Exodus 22:18 · Bible study
Exodus 22:18 Commentary: Sorcery, Covenant Loyalty & God's Holiness
Hebrew · 9 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why did God command the death penalty for sorcery? What this reveals about covenant loyalty, and how Christians interpret it today.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Sorcery is a capital offense because it is rebellion against God's exclusive lordship.
- Key words: 'sorceress' (Hebrew mekashephah) denotes one who practices magical arts, often consulting spirits.
- Main debate: Whether witches actually had supernatural power or merely pretended (Adam Clarke argues reality; Gill suggests fraud with possible demonic assistance).
- Theological theme: God's holiness demands that His people renounce all spiritual counterfeits and trust Him alone.
- Best use: To illustrate the gravity of covenant unfaithfulness and the need for exclusive devotion to God, without applying the death penalty today.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
You must not allow a sorceress to live.
WEB World English Bible 2000
“You shall not allow a sorceress to live.
KJV King James Version 1769
Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
Thou shalt not suffer a sorceress to live.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
`A witch thou dost not keep alive.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
— Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
Wizards thou shalt not suffer to live.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
A la hechicera no dejarás que viva.
À feiticeira não deixarás que viva.
Tu ne laisseras point vivre la magicienne.
[22:17] Die Zauberinnen sollst du nicht leben lassen.
De toveres zult gij niet laten leven.
Non lascerai vivere la strega.
Czarownicy żyć nie dopuścisz.
Ворожеи не оставляй в живых.
「行邪術的女人，不可 容她存活。
Any woman using unnatural powers or secret arts is to be put to death.
Verse in Context
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree this verse demanded capital punishment for sorcery because it was rebellion against Yahweh. Adam Clarke notes the law's existence proves the practice was real in Israel. Barnes describes witchcraft as an appeal to a power not acting under divine law, an act of rebellion. Calvin argues such illusions carry a wicked renunciation of God. Keil & Delitzsch add that sorcery was both a way to harm a neighbor and a practical denial of Israel's holy calling. The Cambridge Bible points out the law belongs to the older dispensation and must be read in the context of progressive revelation. Together, the commentators see the command as protecting Israel's exclusive covenant loyalty to God by removing any competing spiritual authority.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Traditional supernaturalist: The existence of a law against witchcraft proves real occult power (Adam Clarke, Calvin). The woman of Endor (1 Samuel 28) suggests actual contact with spirits.
- Skeptical/fraud view: Gill and others note that many practices were 'juggling tricks' and pretensions. The Bible condemns the intent and the deception.
- Theocratic civil law view: The command is part of Israel's unique covenant with God, not a universal moral law. It points to the seriousness of apostasy within a holy nation.
What is clear: God views sorcery as a serious breach of covenant loyalty, incompatible with trust in Him, and He commanded ancient Israel to purge it from their community.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Nature of witchcraft | Witchcraft involved consulting spirits or using charms to gain hidden knowledge or power, and was condemned by God. | Some commentators (Adam Clarke, Calvin) assert actual demonic empowerment; others (Gill, Cambridge Bible) allow that much of it was fraud or jugglery, though possibly with evil spirits exploiting the pretense. |
| Application to modern law | The command was part of Israel's theocratic civil code, not a universal mandate for all societies. | How to apply it today: some traditions see it as abrogated in Christ; others warn against occult participation but reject capital punishment. |
| Gender specificity | Both men and women could be guilty of sorcery (Deuteronomy 18). | Why only the feminine form here? Calvin and Keil suggest women were more prone to this sin; others treat the feminine as a generic representative of the class. |
| Relevance for Christians | The New Testament forbids occult practices (Galatians 5:20; Acts 19). | How strictly to interpret: some argue the prohibition remains the same in substance, while others emphasize freedom in Christ from fear of curses. |
Historical & Cultural Context
This verse sits within a section of Exodus (22:18, 31) that shifts from civil case laws to commands rooted in Israel's identity as a holy nation. Keil & Delitzsch note the transition from natural right to demands based on election. Sorcery and divination were common among the Canaanite nations Israel would enter, and the law draws a sharp line. The Cambridge Bible describes magic practiced extensively throughout the ancient Near East, especially in Assyria and Egypt, for healing, harming, or manipulating spirits. Ellicott's Commentary observes that the Canaanites routinely committed such acts, so God declared His abhorrence.
The phrase “sorceress” uses a feminine form (mekashephah). Calvin and others suggest women were singled out because they were more prone to superstition, but the same prohibition applied to men (Deuteronomy 18:10, 11). This law was not a license for personal vengeance; execution followed a judicial trial (Gill, citing Jarchi). Tragically, this command has been historically misused to justify witch hunts. In its original setting, it functioned as a civil statute for a theocratic nation, not a mandate for individuals to act outside due process.
Textual Notes
The supplied sources note no significant textual variants for Exodus 22:18. The Hebrew text is stable across manuscripts, and the translations consulted (WEB, KJV, ASV, BSB, YLT, Darby, Douay) agree on the substance: a capital sentence against the female practitioner of sorcery.
Reception History
In the early church, this verse was read as a divine prohibition against demonic practices; Christians were urged to flee all magic. During the medieval period, the verse was twisted to justify widespread witch hunts, often targeting innocent people. The Cambridge Bible notes that witches were executed in England as late as 1716. Reformation commentators like Calvin and Matthew Henry upheld the law's validity for their era but emphasized judicial process. Modern Christian reading sees the command as specific to Israel's theocracy, while the New Testament calls believers to put away occult involvement out of love for Christ, not fear of execution. The verse continues to challenge readers to reflect on exclusive loyalty to God.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- Spiritual infidelity is serious. Sorcery turned to powers other than God, breaking the first commandment. The death penalty underscores that covenant loyalty cannot tolerate rivals.
- The community must guard its witness. Israel was called to be holy (Exodus 22:31). Permitting witchcraft would corrupt the nation's testimony to the world.
- God desires exclusive devotion. The penalty was severe because love for God is jealous (Exodus 20:5). The same God invites us to wholehearted trust.
Five-point outline
- Context: The law appears after civil statutes and before commands for social justice, showing that loyalty to God underpins just community.
- Definition: Sorcery (mekashephah) included divination, charms, and consulting spirits, practices that denied God's sovereignty.
- Reason: Such acts were rebellion against Yahweh, a capital crime in Israel's theocracy. Calvin calls them a renunciation of God.
- Covenant dimension: The command protected the community from influences that would erode faith and lead to idolatry.
- Christ connection: Jesus defeats spiritual powers (Colossians 2:15). The New Testament calls believers to reject occult practices and find all power in Christ.
Illustration hooks
- Trusting a horoscope instead of praying: the quiet pull of wanting answers apart from God.
- Watching entertainment that glamorises the occult: how small fascinations can dull our sensitivity to God's holiness.
- The embarrassment of a superstition like knocking on wood: why humans so easily look for hidden influences.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Does this mean we should execute people who practice witchcraft today?
- What counts as sorcery in modern life? Are tarot cards, Ouija boards, or fortune-tellers included?
- If God is all-powerful, why did He feel threatened by witches?
Leading a Discussion
This verse is one of the hardest in the Old Testament for modern readers. It commands execution for sorcery, a practice that can feel distant or harmless. But the law reveals something crucial about covenant loyalty and the holiness God required from His people. As we discuss, remember that this command was given to a specific nation under a specific covenant, and it points to the seriousness of trusting anything above God.
Discussion questions
- What do you think the word 'sorceress' meant in ancient Israel? How does the context of Exodus 22 help define it?
- Why do you think the death penalty was attached to this practice? What does that suggest about how God viewed sorcery?
- The commentators point out that the same law applied to men (Deuteronomy 18:10, 11). Why might the feminine form be used here?
- How does this command connect with the first two commandments (Exodus 20:3, 4)?
- In what ways might people today turn to spiritual resources other than God? How is that similar to ancient sorcery?
- The Cambridge Bible says this law 'does not breathe the spirit of Christ.' How does the New Testament change our approach to spiritual powers and to people who practice them?
- How can we take the seriousness of this command seriously without misusing it as past generations did?
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Leviticus 19:26 | “‘You shall not eat any meat with the blood still in it. You shall not use enchantments, nor practice sorcery. |
| Leviticus 19:31 | “‘Don’t turn to those who are mediums, nor to the wizards. Don’t seek them out, to be defiled by them. I am Yahweh your God. |
| Leviticus 20:6 | “‘The person that turns to those who are mediums and wizards, to play the prostitute after them, I will even set my face against that person, and will cut him off from among his people. |
| Leviticus 20:27 | “‘A man or a woman that is a medium or is a wizard shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones. Their blood shall be upon themselves.’” |
| Deuteronomy 18:10 | There shall not be found with you anyone who makes his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who tells fortunes, or an enchanter, or a sorcerer, |
| Deuteronomy 18:11 | or a charmer, or someone who consults with a familiar spirit, or a wizard, or a necromancer. |
| I Samuel 28:3 | Now Samuel was dead, and all Israel had mourned for him and buried him in Ramah, even in his own city. Saul had sent away those who had familiar spirits and the wizards out of the land. |
| I Samuel 28:9 | The woman said to him, “Behold, you know what Saul has done, how he has cut off those who have familiar spirits and the wizards out of the land. Why then do you lay a snare for my life, to cause me to die?” |
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
9 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke argues that the existence of the law itself proves that witches were real, since God would not legislate against a fiction. He explains that the Hebrew term mecashshephah likely refers to someone who professes to reveal hidden mysteries through commerce with God or the invisible world, not necessarily through demonic powers.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes frames witchcraft not as superstition but as an appeal to a power that operates outside God's authority, making it an act of rebellion against Yahweh. For him the law's capital penalty targets the principle of allegiance itself: turning to any power that does not submit to the divine order.
Calvin's Commentaries Reformed 1564
Calvin argues that the command against witches covers every form of occult practice, not just a particular kind. He sees sorcery, necromancy, and consulting spirits as a wicked renunciation of God, which explains the death penalty. The law names women because their sex is more prone to superstition, but the same punishment applies to men.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator stresses that the Old Testament law against sorcery must be understood in its ancient context where magic was pervasive. He argues this law belonged to the older dispensation and does not bind Christians, since revelation was progressive and the spirit of Christ supersedes it. He notes the law has been tragically misapplied in witch hunts.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill stresses that the command against witches does not authorize private individuals to take action. Instead, the accused must be tried before a proper court and, if found guilty, executed by the civil magistrate. Although the law uses the feminine word "witch," it equally applies to men who practice sorcery.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil-Delitzsch sees a shift in these laws, which now demand holiness beyond natural right because Israel belongs to Jehovah. For witchcraft, they note the unusual phrase "shalt not suffer to live" rather than "shall surely die," arguing this allows discretion: only persistent witches who refuse to stop practicing actual witchcraft are to be executed, distinguishing it from mere jugglery.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange sees these laws not as a criminal code but as a system training Israel for freedom. He highlights that the ordinances begin with emancipation, and all provisions indirectly secure personal liberty. Each section, he argues, connects to one of the Ten Commandments, grounding civil law in theocratic principles.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Matthew Henry stresses that even in a case where God's law itself appointed marriage as the penalty for seduction, the father's consent was still required, showing how sacred parental authority remains. He also notes that the law makes witchcraft a capital offense, indicating its seriousness.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley is disturbed that people in his own day think themselves wiser than their ancestors by denying that witches ever existed. He insists the sin and danger of witchcraft were real and recognized by both Scripture and English law, which punished it severely. Dismissing it as superstition is not progress but unbelief.