Deuteronomy 28:56 · Bible study
Deuteronomy 28:56 Commentary: The Tender Woman's Evil Eye in Siege
Hebrew · 7 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
This verse from the covenant curses shows how even the most refined woman turns selfish under siege, revealing sin’s dehumanizing effect and the depth of
Research Summary
- Meaning: Even the most sheltered, refined woman will become selfish and cruel toward her family under the extreme conditions of covenant curse.
- Key words: tender (רַכָּה) = soft; delicate (עֲנֻגָּה) = pampered; evil eye (תֵרַע עֵינָהּ) = idiom for stinginess, hatred, or withholding.
- Main debate: Whether the verse describes a literal historical event prophesied in advance (Clarke, Josephus) or serves as a general covenantal warning (Cambridge, Geneva). Both hold the actual curse is horrific.
- Theological theme: The depth of human sin under judgment; the inversion of God’s created order of love and provision.
- Best use: Preaching the severity of covenant breaking and the grace of Christ who bore the curse for us.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
The most gentle and refined woman among you, so gentle and refined she would not venture to set the sole of her foot on the ground, will begrudge the husband she embraces and her son and daughter
WEB World English Bible 2000
The tender and delicate woman among you, who would not venture to set the sole of her foot on the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye will be evil toward the husband that she loves, toward her son, toward her daughter,
KJV King James Version 1769
The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter,
ASV American Standard Version 1901
The tender and delicate woman among you, who would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter,
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
`The tender woman in thee, and the delicate, who hath not tried the sole of her foot to place on the ground because of delicateness and because of tenderness--her eye is evil against the husband of her bosom, and against her son, and against her daughter,
Darby Darby Bible 1890
The eye of the tender and luxurious woman in thy midst who would not attempt to set the sole of her foot upon the ground from luxuriousness and from tenderness, shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and her son, and her daughter,
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
The tender and delicate woman, that could not go upon the ground, nor set down her foot for over much niceness and tenderness, will envy her husband who lieth in her bosom, the flesh of her son, and of her daughter,
Translations in other languages (10 available)
La tierna y la delicada entre vosotros, que nunca la planta de su pie probó á sentar sobre la tierra, de ternura y delicadeza, su ojo será maligno para con el marido de su seno, y para con su hijo, y para con su hija,
A tenra e a delicada entre vós, que nunca a planta de seu pé provou a sentar sobre a terra, de ternura e delicadeza, seu olho será maligno para com o marido de seu seio, e para com seu filho, e para com sua filha,
La femme d’ entre vous la plus délicate et la plus habituée à la mollesse, qui par mollesse et par délicatesse n’ essayait pas de poser à terre la plante de son pied, aura un œil sans pitié pour le mari qui repose sur son sein, pour son fils et pour sa fille;
Ein Weib unter euch, das zuvor zärtlich und in Üppigkeit gelebt hat, daß sie nicht versucht hat, ihre Fußsohle auf die Erde zu setzen, vor Zärtlichkeit und Wohlleben, die wird ihrem Manne in ihren Armen und ihrem Sohne und ihrer Tochter nicht gönnen
Aangaande de tedere en wellustige vrouw onder u, die niet verzocht heeft haar voetzool op de aarde te zetten, omdat zij zich wellustig en teder hield; haar oog zal kwaad zijn tegen den man haars schoots, en tegen haar zoon, en tegen haar dochter;
La donna più delicata e più molle tra voi, che per mollezza e delicatezza non si sarebbe attentata a posare la pianta del piede in terra, guarderà di mal occhio il marito che le riposa sul seno, il suo figliuolo e la sua figliuola,
Pieszczotliwa między wami, i w rozkoszy wychowana niewiasta, która ledwie nogą swoją dostępowała ziemi dla pieszczoty i rozkoszy, będzie zajrzała mężowi swemu własnemu i synowi swemu, i córce swojej.
[Женщина] жившая у тебя в неге и роскоши, которая никогда ноги своей не ставила на землю по причине роскоши и изнеженности, будет безжалостным оком смотреть на мужа недра своего и на сына своего и на дочь свою
你們中間，柔弱 嬌嫩的婦人，是 因嬌嫩 柔弱 不 肯 把 腳 踏 地的，必惡 眼 看她懷中 的丈夫 和她的兒 女。
The most soft and delicate of your women, who would not so much as put her foot on the earth, so delicate is she, will be hard-hearted to her husband and to her son and to her daughter;
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Deuteronomy 28:56
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators across traditions agree this verse witnesses the extreme corruption of human nature under covenantal curse. The woman described as tender (רַכָּה, rakah) and delicate (עֲנֻגָּה, anugah) represents the most pampered, sheltered person in Israelite society, one who would not even risk setting her foot on the ground (Gill). That such a person becomes evil of eye (תֵרַע עֵינָהּ), a Hebrew idiom for stinginess and hatred, toward her own husband and children shows the curse’s reach. Wesley calls the evil eye “unmerciful”: she desires their destruction for food. Clarke connects it to the Roman siege of Jerusalem, where a woman named Mary boiled and ate her own child, fulfilling the curse in ghastly detail. The Cambridge Bible notes that these curses are predicted absolutely, grounded in Israel’s actual failure to serve God. The what is agreed: the curse strips away every natural affection, turning tenderness into terror.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Literal historical warning: Points to the concrete fulfillments in Israel's history (2 Kgs 6:29; Josephus on AD 70; Clarke). The verse is prophecy of actual events.
- Covenantal hyperbole: Reads the language as intensified rhetoric within the curse form (similar to other ancient Near Eastern treaties). The point is the extreme nature of judgment, not necessarily a prediction of every detail.
- Symbol of spiritual desolation: Sees the breakdown of family love as a symbol of the alienation from God that sin produces, applicable to anyone who turns from the covenant (Lange, Wesley).
What is clear: All views agree that this verse depicts the catastrophic consequences of covenant unfaithfulness: sin destroys even the most intimate human bonds, turning tenderness into cruelty.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of the woman's sin | All agree her 'evil eye' represents selfishness, stinginess, and cruelty toward her own family, a breakdown of natural love. | Some emphasize psychological breakdown under trauma (the woman is a victim of circumstance), while others stress moral culpability and covenant unfaithfulness as the root cause. |
| Historical fulfillment | The verse points to actual sieges in Israel’s history, most notably the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Josephus). | Whether the curse was fulfilled only in AD 70 (Clarke) or also in earlier events like the Assyrian/Babylonian sieges (Lange, Matthew Henry). Both acknowledge it has been realized. |
| Application for Christians today | All affirm this warning reveals the seriousness of disregarding God’s covenant. | Some apply it as a direct warning against national disobedience (e.g., Reformed traditions), while others see it fulfilled in Christ and morally instructive but not directly applicable to the church (e.g., dispensational views). |
Historical & Cultural Context
Deuteronomy 28 forms the covenant’s closing ceremony: blessings for obedience on Mount Gerizim (vv1, 14) and curses for disobedience on Mount Ebal (vv15, 68). Verses 52, 57 focus on the horrors of a siege by a far-off, ruthless nation, described earlier as “swift as the eagle flieth” (v49). Within that portrait, vv54, 57 paint a chilling contrast: the men who were “tender and very delicate” (v54) and the women who were “tender and delicate” share the same fate. The woman in v56, who had never set foot on the ground from delicacy, represents the extreme. In a world where daily bread was won by hard labor, such refinement signaled wealth and status. Yet under the covenant curse, that very luxury becomes the measure of the fall. Neither wealth nor soft living can insulate one from judgment.
The phrase “her eye will be evil” (תֵרַע עֵינָהּ) is a Hebrew expression for grudging, envious, or withholding behavior. It appears elsewhere in contexts of stinginess (Deut 15:9; Prov 23:6). The siege economy reverses the normal order: the one who once gave generously now resents every mouthful her family takes. Gill quotes Josephus’s account of women snatching food from their husbands’ and infants’ mouths. The literary structure, two parallel lines in v53 and v57, drives the horror home: “You will eat the fruit of your own body, the flesh of your sons and daughters.” The curse is not arbitrary; it is the consequence of abandoning the covenant God who gave the land and its abundance. The context also echoes Leviticus 26:29 and 2 Kings 6:29, where mothers ate their children during earlier sieges, history confirms what the threat predicted.
Textual Notes
The supplied sources note no significant textual variants for this verse. The Masoretic Text is consistent across manuscripts, and the Greek Septuagint translates the Hebrew closely. Some English versions (e.g., BSB, Darby) render “evil eye” idiomatically as “begrudge” or “shall be evil,” but this is translation choice, not a textual issue.
Reception History
This verse has been read with shock and sobriety across church history. The Jewish historian Josephus (Wars of the Jews) records its graphic fulfillment during the Roman siege, quoting the case of Mary of Bethezob. Early Christian writers (e.g., Eusebius) saw it as God’s righteous judgment on those who rejected Christ. In the Reformation, Geneva and Matthew Henry used it to preach the terror of the law and the need for repentance. More recent commentators (Clarke, Cambridge) connect it to the horrors of war and famine, warning of sin’s consequences. The verse is rarely preached in isolation due to its disturbing content, but it remains a stark reminder of the covenant’s brokenness and the grace of the gospel that bears the curse in Christ.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The most sheltered are not exempt from judgment. The woman’s refinement (never stepping on the ground) underscores that covenant faithfulness, not social status, determines blessing. No one is too tender for the consequences of sin.
- Sin dehumanizes by inverting natural love. The “evil eye” replaces love for husband and children with selfish hatred. What once nourished becomes a threat. The curse does not merely cause suffering; it ruins the very image of God in us.
- Christ reverses the curse from inside out. Where the old covenant law could only threaten, the new covenant in Christ offers a heart transformation (Jer 31:33). He takes the curse of the law upon Himself (Gal 3:13) and gives a new spirit, one that loves, gives, and sacrifices.
Five-point outline
- The context: This is one of the covenant curses in Deut 28, pronounced before entering the land, with siege as the ultimate disaster.
- The character: The tender woman symbolizes the most pampered, the least prepared for hardship.
- The crime: Her “evil eye” toward her own family, a complete breakdown of maternal care.
- The consequence: The siege reduces even the most refined to starvation and cannibalism (v53, 57).
- The cure: Faithfulness to God under the new covenant in Christ, who restores right relationships and gives food that never perishes.
Illustration hooks
- Family during hard times: A parent who hoards food in a crisis, ignoring children’s cries, this verse captures the extreme of that selfish instinct, showing how famine tests the soul.
- Wealth and fragility: Someone raised in luxury who has never known want; when a sudden loss (job, health) strikes, the shock can reveal a desperate attachment to comfort. The curse exposes what we truly trust.
- Historical anchor: The siege of Jerusalem in AD 70, documented by Josephus, where a mother named Mary ate her own child. This is not hyperbole but prophecy in history.
Questions your congregation is asking
- “Does God really send such horrible curses today? What about the suffering of innocent children?”
- “How could a loving God threaten to turn a mother against her own children?”
- “If this is part of the old covenant, does it still apply to believers under the new covenant?”
Leading a Discussion
Deuteronomy 28:56 is one of the most disturbing verses in Scripture. It stretches our understanding of God’s justice and the seriousness of covenant breaking. As you read it, notice the detail: the woman is described as tender and delicate, someone who would not even set her foot on the ground. The siege shatters not only her body but her soul. The passage raises hard questions about sin, suffering, and God’s character. Discuss with humility, remembering that these words were spoken to a specific people in a specific covenant context, and that the New Testament reveals the ultimate answer in Christ.
Discussion questions
- Observation: What words describe the woman’s social position and personality in verses 56? How does the text emphasize her delicacy?
- Observation: Read the cross-references in Lamentations 4:3 and 4:6. What do they add to your understanding of this curse?
- Interpretation: The phrase “her eye will be evil” is a Hebrew idiom. Based on the context, what does it mean? How does it contrast with the “good eye” of generosity described elsewhere (Deut 15:9)?
- Interpretation: The commentators point to historical fulfillments such as the Roman siege of Jerusalem. How does knowing that this happened in history affect your view of the passage?
- Application: This curse was for a covenant-breaking nation. In what ways can individuals or communities today experience the “dehumanizing” effects of sin even without a literal siege?
- Application: How does the gospel of Christ address the heart condition that leads to such selfishness and cruelty? Read Galatians 3:13 (“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law…”). How does that change the way you hear this verse?
- Application: What does this passage teach us about the seriousness of our covenant with God? How can it lead us to gratitude for grace?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Deuteronomy 28:54 | The man who is tender among you, and very delicate, his eye will be evil toward his brother, toward the wife whom he loves, and toward the remnant of his children whom he has remaining, |
| Isaiah 3:16 | Moreover Yahweh said, “Because the daughters of Zion are arrogant, and walk with outstretched necks and flirting eyes, walking daintily as they go, jingling ornaments on their feet; |
| Lamentations 4:3 | Even the jackals offer their breast. They nurse their young ones. But the daughter of my people has become cruel, like the ostriches in the wilderness. |
| Lamentations 4:6 | For the iniquity of the daughter of my people is greater than the sin of Sodom, which was overthrown as in a moment. No hands were laid on her. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
7 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke insists that the prophecy about delicate women was literally fulfilled when Jerusalem fell to the Romans, citing the specific case of a noblewoman named Mary who boiled and ate her own child in famine-driven desperation. He sees this as the historical reality behind Moses' warning.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
Cambridge Bible Schools stresses that this passage is not a conditional warning but an absolute prediction, already certain because Israel had failed to serve God. The horror reaches its peak in a mother who eats her own child during the siege, a distinction from merely grudging a share of that awful food.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note highlights the shocking reversal during the siege: a woman so delicate she never placed her foot on the ground turns her grief into bitterness against her own husband and children. Her former softness makes her later harshness all the more unnatural and severe.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill highlights the shocking contrast of a woman so delicately raised she would not set foot on the ground, yet driven by famine to begrudge and snatch food from her own husband and children. He uses Josephus to show that mothers even stole food from their infants' mouths, underscoring the famine's utter devastation of natural affection.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange sees the exhaustive listing of every blessing and curse as deliberate—it proves that nothing in life is accident or human achievement, but God directly rules every particular. For him religion here is not knowledge or worship but daily experience, one day teaching another. This moral framing strips earthly prosperity of its attraction and gives suffering its purpose toward repentance.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry points out that Israel's punishment was a precise reversal of their sin. Because they refused to serve God with joyful hearts while enjoying every good thing, they would be forced to serve merciless enemies in desperate lack. The curses were not random but reflected the exact failure of their gratitude.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley distinguishes between being evil and being unmerciful. Here he notes that this female figure actively desires or plots the destruction of others in order to satisfy her own needs. Her cruelty is not passive but deliberate, treating human beings as prey for her sustenance.