By Idan Dershowitz
Dr. Dershowitz try a biblical scholar.
No text has received a better influence on thinking toward gay anyone as compared to biblical publication of Leviticus, which forbids sex between guys. Before Leviticus had been written, straight-out prohibitions against homosexual sex — whether between men or women — comprise practically unheard-of inside the old globe.
Part 18 of Leviticus have a listing of restricted incestuous functions, followed closely by prohibitions against sex with a menstruating lady, bestiality and other intimate acts. In Verse 22, we discover their most well-known injunction: “You shall perhaps not lie with a male just like a lady; really an abomination.” (Leviticus 20:13 repeats this law, in conjunction with a punishment for those who break they: “They will probably be place to demise; her blood is actually upon all of them.”)
Like other old messages, Leviticus is made progressively over a long years and include the text of greater than one publisher. Numerous scholars believe the part by which Leviticus 18 looks was actually added by a comparatively late editor, possibly person who worked above 100 years following eldest material in the book got consisting.
But i believe a healthier declare is actually justified. As I disagree in a write-up posted in the latest issue of the record Hebrew Bible and historical Israel, there was close evidence that an earlier form of the statutes in Leviticus 18 permitted sex between guys. And having the prohibition against same-sex relations included with it, the sooner book, I think, had been revised in an attempt to obscure any implication that same-sex connections got when become permissible.
The chapter’s earliest character, however, could be uncovered with some investigator work.
The core of Leviticus 18 will be the a number of incest guidelines, all of including the unforgettable phrase “uncover nakedness.” This can be generally fully understood as a euphemism for intercourse, so “you shall not find the nakedness of one’s father’s sibling” means something similar to “do not need gender together with your father’s brother.”
A lot of incest guidelines were recommended in an easy fashion, but two aren’t. The very first exception to this rule is actually: “The nakedness of pops and the nakedness of your own mama you shall not unearth; the woman is their mama, you shall not discover this lady nakedness” (emphasis my own). At first, this verse has a tendency to outlaw intercourse between one and either of his moms and dads. But the italicized reason, or gloss, suggests that legislation in fact covers only 1 father or mother: the mother. It is hard to reconcile the two parts of this phrase.
Exactly the same thing occurs once again several passages afterwards: “You shall maybe not find the nakedness of father’s buddy.” Easy, right? The next gloss, however, may give you whiplash: “you shall maybe not approach their girlfriend, she actually is the aunt.” By the point we’ve complete checking out the gloss, a prohibition against intercourse between a guy along with his paternal uncle provides transformed into a law about intercourse between a man and that uncle’s girlfriend.
Each verse in Leviticus 18’s a number of incest regulations consists of an identical gloss, nevertheless rest are simply just emphatic, operating homes the point. (including, “You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law; she actually is your own son’s wife, you shall perhaps not unearth her nakedness.”) Best within these two situation — the father and mommy, and father’s bro — perform the glosses adjust our very own comprehension of what is forbidden. A law prohibiting intercourse with one’s father fades aside, and a law against gender with one’s uncle is actually reinterpreted as a ban on intercourse with one’s aunt.
What we should bring let me reveal stronger proof of editorial intervention.
Really worth noting these particular new glosses give the idiom “uncover nakedness” incoherent. The expression can’t signify intercourse if uncovering the nakedness of one’s pops is actually an act that also involves one’s mother — once the gloss means.
But much more strikingly, the 2 exceptional passages would be the sole your that target incest between boys — most of the other individuals involve women 
. The moment the brand new glosses happened to be put into the text, the prohibitions in Leviticus against incest don’t banned any same-sex couplings; best heterosexual pairs are prohibited.
If an afterwards publisher of Leviticus compared homosexual intercourse, you may wonder, wouldn’t they made more good sense for him (and it also is probably a your) to exit the initial restrictions on homosexual incest intact?
No. the answer to recognizing this editorial decision could be the notion of “the exclusion proves the guideline.” Relating to this idea, the existence of an exception indicates the existence of a broader guideline. Eg, a sign proclaiming a workplace as closed on Sundays implies that the office is open on all other times of the times.
Today, apply this concept to Leviticus 18: a law declaring that homosexual incest is actually prohibited could sensibly be taken to suggest that non-incestuous homosexual intercourse are permitted.
A lawmaker was unlikely to establish that murdering one’s daddy was unlawful if there’s already a blanket injunction against murder. By the same token, it’s not essential to stipulate that sex between two certain males was forbidden if a categorical ban against sex between guys is from the books.
It appears that making use of the later introduction in Leviticus of a rules banning all male homosexual intercourse, they turned into expedient to create the sooner material latest by doing out with two now-superfluous injunctions against homosexual incest — injunctions that produced feeling whenever sex between males ended up being if not enabled.
This editor’s decision to counteract old statutes by creating new glosses, instead of deleting the regulations completely, is actually serendipitous: the guy left behind plenty of clues for their handiwork to-be detectable.
One can only picture how different the historical past of culture may have been had the earlier type of Leviticus 18’s laws inserted the biblical canon.