[b-hebrew] Leviral marriage

Read, James C K0434995 at kingston.ac.uk
Fri Oct 21 06:02:46 EDT 2005


There seem to be two wedding ceremonies in the torah.

1)Adam & Eve
2)Isaac & Rebekah

Adam & Eve's wedding ceremony consists of God saying 'Wake up Adam. I've 
made you a woman. Have fun.'

Isaac & Rebekah's wedding consists of Isaac taking her into his Mum's tent 
and 'loving' her.

All modern day formal ceremonies seem to be an attempt to formalise these 
events and for the most part take their customs from extra-biblical religions 
and/or cultures. 

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of Yigal Levin
Sent: Fri 10/21/2005 12:27 AM
To: b-hebrew
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Leviral marriage
 
>From a purely semantic point of view, biblical hebrew does not have separate 
words for "wife" and "woman". Both are "ishah". We really don't know what 
kind of "wedding" ceremony existed in biblical Israel. If an ishah (wonam) 
"was a man's", she was his ishah (wife).

Yigal
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Read, James C" <K0434995 at kingston.ac.uk>
To: "Read, James C" <K0434995 at kingston.ac.uk>; <bill.rea at canterbury.ac.nz>; 
<b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 1:13 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Leviral marriage


>
> On rereading my post I realised that I should correct myself.
>
>>Yah had expressed quite clearly that taking another man's wife was an
>>immoral act.
>
> I would probably have been more faithful to the text by saying that Yah
> had quite clearly expressed that it was immoral to take another man's
> woman.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of Read, James C
> Sent: Thu 10/20/2005 11:08 PM
> To: bill.rea at canterbury.ac.nz; b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Leviral marriage
>
> Bill,
>
> Your reasoning was very followable up until this point.
>
>>David's half dozen doesn't raise any moral qualms except the acquistion
>>of Bathsheba. But even here Nathan the Prophet was not sent
>>to David until after Uriah was dead. If God had sent Nathan after David
>>had shagged Bathsheba he (God) could have saved Uriah's life.
>
> Are you suggesting that Yah was only upset with David for having Uriah
> bumped off and not for the original doing the dirty on him with his wife?
>
> This would seem to contradict the context as Nathan tells a story about
> a man with many who steals from a man with only one. This would seem to
> indicate that Uriah's objective was to make David understand the gravity
> of his mistake regarding the stealing of Uriah's wife. Plus the greater
> context of the law and more specifically of the ten words shows that
> Yah had expressed quite clearly that taking another man's wife was an
> immoral act.
>
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
>
>
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> 

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list