Leviticus 18:10 · Bible study
Leviticus 18:10 Commentary: Prohibiting Incest with Grandchildren
Hebrew · 6 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why does Leviticus 18:10 explicitly forbid sex with a granddaughter but not a daughter? Explore the law's logic, grammar, and implications for family honor.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Explicitly forbids sexual relations with a granddaughter; implicitly forbids them with a daughter, as she is even closer kin.
- Key words: “Uncover nakedness” (H6172 ‛er.vah), a euphemism for sexual intercourse; “nakedness… your own” (H6172 with possessive), emphasizes biological identity with the relative.
- Main debate: Why is the daughter omitted? Either a scribal oversight (Cambridge) or a deliberate inference (Jarchi, Gill, Keil). Both agree the daughter is prohibited.
- Theological theme: Family holiness and the sanctity of blood relationships. God sets boundaries to protect the family as the basic unit of covenant community.
- Best use: Teaching the logic of biblical sexual ethics, the role of inference in interpreting prohibition lists, and the abiding principle that sexual intimacy belongs within clear relational boundaries.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
You must not have sexual relations with your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, for that would shame your family.
WEB World English Bible 2000
“‘You shall not uncover the nakedness of your son’s daughter, or of your daughter’s daughter, even their nakedness; for theirs is your own nakedness.
KJV King James Version 1769
The nakedness of thy son’s daughter, or of thy daughter’s daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs is thine own nakedness.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
The nakedness of thy son’s daughter, or of thy daughter’s daughter, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs is thine own nakedness.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
`The nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's daughter: thou dost not uncover their nakedness; for theirs is thy nakedness.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
The nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's daughter — their nakedness shalt thou not uncover; for theirs is thy nakedness.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy son's daughter, or thy daughter's daughter: because it is thy own nakedness.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
La desnudez de la hija de tu hijo, ó de la hija de tu hija, su desnudez no descubrirás, porque es la desnudez tuya.
A nudez da filha de teu filho, ou da filha de tua filha, seu nudez não descobrirás, porque é a nudez tua.
Tu ne découvriras point la nudité de la fille de ton fils ou de la fille de ta fille. Car c’ est ta nudité.
Du sollst die Blöße der Tochter deines Sohnes oder deiner Tochter nicht aufdecken; denn es ist deine Blöße.
De schaamte der dochter uws zoons, of der dochter uwer dochter, haar schaamte zult gij niet ontdekken; want zij zijn uw schaamte.
Non scoprirai la nudità della figliuola del tuo figliuolo o della figliuola della tua figliuola, poiché è la tua propria nudità.
Sromoty córki syna twego, także sromoty córki córki twojej, nie odkryjesz; bo to sromota twoja.
Наготы дочери сына твоего или дочери дочери твоей, не открывай наготы их, ибо они твоя нагота.
不可 露 你孫 女 或是 外孫 女 的下體，露了她們 的下體 就是 露了自己的下體。
You may not have sex relations with your son's daughter or your daughter's daughter, for they are part of yourself;
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Leviticus 18:10
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 that this verse is a clear prohibition of sexual relations with a granddaughter, whether through a son or a daughter. The phrase “theirs is your own nakedness” (Hebrew ‛er.vat·kha hennah) means the granddaughter is direct flesh of the man’s flesh. Gill quotes Jarchi’s reasoning: if a granddaughter is forbidden, then a daughter is even more obviously prohibited, the closer relation is assumed by the law. Keil and Delitzsch note that the phrase equates the act to dishonoring one’s own flesh and blood. The grammar uses the negative particle lo’ with an imperfect verb (te.ga.Leh), a standard form for an absolute command: “you shall not uncover.” The euphemism “uncover nakedness” (H6172) consistently denotes sexual intercourse throughout this chapter. No commentator doubts the prohibition; the only question is why the daughter is not stated explicitly. Cambridge Bible suggests a possible scribal omission at the beginning of the verse, while most other sources see the daughter’s prohibition as implied by the general rule in verse 6 (“none of you shall approach any close relatives”) and by this very verse’s logic.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Low
What is clear: The verse explicitly prohibits sexual relations with a granddaughter; the prohibition of a daughter is inferred from the general rule in Leviticus 18:6 and from the logic that closer relatives are covered by the same or stronger reasoning.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Prohibition of a granddaughter | All traditions understand this verse as a divine command against sexual intercourse with a granddaughter, whether from a son or a daughter. | No debate, the explicit text is clear. |
| Reason for the prohibition | Commentators agree that the phrase “theirs is your own nakedness” grounds the prohibition in biological descent: the granddaughter is the grandfather’s own flesh. | Some emphasize the honor aspect (shaming the family), others stress the violation of a blood bond. Both coexist. |
| Inclusion of a daughter | All major commentators affirm that the daughter is also forbidden, even though not named. The general rule (v. 6) and the logic of “greater to lesser” make this certain. | Why is the daughter not named? Some see a possible scribal omission (Cambridge Bible); others argue it is simply assumed and not needing explicit statement (Gill, Jarchi). |
| Extension to other direct descendants | The prohibition logically extends to great-granddaughters and further direct lineage, though this is not explicit in the verse. | Some traditions (rabbinic) explicitly expand the list; others leave it as an open inference. |
Historical & Cultural Context
This prohibition appears in the holiness code of Leviticus, a section of laws given to Israel after the Exodus to set them apart from surrounding nations. Marriage and sexual relations within the extended family were common in the ancient Near East, Egyptians and Canaanites allowed many unions that Israel was commanded to avoid (see vv. 24, 30). The phrase “uncover nakedness” is a euphemism for sexual intercourse, used twenty-one times in chapters 18 and 20. The law addresses adult men directly (“you” singular), reflecting a patriarchal society where men held primary responsibility for maintaining family boundaries. The phrase “theirs is your own nakedness” (v. 10) emphasizes biological descent: a granddaughter shares the grandfather’s bloodline, making sexual union with her a violation of the man’s own flesh. Keil and Delitzsch point out that the prohibition covers both patrilineal and matrilineal granddaughters alike, daughters of son and daughter, showing that the bond is not merely legal but biological. This differs from some older cultures that permitted such marriages within the royal family to preserve dynastic lines. The underlying purpose, as the chapter heading in verse 6 states, is to define who is “near of kin”; the list in verses 7, 18 is not exhaustive but illustrative, building from the most immediate relationships outward. The daughter is omitted not because she was permitted, but because her case was considered too obvious to state.
Textual Notes
The supplied sources note no significant manuscript variants for Leviticus 18:10. However, Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges suggests that the prohibition of a daughter was “probably omitted accidentally by a copyist from the beginning of this verse.” This is a conjecture based on the structure of the chapter, not a variant attested in the Hebrew manuscripts. Most commentators (Gill, Keil, Matthew Henry) do not adopt this textual explanation; they treat the omission as intentional and interpret the verse as implying the daughter’s prohibition. The Masoretic Text is stable here.
Reception History
Jewish tradition, reflected in the Mishnah and Talmud, used Leviticus 18 as the foundation for an expanded list of prohibited relationships, including those not explicit in the text. Rabbinic interpretation consistently included the daughter under the general rule of verse 6 and the logic of verse 10. In Christian history, the early church saw these laws as part of the moral law that remains binding. Church fathers like Augustine and Aquinas cited Leviticus 18 in developing natural law arguments against incest. During the Reformation, commentators like John Calvin and Matthew Henry used this passage to teach that God’s law protects family integrity and that silence in Scripture does not mean permission. Today, the verse is still referenced in moral theology and ethics to illustrate the principle that the most obvious prohibitions may be left unstated because they are self-evident to a formed conscience.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- God sets clear boundaries for family intimacy. The law protects the family structure by forbidding sexual relations between grandparents and grandchildren. This is a moral boundary, not a cultural preference.
- What is unspoken is still commanded. The daughter is not listed, yet every interpreter agrees she is included. The general principle (v. 6) covers what is too obvious to enumerate.
- Family honor is grounded in our shared flesh. “Theirs is your own nakedness” roots sexual ethics in the reality that our bodies are interconnected. To violate a close relative is to violate yourself.
Five-point outline
- The law defines “near of kin.” Verse 10 clarifies that a granddaughter is near kin, whether from son or daughter.
- The grammar of prohibition. “You shall not” (lo’ + imperfect) is absolute, not advisory. It binds the conscience.
- Inference from the greater to the lesser. If a granddaughter is forbidden, a daughter is far more so.
- Biological descent as the basis for the rule. “Your own nakedness” means the act dishonors the man’s own bloodline.
- This law is part of a larger pattern. The entire chapter builds a framework for sexual holiness that distinguishes Israel from the nations.
Illustration hooks
- A family photo album. Looking at pictures of your children and grandchildren, you see your own face reflected. The verse says that face is sacred, not to be approached sexually.
- A set of nesting bowls. The largest bowl holds the others, the daughter is the closest bowl, the granddaughter one step out. The law covers both, but it starts with the obvious.
- A stop sign at a dead end. Some prohibitions seem unnecessary because they are so obvious. But the sign is there to protect, not to insult intelligence.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Does this law still apply today, or was it just for ancient Israel?
- Why doesn’t the Bible explicitly say “no sex with your daughter” if it’s so important?
- What does “theirs is your own nakedness” mean for how we think about family relationships?
Leading a Discussion
Opening framing: Leviticus 18:10 sits inside a list of sexual prohibitions that define the boundaries of family honor. This verse forbids sex with a granddaughter and, by implication, with a daughter. The text assumes we can connect the dots. As a small group, work through the questions below to understand what this verse says and how its principles shape our lives today.
Discussion questions
- Read Leviticus 18:6 and 18:10 together. What is the general rule in verse 6, and how does verse 10 apply it specifically?
- The verse names a granddaughter but not a daughter. Why do you think the writer did that? What clues in the text and its context support your answer?
- Look at the phrase “theirs is your own nakedness.” What does it mean that a grandchild carries the grandfather’s own flesh? How does that deepen the reason for the prohibition?
- Compare verse 10 with other cultures in the ancient world that permitted marriage between close relatives (for example, Egyptian royal marriages). Why did Israel need a different standard?
- How might this verse be misused or misunderstood today? Is it simply about blood relation, or does it have a broader application to family boundaries?
- Hebrews 13:4 says marriage should be honored by all. How does this chapter contribute to honoring marriage and protecting vulnerable family members?
- In what ways can this ancient law inform how we teach children and grandchildren about respect and boundaries within the family?
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.
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
5 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The Cambridge Bible Schools notes that the law's failure to include a daughter in its prohibition is probably due to a scribe accidentally omitting those words from the beginning of the verse.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note emphasizes that the command against uncovering a grandchild's nakedness applies equally to grandchildren from either a son or a daughter. The reason given is that such an act is considered the grandparent's own shame, reflecting the intimate familial bond.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill points out that the prohibition against marrying a granddaughter logically includes one's own daughter, since the relation is even closer. Citing the Jewish commentator Jarchi for this reasoning, he adds that such relatives are one's own flesh and blood, as the Targum describes.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil and Delitzsch see the key phrase as the text's own explanation: a granddaughter is the grandfather's "nakedness" because she is directly descended from him. Marrying her would dishonor his own flesh and blood, making the incest equivalent to self-degradation.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry emphasizes that these prohibitions rest on God's own authority and the natural bonds of family. He stresses that approaching near kin violates the honor due to parents and corrupts the sacred order of relationships, making such acts not merely unclean but wicked.