Deuteronomy 22:16

Translation
King James Version
And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
And the damsel's H5291 father H1 shall say H559 unto the elders H2205, I gave H5414 my daughter H1323 unto this man H376 to wife H802, and he hateth H8130 her;
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
The girl's father will say to the leaders, 'I let my daughter marry this man, but he hates her,
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
and say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he has come to hate her.
Ask
American Standard Version
and the damsel’s father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
The young lady’s father shall tell the elders, “I gave my daughter to this man as his wife, and he hates her.
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
And the maydes father shall say vnto the Elders, I gaue my daughter vnto this man to wife, and he hateth her:
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
and the father of the damsel hath said unto the elders, My daughter I have given to this man for a wife, and he doth hate her;
Ask
In the KJVVerse 5,487 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

Deuteronomy 22:16 presents the father's crucial defense before the city elders, directly countering his new son-in-law's malicious accusation of his daughter's pre-marital impurity. This verse encapsulates the father's assertion that he legitimately and formally gave his daughter in marriage, contrasting this with the husband's subsequent "hatred" or rejection of her, implying that the husband's claim of impurity is a false pretext to unjustly dissolve the union and slander her reputation.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: This verse is intricately woven into a specific legal section of Deuteronomy, Deuteronomy 22:13-21, which addresses the grave matter of a husband accusing his newlywed wife of not being a virgin. The preceding verses, Deuteronomy 22:13-15, establish the scenario: a man marries, subsequently "hates" his wife, and then brings a public charge against her purity. Verse 16 initiates the father's direct response and counter-argument, setting the stage for the presentation of evidence in Deuteronomy 22:17, the elders' judgment and punishment for false accusation in Deuteronomy 22:18-19, or the severe consequences for the woman if the accusation is proven true in Deuteronomy 22:20-21. This structured legal narrative underscores the gravity of such accusations and the meticulous process designed to ensure justice and protect the innocent.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: In ancient Israelite society, a woman's virginity at the time of marriage was of paramount importance, serving as a cornerstone of her family's honor, her personal social standing, and the legitimacy of the marital covenant itself. Marriages were frequently arranged, often involving a "bride-price" or "dowry," and were understood as a binding covenant not only between individuals but also between families. The "city elders" (zāqên), mentioned here and throughout the Old Testament, functioned as the local judicial authorities. They convened at the city gate—a public forum—to hear disputes, administer justice, and uphold community standards, as evidenced in other legal proceedings such as the judgment of a rebellious son in Deuteronomy 21:19 or Boaz's legal transaction in Ruth 4:1-12. False accusations, particularly those concerning sexual purity, carried devastating potential consequences, including social ostracism, public shame, and even the death penalty for the accused woman. Therefore, the law in Deuteronomy 22:13-21 served as a crucial legal safeguard, providing a mechanism for women and their families to defend against malicious slander and arbitrary repudiation by their husbands.
  • Key Themes: Deuteronomy 22:16 contributes significantly to several overarching themes prominent within the book of Deuteronomy and the broader Mosaic Law. Firstly, it powerfully illustrates the theme of Protection of the Vulnerable, particularly women, who in a patriarchal society were often susceptible to abuses of power. God's law consistently demonstrates a profound concern for the marginalized and those who might lack direct legal power, providing specific mechanisms for their defense and redress. Secondly, the passage emphasizes Justice and Due Process, highlighting the critical role of the elders in impartially hearing evidence and rendering righteous judgments. This reflects God's own character as a God of justice, who demands fairness, truth, and equity in all legal proceedings (Deuteronomy 16:18-20). Thirdly, it reinforces the Integrity and Sanctity of Marriage as a divinely ordained covenant, imposing severe penalties on those who would defile it through false accusation or unjust repudiation. Finally, the implied condemnation of the husband's false claim speaks directly to the theme of Truthfulness and the Condemnation of False Accusation, echoing the foundational Ninth Commandment against bearing false witness (Exodus 20:16).

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • hateth (Hebrew, sânê', H8130): While often translated as "hate" in an emotional sense, in legal and relational contexts within the Old Testament, sânê' frequently denotes "to treat with aversion," "to dislike strongly," "to reject," or "to repudiate." In Deuteronomy 22:16, it implies the husband's desire to dissolve the marriage, not necessarily out of intense emotional animosity, but because he found his wife displeasing or undesirable after the marriage, leading him to seek a pretext for divorce. This legal "hatred" is distinct from the emotional hatred of an enemy, focusing instead on a functional rejection of the marital bond, likely to avoid the obligations of the covenant or to seek a different wife.
  • gave (Hebrew, nāthan, H5414): This verb signifies "to give," "to place," "to put," or "to hand over." In the context of marriage, it highlights the formal, legal act of the father transferring his daughter into the care and household of her husband. This was a public and legally binding transaction, often involving a bride-price or dowry. The father's use of nāthan here emphasizes the legitimate and complete nature of the marriage, directly countering the husband's attempt to invalidate it by claiming pre-marital impurity. It underscores the father's legal standing and the established covenant.

Verse Breakdown

  • "And the damsel's father shall say unto the elders": This clause establishes the setting and the speaker. The "damsel's father" is the primary advocate for his daughter, highlighting the patriarchal structure where the father was responsible for his family's honor and legal defense. The "elders" are the designated judicial body, indicating that this is a formal legal proceeding at the city gate, where justice was administered. The father's address to them signifies his appeal to the highest local authority for a righteous judgment.
  • "I gave my daughter unto this man to wife": This is the core of the father's defense. By stating that he "gave" his daughter, he asserts the legitimacy and completeness of the marriage. This act of "giving" was a public, legal, and often ceremonial transfer, signifying the establishment of a valid marital covenant. The father is essentially reminding the elders and the husband that a binding agreement was made, and his daughter entered the marriage honorably and legitimately. This directly challenges the husband's claim of impurity, which would imply the marriage was never truly valid from the outset.
  • "and he hateth her": This is the father's accusation against the husband, providing the motive for the false charge. The use of "hateth" (sânê') here suggests that the husband's accusation is not based on actual impurity but on his personal aversion or desire to repudiate the marriage. The father implies that the husband is seeking to unjustly divorce his wife, perhaps having grown tired of her or desiring another, and is using the accusation of non-virginity as a convenient, albeit devastating, pretext. This clause shifts the focus from the daughter's alleged fault to the husband's malicious intent, framing the entire dispute as one of slander rather than genuine impurity.

Literary Devices

The verse employs several significant literary devices. Legal Language is paramount, as the entire passage functions as a legal statute and a forensic narrative. Terms like "damsel's father," "elders," "gave," and "hateth" are not merely descriptive but carry specific legal weight within ancient Israelite jurisprudence, outlining roles, actions, and motivations in a formal dispute. This creates a Forensic Narrative, where the verse acts as a crucial piece of testimony within a courtroom-like setting, presenting the father's plea. There is also an element of Contrast implicit in the father's statement: he "gave" his daughter honorably and legitimately, while the husband "hates" or rejects her unjustly. This juxtaposition highlights the husband's malicious intent against the father's righteous action. Furthermore, the father's statement functions as an Appeal to Authority, directly addressing the elders who hold the power to judge, thereby invoking the legal system to protect his daughter.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

Deuteronomy 22:16, though rooted in a specific legal context, resonates with profound theological principles concerning justice, truth, and the sanctity of covenant. It reflects God's character as one who champions the cause of the vulnerable and demands integrity in human relationships. The law's provision for the father to defend his daughter underscores the divine concern for protecting reputation and ensuring due process, especially when false accusations threaten to destroy a person's life and standing. This passage implicitly condemns the act of bearing false witness and highlights the destructive power of slander motivated by personal aversion or malice. It reminds us that God's law is not merely a set of rules but a reflection of His righteous nature, designed to foster a society built on truth, fairness, and the upholding of sacred commitments like marriage.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

While the specific legal scenario of Deuteronomy 22:16 is culturally distant, its underlying principles remain profoundly relevant for believers today. This verse calls us to a deep commitment to truthfulness in all our interactions, reminding us of the devastating impact of false accusations and malicious slander on individuals and communities. It highlights God's unwavering concern for justice, especially for those who are vulnerable or easily exploited. We are challenged to be people who not only refrain from bearing false witness but actively seek to defend the innocent and uphold the truth, even when it is inconvenient or unpopular. Furthermore, the passage underscores the sanctity of marital covenants and the importance of resolving relational conflicts with integrity and a commitment to love, rather than resorting to destructive and dishonest means. In our own communities, we are called to emulate the wisdom and impartiality of the elders, seeking to administer justice fairly and with compassion, ensuring that the vulnerable are protected and that truth prevails.

Questions for Reflection

  • How does this passage challenge me to uphold truthfulness in my words and actions, even when it might be difficult or costly?
  • In what ways can I, or my community, better protect those who are vulnerable to false accusations or injustice today?
  • What does this law teach me about the importance of integrity and commitment within marital or other covenant relationships?
  • How do I respond when I encounter situations where someone's reputation is being unjustly attacked, and what role should I play?

FAQ

What was the primary purpose of this specific law in Deuteronomy 22:13-21?

Answer: The primary purpose of this law was twofold: first, to protect the honor, reputation, and life of a newly married woman from false accusations of pre-marital non-virginity by her husband; and second, to deter husbands from unjustly repudiating their wives for personal dislike or convenience by fabricating charges. It provided a legal mechanism for the woman's family to defend her honor and ensure justice, imposing severe penalties on the slandering husband while also outlining the dire consequences if the accusation was proven true. This law underscored the sanctity of marriage and the importance of truthfulness within the Israelite community, reflecting God's demand for righteousness in all social interactions.

What did "he hateth her" truly mean in this context?

Answer: In this specific legal context, "he hateth her" (Hebrew sânê') does not necessarily imply intense emotional animosity, but rather a strong aversion, dislike, or desire to repudiate the marriage. It suggests that the husband found his wife displeasing after marriage and sought a pretext to divorce her, rather than a genuine discovery of pre-marital impurity. This "hatred" is a functional rejection of the marital covenant, leading him to invent a charge that would nullify the marriage and potentially free him from his obligations. It highlights a malicious intent to escape the marriage without just cause, using a devastating false accusation as a means to an end.

What were the consequences for the husband if the father proved his daughter's innocence?

Answer: If the father successfully proved his daughter's innocence (often by presenting evidence of virginity to the elders, as mentioned in Deuteronomy 22:17), the husband faced severe penalties. According to Deuteronomy 22:18-19, the elders were to "chastise" him (likely a public flogging or rebuke), fine him 100 shekels of silver (double the typical bride-price, which was given to the father), and he would never be permitted to divorce her throughout his life. This ensured that the husband bore the full weight of his slander and was permanently bound to the wife he had falsely accused, serving as a strong deterrent against such malicious actions and protecting the wife's future security.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

Deuteronomy 22:16, with its focus on protecting the vulnerable from false accusation and upholding the integrity of covenant, finds profound fulfillment and illumination in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jesus is the ultimate embodiment of truth and justice, who consistently defended the marginalized and exposed the hypocrisy of those who sought to condemn the innocent. Like the father in the text, Jesus stands as our advocate, defending us against the false accusations of the accuser, Satan (Revelation 12:10). He himself suffered the ultimate false accusation and unjust condemnation, being "led as a lamb to the slaughter" (Isaiah 53:7) and crucified despite being without blemish or sin (1 Peter 2:22). Furthermore, where the Old Testament law sought to curb "hatred" and ensure covenant faithfulness, Christ calls His followers to a radical love that transcends mere legal compliance, commanding us to love even our enemies (Matthew 5:44) and to love one another as He has loved us (John 13:34). In Christ, the principles of justice, truth, and the sanctity of covenant are not merely enforced by law but are perfectly lived out and made possible through His grace, transforming hearts to pursue righteousness and protect the vulnerable, reflecting the very character of God.

Copy as

Commentary on Deuteronomy 22 verses 13–30

These laws relate to the seventh commandment, laying a restraint by laying a penalty upon those fleshly lusts which war against the soul.

I. If a man, lusting after another woman, to get rid of his wife slander her and falsely accuse her, as not having the virginity she pretended to when he married her, upon the disproof of his slander he must be punished, Deu 22:13-19. What the meaning of that evidence is by which the husband's accusation was to be proved false the learned are not agreed, nor is it at all necessary to enquire - those for whom this law was intended, no doubt, understood it: it is sufficient for us to know that this wicked husband, who had thus endeavoured to ruin the reputation of his own wife, was to be scourged, and fined, and bound out from ever divorcing the wife he had thus abused, Deu 22:18, Deu 22:19. Upon his dislike of her he might have divorced her if he had pleased, by the permission of the law (Deu 24:1), but then he must have given her her dowry: if therefore to save that, and to do her the greater mischief, he would thus destroy her good name, it was fit that he should be severely punished for it, and for ever after forfeit the permission to divorce her. Observe, 1. The nearer any are in relation to us the greater sin it is to belie them and blemish their reputation. It is spoken of as a crime of the highest nature to slander thy own mother's son (Psa 50:20), who is next to thyself, much more to slander thy own wife, or thy own husband, that is thyself: it is an ill bird indeed that defiles its own nest. 2. Chastity is honour as well as virtue, and that which gives occasion for the suspicion of it is as great a reproach and disgrace as any whatsoever: in this matter therefore, above any thing, we should be highly tender both of our own good name and that of others. 3. Parents must look upon themselves as concerned to vindicate the reputation of their children, for it is a branch of their own.

II. If the woman that was married as a virgin was not found to be one she was to be stoned to death at her father's door, Deu 22:20, Deu 22:21. If the uncleanness had been committed before she was betrothed it would not have been punished as a capital crime; but she must die for the abuse she put upon him whom she married, being conscious to herself of being defiled, while she made him believe her to be a chaste and modest woman. But some think that her uncleanness was punished with death only in case it was committed after she was betrothed, supposing there were few come to maturity but what were betrothed, though not yet married. Now, 1. This gave a powerful caution to young women to flee fornication, since, however concealed before, so as not to mar their marriage, it would very likely be discovered afterwards, to their perpetual infamy and utter ruin. 2. It is intimated to parents that they must by all means possible preserve their children's chastity, by giving them good advice and admonition, setting them good examples, keeping them from bad company, praying for them, and laying them under needful restraints, because, if the children committed lewdness, the parents must have the grief and shame of the execution at their own door. That phrase of folly wrought in Israel was used concerning this very crime in the case of Dinah, Gen 34:7. All sin is folly, uncleanness especially; but, above all, uncleanness in Israel, by profession a holy people.

III. If any man, single or married, lay with a married woman, they were both to be put to death, Deu 22:22. This law we had before, Lev 20:10. For a married man to lie with a single woman was not a crime of so high a nature, nor was it punished with death, because not introducing a spurious brood into families under the character of legitimate children.

IV. If a damsel were betrothed and not married, she was from under the eye of her intended husband, and therefore she and her chastity were taken under the special protection of the law. 1. If her chastity were violated by her own consent, she was to be put to death, and her adulterer with her, Deu 22:23, Deu 22:24. And it shall be presumed that she consented if it were done in the city, or in any place where, had she cried out, help might speedily have come in to prevent the injury offered her. Qui tacet, consentire videtur - Silence implies consent. Note, It may be presumed that those willingly yield to a temptation (whatever they pretend) who will not use the means and helps they might be furnished with to avoid and overcome it. Nay, her being found in the city, a place of company and diversion, when she should have kept under the protection of her father's house, was an evidence against her that she had not that dread of the sin and the danger of it which became a modest woman. Note, Those that needlessly expose themselves to temptation justly suffer for the same, if, ere they are aware, they be surprised and caught by it. Dinah lost her honour to gratify her curiosity with a sight of the daughters of the land. By this law the Virgin Mary was in danger of being made a public example, that is, of being stoned to death, but that God, by an angel, cleared the matter to Joseph. 2. If she were forced, and never consented, he that committed the rape was to be put to death, but the damsel was to be acquitted, Deu 22:24-27. Now if it were done in the field, out of the hearing of neighbours, it shall be presumed that she cried out, but there was none to save her; and, besides, her going into the field, a place of solitude, did not so much expose her. Now by this law it is intimated to us, (1.) That we shall suffer only for the wickedness we do, not for that which is done to us. That is no sin which has not more or less of the will in it. (2.) That we must presume the best concerning all persons, unless the contrary do appear; not only charity, but equity teaches us to do so. Though none heard her cry, yet, because none could hear it if she did, it shall be taken for granted that she did. This rule we should go by in judging of persons and actions: believe all things, and hope all things. (3.) That our chastity should be as dear to us as our life when that is assaulted, it is not at all improper to cry murder, murder, for, as when a man riseth against his neighbour and slayeth him, even so is this matter. (4.) By way of allusion to this, see what we are to do when Satan sets upon us with his temptations: wherever we are, let us cry aloud to heaven for help (Succurre, Domine, vim patior - Help me, O Lord, for I suffer violence), and there we may be sure to be heard, and answered, as Paul was, My grace is sufficient for thee.

V. If a damsel not betrothed were thus abused by violence, he that abused her should be fined, the father should have the fine, and, if he and the damsel did consent, he should be bound to marry her, and never to divorce her, how much soever she was below him, and how unpleasing soever she might afterwards be to him, as Tamar was to Amnon after he had forced her, Deu 22:28, Deu 22:29. This was to deter men from such vicious practices, which it is a shame that we are necessitated to read and write of.

VI. The law against a man's marrying his father's widow, or having any undue familiarity with his father's wife, is here repeated (Deu 22:30) from Lev 18:8. And, probably, it is intended (as bishop Patrick notes) for a short memorandum to them carefully to observe all the laws there made against incestuous marriages, that being specified which is the most detestable of all; it is that of which the apostle says, It is not so much as named among the Gentiles, Co1 5:1.

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 13–30. Public domain.
Copy as
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as

Continue studying Deuteronomy 22:16 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.

Read & Compare

Commentaries

Original Language & Research

Sermons, Hymns & Audio

TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.