The Bible Says That!? - The Levite and His Concubine
Click Play below to listen as you read along. Click "Download" to see today's worksheet as well!
Today, we’re talking about a different perspective on the Levite and His Concubine. Specifically, there is a textual issue with this text that may better explain why the story plays out the way it does. Additionally, well see what this means for the reliability of the biblical text.
Read Judges 19:1-30
Judges 19:1-30
Reread vv.1-5
From your initial reading, who is the “bad” guy in this story. Why?
Who was “wronged” in this story so far. How and why?
Does anyone’s study Bible have anything in translation for 19:2.
ESV: “concubine was unfaithful to him”
KJV: “played the whore against him”
NIV: “unfaithful to him”
NLT: “She became angry with him”
NASB: “concubine found him repugnant”
NET: “She got angry at him”
What do you think is going on here!?
This verse has what is called a “textual variant” in it, where one ancient manuscript has one word while another ancient manuscript has another word. Specifically the words for “play the harlot,” “angry with him,” or “found him repugnant.” So First lets take a look at the different manuscripts and see for our selves what is going on here and see if we can figure out why this is. Then second, we will see how the different interpretive move will impact the meaning of the rest of the story.
Take a look at today's handout. You can also see the contents of the handout below
MT (Masoretic Text = The Hebrew Old Testament) < reads right to left
וַתִּזְנֶה עָלָיו פִּילַגְשׁוֹ, וַתֵּלֶךְ מֵאִתּוֹ אֶל-בֵּית אָבִיהָ אֶל-בֵּית לֶחֶם יְהוּדָה
"And his concubine played the harlot against him, and went away from him to her father’s house in Bethlehem Judah."
LXX (A) (Codex Alexandrinus, 5th Century)
καὶ ἐπορνεύσατο ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἡ παλλακὴ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀπῆλθεν ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν οἶκον τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῆς εἰς Βηθλεὲμ Ιουδα
"And she got angry with him and left him, and went away from him to her father’s home in Bethlehem Judah."
LXX (B) (Codex Vaticanus, 4th Century)
καὶ επορεθυη απ᾽ αὐτὸυ ἡ παλλακὴ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀπῆλθε παρ αὐτοῦ εἰς οἶκον πατρὸς αὐτῆς εἰς Βηθλεὲμ Ιουδα
"And she departed from him and she left him, and went away from him to her father’s home in Bethlehem Judah."
Josephus (an early Jewish historian who documented Jewish History) notes in his writing the Antiquities of the Jews (Antiquities 5.2-5.7) he basically says: the concubine was very beautiful and the Levite was enamored with her beauty. However, she did not return his love, which led to a marriage problem. They fought and she left him because of this marriage problem.
זנה vs זנח
See the difference between the two words above or at the bottom of the handout.
The one on the left is "ZNH" and means “to be a Harlot” the one on the right is "ZNCH" and means “to be angry” So it is possible that some scribe somewhere along the way made a very easy to make mistake and thus we end up with these different translational differences.
Ok we’ve looked at the text issues. Let’s see what this means for the story and how the different interpretations impact the meaning of the story
If we go with “Harlot”, who is the “bad guy” in the story? – the concubine
If we go with “She was angry against,” who is the bad guy in the story? – the Levite. Ahhh!
We all know what’s going on in the story if its “harlot” but lets assume that we should translate that word as ZNCH and “she was angry against.” How does the story change?
If it’s ZNCH, Why does she leave? – she’s angry at him!
If it’s ZNH, why does she leave? – we don’t know
If its ZNCH, what is the Levites motivation for trying to win her back? – He messed up and is trying to fix the relationship
If its ZNH, why does he try to win her back? – We don’t know. Maybe he’s a super stand up guy. But then we run into issues for how he treats her later in the story.
If its ZNCH, does it better fit the Levites character that he would continue to treat her cruelly?
If it’s ZNH, why would he bother to win her back just to do this horrible thing to her in vv. 25ff plus cutting her up.
With “played the harlot,” does the interpretation of this story paint her as the “bad guy?” And if she is the bad guy, then would she be deserving of her death in this context? Most would say yes.
In the OT, are Levites the good guys or the bad guys? – the good guys! They are priests of God. So if Levites are good guys, would it be a good thing or a bad thing to have a really bad story about a Levite – a priest of YHWH, have a prostitute, anger a woman for no reason, deal with the potential divorce issue, Him being in the wrong with their relationship, him being in the wrong for her demonization, and then ultimately being the one who kills her to make a point?
So what tiny little adjustment does someone need to make to the story to make sure that the Levite is seen as the good guy rather than the bad guy? – change one tiny little word to put the blame on her.
So the problem is not necessarily a translational one, this was most likely an honest mistake or an attempt to not paint a priest of God in a negative light. However, the question becomes, “where did this idea of “harlot” come from if all of the other interpretations had the Levite be the bad guy and the concubine be the victim in this story? It is likely that late in the tradition, someone made a tiny little switch to make her a “harlot” in order to justify her death.
Take away
How has this shifted your view of this story?
What did you learn?
Was this a hard thing to wrestle with?
Does the main lesson of the story change? No of course not, but does it still shift our perspective? Yes of course.
This is a difficult thing to wrestle with. But the Bible is filled with these little quirks and that is why it is so important that we check and check and check the facts and the text to make sure that we are being diligent in our interpretation and translation of the Bible.