Abhor
Understanding Abhor in Biblical Context
The term "abhor" in Scripture conveys more than mild dislike, it expresses profound moral and spiritual revulsion. This strong rejection appears throughout both Testaments, describing God's response to sin, idolatry, and injustice, as well as the appropriate response of faithful people toward evil. Unlike modern usage where it might indicate personal distaste, biblical abhorrence is rooted in objective moral and covenantal realities.
Old Testament Expressions of Abhorrence
Several Hebrew words convey the concept of abhorrence, each with distinct nuances. The word ba'ash (to be or become stinking) appears in 1 Samuel 27:12, where David pretends loyalty to Achish while actually being detestable to the Philistines. Ga'al (to cast away as unclean, to loathe) appears in Ezekiel 16:5, describing how an abandoned infant was "loathed" or despised. Quts (to loathe, to fear) appears in Exodus 1:12, where the Egyptians came to "dread" the Israelites because of their multiplication.
Perhaps the strongest term is shaqats (to detest, abhor), used in Leviticus 11:11 and 43 regarding unclean animals: "They shall be an abomination to you." This term establishes abhorrence within the purity system that distinguished Israel from surrounding nations. In Psalms, this revulsion appears in personal devotion: "For he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted" (Psalm 22:24).
New Testament Development
The New Testament continues this theme with Greek terms that emphasize moral and spiritual rejection. Bdelussomai (derived from bdeo, to stink) appears in Romans 2:22, where Paul challenges those who "abhor idols" yet commit sacrilege. This connects external religious observance with internal moral consistency.
Apostugeo (to hate, shrink from) appears in Romans 12:9: "Abhor what is evil; cling to what is good." This concise command summarizes the Christian's ethical orientation, not merely avoiding evil but actively detesting it while passionately embracing good. This represents a transformation from the Old Testament's primarily cultic or national applications to a personal, ethical imperative for all believers.
Theological Implications of Abhorrence
Abhorrence in Scripture reveals important aspects of God's character and humanity's proper response to sin. God's abhorrence of sin isn't arbitrary but flows from his holy nature (Habakkuk 1:13). This divine revulsion isn't merely emotional but has covenantal consequences, as seen when God rejects Saul's kingship (1 Samuel 15:23) or when Israel's idolatry provokes God's disgust (Jeremiah 44:4).
For believers, abhorring evil isn't optional but essential to spiritual health. This involves both rejecting specific sins and cultivating a disposition that finds sin repugnant. The concept challenges superficial religiosity that condemns certain sins while tolerating others, calling instead for consistent moral integrity.
Practical Applications for Modern Readers
Understanding biblical abhorrence helps contemporary readers avoid two extremes: moral indifference on one hand and self-righteous judgmentalism on the other. The call to "abhor what is evil" (Romans 12:9) requires discernment to identify genuine evil rather than mere cultural differences. It also demands self-examination, as the biblical writers frequently direct abhorrence toward one's own sin before criticizing others (Ezekiel 36:31).
This concept remains relevant for ethical decision-making, spiritual formation, and maintaining distinctiveness from values contrary to God's character. It provides a theological foundation for resisting compromise with systems, practices, or ideologies that contradict biblical revelation.
Biblical Context
The concept of abhorrence appears throughout Scripture, beginning with God's response to human violence before the flood (Genesis 6:5-7) and continuing through Israel's covenant relationship where God promises to abhor them if they break covenant (Leviticus 26:11, 15, 30). The wisdom literature frequently contrasts the righteous who abhor falsehood (Proverbs 13:5) with the wicked who abhor the upright (Proverbs 29:27). The prophets use abhorrence language to describe God's response to Israel's idolatry (Jeremiah 14:19-21) and empty ritual (Isaiah 1:13-14). In the New Testament, the concept shifts from primarily cultic applications to ethical imperatives for all believers, particularly in Paul's letters where it becomes part of basic Christian ethics (Romans 12:9).
Theological Significance
Abhorrence reveals God's holy character, his complete opposition to sin and evil. This isn't merely emotional distaste but reflects God's consistent moral nature. The concept also illuminates humanity's proper response to evil: not just avoidance but active moral revulsion. This has implications for understanding repentance, which involves coming to share God's perspective on sin. The development from Old to New Testament shows how abhorrence moves from external purity concerns to internal transformation, emphasizing that true righteousness involves both rejecting evil and embracing good. Ultimately, God's abhorrence of sin explains the necessity of Christ's atonement, only through Christ can sinners be reconciled to a God who rightly abhors sin.
Historical Background
Ancient Near Eastern cultures surrounding Israel had their own concepts of ritual impurity and things deemed detestable, often related to foreign gods or practices. Israel's purity laws distinguished them from neighboring peoples, with certain animals, practices, or idols declared "abominations" (to'ebah). Archaeological evidence shows that practices Israel was commanded to abhor, such as child sacrifice, cultic prostitution, and idol worship, were common in Canaanite religion. The Greek philosophical tradition, particularly Stoicism, emphasized controlling passions rather than cultivating moral revulsion, making Paul's command in Romans 12:9 distinctive. Understanding these contexts helps explain why certain things were specifically identified as abhorrent in Scripture, often because they represented practices of surrounding nations or contradicted Israel's unique covenant identity.