Christianity 201

September 4, 2015

The Price of a Dog

The older translations of Deuteronomy 23:18 contain one prohibition which is easily understood and one which might be a mystery:

Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the Lord thy God.

The NIV clarifies

You must not bring the earnings of a female prostitute or of a male prostitute into the house of the Lord your God to pay any vow, because the Lord your God detests them both.

which is supported in the explanation by Matthew Henry which follows.

The NLT is even clearer

When you are bringing an offering to fulfill a vow, you must not bring to the house of the Lord your God any offering from the earnings of a prostitute, whether a man or a woman, for both are detestable to the Lord your God.

cats and dogs in the BibleMatthew Henry writes:

The land of Israel must be no shelter for the unclean; no whore, no Sodomite, must be suffered to live among them (Deut. 23:17, 18), neither a whore nor a whoremonger. No houses of uncleanness must be kept either by men or women. Here is,

1. A good reason intimated why there should be no such wickedness tolerated among them: they were Israelites. This seems to have an emphasis laid upon it. For a daughter of Israel to be a whore, or a son of Israel a whoremaster, is to reproach the stock they are come of, the people they belong to, and the God they worship. It is bad in any, but worst in Israelites, a holy nation, 2 Sam. 13:12.

2. A just mark of displeasure put upon this wickedness, that the hire of a whore, that is, the money she gets by her whoring, and the price of a dog, that is, of the Sodomite, pimp, or whoremaster (so I incline to understand it, for such are called dogs, Rev. 22:15), the money he gets by his lewd and villainous practices, no part of it shall be brought into the house of the Lord (as the hire of prostitutes among the Gentiles was into their temples) for any vow. This intimates,

(1.) That God would not accept of any offering at all from such wicked people; they had nothing to bring an offering of but what they got by their wickedness, and therefore their sacrifice could not but be an abomination to the Lord, Prov. 15:8.

(2.) That they should not think, by making and paying vows, and bringing offerings to the Lord, to obtain leave to go on in this sin, as (it should seem) some that followed that trade suggested to themselves, when their offerings were admitted. Prov. 7:14, 15, This day have I paid my vows, therefore came I forth to meet thee. Nothing should be accepted in commutation of penance.

(3.) That we cannot honor God with our substance unless it be honestly and honorably come by. It must not only be considered what we give, but how we got it; God hates robbery for burnt-offerings, and uncleanness too.

Why are we looking at this? I think the principle is that one doesn’t sanctify the revenue received by ill-gotten gain by putting toward an offering or missions pledge. Maybe you cheated someone in a business deal. Perhaps you were paid to do something illegal. Or it may be that the income was derived from something you just know was morally wrong.

Which begs the question, should a church accept the proceeds of lottery winnings that someone wants to donate? Your answer probably is based largely on whether or not you see the lottery as sin, though for many it certainly involves coveting, a sloth-based attitude toward earning, addictive behavior, or a lack of dependence on God to supply our needs.

I covered this topic at Thinking Out Loud briefly here and here, with several comments on the second one. I suspect if you poll enough Christian people on this subject, you would get a variety of answers.

The takeaway today is simply that whatever you might consider “the price of a dog,” it should not be brought to the church as part of a tithe or offering. Such a donation does not absolve an individual of the sin committed, only a contrite heart and a seeking of God’s forgiveness (and a desire not to return to the activity in question)


While preparing today’s devotions, I had a Graham Kendrick playlist running on YouTube. This song was part of that; I wasn’t familiar with it before. Join me in listening to it a couple of times.

Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: