49 "I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law."
by George Reed
How can we understand it when Jesus, the Prince of Peace, says, “Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division!”? What do we make of Jesus proclaiming that households will be divided because of him; that parents and children will be at odds? While some of the wits around us have used the pun of Know Jesus — Know Peace; No Jesus — No Peace, it seems that Jesus would have said Know Jesus — No Peace.
Jesus was aware of those around him who resisted the Roman occupation with violence and murder. He would have also known people who were willing to do anything to get along with the Romans. And, I am sure, there must have been those who just tried their best to ignore all this political talk and maneuvering and wanted to just get on with their lives. While Jesus seems to never sanction the use of force and violence, he also did not embrace either of the other ways to find peace. For Jesus there could be no peace without justice and mercy.
Jesus’ whole life can be seen as a parable about what it means to stand up to oppression. It didn’t matter to Jesus if the oppression was political, financial, or religious and often it was all three rolled into one. He could have spent his life wandering the hills of Galilee teaching and healing. He could have stayed away from the temple authorities and the Roman occupation forces. Or he even could have stayed with Mary and Joseph taking care of daily business. But that was not what he chose to do. Against all advice of family and friends, he turned his face to Jerusalem and went to face the oppressors.
Jesus didn’t take an army with him but he went to call out the temple and Roman authorities for what they were: oppressors of the poor and needy. The Roman lash was terrible but no more destructive than the Roman tax. In the face of this oppression, the temple authorities did nothing to ease their own demands for the tithe. Instead of being the ones who spoke up for the poor, they added their own load to the burden the poor were forced to carry.
The Pax Romana, the Roman Peace, was based on brutal violence. If a disturbance breaks out among a group of people the way the Romans kept peace was to quickly and decisively put an end to the trouble. The only question was whether it was better to kill them all then or herd them up and crucify them later. Was it better to make the crowd cower with swift violence or better to let them see the trouble makers suffer slowly? Jesus knew that this peace was not really peace. It was violent hatred that did not count people as being of value. The way for the temple authorities to achieve peace was to cooperate with the Romans so that the temple trade was not disturbed and they could still receive the sacrifices, gifts, and tithes of the people. Jesus would confront both parties with the strongest weapon of all: truth. He presented himself to them and all could see them for what they truly were.
So why do we, Jesus’ disciples, find it so hard to take a stand for what we believe in? The violence is all around us with school shootings coming so often that we have to identify which one we are talking about. The victims and perpetrators of acts of violence are getting younger and younger. Random shootings happen so often we have a special term for them, calling them drive-bys, and they are as common as the drive-thru windows at the fast food chains. Movies, television, and video games are full of the most graphic violence. Somehow we don’t see how it is creating a culture of violence, and so we remain silent. And our children die around us.
There are those who say there are not enough studies to convince them that violence on TV and in video games produces a culture of violence but by the time the researchers have studied the effects of hours of daily violence on young people over ten year’s time, it will be too late. You couldn’t find a more effective way to brainwash someone than to get them to play games constantly that reward them for a certain behavior. That is what we are subjecting our children to in the most graphic, realistic forms.
At the very least, we need to insert some balance into the lives of the young people who have been entrusted to our care by God. We need to let them hear us state our belief in a God of love and a Savior who turned his back on violence as a means of solving problems. We need to stop worrying about whether or not our children like us as friends and see to it that they respect us as adults. This should be done not by being mean and oppressive to them but by spending time with them and talking with them about the really important issues in life. We need to take a stand.
Jesus still calls his disciples to follow, sometimes, right to Jerusalem and the very seat of power. Whatever authority brings oppression to those who are least able to defend themselves, Jesus marches to face them and he calls us to go with him. Whether it is religious folk sitting in judgment on others or government officials loading unfair tax burdens on the poor, it is still oppression. Whether it is government officials drawing large salaries and having wonderful healthcare while denying it to others or religious folks saying how much God loves them and hates others, it is still oppression. Whatever form it takes, Jesus will be at the forefront leading the march to stand against such abuse and oppression.
Jesus calls us to take our place, to choose our side. He knows that not everyone will choose wisely. There will be those who choose, for whatever reason, to side with the oppressors. But decisions must be made. Stands must be taken. Peace that ignores oppression is no peace at all.
As Jesus’s popularity soars, he talks more about the need to be ready to face God’s judgment (12:1). Much of what Jesus says in this section relates to righteousness and faithfulness before God. Beware of the hypocritical influence (“yeast”) of the Pharisees, Jesus says, since one day everything will be revealed for all to see (12:2–3). As a result, disciples should fear the Lord, who cares deeply about them (12:4–7). If we acknowledge Jesus before people, he will acknowledge us before the Father at the last judgment. If we disown him now, he will disown us then (12:8–9). And confessing Jesus means submitting to the Holy Spirit, who will empower us to witness before a hostile audience (12:11–12). Jesus gives the parable of the rich fool to illustrate what he has just said (12:13–21). The r…
49 "I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law."
The relationship of the next paragraph (12:49–53) to the preceding one may be the thought of judgment. The fire that Jesus wants to be “kindled” (12:49) is the fire of judgment that discriminates between the unrighteous and righteous. It probably does not refer to the Holy Spirit here (but cf. Luke 3:16). The purifying fire is also related to Jesus’s imminent baptism (12:50). The baptism that Jesus must undergo is not a literal baptism; rather, it is a metaphor of some overwhelming catastrophe—clearly his death on the cross. The arrival of Jesus did bring peace on earth (Luke 2:14), but the fire of judgment also means the separation and division of families. That division stems from one’s stance toward Jesus (cf. Mic. 7:6).
Discerning the signs of the times is the subject in 12:54–59. The purifying fire of God’s judgment is imminent (12:49). Jesus warns his listeners that they need to see the urgency of the present time, because the eschatological crisis is at hand. His listeners are adept at detecting forecasts of coming weather (12:54–55), but they fail to see the forecast of the coming crisis that is implicit in Jesus’s ministry (12:56). Jesus uses an illustration to convey the same point in another way (12:57–59). If a person were going to court, knowing he could lose the case and spend some time in jail (12:59), then he would certainly try to reconcile with his adversary on the way to the courthouse. So too a person who is under the threat of judgment should reconcile with God while there is still time.
Big Idea: God’s true servants will not be caught unawares but will always be found doing their master’s will.
Understanding the Text
The theme of readiness for the Lord’s coming, begun at 12:35, now continues: 12:35–48 is a coherent unit of teaching, which has been broken up here simply to accommodate the commentary divisions. The collection of sayings that follows in 12:49–59 does not relate specifically to that theme, but it does add further to the sense of crisis: Jesus’s arrival has confronted people with serious and difficult choices that will have eternal consequences. This theme will continue in the call to repentance in 13:1–9.
All this is to be understood against the background of 12:1: Jesus has attracted a very large crowd, but he speaks primarily to his disciples. However, what he says has relevance to all who hear him, and the larger crowd is expected to take notice. In 12:54 that wider audience comes more clearly into focus.
Historical and Cultural Background
The setting presupposed in 12:41–48 (as already also in 12:35–38) is that of a relatively affluent household in which most of the work is done by a good number of slaves, owned by and responsible to their master. Such a large household would have a “steward” (NIV: “manager”), himself a slave, to whom the householder delegates responsibility over the rest of the slaves, both for supervising their work and for looking after their material needs. Slaves were routinely kept in order by the threat of corporal punishment (12:47–48).
The family group presupposed in 12:52–53 is, however, apparently less affluent: no slaves are mentioned, just the immediate nuclear family and their spouses.
Interpretive Insights
12:41 are you telling this parable to us, or to everyone? Peter often is the spokesman for the disciple group. In view of the surrounding crowd (12:1) he wants to know whether all are equally called to vigilance. The answer is not clear from what follows. If “slaves” is a metaphor for disciples, then apparently they are the immediate target. But everyone in the crowd is a potential disciple, so perhaps the question does not really need an answer. If the shoe fits, wear it.
12:43 It will be good for that servant. This is another beatitude as in 12:37–38 above. The one so congratulated is the “faithful and wise steward,” so called on the basis of his behavior in the first of two possible scenarios (12:42–44). The steward’s behavior in 12:45–46, by contrast, is not “faithful and wise.”
12:44 he will put him in charge of all his possessions. This slave receives not just the management of the other slaves. The reward for having been faithful in this less demanding area is not a relaxation of his duties, but rather a huge increase in his responsibilities, as in the parable of the minas in 19:16–19 (though no doubt he could also expect an enhanced status and lifestyle). The essence of discipleship is service rather than privilege.
12:46 He will cut him to pieces. This is a surprisingly vivid and violent image. The setting in an ordinary household has been left behind. The following clause, “assign him a place with the unbelievers,” shows that the intended application has invaded the parable. This violent end represents the lot of those who have abused their Lord’s trust and so have failed in their discipleship.
12:47–48 The servant who knows the master’s will . . . the one who does not know. This is a separate saying but is appropriately added here because it too uses the imagery of master and slave. Both slaves are punished, but the one whose offense was unawares is treated less severely. The Old Testament distinguishes between intentional and unintentional sin, the latter (but not the former) being forgivable after atonement has been made (Num. 15:22–31). Here the fact that even the unwitting offender is punished, albeit more leniently, perhaps indicates that sin remains sin even when we are not aware of it, and it cannot simply be ignored.
12:48 From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded. Privilege brings responsibility. To be entrusted with “the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God” (8:10) is to incur a much higher level of responsibility, and deliberate repudiation of that responsibility will have severe consequences.
12:49–50 I have come to bring fire on the earth . . . I have a baptism to undergo. The two images of baptism and fire have already been linked together in 3:16–17 in John the Baptist’s prophecy of Jesus’s mission. The fire indicates a mission that will purify and destroy and, like a wildfire spreading across the earth, leave no one unaffected. The baptism (being “plunged” into something) is not now about what Jesus will bring to others, but here (as in Mark 10:38) probably is an image for the personal suffering that will be an essential part of his own mission. Until all that is accomplished, Jesus feels “constrained,” frustrated, longing to have it all completed. That the fire is not yet “kindled” suggests that he is thinking particularly of the coming judgment that will result from his mission (and which has been the subject of 12:45–48).
12:51 peace on earth . . . division. The angels spoke of the coming of peace on earth in 2:14 (and cf. 19:38), and Jesus’s disciples have been sent to proclaim peace (10:5–6); he himself wants to bring peace to Jerusalem (19:42). Compare also the summary of Jesus’s mission in Acts 10:36. This exclamation is therefore perhaps not so much a statement of Jesus’s real purpose, but rather a sad recognition that his message of peace will in fact prove to be one of division, as people take opposite sides in relation to him. This too was already predicted at his birth (2:34–35).
12:52 there will be five in one family divided against each other. Family solidarity was much valued, and so this is a particularly telling prediction: Jesus’s divisive message will penetrate so deeply that even this basic loyalty is compromised. The specific relationships spelled out in 12:53 echo those of Micah 7:6, a poignant cameo of the dire state to which Judah’s rebellion had brought its society.
12:56 How is it that you don’t know how to interpret this present time? “Time” here translates kairos, often used of a time of special significance, even a crisis. Jesus is now speaking to those in the crowd who have not responded to his message by becoming disciples. The common sense that underlies elementary weather lore seems to have deserted them when it comes to interpreting the equally obvious signs of Jesus’s ministry. Compare 11:20 for the visible evidence of the inbreaking of the kingdom of God. The “signs” that they had requested (11:16, 29) were already abundantly there. They are “hypocrites” in that they are unable or unwilling to transfer their diagnostic skill from the natural sphere to the spiritual, and so they miss what is plain for all to see.
12:58 As you are going with your adversary to the magistrate. Here we have an everyday scene that illustrates the need to take timely action and not to let things drift. Once the legal process has been started, there is no way out. It is inappropriate to press the details of the cameo by asking who is represented by the “adversary,” what the offense was, or what sort of “reconciliation” is in view. The point is in being alert to one’s danger before it is too late. Sitting on the fence is not an option when the kingdom of God has dawned and God’s judgment is imminent.
Theological Insights
There is an overriding sense of eschatological urgency in this whole section, which began at 12:35. The prospect of the Lord’s return should concentrate the disciple’s mind, and the fact that that return will be unannounced means that we can never be “off duty.” But “being ready” is not a matter of calculating the possible date or of giving up the ordinary responsibilities of life. The steward’s “readiness” consists in faithful service, in fulfilling responsibilities at all times, so as not to be caught unprepared.
So much for disciples who expect Jesus’s return. But the rest of the world also needs to be alert and to avoid complacency. Jesus’s ministry brings division and judgment, and no one is exempt. It is important to respond to the offer of salvation now, before it is too late.
The distinction between deliberate and unwitting sin in 12:47–48, with different levels of punishment resulting, raises interesting questions about the basis of God’s judgment. Does this suggest a distinction between those who have heard and rejected the gospel and those who have never heard it?
The phrase “I have come to . . .” (12:49; cf. 5:32; 19:10) implies a mission that originated elsewhere, and it has been used to argue that the Synoptic Gospels also support the idea, familiar from the Gospel of John, of Jesus’s preincarnate divine existence.1
Teaching the Text
There are three main sections in this passage, which may be taught either separately or together. If taught together, the focus should be on the necessity for believers to live a life of watchful readiness and service to the Lord, recognizing that this loyalty places us in opposition to the values and goals of the world. If taught separately, the following themes may be pursued:
1. 12:35–48 (including the last section of the previous passage). Consider the relationship between master and slave in a wealthy household, and reflect on why Jesus thought it suitable as a model for teaching about his return. Pick up the issues suggested in regard to 12:35–40 in the previous section, particularly the issue of what it means to “be ready.” It might be helpful to think about how such imagery developed: its application to the later Christian expectation of the parousia is clear, but what might it have meant to the disciples when Jesus was still with them? A further lesson relates to 12:48b: invite listeners to consider what they themselves have been “given” by God, and what therefore might be “demanded” of them.
2. 12:49–53. This is a series of three rather loosely connected sayings. In your teaching consider in what way Jesus’s ministry brought fire on the earth, the nature of his “baptism,” and why division was inevitable. How does this relate to the Old Testament expectation of a “prince of peace”? And how far are Jesus’s modern disciples expected to be dividers and fire raisers? Consider examples where Christian values are increasingly at odds with the values of the world. How can Christians both stand firmly for what is right and also be reconcilers and peacemakers?
3. 12:54–59. Again, these apparently are two separate sayings. The first (12:54–56) raises the question of the nature of the “present time” that Jesus expects the crowd to interpret, and asks what signs should have given them the clue. In your teaching you might first point out the signs that Jesus’s audience was failing to discern (the evidence of the in-breaking of the kingdom of God) and then raise the question of what signs our present generation may be missing. The second saying (12:57–59) similarly raises the question of the “right” (the word usually means “just, righteous”) that they were meant to be able to judge, and what was the urgent action that ought to result from this discernment. The “right” here relates to reconciliation with enemies or opponents. Consider with your group or audience how this issue of reconciliation represents the heart of the gospel message.
Illustrating the Text
We are to be ready for the Lord’s coming, faithful to what he has given us to do.
Literature: The Odyssey, by Homer. This work (perhaps 850 BC, though its date is debated) is one of two great Greek epic poems (the other is The Iliad) attributed to Homer. The work chronicles the ten years that it took Odysseus (Ulysses in Roman mythology) to return to Ithaca after the ten-year Trojan War. He has many adventures and mishaps but finally arrives home to his waiting wife, Penelope, and his son, Telemachus. While Odysseus has been gone, a group of suitors, really usurpers, have been taking advantage of his home and possessions on the assumption that he will never return. They have also aggressively sought Penelope’s hand in marriage to further advance their intentions.
Penelope is aware that she could break her vows to her absent husband and choose a new husband who would be king and who would kill Odysseus. However, she remains faithful to Odysseus during his twenty-year absence, inventing reasons why she cannot choose a suitor, working hard to trick those who seek her hand. The device that works the longest for her is when she informs her suitors that she is weaving a burial covering for Odysseus’s father, Laertes, and only when it is completed will she choose one of them to be her husband. Every day for a number of years she unravels part of the work that she has already finished, buying time. Because of Penelope’s perseverance, her name has come to be associated with faithfulness in marriage.
Jesus’s mission will leave people seriously divided.
Biography: Billy Sunday. Sunday was a baseball player who became a celebrated evangelist. His biographer, Elijah Brown, writes, “No one can doubt the absolute sincerity of the man. He is a Daniel come to judgment, a Savonarola denouncing the sins of the people, an Isaiah pointing to God as the solution of great public questions. . . . You cannot explain his marvelous success on any other basis than that God is with him.” All this being true, Billy’s plain talking and teaching of the Word divided people. Brown continues, “Of course there are some church members who will not go to hear Sunday. . . . They are living a dual life, and they do not want the sword of the Spirit as it is wielded by Billy to lay bare the rottenness of their lives.”2
History: A Legacy of Hatred, by David A. Rausch. Rausch’s fine book focuses on why Christians must not forget the Holocaust. In one chapter, Rausch asks, “What made the difference between the few Christians who helped the Jewish people and the multitude who did not?” Having studied the issue, he reflects that the reoccurring emphasis on established ethical patterns of Christian thought and practice looms large. They strove to be Christ-like in their attitudes toward other religions and races, seeking to unlearn the prejudice bolstered and sustained by the community around them. Because prejudice is a learned behavior, they geared their lives to immunize themselves from its infection. . . . Godly thinking provided personal enhancement and comprehension of the infinite value of a human life and God’s love for every person.3
Clearly Christlike thinking can divide not only unbelievers from believers but also believers from other believers.
Direct Matches
The initiatory ritual of Christianity. This rite is of great significance in connecting the individual both to Christ and to the greater community of believers. Baptism carries an equal measure of symbolism and tradition, evoking a connection between OT covenantal circumcision and ritual cleansing and NT regeneration and redemption.
The immediate precursor of Christian baptism was the baptism of John the Baptist (Mark 1:4 pars.), a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, preparing the hearts of the people for the coming Messiah. But when Jesus himself was baptized by John to “fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15) and to allow Jesus to identify with sinful humanity, he became the firstfruits of the new covenant. John emphasized that his baptism with water was inferior to the baptism “with the Holy Spirit and fire” that Jesus would bring (Matt. 3:11). Jesus’ disciples continued John’s baptism during his earthly ministry (John 4:1 2).
Baptism was immediately important in the early church. Jesus commanded the disciples to “make disciples . . . , baptizing them” (Matt. 28:19). The disciples replaced Judas from among those “who have been with us the whole time . . . from John’s baptism” (Acts 1:21–22). Peter’s first sermon proclaims, “Repent and be baptized” (2:38). The apostles baptized new believers in Christ immediately (8:12–13, 38; 9:18; 10:48; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 19:5; 22:16).
For the apostle Paul, baptism represents a participation in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Paul writes, “Don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death” (Rom. 6:3–4); “In him you were . . . buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead” (Col. 2:11–12).
Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12 13).
Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).
For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1 Kings 2:1–4). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).
People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.
Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.
The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.
Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:6 17). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.
Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).
Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.
Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60 percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.
Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.
Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).
The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.
In general, Torah (Law) may be subdivided into three categories: judicial, ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlap with the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah” with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 19 23) following the Israelites’ deliverance from the land of Egypt, though some body of customary legislation existed before this time (Exod. 18). These instructions find expansion and elucidation in other pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24, indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code of conduct and worship for Israel not only during its wilderness wanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan following the conquest.
More specifically, the word “law” often denotes the Ten Commandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “ten words”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered to Moses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandments reflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided into two parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which they were first recorded: the first four address the individual’s relationship to God, and the last six focus on instructions concerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplistic expression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelines extends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any and all incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thing forbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing the prohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice its opposite good in order to be in compliance.
Direct Matches
The wife of one’s son. Scriptural parent-in-law/daughter-in-law pairs include Terah/Sarai (Gen. 11:31), Judah/Tamar (Gen. 38:11, 16, 24; 1 Chron. 2:4), Naomi/Ruth (Ruth 1:6, 7, 8, 22; 2:20; 4:15), Naomi/Orpah (Ruth 1:6, 7, 8), and Eli/wife of Phineas (1 Sam. 4:19).
The OT is forceful in governing the conduct of fathers-in-law toward their daughters-in-law, proscribing any sexual behavior between them (Lev. 18:15; 20:12; Ezek. 22:11). The narrative drama of efforts by the widowed daughter-in-law Tamar to conceive by her father-in-law, Judah, turns on this point, since he had deprived her of her levirate marriage rights (Gen. 38:6–27).
Otherwise, the biblical expectation is that a daughter-in-law will have a close filial relationship with her parents-in-law. Naomi calls her daughters-in-law “my daughters” (Ruth 1:11, 12, 13), and Ruth’s oath to her is frequently adopted by couples in modern marriage ceremonies (Ruth 1:16–17). In his anger at Israel, God refers to daughters and daughters-in-law similarly (Hos. 4:13–14). Indeed, an image of ungodliness is the rebellion of a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law (Mic. 7:6; Matt. 10:35; Luke 12:53).
Human Uses and Metaphors
Fire is a basic necessity for various human activities such as cooking (Exod. 12:8; Isa. 44:15–16, 19; John 21:9), warming (Isa. 44:16; Jer. 36:22; John 18:18), lighting (Isa. 50:11), manufacturing (Exod. 32:24), and refining metals (Num. 31:22–23). Fire is also an important means of maintaining the purity of God’s people, used to punish sinners (the sexually immoral [Lev. 20:14; 21:9; cf. Gen. 38:24] and the disobedient [Josh. 7:25; cf. 2 Kings 23:16]) and to destroy idols (Exod. 32:20; Deut. 7:5, 25; 2 Kings 10:26), chariots (Josh. 11:6, 9), and the cities of Canaan (Josh. 6:24; 8:19; 11:11; Judg. 18:27). As an essential means of worship, fire is used to burn sacrificial animals (Gen. 8:20; Exod. 29:18; Lev. 1:9; 3:3; 9:10, 13–14, 20) and grain offerings (Lev. 2:2, 9; 9:17).
The Mosaic law has several regulations concerning fire. Regarded as work, starting a fire is forbidden on the Sabbath (Exod. 35:3). It is the responsibility of the priests to keep the fire burning on the altar (Lev. 6:9, 12–13). The use of an “unauthorized fire” for sacrifice is forbidden (note Nadab and Abihu’s death [Lev. 10:1–2; cf. Num. 3:4; 26:61; 1 Chron. 24:2]). Also, contrary to the Canaanite religious custom, burning children is forbidden (Deut. 18:10), though the Israelites failed to keep this command and elicited God’s judgment (2 Kings 16:3; 17:17; 21:6; Jer. 7:31; 32:35; note Josiah’s ban in 2 Kings 23:10).
As a metaphor, fire also signifies human anger (Ps. 39:3), wickedness (Isa. 9:18), self-reliance (Isa. 50:11), evil planning (Hos. 7:6–7), lust (Prov. 6:27–28), evil speech or tongue (Prov. 16:27; James 3:5–6), and, paradoxically, kindness to an enemy (Prov. 25:22; Rom. 12:20).
Divine Uses and Metaphors
In the Bible, God is described as the ruler of fire (Ps. 104:4; cf. 1 Kings 18). Positively, God sends fire to signify his acceptance of worship (Lev. 9:24; Judg. 13:19–20; 1 Kings 18:38; 2 Chron. 7:1–3; cf. Luke 9:54). God also purifies his people by fire in order to provide them with abundance (Ps. 66:12), to cleanse them of their sins (Isa. 6:6–7), to refine them into the true remnant (Zech. 13:9), to restore true worship (Mal. 3:2–3), to bring forth genuine faith (1 Cor. 3:13, 15; 1 Pet. 1:7), and to give Christians a true joy of participating in Christ’s suffering (1 Pet. 4:12). God also promises to make his people like a firepot and a flaming torch that will burn the surrounding enemies (Zech. 12:6). Negatively, God uses fire to punish the wicked and disobedient (Gen. 19:24; Exod. 9:23; Num. 11:1; 16:35; 2 Kings 1:10, 12; Isa. 29:6; 34:9–10; 66:24; Ezek. 38:22; 39:6; Rev. 20:9). God is a farmer burning unfruitful trees (John 15:2, 6; cf. Matt. 3:10; 7:19; 13:40) and “thorns and briers” (Isa. 10:17). The eternal fire of hell is the place where God’s final judgment will be executed (Matt. 5:22; 25:41; Mark 9:45–49; Jude 1:7; note the “lake of fire” in Rev. 20:14–15; cf. 14:10; 21:8).
Fire is also a symbol used to image the indescribable God. It symbolizes God’s presence: a smoking firepot with a flaming torch (Gen. 15:17), the burning bush (Exod. 3:2; cf. Elijah’s expectation [1 Kings 19:12]), the pillars of fire and smoke (Exod. 13:21–22; Num. 14:14), the smoke on Mount Sinai and in the tabernacle and the temple (Exod. 19:19; Num. 9:15–16; Deut. 4:11–12; Isa. 6:4). Fire marks God’s protection: the “horses and chariots of fire” (2 Kings 6:17; cf. 2:11), the “wall of fire” (Zech. 2:5). Fire also represents God’s glory: God’s throne (Dan. 7:9; cf. Ezek. 1:4, 13; 10:2, 6–7), God’s form (Ezek. 1:27), the seven spirits of God before the throne (Rev. 4:5). God in his holy wrath is also likened to a burning fire (Pss. 79:5; 89:46; Isa. 5:24; 33:14; Jer. 15:14; Ezek. 21:31; 22:21; Hos. 8:5; note the expression “consuming fire” [Deut. 4:24; Isa. 33:14; Heb. 12:29]) and even to a fiery monster (Ps. 18:8; Isa. 30:33; 65:5; cf. Job 41:19–21). Fire is an important element in the description of the day of the Lord (Joel 2:3; cf. 2 Pet. 3:12). God’s words in the prophet’s mouth are likened to a fire (Jer. 5:14; 20:9; 23:29).
Fire is also used to speak of Jesus. John the Baptist refers to Jesus’ baptism as one with the Holy Spirit and fire (Matt. 3:11). Jesus identifies the purpose of his coming as casting fire on earth (Luke 12:49). The returning Jesus is portrayed as coming in “blazing fire” (2 Thess. 1:7), and the eyes of the glorified Christ are likened to “blazing fire” (Rev. 1:14; 2:18; cf. “flaming torches” in Dan. 10:6). In Acts 2:3 the Holy Spirit is portrayed as the “tongues of fire.”
The mother of an individual’s spouse. Isaac married Rebekah, Milkah’s daughter. Milkah is thus Isaac’s mother-in-law (Gen. 24:47). The most well-known biblical example is Naomi, Ruth’s mother-in-law (Ruth 1:3–4). Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law of a fever (Luke 4:38–39). The law forbade a man to have sexual intercourse with his mother-in-law (Deut. 27:23). Social chaos was often described as a breakdown of family relationships, including that between daughter-in-law and mother-in-law (Mic. 7:6; Luke 12:53).
Secondary Matches
Bathing was built into the very structure of the culture of the biblical world. Jewish ritual baths, miqwa’ot, were found throughout the Mediterranean world in both private homes and public places. Likewise, bathhouses were common in the Greco-Roman landscape of urban life. Ancient literary and archaeological sources attest to the traditions of curative bathing throughout the Mediterranean basin.
Homer wrote of bathing in warm water as a luxury and part of a hero’s welcome. Greek philosophers describe taking a hot bath as reserved for the aristocracy. In contrast, the Spartans bathed only in cold water. The Greeks incorporated full bathing facilities into their gymnasium programs. It was customary in the Roman Empire for men and women to bathe separately. Some of Rome’s extant public baths have inscriptions indicating separate spaces for the sexes. Some of the emperors, however, tolerated mixed bathing.
In the OT, bathing is often part of purification rituals. The Israelites had cleansing rituals that included bathing in running water (Lev. 15:13). In the NT, washing or bathing (baptizing) can be either literal or metaphorical (Luke 12:50; Rom. 6:3–4; 1 Cor. 10:2; 12:13; Col. 2:12; Rev. 7:14; 22:14). Baptizing is presented as a symbol of purification from sin (Acts 22:16) or spiritual pollution, and water baptism became the initiation rite for the early Christian community. Early Jewish Christian communities had a preference for using the Jewish ritual baths or pools for their baptisms because their water was channeled in from natural sources. See also Baptism.
The KJV translation for a young girl, an unmarried woman or virgin, or a female servant. At least five Hebrew words are used to refer to such women. Betulah refers to an unmarried virgin or a young woman who has had no sexual experience (Gen. 24:16; Job 31:1; Exod. 22:16–17). A man who forcefully lay with such a woman was expected to marry her (Deut. 22:13–19). When David was old, a virgin was found to lie at his side to keep him warm (1 Kings 1:2). Israel as a nation is identified as a young virgin (Jer. 31:4). The second term is ’amah, translated “bondwoman,” “maidservant,” “maid,” “bondmaid,” “servant,” or “female servant” (Gen. 20:17; Exod. 2:5). The third is shipkhah, which refers to a female slave who is of close kinship to her master (Gen. 29:24). The fourth is na’arah, which is translated “unmarried girl” (Esther 2:4 [NIV: “young woman”]) or “servant” (Esther 4:4 [NIV: “female attendant”]; Ruth 2:23). The fifth is ’almah, which is translated “girl” (Exod. 2:8), “virgin” (Isa. 7:14), or “maiden” (Prov. 30:19 [NIV: “young woman”]).
In the NT, several Greek words are sometimes translated as “maiden” in the KJV. Parthenos refers to a “virgin,” male or female (Matt. 1:23; Acts 21:9; Rev. 14:4). Pais generally means “a young girl,” “maiden,” or “child” (Luke 8:51, 54). Paidiskē refers to a “female slave,” “servant maid,” or “servant girl” (Mark 14:66; Luke 12:45). The word korasion refers to a “girl” or “little girl” (Matt. 9:24–25). Nymphē refers to a “young wife” or “bride” (Luke 12:53; Rev. 21:2).
The KJV translation for a young girl, an unmarried woman or virgin, or a female servant. At least five Hebrew words are used to refer to such women. Betulah refers to an unmarried virgin or a young woman who has had no sexual experience (Gen. 24:16; Job 31:1; Exod. 22:16–17). A man who forcefully lay with such a woman was expected to marry her (Deut. 22:13–19). When David was old, a virgin was found to lie at his side to keep him warm (1 Kings 1:2). Israel as a nation is identified as a young virgin (Jer. 31:4). The second term is ’amah, translated “bondwoman,” “maidservant,” “maid,” “bondmaid,” “servant,” or “female servant” (Gen. 20:17; Exod. 2:5). The third is shipkhah, which refers to a female slave who is of close kinship to her master (Gen. 29:24). The fourth is na’arah, which is translated “unmarried girl” (Esther 2:4 [NIV: “young woman”]) or “servant” (Esther 4:4 [NIV: “female attendant”]; Ruth 2:23). The fifth is ’almah, which is translated “girl” (Exod. 2:8), “virgin” (Isa. 7:14), or “maiden” (Prov. 30:19 [NIV: “young woman”]).
In the NT, several Greek words are sometimes translated as “maiden” in the KJV. Parthenos refers to a “virgin,” male or female (Matt. 1:23; Acts 21:9; Rev. 14:4). Pais generally means “a young girl,” “maiden,” or “child” (Luke 8:51, 54). Paidiskē refers to a “female slave,” “servant maid,” or “servant girl” (Mark 14:66; Luke 12:45). The word korasion refers to a “girl” or “little girl” (Matt. 9:24–25). Nymphē refers to a “young wife” or “bride” (Luke 12:53; Rev. 21:2).
The KJV translation for a young girl, an unmarried woman or virgin, or a female servant. At least five Hebrew words are used to refer to such women. Betulah refers to an unmarried virgin or a young woman who has had no sexual experience (Gen. 24:16; Job 31:1; Exod. 22:16–17). A man who forcefully lay with such a woman was expected to marry her (Deut. 22:13–19). When David was old, a virgin was found to lie at his side to keep him warm (1 Kings 1:2). Israel as a nation is identified as a young virgin (Jer. 31:4). The second term is ’amah, translated “bondwoman,” “maidservant,” “maid,” “bondmaid,” “servant,” or “female servant” (Gen. 20:17; Exod. 2:5). The third is shipkhah, which refers to a female slave who is of close kinship to her master (Gen. 29:24). The fourth is na’arah, which is translated “unmarried girl” (Esther 2:4 [NIV: “young woman”]) or “servant” (Esther 4:4 [NIV: “female attendant”]; Ruth 2:23). The fifth is ’almah, which is translated “girl” (Exod. 2:8), “virgin” (Isa. 7:14), or “maiden” (Prov. 30:19 [NIV: “young woman”]).
In the NT, several Greek words are sometimes translated as “maiden” in the KJV. Parthenos refers to a “virgin,” male or female (Matt. 1:23; Acts 21:9; Rev. 14:4). Pais generally means “a young girl,” “maiden,” or “child” (Luke 8:51, 54). Paidiskē refers to a “female slave,” “servant maid,” or “servant girl” (Mark 14:66; Luke 12:45). The word korasion refers to a “girl” or “little girl” (Matt. 9:24–25). Nymphē refers to a “young wife” or “bride” (Luke 12:53; Rev. 21:2).
When God creates humans, he pronounces them “very good/beautiful” (Gen. 1:31). They are designed to be magnificent visual displays of God’s character (1:26–27). Human sexuality originally is set in a context of overwhelming beauty. God’s first command is to reproduce and extend this paradise throughout the earth (1:28). Human sexuality is not simply a mechanism for reproduction. From the outset it has been about completion, without which there is loneliness (2:18).
Although the Bible does not define the distinctives of masculinity and femininity in any detail, it does defend that there are distinctions between the genders. Behaviors that confuse the genders are explicitly condemned (Deut. 22:5; 1 Cor. 6:9; 11:4–16).
Homosexual intercourse (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:24–27; 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10) and intercourse with an animal (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 18:23; 20:15–16; Deut. 27:21) are violations of God’s created order.
Nakedness
“Nakedness” is confined to the genitals and buttocks (Exod. 20:26; Isa. 20:2–4; Ezek. 23:18, 29; Nah. 3:5) and, after the fall, is synonymous with shame (Gen. 3:7–10; 1 Sam. 20:30; Isa. 47:3; Jer. 13:26; Mic. 1:11; Nah. 3:5; Rev. 3:18; cf. Rom. 1:23–24; 1 Cor. 12:23–24). A woman’s breasts are recognized as erotic (Prov. 5:19; Ezek. 23:3, 21) but not shameful. God slaughters an animal in order to cover nakedness (Gen. 3:21). Ultimately, when sin and death are removed and the body raised, the redeemed will have no shame and will be clothed only in their righteousness (Rev. 19:5–9).
Exposing nakedness is an action used to humiliate enemies (2 Sam. 10:4–5; 1 Chron. 10:9; Isa. 47:3). Jesus is stripped naked (Matt. 27:28, 35–36). Violating another’s nakedness includes touching or seeing (Deut. 25:11) and produces extreme personal disgrace (Lev. 18:6–19 NASB; Hab. 2:15–16). It is an act of grace to cover another’s nakedness (Isa. 58:7; Ezek. 18:7, 16). To even talk or laugh about inappropriate exposure brings dishonor (Gen. 9:21–23). The overarching principle is purity (Lev. 18:24).
Marriage and Adultery
Although damaged by sin, marriage continues to be the ultimate human relationship involving intimacy, privacy, and liberty. Marriage is defined by a covenant—a contract witnessed and enforceable, not just a promise made in private. The couple separate from their parents to become “one flesh” (Gen. 2:24).
Once the marriage contract is agreed upon, the couple are married. They cannot consummate the marriage until the economic commitments of the contract have been delivered (Matt. 1:18; 25:1–13). This is celebrated with a feast. Jesus uses this custom as an analogy for his departure and return (John 14:1–3).
Paul commands husbands to love their wives (Eph. 5:25–33; cf. Gen. 24:67; 29:20; 1 Sam. 1:5; Eccles. 9:9; Song 8:6–7). Nowhere in the Bible is a wife commanded to love her husband, though older women should teach younger women to do so (Titus 2:3–4). Love is the husband’s responsibility. Love is a command that can be obeyed, not just a pleasurable feeling over which one has no control. The model of husbandly love is Jesus laying down his life for his people.
The ecstasy of making love is celebrated in the erotic Song of Songs, which holds out the hope of such marital delight even now. The axiom of marriage is a righteous jealousy (cf. Exod. 20:5; 34:14; Num. 5:14, 30; Prov. 6:34).
The first year of marriage is especially important and is protected by exemption from military service (Deut. 20:7; 24:5).
When a man dies without a male heir, his widow’s possession of that part of the family estate can result in her marrying a man from another family and so alienating that land. This can be resolved either by the injustice of eviction or by the device of levirate marriage. The nearest male relative of the deceased husband marries the widow, and their son then inherits the deceased husband’s name and title to the land (Deut. 25:5–10; cf. Gen. 38; Ruth).
Concubines are wives from poor families, slaves, or captives, and their marriages are protected (Exod. 21:7–9; Deut. 21:11–14).
Rape of a married woman constitutes adultery by the rapist, not the victim. Consensual sex with a married woman is adultery by both parties. Rape of a single woman is treated as fornication, with no blame attached to the woman. Her father has the option of letting her marry the man or receiving significant financial compensation (Exod. 22:16–17; Deut. 22:23–27). Her father has the right to take the money and refuse the marriage. To falsely accuse a woman of adultery is a crime (Deut. 22:13–21).
Prostitution is an extreme form of adultery or fornication and totally forbidden (Lev. 19:29; Deut. 23:17). Under the new covenant, this warning is heightened by the reality of the gift of the Holy Spirit transforming each believer into the temple of the Lord (1 Cor. 6:15–20).
Originally, marriage between siblings is implied (Gen. 4:17, 26; 5:4). Abram married his half sister, Sarai (Gen. 20:12; cf. Gen. 11:29; Num. 26:59). The Mosaic covenant at Sinai bans marriage to blood relationships closer than first cousins and to in-laws (Lev. 18:6–30; cf. 2 Sam. 13; 1 Cor. 5:1).
Polygamy occurs soon after the fall (Gen. 4:19–24). It is never explicitly forbidden in the Bible, but it is managed by OT law so as to restrain further injustice and damage. It is always seen as less than satisfactory (cf. Gen. 29–30; 1 Sam. 1:6; 2 Sam. 13; 1 Kings 1–2; 11). In the NT, monogamy is mandatory for those who would lead the church (1 Tim. 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6). (See also Premarital and Extramarital Sex.)
Self-Control and Purity
The violation of sexual purity is a decision of the heart (Ezek. 23:11; Matt. 5:28). The biblical concept of lust entails more than just physical arousal. It involves a strong desire for/coveting of (cf. James 1:14–15) something that one has no right to acquire. This establishes both the need for self-control (Titus 2:5–6) and the availability of appropriate options (1 Cor. 7:2, 5, 9). Masturbation is nowhere mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 38:9 is about failure to fulfill the levirate). The critical issue is lust.
Sexual misconduct is never the responsibility of the victim (Deut. 22:25). Nevertheless, for reasons of personal safety as well as out of concern for one another, the family of Christ must practice modesty in dress (1 Tim. 2:9) and consider how to build one another up rather than put stumbling blocks in each other’s way.
God always provides the believer with what is necessary to resist temptation and make the right choices (1 Cor. 10:13). Consequently, a significant aspect of every parent’s role is to teach godly sexual wisdom to children before they face such challenges (cf. Prov. 1–9).
The gospel requires us to view sexuality from a wider perspective. Reproduction also occurs through the preaching of the gospel, calling forth new birth and a new people (Matt. 28:18–20). This gospel call will divide families (Luke 12:53). Singleness is no barrier to one’s ability to fulfill the command to multiply and fill the earth (Isa. 56:3–8). In times of distress it may be better to remain single (1 Cor. 7, esp. v. 26). This is also a gift of God (1 Cor. 7:7), given to equip one for the fulfillment of the gospel commission.
When God creates humans, he pronounces them “very good/beautiful” (Gen. 1:31). They are designed to be magnificent visual displays of God’s character (1:26–27). Human sexuality originally is set in a context of overwhelming beauty. God’s first command is to reproduce and extend this paradise throughout the earth (1:28). Human sexuality is not simply a mechanism for reproduction. From the outset it has been about completion, without which there is loneliness (2:18).
Although the Bible does not define the distinctives of masculinity and femininity in any detail, it does defend that there are distinctions between the genders. Behaviors that confuse the genders are explicitly condemned (Deut. 22:5; 1 Cor. 6:9; 11:4–16).
Homosexual intercourse (Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Rom. 1:24–27; 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10) and intercourse with an animal (Exod. 22:19; Lev. 18:23; 20:15–16; Deut. 27:21) are violations of God’s created order.
Nakedness
“Nakedness” is confined to the genitals and buttocks (Exod. 20:26; Isa. 20:2–4; Ezek. 23:18, 29; Nah. 3:5) and, after the fall, is synonymous with shame (Gen. 3:7–10; 1 Sam. 20:30; Isa. 47:3; Jer. 13:26; Mic. 1:11; Nah. 3:5; Rev. 3:18; cf. Rom. 1:23–24; 1 Cor. 12:23–24). A woman’s breasts are recognized as erotic (Prov. 5:19; Ezek. 23:3, 21) but not shameful. God slaughters an animal in order to cover nakedness (Gen. 3:21). Ultimately, when sin and death are removed and the body raised, the redeemed will have no shame and will be clothed only in their righteousness (Rev. 19:5–9).
Exposing nakedness is an action used to humiliate enemies (2 Sam. 10:4–5; 1 Chron. 10:9; Isa. 47:3). Jesus is stripped naked (Matt. 27:28, 35–36). Violating another’s nakedness includes touching or seeing (Deut. 25:11) and produces extreme personal disgrace (Lev. 18:6–19 NASB; Hab. 2:15–16). It is an act of grace to cover another’s nakedness (Isa. 58:7; Ezek. 18:7, 16). To even talk or laugh about inappropriate exposure brings dishonor (Gen. 9:21–23). The overarching principle is purity (Lev. 18:24).
Marriage and Adultery
Although damaged by sin, marriage continues to be the ultimate human relationship involving intimacy, privacy, and liberty. Marriage is defined by a covenant—a contract witnessed and enforceable, not just a promise made in private. The couple separate from their parents to become “one flesh” (Gen. 2:24).
Once the marriage contract is agreed upon, the couple are married. They cannot consummate the marriage until the economic commitments of the contract have been delivered (Matt. 1:18; 25:1–13). This is celebrated with a feast. Jesus uses this custom as an analogy for his departure and return (John 14:1–3).
Paul commands husbands to love their wives (Eph. 5:25–33; cf. Gen. 24:67; 29:20; 1 Sam. 1:5; Eccles. 9:9; Song 8:6–7). Nowhere in the Bible is a wife commanded to love her husband, though older women should teach younger women to do so (Titus 2:3–4). Love is the husband’s responsibility. Love is a command that can be obeyed, not just a pleasurable feeling over which one has no control. The model of husbandly love is Jesus laying down his life for his people.
The ecstasy of making love is celebrated in the erotic Song of Songs, which holds out the hope of such marital delight even now. The axiom of marriage is a righteous jealousy (cf. Exod. 20:5; 34:14; Num. 5:14, 30; Prov. 6:34).
The first year of marriage is especially important and is protected by exemption from military service (Deut. 20:7; 24:5).
When a man dies without a male heir, his widow’s possession of that part of the family estate can result in her marrying a man from another family and so alienating that land. This can be resolved either by the injustice of eviction or by the device of levirate marriage. The nearest male relative of the deceased husband marries the widow, and their son then inherits the deceased husband’s name and title to the land (Deut. 25:5–10; cf. Gen. 38; Ruth).
Concubines are wives from poor families, slaves, or captives, and their marriages are protected (Exod. 21:7–9; Deut. 21:11–14).
Rape of a married woman constitutes adultery by the rapist, not the victim. Consensual sex with a married woman is adultery by both parties. Rape of a single woman is treated as fornication, with no blame attached to the woman. Her father has the option of letting her marry the man or receiving significant financial compensation (Exod. 22:16–17; Deut. 22:23–27). Her father has the right to take the money and refuse the marriage. To falsely accuse a woman of adultery is a crime (Deut. 22:13–21).
Prostitution is an extreme form of adultery or fornication and totally forbidden (Lev. 19:29; Deut. 23:17). Under the new covenant, this warning is heightened by the reality of the gift of the Holy Spirit transforming each believer into the temple of the Lord (1 Cor. 6:15–20).
Originally, marriage between siblings is implied (Gen. 4:17, 26; 5:4). Abram married his half sister, Sarai (Gen. 20:12; cf. Gen. 11:29; Num. 26:59). The Mosaic covenant at Sinai bans marriage to blood relationships closer than first cousins and to in-laws (Lev. 18:6–30; cf. 2 Sam. 13; 1 Cor. 5:1).
Polygamy occurs soon after the fall (Gen. 4:19–24). It is never explicitly forbidden in the Bible, but it is managed by OT law so as to restrain further injustice and damage. It is always seen as less than satisfactory (cf. Gen. 29–30; 1 Sam. 1:6; 2 Sam. 13; 1 Kings 1–2; 11). In the NT, monogamy is mandatory for those who would lead the church (1 Tim. 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6). (See also Premarital and Extramarital Sex.)
Self-Control and Purity
The violation of sexual purity is a decision of the heart (Ezek. 23:11; Matt. 5:28). The biblical concept of lust entails more than just physical arousal. It involves a strong desire for/coveting of (cf. James 1:14–15) something that one has no right to acquire. This establishes both the need for self-control (Titus 2:5–6) and the availability of appropriate options (1 Cor. 7:2, 5, 9). Masturbation is nowhere mentioned in the Bible (Gen. 38:9 is about failure to fulfill the levirate). The critical issue is lust.
Sexual misconduct is never the responsibility of the victim (Deut. 22:25). Nevertheless, for reasons of personal safety as well as out of concern for one another, the family of Christ must practice modesty in dress (1 Tim. 2:9) and consider how to build one another up rather than put stumbling blocks in each other’s way.
God always provides the believer with what is necessary to resist temptation and make the right choices (1 Cor. 10:13). Consequently, a significant aspect of every parent’s role is to teach godly sexual wisdom to children before they face such challenges (cf. Prov. 1–9).
The gospel requires us to view sexuality from a wider perspective. Reproduction also occurs through the preaching of the gospel, calling forth new birth and a new people (Matt. 28:18–20). This gospel call will divide families (Luke 12:53). Singleness is no barrier to one’s ability to fulfill the command to multiply and fill the earth (Isa. 56:3–8). In times of distress it may be better to remain single (1 Cor. 7, esp. v. 26). This is also a gift of God (1 Cor. 7:7), given to equip one for the fulfillment of the gospel commission.
- Abortion, parental rights, trans issues: What would a Kamala Harris victory look like?
- Christian man arrested for Muhammad TikTok comment
- Christian business owner prays over Trump, sees hurricane as catalyst for community healing
- Russell Brand: People in Hollywood are 'terrified of being exposed' for their sins
- Christians will ‘go to court’ on Judgment Day over what they did, John Piper says
- Majority of practicing Christians admit to viewing porn, many comfortable with habit: study
- Pastor Jack Hibbs poses question to Evangelicals for Harris after ‘wrong rally’ rebuke
- Reformation Sunday: 2M Koreans unite to protest law, prevent nation from going down liberal path
- Therapists urge churches to offer more than celibacy for people with unwanted same-sex attraction
- White House hails record decline in drug overdose deaths
- Here’s why NYC public school students have off the day after Halloween
- Trans Influencer From Thailand Dresses Up As 'Gajanani'; Sparks Debate Online Over Attire
- ‘But You Don’t Look Israeli’
- Singham Again Vs Bhool Bhulaiyaa 3 Clash Intensifies: T-Series Accuses Ajay Devgn's Team Of Pressuring Exhibitors
- Christians will ‘go to court’ on Judgment Day over what they did, John Piper says
- ‘Real Housewives of New York’ Play Hot Potato With Scientology Drama
- Scotch Plains Township Hosts First Ever Diwali Celebration
- Gov. Josh Shapiro signs law recognizing Diwali as a state holiday in Pennsylvania
- Man exposed himself, committed lewd act in front of passengers on flight to Boston, feds say
- Are Jews safe in America?
- Father of Liberation Theology, a Tiny Man with Giant Legacy, Dead at 96
- Harris' Moment Against Christians Risks Repercussions for Dems
- Is the Owl of Minerva Flying?
- The Fatal Flaw of the Multicultural Church Movement
- What to Expect from the 1st Global Child Protection Report
- 'Thou Setter Up and Plucker Down of Kings'
- Majority of Practicing Christians Admit to Viewing Porn
- Rejoice With Trembling
- US Churchgoers Want to Hear Pastors Address Current Issues
- How MAGA Borrows from Religion