15

The passage can be made to mean what the author wants it to mean, although the meaning produced is absurd. "For whatever reason," the author shrugs, two men who lay down in a bed that belonged to a woman should be put to death. Whatever reason, indeed! As this person correctly notes at the bottom, men were forbidden from "lying in the bed" of a woman at ...


15

All citations are from the orignal Hebrew and Aramaic, not translations In modern Hebrew, עטלף, the word to which I believe you are referring, indeed means bat. But Targum Yonason translates that word as טרפידא in Aramaic, which, based on the roots, (to capture prey by chasing it down and ripping it apart) leans more towards a sort of owl or other bird of ...


14

The Specific is Covered in the More General Leviticus 18:17a states (NKJV): You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter If a man has a daughter, he certainly (at least in that time before in vitro fertilization, etc.) has experienced sexual relations with the "woman" who is the mother of both "her daughter" and his daughter. Now 18:...


12

In the Hebrew Scriptures, death was "dirty." For example, contact with anything dead (whether animal or man) made the Israelite unclean in the ritual sense. Thus any scavenger was not appropriate for human consumption, since such animals consumed the refuse and/or carcasses of other animals. Only animals who chewed the cud (and split the hoof) were consumed ...


12

The translation "rival" for לצרור is an over-literal and uncertain translation, but perhaps the best we can do in English. The MT of Leviticus 18:18 is: וְאִשָּׁ֥ה אֶל־אֲחֹתָ֖הּ לֹ֣א תִקָּ֑ח לִצְרֹ֗ר לְגַלּ֧וֹת עֶרְוָתָ֛הּ עָלֶ֖יהָ בְּחַיֶּֽיהָ The only other verse that we have for direct comparison is I Samuel 1:6 (NIV) Because the LORD had closed ...


11

The bible was written in a time of a primarily oral culture. Repetition is often used for emphasis or to drive home a point (as Seeker of Truth mentioned), and to make things easier to remember. So important things were repeated a whole bunch of times in slightly different words to make it easier to remember. Even if you didn't remember it the first several ...


11

Although this question has been much discussed over the centuries, there is no clear consensus to explain omission of an explicit prohibition on father-daughter incest from Leviticus 18. As with many legal subjects, the discussion of this issue can quickly become complex. Those interested in the fine details should consult the literature at the conclusion ...


10

'Clean' (טָהֵר) in Leviticus 16 The Hebrew verb טָהֵר / taher is used consistently throughout the Hebrew Bible in terms of cleansing or purifying, and so in the context of Leviticus 16 the stated meaning is that by performing the described ritual, the High Priest would have his sins cleansed and he would become pure. This ritual purification was required ...


8

Mark is without doubt the most straightforward of the gospels. The book is short and engaging. It is more critical of the disciples than the other gospel, often in a humorous way. Often Mark includes details that Matthew and Luke choose to leave out, i.e. that the grass was green when the 5000 sat down to eat. Mark often chooses a few stories and tells ...


8

The iron age does not refer to the invention of iron smelting. As Wikipedia says: It is defined by archaeological convention, and the mere presence of cast or wrought iron is not sufficient to represent an Iron Age culture; rather, the term "Iron Age" implies that the production of carbon steel has been perfected to the point where mass production of ...


7

Leviticus 23:18 commands us to sacrifice ten animals only. The command is a collective command on the descendants of Israel to fulfill as a nation. The command is not on each individual separately. The language of Leviticus 23:2-36, which deals with the holidays, is plural imperative. A priori, this form could be interpreted either as commandments whose ...


7

Introduction It seems that the confusion may arise from the presumption that chapter's primary concern is sexual practices; it is not. It is easy to see how this confusion might arise however. As modern westerners, we lack familiarity with Canaanite/Egyptian pagan religious practices and this understandably leads to the assumption that this passage is ...


6

Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, in his commentary to Leviticus 12, explains the sin-offering of the new mother (and the nazirite’s, in that chapter) as a sort of prophylactic offering: At the moment the woman (or the former nazirite) re-enters ordinary human interactions after her period of impurity, she brings this offering to symbolize her commitment to ...


6

We find even within scripture that there existed a heathen practice of cutting the flesh as part of an attempt to appeal to the gods, a kind of unholy sacrifice if you will. So they shouted louder and slashed themselves with swords and spears, as was their custom, until their blood flowed. (NIV 1 Kings 18:28) There are other references to cuttings ones ...


6

It's a great question, and the truth is that the sentence is fairly ambiguous despite attempts to translate it otherwise (as in the ChaBaD translation brought in @crownjewel82's answer). Here's the verse - note that the closest we get to punctuation are the cantillation marks, which have a zaqef qaton (a minor disjunctive, like a comma or semicolon) at the ...


6

The original Hebrew text reads בקרת תהיה, “there shall be biqoreth”. This last word is variously translated as “investigation” or “punishment”, but it seems only the KJV applies this specifically to the woman. The Hebrew text doesn’t support this at all, so it’s unclear why the KJV translates the text this way. Perhaps this was a mistake; perhaps they had a ...


6

Definition The Hebrew term often translated "thigh" is ירך (yārēḵ; יָרֵךְ), which HALOT notes can refer to (my numbering; HALOT has only 2 entries and groups a number of meanings under #1 of there entry): The upper thigh (upper leg); e.g., Exo 28:42 (distinct from the waist here, referring to the bottom extent of priest's trousers), Jer 31:19 (Jeremiah ...


6

This is a seemingly unusual action by the Lord, in that Nadab and Abihu had offered incense before the Lord, without provocation from the Lord. It's important to understand that a priest acts for God on behalf of the people. Mal. 2:7, "For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the ...


6

The Hebrew formulation is: עֶרְוַ֥ת אֲחֽוֹת־אִמְּךָ֖ לֹ֣א תְגַלֵּ֑ה כִּֽי־שְׁאֵ֥ר אִמְּךָ֖ הִֽוא׃ (Lev 18:13, Westminster Leningrad Codex) Literally, the term גילוי עריות means "uncovering nakedness". However, this is just a euphemism for sexual relations. This can be seen from the following verses (Lev 18:20-23) and the parallel chapter (Lev 20:11-21) ...


6

There is no answer to this question in the MT itself, but there are several possible answers that do not overtly contradict the MT: The law dates from the time of, or only refers to, the stationary central sanctuary in Bet El or Jerusalem. The law applied only when the altar in the desert was actually set up, but not to the time during which it was ...


6

There is some difference of opinion about what the Hebrew of Leviticus 19:20 in the MT means. There is also some difference of opinion with respect to case law, if the bondswoman in this verse is an Israelite or is she is a Canaanite bondswoman intended for being the wife of a Canaanite servant. The MT is: וְאִישׁ כִּי יִשְׁכַּב אֶת אִשָּׁה שִׁכְבַת ...


6

In a compilation made in mid-13th century France by Chizkuni, there is an explanation quoting Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, that the 8th day had been chosen by God for circumcision of the newly born so that the whole family could rejoice in that celebration. Otherwise, the mother of the child could not be part of it due to her still being ritually unclean: ...


5

וְשֶׂ֣רֶט לָנֶ֗פֶשׁ לֹ֤א תִתְּנוּ֙ בִּבְשַׂרְכֶ֔ם וּכְתֹ֣בֶת קַֽעֲקַ֔ע לֹ֥א תִתְּנ֖וּ בָּכֶ֑ם אֲנִ֖י יְהוָֽה Grammatically speaking, "the dead" isn't even mentioned in the original Hebrew text. It was simply "the soul." In Hebraic thought, the soul is the unified body and spirit. The soul can be dead, or the soul can be alive. The text doesn't say one way ...


5

I would not translate Azazel as being the goat itself. The verse at Lev. 16:10 specifically says that Aaron the priest would draw lots on Yom Kippur day -- the Day of Atonement. There were two lots corresponding to two goats there before the altar. The lottery would determine which goat became a communal offering at the Temple, and "and the he goat upon ...


5

I don't think any of your four options answer your question. From an Orthodox Jewish perspective, the answer to your question is that each verse serves a different purpose. In the Torah -- the Five Books of Moses (Genesis through Deuteronomy) negative commandments (i.e. anything that says, "thou shalt not...") are brought out in two separate verses -- one ...


5

"Love your neighbour" has one meaning in the Old Testament and a subtly different meaning in the New Testament, where we acknowledge it to have a more universal meaning. However, this question is about its use in the OT. In Leviticus 19:18, the word 'neighbour' refers to fellow-Israelites and was understood that way by the earliest rabbinic interpretations. ...


5

No, this passage does not say that leprosy can be cured using birds. The rite described here is not about "curing" at all. Rather, it is about the ritual purification. These verses describe the first stage by which one previously excluded from the community was restored to fellowship within the nation of Israel. The (former) leper must have been healed (by ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible