Leviticus Chapter 20
Penalties for Laws Already Given
The Lord’s commands in this chapter focus not on restating moral prohibitions but on prescribing the consequences for violating them. Whereas Leviticus 18 warns the individual not to commit such sins, Leviticus 20 charges the community with enforcing God’s justice upon those who do. As Mark F. Rooker observes, “Whereas Leviticus 18 addresses the would-be offender of a God-given decree, Leviticus 20 addresses the Israelite community, which was responsible for seeing that violations of Law receive their just reward.” The community was not to tolerate wickedness within its midst, for the nation was to remain holy as the people of God.
A. The Penalty for Sins of Idolatry
1. (Leviticus 20:1–5) Molech Worship
Text (NKJV):
“Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Again, you shall say to the children of Israel: Whoever of the children of Israel, or of the strangers who dwell in Israel, who gives any of his descendants to Molech, he shall surely be put to death. The people of the land shall stone him with stones. I will set My face against that man, and will cut him off from his people, because he has given some of his descendants to Molech, to defile My sanctuary and profane My holy name. And if the people of the land should in any way hide their eyes from the man, when he gives some of his descendants to Molech, and they do not kill him, then I will set My face against that man and against his family; and I will cut him off from his people, and all who prostitute themselves with him to commit harlotry with Molech.’”
The worship of Molech was one of the most horrific forms of idolatry known to the ancient world. The Canaanites honored this false god by heating a large bronze statue until it was red hot and then placing living infants into its outstretched hands. The pounding of drums drowned out the screams of the dying children as their lives were consumed by fire. This abomination was not only a crime against humanity but a direct defilement of the holiness of God’s sanctuary and a profanation of His name.
Some have argued that the phrase “to pass through the fire” might indicate a symbolic act rather than literal human sacrifice. Yet historical and biblical evidence points strongly to the reality of child sacrifice. The practice was an abomination to the Lord, and thus the punishment was to be death. The Lord’s command, “he shall surely be put to death,” is rendered in Hebrew as an emphatic phrase meaning “dying he shall die,” underscoring the certainty of judgment.
God decreed that the offender be stoned by “the people of the land.” This communal execution revealed that the sin of Molech worship was not merely a private offense but a national corruption. To allow such wickedness to persist would endanger the spiritual integrity of Israel as a covenant people. Furthermore, the Lord warned against those who “hide their eyes” from such evil. To ignore blatant sin is itself a grievous sin. God demanded that His people confront evil, not conceal it.
Finally, the Lord declared, “I will set My face against that man and against his family.” If Israel refused to execute justice, then God Himself would bring it about. His wrath would extend to the offender’s family and to all who joined in idolatry. This principle demonstrates the seriousness with which God views sin that defiles His holiness and corrupts the community of His people.
2. (Leviticus 20:6–8) The Penalty for Involvement with the Occult
Text (NKJV):
“‘And the person who turns to mediums and familiar spirits, to prostitute himself with them, I will set My face against that person and cut him off from his people. Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am the LORD your God. And you shall keep My statutes, and perform them: I am the LORD who sanctifies you.’”
The Lord here condemned all forms of occult involvement—mediums, spiritists, and necromancers who claim to communicate with the dead or unseen spirits. Those who “turn to mediums and familiar spirits” are said to “prostitute” themselves, because seeking guidance from such sources is spiritual adultery against God. It is a rejection of divine revelation in favor of demonic deception. God Himself promised, “I will set My face against that person and cut him off,” demonstrating that such practices bring separation from Him and spiritual death.
This principle carried into the New Testament era, where believers likewise rejected occultism in obedience to God. In Acts 19:17–20, the new converts in Ephesus publicly burned their books of magic and sorcery as evidence of repentance and allegiance to Christ. The apostle John also warned in 1 John 4:2 that “every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God,” showing that there are indeed spirits who are not from God and must be wholly rejected.
Adam Clarke described a “familiar spirit” as “a spirit or demon, which, by magical rites, is supposed to be bound to appear at the call of his employer.” Such practices seek forbidden power and knowledge apart from the will of God, placing the practitioner in direct opposition to Him.
The Lord then calls His people to holiness: “Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am the LORD your God.” Holiness involves separation from the unclean and devotion to God alone. He reminds them, “I am the LORD who sanctifies you,” emphasizing that sanctification is both a divine act and a human responsibility. God does the sanctifying work, but His people must yield to His Spirit and obey His Word. It is a partnership of grace and faithfulness, where God sets apart the believer, and the believer cooperates in obedience.
Summary:
Leviticus 20 begins by reinforcing the necessity of holiness in the community of God’s people. Molech worship and occult practices represented open rebellion against God’s authority and holiness. The command to execute judgment revealed that the covenant community bore responsibility for preserving purity within its borders. To tolerate or ignore such sin would invite divine wrath, but to obey God’s statutes brought the blessing of His sanctifying presence.
B. The Penalties for Sins of Immorality
God’s law not only outlined what was holy and acceptable before Him but also prescribed the consequences for violating His moral order. In this section, the Lord deals with sins that destroy the family and corrupt the moral fabric of society. Whereas idolatry and occultism were offenses against God’s holiness, immorality was an assault against the sanctity of human relationships and the covenant structure of Israelite life. These laws emphasize that holiness must be preserved in both worship and conduct.
1. (Leviticus 20:9) The Penalty for the Cursing of a Parent
Text (NKJV):
“‘For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him.’”
The seriousness of this command reflects God’s high regard for family order and parental authority. “Everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death” was not directed at childish disrespect or youthful rebellion but at an adult child whose heart was set in defiance against his parents. Such hostility was viewed as an attack on the foundation of family life, which in turn was the foundation of the covenant community.
In ancient Israel, the family represented the smallest unit of God’s covenant people, and rebellion against parental authority was rebellion against God’s appointed order. Other ancient Near Eastern cultures often punished economic crimes more harshly than domestic or religious offenses, but Israel reversed this pattern. As Mark Rooker observes, “Unlike other ancient Near Eastern civilizations, in Israel crimes of a religious nature or against family life received the strongest punishment.” This reveals God’s design that the home is sacred, and parents must be honored as representatives of divine authority.
This commandment was later cited by Jesus Christ in Matthew 15:4 and Mark 7:10 when He condemned the Pharisees for nullifying God’s Word through their traditions. The religious leaders devised legal loopholes, such as declaring possessions “Corban” (devoted to God), which allowed them to withhold support from their parents. Christ exposed their hypocrisy by pointing back to this command, showing that dishonoring one’s parents, even under the guise of piety, violates God’s law.
The act of “cursing” one’s parents involved more than harsh words. It referred to invoking harm or calling down a curse upon them, often accompanied by occult or ritual elements. Gleason Archer notes that in the superstitious mindset of the ancient Near East, curses were believed to carry inherent power and could devastate families and reputations. As Harrison observed, “Elaborate curses, many of which appear to have the nature of magical spells, were current in the ancient Near East, and amongst superstitious people often worked with devastating effect since in the eastern mind the curse carried with itself its own power of execution.”
The phrase “shall surely be put to death” is emphatic, yet it was not a law allowing parental vengeance. Deuteronomy 21:18–21 clarifies that a rebellious child was to be brought before the elders of the city for judgment. Parents did not possess unilateral power over life and death but had to present the case publicly, where witnesses and judges could determine guilt. This ensured fairness and prevented abuse of authority. The requirement of community judgment upheld justice while maintaining family integrity.
The statement “his blood shall be upon him” indicates personal accountability. As Peter-Contesse explains, “This expression indicates that the person who committed the act is alone responsible for his own death. The blame cannot be shared with anyone else.” In this, the principle of moral responsibility is established — every person bears the consequence of his or her own sin before God.
2. (Leviticus 20:10) The Penalty for Adultery
Text (NKJV):
“‘The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death.’”
Adultery, like idolatry, was viewed as a covenant violation — not only against one’s spouse but also against God, who ordained marriage as a holy union. The law stated plainly that “the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.” This punishment, though severe, emphasized the destructive power of adultery. It shattered families, undermined trust, and corroded the spiritual integrity of Israelite society. Because marriage symbolized the covenant between God and His people, its violation represented a grave offense against divine holiness.
Practically, however, this law was seldom enforced through execution. Deuteronomy 17:6–7 required the testimony of two or three witnesses for a capital crime, and the witnesses themselves had to be willing to begin the execution by casting the first stone. In cases of adultery, it was exceedingly rare for there to be eyewitnesses who could meet this burden of proof or who were willing to initiate the execution. Thus, while the penalty expressed the moral gravity of the act, its application was constrained by procedural safeguards.
This helps explain Jesus’ response in John 8:1–12, when the Pharisees brought before Him a woman accused of adultery. They claimed to have caught her in the act, yet they did not bring the guilty man. Jesus confronted their hypocrisy, saying, “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” By doing this, He upheld both the law’s holiness and its justice, exposing that none present were righteous enough to execute judgment. The absence of witnesses ready to fulfill the law’s requirements rendered their accusation void.
Even though the literal enforcement of the death penalty for adultery was rare, the law served an important purpose. It declared in unmistakable terms that adultery is evil in God’s sight and intolerable among His people. The presence of such a penalty elevated the sanctity of marriage and impressed upon Israel the seriousness of sexual sin. It was God’s way of setting a moral standard for His people to pursue, not merely to regulate.
As Mark Rooker notes, “As moral laws the sexual offenses are still applicable during the age of the church, though like the crime of cursing of parents the capital punishments for these offenses were limited to the time when God’s people constituted a redeemed theocratic nation.” In the church age, believers are still called to uphold God’s moral standards, yet the punishments of ancient Israel’s civil law no longer apply. Adultery remains sin, but its consequence under grace is spiritual discipline, repentance, and restoration through Christ.
The repetition of “shall surely be put to death” emphasizes that God regards sexual sin with utmost seriousness. These laws were intended to protect the sanctity of family, preserve covenant faithfulness, and prevent moral decay in Israel. The presence of the law and its penalties declared to the entire community that God’s people must live differently — in purity, faithfulness, and reverence for His holiness.
Summary:
Leviticus 20:9–10 demonstrates that immorality and rebellion against authority are not minor infractions but sins that strike at the heart of God’s design for His people. The cursing of parents represents the rejection of divine authority within the family, while adultery corrupts the sacred covenant of marriage. Though capital punishment was rarely carried out, these laws established enduring moral truths: that family order and sexual purity are vital to a holy people, and that sin brings death, whether by law or by divine judgment.
3. (Leviticus 20:11–12) The Penalty for Sins of Incest
Text (NKJV):
“The man who lies with his father’s wife has uncovered his father’s nakedness; both of them shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death. They have committed perversion. Their blood shall be upon them.”
The Lord now addresses the specific sexual perversions that violate natural and divine boundaries. “The man who lies with his father’s wife has uncovered his father’s nakedness” refers to sexual relations with a stepmother or any woman previously united to one’s father. Such behavior was regarded as dishonoring one’s father directly. To “uncover nakedness” in Hebrew idiom (as used in Leviticus 18) was a euphemism for engaging in sexual relations. This act violated both moral decency and familial respect, and it symbolically desecrated the family’s integrity.
The law equally condemns sexual relations between a man and his daughter-in-law, saying, “They have committed perversion.” The Hebrew term translated as “perversion” (תֶּבֶל, tebel) conveys the sense of “confusion,” “mixing,” or “disorder.” As Peter-Contesse notes, “It carries the idea of confusion or of something that is out of harmony with the normal order of creation.” Thus, incest is not only a violation of moral law but a disruption of God’s created order and design for family purity.
In Leviticus 18:6–18, God had already laid out the boundaries for sexual relations, forbidding unions within close kinship lines. Those prohibitions were now backed by clear penalties in Leviticus 20. “Both of them shall surely be put to death” shows that both parties were accountable; consent did not absolve guilt. The punishment of death signified the gravity of this sin. In God’s sight, incest is not a private matter but a corrupting force that destroys generations.
The statement “Their blood shall be upon them” reiterates personal accountability. It means that the guilt and consequence of their sin rest entirely upon their own heads. The family, the community, and the nation are exonerated from blame because the offenders brought judgment upon themselves. The death penalty, while severe, demonstrated that incest was a sin that murdered families, undermined moral order, and desecrated the holiness of the covenant people.
4. (Leviticus 20:13) The Penalty for Homosexual Sin
Text (NKJV):
“If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.”
This verse addresses homosexual activity directly and unambiguously. The wording is clear and deliberate: “If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.” The Hebrew term for “abomination” (תּוֹעֵבָה, to‘evah) signifies something detestable, loathsome, and utterly offensive to God. It is used throughout the Old Testament to describe practices that contradict God’s moral nature and divine order, such as idolatry (Deuteronomy 7:25–26) and occultism (Deuteronomy 18:12).
This command was first given in Leviticus 18:22, which stated, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.” Here, Leviticus 20 adds the prescribed penalty: “They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.” Homosexual acts were treated in the same category as adultery and incest, carrying the same punishment, because all three were sins that destroyed the family structure — the foundational institution of society and God’s covenant people.
The commandment’s moral principle transcends its civil application. In the theocratic nation of Israel, the civil penalty (death) reflected God’s judgment against the act’s corrupting influence on society. However, even though Christians today live under grace and not under Israel’s civil law, the moral condemnation of homosexual practice remains unchanged in Scripture. The New Testament affirms this moral standard, stating in Romans 1:26–27:
“For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.”
Likewise, 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 warns, “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.”
The phrase “Their blood shall be upon them” once again underscores that the guilt and punishment are self-inflicted. Those who commit such acts bear full responsibility for the judgment they incur. The repetition of this expression across these verses emphasizes personal culpability and the righteousness of God’s law.
While modern society excuses or celebrates what God calls sin, the Word of God stands eternally unaltered. In the church age, believers are not commanded to execute civil penalties, but the moral standard remains absolute. Homosexual sin, like adultery and incest, violates the divine pattern established in Genesis 2:24: “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Marriage is the only God-ordained context for sexual intimacy — between one man and one woman, joined in covenant before God.
These commands, while given to ancient Israel, reflect unchanging moral truth. The severity of the punishment shows how detestable these sins were to God and how destructive they are to the human family. Israel was to remain distinct from the nations, preserving both physical and moral purity.
Summary:
Leviticus 20:11–13 presents God’s unyielding standard for sexual morality. Incest, adultery, and homosexual acts each defile God’s design for human relationships and undermine the covenant community’s holiness. The death penalty in Israel served to preserve moral order and communicate the seriousness of these sins. Though civil penalties no longer apply in the church age, the moral imperatives remain. God’s people are called to purity, faithfulness, and obedience to His created order.
5. (Leviticus 20:14) The Penalty for Marrying Both a Woman and Her Mother
Text (NKJV):
“If a man marries a woman and her mother, it is wickedness. They shall be burned with fire, both he and they, that there may be no wickedness among you.”
This command addresses one of the most detestable forms of incest and sexual confusion — the uniting of a man with both a woman and her mother. The phrase “If a man marries a woman and her mother” refers not only to a formal marriage but to any sexual union that joins all three individuals in what Scripture calls “wickedness.” The Hebrew word used here, zimmah, denotes lewdness, immorality, or a deliberate act of moral corruption.
This act was previously prohibited in Leviticus 18:17, where God declared, “You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; you shall not take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness. They are near of kin to her. It is wickedness.” Such a sin perverts the sacred structure of the family, confusing generational and relational boundaries. It was therefore considered an abomination before God and a corruption of the social and moral order.
The penalty, “They shall be burned with fire, both he and they,” reveals the seriousness of this transgression. In the theocratic law of Israel, this penalty symbolized complete eradication of moral defilement from the covenant community. Fire was often associated with the judgment and purging of sin, as seen later in Joshua 7:15 regarding Achan’s sin and in Genesis 19 with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Some commentators, such as Adam Clarke, have argued that the phrase “burned with fire” may not have referred to literal burning alive but to branding or a form of public disgrace. Clarke wrote, “It is very likely that the crime mentioned in this verse was not punished by burning alive, but by some kind of branding, by which they were ever after rendered infamous…. Branding with a hot iron would certainly accomplish every desirable end both for punishment and prevention.” While this interpretation is possible linguistically, the straightforward reading of the text and its parallel with other capital offenses indicates that death was indeed the intended punishment.
Regardless of whether the punishment was literal or symbolic, the principle is clear: such perversion was to be utterly condemned and purged from among the people. The closing phrase, “that there may be no wickedness among you,” emphasizes the divine intent — Israel was to be a holy nation, distinct from the surrounding pagan cultures that normalized such behavior. The people of God were not to tolerate or excuse perversions that defiled marriage and family.
6. (Leviticus 20:15–16) The Penalty for Bestiality
Text (NKJV):
“If a man mates with an animal, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall kill the animal. If a woman approaches any animal and mates with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood is upon them.”
The sin of bestiality represents one of the lowest depths of moral corruption — the confusion of the created order itself. “If a man mates with an animal,” or if “a woman approaches any animal,” it is an act that violates the fundamental distinctions God established between humanity and the animal kingdom. This command was previously given in Leviticus 18:23, where God stated, “Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it. It is perversion.”
The penalty in Leviticus 20 is unequivocal: both the human and the animal were to be put to death. This demonstrates how detestable and unnatural the act was in the sight of God. The repetition of “They shall surely be put to death. Their blood is upon them” underscores both the certainty and justice of divine judgment. The offender bears full responsibility for his or her own death.
Furthermore, the instruction to also kill the animal served a symbolic and practical purpose. The animal was not guilty of moral sin, yet it was destroyed “lest the sight of such a beast should bring that loathsome sin to remembrance,” as Trapp observes. By removing even the memory of the act, God ensured that His people would not be tempted to normalize or trivialize such abominations. The execution of the animal also eliminated the possibility of using it in later idolatrous or ritual contexts, as some pagan religions incorporated bestiality in their fertility rites.
The commandment preserved the clear distinction between human beings — made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26–27) — and animals. To blur that distinction is to deface the divine image and rebel against God’s created order. Bestiality, like homosexuality and incest, was not merely an act of personal sin but a desecration of God’s moral and natural law.
These strict penalties reflected God’s intent that Israel live as a holy nation, separate from the corrupt practices of the Canaanites and other pagan peoples. As Leviticus 18:27–28 warned, “For all these abominations the men of the land have done, who were before you, and thus the land is defiled, lest the land vomit you out also when you defile it.”
Summary:
Leviticus 20:14–16 demonstrates the uncompromising nature of God’s holiness concerning sexual morality. Marrying both a woman and her mother was branded as “wickedness,” deserving of death, for it destroyed the sanctity of family. Bestiality, an act of complete moral corruption, also incurred the death penalty for both offender and animal, to remove all trace of such perversion from the land. Through these laws, God reaffirmed that Israel was to remain pure, distinct, and undefiled, reflecting His own holiness in every aspect of life.
7. (Leviticus 20:17–21) Penalties for Other Sexual Sins
Text (NKJV):
“‘If a man takes his sister, his father’s daughter or his mother’s daughter, and sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness, it is a wicked thing. And they shall be cut off in the sight of their people. He has uncovered his sister’s nakedness. He shall bear his guilt. If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has exposed her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from their people. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister nor of your father’s sister, for that would uncover his near of kin. They shall bear their guilt. If a man lies with his uncle’s wife, he has uncovered his uncle’s nakedness. They shall bear their sin; they shall die childless. If a man takes his brother’s wife, it is an unclean thing. He has uncovered his brother’s nakedness. They shall be childless.’”
This section continues the pattern established in Leviticus 18, where the Lord gave moral prohibitions against various sexual offenses. Here in chapter 20, He prescribes the corresponding penalties. These sins involved illicit relations with close relatives or actions that violated the boundaries of ceremonial and moral purity.
a. “If a man takes his sister, his father’s daughter or his mother’s daughter”
The law against sexual relations with one’s sister had already been clearly stated in Leviticus 18:9. The phrase “takes his sister” here refers to engaging in sexual relations with her. Such behavior was labeled “a wicked thing,” indicating that it was not merely inappropriate but morally perverse and spiritually defiling. The Hebrew word translated “wicked thing” (chesedah) carries a sense of disgrace and moral corruption. This was not only an offense against natural law but a direct defilement of the family unit, which God ordained as sacred.
b. “They shall be cut off in the sight of their people”
Unlike the earlier offenses that demanded the death penalty, these sins carried a different consequence — being “cut off” from the community. This penalty implied excommunication, social banishment, or exile from the covenant people. The offenders were removed from the fellowship and protection of Israel, deprived of participation in religious life, and viewed as spiritually defiled until repentance and ceremonial cleansing occurred.
This distinction between death and expulsion demonstrates God’s graduated approach to justice. Some sins corrupted the community so severely that they required the offender’s removal by death; others were dealt with through separation and exclusion. In both cases, the holiness of the people was to be preserved. The phrase “cut off in the sight of their people” also indicated public disgrace — their punishment was not hidden but meant to deter others from committing similar acts.
c. “If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness”
This refers to sexual intercourse during a woman’s menstrual period, which was forbidden in Leviticus 18:19. The law recognized such relations as a direct violation of ceremonial purity because the menstrual flow represented uncleanness under the Mosaic system. The offenders were to be “cut off from their people,” reflecting the seriousness of disregarding God’s commands concerning bodily and ceremonial holiness. In the ancient world, pagan fertility rituals often involved such acts, but Israel was called to live by a higher moral standard that reflected the holiness of God.
d. “You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother’s sister nor of your father’s sister”
The prohibitions against relations with one’s aunts were also stated earlier (Leviticus 18:12–13). These commands reinforced the sanctity of extended family relationships. Sexual relations within such kinship lines were considered “uncovering his near of kin,” which meant violating family honor and integrity. The offenders “shall bear their guilt,” a phrase signifying that they would carry the moral and spiritual consequence of their actions before God.
e. “If a man lies with his uncle’s wife… they shall die childless”
In this case, the sin involved sexual relations with one’s aunt by marriage, equated with uncovering the nakedness of one’s uncle. While this offense did not mandate the death penalty, it invoked divine retribution: “They shall die childless.” This curse was understood not only as a tragic loss but as a direct act of God removing the offender’s future legacy. To “die childless” was considered a form of living death in the ancient world, where one’s lineage and name were vital to covenant blessing and social identity.
Mark Rooker notes, “Dying childless was regarded as a tragedy in biblical times…. In a sense dying childless was a form of death because the guilty party’s name became extinct.” This consequence expressed divine justice — those who corrupt family relations would see their own family line extinguished.
Peter-Contesse offers an additional insight: “The root word here means ‘stripped,’ but it has traditionally been understood to mean ‘deprived of children.’ It is so translated in Genesis 15:2 to describe Abram. But in this context it is more likely that it means ‘stripped of posterity,’ indicating not only that the guilty parties would not bear any children, but also that any offspring that they already had (separately) would be taken from them.” This interpretation emphasizes total loss — not only infertility but the erasure of one’s lineage and family name.
Matthew Poole also suggests a related nuance: “Or shall not be reputed their genuine children, but bastards, and therefore excluded from the congregation of the Lord” (referencing Deuteronomy 23:2). This would mean that even if offspring were born, they would be legally disinherited and barred from covenant participation, effectively ending the sinner’s family line within Israel’s community.
f. “If a man takes his brother’s wife, it is an unclean thing”
This final example further underscores the sacredness of familial boundaries. The phrase “he has uncovered his brother’s nakedness” expresses that such an act was not only sexual sin but a dishonor to one’s brother and to the covenant of marriage. This prohibition excluded the practice except in the special case of levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5–10), where a man could marry his deceased brother’s widow to preserve his brother’s name. Apart from that narrow context, it was forbidden. The judgment, “They shall be childless,” again represents divine judgment — the extinguishing of legacy for those who corrupted sacred family order.
Summary:
Leviticus 20:17–21 reveals God’s detailed concern for preserving purity within family and society. The penalties varied in severity — some sins warranted death, others demanded exclusion, and some invoked divine judgment resulting in barrenness or the loss of lineage. In every case, the principle was clear: sexual sin defiles both the individual and the community. Holiness demanded that Israel maintain moral order, respect family boundaries, and abstain from practices that blurred the distinctions God had ordained.
8. (Leviticus 20:22–26) Summation: Why God Called Israel to Such Holiness
Text (NKJV):
“‘You shall therefore keep all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them, that the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out. And you shall not walk in the statutes of the nation which I am casting out before you; for they commit all these things, and therefore I abhor them. But I have said to you, “You shall inherit their land, and I will give it to you to possess, a land flowing with milk and honey.” I am the LORD your God, who has separated you from the peoples. You shall therefore distinguish between clean animals and unclean, between unclean birds and clean, and you shall not make yourselves abominable by beast or by bird, or by any kind of living thing that creeps on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean. And you shall be holy to Me, for I the LORD am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be Mine.’”
This closing section of Leviticus 20 provides a powerful theological summary of why God required such strict moral and ceremonial separation for Israel. These laws were not arbitrary regulations but divine boundaries rooted in God’s own holy nature and His covenant purpose for His people.
a. “You shall not walk in the statutes of the nation which I am casting out before you”
The Canaanites who inhabited the Promised Land were deeply entrenched in the abominable sins described throughout Leviticus 18–20 — idolatry, sexual immorality, child sacrifice, and occult practices. Because of their unrepentant wickedness, God decreed that they would be dispossessed of their land and judged through Israel’s conquest. Israel was warned not to imitate their behavior or adopt their customs, lest they suffer the same fate.
This statement reveals that the moral laws of God are not culturally relative but universally binding. Sinful practices that brought divine judgment upon one nation would bring the same judgment upon any other that followed them. The Lord’s holiness is absolute, and He demanded that His people live by a higher standard than the pagan nations around them.
b. “That the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out”
The imagery of the land “vomiting out” its inhabitants conveys the idea that moral corruption defiles the earth itself, provoking a kind of spiritual reaction from the created order. God pleaded with Israel to obey Him so that the land would not expel them as it had the Canaanites. Sadly, Israel did not heed this warning. The northern kingdom was carried away by Assyria in 722 B.C., and Judah was exiled to Babylon in 586 B.C. — the very consequence God had forewarned.
As G. Campbell Morgan observed, “The very land referred to in this word of the law of God stands today at the centre of the earth, a standing witness to the truth. There it has been for ages, fruitless and barren, and yet naturally there is no land more fertile. Men corrupted it, and it vomited them out.” He continued, “The principle is of the widest application. Whatever the territory man reigns over, it is affected by his character. If he be polluted and corrupt, then all that is under his sway becomes polluted and corrupt.”
This demonstrates a spiritual law that transcends geography: when a people reject God’s truth, moral decay inevitably leads to societal collapse.
c. “I am the LORD your God, who has separated you from the peoples”
This statement defines the heart of Israel’s identity. God’s purpose for His people was separation — not isolation, but distinction. They were to be distinct in worship, diet, morality, and conduct because they represented the one true God among the nations. This separation was symbolized through ceremonial laws distinguishing between clean and unclean animals, teaching that God’s people must discern between what is holy and what is profane.
Israel’s separation had a divine purpose in the unfolding plan of redemption. They were chosen to receive the covenants, the revelation of God’s Word, and ultimately to bring forth the Messiah (Romans 9:4–5). Their election was not a guarantee of individual salvation but a calling to serve God’s redemptive plan for the world.
Similarly, in the church age, believers are called to be separate from the world while serving as witnesses within it. In Acts 13:1–2, the Holy Spirit separated Paul and Barnabas for the work of the gospel, and every Christian today shares that same spiritual calling — to be sanctified for God’s use. As F. B. Meyer reflected, “What an honour is this! To be for God Himself: to do His errands, to fulfil His behests and give Him pleasure! Rejoice greatly when God says, ‘Thou art Mine.’”
d. “That you should be Mine”
This phrase reveals the ultimate purpose of holiness — not mere ritual purity or external obedience, but relationship. God did not separate Israel only so they could possess the land; He separated them so He could possess them. Holiness was the condition of intimacy.
“I am the LORD your God… that you should be Mine” expresses a covenant bond rooted in love. God’s desire was not mechanical compliance but faithful fellowship. Holiness is not simply avoiding sin; it is belonging wholly to God. As Peter later wrote to the church, echoing this passage, “But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light” (1 Peter 2:9).
Israel’s holiness was thus both ethical and relational — a visible testimony to the nations that they belonged to the living God, distinct from the idols and corruptions of the world.
Summary:
Leviticus 20:22–26 summarizes the entire holiness code by reminding Israel that obedience was not about legalism but about loyalty to a holy God. The separation from pagan practices and unclean things symbolized a deeper spiritual truth: Israel belonged to God. Their holiness was essential not only to maintain the land but to reflect God’s character before the nations. Holiness was the condition of covenant blessing, and its neglect led to divine judgment and exile.
9. (Leviticus 20:27) Penalty for Being a Medium or Practitioner of the Occult
Text (NKJV):
“‘A man or a woman who is a medium, or who has familiar spirits, shall surely be put to death; they shall stone them with stones. Their blood shall be upon them.’”
This final verse reiterates the seriousness of occult practices under the Mosaic covenant. The command differentiates between those who consulted mediums (who were to be cut off, per Leviticus 19:31 and 20:6) and those who practiced such arts, who were to be executed by stoning. The penalty underscored the danger such individuals posed to the community — leading others into deception and rebellion against God.
The phrase “shall surely be put to death” uses the emphatic Hebrew construction mot yumat, meaning “dying he shall die,” emphasizing the certainty of judgment. The occult was not merely superstition; it was spiritual treason against the God of Israel. By communing with demonic powers, mediums introduced idolatry and spiritual corruption into the covenant community.
The closing phrase, “Their blood shall be upon them,” declares moral accountability. The guilt and consequence of their actions rested entirely upon their own heads. This judgment was just because those who practiced witchcraft not only sinned personally but enticed others to sin. As Jesus later warned, “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea” (Matthew 18:6).
The severity of the punishment reflects the spiritual reality behind such practices. The occult invites demonic influence, opposes the authority of God, and leads souls away from truth. In the theocratic context of Israel, where God dwelt among His people, such sin was intolerable.
Summary:
Leviticus 20:27 concludes the chapter by reaffirming that holiness involves separation from all occult and demonic influence. Those who practiced such arts were to be judged with finality, ensuring that Israel remained spiritually pure and faithful to the Lord. Holiness required not only obedience in moral and sexual purity but also complete rejection of any spiritual corruption that might defile the nation.
