Appendices. The grouping of offences is noteworthy, and the presence of Leviticus 18:21 (perhaps not original) with the rest. For Leviticus 18:19, see on Leviticus 15:24, and cf. Ezekiel 18:6. For Leviticus 18:20, cf. Exodus 20:14. If the characteristic words to defile thyself, were taken seriously, they would revolutionise the still prevailing moral estimates of sexual sins. For the custom of the ceremonial passing of children through the fire, cf. Leviticus 8:21 *, 2 Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 7:31 *, Ezekiel 20:25 f.* It is not certain that this meant a horrible death; it might simply involve (as in other countries) a leaping through flames, regarded either as purificatory or as an equivalent for such a sacrifice as that of Genesis 22. The name Molech is connected with the Heb. word for king (cf. Baal = lord), possibly pronounced by later Jews with the vowels of the word Bosheth (shame, cf. Numbers 32:38 *, 1 Samuel 14:47 *, 1 Kings 16:32 *). Doubtless Molech was identified by the populace with Yahweh. The horror of the unions prohibited in Leviticus 18:22 f. is deep-rooted (cf. Genesis 19:5). By confusion (Leviticus 18:23) is meant a disturbance and violation of the order of nature, and therefore something repulsive. The chapter does not refer either to fornication or to simple unchastity. The former is a recognised institution in the OT (cf. Genesis 38, 1 Kings 22:38, not RVm), but regarded by the better minds with loathing (Hosea 1-3, Ezekiel 23). The latter is seldom referred to (in Exodus 22:16 and Leviticus 19:20, unchastity is thought of as a sin chiefly against property, as often in English and other law); independently of the codes, however, moral feeling on the subject definitely though perhaps slowly advances in Israel, doubtless owing in part to the intensity of family life and feeling but it first finds clear expression in the NT.

Continues after advertising
Continues after advertising