Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 – Part 4: Broader Contextual Considerations

In this instalment, I consider the broader contextual situation, both in terms of the biblical text of Leviticus, but also the cultural context of both ancient Near East and Mediterranean societies. This is fairly straightforward and graphic but is necessary if we are going to have an intelligent discussion regarding what the biblical texts say, or don't say, about same-sex intimacy. So, as they say on television–but revised for reading: "The following article contains graphic context...much like real life. Reader discretion is advised."

******************

3.     Broader Contextual Considerations

3.1       The Holiness Code and the Book of Leviticus

Our two passages are located in a section of Leviticus known as “the Holiness Code” which includes chapters 17–27. Jacob Milgrom notes that in the Holiness Code “two critical changes occur: ritual impurity becomes moral impurity; and the domain of the sacred expands, embracing the entire land, not just the sanctuary, and all of Israel, not just the priesthood.” Thus, there is a “decided emphasis on ethical behavior and the granting of civil equality to the resident alien.”[1] We can see this in chapters 18 and 19 in that the resident alien is held to the same ethical standards in terms of both blessing and punishment (18:26). As we have already noted, the individual can defile the land through his disobedience and thus, like the Canaanites before him, be vomited out by the land. Many scholars see the Holiness Code as a development of the earlier legal codes, probably written in the late eighth century BCE.[2] What is of note is that no other biblical law code contains any law even remotely related to same-gender sexual intimacy. It is only found within these two chapters of Leviticus.

3.2       Other references to same-gender sex in the Hebrew Bible

All scholars would agree that this law is not found elsewhere but would disagree on whether same-gender sexual intimacy is demonstrated or prohibited by means of other Hebrew Bible texts. The texts most often cited are Gen 19:1–11 and Judg 19:22–26. However, what seems quite obvious in these two, almost identical, narratives is that rampant homosexual desire was not the motivation of the towns’ people, but rather rampant pride, violence and prejudice. Their plan was not the result of same-sex attraction. Their intention was gang rape for the purpose harming, humiliating and dominating the strangers. According to the narratives, the Sodomites did not get a chance to carry out their plan—being blinded by the visiting angels—and the men of Gibeah took the Levite’s concubine and ravished her all night to the point of death.

The author of Genesis 19 makes it clear that the entire male population of Sodom gathered around Lot’s house demanding access to his guests (v. 4). If their motivation was unbridled homoeroticism, then other biblical texts that reference Sodom would point to its universal homoeroticism as “the”—or a least “a”—reason for its destruction. Sodom is indeed referenced in several other texts in the Hebrew Bible (and the New Testament) but not once is the reason for its destruction given as same-gender sexual intimacy.[3] Even in the extrabiblical literature of Second Temple Judaism, the sin of the Sodomites is never connected to their sexuality.[4]

David Gushee notes that “[t]he men of Sodom want gang rape…[and] I would also suggest that the men wanted to dominate, humiliate and harm the male visitors precisely by treating them like defenseless women…It is about a town that had sunk to the level of the most depraved battlefield or prison” (emphasis is Gushee’s).[5] As Bird concludes, these narratives clearly indicate that “male honor is threatened by homosexual intercourse” where “sexual behavior [is] governed by views of gender roles and sexual honor.”[6] The goal of the Sodomites’ and Gibeahites’ demand “to know” the foreigners was to dominate, humiliate and control. While the Sodomites were prevented from doing so by divine intervention, the Gibeahites did the next closest thing by ravishing the Levite’s concubine, thus humiliating him.

3.3       Ancient Near Eastern law codes, culture and same-gender sex

It is widely agreed that there is very little evidence of “same-sex erotic interaction” from the ancient Near East, but what there is supports the idea that in these patriarchal cultures maintaining defined gender roles was crucial. So, when it comes to male-to-male sexual acts, the penetrator takes on the active male role, while the penetrated is the passive “female.”[7] One briefly stated Middle Assyrian Law (A. 20) states, “If a man sodomizes his comrade and they prove the charges against him and find him guilty, they shall sodomize him and they shall turn him into a eunuch.”[8] As Martti Nissinen notes, “The Middle Assyrian Laws decrees that a man who has raped another man be raped and castrated himself; his manly honor was to be disgraced, and he was to lose his masculinity and change his gender identity permanently.”[9]

            In contrast to the paucity of Near Eastern same-gender references, there are numerous resources available to help us appreciate same-gender sexual relationships among the ancient Greeks and Romans. Nissinen notes that the composition of the Holiness Code “belongs to the post-exilic situation of the fifth century BCE, when the Jewish community attempted to detach itself from outsiders.”[10] Thus, it seems reasonable to consider the attitudes of the ancient Greeks. Among Greeks it was acceptable for male citizens to have same-sex relations with those of lower social status such as a youth, a slave, or a foreigner. However, to be sexually involved with another male citizen, the penetrator violated his partner’s masculinity and the citizen who allowed himself to be penetrated “detach[ed] himself from the ranks of male citizenry and classifi[ed] himself with women and foreigners.”[11]

            If Lev 18:22 and 20:13 are indeed a prohibition against all manner of man-to-male sexual intimacy, then certainly this biblical law contrasts with the cultures surrounding Israel in its past and present. But is this an all-encompassing prohibition or does it prohibit something more specific? Various other questions need to be asked and answered before a determination can be made.    

---

[1] Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus: A Book of Ritual and Ethics (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004), 175.

[2] Milgrom, Leviticus, 175; Richard S. Hess, Leviticus, The Expositors Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), Kindle ebook, V. “The Holiness Code,” loc. 6111.

[3] Deut 29:23; 32:32; Isa 1:9f, 3:9; 13:10; Jer 23:14; 49:18; 50:40; Lam 4:6; Ezek 16:46–50; Amos 4:11; Zeph 2:9; Matt 10:15; Luke 10:10–12; Rom 9:29; 2 Pet 2:6–10; Jude 6–7. Instead, the sins of Sodom that are highlighted are abuses of public justice, adultery, lying, pride, excess food, prosperous ease and lack of care or mocking of the poor.

[4] Gushee, Changing Our Minds, ch. 12, loc. 1015. See Sirach 16:8; 3 Maccabees 2:5; Wisdom 19:15.

[5] Gushee, Changing Our Minds, ch. 12, loc. 1025.

[6] Phyllis A. Bird, “The Bible in Christian Ethical Deliberation concerning Homosexuality: Old Testament Contributions,” in Homosexuality, Science, and the “Plain Sense” of Scripture, ed. David L. Balch (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 148.

[7] Bird, “The Bible in Christian Ethical Deliberation,” 158; Jean Bottero, Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods, Trans. Zainab Bahrani and Marc Van De Mieroop (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992),191.

[8] Ca. 1076 BCE. As translated by Martha T. Roth, Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor, Writings from the Ancient World (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1977), 160.

[9] Martti Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective, Trans. By kirsi Stjerna (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998), 43.

[10] Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World, 38.

[11] Oylan, “With a Male You Shall Not Lie,” 190.

Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 – Part 3: A Close Reading of Both Verses

The following section of my paper is the most technical portion. However, I would not advise skipping it entirely even if you are not familiar with Hebrew vocabulary or grammar. Try to understand whatever you can, otherwise you're stuck with the highly interpretive translations of our modern English translations. These two small verses are very challenging to translate into idiomatic English; my more literal translations are quite cumbersome, but necessary to a proper reading. The most important things I've highlighted.

***************

2.    Close Reading and Analyses in the Immediate Context

In this section, because the law is stated quite similarly in the two chapters, I will compare 18:22 and 20:13 lexically and contextually. First, here are the Hebrew texts and my, quite literal, translation.[1]

Lev 18:22

וְאֶ֨ת־זָכָ֔ר לֹ֥א תִשְׁכַּ֖ב מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה הִֽוא

And with a male you will not lie down, beds (lyings) of a woman; an abomination it [is].

Lev 20:13

וְאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁכַּ֤ב אֶת־זָכָר֙ מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֔ה תּוֹעֵבָ֥ה עָשׂ֖וּ שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם מֹ֥ות יוּמָ֖תוּ דְּמֵיהֶ֥ם בָּֽם

And a man who lies down with a male, beds (lyings) of a woman, an abomination they have committed. The two of them will surely be put to death. Their blood [is] on them.

It is of note that Lev 20:13 does more than simply restate this law found in 18:22 in a different format and add a specific punishment clause, but actually re-contextualizes this law.  

2.1.      Lev 18:22a cf. Lev 20:13a

וְאֶ֨ת־זָכָ֔ר לֹ֥א תִשְׁכַּ֖ב

“And with a male you will not lie down…” (18:22a)

וְאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁכַּ֤ב אֶת־זָכָר֙

 “And a man who lies down with a male…” (20:13a)

In biblical Hebrew there are three words used for the male of the human species, two of which are used in our texts. זָכַר generally means “male” and is often coupled with “female” as in Gen 1:27.[2] In that passage, אָדָם is best translated as “humankind” (i.e., inclusive of both male and female). זָכַר is “male” and נְקֵבָה is “female.”  זָכַר and נְקֵבָה are used in tandem throughout Genesis to refer to the two genders of the human species (see 5:2), but also to refer to the two genders of non-human species (see 6:19; 7:3, 9, 16). In Leviticus, זָכַר is most often used with reference to male animals being offered as sacrifices, that they are to be “without blemish” (see 1:3, 10; 3:1, 6; 4:23; 22:19). It is also used to refer to human males of any age from birth through death (see 6:18, 29; 7:6; 12:2, 7; 15:33; 27:3–7). In Lev 27:2–7, not only is it obvious that זָכַר is used for a male of any age, but also that נְקֵבָה is the word for female that is used in such contexts.

The main word used for those of male gender in Leviticus is אִישׁ, which is generally translated as “man.”[3]  Where, in the same context the female gender is referenced, the partner of אִישׁ is אִשָּׁה translated as either “woman” or “wife.”[4] In Lev 18:22, אִישׁ is not used. Instead, the subject of the sentence is embedded in תִשְׁכַּ֖ב which is masculine in gender.[5] It is of note that Lev 20:13 reads, “And a man (אִישׁ) lies with a male (זָכַר)…” not “And a man lies with a man…” as most would expect.  

Both texts use the verb שָׁכַב which means “to lie down” and depending on context it can refer to rest, sleep, sexual intercourse or death.[6] In this context, it is almost universally agreed among scholars that שׁכב has sexual connotations. Of the fifteen times שׁכב is used in Leviticus, ten times it is used to refer to sexual intimacy. It is of note that in chapter 18 שׁכב is used only once (v. 22), yet the majority of laws deal with sexual intimacy with close family members. In chapter 20, where essentially the same laws are presented in a different order, שׁכב is used in our verse and four others.[7] The multiple use of שׁכב in chapter 20 is significant because it makes clear that to שׁכב with someone is to עֶרְוָה גלה (“uncover nakedness”). Where שׁכב appears in chapter 20 without a reference to nakedness being uncovered, that result can be presumed. And where some form of עֶרְוָה גלה occurs in either chapter, we know that someone has laid down (שׁכב) with someone.

2.2.      Lev 18:22b and Lev 20:13b

מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה

“…beds (lyings) of a woman…” (18:22b & 20:13b)

Most scholars refer to this expression as the most problematic phrase in both verses. Some would say that a literal translation is not difficult as both are common words. אִשָּׁה is the feminine singular noun meaning “woman” or “wife.” מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י is the masculine, plural construct of the noun מִשְׁכָּב, which means a place of lying, such as a couch or bed, and thus can also be understood as the act of lying. In Leviticus, מִשְׁכָּב is most often translated (NRSV) as bed (see 15:4, 5, 21, 23, 24, 26). Only in 18:22 and 20:13 does the NRSV not bother to translate מִשְׁכָּב. I would have agreed with those who accept the most referenced English translations until I examined these verses in Hebrew. It then becomes obvious that these translations try to smooth out the Hebrew into clear English, but that in doing so they negate the unique and ambiguous nature of this idiom. The best translation of מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה is “beds of a woman,” regardless of how cumbersome this more literal translation is in context.

The only other place in the entire Old Testament where this form of מִשְׁכָּב appears is Gen 49:4, where the NRSV translates it as “bed of,” while choosing to ignore that מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י is plural. The context in Genesis 49 involves Jacob telling his sons what will happen to them in the days to come (49:1). Though Reuben was Jacob’s first born and should have received the greatest blessing, he was told that he would “no longer excel because you went up onto your father’s bed.”[8] Jacob is referring to the incident recorded in Gen 35:22 where “Reuben went and lay (שׁכב) with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it.” The author of Genesis understood, “Reuben went and lay with Bilhah” ( וַיֵּ֣לֶךְ רְאוּבֵ֔ן וַיִּשְׁכַּ֕ב֙ אֶת־בִּלְהָ֖ה֙ ) to be equivalent to “you went up on the beds of your father” (עָלִ֖יתָ מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אָבִ֑יךָ). It is of note that this, only other, use of מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י (“beds of”) is an incident of incest.

Getting back to Lev 18:22 and 20:13, we see that what has been added to almost all English translations of  מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה are the words “as” and “with” and what is left untranslated is “beds of.” The entire expression is translated into English by virtually all scholarly translators, both by committee and individuals, “as one lies with a woman.” A few do not translate this Hebrew expression at all.[9] Even in consulting various commentaries that deal with the Hebrew text, most do not discuss this idiom. The commentators are either so confused by it that they do not want to tackle it—which is not very likely—or for them the meaning is so clear that they do not feel the need to discuss it.[10]

It is also worthy of note that the author of Leviticus used אִשָּׁ֑ה and not נְקֵבָה. נְקֵבָה is used for the female gender of animals and of humans, infant and adult alike (27:4–7). And it is used in tandem with זָכַר, as one would expect. Yet in Leviticus 18 and 20 only אִשָּׁ֑ה is used (not נְקֵבָה)   and is translated (NRSV) as “woman” (18:17, 18, 19, 22, 23; 20:13, 16, 18, 27)  or “wife” (18:8, 14, 15, 16, 20; 20:10, 11, 14, 20, 21) depending on context. זָכַר is found only in 18:22 and 20:13.    

Reading 18:22a-b and 20:13a-b results in some clarity and some confusion. There is no doubt that שׁכב, “to lie down,” in this context refers to an act of sexual intimacy. Questions, however, are raised about the use of מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה. Just how the Israelites would have understood this idiom in this context is unclear.  

2.3       Lev 18:22c cf. Lev 20:13c

תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה הִֽוא

“An abomination it [is].” (18:22)

תּוֹעֵבָ֥ה עָשׂ֖וּ

“An abomination they have committed.” (20:13)

Whatever parts “a” and “b” of each verse mean—whatever act is prohibited—either “it is an abomination” (18:22) or “they have committed an abomination” (20:13). The key word here is תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה, most often translated “abomination.” It appears in Leviticus only in chapters 18 and 20 and specifically in 18:22, 26, 27, 29, 30 and 20:13. Other similar words are also found in these two chapters which pass judgment on various acts: זִמָּה (18:17; 20:14), translated as “a depravity;” תֶּבֶל (18:23; 20:12), translated “ a perversion;” and, חֶסֶד (20:17), translated as “a disgrace.” For the author of Leviticus many acts are an abomination, a depravity, a perversion and/or a disgrace. And according Lev 18:24–29, all the previously mentioned acts in the chapter are תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה. These include various types of heterosexual incest, sex with a menstruating woman, offering offspring to Molech, sex with an animal by either a man or a woman and lying with a male.

תּוֹעֵבָה is used by the biblical authors 121 times throughout the Old Testament, predominantly in Deuteronomy, Ezekiel and Proverbs. Many acts (and attitudes) are abominations and some are even referred to as תוֹעֲבַ֛ת יְהוָ֥ה, “an abomination to Yahweh.”[11] However, just because the acts listed in Leviticus 18 (and by comparison, the acts of Leviticus 20) are not specifically referred to “abominations to Yahweh,” does not in any way undermine the seriousness of this condemnation—as the punishments proscribed in both chapters indicate. However, neither can one conclude the act of a man “lying down with a male” is somehow more serious than any other acts identified as either “an abomination” or “an abomination to Yahweh.”[12]  Lings notes that תוֹעֲבַ֛ת “covers any abominable behavior that makes the men and women of Israel stray from the way marked out for them by YHWH, the sacred ineffable name attributed to the deity.”[13] The exegete should neither minimize this particular תוֹעֲבַ֛ת nor should it be overemphasized, as compared to other similar pronouncements.

2.4       Lev 20:13d

שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם מֹ֥ות יוּמָ֖תוּ דְּמֵיהֶ֥ם בָּֽם

“The two of them will surely be put to death. Their blood [is] on them.”

In Leviticus 18, the consequence for any of these acts is the defilement of the person and the land. And just like the Canaanites, an Israelite who commits any of these iniquities, God will “punish” and he will be vomited out by the land (18:24–28). While defilement of person and land is something that happens with the violation of any of the above stated laws, the punishment, if it is comparable to what God did with the previous inhabitants, is completed, not immediately, but over time. It is God who will punish, and it is the land that will vomit out the guilty inhabitants. However, in Leviticus 20, many of the same laws, when violated, are punishable by death.[14]  Yet, even in chapter 20, for several other laws the stated punishment is either being “cut off from their people” (similar to chapter 18), being “childless” and/or simply being “subject to [unspecified] punishment.”[15]

There is a lot of discussion among scholars about what each of these punishments involves, when they are to be enacted and by whom. Perhaps the easiest answer to these questions is that one way or another, whether immediately carried out by the non-offending Israelites or over time by God, the end result is “death” of one sort or another; either physically by execution, socially and ethnically by exile or by the termination of one’s family line. In this respect, the punishments listed in chapter 20 do not differ from those laid out in chapter 18, in that all involve a “death” (i.e., a separation and an end). Lev 20:2–3 states that those “who give any of their offspring to Molech shall be put to death; the people of the land shall stone them to death. I myself will set my face against them, and will cut them off from the people…” Does this suggest that “they shall be put to death” and “they shall be cut off from the people” are one and the same punishment?

Specifically, with regard to Lev 18:22 and 20:13, we see that violating the commandment to “not lie with a male” is no less or more serious to Yahweh, based on the punishments prescribed, than violating any of the other commandments in Lev 18 or 20. This is important to consider in that at least some of these commandments, by Christian standards and practice today, are certainly not as serious as others are; especially 20:9, cursing your father or mother, and 20:18, having sexual relations with the woman who is menstruating. The other thing to notice with these commandments is that most of the Israelite patriarchs broke one or more of these commandments and did not suffer the penalty of death and, in most cases, there was no word of condemnation from Yahweh. These and other observations make one wonder about whether there is a rationale that pulls all these commandments together and whether they are meant to be binding on any other than the Israelite people while they lived in the land that Yahweh was giving to them.[16]

---

[1] See Appendix B: Grammatical Analyses and Literal Translations of Lev 18:22 & 20:13.

[2] Gen 1:27 reads, וַיִּבְרָ֨א אֱלֹהִ֤ים ׀ אֶת־הָֽאָדָם֙ בְּצַלְמֹ֔ו בְּצֶ֥לֶם אֱלֹהִ֖ים בָּרָ֣א אֹתֹ֑ו זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה בָּרָ֥א אֹתָֽם׃.

[3] אִישׁ is used 76 times in Leviticus. The majority of times it is translated “man,” though it is also translated “anyone,” “someone,” “one,” and “husband.” Some versions (e.g., NRSV) tend to render אִישׁ as “someone” or “anyone” to be gender inclusive, though I think the NET Bible does a better job of more often translating אִישׁ as “man” unless context indicates both genders are under consideration. Afterall, all ancient Near East societies were decidedly patriarchal, not egalitarian.

[4] See 15:18, 33; 18:8, 14, 15, 16, 20; 20:10, 11, 14, 20, 21

[5] תִשְׁכַּ֖ב: Qal, Imperfect, 2^nd, Masculine, Singular of שׁכב.

[6] יִשְׁכַּ֤ב in Lev 20:13 is a Qal, Imperfect, 3^rd, Masculine, Singular of שׁכב.

[7]  Lev 20:11, 12, 18, 20. To שׁכב with someone is to “uncover [someone’s] nakedness—see 20:11, 18, 20.

[8] The pertinent phrase in Gen 49:4 reads כִּ֥י עָלִ֖יתָ מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אָבִ֑יךָ and is best translated as “because you went up on beds of your father” (or, “because you went up on your father’s beds”).  

[9] See Appendix A.

[10] E.g., Wold, writes, “Some writers suggest that the phrase the lying (down) of a woman [מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה]…is ambiguous” (Out of Order,104).  His view is that, “Contrary to the opinions presented by many contemporary scholars, the language of the two biblical laws on homosexuality is clear” (Out of Order, 102). In contrast, Saul M. Olyan writes, “What do Lev 18:22 and 20:13 actually mean? Determining this is complicated by the presence of the opaque idiom…in both formulations. The most common translation… “as with a women,” is interpretive, not literal” [Saul M. Olyan, “And with a Male You Shall Not Lie the Lying down of a Woman,” Journal of the History of Sexuality (1994, No. 2): 183–184].

[11] Deut 7:25; 12:31; 17:1; 18:12; 22:5; 23:18; 25:16; Prov 3:32; 6:16–19; 11:1; 12:22; 15:8–9, 26; 16:5; 17:15; 20:10, 23. Such abominations to Yahweh include: idol worship; sacrificing children to Canaanite gods; sacrificing defective animals to Yahweh; practicing divination; casting spells; consulting ghosts; cross dressing; brinigng fees or wages of a prostitute into Yahweh’s house; using dishonest weights and measures; having haughty eyes, or a lying tongue; shedding innocent blood; devising wicked plans; rushing to do evil; giving false testimony; justifying the wicked and condemning the righteous.

[12] Friedman notes that some of the acts identified as תוֹעֲבַ֛ת, including some listed in Lev 18 and 20, are acts of which the great patriarchs of Israel were guilty. He concludes from that observation that what was not תוֹעֲבַ֛ת “in the generation of the patriarchs has changed and become one in the generation of Moses…An act or an object that is not a [תוֹעֲבַ֛ת] can become one, depending on time and circumstances [Richard Elliott Friedman and Shawna Dolansky, The Bible Now: Homosexuality, Abortion, Women, Death Penalty, Earth (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 36]. Gushee notes, “It is relevant to note that never again, outside of Leviticus, are same-sex actions mentioned in Old Testament law, leaving at least 111 of the 117 uses of the term “abomination” to describe other issues. It is interesting how few of those other acts or character qualities are ever described as abominations by Christians today” [David P. Gushee and Brian d. McLaren, Changing Our Minds: Definitive 3^rd Edition of the Landmark Call for Inclusion of LGBTQ Christians with Response to Critics (Canton, MI: Read the Spirit Books, 2017), Kindle edition, ch. 12, loc. 1062).

[13] K. Renato Lings, “The ‘Lyings’ of a Woman: Male-Male Incest in Leviticus 18:22?” Theology and Sexuality, 15.2 (2009), 236.

[14] Those who “shall be put to death” are: those who “give any of their offspring to Molech” (v. 2); “all who curse their father or mother (v. 9); “both the adulterer and the adulteress” (v. 10); both the “man who lies with his father’s wife” along with the father’s wife (v. 11); “a man [who] lies with his daughter-in-law” along with the daughter-in-law (v. 12); “a man [who] lies with a male” and the male with whom he lies (v. 13); “a man [who] takes a wife and her mother” along with his wife and her mother by being “burned to death” (v. 14); “a man [who] has sexual relations with an animal” along with the animal (v. 15);  “a woman [who]…has sexual relations with an animal” along with the animal (v. 16); “a man or a woman who is a medium or a wizard” by stoning (v. 27).

[15] Those who “shall be cut off from their people” are: “a man who takes his sister” or half-sister” along with the sister or half-sister (v. 17); “a man [who] lies with a woman having her sickness” along with the woman (v. 18). Those who are “subject to punishment” are: “a man who takes his sister” or half-sister” along with the sister or half-sister (v. 17); a man who “uncovers the nakedness” of his “mother’s sister” or “father’s sister” or “uncle’s wife” (v. 19–20). Those who will “die childless” are: a man who “uncovers the nakedness” of his “mother’s sister” or “father’s sister” or “uncle’s wife” (vv. 19–20); “a man [who] takes his brother’s wife” (v. 21).

[16] Note that in Lev 18:2 God tells Moses to “Speak to the people of Israel,” and in 20:2 Yahweh tells Moses, “Speak to the people of Israel. Any of the people of Israel, or of the aliens who reside in Israel…”