Leviticus 20:18 · Bible study
Leviticus 20:18 Commentary: Why Intentional Sin Carries a Harder Penalty
Hebrew · 7 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Why does Leviticus 20:18 prescribe death for intercourse during menstruation when Leviticus 15:24 only requires seven days of uncleanness?
Research Summary
- Meaning: Deliberate intercourse with a menstruating woman is a capital offense, in contrast to accidental contact which only causes temporary uncleanness. Both parties bear equal guilt.
- Key words: “Cut off” (H3772 karat), removal from community, possibly by death; “fountain” (H4726 maqor), the source of blood/the life-flow of a woman.
- Main debate: Whether “cut off” means death by stoning, childlessness, or divine judgment; and how this law relates to the accidental uncleanness in Leviticus 15:24.
- Theological theme: Holiness requires knowledge and willing obedience. Intentional sin against clear commands threatens the community’s identity as God’s people.
- Best use: Understanding the seriousness of deliberate sin, and appreciating the grace provided for unintentional failures, especially in light of Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
If a man lies with a menstruating woman and has sexual relations with her, he has exposed the source of her flow, and she has uncovered the source of her blood. Both of them must be cut off from among their people.
WEB World English Bible 2000
“‘If a man lies with a woman having her monthly period, and uncovers her nakedness, he has made her fountain naked, and she has uncovered the fountain of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
KJV King James Version 1769
And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness; he hath discovered her fountain, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness; he hath made naked her fountain, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
`And a man who lieth with a sick woman, and hath uncovered her nakedness, her fountain he hath made bare, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood, --even both of them have been cut off from the midst of their people.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
And if a man shall lie with a woman in her infirmity, and uncover her nakedness, her flux doth he lay bare, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood; and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
If any man lie with a woman in her flowers, and uncover her nakedness, and she open the fountain of her blood: both shall be destroyed out of the midst of their people.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Y cualquiera que durmiere con mujer menstruosa, y descubriere su desnudez, su fuente descubrió, y ella descubrió la fuente de su sangre: ambos serán cortados de entre su pueblo.
Qualquer um que dormir com mulher menstruada, e descobrir sua nudez, sua fonte descobriu, e ela descobriu a fonte de seu sangue: ambos serão eliminados dentre seu povo.
Si un homme couche avec une femme qui a son indisposition, et découvre sa nudité, s’ il découvre son flux, et qu’ elle découvre le flux de son sang, ils seront tous deux retranchés du milieu de leur peuple.
Wenn ein Mann beim Weibe schläft zur Zeit ihrer Krankheit und entblößt ihre Scham und deckt ihren Brunnen auf, und entblößt den Brunnen ihres Bluts, die sollen beide aus ihrem Volk ausgerottet werden.
En als een man bij een vrouw, die haar krankheid heeft, zal gelegen en haar schaamte ontdekt, haar fontein ontbloot, en zij zelve de fontein haars bloeds ontdekt zal hebben, zo zullen zij beiden uit het midden huns volks uitgeroeid worden.
Se uno si giace con una donna che ha i suoi corsi, e scopre la nudità di lei, quel tale ha scoperto il flusso di quella donna, ed ella ha scoperto il flusso del proprio sangue; perciò ambedue saranno sterminati di fra il loro popolo.
Kto by spał z niewiastą czasu przyrodzonej choroby jej, i odkryłby sromotę jej, i obnażyłby płynienie jej, i ona by też odkrywała płynienie krwi swojej, wytraceni będą oboje z pośrodku ludu swego.
Если кто ляжет с женою во время болезни кровоочищения и откроет наготу ее, то он обнажил истечения ее, и она открыла течение кровей своих: оба они да будут истреблены из народа своего.
婦人 有月經， 若 與她 同房，露了 她的下體，就是露了 婦人的血源，婦人 也露了 自己的血 源，二人 必從民 中 剪除。
And if a man has sex relations with a woman at the time when she is unwell, he has seen her fountain and she has let the fountain of her blood be uncovered, and the two of them are to be cut off from among their people.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Leviticus 20:18
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators agree that Leviticus 20:18 prescribes the severest penalty, being "cut off" from Israel, for a specific act that Leviticus 15:24 treats with relative leniency. The difference turns on intention and knowledge. Gill draws the line clearly: the seven-day uncleanness in Leviticus 15:24 applies when a man lies with his wife ignorantly and her condition is discovered afterward; Leviticus 20:18 addresses deliberate, knowing transgression. Calvin sees the severity as evidence of the crime's nature, a matter not merely of hygiene but of modesty and self-control. Both man and woman are liable because, as Gill notes, the phrase "she has uncovered the fountain of her blood" implies her willing consent. Keil and Delitzsch group this offense with adultery, incest, and homosexuality in a list of capital crimes. The punishment, whether by the magistrate or by divine action, underscores God's demand for holiness among a people called to be separate.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Intentional vs. Accidental (Gill, Calvin): Leviticus 15:24 shows a light penalty for accidental contact; Leviticus 20:18 adds the death penalty for deliberate sin. The difference is the presence of knowledge.
- Ceremonial vs. Moral Law: Some see this as a ceremonial purity regulation that passed away with the temple; others see a universal moral principle about respecting the boundary of life and blood.
- Penalty: Death vs. Exclusion: The Hebrew <em>karat</em> can mean execution, excommunication, or divine punishment. The context of Lev 20 includes stoning for other offenses, but this verse does not specify method.
What is clear: The text condemns deliberate sexual intercourse during menstruation as a serious offense that separates the offender from the covenant community, and it distinguishes this from accidental contact.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Intention vs. Accidental | Leviticus 15:24 covers accidental contact during menstruation with a lesser consequence (uncleanness for seven days); Leviticus 20:18 covers deliberate, knowing transgression. | Some traditions (e.g., Jewish interpretation) see the distinction as inherent to the legal system. Some Christian interpreters argue that the ceremonial law as a whole is no longer binding, while others maintain that the moral principle, honor the body and obey God's commands, endures. |
| Nature of the Penalty | "Cut off from among their people" is the most severe penalty available in the covenant community. | Whether this meant execution by stoning (as with other capital sexual sins in Lev 20), excommunication, or divine punishment (premature death or childlessness) is debated. The Hebrew term <em>karat</em> can refer to all these. |
| Scope of Application | The law applies to sexual intercourse with a menstruating woman, but both consenting parties are held equally guilty. | Some commentators limit this to married couples; others extend it to any sexual relationship. Gill notes that if the woman were forced, only the man would be cut off. |
| Relevance for Christians | Christians affirm that Christ fulfilled the ceremonial law, and the ritual purity system no longer governs believers. | Catholic and Orthodox traditions see a continued moral norm that sexual relations should respect the natural rhythms of the body (Humanae Vitae). Protestant and Evangelical traditions vary: some view this as purely ceremonial, while others draw principles about honoring the body and God’s design for sexuality. |
Historical & Cultural Context
Ancient Israel's world was framed by a deep respect for blood as the seat of life (Leviticus 17:11). A woman's menstrual bleeding was not shameful in itself, it was a natural, bodily process, but it rendered her "unclean" in a ritual sense because it involved the loss of life-force. During this time, she was set apart from normal contact, including sexual relations.
This law appears in a context where Canaanite religious practices involved fertility rites and sexual license that God explicitly condemns (Leviticus 18:24, 30; 20:22, 24). The surrounding nations, in their worship, often blurred the boundaries between the sacred and the profane, treating all expressions of sexuality as acceptable. Israel's sexual ethics were meant to mark them as distinct, holy because God is holy.
The penalty of "cutting off" (Hebrew karat) is ambiguous in its execution. It could mean death by stoning at the hands of the community (as with other capital sexual offenses in this chapter), or it could refer to being supernaturally cut off from the covenant people, dying childless or being struck down by God (cf. Genesis 17:14; Exodus 30:33). The verb appears throughout the chapter for incest, adultery, and other intentional violations. By attaching this penalty to intercourse during menstruation, the text affirms that deliberate defiance of a clear command carries the same weight as other major sexual sins. The land itself, God warns, would "vomit" out a people that tolerated such things (v. 22).
The distinction between Leviticus 15:24 and 20:18 was likely recognized by the original audience: a person who accidentally touched something unclean incurred temporary impurity that could be cleansed; a person who knowingly broke a divine prohibition with full understanding incurred guilt that demanded removal from the community.
Textual Notes
Reception History
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- Intention matters to God. Accidental contact with impurity is handled with grace (Leviticus 15:24). Deliberate transgression receives severe judgment. This teaches that God weighs the heart's knowledge and intent.
- Blood as life demands honor. Menstrual blood is called "the fountain of her blood", a phrase echoing the source of life. Sex during menstruation is not merely a hygienic concern but a theological one: it treats the seat of life with disregard.
- Holiness requires boundaries in marriage. The prohibition is not a rejection of intimacy but a call to honor the rhythms God built into the body. Even within marriage, not everything is permitted at all times.
Five-point outline
- Context: Leviticus 20 lists penalties for sexual sins. This verse sits between incest and bestiality, it belongs to the same moral gravity.
- Distinction from 15:24: The accidental vs. intentional.
- Meaning of "cut off": Separation from the community, possibly death, certainly exclusion from God's people.
- Shared responsibility: "Both of them" are cut off. Both are morally accountable.
- New covenant application: The ceremonial aspects have passed, but the principles of honoring life, respecting the body, and obeying God's design remain.
Illustration hooks
- A posted speed limit: driving five over might get a warning (Lev 15), but driving forty over knowingly brings a much higher penalty (Lev 20). Intent changes the consequence.
- Treating a signal as a suggestion vs. a command: some instructions are given to protect, not restrict. When we treat them as optional, we ignore the wisdom of the one who gave them.
- A young couple who choose to honor a season of abstinence despite cultural pressure, finding that boundaries deepen intimacy rather than harming it.
Questions your congregation is asking
- Does this apply to Christians today? How do we know which Old Testament laws are still binding?
- What does this say about God's view of women's bodies? Is there something shameful about menstruation?
- Why would a loving God command the death penalty for a sexual act within marriage?
Leading a Discussion
This passage challenges modern readers. It helps to place it in the larger story of a holy God forming a holy people. Begin by reading both Leviticus 15:24 and Leviticus 20:18 aloud. Notice the difference in penalty. Why would the same action be treated so differently? The answer lies in the presence or absence of knowledge and intent.
Discussion questions
- Observation: What does the text say will happen to both the man and the woman in 20:18? How does that differ from Leviticus 15:24?
- Interpretation: Why do you think God distinguishes between accidental contact and intentional sin? What does that tell you about God's character?
- Interpretation: The phrase "fountain of her blood" is used poetically. What does this imagery suggest about how God views blood and life?
- Application: How should Christians today read a command like this? Does it inform how we view sexuality, the body, or conscience?
- Application: This law was given to a community living near nations that had no such restrictions. How does the call to be "holy" and "separate" apply to our own context?
- Heart check: Are there areas in your own life where you knowingly continue in something you believe is wrong? How does the distinction between accidental and intentional sin affect your response?
- Grace note: How does the purity system's provision for accidental sin (Lev 15) foreshadow the fuller grace we find in Christ?
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)
| Leviticus 15:24 | “‘If any man lies with her, and her monthly flow is on him, he shall be unclean seven days; and every bed he lies on shall be unclean. |
| Leviticus 18:19 | “‘You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is impure by her uncleanness. |
| Ezekiel 18:6 | and has not eaten on the mountains, hasn’t lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, hasn’t defiled his neighbor’s wife, hasn’t come near a woman in her impurity, |
| Ezekiel 22:10 | In you have they uncovered their fathers’ nakedness. In you have they humbled her who was unclean in her impurity. |
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
6 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Calvin's Commentaries Reformed 1564
Calvin focuses on the brutal lust behind the act, arguing the severe punishment targets not just the offense but the shameless impulse that overrides the natural modesty even animals observe. God gives this law to train believers in decency and proper restraint within marriage, not merely to prevent physical harm.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
Cambridge Bible Schools notes that while the instructions here largely repeat those found in Leviticus 18, they go a step further by adding explicit penalties for each transgression. This addition underscores the seriousness of these commands by linking them directly to consequences.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva note stresses mutual guilt: both the man and the woman bear full responsibility when intercourse occurs during her menstrual period. Neither is excused, and both face the same drastic penalty of being cut off from the community.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill clarifies that this penalty applies only when both parties knowingly engage in the act. If the woman was forced, only the man would be cut off. But when both are aware and consenting, both are equally liable to being cut off from their people.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil and Delitzsch clarify that the burning commanded for certain capital offenses in the law means burning the corpse after execution, not death by fire. The punishment was stoning, followed by cremation of the body, which heightened the dishonor of the crime.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange argues that this chapter is not merely an appendix but introduces a new perspective: the land itself must be kept holy. The abominations make the land "sickened" and provoke it to reject the people, just as it rejected the Canaanites. The death penalties are necessary to keep the land clean from defilement.