Leviticus 18:15

Translation
King James Version
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter in law: she is thy son's wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
Ask
KJV (with Strong's)
Thou shalt not uncover H1540 the nakedness H6172 of thy daughter in law H3618: she is thy son's H1121 wife H802; thou shalt not uncover H1540 her nakedness H6172.
Ask
Complete Jewish Bible
You are not to have sexual relations with your daughter-in-law; because she is your son's wife. Do not have sexual relations with her.
Ask
Berean Standard Bible
You 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.
Ask
American Standard Version
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter-in-law: she is thy son’s wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
Ask
World English Bible Messianic
“‘You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law: she is your son’s wife. You shall not uncover her nakedness.
Ask
Geneva Bible (1599)
Thou shalt not discouer the shame of thy daughter in lawe: for she is thy sonnes wife: therefore shalt thou not vncouer her shame.
Ask
Young's Literal Translation
`The nakedness of thy daughter-in-law thou dost not uncover; she is thy son's wife; thou dost not uncover her nakedness.
Ask
See also
Leviticus 20:12Genesis 38:26Ezekiel 22:11Genesis 38:18Genesis 38:19
In the KJVVerse 3,267 of 31,102

Study This Verse

SUMMARY

Leviticus 18:15 explicitly forbids a man from engaging in sexual relations with his daughter-in-law, emphasizing her status as his son's wife. This command is an integral component of God's broader statutes on sexual purity and familial integrity, designed to distinguish the Israelite community from the morally corrupt practices of surrounding pagan nations. It underscores the sanctity of marital covenants and the foundational role of the family unit in maintaining a holy and ordered society under divine law.

CONTEXT

  • Literary Context: Leviticus 18:15 is situated within a broader chapter, Leviticus 18, which details a comprehensive list of illicit sexual unions. This chapter opens with a divine command for Israel to "do my judgments, and keep my ordinances, to walk therein" (Leviticus 18:4), immediately distinguishing God's standards from the depraved practices of Egypt and Canaan. The prohibitions range from various forms of incest (e.g., mother, sister, granddaughter) to bestiality and child sacrifice, culminating in a solemn warning about the land "vomiting out" those who defile it with such abominations (Leviticus 18:28). Within this framework, the prohibition against a man uncovering the nakedness of his daughter-in-law is a specific injunction safeguarding the integrity of the nuclear family and the sanctity of marriage within that structure, reinforcing the principle that marriage creates new, distinct family units whose boundaries must be respected.
  • Historical & Cultural Context: The laws in Leviticus 18 were given to ancient Israel as they stood on the cusp of entering the land of Canaan, a region notorious for its moral depravity. Archaeological and textual evidence from the ancient Near East, particularly regarding Canaanite and Egyptian societies, indicates that many of the practices explicitly forbidden in this chapter, including various forms of incest, cultic prostitution, and child sacrifice, were common. For instance, Egyptian pharaohs sometimes married their sisters to maintain royal bloodlines, and cultic practices in Canaan often involved sexual rituals that blurred moral boundaries. God's commands in Leviticus were therefore not merely arbitrary rules but a divine mandate to establish a holy nation, distinct from the surrounding pagan cultures. The pervasive call to be holy, "for I am holy" (Leviticus 11:44), permeated every aspect of Israelite life, including their sexual ethics. By prohibiting relations with a daughter-in-law, God directly countered cultural norms that blurred familial and sexual boundaries, ensuring the purity and stability of Israelite families, which were the foundational units of their covenantal society.
  • Key Themes: The prohibition in Leviticus 18:15 contributes significantly to several key themes pervasive throughout the book of Leviticus. Foremost among these is the theme of Holiness and Purity, emphasizing God's absolute moral standard and His demand for His people to reflect His character in their conduct. This verse, alongside others in Leviticus 18, defines the boundaries of acceptable behavior, particularly in the realm of sexuality, as integral to Israel's sanctification. Another crucial theme is the Sanctity of Marriage and Family. The law protects the integrity of the marital covenant and the family unit, recognizing them as divinely instituted foundations of society. Violations like that described in this verse directly undermine these sacred bonds. Finally, the theme of Distinction from Pagan Practices is evident. By explicitly forbidding practices common in surrounding cultures, God establishes Israel as a separate, holy nation, whose ethical framework is derived from divine revelation, not human depravity. The consequences for violating these laws, such as the land "vomiting out" its inhabitants (Leviticus 18:28), underscore the gravity of maintaining these distinctions.

EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Key Word Analysis

  • Uncover (Hebrew, gâlâh', H1540): From the primitive root H1540, meaning "to denude (especially in a disgraceful sense); by implication, to exile (captives being usually stripped); figuratively, to reveal." In the context of "uncover the nakedness," this verb functions as a euphemism for sexual intercourse, implying a stripping away of modesty and a disgraceful, illicit act.
  • Nakedness (Hebrew, ʻervâh', H6172): Meaning "nudity, literally (especially the pudenda) or figuratively (disgrace, blemish)." In phrases like "uncover the nakedness," it is a legal and moral euphemism for sexual intercourse itself. Its use throughout Leviticus 18 emphasizes the profound defilement and moral disgrace associated with the forbidden sexual acts, highlighting them as violations of divine purity and human dignity.
  • Daughter in law (Hebrew, kallâh', H3618): Meaning "a bride (as if perfect); hence, a son's wife." This term precisely defines the relationship, emphasizing the familial bond established through marriage. The prohibition acknowledges the daughter-in-law as a distinct member of the extended family unit, whose marital bond with the son must be respected and protected by the father-in-law, establishing a clear boundary.

Verse Breakdown

  • "Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter in law": This is a direct, apodictic command, characteristic of the Holiness Code. It unequivocally forbids sexual intercourse between a man and his son's wife. The use of "uncover the nakedness" euphemistically yet powerfully conveys the illicit and defiling nature of the sexual act.
  • "she [is] thy son's wife": This clause provides the explicit rationale and legal justification for the prohibition. It grounds the command in the existing, sacred marital relationship. The daughter-in-law's status as "thy son's wife" means she is already in a sacred, exclusive covenant with the son, and any sexual act with the father-in-law would be a profound act of adultery against the son, a betrayal of family trust, and a severe disruption of the family's integrity.
  • "thou shalt not uncover her nakedness": The repetition of the prohibition serves to emphasize its gravity and finality. This reiteration underscores the absolute nature of the command, leaving no room for ambiguity or exception. It reinforces the seriousness of violating this particular familial and marital boundary, highlighting the divine abhorrence for such an act.

Literary Devices

Leviticus 18:15 employs several literary devices to convey its message with clarity and force. The most prominent is Euphemism, specifically the phrase "uncover the nakedness," which serves as a polite yet potent substitute for direct reference to sexual intercourse. This device allows the sacred text to discuss sensitive topics without explicit vulgarity, while simultaneously highlighting the profound moral and spiritual implications of the forbidden acts. The use of Repetition is also evident, with the phrase "thou shalt not uncover her nakedness" appearing twice. This repetition is not redundant but serves to emphasize the absolute nature of the prohibition, underscoring its non-negotiable importance and the severe consequences of its violation. Furthermore, the verse exemplifies Legal Formulation, presenting an apodictic (absolute, unconditional) command. This direct, declarative style is typical of the Holiness Code, emphasizing the divine authority behind the law and its non-negotiable character. The clarity and directness of the language ensure that the command is easily understood and its violation unequivocally condemned, establishing a clear moral boundary.

THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS

Leviticus 18:15, like the broader chapter, profoundly connects to the overarching theological theme of God's holiness and His demand for His people to reflect that holiness in their lives. The prohibition against sexual relations with a daughter-in-law is not merely a social rule but a divine standard for purity, designed to protect the sanctity of marriage and the integrity of the family unit, which are foundational to a righteous society. This command underscores that marriage is a sacred covenant established by God, and any act that defiles or undermines it is an affront to His divine order. It teaches that boundaries within family relationships are divinely ordained for protection and flourishing, preventing chaos, moral decay, and the blurring of roles that would inevitably lead to societal breakdown. The integrity of the family, as the basic building block of society, is thus directly linked to the nation's covenant faithfulness and its ability to dwell securely in the promised land.

REFLECTION AND APPLICATION

Leviticus 18:15, while rooted in the ancient Israelite context, provides timeless principles for reflection and application in contemporary life. It profoundly reminds us that God is deeply concerned with the purity and integrity of our relationships, especially within the family. This command calls believers to a high standard of sexual morality, emphasizing that sexual intimacy is sacred and reserved exclusively for the covenant of marriage. It challenges us to honor and protect the marital bonds of others, recognizing that to violate these boundaries, even indirectly, is to sow discord, cause profound harm, and undermine the very fabric of family and society. For us today, it means cultivating a heart that respects God's design for marriage, maintains healthy and appropriate boundaries in all relationships, and actively pursues holiness in thought, word, and deed, reflecting Christ's character in every sphere of life. This pursuit of holiness is not merely about avoiding sin, but about embracing God's good design for human flourishing.

Questions for Reflection

  • How does this command highlight the importance of clear, divinely ordained boundaries within family relationships today, and what are practical ways to uphold them in our modern context?
  • In what ways does society's increasingly fluid view of sexual ethics differ from God's unchanging standards as revealed in this passage, and how should believers thoughtfully and faithfully respond to this disparity?
  • Beyond avoiding specific forbidden acts, how can we actively cultivate a heart that honors and protects the sanctity of marriage, both our own and others', in our words, actions, and even our private thoughts?

FAQ

Why is this specific relationship forbidden, and what are its broader implications for family integrity?

Answer: This relationship is forbidden primarily because the woman is "thy son's wife," meaning she is already in a sacred marital covenant with the man's son. Engaging in sexual relations with her would constitute adultery against the son, a profound betrayal of family trust, and a severe violation of God's established order for marriage and family. The broader implications are significant: it safeguards the integrity of the nuclear family, prevents confusion of lineage and roles, and upholds the sanctity of the marital bond as exclusive and inviolable. It also reinforces the principle that marriage creates new, distinct family units that must be respected by the original family, ensuring clarity and order within the broader community.

Is this law still relevant for believers today, given its Old Testament context, or is it merely an ancient cultural artifact?

Answer: Absolutely. While the specific legal context is ancient Israel, the underlying moral principles are eternal and universally applicable. The prohibition against incest and adultery, of which this command is a specific instance, reflects God's unchanging character and His design for human sexuality and relationships. The New Testament consistently upholds the sanctity of marriage and calls believers to sexual purity, echoing the spirit of these Old Testament laws. For example, 1 Thessalonians 4:3 states, "For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication," and 1 Corinthians 6:18 commands believers to "Flee fornication." The specific prohibition in Leviticus 18:15 serves as a powerful reminder of God's high standard for sexual morality and the importance of respecting familial and marital boundaries, which remain foundational for human flourishing.

CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT

The prohibitions in Leviticus, including that of Leviticus 18:15, reveal the holy standard of God and humanity's inherent inability to perfectly fulfill it, thus pointing to the pervasive nature of sin and the ultimate need for a Savior. While these laws established a distinct moral code for Israel, their ultimate purpose was to highlight sin and the necessity of redemption. In Christ, the moral essence of these laws is not abolished but fulfilled and elevated. Jesus declared that He did not come to destroy the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them (Matthew 5:17). He expands the concept of purity beyond outward actions to the very intentions of the heart, as seen in His teaching on lust (Matthew 5:27-28), demonstrating that true holiness originates from within. Through His perfect life, atoning death on the cross, and victorious resurrection, Christ provides the righteousness that the Law demands and the power for believers to live in genuine holiness. The Holy Spirit, given to those who believe, enables them to walk "not after the flesh, but after the Spirit," thereby fulfilling "the righteousness of the law" (Romans 8:3-4). Thus, the call to sexual purity and the honoring of marital bonds, exemplified in Leviticus 18:15, finds its ultimate empowerment and deepest meaning in Christ, who calls His followers to be holy as God is holy (1 Peter 1:15-16) and to flee all forms of sexual immorality, recognizing their bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:18-20).

Copy as

Commentary on Leviticus 18 verses 6–18

I. II. Main points1. 2. Sub-points

These laws relate to the seventh commandment, and, no doubt, are obligatory on us under the gospel, for they are consonant to the very light and law of nature: one of the articles, that of a man's having his father's wife, the apostle speaks of as a sin not so much as named among the Gentiles, Co1 5:1. Though some of the incests here forbidden were practised by some particular persons among the heathen, yet they were disallowed and detested, unless among those nations who had become barbarous, and were quite given up to vile affections. Observe,

I. That which is forbidden as to the relations here specified is approaching to them to uncover their nakedness, Lev 18:6.

1.It is chiefly intended to forbid the marrying of any of these relations. Marriage is a divine institution; this and the sabbath, the eldest of all, of equal standing with man upon the earth: it is intended for the comfort of human life, and the decent and honourable propagation of the human race, such as became the dignity of man's nature above that of the beasts. It is honourable in all, and these laws are for the support of the honour of it. It was requisite that a divine ordinance should be subject to divine rules and restraints, especially because it concerns a thing wherein the corrupt nature of man is as apt as in any thing to be wilful and impetuous in its desires, and impatient of check. Yet these prohibitions, besides their being enacted by an incontestable authority, are in themselves highly reasonable and equitable. (1.) By marriage two were to become one flesh, therefore those that before were in a sense one flesh by nature could not, without the greatest absurdity, become one flesh by institution; for the institution was designed to unite those who before were not united. (2.) Marriage puts an equality between husband and wife. "Is she not thy companion taken out of thy side?" Therefore, if those who before were superior and inferior should intermarry (which is the case in most of the instances here laid down), the order of nature would be taken away by a positive institution, which must by no means be allowed. The inequality between master and servant, noble and ignoble, is founded in consent and custom, and there is no harm done if that be taken away by the equality of marriage; but the inequality between parents and children, uncles and nieces, aunts and nephews, either by blood or marriage, is founded in nature, and is therefore perpetual, and cannot without confusion be taken away by the equality of marriage, the institution of which, though ancient, is subsequent to the order of nature. (3.) No relations that are equals are forbidden, except brothers and sisters, by the whole blood or half blood, or by marriage; and in this there is not the same natural absurdity as in the former, for Adam's sons must of necessity have married their own sisters; but it was requisite that it should be made by a positive law unlawful and detestable, for the preventing of sinful familiarities between those that in the days of their youth are supposed to live in a house together, and yet cannot intermarry without defeating one of the intentions of marriage, which is the enlargement of friendship and interest. If every man married his own sister (as they would be apt to do from generation to generation if it were lawful), each family would be a world to itself, and it would be forgotten that we are members one of another. It is certain that this has always been looked upon by the more sober heathen as a most infamous and abominable thing; and those who had not this law yet were herein a law to themselves. The making use of the ordinance of marriage for the patronizing of incestuous mixtures is so far from justifying them, or extenuating their guilt, that it adds the guilt of profaning an ordinance of God, and prostituting that to the vilest of purposes which was instituted for the noblest ends. But,

2.Uncleanness, committed with any of these relations out of marriage, is likewise, without doubt, forbidden here, and no less intended than the former: as also all lascivious carriage, wanton dalliance, and every thing that has the appearance of this evil. Relations must love one another, and are to have free and familiar converse with each other, but it must be with all purity; and the less it is suspected of evil by others the more care ought the persons themselves to take that Satan do not get advantage against them, for he is a very subtle enemy, and seeks all occasions against us.

II. The relations forbidden are most of them plainly described; and it is generally laid down as a rule that what relations of a man's own he is bound up from marrying the same relations of his wife he is likewise forbidden to marry, for they two are one. That law which forbids marrying a brother's wife (Lev 18:16) had an exception peculiar to the Jewish state, that, if a man died without issue, his brother or next of kin should marry the widow, and raise up seed to the deceased (Deu 25:5), for reasons which held good only in that commonwealth; and therefore now that those reasons have ceased the exception ceases, and the law is in force, that a man must in no case marry his brother's widow. That article (Lev 18:18) which forbids a man to take a wife to her sister supposes a connivance at polygamy, as some other laws then did (Exo 21:10; Deu 21:15), but forbids a man's marrying two sisters, as Jacob did, because between those who had before been equal there would be apt to arise greater jealousies and animosities than between wives that were not so nearly related. If the sister of the wife be taken for the concubine, or secondary wife, nothing can be more vexing in her life, or as long as she lives.

Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 6–18. 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 Leviticus 18:15 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.