It wasn't just women who could become unclean via bodily discharges, it affected men too. The common view seems to be that the discharges in v 2-12 referred to those from a man's sexual organs, gonorrhoea possibly being one concern. Such a man was in danger of rendering anything that he touched as unclean. Again, there are obvious hygiene reasons for some of the rules. We can, however, take a wider view as well. When a politician or similar person (if you accept the premise that politicians are human, which some may doubt) has an affair there is always the view proffered that "as long as he is good at his job it doesn't matter". This is nonsense. We cannot compartmentalise our lives, our spiritual state affects all that we do, whether for good or evil.
Next in this delightful chapter we come to emissions of semen. It seems that this includes both emissions during sex and other emissions. These other emissions may include nocturnal emissions and masturbation. No sacrifice was needed for this uncleanness, this was also the case for menstruation. This is a further reminder that uncleanness and sin were not synonymous. Bathing was all that was required.
A woman's period comes next, and, as was just mentioned, no sacrifice was required.
This is then followed by regulations for abnormal flows of blood from a woman.
If nothing else, this chapter proves that God is far less squeamish and far less reticent about talking about some of these things than we sometimes are.
Ian, Thanks for this blog. Your thoughts and musings are very welcome in an age when quality Bible debate and comment are severely lacking.
ReplyDelete