A Moral Blow
Not realizing that she was his daughter-in-law, he went over to her by the roadside and said, “Come now, let me sleep with you.” Genesis 38:16a NIV
Sleep with you – Okay, so we’re past the scandalous nature of this event. We think of it religiously as if it’s about inequity, and, of course, ultimately, about the line of the Messiah. That helps us overlook the moral circumstances. Almost. You see, there is something else happening in this verse that forces us to face the moral outrage, something you won’t see in a translation like the NIV or in the NASB (“Let me have relations with you”). Most of the time when a Hebrew text deals with sex the words are euphemistic or innuendo. Even in the Song of Songs, sexual activity is described in allusions, hints, or allegories. Hebrew is not a graphic language. By the way, neither is “proper” English, which is why we get translations like “sleep with you.” We all know perfectly well that Judah didn’t “sleep” with Tamar, but we don’t like to say what he actually did. Neither does Hebrew. We can see this quite clearly in the first description of sexuality when the text says “and the man knew his wife.” But in this verse, Hebrew breaks protocol.
The Hebrew text literally reads, “Here, now! Let me enter into you.” Furthermore, the verb is an imperfect—an action that continues. Judah doesn’t enter once. He enters multiple times. It’s just too explicit for ordinary Hebrew, and for us. So, we tone it down. Tamar’s reply is just as scandalous. “What will you give me so that you can come in to me?” is also grammatically odd. She uses the second person, masculine form of the verb “to come in.” That tells us something else. For her this is not about an encounter. It’s about his genitals. She is just the space he wants. Once again, far too explicit for normal Hebrew.
But that’s the point. The text is morally uncomfortable! It violates our usual decorum about sex. It slaps us in the face. This action, this choice, isn’t about intimacy. It’s about ejaculation. Both parties know that. Both parties speak in what Hebrew would consider pornographic language. There’s no question about what is happening or why, except, of course, that Tamar is disguising herself and her real motives. At the side of the road, everything animal about Judah’s desire is portrayed and acknowledged. You can imagine what that would really look like in translation.
Now the question is “Why?” Why would the Hebrew text deliberately depart from its typical, veiled treatment of sexual activity? Why use such inappropriate language? Do you suppose the Hebrew reader could sweep this under the table? Impossible! It’s so brash it can’t be ignored. And perhaps that’s the reason. What Judah does, and what Tamar acknowledges that he does, is completely out of bounds. It’s so scandalous that it can’t even be written decently. His action is utterly without regard to Tamar and to himself. He violates every relational obligation, even to the woman he thinks is a prostitute. As Tamar’s wording suggests, he’s just renting space. When English opts for translations that avoid the graphic imagery of the text, it fails to produce the shock embodied in the Hebrew. While we get the idea, the translation doesn’t communicate the slap in the face. It doesn’t deliver the moral blow necessary to really understand the story. It makes the story palatable—as if that were good enough.
Topical Index: Judah, Tamar, come in to, Genesis 38:16a
