Introduction

1. NAME AND TEXT

The name “Leviticus” derives from the LXX. It is not so designated in the MT. There it is named according to the first word in Hebrew—wayyiqrā ʾ, “(and) he called.” This Hebrew custom is followed in all the books of the Pentateuch. The LXX, however, introduced a term that would describe the Levites, even though they are not mentioned in the book—neither the MT nor the LXX—except at 25:32–34.

The text seems well preserved in the MT, with need for few emendations. From the Dead Sea Scrolls, the paleo-Leviticus scroll (c. 100 BC) preserves a text that closely follows that of the MT.1 Indeed, despite the huge variety of attestations of Leviticus in Dead Sea Scroll texts, paraphrases, commentaries, and reworkings,2 there seems to be a single textual tradition preserved.3 Furthermore, the first-century AD fragments (4:3–9 and 8:31–11:40) from Masada attest to a text (presumably brought from the Jerusalem temple by the Zealots) that is identical to the MT.4 The LXX, as for the other prose sections of the Pentateuch, attests to a careful translation of a text similar to that behind the MT.

2. DATE AND AUTHORSHIP

Critical issues surrounding the date of the priestly material, comprising most of Leviticus, came to a focus in the late nineteenth-century with Julius Wellhausen,5 who asserted a sixth- and fifth-century BC origin for Leviticus. Based on evolutionary understandings of the processes of history, the scholarly community followed with one accord the assumption that this work represented a complex set of rituals that stood at the climax and end of the OT development of its faith. While recognizing possible preexilic antecedents in the Holiness source (chs. 17–26) and occasional early allusions elsewhere, the language and description was thought to betray a mid-first-millennium origin. But recent discoveries as well as a change in the philosophical approach have rightly called into question the assumptions of a postexilic date. Here are a few examples that argue for a second-millennium BC context:

1. The form of the tabernacle, as well as objects such as the lampstand, most closely resemble models from the West Semitic world of Ugarit as well as Hittite and Egyptian objects known only from the second millennium BC.6
2. Discussion of the ark, the Urim and Thummim, and the anointing oil appears in earlier texts and not at all in postexilic literature of the Bible.7
3. The language of Leviticus includes terms that do not occur in literature that is clearly postexilic. In some cases later literature used new vocabulary to replace earlier expressions occurring in Leviticus.8
4. Leviticus exhibits many parallels with texts of ancient Near Eastern culture. Most of these come from the Late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 BC), such as legal documents from Ugarit, Nuzi, Egypt, and the Middle Assyrian period. But no closer cultural milieu can be found than that of the Hittites of this period. Ritual, legal, administrative, and other texts exhibit parallels on all levels with Leviticus (cf. notes on 1:1, 4; 5:4, 15–16, 21, 27 [14, 20]; 8:2–35; 11; 12:2–8; 14:33–53; 16:1, 4, 8; 18:1–18, 22–23; 23:4; 24:8; 25:23; 26; 27:9–13). Thus the late second millennium BC remains the closest cultural environment for the traditions and institutions described in Leviticus.
5. In addition, the recent analysis of texts from the thirteenth-century BC West Semitic city of Emar reveals literary forms and cultic institutions not found anywhere else except in Leviticus: anointing the priest with oil and blood (8:30–35); seven-day priestly installation (ch. 9); use of fire on the last day of the installation (10:1); detailed formal and content parallels with the cultic calendar of Leviticus 23; and a special seven-year cycle (25:3–4).9

Despite obvious updating of the grammar and style of the text, a growing collection of multilevel parallels between Leviticus and the era of the fourteenth and thirteenth centuries BC is emerging. This empirical evidence argues that the substance of Leviticus has an antiquity that reaches back to the earliest traditions of Israel as a nation.

There is a rabbinic tradition that attributions of Mosaic revelation (e.g., Lev 1:1) may be understood as oral law or even as a later development within the spirit of Moses. In particular Nehemiah 10, whose laws are not found in the Pentateuch and yet appear to be attributed to Moses (vv.30, 35–37), has been cited as an example of this.10 But the comparative evidence regarding the material in Leviticus points to an ultimate origin for many details in the Mosaic era. Now, even more than a generation ago, it is possible to imagine a second-millennium BC origin for the call to holiness as defined by the book of Leviticus.

3. SCHOLARSHIP AND INTERPRETATION

(1) The publication of Wellhausen’s Prolegomena in 1878 provided the intellectual basis for the critical position of the priestly material at the end of the development of the Pentateuch. This document included editorial insertions scattered throughout the first five books, dealing with creation (Ge 1:1–2:4a) as well as priestly and ritual laws. Leviticus was seen as written in the postexilic period in order to justify the priestly reconstruction program for the returnees to Jerusalem in the sixth and fifth centuries BC. The Holiness Code (Lev 17–26) was incorporated into the book though its origins dated from an earlier period.

Leviticus, in other words, represented the final stages of a development in Israelite religion that began with direct communication with God, was followed by intermediaries such as prophets, priests, and kings, and culminated in a complex religious cult that provided for all kinds of contingencies.

Scholars argued that this evolution of increasing complexity represented an accurate analysis of the history of Israelite religion. Thus, for many Protestant critics of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, these intricacies of the Israelite cult as exemplified by Leviticus demonstrated a decadence of Jewish religion that Jesus Christ replaced with a faith not unlike that original to Israel.

With the foundation of the studies of Leviticus based on assumptions of a decadent set of rituals that developed late in Israel’s history, it is not surprising that many of the most vibrant exegetical commentaries of Leviticus available to pastors through the middle of the twentieth century either predated this period11 or were written by evangelicals who would not compromise the value of the literature with these assumptions. The former group represented a break with the longstanding use of allegory in the interpretation of the OT ritual (though preserving a strong Christological emphasis), while the latter were virtually nonexistent.

(2) The assumptions of critical scholarship began to be challenged with the publication of ancient Near Eastern temple and ritual records from Egypt and Mesopotamia. Both cultures demonstrated the presence of complex cultic rites in the second millennium BC that vitiated any argument that Israel’s cult reflected a relatively late development of the first millennium.

Furthermore, the discovery and interpretation of Hittite texts from Anatolia, and Ugaritic rituals from that city on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, added evidence of religious rituals and laws that resembled Israel’s on many levels. The fact that both of these civilizations ceased to exist well before 1000 BC terminated arguments of a late date for Levitical rituals as based on complexity. Indeed, given details of the extrabiblical texts, the monotheistic simplicity of ancient Israel provided a stark contrast. The biblical rituals appeared to take only the most basic forms with which peoples of that culture were familiar and to use them as a means/medium for communicating the eternal truths of God’s desire to provide for a relationship with his people.

The late twentieth century saw the publication of the Emar material, also from a second millennium BC West Semitic culture, similar in many ways to ancient Israel’s. From there, Akkadian texts of priestly installation and multi-month ritual calendars appeared—texts whose only parallels could be found in Leviticus (chs. 8–10; 23) or elsewhere in the Bible. The ongoing publication and study of all of this material has overturned many arguments used to presume an exilic/postexilic date for the biblical material.

One example may suffice. In Leviticus 8:30 the chief priest is anointed with oil and blood. Noth represents the traditional critical view that this act of anointing passed to the high priest only in the postexilic period, when there was no longer a king but rather a priest as leader.12 But the rite of anointing priestly figures with oil is attested already in thirteenth-century BC Emar.13 The same is true with the anointing with blood. Certainly, studies of cultic texts at Emar and among the Hittites (and their Hurrian neighbors)—all of the second millennium BC—remain one of the most exciting new sources for a deeper appreciation of the great antiquity lying behind many of the texts of Leviticus.

(3) Along with the development of comparative studies as accessed through ancient Near Eastern texts and archaeology, there has been a concomitant emergence of interpretive models in the field of anthropology. More than perhaps anyone else working in this area, Mary Douglas has contributed significantly to the study of Leviticus. In several works she has sought to understand the essential components of the holy and sacred in ancient Israel.14 Because they explain the structure of the biblical cult and rituals as presented in the text, her theories do not depend on a particular critical reconstruction of Leviticus. Some of these basic ideas are developed below under the theological theme of holiness.

Here it will suffice to provide the example of Leviticus 11. The principles by which Israelites could determine whether an animal was clean or unclean are clearly set forth in this text. But the reasons for the distinctions between these animals are never discussed in the Bible. Anthropological explanations have proven popular, particularly those elaborated by Douglas. Her earlier work developed the view that an animal’s status was determined by its locomotion. Following Genesis 1 and the division of the world into three areas—land, water, and sky—it was concluded that clean animals use means of locomotion that correspond to the sphere of their existence: animals walk, fish swim, and birds fly.15 Where there is another method of locomotion, and particularly where animals do not remain in one of the three spheres but cross from one area to another, the animal is unclean. Though this interpretation explains many animals, it does not explain them all.

Another approach is to declare as unclean those animals that eat dead creatures (and their blood)16 and insects that bite or otherwise destroy the products of culture (as moths;17 Douglas also relates as unclean animals whose appearance seems unbalanced or lacking18). Again, this does not explain all parts of the classification.

More recently, Douglas discussed the distinction between unclean and abomination as used in Leviticus.19 In particular, Leviticus 11 identifies the land animals as unclean (ṭāmē ʾ, GK 3238) and those that “teem” or “swarm” in the sky and in the waters as an abomination (šeqeṣ, GK 9211). But as she notes, even in this text the terms are used interchangeably and Deuteronomy 14 clearly mixes them. Therefore, the distinction is not as important as the principle of God’s protection of animal life. By forbidding not only the eating of these animals but also the touching of their carcasses, God has effectively declared any use of their bodies—for food or clothing or whatever—off limits to Israel. Especially the animals that swarm or teem have no place on Israel’s menu. These symbolize the great (re)productivity of God’s creation of life and their obedience to his command to multiply and increase. Instead, a restricted group of animals may serve as food. In particular, these are animals that sojourn with Israel and are designated as sacrificial substitutes for the people of the nation. They are fellow members of the covenantal community.

A comparative approach leads to similar conclusions. The Hittite laws also reveal a set of distinctions that include clean and unclean. As Harry Hoffner notes, the clean animals seem to be those that the Hittites were most familiar with, while the unclean animals are those that the Hittites knew and understood the least. This compares with the Israelite practice:

In ancient Israelite law the “clean” land animals which were permitted for eating and sacrifice were the ox, the sheep and the goat, animals which had the longest history of domestic association with the early Israelites going back to their semi-nomadic period. The pig, being an animal normally kept by settled (non-nomadic peoples) appeared relatively late in Israelite domestic experience and was therefore never included among the “clean” animals. The horse and the camel also were relatively late entrants in the Israelite domesticated animal scene. We may apply somewhat the same logic to the Hittite animal world. Animals such as the ox, sheep and pig were kept by the Hittites and their ancestors long before the horse and mule were introduced.20

Thus one may conclude that the text of Genesis, with its division of land, sea, and air animals and its value of animals and their fruitfulness, forms a basis for the understanding of the clean/unclean distinctions in Leviticus 11. The value associated with animals meant that Israelites could never raise or hunt animals for their meat and body parts, except in the case of those animals that had remained a part of the nation of Israel since patriarchal times. Israel could kill and eat them, but even there Leviticus closely associated the value of animals with their role as objects of sacrifice; that is, the Israelites valued more highly the animals they could offer to God in place of themselves for their sins.

(4) There has been a new focus on the study of biblical literature, viz., that of applying modern literary techniques of analysis to the biblical text. Though this may move in an almost limitless number of possible directions, there are four examples that have proven particularly effective and may be cited here.

The first is the study of linguistic terminology and style that began with the groundbreaking contributions of A. Hurvitz more than two decades ago.21 There are terms in the priestly material of Leviticus that one would expect to find in Ezekiel and undoubtedly postexilic writings. But in Ezekiel these terms are missing and sometimes replaced with later expressions. The importance of this argument led Milgrom to introduce his multivolume commentary by citing this evidence and to date the first half of the book of Leviticus largely to the eighth century BC.22

Milgrom also followed Knohl in arguing that the Holiness source (chs. 17–26) should be dated about a century later.23 Again, linguistic arguments were used to demonstrate how the holiness material represents a reworking and expansion of the vocabulary of priestly texts. While Knohl offered many arguments for this sequence, central to his analysis was the cultic calendar of Leviticus 23. The calendar is repeated five times in the Pentateuch but only here and in Numbers 28–29 in great detail. The latter is understood as a priestly source similar to Leviticus 1–16. This sort of repetition of Israel’s cultic calendar allowed critics to compare, contrast, and discuss development in a manner not found with other legal texts.

Leviticus 23:7–8 prescribes offerings but does not detail the contents. They appear in Numbers 28:19–24; therefore, it is logical to assume that the writer of Leviticus 23 must have been aware of the text of Numbers 28. Thus, with this undoubted example (among others), the conclusion that the Holiness source is chronologically subsequent to the priestly material (Lev 1–16) seems appropriate. Further, though the expansive nature of much vocabulary in the Holiness source may indicate a significant chronological gap between it and Leviticus 1–16, it may be more easily explained as a natural outcome of texts that focus on the entire Israelite community rather than only on the sacrificial system.

Recent comparison with the only other West Semitic, multimonth cultic calendar—that of thirteenth-century BC Emar—has demonstrated parallels of structure and content that refute earlier critical assumptions about editorial duplication and insertion in this material of Leviticus.24 If supposed duplications and insertions can be shown already to have existed as part of a single, integral, and similar text of the thirteenth century BC, what does this say about the literary history of Leviticus 23? If this unity occurs in the one text where it can be tested with an ancient Near Eastern parallel, what does this say about the application of the same methods of editorial dissection to other chapters in Leviticus? All assumptions deserve reexamination with a predisposition toward greater unity in the text as we now have it.

The second area of literary focus is Rainey’s analysis of the sacrifices and their sequence in chs. 1–9. In the first section, Rainey calls 1:1–6:7 [5:26] a “handbook for priests.”25 However, it is clear from the text that the intended audience also includes laity.26 Rainey observes that this section is made up of those sacrifices that provide a pleasing aroma (the burnt offering, the grain offering, and the fellowship offering; 1:3–3:17) followed by those that pertain to forgiveness of sin (the purification offering and the reparation offering; 4:1–6:7 [5:26]). In the first section the burnt offering is directed to God to express total dedication, while the grain offering is always associated with the burnt offering. In the second part, sins primarily against God are dealt with first (purification offering) and followed by those affecting other people (reparation offering). This is a useful explanation; however, it should be noted that 4:31 also describes the burning of a purification offering as an “aroma pleasing to the LORD.” While this appears only once, it serves to link this offering with those of chs. 1–3 as well as to introduce the category of purification offerings in chs. 4–6.

In the second section (6:8[6:1]–7:38), the order of sacrifices is identical to the order in the first six chapters, with one exception. The fellowship offering is reserved till last. Rainey has designated this order as administrative, in contrast to the first description of the sacrifices in Leviticus.27 This structure is concerned with who receives the offerings and the relative frequency of the offerings. God alone receives the burnt offering. The priests receive parts of the grain, purification, and reparation offerings. The offerers receive from the fellowship offering. This offering does not require any of the remainder of the sacrifice (that part not offered to the Lord) to be reserved for the priests. This is unlike the grain offering, the purification offering, and the reparation offering. Instead, as is noted in these chapters (but not in 1:3–6:7[5:26]), the offerer presents a gift of cakes to the priest. In terms of the frequency of the offerings, a comparison with Numbers 28–29 reveals that the burnt offerings outnumber the purification offerings. The third section (Lev. 8–9) deals with the actual sequence in which the sacrifices are presented in the ordination and in many other ceremonies.

A third area returns to the recent study of Douglas. She analyzes the book as a ring structure:28

Things and persons consecrated to the Lord (chs. 1–9)
- The Holy Place defiled (ch. 10)
  - Blemish, leprosy (chs. 11–15)
    - Atonement for tabernacle (ch. 16) and summary (ch. 17)
      - Sex, Molech (ch. 18)
        
        Mid-Turn: Equity between people (ch. 19)
      - Sex, Molech (ch. 20)
    - Blemish, leprosy (chs. 21–22)
  - Holy times, Day of Atonement (ch. 23)
- The Name defiled (ch. 24)
Things and persons belonging to the Lord (ch. 25)
Ending: Equity between God and people (ch. 26; cf. ch. 19)
Latch: Redeeming things and persons consecrated or belonging to the Lord (ch. 27)

The fourth area is exemplified by Warning.29 His method involves the identification of repetitive words and phrases in Leviticus. He counts their number of appearances and observes how they link sections together as well as the manner in which the seventh, twelfth, and other sequential occurrences of the terms highlight key thematic concerns. Though the work may overdo the tendency to count numbers of words, it repeatedly contributes additional support for the stylistic unity of the MT.

The cumulative weight of this analysis is impressive and calls into question many facile assumptions about the fragmentation of the text into multiple editorial hands. About eighteen examples are included in the commentary. Thus the literary analyses have followed the scholarly tendencies of recent decades in their appreciation of the literary unity of the text as well as the coherence of its message.

4. THEOLOGY

Among the theological subjects these texts touch on, the concerns of sacrifice, sin, and holiness dominate. Salient features outlined here anticipate the more extensive treatment throughout the commentary.

Sacrifice

The origins of sacrifice remain a disputed topic. Certainly, the people of the ancient Near East understood as a primary purpose the placating of deities through feeding them with sacrificial meats and delicacies.30 No such purpose served the Israelite God. Instead, sacrifices (and more generally offerings) provided a means of commitment of all that the people received as gifts from God (burnt and grain offerings). They provided access for the Israelites and their families to enjoy feasts and communion with God in a physical manner (fellowship offerings).

Antecedent and most important were the purification, reparation, and guilt offerings. The purification offering (ḥaṭṭā ʾt [GK 2633], sometimes called a sin offering) removed impurities (ch. 4). Its manipulation of blood in the sanctuary suggests a concern with the reestablishment of a relationship between God and the offerer through removing the obstacles of wrongdoing. The burnt offering (ʿōlâ, GK 6592), which was entirely consumed on the altar, represented the most basic offering (ch. 1). While it provided for atonement (1:4; 16:25), the offerers’ act of placing their hands on the victim probably signified their total dedication to God.31 The fellowship offering (š^elāmîm, GK 8968) required only the burning of the fat of the sacrificed animal. The meat was returned to the offerers, who could enjoy it as a meal before God (3:1–5; 1Sa 1:3–5). It was an occasion for a meat meal, celebrating communion with God. The sequence of purification, burnt, and fellowship offerings found in the ordination of the priests and the Day of Atonement rituals (chs. 8–9; 16) represents the essential order for the sinner’s approach to God: repentance and forgiveness, (re-)dedication, and fellowship. Thus Paul and the other apostolic apostolic writers of the New Testament letters based their understanding of the believer’s salvation and life of discipleship on the significance and order of these sacrifices.

Sin

Gane has usefully outlined the expiatory sacrifices and the sins with which they deal.32 The purification, reparation, and guilt offerings (chs. 4–7) could address four classes of wrongdoings: the ritual impurity (ṭum^e ʾâ, GK 3240), the defiant sin (pešaʿ, GK 7322), the nondefiant sin (ḥaṭṭā ʾt, GK 2633), and the culpability resulting from sin (ʿ^awōn, GK 6411). All occur in 16:16 because the Day of Atonement/Purification purges the first three from the sanctuary, removes the second, third, and fourth from the camp (16:21), and cleanses the people of nondefiant sin (16:30, 34). During the rest of the year, Leviticus 4–5 allows for the removal of impurity, nondefiant sin, and culpability from the people. The impurity of the sin transfers to the sanctuary just as the culpability is taken up by the priests (and the priests only—never the sanctuary). The Day of Atonement deals with these.

Gane denies any ritual means to address the defiant sin as far as its removal from the perpetrator. He notes that this sin includes only the worship of Molech (20:3) and nonrepentant corpse contamination (Nu 19:13, Nu 19:20) in the legal materials. But God can forgive this sin (e.g., Ex 34:7; Nu 14:18; Pss 32:1: 51:3; 65:3[4]; Isa 43:25) directly by bearing it himself. The sacrificial system demonstrates God’s justice in providing a means for dealing with sin and its guilt without denying it or showing favoritism. It demonstrates God’s mercy insofar as the system exists and was instituted by God to maintain a relationship with his people despite their lapses. It demonstrates God’s holiness, as God must provide a means by which to overcome the sin that separates him from his people.

Holiness

Holiness identifies a basic characteristic of God (10:3) that separates him from the world. In Leviticus God calls his people to holiness because he wants them to be like him (11:44–45; 19:2; 20:7–8); God makes his people holy (21:8, 15, 23; 22:9, 32). In order to teach his people about holiness, God designates offerings (2:3, 10; 6:17, 25, 29; 7:1, 6; 10:12, 17), places (6:16, 26–27, 30; 10:13; 16:2), people (6:18; 21:6–8), and objects (5:15–16) as holy. God commands the priests to distinguish what is holy and to teach this to the people (10:10). Holiness is taught to the people in terms of boundaries and divisions that provide a graded means of access to God.

Thus at the center of the community stood the Most Holy Place, where God resided and which only priests could approach. There the divine life provided fellowship and order to the people. Around that place was the camp where God’s people resided—a place marked off itself as a holy place. Though not as strict in terms of regulations and access, chs. 17–27 called the people to particular life within it. Outside the community was the world of chaos and death. Here the scapegoat took the sins of the community once a year and here all that was unclean resided.

Corresponding to these three areas are three classes of people: priests, closest to God and called to the highest standards of holiness; Israelites, members of the covenantal community and called to a lesser (but no less important) standard of holiness; and the rest of the world’s people, whose holiness is not a concern of Leviticus (cf. Ge 9), but who nevertheless must take on certain responsibilities of holiness if they live among the Israelites.

Corresponding to people is the animal world. It also comprises three classes: animals liable for sacrifice (chs. 1–10, 16); those who are clean and may be eaten (ch. 11); and those who are unclean. Thus holiness was taught in every area of life.

5. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Commentaries

Budd, Philip J. Leviticus. New Century Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

Elliger, K. Leviticus. Handbuch zum Alten Testament. Tübingen: Mohr, 1966.

Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Leviticus: A Commentary. Translated by Douglas W. Stott. Old Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996.

Harris, R. Laird. “Leviticus.” Pages 499–654 in vol. 2 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein et al. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990.

Harrison, Roland K. Leviticus: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1980.

Hartley, John E. Leviticus. Word Biblical Commentary 4. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1992.

Keil, C. F. “The Third Book of Moses.” Vol. 2 of The Pentateuch. Edited by C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch. Translated by James Martin. Repr., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1975.

Kellogg, S. H. The Book of Leviticus. 3rd ed. 1899. Repr., Minneapolis: Klock & Klock, 1978.

Levine, Baruch A. Leviticus. JPS Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989.

Milgrom, Jacob. Leviticus 1–16: A New Translation and Commentary. Anchor Bible 3. New York: Doubleday, 1991.

———. Leviticus 17–22: A New Translation and Commentary. Anchor Bible 3a. New York: Doubleday, 2000.

———. Leviticus 23–27: A New Translation and Commentary. Anchor Bible 3b. New York: Doubleday, 2000.

Noth, Martin. Leviticus: A Commentary. Translated by J. E. Anderson. 2nd ed. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977.

Rooker, Mark F. Leviticus. New American Commentary 3A. Nashville: Broadman, 2000.

Wenham, Gordon J. The Book of Leviticus. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

Other Resources

Brichto, H. Chanan. “On Slaughter and Sacrifice, Blood and Atonement.” Hebrew Union College Annual 47 (1976): 19–55.

Dever, William. What Did the Biblical Writers Know & When Did They Know It? What Archaeology Can Tell Us about the Reality of Ancient Israel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.

Douglas, Mary. Leviticus as Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Driver, G. R. “Birds in the Old Testament.” Palestine Exploration Quarterly 20 (1955): 129–40.

———. “Three Technical Terms in the Pentateuch.” Journal of Semitic Studies 1 (1956): 97–105.

Fleming, Daniel E. Time at Emar: The Cultic Calendar and the Rituals from the Diviner’s House. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2000.

______. “The Biblical Tradition of Anointing Priests.” Journal of Biblical Literature 117 (1998): 401–14.

Gelb, Ignace J., et al. Computer-Aided Analysis of Amorite. Assyriological Studies 21. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1980.

Gorman, Frank H., Jr. The Ideology of Ritual: Space, Time and Status in the Priestly Theology. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 91. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990.

Gröndahl, F. Die Personennamen der Texte aus Ugarit. Studia Pohl 1. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1967.

Hess, Richard S. Studies in the Personal Names of Genesis 1–11. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 234. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1993.

———. Joshua. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

______. “The Image of the Messiah in the Old Testament.” Pages 22–33 in Images of Christ: Ancient and Modern. Edited by S. E. Porter, M. A. Hayes, and D. Tombs. Roehampton Institute London Papers 2. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

______. “Leviticus 10:1: Strange Fire and an Odd Name,” BBR 12 (2002): 187–98.

______. “Multi-Month Ritual Calendars in the West Semitic World.” Pages 233–53 in The Future of Biblical Archaeology. Edited by J. Hoffmeier and A. R. Millard. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.

Hoffner, Harry A., Jr. “Second Millennium Antecedents to the Hebrew ʾob.” Journal of Biblical Literature 86 (1967): 385–401.

———. “Incest, Sodomy and Bestiality in the Ancient Near East.” Pages 81–90 in Orient and Occident: Essays Presented to Cyrus H. Gordon on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Edited by H. A. Hoffner Jr. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 22. Kevelaer/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Butzon & Bercker/Neukirchener, 1973.

______. The Laws of the Hittites: A Critical Edition. Vol. 23 of Documenta et Monumenta Orientis Antiqui. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

Hulse, E. V. “The Nature of Biblical ‘Leprosy’ and the Use of Alternative Medical Terms in Modern Translations of the Bible.” Palestine Exploration Quarterly 107 (1975): 87–105.

Joosten, Jan. People and Land in the Holiness Code: An Exegetical Study of the Ideational Framework of the Law in Leviticus 17–26. Vetus Testamenum Supplements. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

Kiuchi, N. The Purification Offering in the Priestly Literature: Its Meaning and Function. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 56. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987.

Knierim, Rolf. Text and Concept in Leviticus 1:1–9: A Case in Exegetical Method. Forschungen zum Alten Testament 2. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1992.

Lambert, W. G. “Prostitution.” Pages 127–57 in Aussenseiter und Randgruppen: Beiträge zu einer Sozialgeschichte des Alten Orients. Edited by V. Haas. Xenia: Konstanzer Althistorische Vorträge und Forschungen, Heft 32. Konstanz: Universitätsverlag, 1992.

Magonet, Jonathan. “‘But If It Is a Girl, She is Unclean for Twice Seven Days. . . .’ The Riddle of Leviticus 12.5.” Pages 144–52 in Reading Leviticus: A Conversation with Mary Douglas. Edited by J. F. A. Sawyer. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 227. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996.

Olyan, Saul M. “What Do Shaving Rites Accomplish and What Do They Signal in Biblical Ritual Accounts?” Journal of Biblical Literature 117 (1998): 611–22.

Parpola, Simo, and K. Watanabe. Neo-Assyrian Treaties and Loyalty Oaths. State Archives of Assyria 2. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1988.

Rainey, Anson, F. “Sacrifice and Offerings.” Pages 194–211 in vol. 5 of The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible. Edited by Merrill C. Tenney. Grand Rapids.: Zondervan, 1975.

Roth, Martha T. Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor. Society of Biblical Literature Writings from the Ancient World Series. Atlanta: Scholars, 1995.

Speiser, Ephraim A. Oriental and Biblical Studies. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1967.

Van der Toorn, Karel. “Female Prostitution in Payment of Vows in Ancient Israel.” Journal of Biblical Literature 108 (1989): 193–205.

______. From Her Cradle to Her Grave: The Role of Religion in the Life of the Israelite and the Babylonian Woman. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.

Warning, Wilfried. Literary Artistry in Leviticus. Biblical Interpretation Series 35. Leiden: Brill, 1999.

Wold, Donald J. Out of Order: Homosexuality in the Bible and the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998.

Wright, David. The Disposal of Impurity: Elimination Rites in the Bible and in Hittite and Mesopotamian Literature. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 101. Atlanta: Scholars, 1987.

Zatelli, Ida. “The Origin of the Biblical Scapegoat Ritual: The Evidence of Two Eblaite Texts.” Vetus Testamentum 48 (1998): 254–63.

Zohar, N. “Repentance and Purification: The Significance and Semantics of in the Pentateuch.” Journal of Biblical Literature 107 (1988): 609–18.

6. OUTLINE

I. The Offerings (1:1–7:38)
1. A. The Offerings from the People’s Perspective (1:1–6:7 [5:26])
  1. 1. Introduction and the Burnt Offering (1:1–17)
    1. a. Introduction (1:1–2)
    2. b. The burnt offering (1:3–17)
  2. 2. The Grain Offering (2:1–16)
    1. a. The offering of uncooked grain (2:1–3)
    2. b. The offering of cooked grain (2:4–10)
    3. c. The offering must be without yeast (2:11–13)
    4. d. The offering of firstfruits (2:14–16)
  3. 3. The Fellowship Offering (3:1–17)
  4. 4. The Purification Offering (4:1–5:13)
    1. a. Introduction (4:1–2)
    2. b. The general purification offering (4:3–35)
    3. c. Conditions requiring purification (5:1–4)
    4. d. The purification offering for sins of 5:1–4 (5:5–13)
  5. 5. The Reparation Offering (5:14–6:7 [5:14–26])
2. B. The Offerings from the Priests’ Perspective (6:8–7:38 [6:1–7:38])
  1. 1. The Burnt Offering (6:8–13 [6:1–6])
  2. 2. The Grain Offering (6:14–23 [6:7–16])
  3. 3. The Purification Offering (6:24–30 [6:17–23])
  4. 4. The Reparation Offering (7:1–6)
  5. 5. The Offering Remains That Belong to the Priests: A Summary (7:7–10)
  6. 6. The Fellowship Offering (7:11–34)
  7. 7. Conclusion of the Offerings from the Priests’ Perspective (7:35–36)
  8. 8. Conclusion to the Offerings (7:37–38)
II. The Ordination and Service of the Priests (8:1–10:20)
1. A. The Ordination of the Priests (8:1–36)
  1. 1. The Public Presentation of the Priests and the Items (8:1–4)
  2. 2. The Priestly Robing and Anointing (8:5–13)
  3. 3. The Offerings (8:14–29)
  4. 4. The Consecration (8:30–35)
  5. 5. The Conclusion (8:36)
2. B. The Beginning of the Priestly Service (9:1–24)
  1. 1. The Instructions (9:1–7)
  2. 2. The Offerings for Aaron the Priest (9:8–14)
  3. 3. The Offerings for the People of Israel (9:15–21)
  4. 4. Conclusion: The Priestly Blessing and the Glory of the Lord (9:22–24)
3. C. Violation of the Sacrifices: The Deaths of the Priest’s Two Sons (10:1–20)
  1. 1. The Sin of Nadab and Abihu and Its Consequences (10:1–7)
  2. 2. Instructions for the Priests (10:8–11)
  3. 3. The Priests Complete Their Consecration (10:12–20)
  4. 4. Conclusion: The Priestly Blessing and the Glory of the Lord (9:22–24)

III. Laws of Cleanness and Uncleanness (11:1–15:33)

A. Food (11:1–47)
1. 1. Introduction (11:1–2a)
2. 2. Land Animals, Part I: Quadrupeds (11:2b–8)
3. 3. Water Animals (11:9–12)
4. 4. Birds and Winged Insects (11:13–25)
5. 5. Land Animals, Part II (11:26–45)
6. 6. Summary of the Law of Unclean Animals (11:46–47)
B. Childbirth (12:1–8)
C. Skin Diseases Diagnosed (13:1–59)
1. 1. General Skin Disease (13:1–8)
2. 2. White Swelling Skin Disease (13:9–11)
3. 3. Spreading Skin Disease (13:12–17)
4. 4. Boils (13:18–23)
5. 5. Burns (13:24–28)
6. 6. Head Sore (13:29–37)
7. 7. White Spots (13:38–39)
8. 8. Sore on a Bald Spot (13:40–44)
9. 9. Rules for Living with an Infectious Skin Disease (13:45–46)
10. 10. Mildew (13:47–59)
D. Cleanness from Skin Diseases (14:1–57)
1. 1. Introduction (14:1–2a)
2. 2. Cleaning of the Person with Skin Disease (14:2b–20)
3. 3. Cleaning of a Poor Person with Skin Disease (14:21–32)
4. 4. Diagnosis and Treatment of Mildew in Buildings (14:33–53)
5. 5. Summary and Conclusion of Skin Diseases (14:54–57)
E. Cleanness from Bodily Discharges (15:1–33)
1. 1. Introduction (15:1–2a)
2. 2. Male Chronic Emission (15:2b–15)
3. 3. Male Emission of Semen (15:16–17)
4. 4. Sexual Relations (15:18)
5. 5. Female Menstrual Period (15:19–24)
6. 6. Female Chronic Diseases (15:25–30)
7. 7. Summary (15:31–33)

IV. The Day of Atonement (16:1–34)
1. A. Introduction: The Words of God (16:1–2a)
2. B. The Preparation of the Priest (16:2b–5)
3. C. Selection of the Sacrifices (16:6–10)
4. D. The Purification Offering of the Priest (16:11–14)
5. E. The Purification Offering of Israel and the Atonement of the Holy Place (16:15–19)
6. F. Atonement for Israel (16:20–22)
7. G. The Aftermath: Returning from God’s Presence (16:23–28)
8. H. The Continuing Responsibility of Israel and the Priest (16:29–34)

V. The Holiness Code (17:1–26:46)

A. Prohibitions concerning the Eating of Meat and Blood (17:1–16)

1. Prohibition of Sacrificial Animal Slaughter (17:1–7)

2. Prohibition of Animal Sacrifices (17:8–9)

3. Prohibition against Eating Blood (17:10–12)

4. The Blood of Hunted Animals (17:13–14)

5. Improperly Butchered Animals (17:15–16)

B. Illicit Sexual Unions (18:1–30)

1. Command for Exclusive Loyalty to God (18:1–5)

2. Improper Unions among Kin (18:6–18)

3. Other Improper Unions (18:19–23)

4. Recapitulation of Command to Devote Exclusive Loyalty to God (18:24–30)

C. A Summary of the Ceremonial and Ethical Law (19:1–37)

1. Command to Holiness (19:1–2)

2. Religious Concerns of Holiness (19:3–8 [Dt 24:19–22; 27:15–18])

3. Ethical Concerns of Holiness (19:9–18)

4. Ceremonial and Cultic Concerns (19:19–31 [Dt 22:9–11])

5. Matters of Ethics and Justice (19:32–36 [Dt 25:13–26])

6. Summary (19:37)

D. Israel’s Holiness in the Family (20:1–27)

1. Introduction (20:1–2a)

2. Molech (20:2b–5)

3. Mediums and Spiritists (20:6)

4. Holiness and Obedience (20:7–9)

5. Sexual Sin (20:10–21)

6. Obedience and Holiness (20:22–26)

7. Mediums and Spiritists (20:27)

E. Qualifications for a Priest (21:1–22:16)

1. Purity (21:1–24)

a. Instructions for the priests (21:1a)

b. Mourning (21:1b–6)

c. Prostitution (21:7–9)

d. Mourning rituals for the high priest (21:10–12)

e. Marriage for the high priest (21:13–15)

f. Defects (21:16–23)

g. Conclusion (21:24)

2. Diet (22:1–16)

a. Who may eat the offerings: priests (22:1–9)

b. Who may eat the offerings: others (22:10–16)

c. Introduction (1:1–2)

F. Sacrificial Animals and Thank Offerings (22:17–33)

1. Acceptable Animals for Sacrifice (22:17–25)

2. Slaughtering Families of Animals and Eating Thank Offerings (22:26–30)

3. Conclusion (22:31–33)

G. Cultic Calendar (23:1–44)

1. Introduction (23:1–2a)

2. Sabbath (23:2b–3)

3. Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread (23:4–14)

4. The Feast of Weeks (23:15–22)

5. Day of Trumpets (23:23–25)

6. Day of Atonement (23:26–32)

7. The Feast of Tabernacles (23:33–36)

8. Other Feasts (23:37–38)

9. The Feast of Yahweh (23:39–43)

10. Conclusion (23:44)

H. Holiness at the Sanctuary: Lamps, Bread, and Blasphemy (24:1–23)

1. The Continually Burning Lamp (24:1–4)

2. The Bread of God’s Presence (24:5–9)

3. The Blasphemer (24:10–23)

I. Holiness of the Land (25:1–55)

1. Sabbatical Year (25:1–7)

2. Year of Jubilee (25:8–13)

3. Leasing the Land (25:14–17)

4. Rewards for Obedience (25:18–19)

5. Provision without Planting (25:20–22)

6. Divine Ownership of the Land (25:23–24)

7. Purchase of Leased Land before the Jubilee (25:25–28)

8. Selling Houses (25:29–34

9. Debt Slavery (25:35–43)

10. Non-Israelite Slaves (25:44–46)

11. Slave Holders (25:47–55)

J. Blessings and Curses (26:1–46)

1. Idolatry, Sabbaths, and Sanctuary (26:1–2)

2. Blessings for Faithfulness (26:3–13)

3. Curses for Disobedience: Disease and Defeat (26:14–17)

4. Further Curses for Disobedience: Drought and Sterility of Land (26:18–20)

5. Further Curses for Disobedience: Wild Animals (26:21–22)

6. Further Curses for Disobedience: Destruction, Plague, and Famine (26:23–26)

7. Further Curses for Disobedience: Annihilation and Deportation (26:27–39)

8. Repentance and Forgiveness (26:40–43)

9. God’s Faithfulness (26:44–45)

10. Conclusion (26:46)

VI. Addendum on Vows and Things Dedicated and Devoted (27:1–34)

A. Vows (27:1–13)
B. Dedicated Property (27:14–27)
C. Devoted Items and People (27:28–29)
D. Tithes (27:30–33)
E. Conclusion (27:34)

1. David Noel Freedman and Kenneth A. Mathews, The Paleo-Hebrew Leviticus Scroll (11Q PaleoLev) (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1985); there may be fifteen significant variants, all inferior to the MT.

2. Sidnie White Crawford, “The ‘Rewritten’ Bible at Qumran: A Look at Three Texts.” ErIsr 26 (1999): 1*–8*.

3. Eugene Ulrich, “The Bible in the Making: The Scriptures Found at Qumran,” in The Bible at Qumran: Text, Shape, and Interpretation, ed. Peter W. Flint (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 51–66.

4. S. Talmon, “Fragments of Two Scrolls of the Book of Leviticus from Masada,” ErIsr 24 (1993): 99–110 (Hebrew).

5. Julius Wellhausen, Prologomena to the History of Israel, trans. J. S. Black and A Menzies (Edinburgh: A. & C. Black, 1885).

6. Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1–16: A New Translation and Commentary (AB 3; New York: Doubleday, 1991), 10.

7. Ibid., 11.

8. Ibid., 3–8; see also A. Hurvitz, A Linguistic Study of the Relationship between the Priestly Source and the Book of Ezekiel (CahRB 20; Paris: Gabalda, 1982).

9. See Daniel E. Fleming, The Installation of Baal’s High Priestess at Emar (HSS 42; Atlanta: Scholars, 1992); Richard S. Hess, “The Slaughter of the Animals in Genesis 15:18–21 and Its Ancient Near Eastern Context,” in He Swore an Oath: Biblical Themes from Genesis 12–50, ed. R. S. Hess, E. Satterthwaite, and G. J. Wenham, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids.: Baker, 1994), 55–65; idem, “Leviticus 10:1: Strange Fire and an Odd Name,” BBR 12 (2002): 187–98; idem, “Multi-Month Ritual Calendar in the Est Semitic World: Emar 446 and Leviticus 23,” in The Future of Biblical Archaeology, ed. J. Hoffmeier and A. Millard (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 233–53; Gerald A. Klingbeil, “The Syntactic Structure of the Ritual of Ordination (Lev 8),” Bib 77 (1996): 509–19; idem, A Comparative Study of the Ritual of Ordination as Found in Leviticus 8 and Emar 369: Ritual Times, Space, Objects and Action (Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 1998).

10. Jacob P. Milgrom, Leviticus 17–22: A New Translation and Commentary (AB 3a; New York: Doubleday, 2000), 1368–69.

11. See, e.g., the commentaries of Andrew Bonar, A Commentary on the Book of Leviticus (1852; repr., Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978); John Calvin, Commentaries on the Last Books of Moses (repr. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979); C. F. Keil, “The Third Book of Moses,” vol. 2 of The Pentateuch, ed. C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, trans. James Martin (repr., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 1975); S. H. Kellogg, The Book of Leviticus, 3rd ed. (1899; repr., Minneapolis: Klock & Klock, 1978).

12. Martin Noth, Leviticus: A Commentary, trans. J. E. Anderson, 2nd ed. (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977), 38.

13. Daniel Fleming, “The Biblical Tradition of Anointing Priests” JBL 117 (1998): 410.

14. Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger (London: Routledge & Keegan Paul, 1966); idem, Leviticus as Literature (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1999); idem, “The Forbidden Animals in Leviticus” JSOT 59 (1993): 3–23; idem, “Sacred Contagion,” in Reading Leviticus: A Conversation with Mary Douglas, ed. F. A. Sawyer (JSOTSup 227; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 86–106.

15. See Douglas, Purity and Danger.

16. Jiøí Moskala, The Laws of Clean and Unclean Animals in Leviticus 11: Their Nature, Theology and Rationale (Berrien Springs, MI: Adventist Theological Society, 2000).

17. See M. Carroll, “One More Time: Leviticus Revisited,” in Anthropological Approaches to the Old Testament, ed B. Lang (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 117–26.

18. See Douglas, “The Forbidden Animals in Leviticus,” 3–23; idem, “Sacred Contagion,” 86–106.

19. Douglas, Leviticus as Literature, 134–75.

20. Harry A. Hoffner Jr., The Laws of the Hittites: A Critical Edition (Documenta et Monumenta Orientis Antiqui 23; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 224.

21. See Hurvitz, A Linguistic Study; idem, “Dating the Priestly Source in Light of the Historical Study of Biblical Hebrew a Century after Wellhausen” (BZAW 100; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1988), 88–99; also see M. Paran, “Literary Features of the Priestly Code: Stylistic Patterns, Idioms and Structures” (Ph.D. diss.; Hebrew University, 1983) (in Hebrew).

22. Milgrom, Leviticus 1–16, 2–8.

23. Israel Knohl, The Sanctuary of Silence: The Priestly Torah and the Holiness School (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995).

24. Hess, “Multi-Month Ritual Calendars in the West Semitic World,” 233–53.

25. Anson F. Rainey, “The Order of Sacrifices in Old Testament Ritual Texts” Bib 51 (1970): 485–98; idem, “Sacrifice and Offerings,” in The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, ed. Merrill C. Tenney (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975), 5:194–211.

26. John E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC 4; Waco, Tex.: Word, 1992), 7.

27. Rainey, “The Order of Sacrifices,” 487–93.

28. Douglas, “The Forbidden Animals in Leviticus,” 11; cf. also idem, Leviticus as Literature.

29. See Wilfried Warning, Literary Artistry in Leviticus (Biblical Interpretation Series 35; Leiden: Brill, 1999).

30. Rainey, “The Order of Sacrifices,” 495–99.

31. Gordon J. Wenham, “The Theology of Old Testament Sacrifice,” in Sacrifice in the Bible, ed. R. T. Beckwith and M. J. Selman (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 79–83.

32. Roy E. Gane, “Moral Evils in Leviticus 16:16, 21 and Cultic Characterization of YHWH,” paper presented at the annual regional meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature (Denver, November 2001).