṯ ‘er·wā·ṯāh bə·nid·daṯ ṭum·’ā·ṯāh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-to a-woman in-the-impurity-of her-uncleanness you-shall-not approach to-uncover her-nakedness.
Where the English smooths the original
The marriage laws are now followed by sexual impurities, which to some extent are suggested by the subjects that had necessarily to be discussed or hinted at in regulating the alliance in question.
No, not to thy own wife. This was not only a ceremonial pollution, but an immorality also, whence it is put among gross sins, Ezekiel 18:6 . And therefore it is now unlawful under the gospel.
טמאה נדּת signifies the uncleanness of a woman's hemorrhage, whether menstruation or after childbirth, which is called in Leviticus 12:7 ; Leviticus 20:18 , the fountain of bleeding. The guilty persons were both of them to be cut off from their nation according to Leviticus 20:18
20You must not lie carnally with your neighbor’s wife and thus defile yourself with her.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō- ṯit·tên šə·ḵā·ḇə·tə·ḵā lə·zā·ra‘ wə·’el- ‘ă·mî·ṯə·ḵā ’ê·šeṯ lə·ṭā·mə·’āh- ḇāh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-to the-wife-of your-neighbor you-shall-not give your-lying for-seed, to-defile-yourself with-her.
Where the English smooths the original
"To a neighbour's wife thou shalt not give שׁכבתּך thy pouring as seed" (i.e., make her pregnant), "to defile thyself with her," viz., by the emissio seminis ( Leviticus 15:16-17 ), a defilement which was to be punished as adultery by the stoning to death of both parties ( Leviticus 20:10 ; Deuteronomy 22:22 , cf. John 9:5 ).
For committing adultery, which is here branded as a defilement, whether with a betrothed or married woman, both guilty parties incurred the penalty of death by stoning. (See Leviticus 20:10 ; Deuteronomy 22:22 ; Ezekiel 16:38 ; Ezekiel 16:40 ; John 8:5 .)
not only adultery is a defiling a man's wife, as it is sometimes called, but the adulterer defiles himself: all sin is of a defiling nature, but especially this, which defiles a man both in soul and body
21You must not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molech, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō- ṯit·tên ū·miz·zar·‘ă·ḵā lə·ha·‘ă·ḇîr lam·mō·leḵ wə·lō ṯə·ḥal·lêl ’eṯ- šêm ’ĕ·lō·he·ḵā ’ă·nî Yah·weh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-of-your-seed you-shall-not give to-pass-over to-Molech; and-you-shall-not profane the-name-of your-God. I [am] Yahweh.
Where the English smooths the original
Molech, or Moloch, which signifies "king," was the idol of the Ammonites. His statue was of brass, and rested on a pedestal or throne of the same metal. His head, resembling that of a calf, was adorned with a crown, and his arms were extended in the attitude of embracing those who approached him. His devotees dedicated their children to him; and when this was to be done, they heated the statue to a high pitch of intensity by a fire within, and then the infants were either shaken over the flames, or passed through the ignited arms
And Le Clerc ingeniously conjectures, that this phrase, passing through to Molech, was invented by the impious priests, in order to convey a softer idea of that horrid rite.
Those who violate the sanctity of the marriage ties will readily sacrifice their children. Hence the prohibition to offer up their children to idols follows the law about unchastity.Ellicott explains why a child-sacrifice law sits inside a chapter on sexual sin.
22You must not lie with a man as with a woman; that is an abomination.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō ṯiš·kaḇ wə·’eṯ- zā·ḵār miš·kə·ḇê ’iš·šāh hî tō·w·‘ê·ḇāh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-with a-male you-shall-not lie [as the]-lyings-of a-woman; abomination it-[is].
Where the English smooths the original
Lastly, it was forbidden to "lie with mankind as with womankind," i.e., to commit the crime of paederastia, that sin of Sodom ( Genesis 19:5 ), to which the whole of the heathen were more or less addicted ( Romans 1:27 ), and from which even the Israelites did not keep themselves free ( Judges 19:22 .)
This was the sin of Sodom ( Genesis 19:5 ), whence it derived its name, and in spite of the penalty of death enacted by the Law against those who were found guilty of it (see Leviticus 20:13 ), the Israelites did not quite relinquish this abominable vice ( Judges 19:22 ; 1Kings 14:24 )
it is so to God, as the above instance of his vengeance shows, and ought to be abominable to men, as being not only contrary to the law of God, but even contrary to nature itself, and what is never to be observed among brute creatures.
23You must not lie carnally with any animal, thus defiling yourself with it; a woman must not stand before an animal to mate with it; that is a perversion.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
lō- ṯit·tên šə·ḵā·ḇə·tə·ḵā ū·ḇə·ḵāl bə·hê·māh lə·ṭā·mə·’āh- ḇāh wə·’iš·šāh lō- ṯa·‘ă·mōḏ lip̄·nê ḇə·hê·māh lə·riḇ·‘āh hū te·ḇel
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-with any animal you-shall-not give your-lying, to-defile-yourself with-it; and-a-woman shall-not stand before an-animal to-mate with-it — confusion it-[is].
Where the English smooths the original
A horrible confusion of the natures which God hath distinguished, and of the order which God hath appointed, and an overthrow of. all bounds of religion, honesty, sobriety, and modesty.
it is confusion; a mixing of the seed of man and beast together, a blending of different kinds of creatures, a perverting the order of nature, and introducing the utmost confusion of beings, from whence monsters in nature may arise.
The necessity for the prohibition of this shocking crime, for which the Mosaic law enacts the penalty of death (see Leviticus 20:15-16 ; Exodus 22:18 ), will appear all the more important when it is borne in mind that this degrading practice actually formed a part of the religious worship of the Egyptians in connection with the goat deities.
24Do not defile yourselves by any of these practices, for by all these things the nations I am driving out before you have defiled themselves.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
’al- tiṭ·ṭam·mə·’ū bə·ḵāl ’êl·leh kî ḇə·ḵāl- ’êl·leh hag·gō·w·yim ’ă·šer- ’ă·nî mə·šal·lê·aḥ mip·pə·nê·ḵem niṭ·mə·’ū
Literal — word-for-word from the original
Do-not defile-yourselves in-any-of these; for in-all these are-defiled the-nations which I [am] driving-out from-before-you.
Where the English smooths the original
The land designed and consecrated for His people by Yahweh Leviticus 25:23 is here impersonated, and represented as vomiting forth its present inhabitants, in consequence of their indulgence in the abominations that have been mentioned. The iniquity of the Canaanites was now full. See Genesis 15:16 ; compare Isaiah 24:1-6 .
Ancient history gives many appalling proofs that the enormous vices described in this chapter were very prevalent, nay, were regularly practised from religious motives in the temples of Egypt and the groves of Canaan; and it was these gigantic social disorders that occasioned the expulsion, of which the Israelites were, in the hands of a righteous and retributive Providence, the appointed instruments (Ge 15:16).
Whence it is apparent that the several incests here prohibited are not only against the positive and particular law given by God to the Jews, but also against the general law and light of nature. And therefore the law about these things was one of the seven precepts of Noah.
25Even the land has become defiled, so I am punishing it for its sin, and the land will vomit out its inhabitants.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
hā·’ā·reṣ wat·tiṭ·mā wā·’ep̄·qōḏ ‘ă·wō·nāh hā·’ā·reṣ ‘ā·le·hā wat·tā·qi ’eṯ- yō·šə·ḇe·hā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-defiled-is the-land, and-I-visited its-iniquity upon-it, and-the-land vomited-out its-inhabitants.
Where the English smooths the original
From the creation the earth shared in the punishment of man’s guilt ( Genesis 3:17 ), and at the restitution of all things she is to participate in his restoration ( Romans 8:19-22 ). The physical condition of the land, therefore, depends upon the moral conduct of man.
He compares the wicked to evil humours and overeating, which corrupt the stomach, and oppress nature, and therefore must be cast out by vomit.
The pret. ותּקא ( Leviticus 18:25 ) and קאה ( Leviticus 18:28 ) are prophetic (cf. Leviticus 20:22-23 ), and the expression is poetical. The land is personified as a living creature, which violently rejects food that it dislikes.
26But you are to keep My statutes and ordinances, and you must not commit any of these abominations—neither your native-born nor the foreigner who lives among you.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
’at·tem ’eṯ- ū·šə·mar·tem ḥuq·qō·ṯay wə·’eṯ- miš·pā·ṭay wə·lō ṯa·‘ă·śū mik·kōl hā·’êl·leh hat·tō·w·‘ê·ḇōṯ hā·’ez·rāḥ wə·hag·gêr hag·gār bə·ṯō·wḵ·ḵem
Literal — word-for-word from the original
But-you shall-keep My-statutes and My-judgments, and-you-shall-not do any-of these abominations — the-native-born and-the-sojourner who-sojourns among-you.
Where the English smooths the original
In nation or religion, of what kind soever. For though they might not force them to submit to their religion, yet they might restrain them from the public contempt of the Jewish laws, and from the violation of natural laws, which, besides the offence against God and nature, were matters of evil example to the Israelites themselves.
As the perpetration of the above named abominations entailed such disastrous consequences both to the land and to its inhabitants, the strict observance of the Divine statutes is enjoined upon all alike, whether they be Israelites by race or strangers who took up their abode amongst them and joined the Jewish community.
whether of a ceremonial nature, and enjoined them according to his sovereign will and pleasure; or of a moral nature, and founded in justice and equity, and so worthy of their regard, and obligatory upon them
27For the men who were in the land before you committed all these abominations, and the land has become defiled.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
kî ’eṯ- ’an·šê- hā·’ā·reṣ ’ă·šer lip̄·nê·ḵem ‘ā·śū kāl- hā·’êl hat·tō·w·‘ê·ḇōṯ hā·’ā·reṣ wat·tiṭ·mā
Literal — word-for-word from the original
For all these abominations the-men-of the-land who-[were]-before-you have-done, and-defiled-is the-land.
Where the English smooths the original
Though the contents of this verse are substantially the same as those in Leviticus 18:24-25 , yet the wording is different. In the former the Israelites are exhorted not to pollute themselves as the different tribes or nations have both polluted themselves and the land, whilst here the inhabitants of Canaan are more specifically described as having practised the abominations. The repetition of the same sentiments in diiferent words, as is frequently the case in Hebrew, is designed to impart emphasis.
these were guilty of unclean copulations, of incestuous, marriages, of fornication and adultery, and of bestiality and idolatry: which were before you; lived in the land before them, had long dwelt there, but now about to be cast out for their sins; and therefore they who were going to succeed them should take warning by them
before a law can be disobeyed, it must have been previously in existence; and hence a law, prohibiting all the horrid crimes enumerated above—a law obligatory upon the Canaanites as well as other nations—was already known and in force before the Levitical law of incest was promulgated.
28So if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it spewed out the nations before you.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
bə·ṭam·ma·’ă·ḵem ’ō·ṯāh hā·’ā·reṣ wə·lō- ṯā·qî ’eṯ·ḵem ka·’ă·šer qā·’āh ’eṯ- hag·gō·w ’ă·šer lip̄·nê·ḵem
Literal — word-for-word from the original
Lest the-land vomit-you-out when-you-defile it, as it-vomited-out the-nation which-[was]-before-you.
Where the English smooths the original
By unnecessarily translating the same word differently into “vomiteth” in Leviticus 18:25 , and “spue” here, as is done in the Authorised Version, the striking connection between the two verses is somewhat weakened.Ellicott names the very translation seam this synthesis flags between vv. 25 and 28.
Both for their wicked marriages, unnatural copulations, idolatry or spiritual whoredom with Molech and such like abominations.
By sinning on it, and so rendering it obnoxious to the curse of God, as the whole earth originally was for the sin of man; and so be cast out of it, as Adam was out of paradise, and as the Israelites might expect to be cast out of Canaan, as the old inhabitants of it had been
29Therefore anyone who commits any of these abominations must be cut off from among his people.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
kî kāl- ’ă·šer ya·‘ă·śeh mik·kōl hā·’êl·leh hat·tō·w·‘ê·ḇō·wṯ wə·niḵ·rə·ṯū han·nə·p̄ā·šō·wṯ hā·‘ō·śōṯ miq·qe·reḇ ‘am·mām
Literal — word-for-word from the original
For whoever does any-of these abominations — the-souls who-do-[them] shall-be-cut-off from-among their-people.
Where the English smooths the original
We must understand this latter phrase as expressing an "ipso facto" excommunication or outlawry, the divine Law pronouncing on the offender an immediate forfeiture of the privileges which belonged to him as one of the people in covenant with Yahweh.
This phrase therefore of cutting off is to be understood variously, as many other phrases are, either of ecclesiastical, or civil and corporal punishment, according to the differing natures of the offences for which it is inflicted.
This strong denunciatory language is applied to all the crimes specified in the chapter without distinction: to incest as truly as to bestiality, and to the eleven cases of affinity [Le 18:7-16], as fully as to the six of consanguinity [Le 18:17-20]. Death is the punishment sternly denounced against all of them.
30You must keep My charge not to practice any of the abominable customs that were practiced before you, so that you do not defile yourselves by them. I am the LORD your God.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
ū·šə·mar·tem ’eṯ- miš·mar·tî lə·ḇil·tî ‘ă·śō·wṯ hat·tō·w·‘ê·ḇōṯ mê·ḥuq·qō·wṯ ’ă·šer na·‘ă·śū lip̄·nê·ḵem wə·lō ṯiṭ·ṭam·mə·’ū bā·hem ’ă·nî Yah·weh ’ĕ·lō·hê·ḵem
Literal — word-for-word from the original
And-you-shall-keep My-charge, not to-do any-of the-abominable statutes which-were-done before-you, that-you-defile not yourselves by-them. I [am] Yahweh your-God.
Where the English smooths the original
These abominations were not practised simply as customs, but were legally enacted as statutes of the land, and formed part of their religious institutions (see Leviticus 18:3 ). A similar state of degeneracy is described by Isaiah, who tells us that the Divine statutes, which is the same word used in the passage before us, were changed.
warned the Israelites to beware of these abominations, that the land might not spit them out as it had the Canaanites before them.Keil's closing summary of the chapter's warning.
In giving the Israelites these particular institutions, God was only re-delivering the law imprinted on the natural heart of man; for there is every reason to believe that the incestuous alliances and unnatural crimes prohibited in this chapter were forbidden to all men by a law expressed or understood from the beginning of the world
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
The chapter opens not with a prohibition but with an identity, repeated like a hammer-stroke: ’ă·nî Yah·weh ’ĕ·lō·hê·ḵem, “I am Yahweh your God” (vv. 2, 4, 5, and again at v. 30). Cambridge counts it: the formula “is made three times in these five verses,” placing before the people two thoughts — “That the Lord is holy… That the Lord has commanded holiness.” The Hebrew sets up a contest of statutes: Israel must not walk “in their statutes” (chuqqâh, H2708, v. 3) but in “My statutes” (same word, v. 4). Ellicott catches the deliberate opposition — “my judgments and mine ordinances… in opposition to ‘their ordinances,’ and has here the force of Mine only.” The whole catalogue hangs on one claim of ownership. And the frame closes (v. 5) on the chapter's most-quoted line: the man who does these “shall live by them.” Ellicott alone names every later use of that clause — Ezekiel, Nehemiah, and “by St. Paul (Romans 10:5; Galatians 3:12), who contrasts this promise made to works with the promise of the Gospel made to faith.” The frame, not the sins, is the theological heart of the unit. (All claims here are sourced to Cambridge, Ellicott, and the BSB text; ⚙ the linkage of these voices is the synthesis author's.)
Verse 6 gives the master-rule, and the Hebrew is more visceral than any English: ’îš ’îš (“man, man” — every man whatsoever), to no šə·’êr bə·śā·rōw, “flesh of his flesh,” shall he draw near. Keil grounds it on Genesis 2:24: “a flesh that is of his own flesh… applied to a blood-relation.” From this one premise the catalogue unfolds — mother, stepmother, sister, granddaughter, aunt, daughter-in-law, sister-in-law — each forbidden because she is, by blood or by the one-flesh of marriage, the man's own nakedness. The Pulpit Commentary maps the whole table of degrees with canonist precision; Keil enumerates eleven cases. Two famous cruxes surface here. The missing daughter: Ellicott and Cambridge judge a clause “probably omitted accidentally by a copyist” from v. 10 — the Pulpit Commentary answers that v. 17's general rule already “covers the case of a man's own daughter.” And the brother's wife (v. 16): forbidden here, yet commanded in Deuteronomy 25:5. Bishop Wordsworth, quoted in the Pulpit Commentary, resolves it — “In a special case, for a special reason applicable only to the Jews, God was pleased… to change the prohibition into a command.” The synthesis lets the voices disagree; it does not flatten them.
The second half turns from marriage-degrees to five impurities — the menstruant (v. 19), the neighbor's wife (v. 20), Molech (v. 21), same-sex union (v. 22), and the beast (v. 23) — and then to the climax. The keyword is ṭâmêʼ (H2930), defile, and it migrates: the adulterer “defiles himself” (v. 20, Gill); the nations are defiled (v. 24); the land is defiled (v. 25). Then the startling image: the land vomits (qôwʼ, H6958, a rare verb) its inhabitants. Ellicott: “the land, which is here personified, is represented as loathing the wicked conduct of her children.” Geneva's note is unforgettable — the wicked are “evil humours and overeating, which corrupt the stomach… and therefore must be cast out by vomit.” Keil reads the past-tense verbs as prophetic: the expulsion is so certain it is spoken as done. And the land plays no favorites: it spat out the Canaanites (v. 28) and will spit out Israel on the identical terms. JFB draws the deepest inference — that the Canaanites' punishment proves a moral law older than Sinai, for “before a law can be disobeyed, it must have been previously in existence.” The chapter closes (v. 30) as it opened: “I am Yahweh your God.”
Read on its own terms, Leviticus 18 is not first a sex code; it is a chapter about ownership of statutes, and the prohibitions are its evidence. The frame (vv. 2–5, 30) repeats one sentence — “I am Yahweh your God” — and stakes everything on it: the same Hebrew word chuqqâh names both the nations' statutes (v. 3) and God's (vv. 4, 26, 30), and the whole drama is which set Israel will walk in. Two things follow that the catalogue makes inescapable. First, the law reaches deeper than Israel: the missing qualifier “of the house of Israel” (Ellicott, v. 6), the inclusion of the sojourner (v. 26), and above all the vomiting land that judged Canaanites who never stood at Sinai (vv. 24–28) — all say these are not tribal taboos but the moral architecture of creation itself, what JFB calls a law “imprinted on the natural heart of man.” Second, the climactic threat is ecological and impartial: the land is a stomach, and it has no covenant loyalty — it expels whoever poisons it, Canaanite or Israelite alike. The honest tension the chapter leaves unresolved is v. 5's promise — do these and live. Within Leviticus it means life in the land. Paul, reaching across the Testaments, lifts the same clause to mean the law's testimony about itself — that its life is by doing, which is exactly why the Gospel must offer life another way. The chapter does not settle that; it sets the terms a fallible reader must take to the rest of Scripture.
The land keeps no covenant — it is a stomach, and it vomits up whoever poisons it, Canaanite or Israelite alike. (an interpretive line, not Scripture)
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
The whole incest code of chapter 18 is restated, with penalties attached, in Leviticus 20. The shared idiom of the two chapters is ‘er·wāh (nakedness, H6172) bound to gâlâh (to uncover, H1540) — but ⚙ at 40 and 167 verses these are only moderately rare, so the Verifier tiers the broad restatement (e.g. Lev 18:6↔20:11, 20:17) as structural/thematic, not verbal. The tier rises to verbal at one precise seam: the aunt-and-near-kin law, where the rare šə·’êr (flesh-kin, H7607, in only 16 verses) is shared between Lev 18:6 and Lev 20:19 — a low-frequency lexeme that makes that one pair a genuine verbal echo, not a coincidence of common words. So the badge's verbal tier rests on the 18:6↔20:19 anchor; the rest of the cross-chapter web is the same law restated thematically. Keil treats the two chapters as one law in two deliveries: ch. 18 commands, ch. 20 punishes.
Leviticus 20:11 · Leviticus 20:17 · Leviticus 20:19
basis: Hebrew↔Hebrew; the verbal tier rests on ONE pair — rare shared lexeme H7607 šᵉʼêr (16 vv) at Lev 18:6↔20:19 (Verifier-confirmed verbal). The broader restatement (18:6↔20:11, 20:17) shares only the moderate-frequency pair H6172 ʻervâh + H1540 gâlâh and is Verifier-tiered structural/thematic — not verbal
The chapter's climactic figure — the land that vomits out its defilers — is built on the rare verb qôwʼ (H6958), which the Verifier finds in only 7 verses of the whole OT. It frames vv. 25 and 28 as a verbal inclusio (shared qôwʼ + ṭâmêʼ, defile), and recurs at Leviticus 20:22, where the same warning is repeated almost verbatim. Ellicott rebukes the AV for breaking the link by rendering the one Hebrew word two ways (“vomiteth” / “spue”); the synthesis restores it. Keil reads the verbs as prophetic preterites — judgment spoken as already accomplished.
Leviticus 18:25 · Leviticus 18:28 · Leviticus 20:22
basis: Hebrew↔Hebrew; rare shared lexeme H6958 qôwʼ (in only 7 vv) joins Lev 18:25↔18:28 and Lev 20:22 (Verifier-confirmed)
Verses 20 and 23 both use šᵉkôbeth (H7903, “lying / emission of seed”), a word the Verifier finds in only 4 verses of Scripture. That scarcity makes its appearances a true verbal chain: the adultery-law (Lev 18:20) and the bestiality-law (Lev 18:23) are bound to Numbers 5:20 — the ordeal of the wife suspected of giving “her lying” to another man — and to Leviticus 20:15, the death-sentence for bestiality. The shared rare lexeme is the recorded basis; one verse defines the sin, another tries it, a third punishes it.
Numbers 5:20 · Leviticus 20:15
basis: Hebrew↔Hebrew; rare shared lexeme H7903 šᵉkôbeth (in only 4 vv) links Lev 18:20 & 18:23 to Num 5:20 and Lev 20:15 (Verifier-confirmed)
The child-sacrifice prohibition (v. 21) shares the proper noun Môlek (H4432) with Leviticus 20:2 — a name the Verifier finds in only 8 verses. Both verses pair it with nâthan (to give) and zeraʻ (seed): chapter 18 forbids giving your seed to Molech; chapter 20 prescribes death by stoning for it. Ellicott explains why this lone idolatry-law sits amid sexual sins: “Those who violate the sanctity of the marriage ties will readily sacrifice their children.” The rare shared name is the recorded basis.
Leviticus 20:2
basis: Hebrew↔Hebrew; rare shared lexeme H4432 Môlek (in only 8 vv), with H5414 nâthan + H2233 zeraʻ, joins Lev 18:21↔20:2 (Verifier-confirmed)
The promise of v. 5 — the man who does these shall live by them — travels through Scripture. Within the Hebrew Bible the Verifier confirms a structural echo at Ezekiel 20:11 and Nehemiah 9:29 (shared chuqqâh, châyâh — live, mishpâṭ, ʼâdâm), where the same clause is recalled. Then it crosses into the New Testament in Paul's hands (Romans 10:5; Galatians 3:12). That crossing cannot rest on shared Strong's numbers — Greek and Hebrew share no lexical index — so the Verifier returns no shared lexeme there and the link is flagged: it is a real and explicit citation (Paul names Leviticus), but its tier is established by Paul's quotation, not by the verbal index, and his interpretation of it is itself contested. Ellicott, Cambridge, Barnes, and JFB all attest the citation.
Ezekiel 20:11 · Nehemiah 9:29 · Romans 10:5 · Galatians 3:12
basis: Hebrew↔Hebrew echo at Ezek 20:11 / Neh 9:29 is structural (shared H2708 chuqqâh, H2421 châyâh, H4941 mishpâṭ); the Romans 10:5 / Gal 3:12 reuse is cross-Testament (Greek↔Hebrew) — Verifier finds NO shared lexeme, so the NT citation is asserted by Paul and the commentators (Ellicott, Cambridge), not by the index, and is flagged
Ezekiel arraigns Jerusalem using the exact idiom of this chapter. The Verifier confirms the shared pair ‘er·wāh + gâlâh (uncover nakedness) across Lev 18 and Ezekiel 16:36, 22:10, and 23:18 — the prophet charging Israel with the stepmother-sin (Ezek 22:10), the menstrual-impurity (22:10), and harlotry described as uncovered nakedness. Because ‘er·wāh (40 vv) and gâlâh (167 vv) are moderately frequent and shared as a motif rather than a unique quotation, this is recorded as structural/thematic, not verbal. The commentators (Ellicott at v. 19; Keil at v. 6) cite Ezekiel as the prophetic outworking of the chapter's threat.
Ezekiel 16:36 · Ezekiel 22:10 · Ezekiel 23:18
basis: Hebrew↔Hebrew; shared motif-pair H6172 ʻervâh (40 vv) + H1540 gâlâh (167 vv) — moderate frequency, so thematic not verbal (Verifier-confirmed)
Three of the chapter's voices (Keil, Barnes, the Pulpit Commentary) ground the entire code on a single prior text: “they shall be one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). It is why the stepmother's nakedness is the father's (v. 8), why the brother's wife is “thy brother's nakedness” (v. 16), why affinity binds as blood does. The Verifier finds the kinship vocabulary (ʼâb, father; ʼêm, mother) shared between Lev 18:7 and Genesis 2:24, but these are common words, and Genesis 2:24 makes no quotation-claim on Leviticus — the connection is the logic of one-flesh, argued by the commentators, not a verbal citation. Recorded therefore as structural.
Genesis 2:24 · Genesis 49:4
basis: Hebrew↔Hebrew; shared common kinship lexemes (H1 ʼâb, H517 ʼêm) — frequent words, so the link is the one-flesh argument of Keil/Barnes/Pulpit, recorded as structural not verbal (Verifier-confirmed)
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
The stepmother-prohibition of v. 8 surfaces, named, in the New Testament. Paul writes that there is “such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife” (1 Corinthians 5:1) — the precise offense of Leviticus 18:8 — and commands the church to put the offender out. Ellicott, Poole, and the Pulpit Commentary all draw the line: the Corinthian sin is the Levitical one, and the apostolic excommunication is the New-Covenant form of the Levitical “cut off from among his people” (v. 29). The link is cross-Testament (Greek↔Hebrew), so it rests on the apostle's explicit echo of the case, not on a shared lexeme — but it is the oldest reading of the church, that the moral substance of this law stands undiminished in Christ.
1 Corinthians 5:1 · Leviticus 18:8 · Leviticus 18:29
Several of the chapter's prohibitions are not abolished but reaffirmed in the New Testament. The Pulpit Commentary, commenting on the same-sex prohibition of v. 22, simply chains it forward to the apostles: it is “the sin of Sodom (see Genesis 19:5 ; Judges 11:22 ; Romans 1:27 ; 1 Corinthians 6:9 ; 1 Timothy 1:10 ).” Ellicott likewise traces from Sodom (Gen 19:5) through Israel's own later lapses (Judg 19:22; 1 Kings 14:24) into the apostolic age. ⚙ The point the synthesis draws is the same one the stepmother-case (v. 8 → 1 Cor 5:1) makes: the moral core of Leviticus 18 reappears in Paul's catalogues of conduct excluded from the kingdom, so the New Covenant does not relax this law but locates obedience to it in those “washed… sanctified… justified in the name of the Lord Jesus” (the very ground 1 Cor 6:11 gives after its vice-list). The link is cross-Testament (Greek↔Hebrew) — the Verifier finds NO shared lexeme, so it rests entirely on the apostle's moral reuse as the commentators report it, not on the verbal index. Ancient and widely held, but argued, not indexed.
Romans 1:27 · 1 Corinthians 6:9 · 1 Timothy 1:10 · Leviticus 18:22
Verse 5's promise — “the man who does these shall live by them” — is the hinge on which the New Testament turns law into the herald of grace. Paul cites it twice (Romans 10:5; Galatians 3:12) as the law's testimony about itself: its life is by doing, and therefore, as Gill reads it, “eternal life… was never intended to be had… by obedience to the law, which fallen man is unable to keep,” but comes “through Christ, as a free gift to all that believe in him.” JFB and Barnes join the verse to Christ's own use of it (Luke 10:28). The figural reading is therefore not novel allegory but the apostolic and dominical handling of the text: Leviticus 18:5 is the law speaking the very word that, honestly faced, sends the sinner to the Gospel. Cross-Testament, so flagged in the threads, but ancient and central in the church's reading.
Romans 10:5 · Galatians 3:12 · Luke 10:28 · Leviticus 18:5
The personified land of vv. 25–28 — defiled, then expelling its defilers — is, Ellicott notes, of a piece with a creation that “shared in the punishment of man's guilt” (Genesis 3:17) and that “is to participate in his restoration” (Romans 8:19–22). The same loathing-figure recurs in the risen Christ's word to Laodicea: “I will spew thee out of my mouth” (Revelation 3:16) — which Ellicott and Gill both cite at v. 25. ⚙ This synthesis reads the trajectory as the church has: the land cannot be made clean by expelling sinners alone, but only by the holiness God demands (vv. 2–5) being supplied — the holiness that the New Testament locates in Christ and the indwelling Spirit, the firstfruits of a creation no longer vomiting but redeemed. This last extension beyond the cited texts is the fallible synthesis author's, offered to be tested, not a claim the PD voices make in these words.
Revelation 3:16 · Romans 8:19-22 · Genesis 3:17 · Leviticus 18:25
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
This unit is a legal catalogue, and the synthesis is built up from the Hebrew. Every commentary excerpt is a verbatim, contiguous substring of the sourced voices_raw — trimmed at the ends to a pointed quotation, never altered, reordered, or stitched. A few honesty notes specific to Leviticus 18:
The veiled vocabulary. The chapter's recurring idiom — “uncover the nakedness” (gâlâh ʻervâh) and “approach” (qârab) — is euphemistic in Hebrew. The BSB's plain “have sexual relations” is an honest interpretation, confirmed by Barnes (“i. e. to have sexual intercourse”) and JFB, but it removes a deliberate veiling; the literal column restores the Hebrew's reticence, and the divergences flag where the smoothing decides a disputed sense.
Two textual seams. (1) Ellicott and Cambridge argue a clause forbidding a man's own daughter dropped by scribal error from v. 10; the Pulpit Commentary counters that v. 17's general rule already covers it. The synthesis reports the disagreement rather than resolving it. (2) The “a woman to her sister” of v. 18 is a genuine crux — two literal sisters (Cambridge, Keil, JFB) or the distributive “one to another,” i.e. a polygamy-restriction (AV margin, Pulpit Commentary). Both readings are PD-attested and left standing.
Cross-Testament links are not verbal. The famous reuse of v. 5 by Paul (Romans 10:5; Galatians 3:12), the Corinthian echo of v. 8 (1 Cor 5:1), and the apostolic vice-lists that carry v. 22 forward (Rom 1:27; 1 Cor 6:9; 1 Tim 1:10, chained by the Pulpit Commentary) cannot be confirmed by shared Strong's numbers — Greek and Hebrew share no lexical index, and the Verifier returns no shared lexeme for these pairs. They are therefore tiered structural/flagged and rest on the apostle's explicit citation as reported by the commentators, not on the verbal index. The same-Testament echoes (Lev 18↔Lev 20, Ezekiel, Numbers 5) are Verifier-confirmed by shared Hebrew lexemes, and the genuinely rare ones (šᵉkôbeth 4 vv, qôwʼ 7 vv, Môlek 8 vv) carry the verbal tier across their whole chain. Two are gradated rather than blanket: šᵉʼêr (16 vv) earns the verbal tier for the single pair Lev 18:6↔20:19 only, while the broader 18↔20 restatement is structural; and kallâh (34 vv, 18:15↔20:12) is moderate enough that the Verifier returns structural, so the daughter-in-law note no longer claims it as a verbal link. The frequent-word links (ʻervâh+gâlâh as a motif, the one-flesh kinship terms) are tiered structural, under-claiming where frequency makes a unique quotation unprovable.
The novel extension. Only the final Christ note (the vomiting land answered by indwelling holiness toward the new creation) goes beyond what the PD voices say in their own words; it is marked novel and offered under Sola Scriptura to be tested, not asserted as their testimony.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)