Infidelity and Nazirites

Numbers 4-6

            Oh, boy. Leviticus 5. Man, do I get questions. My study Bible has this note about the ‘test for unfaithfulness’ (vv. 11-31), “The actions presented here seem severe and harsh.” Really? You think so? This is my fourth or fifth time leading a Today’s Light reading and women are always incensed at this passage. And, honestly, I get it. A jealous husband can accuse his wife, make her stand in front of the whole community, and drink dirty water to see if she’s an adulteress? One commentator poses these questions:

Why, for example, is there a trial only for the suspected wife? What if the woman suspects her husband of unfaithfulness? Does she have any options open to her? Then again, does such a procedure give the husband the right to force his wife through an ordeal any time and every time he entertains illusions about possible escapades by his wife? Must she imbibe this unpalatable ‘mixed drink’ just to satisfy his curiosity (Hamilton, 322-323)?

The whole thing smacks of a Salem witch trial or a purposely false accusation of sexual assault: even if you come out on the good side of things, there’s always the damage to your reputation.

            Our commentator offers three observations: one is suspect, one is patronizing, and one is at least a step in the right direction. First, he assumes (“safely assumes,” he says) that a husband wouldn’t abuse this right. To which I say, “Uh-huh. Sure.” The second is that it’s not really an ordeal. The consequences are all hypothetical To which I say, “Yeah, but the damage to the woman’s reputation remains, even if she comes through the ritual unscathed.” Third, he notes the ritual is actually intended as a protection for the woman. In many ancient societies women lived in a severely disadvantaged social place: in many ancient societies, women could be divorced with little or no reason or recourse. In that context, this ritual is a “prove-it” moment. In this sense, at least, in a world in which women had few, if any, rights, the ritual puts the brakes on rampant injustice perpetuated against her.

            We should note, too, chapter 6, and the Nazirite vow. We should note it if for no other reason than that Samson, Samuel, and John the Baptizer were all lifelong Nazirites. The “Nazirite” appears to come from the Hebrew verb “to separate.” The idea is that an Israelite would uniquely dedicate themselves to the Lord for a time. In that time, they would abstain from anything made with grapes, including wine, abstain from cutting their hair, and do everything in their power to avoid contact with a dead body. Why would they do this? Good question. It may be a little like our practice of Lent in which we attend more services, read more devotions, and sometimes abstain from something in an effort to spend more time reflecting on the Lord and His goodness. But unlike our practice of Lent, in which there are no consequences if you succeed or fail, the Nazirite made significant offerings at the end of his vow. I’m not looking to go back to Moses’ law, but there is something to be said for times of extra dedication to the Lord and to taking those times seriously…