Inquiry:
How should a man who has sex with a menstrating woman be punished? Leviticus 15:24 says he is unclean for seven days, but Leviticus 20:18 says he and the woman should be cut off the people? Is there a contradiction?
Response:
Certainly the language in the two texts is similar, but there are some noteworthy distinctions that may serve to explain why the result in one text is seven days of uncleanness, but the other is a death penalty.
Often when Leviticus is referring to sexual intercourse, the idea of uncovering one’s nakedness is mentioned. We see this in Leviticus 20:18, as the man not only “lies” with the woman, but he “uncovers her nakedness.” In Leviticus 15:24, the man laid down with her, but no mention is made of him uncovering her nakedness. It may be that in Leviticus 15:24 the man simply lay on the same bed with her, and contacted her blood, not by sexual action but through proximity. There is nothing inherent in the Hebrew word שְׁבַק which demands sexual contact.
Can we conclusively determine that there was no sexual contact in Leviticus 15:24? No, I suppose not. However, even if there was sexual intercouse involved in both texts, a distinction is still made in the texts. Leviticus 20:18 speaks of sexual activity wherein the man and woman have both consented (he uncovered her nakedness; she uncovered her flow of blood). If sexual intercourse is in Leviticus 15:24, it does not describe the same consent as Leviticus 20:18. We are not told that the woman did anything in Leviticus 15:24, unlike 20:18.
Which is it? I lean toward the first explanation, but the fact is, whether the word “lie” involves sexual intercourse or not, there is still a difference established in the texts.
There is no contradiction.
Links: YouVersion | GROW magazine
Return to the article archive
