The subject matter here is fundamentally assymetrical between men and women. This chapter is addressed to men. Women have a different problem, they crave "Relationship" (which should not be confused with the dictionary definition of that word, meaning "connected") near as I can tell, when they use that word, they mean "affirmation." They want people to say nice things to them. Some guys -- including all pastors I have ever met -- are like that, but most guys rank Truth, Justice, and Duty as more important. Everybody wants affirmation, nobody wants to be insulted, but sometimes Things Need to be Done, even if they are uncomfortable. Guys do that.
What does this have to do with the Topic of the Day? Different needs result in different temptations, and different responses to temptation. Women want affirmation, guys just have an itch that needs to be scratched. This chapter is to guys: Don't. You don't need to scratch that itch here, with this woman. You can do that, you are a guy. Women, you can get your affirmation from Jesus. You know that. That's why there are more women than men in church. This chapter is not for you. Maybe Song of Solomon, some of the Psalms, the New Testament Epistles. Well, don't be the woman in this chapter, you don't need that. But Solomon is not saying that to you here.
Some parts of the Bible are written to particular people. This church went through Leviticus several months ago. Leviticus was written for the people of Israel more than 3000 years ago. It has some timeless principles and moral absolutes we can dig out -- like the Golden Rule, which is binding on all people everywhere and in all time, without exception -- but most of it is about ceremonial activity that ended on Calvary. Much of the Bible is written to guys, because if guys are doing what God gave them to do, they can explain to the women what they need to know. Men have fallen down on the job.
This chapter is for guys. The moral principle is easy enough to understand,
even the unbelievers understand it. We can ferret out some universal moral
principles, but the basic message is, Don't do that. It's a Duty, guys
can do that. If they want to.
He then goes directly into the chapter topic with the common connector word "For" (Hebrew 'kee') meaning approximately "the following is directly connected to what I just said..." In modern English that might be "Because" or just as easily (in other contexts) "Therefore" or as they say in legalese "Whereas..." [read v.3-6]
We have seen this form before, one line introducing the condition, then (often five, but in this case only three) lines giving he consequences of that choice of action.
Verse four is the sharp contrast to the deceptive sweet-as-honey, slick like oil come-on, the end is bitter (opposite to sweet) and sharp (opposite to smooth).
Verses 5 and 6 are another doublet of doublets, contrasting the death
where the adultress goes to the life she does not think about, and the
"straight" to the grave with the "crooked" of her paths. This doubled-up
poetic form gives emphasis to what the message is: Don't do that.
Verses 9 and 10 are a little obscure. I think it suggests that if you invade another man's territory, then he has a hold on you, and can keep you enslaved. Slavery is illegal here in the USA, so we don't think about what it means. You owe a debt to that guy, you must work it off. Slavery in this country was no fault of your own, somebody else did it to your ancestors, generations ago, but back when this was written, most servitude was working off a debt. That could be the consequence of adultery. At least Solomon says so here. That might not happen here and now, but there is a moral obligation. Don't go there.
[Read v.11-14]
Verse 11 speaks of health consequences to immoral behavior, and they
are! Even more now than when this was written.
[Discuss]
Why is this chapter aimed at men? Because if men don't succumb to temptations,
it doesn't matter what the "adulteress" tries, she won't succeed. We don't
like to talk about this topic in church, but it needs to be said.
Fortunately, a blog post on how the Bible came to be divided up into chapters and verses is going to mentioned who did it:
A man named Stephen Langton divided the Bible into chapters in the year A.D. 1227. The Bible he used was the Latin Vulgate. Langton was a professor at the University of Paris at the time. Later, he became the Archbishop of Canterbury.The author Don Stewart goes on to say that
These chapter divisions were later transferred to the Hebrew text in the fourteenth century by a man named Salomon ben Ishmael. There seems to have been certain changes made by Salomon ben Ishmael because the chapter divisions in the Hebrew text do not line up exactly with the English Bible.And then,
The modern Old Testament division into verses was standardized by the Ben Asher family around A.D. 900. However, the practice of dividing the Old Testament books into verses goes back centuries earlier.I got these comments from the Blue Letter Bible website. The BLB site does not say much about Don Stewart except he wrote a bunch of books (which tells us nothing) and went to BIOLA, which is a pretty good school (both my parents and my sister went there). The picture they show also turns up in a Google search that makes him out to be born in 1950, along with a half-dozen other Don Stewarts (at least three with Christian connections, and one actor). The BLB site draws on a dozen or more different authors, but I didn't track them all down.Modern verse division for the New Testament was the work of Robert Stephanus (Stephens), a French printer. He divided the Greek text into verses for his Greek New Testament published in 1551.
The first entire Bible, in which these chapter and verse divisions were used, was Stephen's edition of the Latin Vulgate (1555).
The first English Bible to have both chapter and verse divisions was the Geneva Bible (1560).
Tom Pittman
2022 August 9