Struggling with the Literal Interpretation of Leviticus 20:13

Leviticus 20:13 states, "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them" ^[1]. This verse has been a subject of controversy and debate, particularly regarding its literal interpretation and application.

Literary Context

Leviticus 20 is part of the Holiness Code, a section of the book of Leviticus that outlines laws and regulations for the Israelites to maintain their covenant relationship with God. The chapter addresses various sexual offenses, including adultery, incest, and bestiality, and prescribes punishments for those who commit these acts. The verse is situated within a broader context of laws aimed at distinguishing Israel from surrounding nations and maintaining ritual purity ^[1].

Historical Setting

The historical setting of Leviticus 20:13 is ancient Israel, during the period of the wilderness wanderings or the early settlement in Canaan. The laws outlined in Leviticus were given to the Israelites through Moses, who received them from God. Understanding the cultural and historical context is crucial for interpreting the verse ^[3].

Key Terms and Exegetical Decisions

The key terms in Leviticus 20:13 include "abomination" (Hebrew: תֹועֵבָה, to'evah), which refers to an act that is ritually or morally reprehensible. The phrase "lies with a male as with a woman" is a clear description of a sexual act between two males. The punishment prescribed is death, emphasizing the severity with which this act was viewed ^[1].

The interpretation of this verse hinges on understanding the nature of the prohibition and its application. Some traditions interpret the verse as condemning homosexual acts as immoral and contrary to God's will ^[2]. Others argue that the context is cultic or ritual, and the prohibition is aimed at certain practices associated with idolatry or pagan worship.

Range of Interpretations

Interpretations of Leviticus 20:13 vary widely across different traditions. Jewish (Rabbinic) tradition, as reflected in the Babylonian Talmud, understands the verse within the context of Jewish law, emphasizing the severity of the punishment for certain sexual offenses ^{[8, 9]}. Reformed and Protestant traditions have also grappled with the verse, with some interpreting it as a condemnation of homosexual acts ^{[11, 7]}.

In contrast, some Jewish (Rationalist) interpreters, such as Abraham Ibn Ezra, have approached the verse with a more nuanced understanding, considering the historical and cultural context ^[4]. Patristic interpretations, as seen in the works of Augustine and Tertullian, often viewed the verse through the lens of moral theology, emphasizing the importance of adhering to God's commands ^{[5, 6]}.

Function in Tradition

Leviticus 20:13 has played a significant role in shaping moral and ethical teachings within various religious traditions. The verse has been cited in discussions about sexual ethics and morality, influencing debates on homosexuality and related issues. Its interpretation has been invoked in both traditional and contemporary contexts to inform understandings of God's will regarding human sexuality.

The diverse interpretations of Leviticus 20:13 reflect the complexity of biblical interpretation and the need to consider historical, cultural, and theological contexts. As with many biblical passages, understanding this verse requires careful examination of its literary and historical setting, as well as engagement with the range of interpretations within different traditions ^[10].

The ongoing debates surrounding Leviticus 20:13 underscore the challenges of applying ancient texts to contemporary issues. As interpreters continue to grapple with the meaning and significance of this verse, they must balance fidelity to the text with sensitivity to the cultural and social contexts in which it is read and applied.

The historical and cultural distance between ancient Israel and modern societies necessitates a thoughtful and nuanced approach to interpreting Leviticus 20:13. By engaging with the verse within its original context and considering the diverse interpretations across traditions, readers can deepen their understanding of its significance and relevance.

Sources

Treasury of Scripture Knowledge “Leviticus 13:3 cross-references: Genesis 13:3, Leviticus 5:3, Leviticus 10:10, Leviticus 13:2, Leviticus 13:8, Leviticus 13:10, Leviticus 13:20, Leviticus 14:37, Leviticus 14:54, Leviticus 14:56, Ezekiel 16:30, Ezekiel 44:23, Hosea 7:9, Haggai 2:11, Malachi 2:7, Matthew 16:19, Matthew 18:17, John 20:23, Acts 20:28, Romans 3:19, Romans 7:7, 1 Corinthians 5:4, 2 Thessalonians 3:14, 1 Timothy 1:20, 2 Timothy 2:16, 2 Timothy 3:13, Hebrews 13:7, Revelation 2:23”
Treasury of Scripture Knowledge “Leviticus 20:13 cross-references: Genesis 19:5, Leviticus 18:22, Deuteronomy 23:17, Judges 19:22, Romans 1:26, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10, Jude 1:7”
Ezekiel “Ezekiel 20:13 (YLT) — And--rebel against me do the house of Israel in the wilderness, In My statutes they have not walked, And My judgments they have despised, Which the man who doth--liveth by them. And My sabbaths they have greatly polluted, And I say to pour out My fury on them in the wilderness, to consume them.”
Sefaria (Jewish (Rationalist)) “Abraham Ibn Ezra on Leviticus 20:3: It would have appeared to us that ba-even (with stones) 12 Literally, with a stone. (v. 2) is a collective noun. 13 Hence ba-even is to be rendered with stones. Compare, And I have oxen (shor), 14 Literally, an ox. and asses (chamor) 15 Literally, an ass. (Gen. 32:6). 16 Literally, and I have an ox and an ass. However, the words of tradition are correct. 17 The rabbis took ba-even literally. According to the Midrash the culprit was first stoned by one stone. See Sanhedrin 6:4, “The place of stoning was twice the height of a man. One of the witnesses knocked ”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 4: Tertullian IV, Minucius Felix, Commodian, Origen — FROM THE GREEK.: long investigation whether this history so deemed literally occurred or not, and whether the literal meaning of this law is to be observed or not. And therefore the exact reader must, in obedience to the Saviour's injunction to" search the Scriptures,"[1] carefully ascertain in how far the literal meaning is true, and in how far impossible; and so far as he can, trace out, by means of similar statements, the meaning everywhere scattered through Scripture of that which cannot be understood in a literal signification.”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 3: Tertullian — CHAP. XXX.--THIS VISION INTERPRETED BY TERTULLIAN OF THE RESURRECTION OF THE BODIES OF THE DEAD. A CHRONOLOGICAL ERROR OF OUR AUTHOR, WHO SUPPOSES THAT EZEKIEL IN HIS CH. XXXI. PROPHESIED BEFORE THE C (part 2): for a similitude, nor does nonentity form a suitable foundation for a parable. It will therefore be right to believe that the bones are destined to have a rehabiliment of flesh and breath, such as it is here said they will have, by reason indeed of which their renewed state could alone express the reformed condition of Jewish affairs, which is pretended to be the”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 44: his children should be stript of the kingdom, and carried away into captivity, for a sin which he had committed ( Isa. 39:7 ); and the households of Pharaoh and Abimelech were made to suffer for an injury done to Abraham ( Gen. 12:17 ; 20:3–18). But the attempt to solve the question in this way is an evasion rather than a true interpretation. For the punishment denounced here and in similar passages is too great to be confined within the limits of the present life. We must therefore understand it to mean, that a curse from the Lord”
Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 47b.13: § Another dilemma was raised by”
Babylonian Talmud (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 176a.94:13: § Another dilemma was raised by”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 2: Augustine — City of God, Christian Doctrine — CHAP. 12.--A DIVERSITY OF INTERPRETATIONS IS USEFUL. ERRORS ARISING FROM AMBIGUOUS WORDS. (part 1): 17. And this circumstance would assist rather than hinder the understanding of Scripture, if only readers were not careless. For the examination of a number of texts has often thrown light upon some of the more obscure passages; for example, in that passage of the prophet Isaiah,(1) one translator reads: "And do not despise the domestics of thy seed;"(2) another reads: "And do not despise thine own flesh."(3) Each of these in turn confir”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 109: Index of Scripture References Genesis 1:2 1:26 1:27 1:31 2:7 2:7 2:17 2:18 2:23 2:23 3:7 3:9 3:12 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:22 4:4 4:7 4:10 4:13 6:3 6:5 6:6 6:18 7:21 8:21 9:6 12:12 12:17 14:18 14:18 15:1 15:1 15:5 15:17 16:9 17:7 17:7 17:10 17:10 17:13 17:15 17:27 18:2 18:23 20:3 20:7 21:1 21:12 21:24 22:1 22:8 22:16-18 23:4 23:19 24:7 24:10 26:27 27:28 27:38-39 28:12 28:20 29 30:2 31:19 31:20 31:40-41 32 32:10 32:13 32:29-30 33 34 36:22 37:18 37:28 37:33 38:18 42 43 43:14 45:5 47:9 47:9 47:29-30 48:14 48:16 49:5-6 49:18 Exodus 2:12 3:2 3”

Ask Your Own Question