Lev 12

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Judith, Jan 25, 2014.

  1. Judith

    Judith
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    982
    Likes Received:
    10
    This passage raises a lot of questions. I would like to here the thoughts of others;

    as to why there needed to be a sin offering

    Why she was in her impurity longer for a female child verses a male child
     
  2. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    114
    I love this type of questions. While we know that laws of this nature don't apply to us, God did put them in the Bible for a reason. And we are to study them.

    You'll get a lot of answers here.

    But ... here's mine for what it's worth.

    [1] Why the sin offering for merely giving birth? Being unclean was not a sin per se, but women and men alike were declared unclean in regards to all types of bodily emissions.

    Giving birth and experiencing pain was part of a woman's curse. It still is. A curse upon women because of sin. While having babies and raising children is a great blessing and joy - the initial pain and bloody mess is a curse.

    In my opinion (and I am no expert), the sin offering was for having to engage in the effects of a curse from God. An appeasement, in other words, for being cursed as a pregnant woman and giving birth in such a messy way and bloody way.

    While don't women still have to do this? Same reason we don't do any of the strange ceremonial laws. The only shedding of blood that cleanses and saves is Jesus Christ's blood.

    [2] Why a longer period of seclusion is a baby girl is born? Did you know that it's not uncommon at all for baby girls to be born with a bloody discharge from their own vagina and to experience one once brought home even?

    Some say it's because of a hormonal exchange between the mother and the baby girl, but I don't know.

    Hmmm...

    TWO females having a bloody discharge. Hence, 66 days for seclusion as opposed to 33 for a male child.

    There is no penalty here. No favoritism.
     
  3. Judith

    Judith
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    982
    Likes Received:
    10
    Now that is an interesting opinion. I hope others can weigh in also.
     
  4. convicted1

    convicted1
    Expand Collapse
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    9,011
    Likes Received:
    3
    Leave it to women knowing how to discuss womenly things womenly... :D :saint: :smilewinkgrin: :1_grouphug:
     
  5. Archie the Preacher

    Archie the Preacher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    0
    Never heard this one before...

    First: net.bible.org/#!bible/Leviticus+12:1 has a discussion note attached to this passage talking about what you asked.

    Second: The "Law" had two functions (and perhaps more depending how one divides it up) - one function was to guard the health and well being of the Israelites, and the other was to demonstrate how adherence to a set of rules would not justify man (and woman) before the Lord. (Paul speaking about the Law in Romans 7:7 and the surrounding paragraph.)

    So I think the 'blood purification' time after birth was quite possibly to protect the woman from infections and complications arising from 'knowing' one another shortly after birth. I don't have a guess why it was longer for girl babies.

    I also took a quick look at the Judaism 101 website. They mention the longer period for girl babies and don't have an explanation either.

    I am sure the Lord had a reason; He doesn't seem to do anything on a whim or caprice. But as with many other things, I can't guess why.
     
  6. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    Hi Judith, we can draw applications from a passage that are applicable to our lives, but may not shed much light on the actual message of God.

    So the safe and easy answer is we do not seem to know, because commentaries are all over the map.

    Some of them, however contain this thought: The rules that categorize a person as unclean, do not seem to arise from any sin of the individual, but arise "naturally" from our physical bodies. So the whole "undeserved uncleanness" points not to some correctable behavior, but as a reminder of our fallen man (or woman) of flesh nature. In that light, the women who already experienced childbirth pain, was cursed with even more pain. So the undeserved and unequal period, upon reflection, might cause a person to consider our fallen condition, or more joyously, how we have been made holy and blameless and clean, by the sin offering of Christ.

    As I said, this is slicing the baloney far to thin to teach as doctrine, but at least it provides food for thought.

    Van
     
    #6 Van, Feb 1, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 1, 2014

Share This Page

Loading...