Leviticus 18: 1 – 30
All In The Family Cancelled
18 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘I am the LORD your God. 3 According to the doings of the land of Egypt, where you dwelt, you shall not do; and according to the doings of the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you, you shall not do; nor shall you walk in their ordinances. 4 You shall observe My judgments and keep My ordinances, to walk in them: I am the LORD your God. 5 You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, which if a man does, he shall live by them: I am the LORD. 6 ‘None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness: I am the LORD. 7 The nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother you shall not uncover. She is your mother; you shall not uncover her nakedness. 8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness. 9 The nakedness of your sister, the daughter of your father, or the daughter of your mother, whether born at home or elsewhere, their nakedness you shall not uncover. 10 The nakedness of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for theirs is your own nakedness. 11 The nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, begotten by your father—she is your sister—you shall not uncover her nakedness. 12 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister; she is near of kin to your father. 13 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is near of kin to your mother. 14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother. You shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt. 15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law—she is your son’s wife—you shall not uncover her nakedness. 16 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness. 17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, nor shall you take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness. They are near of kin to her. It is wickedness. 18 Nor shall you take a woman as a rival to her sister, to uncover her nakedness while the other is alive. 19 ‘Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness as long as she is in her customary impurity. 20 Moreover you shall not lie carnally with your neighbor’s wife, to defile yourself with her. 21 And you shall not let any of your descendants pass through the fire to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God: I am the LORD. 22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. 23 Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it. It is perversion. 24 ‘Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you. 25 For the land is defiled; therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it, and the land vomits out its inhabitants. 26 You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations, either any of your own nation or any stranger who dwells among you 27 (for all these abominations the men of the land have done, who were before you, and thus the land is defiled), 28 lest the land vomit you out also when you defile it, as it vomited out the nations that were before you. 29 For whoever commits any of these abominations, the persons who commit them shall be cut off from among their people. 30 ‘Therefore you shall keep My ordinance, so that you do not commit any of these abominable customs which were committed before you, and that you do not defile yourselves by them: I am the LORD your God.’”
I use to work in the corporate world in a high rise office building in center city Philadelphia. The work spaces were separated by dividers. Most of my coworkers knew that I was a Christian. On many occasions people would come and see me relative to various spiritual and physical issues. One guy however always attempted to embarrass me in front of others. On one occasion when there was a large group gathering in my area he directed a question to me which was loud enough to get everyone else’s attention.
He said to me, ‘You say your bible is accurate, right?’ I told him that I believe that statement true. He went on. ‘If Adam and Eve had two sons then where did Cain get his wife?’ I immediately replied, ‘She was his sister.’ To this answer he went off in a showmanship that should be displayed in Vegas.
So, after his antics died down. I said to him in front of the others, ‘Abraham is an important ancestor of yours, right? Then are you aware that he married his sister?’ To this comment he went off on another verbal show. I opened my bible and I asked him to read out loud a passage from the book of Genesis chapter 20, “1 And Abraham journeyed from there to the South, and dwelt between Kadesh and Shur, and stayed in Gerar. 2 Now Abraham said of Sarah his wife, “She is my sister.” And Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah. 3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, “Indeed you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is a man’s wife.”4 But Abimelech had not come near her; and he said, “Lord, will You slay a righteous nation also? 5 Did he not say to me, ‘She is my sister’? And she, even she herself said, ‘He is my brother.’ In the integrity of my heart and innocence of my hands I have done this.” 6 And God said to him in a dream, “Yes, I know that you did this in the integrity of your heart. For I also withheld you from sinning against Me; therefore I did not let you touch her. 7 Now therefore, restore the man’s wife; for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you and you shall live. But if you do not restore her, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours.” 8 So Abimelech rose early in the morning, called all his servants, and told all these things in their hearing; and the men were very much afraid. 9 And Abimelech called Abraham and said to him, “What have you done to us? How have I offended you, that you have brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? You have done deeds to me that ought not to be done.” 10 Then Abimelech said to Abraham, “What did you have in view, that you have done this thing?” 11 And Abraham said, “Because I thought, surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will kill me on account of my wife. 12 But indeed she is truly my sister. She is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife. 13 And it came to pass, when God caused me to wander from my father’s house, that I said to her, ‘This is your kindness that you should do for me: in every place, wherever we go, say of me, “He is my brother.”?’?”
To save face he responded, ‘Oh, it was his half-sister.’ To this reply everyone walked away.
While the contemporary Western ideal sees marriage as a unique bond between two people who are in love, families in which heredity is central to power or inheritance (such as royal families) have often seen marriage in a different light. There are often political or other non-romantic functions that must be served and the relative wealth and power of the potential spouses may be considered. Marriage for political, economic, or diplomatic reasons, the marriage of state, was a pattern seen for centuries among European rulers. Royal intermarriage is the practice of members of ruling dynasties marrying into other reigning families. It was more commonly done in the past as part of strategic diplomacy for national interest. Although sometimes enforced by legal requirement on persons of royal birth, more often it has been a matter of political policy or tradition in monarchies.
In Europe, the practice was most prevalent from the medieval era until the outbreak of World War I, but evidence of intermarriage between royal dynasties in other parts of the world can be found as far back as the Late Bronze Age.[1] Monarchs were often in pursuit of national and international aggrandizement on behalf of themselves and their dynasties, thus bonds of kinship tended to promote or restrain aggression. Marriage between dynasties could serve to initiate, reinforce or guarantee peace between nations. Alternatively, kinship by marriage could secure an alliance between two dynasties which sought to reduce the sense of threat from or to initiate aggression against the realm of a third dynasty. It could also enhance the prospect of territorial acquisition for a dynasty by procuring legal claim to a foreign throne, or portions of its realm (e.g., colonies), through inheritance from an heiress whenever a monarch failed to leave an undisputed male heir.
In parts of Europe, royalty continued to regularly marry into the families of their greatest vassals as late as the 16th century. More recently, they have tended to marry internationally. In other parts of the world royal intermarriage was less prevalent and the number of instances varied over time, depending on the culture and foreign policy of the era.
“Royal intermarriage” is the practice of members of one royal family marrying into another royal family, who often times had common ancestors and common blood lines of descendants. It became widely practiced as a way of ensuring all members of a royal family were descended from royalty as opposed to commoners. This class distinction gave rise to many house laws stipulating who a dynast could marry to have an equal marriage. This often occurred in monarchies with such small courts that it became a means of maintaining relations, such as Europe and India under the British Raj. If a member of a royal family married someone not of appropriate status, they sometimes lost succession rights, titles, or other royal privileges.
? Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip are both the great grandchildren of Victoria and Albert, making their marriage a “cousin marriage.”
? Prince Charles intended to marry his 2nd cousin, but turned her down to marry his 7th cousin once removed, Princess Diana. Prince Charles' second wife, Camilla, is his 11th cousin.
? It was recently discovered that Kate Middleton and Prince William are 15th cousins.
We learn that there is some bad possible effects of long-term inbreeding or royal intermarriage:
? Hemophilia: a bleeding disorder where it is difficult for blood clots to form when bleeding. It is a recessive sex-linked X-chromosome disorder, meaning more males are affected than females. The Russian Royal Family has been practicing royal intermarriage for many generations and as a result a large number of both male and female relatives suffer from hemophilia.
?
? Lower fertility rates of adult women
?
? Increased mortality of offspring
?
? Increased numbers of mentally and physically disabled offspring
?
? Slower development rates in offspring
Even though the British royal family does not exhibit hemophilia or other disabilities, it does not mean that they are not at risk for developing the negative consequences of inbreeding.
In this chapter, having laid the basis in sacrifice, God now commands His people to walk in His ways and in accordance with all that He has shown them. And here He especially declares to them what relationships with women they are to avoid.
18 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘I am the LORD your God.
What follows very much has the covenant in mind. God stresses constantly, as He did at the giving of the covenant, that He Is Yahweh their God, and that He therefore expects their response.
3 According to the doings of the land of Egypt, where you dwelt, you shall not do; and according to the doings of the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you, you shall not do; nor shall you walk in their ordinances.
Because He Is Yahweh their God, and because they are His, they are not to live as others live and do as others do. They are not to follow the doings of other lands. Nor when he has brought them into the Promised Land are they to walk in the people of the land’s statutes, their behavioral rules that were recorded and required of men. They are rather to do as He requires.
Particularly are they not to follow their attitudes towards sexual relationships. Both the Egyptians and the Canaanites allowed sexual relationships and marriage within some of the degrees described below, and the Canaanites especially were free with their sexual favors, but Israel was not to be so.
This was particularly important in view of the conglomerate nature of ‘the children of Israel’. All among them were used to living in accordance with differing long established and varying customs picked up in Egypt, and previously in Canaan and other places. They were a total mixture of customs. But now they were to put all those behind them and begin to follow Yahweh’s statutes and ordinances. The new beginning established at Sinai had to be seen as pre-eminent. The past must be put behind them.
4 You shall observe My judgments and keep My ordinances, to walk in them: I am the LORD your God.
They are to do the ordinances and judgments that He has required of them, given them in judgments, or caused to be written as their guide and to follow His demands and declarations, and walk in His ways. And they are to do this because He Is Yahweh their God, their Great Deliverer.
We are reminded by this that we too when we become Christians have become a new creation (2 Corinthians 5.17). We too have to put aside the old ways and walk as new men and women.
5 You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, which if a man does, he shall live by them: I am the LORD.
For it is in keeping those statutes and ordinances that they will find life. First of all they will avoid the danger of dying because of sin. Secondly they will live in prosperity and blessing. And thirdly elsewhere in Leviticus chapter 26 verse 3 – 5, it is stressed that they would enjoy the abundant blessings of God. ‘If you walk in My statutes and keep My commandments and do them, then I shall give you rains in their season, and the land will yield its abundant produce and the trees of the field will bear their fruit. And your threshing will last for you until grape gathering, and grape gathering will last until sowing time, and you will eat your food to the full and live securely in your land’. So fullness of life, He tells us, results from knowing God and walking in His ways.
This was not saying that the Law could ‘give life’ as we might understand it. It very much could not. It could only show the life that should be lived. It could show what life was. It was the God of the covenant Who could give life, Who could renew His spirit within them, Who could give them clean hearts if they sought them for the purpose of the ordinances was that they should constantly be returned to cleanness, and to a sense of a right relationship with God. The one who had raised up Abraham, Who had raised up Jacob, could also constantly raise them up. This is the message that the prophets would remind them of again and again. But it was true from the beginning. And through this they could live according to His covenant and enjoy His fullness of blessing. They would ‘live in them’.
But central to this fullness of life were satisfactory family relationships. If they wished to enjoy ‘life’ these were vital. Living in a patriarchal society where the wider family lived in close relationships with each other, and where authority was vested in the wider family and very much determined by status in the household, there was the greatest possible danger among such families, knowing the propensities of men, that the closeness of their relationships in their living together could produce sexual problems, and that those could then produce situations that struck at the very roots of the family and of authority. Men’s lusts would be able to destroy families. They could also make life very difficult for everybody in a constant changing of relationships. They could in effect destroy ‘life’.
This was especially true because men who were in positions of authority in the family could, without these regulations, have enforced their will sexually and caused untold hurt within their own family circles. Without regulation children especially would clearly be vulnerable to those whom they loved and who were responsible for their protection. It was therefore necessary to have strict rules to control these relationships, to prevent them getting out of hand, and to so legislate that such aberrations should not even be thought of.
Practically speaking there were a number of good reasons why the relationships that follow were to be carefully regulated and any stepping across the boundary avoided, even if the assumption is that marriage, albeit often ‘forced’ marriage, was mainly in view by the perpetrators. They could produce complications in status and in inheritance, cause deep rows, division and distress within families, result in huge tensions, destroy inter-relationships, foster discrimination and jealousies between blood relations, produce insecurity and uncertainty in family life, encourage constant distrust and fear, leave young children very vulnerable, and cause much bad blood and hurt which might affect a number of generations. They could destroy the stability, trust and love of the family. Such practices could also have been carried out deliberately in order to concentrate wealth and power within a few families to the general harm of the nation.
In most cases they were also totally unseemly anyway, denoting total lack of what was decent and natural and underlying them were also no doubt a recognition by God of the genetic problems that could arise. But above all they are a reminder that we are not just to be free to follow ‘love’ (or lust) but must first do what is seemly and considerate for all. There are things that come before ‘love’. The family unity must not be destroyed for the selfish gratification of the few. That is why rigid barriers were and are necessary.
Where Christian standards of marriage and life, based on these words, have held sway, these relationships described have not outwardly seemed much of a problem. They have simply not been openly breached
6 ‘None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness: I am the LORD.
First we are instructed that the initial principle was laid down that there should be no sexual approaches among those who were of near kin, no approaches of the kind which were with a view to marriage and sexual relations. This was because Yahweh was Yahweh and disapproved of anything that could destroy family relationships, and knew what great dangers there were of sexual relationships doing this, and what tragedy they could bring about. This principle is now expanded in detail. For He wanted it known that His people were simply not expected to behave like that because they accepted Who and What He Is.
That ‘marriage’ is probably mainly in mind throughout, in that the person would seek to justify their behavior by that means, comes out in that without legal marriage such behavior should automatically have resulted in the death penalty anyway. Thus to have legitimacy they would have to marry the person involved for when two had sexual relations they became one flesh. So it had to be made clear that in relation to those who are of near kin marriage is as bad as fornication and adultery.
On the other hand it might be argued that illicit sex within the family would be so hushed up, and so never revealed, that it had to be legislated against anyway, which explains the strong statements against it within close family relationships. Each man must be made to recognize that God would know and would punish what he did even if men could not. The point is being made that these activities are in fact forbidden under any circumstances, whether within marriage or not, and the emphasis is not so much on marriage as on the evil of sexual relations between such related people. They were wrong under any circumstance, and a professed marriage did not excuse them.
7 The nakedness of your father or the nakedness of your mother you shall not uncover. She is your mother; you shall not uncover her nakedness.
The first forbidden relationship for a man was with his own mother. To marry and/or have relations with his own mother, to uncover her nakedness, was clearly totally unseemly. To do so would be to utterly shame his father’s name, with whom his mother was one flesh, and indeed his mother herself as made one with his father. He would be exposing his father’s nakedness as Ham had done long before (Genesis 9.22). It would be totally unnatural and could not even be considered. Here God was enforcing the fact by statute.
Among other things such a relationship would dishonor the father with whom his wife had been one flesh, so that the revealing of her nakedness was the revealing of his; would distort positions of authority as the son, as the husband of the mother, would gain a status contrary to and in opposition to that of the firstborn son; and it could be seen as against nature.
8 The nakedness of your father’s wife you shall not uncover; it is your father’s nakedness.
The next forbidden relationship was with any other wife or ex-wife of a man’s father. This was forbidden because she and his father were one. Therefore to marry her and/or have sexual relations with her would be shaming his father. It is as if he had had sex with his father. He must not seek to take his father’s place in this way. Furthermore it would again undermine authority.
9 The nakedness of your sister, the daughter of your father, or the daughter of your mother, whether born at home or elsewhere, their nakedness you shall not uncover.
Marriage and/or sexual relations with a blood sister or half-blood sister were also forbidden, even if she had been born elsewhere. It is quite clear how impossible family life would have been if men could pressure their own sisters. Family unity would have been impossible and no beautiful woman would have been safe to pursue an ordinary life ().
As I mentioned earlier when man was first in the world it is clear that such relationships did occur, but that was another matter, for then there was no alternative. All Adam’s sons married their sisters, including Cain. It had to be so then, and genetic make-ups were simpler. But this was now forbidden.
10 The nakedness of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for theirs is your own nakedness.
Marrying and having sexual relationships with grandchildren was also forbidden. Again families could have been destroyed by it, and the future of young children regularly blighted. It was vital that those who had responsibility for such children should honor them and not take advantage of them. They were intended to be their protectors! They should be able to trust their grandfathers absolutely, to watch over them and look after their best interests.
11 The nakedness of your father’s wife’s daughter, begotten by your father—she is your sister—you shall not uncover her nakedness.
This confirms verse 9, especially in the case of a half sister which I mentioned Abraham did.
12 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s sister; she is near of kin to your father. 13 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister, for she is near of kin to your mother.
Here aunts are forbidden as objects of lust, marriage and sexual relations. Again the protection of family unity, and lines of authority, and the necessity to ensure that those who should be protecting relatives left without protection did so with no ulterior motive, is in mind.
14 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s brother. You shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt.
The prohibition also includes aunts through marriage. Marrying and having sexual relations with an uncle’s wife would be a shaming of one’s uncle, whether alive or dead. This also would be judged by the courts, but in this case, additionally, God would punish it directly by making them childless which we learn in chapter 20 verse 20.
15 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law—she is your son’s wife—you shall not uncover her nakedness.
A daughter-in-law, a son’s wife, is forbidden for marriage and sexual relations to a father. The daughter-in-law is one flesh with his son. Thus the father must honor what is his son’s, and not shame his son.
16 You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness.
Nor shall one brother marry and have sexual relations with his brother’s wife, with a view to her becoming his wife and bearing children to him, whether his brother is dead or divorced, for to do so would be to shame his brother, with whom his wife was ‘one’, and destroy family relationships.
17 You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter, nor shall you take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness. They are near of kin to her. It is wickedness.
To marry and have sexual relations with both a mother and her daughter, or with a mother and her granddaughter, was forbidden. They were near kinswomen.
18 Nor shall you take a woman as a rival to her sister, to uncover her nakedness while the other is alive.
Nor should a man marry one sister after another while they were both alive. In a polygamous marriage wives were rivals, and this would be to make two sisters rivals and possibly antagonistic to each other, and would be to destroy the natural love between them. This was not to be contemplated. Family love was important to God, the Supreme Father. As you know this was, of course, what Jacob did and it caused great grief of heart.
In all these prohibitions we see God’s concern that non-sexual, loving relationships and responsibilities within families were of prime importance, that lines of authority should be clearly maintained, that inheritance questions must not be complicated unduly, and that these things must come before all others, so that lust especially must not be in a position to destroy them. They reveal a deep sense of the current and counter-currents that sexual feelings could cause within close family units, and provided the standards by which they should be assessed and dealt with.
However, they also served another purpose. The inter-marriage of relatives who are in too close a relation to each other can also be the cause of an increase in birth defects and, if continued in through the generations, can result in a lack of vitality and vigor in the strain. That also is therefore not something to be advised.
19 ‘Also you shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness as long as she is in her customary impurity.
Sexual relations are forbidden with a woman while she is menstruating. This is put in for completeness here so that all aspects of sexual relations are covered, but it has been dealt with previously.
20 Moreover you shall not lie carnally with your neighbor’s wife, to defile yourself with her.
Adultery is once more specifically forbidden. This again is in order to have a complete picture of sexual relations that are totally forbidden. To lie with a neighbor’s wife is to be defiled, and as we know from elsewhere, deserving of death.
21 And you shall not let any of your descendants pass through the fire to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God: I am the LORD.
This at first seems out of place. It describes the sacrificing of a child to the Ammonite god Molech by ‘passing it through the fire’, which seems to have nothing to do with sexual relations. This covers abortions.
22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.
For men to have sexual relations with another man is immediately declared to be an abomination. In chapter 20 verse 13 both parties are to be put to death. The use of the term abomination demonstrates the strength of God’s feeling against it.
23 Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it. It is perversion.
For a man or woman to have sexual relations with an animal is defiling. This is because it breaks down the barrier between man and beast. It is ‘confusion’. It is punishable by death.
24 ‘Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you. 25 For the land is defiled; therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it, and the land vomits out its inhabitants.
All that has been described is defiling. They are therefore to avoid doing such things. They should remember that it was this kind of behavior that has caused God’s anger to come against the Canaanites in order to drive them from the land. The land is vomiting the Canaanites out because it has been made sick because of their behavior. And it is because of that that God is now visiting His judgment on them for it. Their iniquity has now peaked. His purpose is to cleanse the land of them.
26 You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations, either any of your own nation or any stranger who dwells among you 27 (for all these abominations the men of the land have done, who were before you, and thus the land is defiled), 28 lest the land vomit you out also when you defile it, as it vomited out the nations that were before you.
So Israel must now ‘keep’, that is observe and carry out, His statutes and His ordinances. Neither they nor those whom they allow to dwell among them must engage in such abominations. They are replacing the Canaanites in Yahweh’s land in order to purify the land. If they do such things they too will be vomited out because they have defiled themselves and the land. For it is because of such abominations that the Canaanites are to be driven out in order to cleanse the land ready for their occupation.
29 For whoever commits any of these abominations, the persons who commit them shall be cut off from among their people.
Therefore any who behave in any of these ways are to be cut off from among the people. The point is that they must be removed from among God’s covenant people and from the land.
30 ‘Therefore you shall keep My ordinance, so that you do not commit any of these abominable customs which were committed before you, and that you do not defile yourselves by them: I am the LORD your God.’”
So they are to keep God’s charge, obey His will, and are not to practice any of the abominable things practiced by the Canaanites. Such things are defiling, and they must remember with Whom they have to do. He Is Yahweh, the Holy One, their God Who has spoken all these things and is there to ensure that they fulfill them.
It need hardly be said that it is also incumbent on us to ensure that we too avoid such ‘abominations’.
