15
preserved. This, then, is the idiom; and to this idiom the passage in Leviticus xviii. 18. has no relation. There is nothing distributive nor reciprocal implied in it. The phrase here refers only to the object cf the verb; upon which object no trace of mutual or reciprocal action passes over. To bring it in any degree under the idiom, it should at least read thus: 'Wives (Na-shim) one to another thou shalt not take; and even then it would be unlike any other instance. But, further, the suffixes attached in the singular to the subsequent words (her nakedness, besides her, in her lifetime) show, decisively, that even such a solution is inadmissable; and these of themselves limit the words to two specific individuals (who have no mutual action one upon another,) in the same literal sense as in the preceeding verses, viz., a wife to a sister."
It is thus as plain as day that two sisters are mentioned in Leviticus xviii. 18, as this writer's own first "literal rendering of the Hebrew" declares; and when he afterwards, (page 7), says, "the text in dispute refers neither to polygamy nor to a deceased wife's sister," he not only contradicts himself and what we have above adduced, but he contradicts such writers as Dr. Pusey, the late Bishop of Exeter (Dr. Philpotts), and others of the same school. Dr. Pusey adopts the authorised version, and "interprets the prohibition of marrying two sisters;" and Dr. Philpotts does the same.
PLAIN MEANING OF THE PROHIBITION IN LEV. XVIII. 18.—THE MAGAZINE WRITER'S ABSURD EXAMPLES.
So much at present on the translation of the verse. Let us now briefly notice the prohibition, "thou shalt not take a wife to her sister, &c.," a prohibition understood in all ages, as the words expressly declare, as relating to two sisters. The law of Moses assumes the existance of polygamy, and regulated it, (Exodus xxi. 9–12; Deuteronomy xxi. 15–17), but does not forbid it. The prophet denounced David's adultery, but directly recognized his polygamy
