Parting Comments

Well, there you have it, folks.  We've arrived at the end point, the last page, the conclusion.  We've explored all the rooms of the tabernacle - the outer court, the sanctuary, the holiest place - and here we stand, flanked by justice and redemption with the promises of the covenant soaring above our heads.  We have seen how we are to approach the presence of YHWH and bring our sacrifices and offerings.  We've seen how covenant holiness is defined by the community who would host the electric presence of a holy God - how it defines what we eat, how we dress, how we live among one another and the creatures that are our neighbors.  We've learned about boundaries, about purity, and about why these things matter in our approach to God.  We've seen that God's covenant with the people of faith involves not just God-to-human interactions, but human-to-human, human-to-animal, and human-to-land.

What now?

I really just have one final observation to make in conclusion.  Do you remember how the first 17 chapters composed the "perimeter" of the outer court - defining the sacrificial system and purity system?  We might say that that first (roughly) half was about things that pertain to our approach to the presence of God - it's about worship, about loving God above all else and doing it in a tangible, real way.

And then chapters 18-27 are the holiness code - as this section began to define what justice and integrity are, we were able to get closer and closer to God.  Entering smaller and smaller spaces of imagined rooms, fewer chapters, and smaller units, what we read increasingly had to do with how we treat those around us - embodying YHWH's righteousness toward our families, our neighbors, our slaves, our animals, and our land.  And we learned that none of it is really ours.

So in a sense, we might say that when we are furthest away from the outside, the movement is in - toward the holy place, toward the presence of God through the worship that is expressed - moving "further up and further in."  And when we get where we're going, as far as we possibly can go, what we find is that we cannot stay there but must move back out into the world to extend the justice and righteousness of YHWH to the entire created order.  We find that,

"Even going as far as we can go into the interior of the tabernacle, expecting to unveil its secrets, what we find is no secret: still, only and always, the justice of God and his fidelity to the covenants he made with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob."

Worship and justice.  Loving and serving.

This double-movement of Leviticus is, in a sense, what we do every week when we gather as a community at worship.  We come, bringing ourselves and our offerings "at the entrance of the tabernacle," knowing that as we come we are drawing near to the place that is somehow specially God's own house.  We hear the word read and proclaimed, and as we do we are formed into the kind of people that mirror God's very nature in the devotion we express through our relationships with each other and with everything else in the created order.  We respond by celebrating our communion with YHWH through which we have communion with one another, as that great, mysterious symbol that we live into without knowing how to express it in words.  And then we are sent out to love and to serve, to be the image-bearers of YHWH's righteousness, justice, and holiness - to extend that vision from the the throne of God out through all creation.

We already saw how Jesus' response to the question about which is the greatest commandment drew on Deuteronomy 6 and Leviticus 19 to coin what Scot McKnight calls, "the Jesus Creed."  And here we find that Leviticus is about nothing less -

Love God.  Love each other.

*If any of you have any questions about things you'd like clarification on, topics it may have been helpful to address more fully over the course of the study, or just general observations, I'd love to hear your thoughts.  Please reply below!

Chapters 25-27: The Great Proclamation of Liberty, Part 3

VI.  Chapter 27: Debts to the Lord
        In chapter 25 we read about the jubilee legislation and how debts among persons are to be handled.  Chapter 27, correspondingly, addresses those things that have been dedicated to God.  This is particularly interesting (and often misunderstood), because Leviticus is so insistent that God is the sole owner of the entire created order - land, people, and animals.  How can things dedicated to God be redeemed - and why should they be dedicated in the first place?
     
I'm not sure I fully understand the significance of what is going on here, but I can offer two observations.  First, the idea that certain things would be set aside "as holy-property to YHWH" (27.14) functions within the Levitical framework of distinctions between the holy (kodesh) and the common (hol).  We are meant to understand that there is a difference between the two, and that distinguishing between them is central to the role of the priesthood and life in the community of faith.  Furthermore, these distinctions or boundaries affect all areas of life, not just the 10% we may or may not tithe, or what we choose to do with our Sunday mornings - being holy, being set apart as the people of God, is an all-encompassing way of life.
        Second, after chapters 25-26 have drilled into us God's sole ownership and governance of land, people, and animals, chapter 27 reminds us that this same over-Lord is also a covenant partner.  As creditor, God chooses to participate in the same structures of justice and equality that he holds his people to - the ultimate owner, conqueror, deliverer, and king ordains the law of the land, and then models it. This is how:

• Limits are set on standards of value - all commerce is to be defined by a single weight (25)
• Persons dedicated to the Lord may be redeemed (2-8)
• Animals dedicated to the Lord may be redeemed (9-13)
• Property dedicated to the Lord may be redeemed (14-24)
• Allowances are made for other miscellaneous things, including tithes, exemptions, and special circumstances (26-33)

Notice how these specific allowances that are included in 27 mirror the person-to-person obligations of 25; redemption of persons, animals, and property as covenant partners.

Finally, in addressing things that have been consecrated to the Lord there is a sense that chapter 27 is reaching all the way back to the first few chapters of the book - remember the "bringing-near" of offerings in the approach to the outer court?  Leviticus is in a large sense all about the things that have been consecrated to the Lord and the things that belong to the Lord - distinguishing between the hol and the kodesh.  It is fitting that this final chapter functions as the "latch" around the great ring that has been our tour of the tabernacle.

Does that sound like an afterthought to you?

Chapters 25-27: The Great Proclamation of Liberty, Part 2

IV.  Chapter 26: Covenant Blessings or Curse

        If chapter 19 defined righteousness and justice, chapter 26 expands and completes that definition by describing the results of either faithfulness or infidelity to the covenant.  These are probably the chapters with which we are most familiar, which is all well and good ... except that apart from the rest of the book in which they are situated, they come to mean little more than a list of do's and don'ts and some utopian vision for life on earth - utopian, apparently, because we can never manage the do's as well as the don'ts.  Stripped of the structures they are anchored within and supporting, chapters 19 and 26 might as well be interpreted as, "If you behave you'll be rewarded; if not, well..."

        But a covenant relationship with the living God is not a simple matter of cause and effect.  We cannot earn our way into the promised land.  We cannot bribe God.  What we can do is choose to live our lives within the boundaries YHWH has drawn, knowing that in them is life and outside of them is death - and the death of our bodies is not the worst kind of death.  We should know by now that we are not a covenant people by our own choosing, but because we are chosen - quite apart from anything we've done to deserve it (Deut 9.4-6).  If there are two words I wish I could wipe from our minds as we explore this chapter, it would be "reward" and "punishment."  Maybe we could replace them with words like "flourish," "thrive," "mature," or "dwindle," "diminish," "destruct."  Did you know that it is the same Hebrew root for either "curse" or "become small, of no account, diminished"?  How's that for both a paradigm shift and a reminder of the last narrative we explored, "Cursing for Cursing"?

       
So let's take a look at these blessings and curses.

        First, verses 1-2 immediately bring to mind chapter 19 with the reminder that YHWH alone is God, and guarding the Sabbath is a principle way that we acknowledge that.  Along with that is included this curious phrase: "my Holy-Shrine you are to hold-in-awe, I am YHWH!"  Except it's not really that curious, since the whole book has been about exploring every nook and cranny of the tabernacle, explaining what is to be done in and at the tabernacle, and teaching us how to maintain and purify the tabernacle.  And it's not really that curious since we are as far in and as close up as we can possibly get to the Holiest place on earth, the place that YHWH has declared home. Actually, it's not curious at all since this tabernacle, this dwelling, is supposed to mirror the goodness of creation and God's design for the entire created order.  You asked how the community of faith is supposed to host the dangerous presence of a holy God?  This is how.  This is hospitality through holiness.

        Second, fidelity to the covenant creates space for:

• The abundant fertility and provision of the land (4-5), 
• the blessing of living peacefully within the land, without fear of dangerous animals or invading enemies (6-8),
• and the very presence of YHWH - "I will place my Dwelling in your midst, and I will not repel you.  I will walk about in your midst, I will be for you as a God, and you yourselves will be for me as a people" (9-13).  

Finally, failure to walk within the covenant boundaries is more like massive "systems failure" than punishment for bad behavior.  Or like throwing a wrench in the gears.  Or like John's boat that shut down last week because the intake was fully of jellyfish.  Recalling the warning from chapters 18 and 20 that all of this is so that "the land not vomit you out" (18.24-29, 20.23), the language here is that of physical revulsion - "If you are grossed out by my laws and regulations (26.15), the land will be grossed out by you (27.32-35)!"

        Not surprisingly then, the first of these diminishings is physical infirmity (16-17), and then the turning of covenant partners - if the people of the covenant turn away, then so also will:

• The land - instead of rain in due season producing crop upon crop, "your land will not give-forth its yield" (18-20), 
• Animals - the wild beasts will turn against covenant people and animals alike (18-20),
• and most horrifying of all, the presence of YHWH becomes no longer a blessing but a curse - gone is the protection from war and strife (25), hunger and famine (26), dehumanizing treatment of one another (29), idolatry (30-31), desolation and loss of the land (32-33), exile (34-39), and fear and oppression (36-39).

BUT.

NEVERTHELESS.  

HOWEVER...

all is not lost.  There may yet be hope.  

Even though we have broken-faith (40), walking in opposition and causing God to walk in opposition to us (if you turn up-stream the channel is already going against you); even though we have hardened our hearts and acted as though we did not carry the mark of the covenant in our very bodies (41) - even then, there is still room for another turn.  Repentance requires only the confession of our twisted path (40), and the humbling of our haughty hearts.  YHWH will remember.  He will remember the covenant.  He will remember the promise "to be for them a God" (45).  

BUT. 

NEVERTHELESS.

HOWEVER...

what about the other covenant partners that our turning has affected?

Remembrance and forgiveness don't instantly erase the twisted paths we've cut across the face of the earth.  The land must still be given rest to recuperate from the sickness we've imposed upon it, and this is the meaning of exile.

V.  Exile: "Then the land will find acceptance"
        I've always struggled with the idea of exile.  In and out, back and forth, the people never seem to get the message even though they're booted out time after time, at great cost and with unimaginable suffering.  How is that constructive?  How does that help accomplish YHWH's redemptive purposes?
        But redemptive purposes - for who?   It never dawned on me that maybe it's not just about the people.  Maybe we are not the only ones to whom YHWH has extended the protection of covenant, are not the sum total of God's green earth, are not the axis on which the world turns.  Imagine that.
        Leviticus is clear that even though God will respond to the people's repentance by remembering and honoring his covenant, the land must still "find acceptance" regarding its Sabbaths, "since it did not enjoy-cessation during its Sabbaths when you were settled on it" (35).  The land will have to be left behind, "attaining-acceptance through its Sabbaths by being-desolate-of them" (43).  And here is the most curious thing of all - it is precisely because God will remember his covenant that the people must be exiled from the land.  Listen to what it says:

I will bear-in-mind my Jacob covenant,and yes, my Isaac covenant, 
and yes, my Abraham covenant I will bear-in-mind 
and the land I will bear-in-mind...  

Do you see what has happened?  How do we usually hear this covenant formula?  "God will take account of you ... he will bring you up to the land about which he swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob" (Gen 50.24); "God called-to-mind his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob" (Ex 2.24); "If they should see ... the soil about which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob" (Num 32.11); "This is the land that I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob" (Deut 34.4).  Instead of tracing the covenant forward through time - Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - Leviticus traces it backwards.  And note what is always mentioned before Abraham - the land.  This backward movement as an act of remembrance is almost as if to say, "Yes, I will remember you and the covenant that I made with you and with your fathers, but I will remember it all - the covenant with you, with Jacob, with Isaac, with Abraham, and with the land - for before you were, the land was."  Adam - man.  Adamah - fertile soil.  "And YHWH, God, formed the human, of dust from the soil, he blew into his nostrils the breath of life and the human became a living being" (Gen 2.7).

Is it possible to remember adam and yet forget adamah?
  

Chapters 25-27: The Great Proclamation of Liberty, Part 1

I.  Introduction
        Chapters 25-27 form a second "pedimental" frame corresponding to chapters 18-20, to highlight chapter 26 as an expansion and completion of chapter 19.  These two chapters are the pillars of the Holiness Code because they define covenant righteousness, liberty, and fidelity as YHWH's ultimate vision for the created order - land, animals, and humans alike.  Here in the holiest place, justice and fidelity are envisioned not as abstract concepts but analogous "patterns in time with movements across space."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What??

Okay.  So we encountered chapters 18-20 immediately upon "entering" the second chamber of the tabernacle, the sanctuary.  As proximity to the Holy of Holies increased, it was fitting that those chapters would mark our entrance not only into a new room in our architectural imagination, but into a different section of the book - chapters 1-17 included the sacrificial and purity codes, and 18-27 is considered the Holiness Code.  We might envision ourselves crossing a threshold spanned by two pillars, over which is an arch reading "You shall be holy, for I, YHWH, am holy."  And exploring the pillars on either side, we learned what holiness emphatically is not - idolatry, expressed through pagan immorality.  Instead, God's people are to mirror God himself in the physical, tangible ways they grow their crops and shape their families and deal justly with one another.  To be God's people, we must mimic God's righteousness.

That was our entrance to the sanctuary, and having come through the screen of the 2nd Narrative (24.10-22) we are now entering the Holy of Holies (figuratively, of course, since only the High Priest is allowed in there once a year).  In this innermost room we find only this one unit of three chapters - just as only the Ark of the Covenant is housed in the Holiest Place.  Instead of denunciations of what is not YHWH's idea of righteousness (like chapters 18 and 20), these pillars expand our understanding of the justice and liberty that characterizes YHWH's covenant.  Look to the left (ch 25) and you see the covenant being fleshed out in person-to-person relationships; to the right (ch 26) and God himself participates in these same redemptive acts.  And overhead is the end toward which all else has been driving: God's vision for life within the covenant.

II.  Key Points
        There are three underlying ideas that are foundational for the vision for life expressed in these three chapters:

• First, "jubilee" or "home-bringing" as Fox translates it, defines freedom and liberation by the freedom to return home; the idea is not justice and righteousness just anywhere, but that justice and righteousness are only complete and fulfilled in the place that YHWH chooses and which he has entrusted to the care of his people.  
• Second, God is the sole owner.  The land and the people who inhabit it belong unequivocally to God - there can be no permanent sale or ownership of either.  
• Third, liberty and freedom are found only within God's law; the jubilee legislation of chapter 25 is precisely to legitimate the insistence that the protective boundaries of the covenant provide ultimate freedom.

With that, we're ready to ready to work our way around the Holy of Holies, starting with chapter 25.

III.  Chapter 25: Person to Person Obligations
        Chapter 25 contains and expounds what is known as "the Jubilee legislation," the single greatest passage of civil rights legislation in the Bible.  It is so important, in fact, that many commentators would see it as the penultimate chapter leading up to the grand finale of chapter 26, with chapter 27 as an afterthought that was tagged on at a later date.    I disagree, but we'll come to that later.
        First, what does "jubilee" mean?  I asked this question at Bible study this week, expecting to hear answers like, "a celebration" or "a feast," or "a party" - Exhibit A, entitled "Underestimating Your Students."  They stared at me blankly as if to say, "everyone knows what jubilee means," until Mary Clyde piped up - "Well, there's the Flounder Jubilee when all the flounder come home and beach themselves."  Of course.  The Flounder Jubilee.  Whether on the shores of North Carolina or the desert of the Sinai Peninsula, that's exactly what jubilee means - coming home.  Landing.  So although many of your English translations may read "jubilee," I prefer Fox's term "home-bringing" for the simple reason that it jars us out of any less-robust connotations we may have regarding the word.  Just think of the flounder.
     
The home-bringing legislation makes provisions for:

• Land - sets prices on a sliding scale in relation to the year of home-bringing since God's land cannot be sold and therefore "a certain number of harvests is what he is selling to you" (vv14-24); and stipulates that the land must be returned to its original owners every 50 years (25-34).
• Debts - forbids collecting interest (35-38) and ensures the remission of secular debts (person to person).
• Slavery - Israelites who "sink down in poverty" and whose "hands are too short" may be taken as slaves but must be treated as hired-hands, not the lowest laborers, and only temporarily - they may be redeemed at any time, either through their own labor or their relatives (39-42), are distinguished from foreigners (44-46), and are to be released at home-bringing (47-55).  

What is unique about this legislation is the radical redefinition and periodic redistribution of ownership, as mentioned earlier - yet this is emphatically neither socialism, nor communism, nor (dare I say) capitalism.  The closest historical parallel we might find is a kind of feudalism, except that the feudal lord is God himself.  The land is his, the people are his, and their presence and productivity is as his tenants.
        In the ancient world, it was a common practice of victorious conquerors to release the prisoners and cancel all debts upon ascension as ruler - call it a type of wooing to convince the conquered peoples that this new reign was going to be the greatest thing that ever happened them.  YHWH takes it even a step further, though, and declares that this isn't going to happen just once, now that the people have left Egypt, but every 50 years, like clockwork.  This would have the effect of defining the entire social and economic structure according to the observance of home-bringing, and the constant reminder that all we are and all we have is entrusted to us by YHWH.  So even though these laws are about person-to-person obligations in the mundane exchanges of society, they work to cultivate a constant awareness that how we treat one another affects our relationship with YHWH.  We are not our own - and that is something to celebrate.
 

Land: Holiness & Covenant

Before we charge on through chapters 25-27, we need to turn our attention to another great symbol system that we encounter in Leviticus.  So far we have explored the Sacrificial system and the Purity system, and we come now to the third and final symbol: the Land as both host and covenant partner with God and Israel.  Throughout Leviticus, we have seen hints that the entire created order is related to YHWH's covenant in one way or another, especially in the distinction between animals acceptable for sacrifice (those entrusted to Israel) and those not (because they already belong to God), and the kinds of animals that are good for eating (those entrusted to Israel) and those that aren't (because they already belong to God).  Stated another way, the central idea informing all three symbol systems is that,

All creaturely life belongs absolutely and totally to God, and Israel in particular is to embody that belonging.  

We need to explore Leviticus' perspective of the land as we prepare to engage chapters 25-27, because these chapters trace Israel's faithfulness or failure through a perspective of the land as covenant partner with God.  So what does that mean?  Following Ellen Davis' lead, I will sketch Leviticus' view of land through Three Temporal Perspectives in Three Aspects.


I.  The View of the Land from Three Temporal Perspectives...
        What do we mean by "temporal perspectives"?  Well, simply this: the consensus of current scholarship is that Leviticus was most likely compiled over a period of several centuries.  During this time, the circumstances of the Israelite community and their physical location in relation to "the land" would have undergone several changes, and these different circumstances influence the perspective of the text.  First, there is the perspective of wilderness; the narrative situates Leviticus near Sinai just after Moses has received the ten commandments and the construction of the tabernacle has been completed.  This entire scene is located "in the wilderness," somewhere between the slavery of Egypt and the promise of the holy land.  It is life at the border, the threshold, the "no longer" but "not yet."
        Second, there is the perspective of exile.  We will find out more specifically what exile means as we take a look at chapters 25-27, but already, even before entering the promised land, comes a warning that settling within it is contingent upon a few important details.
        Finally, the perspective of monarchy.  The land belongs to YHWH, and the Israelites are allowed to inhabit it as tenants.  In fact, the Israelites themselves exist as debt-slaves to God by virtue of their being rescued from slavery in Egypt.  Viewed within this monarchic perspective, the tabernacle is the place where God sets up his throne on earth and governs all creaturely life.  The land is God's kingdom.

II.  ...in Three Aspects
        Remember that the above perspectives have to do with specific temporal periods in Israel's history.  The following three aspects differ in that they express how the land was understood to function during any and all of those particular circumstances of time.  First, the land was a means of subsistence.  Loss of the land or its failure to produce had severe and immediate consequences - directly related is the concept of debt-slavery that we will hear about in chapters 25-27, because the land was central to the economy.  If Leviticus is to address economic practices at all, the systems surrounding land ownership and debt-slavery are central.
        Second, if the land belongs to God and is his domain, it is understood to be an extended Sanctuary and locus for holiness of life.  YHWH is really present with Israel (cf. 26.11-12), so the tabernacle is in a direct line with God's throne in heaven - peace, fruitfulness, and shalom spread out from the tabernacle through the land (26.2-3).  On the other hand, if God is really present with Israel, that presence becomes a curse to those who fail to live in congruence with God's commands - we'll get to that later.
        Third and finally, the land is a partner in covenant relationship.  Stop and think about that for a minute - the land is a partner??  When we get to chapter 26 we'll explore the ways that the land participates either in YHWH's protection and provision when Israel is faithful, or punishment when they are not.  There is almost a kind of mystical sensibility that the land is more an animate creature of God than it is a thing acted upon.

With this framework in place, we're ready for chapters 25-27: the Great Proclamation of Liberty.

Chapter 24.10-20: Cursing for Cursing

Now the son of an Israelite woman went out  - he was also the son of an Egyptian man - amid the Children of Israel; and they scuffled in the camp, the son of the Israelite-woman and a (fully) Israelite man.  Now the son of the Israelite woman reviled the Name, and insulted (it), so they brought him to Moshe - now the name of his mother (was) Shelomit daughter of Divri, of the tribe of Dan - and they put him under guard, to clarify it for them by order of YHWH.  And YHWH spoke to Moshe, saying ... whoever reviles the name of YHWH is to be put-to-death, yes, death, the entire community is to pelt, yes pelt him; as the sojourner, so the native, when he reviles the Name, he is to be put-to-death!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You are not to take up the name of YHWH your God for emptiness, 

for YHWH will not clear him that takes up his name for emptiness."

- Exodus 20.6

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Words can be like X-rays if you use them properly - 

they'll go through anything. You read and you're pierced. 

- Aldous Huxley

___________________________________________________________________________________

Yet again, we encounter a story in this book that we call our Scriptures that offends our sense of justice.   Somebody gets in a scuffle, spouts out a few choice words, and - dies?  Really?!?  Who is this God - is it not the One of whom the Psalmist writes, 

Compassionate and gracious, the Lord, slow to anger and abounding in kindness ... not according to our offenses has He done to us, nor according to our crimes requited us.  As a father has compassion for his children, the Lord has compassion for those who fear Him (Psalm 103.8, 10, 13)

or the One who speaks through the prophets, 

Fear not, you shall not be shamed; do not cringe, you shall not be disgraced ... the Holy One of Israel will redeem you - he is called "God of all the Earth." For a little while I forsook you, but with vast love I will bring you back.  In slight anger, for a moment, I hid my face from you; but with kindness everlasting I will take you back in love - said the Lord your Redeemer.  I will not be angry with you or rebuke you.  For the mountains may move and the hills be shaken, but my loyalty shall never move from you, nor my covenant of friendship be shaken - said the Lord, who takes you back in love (Isaiah 54).

I think that often we just "look away" when something seems so at odds with what we understand about God and who we know God to be.  We avoid talking about it (when was the last time you heard this read or preached?!), or we vilify the subjects of the story in a way that makes them safely different from us, or we quietly, in the tiny dark places of our minds where we don't even have to be honest with ourselves, put up some sort of little fence to separate this God from the God we're more comfortable with - the angry God from the merciful God, the Old Testament God from the New Testament God, the Jewish God from the Christian God, the righteous God from the redeemer God, the legalistic God from the gracious God.

How many gods do we have?  

Our text for today forces us back to the question we asked at the beginning of our study - what does it mean to read Leviticus as Scripture?  What does it mean to read it - all of it - as the word of God?  What does it tell us about who God is and how we are to live?  I can't just look away.  I would rather have a God I don't understand than a god I can ignore, or a god I can take apart and piece back together in the shape I want.  And I don't think we have to try to hide these hard things that we don't understand, either from ourselves or from others.

So what has happened here, with this son of an Israelite woman, that is so serious as to end in death?  What does it mean to "revile the name of YHWH"? 

First, let's remember the tone Leviticus has already set for how to deal with sin.  In chapters 1-7 we read about all the kinds of offerings that were to be brought, including the hattat offering which effects purification for sin.  This is what it says: "When one sins in error regarding any of YHWH's commandments that should not be done, by doing any one of them ... he is to bring-near, for the sin that he has sinned ... a hattat offering ... to effect-purgation for him from his sin, and he shall be granted-pardon" (chapter 4).  Granted pardon?  Regarding any of YHWH's commandments.  Okay.  We can live with that.

        But then in chapter 10 we read about Nadav and Avihu, who brought foreign fire to the altar.  Do you remember how they died?  Fire.  Even though this, too, is startling to our feeling that justice is not equal to vengeance, we were able to maybe, just maybe, comprehend that their deaths were less the result of irrational anger than the natural consequence of entering a danger zone without appropriate precautions.  In these two events we start to see something of a general principle of equivalence in Leviticus - if someone becomes impure through inadvertent sin, she brings an offering of purification.  If someone brings the wrong kind of fire, the protective boundaries are breached and YHWH's dangerous fire is no longer safe - "fire for fire."  

        But death for cursing?  Isn't the punishment of death a little out of proportion to insulting God's name?  I'm going to argue that this, too, is a literary comment on the principle of equivalence, and to do so we need to take a closer look at the very careful way that this story is written and the words that are chosen to tell it. 

I.  "Let the punishment fit the crime"?

        1 - The crime? "Reviling the name."  The Hebrew word that is translated "revile" is naqav, which normally means "to pierce, bore through, perforate."  What if this passage were instead translated, "he pierced the Name, perforated the Name with his words"?  Then we ought to ask what harm is done.  Do you remember back in chapters 12-15 when we read about coverings that are compromised by things breaking through the surface of skin, of garments, of tents?  To pierce or perforate God's name is to compromise the integrity of God's reputation. What if the name of God - like skin, like clothes, like houses, like the tabernacle - is also a protective covering over the community of faith, a covering that is maintained and established through reverence and respect by those who are God's image-bearers?  What if that covering is damaged by the very ones who both need protection and are the closest thing to YHWH's representatives in all creation?

        2 - The punishment? "Whoever reviles the name of YHWH is to be put-to-death, yes, death, the entire community is to pelt, yes, pelt him."  The Hebrew word that is translated "pelt" is ragam, meaning "throw, hurl, pelt with stones."  Straightforward enough.  But because this word is always used for the act of stoning, it also came to be used for - cursing.  It seems as though there's a play on words here, inviting our imagination - "The blasphemer has insulted the Name, so let him die by insults."  "He has pierced the Name, so let him be pierced with stones."  "He has hurled insults, so let insults be hurled at him."  Sound like this might be about some kind of equivalence after all? 

II.  A Story about the Name: the Names of the Characters

        There's another interesting feature that I hope you may have noticed if you've been reading the text throughout our study.  Did you notice all of the names that suddenly sprang up?  How many names have we read in Leviticus before now?  Let's see, there was Moses and Aaron... Nadav and Avihu... some others of Aaron's sons... and that's it.  But here in chapter 24, all of a sudden we need to know everyone's name - the mother, the grandfather, the "father's house" (family, tribe), the blasphemer - wait, what was his name?

        Oh.

Well, how about the others - what do their names mean?

• Shelomit - from the root shilem, meaning "repayment, retribution"
• Divri - from the root davar, meaning "to speak" or "quarrel, conduct a lawsuit"
• Dan - the tribe whose people "will mete-out-judgment" (Gen. 49.16)

Are you seeing a theme here? What if we were to rewrite the story with all these encoded suggestions spelled out:

Once there was a man with no name, son of Retribution, grandson of Lawsuit, from the house of Judgment, and he pelted insults at the Name ... and the Lord said, "He shall die, he pelted my Name, he shall be pelted to death."

(Somebody really ought to write a "Leviticus for Dummies")

III.  An Interlude: Equivalence

        Just in case we still haven't gotten the point, our narrative is interrupted with a reiteration of Exodus 21 (especially vv23-25), the familiar passage about making retribution for loss of any kind - 

Now a man - when he strikes-down any human life, he is to be put-to-death, yes, death!  One who strikes the life of an animal is to pay for it, life in place of life.  And a man - when he renders a defect in his fellow: as he has done, thus is to be done to him - break in place of break, eye in place of eye, tooth in place of tooth; as he has rendered a defect in (another) human, thus is to be rendered to him...

Expounding what Scripture means by a "retributive principle" is beyond the scope of our subject for today, but this reminder being included within our narrative soundly affirms that what happens to No-Name is directly related to his actions.

IV.  Conclusion

        While I was in the process of writing this post I received an e-mail with a daily reflection from the Union for Reform Judaism.  It is about God's oneness, and the invitation God extends to the community of faith to participate with God in world-shaping covenant relationship.  Although there are a few things the Christian community might understand differently than this Rabbi's interpretation, suggesting that you read the entire post is the best conclusion I can offer you for how we might try to understand the grave seriousness of diminishing the name of God.  Here is a highlight: 

"Isaiah 49.3 teaches 'You are my servant, Israel.  I will be glorified through you.'  In this way, the Master is dependent on the servant.  God's glory, if we dare say it, depends on how we, human beings of flesh and blood live out our days and our years ... the Rabbis imagine God saying, "When you are My witnesses, I am God.  When you are not My witnesses, it is as if I am not God."

What we do matters.  What we say matters.  And if what we say diminishes God's glory then we ourselves become diminished.          

Chapters 23-24:9: The Shape of the Year

We have two choices: this can either be a short lesson, skimming the surface of Chapter 23 with a few observations related to our study as a whole, or a very - very - long one, explicating the yearly cycle of festivals and holy days and their meaning for the Israelite community.  I vote for Option #1 (my reasons for this are twofold: 1) the theological importance and historical development of this liturgical way of shaping time in the Jewish tradition is vast.  While embarking on this study would doubtless enrich our understanding of Leviticus as a whole, I fear doing so in this context would be more of a de-railing than a detour.  2) I don't know nearly enough about said topic.  It will have to wait for another time).

You are to bring-near a fire-offering to YHWH, for seven days... 

You are to perform-a-sacrifice on the day of your elevating the sheaf, a sheep, wholly-sound, in its (first) year, as an offering-up to YHWH... 

And you are to perform-as-sacrifice: one hairy goat for a hattat, and two sheep, a year old, for a slaughter-offering of shalom...

Does this sound familiar?  Haven't we already heard something like this way back in chapters 1-7, in the outer court?  What are these sacrificial instructions doing here, in the sanctuary?

First, the sacrifices specified in chapters 1-7 were "freewill offerings" of various types; although the offerings were necessary for the maintenance of ritual purification, they were brought at the discretion of the worshipper.  Locating the material describing how to bring these offerings in the "outer court" section of the text makes sense if these are offerings that are brought by anyone, at any time.  Now that we are in the sanctuary, however - that much closer to the presence of YHWH - we find instructions for sacrifices that are initiated by God.  Just as the earlier chapters created a paradigm in which worship, family life, ethics, priestly qualifications and behavior, and sacrificial animals and objects were to be characterized by holiness, so also time is to be defined and ordered by God.  The Israelite calendar was to be shaped not merely by the cycles of the sun and length of days, but by remembering God's redemptive actions on Israel's behalf and responding with the appropriate observances of gratitude, celebration or purification.

Second, chapter 23 constitutes the final block of material before we encounter the 2nd Narrative that is the screen to the Holy of Holies ... which is only entered once a year on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur).  It makes perfect sense that the instructions for shaping the entire year in acknowledgement of YHWH's provision, protection, and presence, would serve as preparation for entering the most sacred area of the tabernacle.  Although the instructions for Yom Kippur have already been outlined in chapter 16, this reminder of the ordering of time through liturgical observance prepares the reader for our literary trip into the Holiest Place.

And just to make sure we realize that we are, indeed, taking a tour of the sanctuary, chapter 24 begins with material pertaining to the furniture that is located in the sanctuary - the lampstand and the table of showbread.  The feasts ordained by God expand and complete chapters 1-7, and the instructions for the oil and baking of bread complete the instructions for their installment recorded earlier in Exodus 27.20-21 and 25.23-30.  We are now ready make our way through the 2nd Screen, the narrative of chapter 24.10-22.

In summary, these "proclamations of holiness" shaping the yearly calendar include time as well as space and behavior in the ordering that reflects YHWH's holiness.  Sketch out a quick list for yourself of when these festivals are supposed to occur and other specifications of time surrounding them - the 7th day, the 7th month, the 14th day of the first month, for 7 days, for 7 weeks.  It is not only remembrance and participation, but symbolic perfection that is to be acted out through the shape of the year.  Little by little, the tabernacle and participation in its functions begins to encompass all aspects of ordinary life.  It is the echo, the reflection, of creation: "This constant orientation to the sabbatical cycle throughout the calendar year keeps the community of faith reminded of the cosmic rhythm that sustains the creational order.  Each sabbatical observance recalls the primordial plan, invites the community to reflect on God's design, and enables them to imitate God's intentions through both their rituals and their ordering of communal life."*  And God blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it...

Next Stop: Chapter 24:10-22 - "Cursing for Cursing"

*Samuel E. Balentine, The Torah's Vision of Worship (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999) 158.

Chapters 21-22: Rules for Priests

So here we are making our way through the sanctuary, which, as you may remember, is the room where only the priests are allowed to go.  It is appropriate, then, that we find here another set of guidelines explaining how the priests are to keep themselves suitable for service in the sanctuary.  What is dealt with here is not a comprehensive job description, but a brief reminder reinforcing some important Levitical themes: "set apartedness" and how to approach the boundaries between life and death.  It is clear that these rules are for priests alone, not for everyone, and are therefore carry greater restrictions and greater consequences.  Chapter 21 describes what maintains the suitability of the priest for sanctuary service, and chapter 22 instructs how to handle the portion of the offerings that belonged to the priest.

I.  Chapter 21: Suitability for Sanctuary Service
        Again, it's easy to see that this chapter isn't supposed to be a complete guidebook - there's a lot that is taken for granted that we already ought to know about the priesthood, and therefore much that is left out.  Chapter 21 deals with only two issues, with various applications: the appropriate contact or avoidance of death, and what kinds of marriage relationships are acceptable.  In verses 1-9 we read how "normal" priests are to form their families and mourn their dead.  Verses 10-15 mirror these guidelines with even more restrictive rules for the High Priest.  And then in verses 16-24 we read that not everyone from priestly families is suitable for service in the sanctuary - those who are born with or develop certain physical defects may not serve, yet they must still be included among those whose livelihood is derived from sanctuary service.

What do we think about that?  Is it offensive to you that physical defects can inhibit a person from certain types of service before the Lord?  I think that before we start jumping to any over-hyped equal rights conclusions we would do well to make note of a few things.  First, notice that the text doesn't say that physical defects mean a person is no longer a priest - Israelite priests were priests by virtue of birth and lineage, not - dare I say - ordination or ambition.  Once a priest, always a priest.  I don't know if there were other types of duties they may have been able to perform, but what is mentioned here is only that they could not approach the altar to offer the burnt offerings.
        Second, remember what happened to Nadav and Avihu in chapter 10?  Remember the danger that is inherent in approaching the altar - that physical, tangible presence of YHWH that is like electricity?  What if these exemptions are more about protection than discrimination - protecting those with afflictions that might make it somehow unsafe for a person to get too close?  What if we thought of "defects" more as "handicaps"?  Perhaps this is too charitable a reading, but it makes me think of how children are sometimes angry when they find one of those outlet covers interfering with their plan to stick their fingers in the outlet.  Maybe, like people in diapers with tiny fingers who don't know about electricity, we don't know enough to argue with God about these things.  And I think there is good support in the text for this idea that exemption equals protection,  since it is clear that these priests are still to be included in eating the portions that were allotted to the priests for their food.  Doesn't sound half bad to me.
        Third, I do think part of why this may be offensive to us is that we still have trouble distinguishing between moral and ritual suitability for approaching God's presence - why should physical and not spiritual things be considered defects?  This, again, is a reminder of the Levitical notion that impurity is almost like a physical substance, underscoring the lack of distinction between physical and spiritual in the ancient world.
        Fourth and finally, remember that the priesthood was supposed to represent God's holiness to the people - and holiness is equated with wholeness or perfection.  The office of the priest was symbolic as much as it was practical, and if the priest is a symbol of God he must be an image of that perfection as we hear in the refrain, "For I am YHWH, the one-who-hallows-you" (vv8, 15, 23).  This interpretation is less convincing to me by virtue of the fact that the rules are only restrictive of service and not state of being (they're still considered priests, even if flawed), but I think it is something we have to consider.

In short, chapter 21 reminds us that as we approach the presence of YHWH the boundary between life and death matters.  The priests are, by nature of their office, in closer proximity to God and must guard this boundary with greater care - how they mourn their dead, how they cultivate life within their families.  Hold that thought.

II.  Chapter 22 - Priests and Animals
        I'll be brief here: this chapter describes who is and is not allowed to eat of the "sacred donations" (the portion of the offerings that were to be given to the priests to provide their livelihood) and how to do so appropriately, and offers a reminder that animals brought for sacrifice must be without defect.  Do you see any parallels with chapter 21 here - who may serve and how/who may eat and how, who may not serve/who may not be sacrificed?  I think it's fairly obvious that both chapters serve as reminders of Leviticus' general scheme of a perfect God requiring perfect worship, but there's also something else going on here.  Why is the body of the sacrificial animal cast in correspondence with the body of the priest?  Is it to say that they are somehow alike - that they are both offered to God in some way, and that what is offered and how it is offered somehow demonstrates God's holiness?  There should be no doubt that this correspondence affirms that both the Israelite and the sacrificial animal are included in what is set apart for covenant with YHWH, similar to the correspondence between chapters 1-7 and 11-15.

III.  Conclusion
        I have two further observations in conclusion:
1) First, we are told three times that these rules are in order that the priests not profane YHWH's holy name (21.6, 22.2, 22.32).  But what does that mean?  We're not dealing here with verbal slander or cursing, we're reading of the way that priests marry and mourn and eat - what do those things have to do with God's name?  Fox's translation of Exodus 20.7, what most of us learned as "you shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain," casts this question in a whole different light - You are not to take up the name of YHWH your God for emptiness, for YHWH will not clear him that takes up his name for emptiness.  Vanity.  Emptiness.  "Don't make my name empty," meaningless, ephemeral, forgettable.  All of these things that the priests are to do or not to do, as representatives of YHWH, have the potential to either glorify God in the eyes of the people or diminish him.  What they do - what we do - matters.

2) Second, we've already established that these guidelines apply specifically to priests.  In that sense, they set the priesthood apart as carrying greater responsibility in their approach to YHWH.  Yet we cannot overlook that these guidelines were specifically to enable them to perform their duties in the sanctuary - the priesthood was not accorded any special status or privilege, elevated above the common Israelite.  Priests didn't choose their lot.  They couldn't be "unpriested." They were not different because they were special, they were different because they had a different job in different proximity to the divine - just as Israel was different not because they were special but because they had a responsibility to love God and to be a blessing to others.  Listen:

I will make your seed many, yes, many, like the stars of the heavens and like the sand that is on the shore of the sea; your seed shall inherit the gate of their enemies, all the nations of the earth shall enjoy blessing through your seed, in consequence of your hearkening to my voice (to Abraham, Gen. 22.17)

I will make your seed many, like the stars of the heavens, and to your seed I will give all these lands; all the nations of the earth shall enjoy blessing through your seed (to Isaac, Gen. 26.4)

Not because of your righteous-merit, or because of the uprightness of your heart, are you entering to possess their land ... you are to know that not because of your righteous-merit is YHWH your God giving you this good land to possess, for a people hard of neck are you!  What does YHWH your God ask of you, except to hold YHWH your God in awe, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve YHWH your God with all your heart and with all your being? (Moses to all Israel, Deut. 8, 10)

Israel itself was to be a kingdom of priests, remember? (Ex. 19.3-6)  Priests are born, not made, and with that birth comes certain responsibilities.

So I wonder what we are to make of this.  Preacher or teacher, mother or missionary, pastor or plumber - I think it's safe to say that we're all included in this "priesthood" inasmuch as we understand ourselves to be in covenant with YHWH.  I think it's safe to say that even within this expanded definition of priesthood, some are given different tasks than others and therefore different responsibilities.  And above all else, I think we can be certain that these responsibilities and how we conduct them have a direct effect on how we either help or inhibit what others think of God.  I wonder if we are representatives or distortions.  I wonder if we use our positions of responsibility to exclude and discriminate against others, or to provide for and protect them.  I wonder if we are careful about what we offer to God and the way in which we offer it, or if we just go through the motions so we can feel how we want to feel about ourselves.  I wonder if we respectfully and gratefully receive what God has provided for us in ways that recognize his provision and generosity, or if we act like we deserve it because, after all, "we earned it."

I wonder if it has anything to do with us that people sometimes think of God as an idea, a name that is a hollow, empty shell, instead of electric and alive and overflowing.

I wonder.

Chapters 18-20: Righteousness

"You shall be holy, for I, the Lord your God, am holy."

We have finally arrived.  We've moseyed around the walls of the outer court, and are well aware of the separation between the holiness of YHWH - who, nonetheless, has taken up residence among us - and the sinfulness of humans.  We've been warned that getting closer to the presence of the Holy Place comes at a price.  And we understand that if we're going to go through that screen into the sanctuary - not all the way into the holiest place but still edging closer to God's electric presence - it's going to mean an entirely new way of life.  It's going to include how we interact with all living things - flying and creeping, swarming and swimming - how we live in our bodies and what we put in them, and how we shape the day to day processes of life.  And we've decided to take the risk.

So as we enter this new room - the sanctuary, or the Holiness Code - the first three chapters act as a unit to help us get our bearings.  Remember those pagan gods of Egypt and Canaan, the ones your friends and neighbors and bosses and - maybe even you - worshipped?  Forget about them.  Remember how you treated one another back there, acting out the ways of the false gods you served in your very bodies?  No more.  And above all, don't forget: you're not in Egypt any more.  "I am the Lord your God WHO BROUGHT YOU OUT of the land of Egypt."  This is a whole new way of life, and it includes all of life.

"You shall be holy, for I, the Lord your God, am holy."

If there is anything we ought to take away from these chapters it is this:

• Remember who you were, and who you now are.
• Remember who YHWH is.

Oh, and by the way, don't forget that holiness equals wholeness - that which is consistent with God and his character.  Everything we talk about from here on out is about the holiness of God, and so it is also about the holiness of God's people.  

"You shall be holy, for I, the Lord your God, am holy."

I.  Chapters 18 and 20: "You are not to do... " - Pillars Defining Righteousness
        I think it's time for some pictures.  Are you ready?!  And by pictures I mean a picture:


That's right, take a good long look.  As a matter of fact, if you look at it long enough I don't think there's much else I need to say.  This lovely illustration, the handiwork of yours truly, helps us visualize how chapters 18-20 function as a unit to highlight 1) that YHWH is Israel's god, not the gods of Egypt and Canaan, 2) what the Israelites are not to do, and 3) what the Israelites are to do to embody YHWH's righteousness, liberty, and justice. 

So chapters 18 and 20.  We should already be comfortable with the idea that we don't get a linear progression of ideas - we don't progress through chapters 18 and 19 to reach the glorious definition of righteousness in chapter 20.  Nope.  We read about all the sins of Egypt and Canaan in chapter 18, skip over chapter 19, and hear them again - this time complete with the consequences those sins evoke - in chapter 20.  Three things about chapters 18 and 20:

• First, these are anathemas against evil things done in Egypt & Canaan (cf. 18.2-5), focusing on idolatry and sexual immorality.  Remember the Levitical theme of inappropriate "mixtures"?  It also applies to relationships.  Furthermore, paganism in the ancient world and the world of the bible is synonymous with sexual immorality - anytime we come to material dealing with sexual immorality, we can pretty much put our money on it not being about defining Israelite relationships but specifically defining the Israelite's relationship with YHWH.   These sins, should you choose to engage them, are a clear indication of religious infidelity.
• Second, these are not laws about everyday relational structures - just like the dietary laws are not about health and skin disorders are not about hygiene, these lists exclude some important things we might think would have been important for the Israelite community: what about divorce, inheritance laws, or succession?  How should marriages be organized, and marriage partners chosen?  How should family life and sexuality be structured?  Leviticus has nothing to say - well, except "I am the Lord."  If the list we're looking for is inadequate, then maybe we should look for another one - and sure enough, we find that the context is inescapably religious (or cultic).  Two more things: 1) when scripture mentions the defilement of the land (18.24-28, 20.22) it is always the result of idolatry; behavior that is so disgusting that the land itself is envisioned as having a physical reaction of revulsion, and 2) the mention of Egypt and Canaan usually equals Egyptian and Canaanite cults; this makes sense of the denunciation of the use of mediums, seers, and divination also included in these chapters.
• Third, a conclusion: "The effect of these unedifying sexual deviations framing chapter 19 is to show up the concepts of righteousness, liberty, and justice which it expounds in the middle.  These chapters contrast the pure and noble character of the Hebrew God with ... the very strange false gods" (Leviticus as Literature 238)

II.  Chapter 19: The Meaning of Righteousness

        There are a couple of clues in chapter 19 that point to it as the most important chapter we've yet encountered.  First, we are smack in the middle of our literary representation of the tabernacle - the sanctuary is the middle room, between the outer court and the holiest place.
        Second, we hear a familiar refrain that has been popping up ever since Exodus: "I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt" (19.36).  Every time we hear this refrain it is a signal that YHWH is defining his holiness and singularity over against some other competitor - in this case, the gods of Egypt and Canaan.  It is a reminder that YHWH is our God because of what he has done for us - we are no longer slaves in Egypt, and their gods we no longer serve.  If there was any doubt after chapter 18 that "idolatry" is the theme of the day, there should be none now.  The first thing we have to understand about holiness and what it means to be the people of YHWH is that YHWH alone is God, and there is room for no other.  Sound familiar (cf. Exodus 20, Deuteronomy 6)??
        Finally, chapter 19 is central because it defines what is central to true religion.  All throughout the Hebrew Bible, the high points of the revelation of YHWH's character converge on these very same themes:

• "What does the Lord require of you, but to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God?" - Micah 6.8
• "Shall not the judge of the whole earth do what is right?" - Genesis 18.25
• "I will make justice the line and righteousness the plumb line." - Isaiah 28.17

So how is justice defined?  I suggest that you make a list of everything that is addressed in chapter 19 - point by point, what are the themes that we find?  Highlight the things with common threads and see if you can find a pattern or if certain things are usually mentioned in close proximity to one another.  Above all, slow down and pay attention.  Take in the landscape.  Imagine life in a society like this.  

Here are a couple of key themes that I noticed:

• Appropriate Boundaries: there is to be no "mixing" of gods.  It's YHWH, and YHWH alone, and in case you forget - "I am YHWH your God" is repeated no fewer than twenty-five times in these three chapters alone!  There is also to be no mixing of crops in the field, of materials in clothing, of animals in breeding - just as there is to be no mixing of Israelite with other idolatrous nations (20.24-26)
• Just Dealings: you are to deal justly and fairly not only among your own family but with your neighbors, with the non-Israelite travelers just passing through, with those disadvantaged by blindness or deafness.  You are not to show favoritism to family members or those in power.  You are not to tip the scales in your own favor.  What's more, you are even to give of what is rightfully yours to those who are in need - leave the edges of your fields for the poor to glean.  "I am YHWH" and this is what I am like. 

Finally, note the proximity of Sabbath keeping, idolatry, and covenantal eating in verses 3-8 and then again in 23-30.  Coincidental?  Take a look at Exodus 20 - somehow, welcoming the day of rest and ceasing from our labors - just like YHWH did - is connected to recognizing that YHWH alone is God.  We are not in control.  And it is also connected to what goes into our bodies - it is YHWH who will provide it for us, and we demonstrate our trust and covenant faithfulness even in the way that we eat.  

     

At the conclusion of chapter 20 we are reminded once again that these three chapters are a hinge between the two sections of the book - carefully read verses 22-26 and you will hear echoes of chapter 11 and a preview of chapter 26.  It is all held together here, right in the middle, right in the center of it all.

And not surprisingly, Jesus agrees.  When asked what the greatest of all the commandments is, Jesus answers from Deuteronomy 6 - "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength" - AND from Leviticus 19 - "and you shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Mk. 12.28-34).  Upon these two commandments stands the whole law.  Upon these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.  And it has always been here, right in front of us, right in Leviticus - don't serve the gods of Egypt and Canaan, and demonstrate righteousness and justice in all that you do, because you are mine and this is what I am like.

That is all. 

Chapters 16-17: Purification and Atonement

So let's review:

• In chapters 1-7, the process of bringing gifts to the altar is outlined, affirming that sins and defilements require atonement.  The body of the sacrificed animal, to whom the covenant is extended, is cast as a microcosm of the tabernacle and Sinai - "further up and further in" equals closer proximity to the divine. 
• Chapters 8-10 recount the first narrative and the consequences of approaching the presence of YHWH on inappropriate terms.  This warning acts as a "screen," separating the outer court from the holy place by reminding the worshipper what - or who - it is that they are approaching. 
• Chapters 11-15 stand opposite chapters 1-7, contrasting the sacrificial animal with the zoo of animals that are not to be eaten or touched, and then the body of the Israelite.  This second half thus expands and completes the first half. 

Our task for today is to explore how chapters 16-17, toward which everything has been building, complete the "ring" of this first section by describing how the tabernacle - the ultimate, all-inclusive covering - is to be purified from the sins of the priests and the Israelites.

I.  "Yom Kippur" - Jewish and Christian Take-Aways
        The once-yearly process of purification described in chapter 16 carries a bi-focal emphasis, as evidenced in the differences between Jewish and Christian interpretation of this event.  In the Jewish tradition, Yom Kippur is a day of fasting, prayer, conversation and sermons - with a clear theological emphasis on purity.  For Christian theology however, the fundamental presupposition is that blood is effective in atoning for sins.  The reasons for this will be clarified in a moment.  For our purposes, we must keep in mind that favoring one interpretation to the exclusion of the other is somewhat thin - we would do well to hold them both in tension, asking how they deepen and complement one another.
        Similarly, Jacob Milgrom argues that rather than the "purity vs. atonement" question, the great antithesis in Leviticus is that purity/holiness = life, and impurity = death.  Cast in this light, purity and atonement are two sides of the same coin.       

II.  Purification and Atonement - Why Blood?
        Why, though, is blood sacrifice acceptable at all?  If the sacrificial system is meant symbolically to restore life, why does it require the taking of a life?  First, note the direct contradiction that the Israelite sacrificial system posed to the common view of the ancient Near East, that sacrifice was food for the gods:

Ut-napishtim, from the Babylonian flood narrative Then I let out [all the animals] to the four winds, offered a sacrifice, and poured a drink offering on the summit of the mountain.  Seven and seven vessels of incense I set up and filled them with cane, cedarwood and myrtle.  The gods smelled the savor, the gods smelled the sweet savor, like flies the gods crowded round the sacrificer....

Psalm 50 El, the God Lord, He spoke and called to the earth from the sun’s rising-place to its setting; from Zion, the zenith of beauty, God shone forth.  Let our God come and not be silent. Before Him fire consumes, and round about Him – great storming. “Hear, O my people, that I may speak, Israel that I witness to you.  God your God am I … I shall not take from your house a bull, nor goats from your pens.  For Mine are all beasts of the forest, the herds on a thousand mountains.  I know every bird of the mountains, creatures of the field are with Me.  Should I hunger, I would not say to you, for Mine is the world and its fullness. Would I eat the flesh of fat bulls, would I drink the blood of goats?  Sacrifice to God a thanksgiving, and pay to the High One your vows, and call on Me in the day of distress – I will free you and you shall revere me.”

In contrast to these gods sniffing around for food "like flies," the God of Leviticus is utterly sublime; sacrifice is burned or taken outside the camp and not offered to God or the priests as food.  Yet this same God is really present, as we are reminded in 16.2-4 with the mention of Nadav and Avihu; even though chapters 16-17 lead us back towards the literary entrance of the outer court, the process of atonement is described as the steps that direct us back to the screen of chapters 8-10 and make entrance into the Holy Place possible.
        Second, if impurities are conceived of as something like a physical substance adhering to the bodies of the Israelites and the walls of the tabernacle, Yom Kippur is a sort of major "house cleaning" in which blood is the "priestly detergent."  Like (yet unlike) water, blood is the ultimate purifying agent.
        Nonetheless, these two observations are not wholly satisfactory.  The closest we get to an explanation to the "why blood?" question from within Leviticus itself is this: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood.  And I myself have given it to you on the altar, to atone for/effect ransom for/wipe over your lives.  For the blood - for life it atones!" (17.11, 14).  The idea is that blood somehow makes creaturely life compatible with God's holiness; an idea which persists into the Gospel.  More on that in a bit.


III.  Blood and Covenant
        As Protestants reading scripture from back to front as we are prone to do - that is, the Old Testament through the lens of the New Testament - we might be tempted to focus on a single highlight of blood atonement from each: the sacrificial system and Christ's death on the cross.  At best, this is very boring.  At worst, I find myself wondering, "Is that really the best God could do?  Why pick blood sacrifice as the way that Christ rewrites the covenant - was there no other way?"  But if we look more carefully, we find that (to use Ellen Davis' elegant summary) "the entire history of the covenant relationship is written in blood - traced through the testaments, from Mt. Ararat to Mt. Sinai, to the tabernacle and temple mount, to Golgotha to the heavenly place where Jesus offers his blood, and to the heavenly Jerusalem in Revelation."  If you find lists of scripture references tedious (as I do), I apologize for what's about to happen.  But this is very important:

• Gen. 9.1-4 - God initiates covenant with Noah; for the first time, permission is given to shed animal blood, but only for eating meat.
• Gen. 17.10-14 - circumcision/blood rite is essential for every male, marking inclusion as God's covenant people and maintaining God's covenant with Abraham. 
• Ex. 4.24-26 - the "bridegroom of blood" passage, involving Moses
• Ex. 12.21-23 - blood on the lintel marks the Israelites as exempt from the death of their firstborns.
• Ex. 24.6-8 - the sealing of the Sinai covenant - "the blood of the covenant which the Lord has cut with you concerning all these matters" - resonates with eucharistic theology: the phrase "blood of the covenant" occurs in the OT only here and in Zechariah 9.11, creating a direct tie between Sinai and the Last Supper (Mt. 26.28)
• Hebrews 12.24 - Jesus is the mediator of a new covenant whose "sprinkled blood" (cf. the sprinkled blood of Lev. 16) speaks a better word than the word of Abel and marks a new and eternal covenant (Heb. 13.20)
• And implicitly ... Rev. 7.9-14 - the multitude sealed in the eternal covenant has washed their robes "in the blood of the Lamb" - sound like priestly detergent to you? 

IV.  Three Observations - how can this understanding of purity and atonement, blood and covenant, deepen our understanding of what it means when Jesus says, "the blood of my covenant"?

        First, blood stands for life, not death - we ought to associate sacrifice not with the taking of a life but the gift of life.  The offering of a life is indissolubly connected with covenant, the tie that binds Israel's life with God's own life. 

        Second, blood is somehow effective in wiping away and covering the effect of human sinfulness.  "Robes washed white in the blood of the Lamb" stands in direct contrast to the story of Cain and Abel, where the shedding of blood is an expression of human violence.  This only makes sense through an understanding of the ways that the sacrificial system acted as a limit to human violence and an affirmation that all life belongs to and is protected by YHWH.  

        Third, a speculation: is it possible that shed blood is a symbol of covenant binding precisely because it is counter-intuitive?  After all, is it logical that Israel be chosen as God's covenant people?  Is it logical that the divine should co-exist with sinful humans?  In the same way, it is counter-logical (but not illogical) that Jesus should make peace between God and humans through the blood of the cross (Col. 1.20), which Paul knew quite well (1 Cor. 1.18).

Finally, chapter 17 acts as the latch on the entrance of chapter 1 by reiterating that sacrificial animals must be brought to the entrance of the tabernacle to be slaughtered.  If there was any doubt that this entire section was a literary tour of the outer court and what goes on within it, there ought to be no question by this point.  Now its time to trace our steps back (through chapter 16) through the screen and into the center of the sanctuary: chapters 18-20, Righteousness in Relationships.     

Chapters 12-15: Purity and Pollution, Part 2

Do you know what a chiasm is?  I didn't either.  So I'm going to guess that since you didn't know, you too had a hard time figuring out what leprosy and clothes and houses have to do with menstruation and childbirth and other bodily emissions.  With the help of some of our favorite scholars, I think we can find some pretty cool stuff going on here beneath the surface - way, way beneath the surface - of these strange and possibly unpleasant chapters.  If you haven't read them yet, stop and do it now.  I'll wait.

I.  Ritual Pollution of the Body: What Comes Out of the Body
        First, however, I echo the premise of our exploration of the dietary regulations of chapter 11: contrary to common assumption, interpreting these chapters as guidelines for health and hygiene is woefully inadequate.  Much is left out, and much is (according to this schema) just silly.  Rest at ease that I'm not going to try to make a case for this kind of interpretation.
        Abandoning the idea of health and hygiene, we find instead an overarching theme of reproduction.  Why are runny noses, skinned knees, and upset stomachs not included in this list of emissions that cause impurity?  Because only menstruation, childbirth, and reproductive or vital fluids are in close enough proximity to the boundary between life and death - these guidelines symbolically affirm life by maintaining and protecting the boundaries between life and death.  There is a deep concern that what is supposed to be inside the body should not be outside the body, and vice versa.  However, remember that these are all natural processes of life - although these types of emissions and discharges result in ritual impurity, they do not imply moral trespass.  No one is to blame, and nothing is wrong - it is simply a part of life that must be handled in certain careful, respectful ways before one can approach holy things, and it is for everyone's protection.  It is because we are human, not divine.
        But... what can skin diseases possibly have to do with this?  They are not exactly bodily emissions.  They aren't related to the reproductive cycle.  Good thing we already know better than to read Leviticus in a straight, discursively logical, line.

A chiasm is a literary device used to highlight particular details of importance, with a "ring" or parallel structure such as A, B, C ... C, B, A.  The meaning that a chiasm is used to highlight is found at the pivot of a series of parallels - in this case, whatever came after C would help explain A, B, and C.  Chapters 12-15 happen to form a chiasm in which the overarching theme is reproduction and in which skin diseases - another kind of boundary violation - are the pivot that explains it.

Pillar: Ch 12 – Reproduction: discharge of blood related to lifecycles                                        Ch 13 – Leprosy: person/garment                     Ch 14 – Leprosy: person/house Pillar: Ch 15 – Reproduction: discharge of vital fluids, men and women

This is all interesting, but we still haven't explained what moldy garments and houses with leaks have to do with the body.  The key lies in this use of chiastic structure - explaining something through something else - and points us to two questions: 1) "How are skin-garments-houses alike?" and 2) "How does this explain the surrounding life-cycle regulations?"  I know we're dangerously close to overusing these two words, but what we have here is a microcosm in which concentric boundaries point to the purpose of the regulations:

• All of these things are coverings - the house that is upon the garment that is upon the skin that is upon the body which contains life-generating substances - and coverings provide protection.  These sequences indicate that what is covered, layer over layer, is what most needs to be valued and protected. 
• All of these, whether disorders or normal functions, pose equivalent threats to the integrity of what they contain or cover because boundaries are being crossed.  A leaky roof threatens the integrity of a home, and so on and so forth. 
• All of these afflictions - discharges, skin diseases, mold - make the body vulnerable, and symbolically or actually endanger life.   

Finally, the three analogies related to skin diseases (skin-garment-house) point us directly to a fourth, which is the analogy of the tabernacle: the ultimate protective "covering" for the people.  Chapter 16 addresses the purification of the tabernacle and the High Priest precisely so that this function of protection may be maintained, and is the point at which everything that has been said in chapters 1-15 converges.

For next time, read chapters 16-17: Purification and Atonement through Blood

Chapter 11: Purity and Pollution, Part 1

Chapter 10 concludes the first roughly-divided section of Leviticus, The Sacrificial Cult.  Moving on into chapters 11-17 we come to the topics of Ritual Pollution and Purification - forbidden and permitted foods, pollution from bodily fluids and skin disease, instructions for purifying the sanctuary and High Priest, and a word on the shedding of animal blood (which, as you might remember from our last lesson, links chapter 17 back to chapter 1).  Today we'll address two concepts that underly the entire discussion of purity and pollution: Morality & Ritual and Boundary Keeping, and then move through the dietary regulations of chapter 11 - or, "what goes in to the body."

I.  The Purity Regulations of Leviticus: Key Concepts


Morality & Ritual - there is a difference between morality and ritual in the thinking of Leviticus.  But they're not wholly separate categories.  Confused?  Let's try to sort this out.
        To begin with, the words "pure" and "impure" carry moral connotations for most of us when we use them to refer to anything other than food.  Think about what we mean when we say, "a pure heart," "her motives are pure," "impure thoughts," - there are definite moral implications.  To understand how these terms are used in Leviticus however, it might be helpful to think about what we mean when we refer to water as pure or impure - if water is "impure," we don't mean to say that it is morally objectionable, but that the material circumstances of the water make it something we probably ought not drink.  In the same way, the priestly tradition categorizes purity according to the material circumstances of an act to determine whether something is ritually pure or impure.  The question is not a moral judgment, but simply what your standing is in the physical realm in relation to the holy - quite simply, "Are you safe to be in the presence of God?"  For example,

• Things classified as pollutants do not carry punishment, unlike actions which violate the moral order.
• They do not pose a danger to the person (unless he/she comes into contact with holy objects, people, or space).
• They are considered contagious, which cannot be said of immorality or sin, and therefore require separation (from either the sanctuary or camp) for a defined length of time, and/or washing (water is understood as a purifying agent)  

The distinction here is not between sin and holiness then, but between what is common and what is holy.  There is a difference.

        Yet even those things which are not morally objectionable or sinful require ritual purification.  Leviticus sometimes distinguishes and sometimes blurs morality and ritual, such as in chapters 7.3-7 and 19.17-19 - is it a moral issue or a ritual issue to fail to slay a sacrificial animal in the appropriate place?  How are acting lovingly toward your neighbor and sowing your fields with only one kind of seed related?  Apparently Leviticus sees no distinction between these things - the outcome is the same, regardless of intent or associations of "morality."  An example of this blurring of ritual and morality from our own context might be found in the way that some traditions handle and dispose of the consecrated Eucharist, either ingesting it or returning it to the earth.  Is it sinful to pour the wine down the drain?  Probably not.  Does it indicate appropriate respect for the particular material circumstances of what would otherwise be common substances of bread and wine?  Probably not.  These are the kinds of issues Leviticus addresses here. 

Boundary Keeping - we've frequently alluded to the importance of boundary keeping in the Levitical symbol system, keeping distinct the categories of creation.  In chapters 11-17 it becomes clear that this distinctiveness also somehow exemplifies holiness - Douglas points out that "Holiness requires that individuals shall conform (fully, or completely) to the class to which they belong.  And holiness requires that different classes of things should not be confused" (Douglas, Purity and Danger).  11.46-47 concludes by reminding us that all of these instructions are so that there may-be-separation between the tamei and the pure (read, "the holy and the common"), distinguishing between the ritually clean and the ritually unclean in three areas of separations:

• What goes into the body - dietary regulations.
• Life and death - what comes out of the body, what may be eaten, what may be offered.
• Outer surfaces - skin diseases, clothing, houses.

So these two concepts - Morality & Ritual and Boundary Keeping - underly and inform the concepts of Purity and Pollution that we will be exploring in this section.

II.  Chapter 11: Permitted and Forbidden Foods
        Did you know that chapter 11, detailing what the Israelites could and could not eat, is at the dead center of Torah? (I realize that the fact that it's not the middle chapter of the book is a bit dissatisfying, but stay with me.)  I'm not going to fill in all the possible significance of that fact for you, but keep it in mind as we move on.  We've talked about how Leviticus is at the center of Torah, apart from which the Old Testament is unintelligible, etc., etc.  We've mentioned the "concentric" structure of much of Leviticus - working from the most clearly defined and limited out through several expanding rings of boundaries and meaning.  And we've also observed that the central concern of Leviticus is maintaining and embodying holiness in every part of life, so that the holiness of YHWH can be both welcomed and respected.  All of these things lead me to suspect that placing the dietary regulations right here, right in the middle, is no coincidence - what is more central to life than eating and all that the production and preparation of food entails?  What consumes most of our time, energy, and resources?  What is the centerpiece of community formation in all cultures, at all times in history?
        Because it is such a common assumption, we need to begin with the admission that associating the Levitical dietary laws with simple health concerns is a deeply inadequate way of understanding them - we all know it's possible to eat shrimp and bacon and live long, healthy lives, and that there are plenty of other "unhealthy" things Leviticus simply ignores.  Ancient limitations on food preparation and storage aren't going to cut it either - I think the Israelites probably could have figured out that meat only lasts so long before it shouldn't be eaten.  If health and history is all we're looking for in these regulations, I'm afraid we're going to be sorely disappointed and have a lot of defending to do of what we've cast as an embarrassingly primitive health code.  In keeping with what we've learned about the complexity and associational structure of Leviticus however, Mary Douglas instead finds here "a sermon on God's pattern of the universe.  In this reading, covenant and fertility are two contrasted principles" (Leviticus as Literature, 174).  These two contrasts point to an emphasis on boundaries and order between humans and other living beings in the following ways:

Covenant
        The laws given to Israel through Moses at Sinai outline what is required for Israel's covenant relationship with YHWH, thereby expressing God's ownership and his justice.  These laws, as we have heard over and over again, are for life, for protection, for keeping covenant relationship.  In the same manner, the purity rules of Leviticus hedge Israel's covenant relationship with YHWH to express his ownership and justice in the relationship between humans and other living beings.  Consider which land animals are classed as "clean" - acceptable for sacrifice and consumption: only the flocks and herds which belong to the Israelites.  All other land animals are "unclean."  This makes perfect sense when we remember that for a covenant to mean anything, some territorial principle is necessary, or at least ownership.   Israel's flocks and herds are the only animals that are on loan to them; all other living things belong to God already and therefore cannot be sacrificed to him, as the Psalmist reminds us - "For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills.  I know all the birds of the hills, and all that moves in the field is mine" (Psalm 50.11).
        And just as surely as God is the owner of all other living things, he is the creator that has pronounced them "good."  Why should YHWH now declare "detestable" what he pronounced "good" at creation?  Perhaps it is that the words translated variously as "abominable" and "unclean" call for a little more exploration:

• "Abominable" or "detestable" distinguishes swarming air and water creatures, and is a Hebrew word that is very rare outside of Leviticus, seemingly chosen specifically for this context to avoid pejorative association.  Because of what "abominable" now means to our modern ears, a better translation might be to "shun" or "stay away from" - God is telling his people to avoid certain things, to keep out of their way, not to harm - much less eat - them.  And read carefully - according to 11.43, what is "abominable" is not the thing itself, but the action of eating them or profiting by their deaths; "It is an abomination to you."  The Israelites are in danger of making themselves detestable through their actions.
• "Unclean" delineates only those living things that do not conform fully to their class - pigs which have cloven hooves but do not chew the cud, rabbits which chew cud but do not have cloven hooves.  Only what is safely within its category may be considered ritually clean, and only what is ritually clean may be sacrificed or eaten. 

Fertility

        The second primary feature of delineating what may or may not be eaten, further demonstrating God's compassion and justice, is kindness toward "teeming" or "swarming" things.  What if we were to read these laws from the other direction - what if rather than protecting the Israelites, these laws are designed to protect the other living beings from the Israelites?   Compare these two passages:

Genesis 1.24-25 God said: Let the earth bring forth living beings after their kind, herd-animals, crawling things, and the wildlife of the earth after their kind! It was so. God made the wildlife of the earth after their kind, and the heard-animals after their kind, and all crawling things of the soil after their kind.  God saw that it was good.

Leviticus 11.46-47 This is the Instruction for animals, fowl and all living beings that stir in the water, all beings that swarm upon the earth, that there may-be-separation between the tamei and the pure, between the living-creatures that may be eaten and the living-creatures that you are not to eat.

"Swarming," "crawling," "teeming" - it's all the same word, and Leviticus uses it in the same way as Genesis (1.20-21, 9.7): a positive sense of abundance, not a threatening, encroaching sense.  If teeming is fulfilling God's command to multiply, exemplifying abundant life, and the holy of holies represents life and God's blessings of life through fertility, then teeming things do not need to be offered because they already exemplify life.  Why can't you put honey on your grain offerings?  Because it is something  that works in the natural mode of generation.  Why unleavened bread?  Because leaven - the process of fermentation - is a living bacteria, generating on its own.  Offering these things on the altar is antithetical.  Besides that, they belong to God already, remember?  Exclusion from the covenant is not a derogatory exclusion from God's protection, but rather indicates a different mode of God's ownership than that of Israel's covenant.
        The protective laws that tell humans to avoid teeming creatures therefore demonstrate God's compassion through protecting life, and the reward of covenanted obedience and loyalty, which is life - "In order that YHWH may turn from the flaming of his anger and show compassion to you, having-compassion on you and making you many, as he swore to your fathers ... you are to hearken to the voice of YHWH your God, by keeping all his commandments ... doing what is right in the eyes of YHWH your God" (Deut. 13.18-19).  

So delineating what Israel may and may not eat is yet another way of demonstrating God's covenant justice and compassionate blessing and protection of life.  As Douglas summarizes, "In this elegant helical twist, covenanted justice is balanced by divine compassion."  What we eat speaks to who our God is, and he is a covenant God of justice and compassion, provision and protection - of all living things.  What goes into our bodies matters.

For next time, read Chapters 12-15: what comes out of the body.