Commentari biblici

Chs. 18–20. Laws dealing with various Moral Subjects

These three chs. contain features common to two or all three of them, which are found nowhere else in the Pentateuch. Such are (1) a collection of laws combined with a hortatory introduction and summary (Leviticus 18:1-5; Leviticus 18:24-30, Leviticus 19:2; Leviticus 19:37, Leviticus 20:1-8; Leviticus 20:22-26), (2) the prohibition of magic (Leviticus 19:26; Leviticus 19:31, Leviticus 20:6; Leviticus 20:27), (3) reference to Molech worship (Leviticus 18:21, Leviticus 20:1-5). Paton (Hebraica, x. [1894] iii ff.) considers that ch. 20 does not present an independent code or recension, but is a hortatory exposition based on chs. 17–19 by a later editor. At all events, the amount of repetition coupled with a variation in expressions in ch. 20 as compared with the three preceding it affords sufficient evidence that the two groups of laws are not in their present form the work of one writer.

Ch. Leviticus 18:1-30. Prohibition of Unlawful Marriages and Unchastity, and of Molech Worship

The introductory clause as far as ‘and say unto them’ is all that belongs to the final revision. The style of Rh[63] appears in Leviticus 18:2 b–5 and in Leviticus 18:24-30; the repetition of the same phrases and the brevity of expression in Leviticus 18:7-23 shew that they form a Torah on social relations which has been included by Rh[64] in his collection. The second person sing is employed throughout Leviticus 18:7-23, the plural in Leviticus 18:6 seems to distinguish it as an introduction added by Rh[65]; cp. the plural in Leviticus 18:3-5 and Leviticus 18:24-30.

[63] A Reviser who combined laws taken mainly from existing codes with a hortatory and warning element.

[64] A Reviser who combined laws taken mainly from existing codes with a hortatory and warning element.

[65] A Reviser who combined laws taken mainly from existing codes with a hortatory and warning element.

Paton (J. Bibl. Lit. xvi. [1897] pp. 43 ff.) takes ‘I am Jehovah your God’ in Leviticus 18:2 as the conclusion of ch. 17 which he regards as a pentad (or Torah made up of a fivefold prohibition) on sacrifice. He considers Leviticus 18:3-5 as a second pentad enjoining allegiance to Jehovah, and concluding with ‘I am the Lord.’ He also divides the rest of the chapter into two decalogues:

1. Purity in those connected through the relationship of parent and child.

The first Pentad: Kinship of the first degree, Leviticus 18:6-10.

The second Pentad: Kinship of the second degree, Leviticus 18:11-15.

2. Purity in remoter relationships.

The first Pentad: Relationships through marriage, Leviticus 18:16-19.

The second Pentad: Purity outside of the family, Leviticus 18:20-23.

To the exhortation concluding with ‘I am the Lord your God’ (Leviticus 18:30) he would add Leviticus 19:2 b, ‘Ye shall be holy,’ etc.

The arrangement in this ch. is better than in ch. 20, and the cases dealt with are more numerous. Ch. 20 contains no parallels to Leviticus 18:7; Leviticus 18:10; Leviticus 18:17 b, Leviticus 18:18, and has therefore been taken as representing an earlier code. On the other hand ch. 20, unlike ch. 18, mentions penalties for the offences, while such indications as it affords by the juxtaposition of ‘you’ in Leviticus 20:14 b, Leviticus 20:15 b, and ‘thou’ in Leviticus 20:16; Leviticus 20:19, and the duplicate clauses in Leviticus 18:10 suggest that whatever age may be ascribed to the code in ch. 20, as compared with that which appears in ch. 18, the former has at any rate been subjected to later editing.

5. I am the Lord] For the significance of this often repeated expression, see pp. xlviii f.

6. A general exhortation (hence perhaps the plural; see above), introductory to the enumeration of specific cases. Baentsch attributes it to the author of the preceding verses.

8. This is the one case which appears (apart from two others in the imprecations, Deuteronomy 27:22-23), but stated in different words, in Deut. (Deuteronomy 22:30 [Heb. 23:1], Deuteronomy 27:20). This has been thought to point to the code represented by the v. in Deut. as earlier than that here; but an easier explanation is to suppose that the practice, as specially prevalent at the time, needed specific prohibition. Illicit connexion with a stepmother here forbidden, was not uncommon in the polygamous East. See Driver, Deut., p. 259, for the custom in Syria and Arabia. It seems to have been still common in the time of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 22:10).

10. The prohibition in the case of a daughter was probably omitted accidentally by a copyist from the beginning of this v.

18. a woman to her sister] This is clearly right, as against the A.V. mg. ‘one wife to another.’ It is the marriage of two sisters together that is prohibited. The words that follow (‘in her lifetime’) show that the law, as set down here, does not prohibit marriage with a deceased wife’s sister. However weighty the reasons which may be adduced against such a connexion, scholars are generally agreed that they derive no support from this v.