10<\/strong>. The prohibition in the case of a daughter was probably omitted accidentally by a copyist from the beginning of this v.<\/p>\n And consequently of all thy children and childrens children, and all downwards; for they are a part of thyself, as coming out of thy loins, and out of thy wife, whose nakedness is thine own. <\/P> <\/p>\n The nakedness of thy son’s daughter, or of thy daughter’s daughter<\/strong>,…. A man might not marry his granddaughter, whether a descendant of his son or of his daughter, nor any further off descending from him in a right line, not his great-granddaughter, and so on; and if he might not marry his granddaughter, much less his own daughter, as Jarchi observes, for the relation is still nearer; therefore that being prohibited, this in course must, though not mentioned:<\/p>\n [even] their nakedness thou shalt not uncover<\/strong>; neither debauch nor marry such an one:<\/p>\n for theirs [is] thine own nakedness<\/strong>; which sprung from his, being the descendants either of his son or daughter; the Targum of Jonathan is,<\/p>\n “for they are as thy nakedness,”<\/p>\n his own flesh and blood.<\/p>\n The prohibition of marriage with a granddaughter, whether the daughter of a son or daughter, is explained in the words, “for they are thy nakedness,” the meaning of which is, that as they were directly descended from the grandfather, carnal intercourse with them would be equivalent to dishonouring his own flesh and blood.<\/p>\n (10) The nakedness of thy sons daughter<\/strong>. From this prohibition it is inferred that a man must not marry his own daughter. If a granddaughter, who is a degree further removed from him, is proscribed, how much more his own daughter. Hence the canonical law during the second Temple deduced from this passage that whoso companieth with a woman, even by way of fornication, and begetteth a daughter, she is forbidden to him. Still, when the mother is expressly forbidden to the son (see Lev. 18:7<\/span>), it is strange that the daughter should have been passed over in silence, and be left to inference. It is therefore more than probable that a word has dropped out of the text, and that originally it stood here, the nakedness of thy daughter and of thy sons daughter, &c. That this is not a solitary instance where the text has suffered from disarrangement we shall presently have occasion to see in Lev. 18:11<\/span>.<\/p>\n Lev 18:10 The nakedness of thy son’s daughter, or of thy daughter’s daughter, [even] their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs [is] thine own nakedness.<\/p>\n Ver. 10. For theirs is thine own nakedness.<\/strong> ] Children are but the father multiplied; the father of another edition.<\/p>\n 18:10 The nakedness of thy son’s daughter, or of thy daughter’s daughter, [even] their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs [is] thine own {f} nakedness.<\/p>\n (f) They are her children whose shame you have uncovered.<\/p>\n The nakedness of thy son’s daughter, or of thy daughter’s daughter, [even] their nakedness thou shalt not uncover: for theirs [is] thine own nakedness. 10. The prohibition in the case of a daughter was probably omitted accidentally by a copyist from the beginning of this v. Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges And … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Leviticus 18:10”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3270","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3270","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3270"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3270\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3270"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3270"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3270"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"