Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Deut. 22:22-29

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>
  • To: "Jason Hare" <jaihare AT gmail.com>, "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Deut. 22:22-29
  • Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:57:04 -0800

Dear Jason,

I gave the full passage to give the full context so that there would be no
question as to the what the Tanakh said regarding the issue.

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
----- Original Message -----
From: Jason Hare
To: Bryant J. Williams III ; B-Hebrew
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Deut. 22:22-29


Bryant,

The relevant text is specifically verse 25, which says that he lay hold of
the girl and slept with her, putting himself as blame, while verse 26 says
that she did nothing wrong, even though she would have gone against her
betrothal if she had done it willingly. This text is clearly referring to a
rape, but the verses above are not, in which the man took her as a wife after
lying with her. The question has nothing to do with the meaning of שכב but
rather with the combination of החזיק and שכב. I hope this helps. (All the
rest of the citations you gave are apparently secondary in relation to the
issue in question.)

Jason


Bryant J. Williams III wrote:
Dear Bill,

כִּֽי־יִמָּצֵ֨א אִ֜ישׁ שֹׁכֵ֣ב׀ עִם־אִשָּׁ֣ה בְעֻֽלַת־בַּ֗עַל וּמֵ֙תוּ֙
גַּם־שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם הָאִ֛ישׁ הַשֹּׁכֵ֥ב עִם־הָאִשָּׁ֖ה וְהָאִשָּׁ֑ה
וּבִֽעַרְתָּ֥
הָרָ֖ע מִיִּשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ ס
23 כִּ֤י יִהְיֶה֙ נַעֲ֯רָ֣ בְתוּלָ֔ה מְאֹרָשָׂ֖ה לְאִ֑ישׁ וּמְצָאָ֥הּ
אִ֛ישׁ
בָּעִ֖יר וְשָׁכַ֥ב עִמָּֽהּ׃
24 וְהֹוצֵאתֶ֨ם אֶת־שְׁנֵיהֶ֜ם אֶל־שַׁ֣עַר׀ הָעִ֣יר הַהִ֗וא וּסְקַלְתֶּ֨ם
אֹתָ֥ם
בָּאֲבָנִים֮ וָמֵתוּ֒ אֶת־הַֽנַּעֲ֯רָ֗ עַל־דְּבַר֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־צָעֲקָ֣ה
בָעִ֔יר
וְאֶ֨ת־הָאִ֔ישׁ עַל־דְּבַ֥ר אֲשֶׁר־עִנָּ֖ה אֶת־אֵ֣שֶׁת רֵעֵ֑הוּ
וּבִֽעַרְתָּ֥
הָרָ֖ע מִקִּרְבֶּֽךָ׃ ס
25 וְֽאִם־בַּשָּׂדֶ֞ה יִמְצָ֣א הָאִ֗ישׁ אֶת־הַֽנַּעֲ֯רָ֮ הַמְאֹ֣רָשָׂ֔ה
וְהֶחֱזִֽיק־בָּ֥הּ הָאִ֖ישׁ וְשָׁכַ֣ב עִמָּ֑הּ וּמֵ֗ת הָאִ֛ישׁ
אֲשֶׁר־שָׁכַ֥ב
עִמָּ֖הּ לְבַדֹּֽו׃
26 וְלַֽנַּ֯עֲרָ֮ לֹא־תַעֲשֶׂ֣ה דָבָ֔ר אֵ֥ין לַֽנַּעֲ֯רָ֖ חֵ֣טְא מָ֑וֶת
כִּ֡י
כַּאֲשֶׁר֩ יָק֨וּם אִ֤ישׁ עַל־רֵעֵ֙הוּ֙ וּרְצָחֹ֣ו נֶ֔פֶשׁ כֵּ֖ן הַדָּבָ֥ר
הַזֶּֽה׃
27 כִּ֥י בַשָּׂדֶ֖ה מְצָאָ֑הּ צָעֲקָ֗ה הַֽנַּעֲ֯רָ֮ הַמְאֹ֣רָשָׂ֔ה*
וְאֵ֥ין
מֹושִׁ֖יעַ לָֽהּ׃ ס
28 כִּֽי־יִמְצָ֣א אִ֗ישׁ נַעֲ֯רָ֤ בְתוּלָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־אֹרָ֔שָׂה
וּתְפָשָׂ֖הּ
וְשָׁכַ֣ב עִמָּ֑הּ וְנִמְצָֽאוּ׃
29 וְ֠נָתַן הָאִ֨ישׁ הַשֹּׁכֵ֥ב עִמָּ֛הּ לַאֲבִ֥י הַֽנַּעֲ֯רָ֖ חֲמִשִּׁ֣ים
כָּ֑סֶף וְלֹֽו־תִהְיֶ֣ה לְאִשָּׁ֗ה תַּ֚חַת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עִנָּ֔הּ לֹא־יוּכַ֥ל
שַׁלְּחָ֖הּ כָּל־יָמָֽיו׃ ס

[ Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia : With Westminster Hebrew Morphology.
electronic ed. Stuttgart; Glenside PA : German Bible Society; Westminster
Seminary, 1996, c1925; morphology c1991, S. Dt 22:22-29]

Relevant transliteration (from Logos Bible Software)
šakab (7 / 212)
Deut 22:22 yimaṣēʾ ʾiyš šokēb| ʿim-ʾišah bəʿulat-
baʿal ûmētû gam-šənêhem haʾiyš hašokēb ʿim-
Deut 22:23 ûməṣaʾah ʾiyš baʿiyr wəšakab ʿimah.
Deut 22:25 bah haʾiyš wəšakab ʿimah ûmēt haʾiyš
ûmēt haʾiyš ʾǎšer-šakab ʿimah ləbadow.
Deut 22:28 ʾorašah ûtəpašah wəšakab ʿimah wənimṣaʾû.
Deut 22:29 wənatan haʾiyš hašokēb ʿimah laʾǎbiy

שָׁכַב (šakab)
3. of sexual relations, lie with: subj. man, c. עִם Gn 30:15, 16; 39:7,
12, 14
(J), Ex 22:15 (E), Dt 22:22 + 8 times Dt., 2 S 11:4, 11; 12:11, 24 Lv
15:33; c.
אֶת fem. with (MT אֹתָהּ, etc., orig. אִתָּהּ, etc., v. Dr 2 S 13:14 and
II.
אֵת, p. 85a supra), Gn 26:10; 34:2, 7; 35:22 (all J), 1 S 2:22 (om. G and
mod.),
2 S 13:14 Ez 23:8 (fig.), Lv 15:24 (שָׁכֹב יִשְׁכַּב), Nu 5:19, also (c.
acc.
cogn. שִׁכְבַת־זֶרַע) v 13 Lv 15:18; 19:20; c. acc. (sf.) fem. Dt 28:30
Kt (v.
[שָׁגֵל]); c. אֵצֶל fem. Gn 39:10 (J); c. אֵת vir. (sodomy), Lv 18:22;
20:13
(both H; c. acc. cogn. מִשְׁכְּבֵי אִשָּׁח); c. עִם־בְּהֵמָה Dt 27:21 Ex
22:18
(E); subj. woman, c. עִם vir. Gn 19:32, 34, 35 (J) 2 S 13:11; אֵת vir. Gn
19:33,
34 (cf. 1 e supra).
[Brown, Francis ; Driver, Samuel Rolles ; Briggs, Charles Augustus:
Enhanced
Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. electronic ed. Oak
Harbor, WA :
Logos Research Systems, 2000, S. 1012]

2381 שָׁכַב (šākab) lie down.
Derivatives
2381a שְׁכָבָה (šĕkābâ) coating.
2381b שְׁכֹבֶת (šĕkōbet) copulation.
2381c מִשְׁכָב (miškāb) couch.
šākab appears most often in the Qal primarily with the meaning “to lie
down (in
death)” or “to lie down (for sexual relations).”
Whenever the derivatives of šākab (see below) are used in a context of
sexual
relationships, those relationships are illicit (Gen 30:15, 16; II Sam
11:11 may
be exceptions). This is no less true with the verb šākab itself. In one
instance
it is used in legal statements that forbid certain types of sexual
liasons.
Exodus 22:16 [H 15] outlaws fornication: “If a man seduce a virgin who is
not
betrothed and ‘sleep/lie’ with her he shall pay her price and make her his
wife.” Deuteronomy 22:22 advocates the death penalty for two people
caught in
adultery: “If a man is caught ‘sleeping/ lying’ with another man’s wife
both
must die.” Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 use šākab in the statement that
prohibits
homosexual relationships: “The man who ‘lies’ with a man … they must die.”
Finally in Deut 27:21 “lying” with animals is cursed by the Law.
It is sobering to notice that for the above sexual aberrations usually
the death
penalty was prescribed. To be sure, the Bible does not tell us to what
degree
the punishment was enforced across the board. But why do the Scriptures
inveigh
so forcefully against tampering with the sexual relationship. Could not
at least
one reason be that Israel was surrounded by cultures in which such
practices
were par for the course at the human or even at the divine level? Perhaps
one of
the most degrading features of pagan religions is the way in which
religious and
sexual expression were often one and the same thing. It was, however, not
a
sacramentalizing of sex but rather an eroticizing of religion.
Apart from legal texts šākab is used in narrative sections that describe
incidents of inappropriate behavior. The daughters of Lot made their
father
drunk and then ‘slept’ with him (Gen 19:32ff.). One of Abimelech’s
subjects
almost inadvertently committed adultery with Rebekah (Gen 26:10). The
verb is
used to describe the rape of Dinah, Jacob’s daughter, by Shechem (Gen
34:2, 7).
Reuben “slept” with his father’s concubine Bilhah while Jacob was absent
(Gen
35:22). The sons of Eli engaged in amorous pursuits in their free time (I
Sam
2:22). Amnon violated his half-sister Tamar (II Sam 13:11, 14),
emulating, no
doubt, the activities of his own father with Bathsheba (II Sam 11:4).
By contrast when the Bible makes reference to a sexual relationship that
is
within the boundaries of God’s will it usually uses a phrase such as
“Adam knew
his wife and she conceived” (Gen 4:1, 17) or “Abraham went in unto Hagar
and she
conceived” (Gen 16:4). The latter phrase is used even in Gen 38:18 of
Judah and
Tamar, father-in-law and daughter-in-law respectively, where Judah denied
Tamar
her levirate rights.
[Victor P. Hamilton, pp. 921-922 in Harris, R. Laird ; Harris, Robert
Laird ;
Archer, Gleason Leonard ; Waltke, Bruce K.: Theological Wordbook of the
Old
Testament. electronic ed. Chicago : Moody Press, 1999, c1980, S. 921]

Bryant says:

It is apparent from even the above sources that Tanakh is very explicit
about
illicit sexual intercourse. Furthermore, since God is holy, He expects His
people to follow His commandments, statutes, laws, etc. The Israelites
were to
be totally different in comparison to the nations that they were to
dispossess
per God's command. This is especially true with regards to sexual
relations and
idolatry. As Victor Hamilton says above, "It is sobering to notice that
for the
above sexual aberrations usually the death penalty was prescribed. To be
sure,
the Bible does not tell us to what degree the punishment was enforced
across the
board. But why do the Scriptures inveigh so forcefully against tampering
with
the sexual relationship. Could not at least one reason be that Israel was
surrounded by cultures in which such practices were par for the course at
the
human or even at the divine level? Perhaps one of the most degrading
features of
pagan religions is the way in which religious and sexual expression were
often
one and the same thing. It was, however, not a sacramentalizing of sex but
rather an eroticizing of religion." It is a violation of the commandment,
"Thou
shalt not acommit adultery." This applies in its literal, figurative and
spiritual senses. See also the entire prophecy of Hosea regarding how
adultery
is understood by God.

This is not a question of ancient views versus modern views.

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
For your security this Message has been checked for Viruses as a courtesy
of Com-Pair Services!


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.7/1232 - Release Date: 01/18/08
7:32 PM


For your security this Message has been checked for Viruses as a courtesy of
Com-Pair Services!




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page