Leviticus 18 - Uncovering ... = Euphemism?

[readmore]

However, neither of Hebrew words from Leviticus 18:6-19 have any nonliteral sexual definitions listed: galah Strong's # 1540 meaning to uncover, remove, reveal; 'ervah Strong's #6172 meaning nakedness, nude, shame (this entry does indicate that exposed or undefended is a figurative usage.) Perhaps this is merely an oversight?

Anyway, the Hebrew phrases like "lay with her father" (Genesis 19:33), "whosoever lieth with a beast" (Exodux 22:19), and "Adam knew Eve his wife" (Genesis 4:1, 4:25) seem to be much more obvious terms for intimate relations.

Good stuff... However, you don't seem to take into account that words when combined may carry a more significant meaning that what is contained in their definitions. Example, "sleep" on its own has a very obvious meaning, and so does, "together", but when you put them together it is a common euphemism that isn't alluded to by the words' particular definitions.

 

[franklinmonroe]

Good stuff... However, you don't seem to take into account that words when combined may carry a more significant meaning that what is contained in their definitions...

Actually, the search program I used does take that into consideration. For example, if you were to look up the Greek word ginomai (Strong's #1096 primarily meaning be) you would find a listing of KJV usage; it notes when it is used as one part of an idiom ("God forbid+3361").

In your example, "sleep" in most dictionaries would include the known common informal, slang, or idiomatic definitions (sleep around, sleep in, sleep on, etc.).

 

[tonyhipps]

Message Deleted

 

[franklinmonroe]

... you don't seem to take into account that words when combined may carry a more significant meaning that what is contained in their definitions...

Building upon the premise that "uncovered his father's nakedness" seems to be a different violation than "lieth with" in Leviticus 20:11, the sentence structure of verse 18 also suggests two separate sins: the one of "lie with" and the one of "uncover her nakedness".
Leviticus 20:17-21 (KJV) --

17. And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness;
it [is] a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister's nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity.
18. And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness; he hath discovered her fountain,
and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.
19. And thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister, nor of thy father's sister: for he uncovereth his near kin: they shall bear their iniquity.
20. And if a man shall lie with his uncle's wife, he hath uncovered his uncle's nakedness: they shall bear their sin; they shall die childless.
21. And if a man shall take his brother's wife, it [is] an unclean thing: he hath uncovered his brother's nakedness; they shall be childless.​

Verse 19 speaks of the combined phrase "uncover the nakedness"; putting the terms "mother's sister" or "father's sister" into today's vernacular is to say it is the individual's aunt. Then verse 20 describes what seems to be a different violation ("lie with") against "his uncle's wife" which is also an aunt. Now, my personal interpretation of these two verses makes the disctiction between the women: that the aunt in verse 19 is his blood relative, while the "wife" of his uncle in verse 20 is a female from outside the family. But if my interpretation is incorrect (and there really is no distiction being made of family relation) then the laws and penalties must be making a distinction between the acts themselves.

Nonetheless, verse 20 does again describe both a "lie with" and an "uncovered his uncle's nakedness" transgression, which clearly is redundant if they mean the same thing. Furthermore, verse 17 seems to indicate that persons of both genders have their own individual "nakedness" which can be violated.

In verses 17 and 21 the Hebrew word rendered "take" is laqach (Strong's #3947) which broadly means to take (or get, seize, receive, acquire, buy, etc.), and can even mean to take a wife. Whatever is meant here by "take", it is parallel yet different from other verses "lie with" (the previously discussed Hebrew word shakab); but "take" is still distinct from the act of uncovering nakedness. None of these sins seem to carry a death penalty. Finally, there is no mentioning of "uncovered nakedness" relative to the sins of homosexuality ("a man also lie with mankind" verse 13) or bestiality ("a man lie with a beast" and "a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto" in verses 15-16 of this chapter), which along with adultery (verse 10) are capital offenses.

All together, it is difficult to make "uncovered nakedness" an euphemism for sexual intercourse in all cases. And if not an euphemism always, then context must indicate when it is figurative, which in turn, requires the interpreter to understand the context with absolute certainity in order to envoke euphemism.