Deuteronomy 22:30

Translation
King James Version
A man shall not take his father's wife, nor discover his father's skirt.
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
A man H376 shall not take H3947 his father's H1 wife H802, nor discover H1540 his father's H1 skirt H3671.
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
"A man is not to take his father's wife, thus violating his father's rights.
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
A man is not to marry his father’s wife, so that he will not dishonor his father’s marriage bed.
Ask
American Standard Version
A man shall not take his father’s wife, and shall not uncover his father’s skirt.
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
A man shall not take his father’s wife, and shall not uncover his father’s skirt.
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
No man shall take his fathers wife, nor shall vncouer his fathers skirt.
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
`A man doth not take his father's wife, nor uncover his father's skirt.
Ask
See also
Deuteronomy 27:20Leviticus 18:81 Corinthians 5:1Leviticus 20:11Ruth 3:9Ezekiel 16:81 Corinthians 5:13
In the KJVVerse 5,501 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

Deuteronomy 22:30 articulates a severe prohibition against a man engaging in sexual relations with his stepmother, employing both direct language and a powerful euphemism. This statute fundamentally underscores the sanctity of family relationships, the imperative of maintaining clear moral and relational boundaries within the covenant community, and God's unwavering demand for sexual purity as a distinguishing mark of His people. It stands as a foundational declaration against incestuous defilement, aiming to preserve the integrity, holiness, and social order of the Israelite household and, by extension, the entire nation.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: Deuteronomy 22:30 concludes a diverse collection of statutes within Deuteronomy 22, which systematically addresses a broad spectrum of civil, moral, and cultic laws designed for the Israelite community as they prepare to inhabit the Promised Land. This chapter transitions from regulations concerning lost property and animal welfare to dress codes and, significantly, to matters of sexual purity and marital integrity. Specifically, verse 30 forms the culmination of a block of laws (Deuteronomy 22:13-30) that meticulously detail various sexual offenses, marriage stipulations, and issues pertaining to family purity. These laws are not presented haphazardly but are strategically ordered to establish a comprehensive moral framework for a society consecrated to Yahweh, building upon and reinforcing the broader covenant stipulations articulated at Mount Sinai and throughout the Pentateuch. The immediate preceding verses delineate laws concerning virginity, adultery, and rape, making the prohibition against incest with a stepmother a logical and emphatic conclusion to a section dedicated to safeguarding the sanctity of marital and familial relationships.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: In contrast to the often fluid and sometimes permissive sexual standards prevalent in ancient Near Eastern societies, where certain incestuous relationships might have been tolerated, particularly among royalty or within cultic practices, the Mosaic Law, as reiterated in Deuteronomy, sets Israel apart by demanding a rigorous standard of sexual purity. This distinctiveness was crucial for maintaining the unique identity of the covenant people, differentiating them from the surrounding pagan cultures whose practices frequently involved sexual immorality, cultic prostitution, and blurred familial boundaries. The prohibition against a man "taking his father's wife" directly challenges and condemns practices that might have been acceptable elsewhere, emphasizing the unique holiness and moral uprightness required of Israel as God's chosen nation. The patriarchal family structure served as the fundamental bedrock of Israelite society, and violations like this incestuous act threatened its very foundation, undermining established authority, purity, and social order. This law, therefore, functioned as a vital bulwark against the moral decay observed in nations like Egypt and Canaan, from whom Israel was commanded to remain entirely separate, as extensively detailed in passages such as Leviticus 18.
  • Key Themes: Deuteronomy 22:30 profoundly contributes to several overarching themes woven throughout the book of Deuteronomy and the broader Pentateuch. Primarily, it powerfully reinforces the theme of Holiness, calling Israel to be a people "set apart" for God, reflecting His character in their conduct and ethical living, as mandated in Leviticus 19:2. The prohibition against incest is a direct and critical application of this call to holiness within the intimate spheres of sexual ethics and family life. Secondly, it emphasizes the Sanctity of Marriage and Family, viewing the family unit not merely as a social construct but as foundational to the covenant community, deserving of divine protection from any form of defilement. Violations of sexual purity, especially those within the family, were seen as a direct affront to God's divine design and a severe threat to social stability and communal well-being. Thirdly, the verse highlights Covenant Fidelity and Obedience, as adherence to such stringent laws was a tangible and essential expression of Israel's loyalty to Yahweh and their unwavering commitment to the covenant established at Sinai. Finally, it underscores the theme of Distinction from Surrounding Nations, as these laws served to clearly delineate Israel's moral and ethical identity, preventing them from adopting the corrupt and defiling practices of the Canaanites whom they were to dispossess.

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • take (Hebrew, lâqaḥ', H3947): A primitive root meaning "to take (in the widest variety of applications); accept, bring, buy, carry away, drawn, fetch, get, infold, [idiom] many, mingle, place, receive(-ing), reserve, seize, send for, take (away, -ing, up), use, win." In this prohibitive context, while lâqaḥ can refer to legitimate marriage (e.g., Genesis 2:24), here it signifies an illicit appropriation or seizure of a woman who is already bound in a sacred relationship to another, specifically the father. The use of "take" emphasizes the active, volitional, and therefore culpable, nature of the transgression, highlighting that the act is not merely passive but a deliberate violation of established boundaries and relationships.
  • discover (Hebrew, gâlâh', H1540): A primitive root meaning "to denude (especially in a disgraceful sense); by implication, to exile (captives being usually stripped); figuratively, to reveal; [phrase] advertise, appear, bewray, bring, (carry, lead, go) captive (into captivity), depart, disclose, discover, exile, be gone, open, [idiom] plainly, publish, remove, reveal, [idiom] shamelessly, shew, [idiom] surely, tell, uncover." In a sexual context, particularly when paired with "nakedness" or "skirt," it functions as a potent euphemism for sexual intercourse. The act of "uncovering" implies a profound violation of privacy, modesty, and sacred boundaries. It denotes an act of sexual intimacy that is illicit, shameful, and exposes what should remain covered and protected within the confines of legitimate marriage. The severity of the act is heightened by this imagery of exposure and defilement.
  • skirt (Hebrew, kânâph', H3671): Meaning "an edge or extremity; specifically (of a bird or army) a wing, (of a garment or bedclothing) a flap, (of the earth) a quarter, (of a building) a pinnacle; [phrase] bird, border, corner, end, feather(-ed), [idiom] flying, [phrase] (one an-) other, overspreading, [idiom] quarters, skirt, [idiom] sort, uttermost part, wing(-ed)." Literally meaning "wing" or "corner," this noun often refers to the corner or hem of a garment. In biblical idiom, to "spread one's skirt over" someone (e.g., Ruth 3:9) can be a euphemism for taking someone into protection, marriage, or sexual intimacy. Conversely, to "discover" or "uncover" another's "skirt" is a powerful euphemism for engaging in illicit sexual relations, particularly with a woman under the protection or authority of another man, or in a forbidden context. Here, "his father's skirt" refers to the father's wife, emphasizing the profound disrespect and violation of the father's marital rights and the sanctity of his union.

Verse Breakdown

  • "A man shall not take his father's wife": This clause directly and unequivocally prohibits a son from marrying or having sexual relations with his stepmother. The phrase "his father's wife" (אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו, 'ēšet 'āvîw) clearly identifies the woman as the father's spouse, whether she is the man's biological mother or a subsequent wife. This prohibition is a cornerstone of the Mosaic Law's family purity statutes, meticulously designed to prevent incest and maintain the integrity and hierarchical order of the patriarchal household. Such an act would constitute a profound violation of filial respect, marital sanctity, and the established relational order within the family unit, blurring essential and divinely ordained boundaries.
  • "nor discover his father's skirt.": This second clause functions as a powerful, reinforcing euphemism for the same prohibited act, intensifying its gravity. As elucidated in the "Key Word Analysis," "discover" (gâlâh) and "skirt" (kânâph) together idiomatically refer to illicit sexual intercourse. The phrase "his father's skirt" specifically identifies the woman as being under the father's marital authority and protection. To "discover" her "skirt" is to violate the father's marital bed and his exclusive rights to his wife, thereby bringing profound shame, defilement, and disruption upon the family. This poetic parallelism between the two clauses emphasizes the gravity of the transgression, highlighting both the direct act and its profound symbolic violation of familial and marital sanctity.

Literary Devices

Deuteronomy 22:30 employs several potent literary devices to convey its strong and unequivocal prohibition. The most prominent is Euphemism, particularly evident in the phrase "nor discover his father's skirt." Instead of explicitly stating "have sexual intercourse," the text uses a veiled, yet universally understood, idiom. This choice serves to underscore the inherent shame, impropriety, and defilement associated with the act, as direct language might be considered too crude or disrespectful for such a heinous offense against family integrity. The verse also utilizes Parallelism between its two clauses—"A man shall not take his father's wife" and "nor discover his father's skirt." This structural repetition, employing synonymous expression, reinforces the prohibition, ensuring the message is clear, emphatic, and memorable. The first clause states the prohibition directly, while the second reiterates it using vivid, idiomatic imagery, thereby intensifying the sense of violation and moral outrage. Furthermore, the verse is characterized by Legal Language in its direct, declarative, and prohibitive form ("shall not"), which is characteristic of the Mosaic Law, establishing an absolute and non-negotiable command for the covenant community, reflecting divine authority.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

Deuteronomy 22:30, like all laws concerning sexual purity in the Pentateuch, profoundly reveals God's character as inherently holy and His desire for His people to reflect that holiness in every sphere of life, especially within the foundational unit of the family. This prohibition underscores that sexual relations are not merely physical acts but are deeply spiritual, relational, and covenantal, designed by God to be confined within the sacred, exclusive boundaries of marriage between one man and one woman. Violations like incest defile not only the individuals directly involved but also the entire family unit and, by extension, the entire covenant community, hindering their ability to represent God's purity and moral order to the surrounding nations. This law, therefore, stands as a testament to God's profound concern for order, integrity, and the holistic well-being of His people, safeguarding them from the chaos, moral degradation, and spiritual defilement prevalent in the surrounding pagan cultures. It teaches that true freedom, flourishing, and divine blessing are intrinsically linked to obedient adherence to God-ordained boundaries.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

Deuteronomy 22:30, though rooted in the specific context of ancient Israelite law, offers timeless and profound principles for believers today. It serves as a powerful reminder that God's standards for sexual purity and relational integrity are not arbitrary restrictions but are divinely designed for our ultimate flourishing, the health of our relationships, and the well-being of society. The sanctity of marriage and family remains paramount in God's eyes, and maintaining clear, respectful, and holy boundaries within these relationships is absolutely essential for spiritual vitality and social order. In a contemporary world where sexual ethics are increasingly blurred, redefined, or dismissed, this verse calls us to a counter-cultural commitment to holiness, recognizing that our bodies and relationships are sacred trusts given by God, to be used in ways that honor Him. It challenges us to critically examine our own lives, our families, and our cultural norms, ensuring that we actively uphold God's unchanging design for sexuality and family, resisting any practice or ideology that would defile or dishonor these sacred institutions. Our faithful obedience in these areas is a powerful and compelling witness to the world of God's transformative power and His benevolent desire for human flourishing.

Questions for Reflection

  • How does the emphasis on "holiness" and "distinction" in Deuteronomy 22:30 challenge contemporary views on sexual freedom, personal autonomy, and societal norms?
  • In what practical ways can we, as individuals and as the church, actively promote and protect the sanctity of marriage and family in our increasingly secular and morally diverse modern context?
  • Beyond explicit sexual prohibitions, what specific relational boundaries are essential for fostering healthy, respectful, and God-honoring family relationships today, and how can we cultivate them?

FAQ

Why is this specific prohibition so severe, and what does "discover his father's skirt" truly mean?

Answer: This prohibition is deemed exceptionally severe because it strikes at the very heart of family sanctity, order, and the divinely established relational hierarchy. Incest, particularly with a stepmother, profoundly undermines patriarchal authority, blurs essential generational lines, and introduces deep defilement and chaos into the household, which served as the foundational unit of Israelite society and a microcosm of the covenant community. Such an act was seen as a grave affront to God's design for purity, order, and the distinctiveness of His people. The phrase "discover his father's skirt" is a powerful and widely understood biblical euphemism for engaging in illicit sexual intercourse. The "skirt" (Hebrew kânâph) literally refers to the hem or corner of a garment, but idiomatically it symbolizes protection, covering, or marital intimacy. To "uncover" or "discover" it is to violate the intimacy and sanctity of the father's marital bed, implying a profound act of disrespect, defilement, and usurpation of the father's exclusive marital rights. This idiom is consistently used elsewhere in scripture to describe forbidden sexual intimacy, as extensively outlined in Leviticus 18:6-19, which details various prohibited degrees of kinship for sexual relations.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

While Deuteronomy 22:30 is a specific command from the Mosaic Law, its underlying principles find profound fulfillment and re-expression in the person and work of Jesus Christ. The law, including these purity statutes, served a crucial purpose: to reveal the absolute holiness of God and, by contrast, the pervasive depth of human sin, thereby demonstrating humanity's inherent inability to perfectly keep God's righteous standards. Christ, however, perfectly embodied the holiness that the law demanded, living a life of absolute purity, unwavering integrity, and complete obedience to the Father, even to the point of sacrificial death on the cross (Hebrews 4:15). Through His atoning sacrifice, Jesus did not abolish the law but fulfilled it, providing the sole means for believers to be declared righteous before God and to enter into a new covenant relationship with Him, empowered by the indwelling Holy Spirit. The New Testament church, as the new family of God, is called to an even higher standard of purity—not merely external adherence to rules, but an internal transformation of the heart that impacts all thoughts and actions (Matthew 5:27-28). The prohibition against incest, and indeed all forms of sexual immorality, is powerfully reiterated in the New Testament (1 Corinthians 5:1; Ephesians 5:3), not as a burdensome legalistic requirement, but as a joyful and Spirit-empowered response to Christ's redemptive work. As those united with Him, believers are called to reflect His holiness in their bodies and relationships (1 Corinthians 6:18-20), embodying the purity, order, and relational integrity that the Old Testament law foreshadowed and now finds its ultimate expression in Christ.

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 22:30 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.