Tyndale Bulletin 66.1 (2015) - WHAT’S WRONG WITH ‘PLAYING THE HARLOT’? - THE MEANING OF זנה IN JUDGES 19:2

Aug 27, 2026

Explores the Levite’s concubine episode in Judges 19, focusing on the debated meaning of זנה in Judges 19:2. Addresses conflicting scholarly interpretations that range from literal sexual misconduct to metaphorical or emotional readings, including alternative renderings found in the Septuagint and proposed emendations of the Masoretic Text. Argues that the Masoretic Text provides the best reading through its fit with lexical and theological context, while preserving the chapter’s moral ambiguity and narrative complexity.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryReligion & Spirituality

FormatPDF

Pages22

Reading Time55 min

AccessFree to download

Summary

Introduction

Feminist and scholarly readings

זנה in the Hebrew Bible

Tyndale Bulletin 66.1 (2015) 41-62 WHAT’S WRONG WITH ‘PLAYING THE HARLOT’? THE MEANING OF זנה IN JUDGES 19:2 Isabelle Hamley Summary The story of the Levite’s concubine in Judges 19 arouses horror—and very mixed scholarly interpretations. The silent concubine is cast in many shades, from silent victim to shady character on a par with the morally troubled Levite. Characterisation hinges on understanding the nature of the concubine’s actions in verse 2. Was she unfaithful, literally or metaphorically? Or simply angry, as in the Greek text? Despite a long tradition of exonerating the concubine from sexual misconduct, the debate has been reopened, unexpectedly, by feminist critics asking why we should automatically assume she is innocent of all wrongdoing, in a text where virtually all characters are morally ambiguous at best. This paper will argue that the Masoretic Text offers the best reading of the story, consistent with subtle narration and moral complexity. 1. Introduction The story of the concubine of Gibeah in the book of Judges is relatively well-known among scholars, but seldom preached on or referred to in popular worship; even among scholars, it is often subsumed into a discussion of the civil war that follows, 1 dissolved into intertext,2 or even treated dismissively as part of an appendix to the main body of 1 E.g. R.B. Chisholm, A Commentary on Judges and Ruth (Kregel Exegetical Library; Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2013) . 2 E.g. S. Frolov, Judges (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2012) . [https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.29385](https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.29385) [https://tyndalebulletin.org/](https://tyndalebulletin.org/) 42 TYNDALE BULLETIN 66.1 (2015) the book.3 Feminist scholars have revived interest in the text as a ‘text of terror’,4 one that highlights the plight of women in biblical times. It is an uneasy, ambiguous text, which has lent itself to many interpretations, depending on how it is seen to fit—or not—with therest of the book, and what its moral message may be, given the conspicuous absence of God in this chapter. Ambiguity sets in right from the start: who exactly is this nameless man? What is the significance of his being a Levite (following the sorry tale of Micah in chapters 17–18)? What is the exact status of the woman he takes as a פילגש (wife-concubine)?5 When we reach verse 2, what is the cause of their separation? MT reads: פילגשו עליו ותזנה . Many translations reflect MT with ‘she played the harlot against him’(ASV, NASB), ‘she played the whore against him’(KJV), ‘she did fornication against him’(Wycliffe Bible), or ‘she was unfaithful to him’(ESV, NIV), in an echo of the phrase used about Israel’s desertion of Yahweh. Others (NRSV, GNB) follow one of the two versions of the Septuagint, either ‘she left him’ in LXXB or she ‘became angry with him’ in LXXA. A number of emendations of MT have been proposed, alongside debate on whether the meaning is literal or metaphorical. Commentators, from early Jewish commentators onwards, have often shown unease with the verse, and made textual, narrative and moral arguments for a different base text. In contrast, this paper will argue that the Masoretic is both probable and likely; that the use of זנה fits with the literary, lexical and theological context and narrative stream. As such, while the different textual options are possible, I would argue that they are not necessary. This paper will first provide a short analysis of the meaning of זנה, survey textual options and probe the reasons underlying the unease of interpreters, before setting forward an argument for keeping the uncomfortable ambiguity of the Masoretic Text. 3 See R.G. Boling, Judges (Anchor Bible Commentaries; New York: Doubleday, 1975) and C.F. Burney, The Book of Judges (New York: KTAV, 1918) . 4 P. Trible, Texts of Terror. Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives (London: SCM, 2002) . 5 A discussion of the precise meaning of פילגש is

FAQs

What central problem does the paper address about Judges 19:2?

It examines what is “wrong with playing the harlot” by determining the meaning of the Hebrew term זנה in Judges 19:2 and how that meaning affects interpretation of the concubine’s actions.

How does the paper evaluate alternative textual traditions to the Masoretic Text?

It surveys translations and Septuagint options and discusses proposed emendations, but argues the Masoretic reading is both probable and likely, making the alternatives unnecessary for the best interpretation.

Why is feminist criticism significant in this debate according to the paper?

Feminist critics reopened the discussion by questioning why the text should automatically be read as presenting the concubine as innocent, especially in a chapter where characters are morally ambiguous and God is notably absent.

Aug 27, 2026

Upload by วิน