Onan the Barbarian? (ritual, punishment, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, procreation)

[sandy whitelinger]

The death of Onan is viewed in different ways. The story, from Genesis 38 goes basically like this:

Judah gives Tamar to his firstborn son, Er, to be a wife. Er died. Judah then instructed his second-born son, Onan, “Go into your brother’s wife and marry her, and bring up an heir to your brother.” Onan knew that any offspring would not be his and after entering Tamar he spilled his seed on the ground. This displeased the Lord and He slew Onan.

The different ways of looking at the meaning of this story of Onan’s death usually come from the spilling of his seed on the ground. Many Christian groups have used this as an injunction against masturbation and coitus interuptus. The idea is that the “spilling of seed” was misusing procreative ability. Some take this a step further and use it to ban any contraceptives.

A second view is that Onan was slain by the Lord for not wanting to sire a son as an heir to his brother. The textual reasons are these:

1. Onan was specifically told by his father to sire a child with Tamar and to raise it as his brother’s heir.
2. Onan specifically spilled his seed on the ground because he knew that a child would not be his.
3. The verse following the stating of Onan’s motive shows that this (the action and the motive) is the reason for the Lord’s displeasure and subsequent slaying of Onan.

Judah’s instructions to Onan fall under the practice of a kinsman redeemer. The inheritance that would have been due to the offspring of Er and Tamar would then fall to the offspring of Onan and Tamar. This was the practice of the time and later codified under Levitical Law.

An argument that each side uses to discredit the other for these two views is that neither offense calls for capital punishment under later Mosaic Law, thus it was never God’s intent. The law, in Leviticus, concerning the spilling of seed, only makes a reference to ritual impurity when one comes in contact with it and proscribes washing it off. Deuteronomy only calls for a mild public humiliation for failure to assume the role of kinsman redeemer.

It seems to me that interpreting the death of Onan as a misuse of procreative potential is an attempt by the Church to control the sexual activity of the faithful. This story has been used to go so far as to say that any intercourse outside of procreation is a sin.

There are other arguments as to the meaning of the story, using the same style of argument that has been presented so far. The Lord could have been displeased with Onan for disobeying his father. There is some credibility to this if one would wish to loosely apply Deuteronomy 18.

There could be implications of fault because Tamar is found in the lineage that leads to Christ. Judah married a Canaanite woman and the half-Canaanite Er and Onan would have polluted the lineage to Christ through Tamar. This perhaps, is the best explanation of the situation in that the rest of Scripture does not directly contradict the possibility. Considering how much non-Jewish lineage is in the line (Ruth and Rahab as examples) it can be seen as questionable. Bolstering the possibility is the limited view God had towards the Caananites.

Some say that the description of Onan is an oponymous aetiological myth concerning fluctuations in the constituency of the tribe of Judah, with the death of Onan reflecting the dying out of a clan.

There could be some connotations of Tamar being a portrait of the Church with Judah being the Holy Spirit and the death of Er and Onan being the death of false idols. Each supposition is as unsubstanciated as another.

No interpretation seems to have a solid foundation. I believe that any secondary and tertiary applications made on an unsure foundation are spurious at best. Making policy based on such a foundation is disengenuous. Perhaps it is enough to just read the story for what it is, how Er and Onan died, and leave it at that.

[sandy whitelinger]

These are references for the above post from the King James Version.

Deuteronomy 25
[5] If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her.
[6] And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.
[7] And if the man like not to take his brother's wife, then let his brother's wife go up to the gate unto the elders, and say, My husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother.
[8] Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak unto him: and if he stand to it, and say, I like not to take her;
[9] Then shall his brother's wife come unto him in the presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face, and shall answer and say, So shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his brother's house.
[10] And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.


Genesis 38
[6] And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, whose name was Tamar.
[7] And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.
[8] And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
[9] And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.
[10] And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.




Onan- one of three sons (Er, Onan and Shelah) of Judah and Shuah
Judah- one of the twelve sons of Jacob (Israel)
Tamar- the wife of Er and in the lineage of Christ

[MidnightBlue]

Originally Posted by sandy whitelinger

Deuteronomy only calls for a mild public humiliation for failure to assume the role of kinsman redeemer.

However, Onan assumed the role of kinsman redeemer (or pretended to) to the extent of having sex with his sister-in-law, but then apparently withdrew to prevent the desired outcome. That seems like a more serious offense.

Originally Posted by sandy whitelinger

It seems to me that interpreting the death of Onan as a misuse of procreative potential is an attempt by the Church to control the sexual activity of the faithful.

Not a very convincing attempt, either.

Originally Posted by sandy whitelinger

There are other arguments as to the meaning of the story, using the same style of argument that has been presented so far. The Lord could have been displeased with Onan for disobeying his father. There is some credibility to this if one would wish to loosely apply Deuteronomy 18.

There could be implications of fault because Tamar is found in the lineage that leads to Christ. Judah married a Canaanite woman and the half-Canaanite Er and Onan would have polluted the lineage to Christ through Tamar. This perhaps, is the best explanation of the situation in that the rest of Scripture does not directly contradict the possibility. Considering how much non-Jewish lineage is in the line (Ruth and Rahab as examples) it can be seen as questionable. Bolstering the possibility is the limited view God had towards the Caananites.

Some say that the description of Onan is an oponymous aetiological myth concerning fluctuations in the constituency of the tribe of Judah, with the death of Onan reflecting the dying out of a clan.

There could be some connotations of Tamar being a portrait of the Church with Judah being the Holy Spirit and the death of Er and Onan being the death of false idols.Each supposition is as unsubstanciated as another.

No interpretation seems to have a solid foundation. I believe that any secondary and tertiary applications made on an unsure foundation are spurious at best. Making policy based on such a foundation is disengenuous. Perhaps it is enough to just read the story for what it is, how Er and Onan died, and leave it at that.

I agree.

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

However, Onan assumed the role of kinsman redeemer (or pretended to) to the extent of having sex with his sister-in-law, but then apparently withdrew to prevent the desired outcome. That seems like a more serious offense.

That would have officially made Tamar his wife and then we are back to spilling his seed and the various permutations.

[david01]

I have always been mystified that this story is perverted IMO to prohibit masturbation and contraception. I agree with the OP and appreciate the evenhanded evaluation of the story,

[MidnightBlue]

Originally Posted by david01

I agree with the OP and appreciate the evenhanded evaluation of the story,

Sandy may be crazy, but he ain't stupid.

[Mestemia]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

Sandy may be crazy, but he ain't stupid.

I have come to that same conclusion in a number of threads...

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by MidnightBlue

Sandy may be crazy, but he ain't stupid.

I might be crazy as well. If you perservere you too can be this way.

[sandy whitelinger]

Something else that might strengthen the idea that it was the fact that Judah's offspring being half-Canaanite could have been the reason fo the deaths of Er and Onan.

Genesis 38:11
Then said Judah to Tamar his daughter in law, Remain a widow at thy father's house, till Shelah my son be grown: for he said, Lest peradventure he die also, as his brethren did.

Judah expected that his third son, Shelah, would die as well if he married Tamar. This also could be further evidence that it was not the act of spilling seed that caused the death of Onan, else why the death of Er and possible Shelah. This could also point to failing as a kinsman redeemer to not being the cause. Shelah never fulfilled that role.