Why Leviticus?

[newadam]

Greetings to everyone...my first post on your site.

Forgive me if I'm in the wrong section of this extensive forum site.

In reading Leviticus in my devotions yesterday, I found myself trying to figure out how I would explain it to a skeptic of the Bible. It is highly ritualistic to the point that it sounds very much like the product of men. If I view it as a document written by men and included in the Bible as an example of the lengths humans go through to try to rid themselves of sin, it's not so hard a chapter to accept. If, on the other hand, I take it as God-breathed to the men of that time, I start to feel like God has a lot of human in Him. Said differently, Leviticus makes more sense when I view it as a portrait of the Christ to come(from when Leviticus was written), but it seems almost ridiculous--and, again, human--in the depth of ritual if taken as a stand-alone book.

So, to ask my question: why do we have this book in the Bible, and do you feel it sounds more human than Heavenly?

Thank you in advance for any insights you can give.

Sincerely,

David

 

[sleepythesahm]

Leviticus is one of the books of the torah, one of the books of Moses. I think that accounts for the overfamiliar ound,the sound of men as you say. These books are moreso the crutch of the jewish faith,but nevertheless are incredibly important to the christin faith.Leviticus in my opinion is an excellent book when it comes to explaining the importance of Jesus and what was done. Its like a book of rules, to give you an idea of what way thhey lived and what rules and sacrifices were to be made.
If you had to summarize its importnace in one theme,I would say it sets up the crucifiction.MOst people who dont believe in Jesus,many christians too,argue that he didnt have to do die. He didnt need to die so painfully. Even when Jesus is praying in the garden,he seems burdened by what he knows he must do. He knows this is the scarifice,the only one large enough to account for all the sins of a wicked sinful people.They had broken the rules and lifestyle God demanded of them, which were detailed in this book as well.
He was the best lamb, the cleanest/purest. The beginning of Leviticus lays out the rules of the sacrifice, including quality expected. Jesus sacrifice makes it so no other alter sacifices need be made.
I might not be explaining it well, but Leviticus is what I call a full circle book. In addition to the above, it also helps to affirm certain new testament things. It is in this book,going back to sacrifices, that we can really understand the idea as Jesus our defender. Hes making this sacrifice,taking himself to the alter on our behalf.He was the only one ho met the beforementioned qualifications,only his sacrifice was good enough.
I know what Im trying to say,but I dont know if its translating well to words.I'll come back if you need clarication.

 

[newadam]

Thanks so much for all the time you spent writing...I FULLY understand what you're saying, and it's what I was saying as well...that is, I can understand Leviticus in light of the New Testament when I look backwards to Leviticus, but I CANNOT understand Leviticus as a stand-alone chapter in God's history, so to speak. He conveyed all these rules--many that don't have any foundation in medical science--to the Jews because...uh, why? Touching blood to tips of ear-lobes, etc., doesn't do anything to heal leprosy (although I understand it may have held symbolic significance to the Jews). It just seems as if God allowed Leviticus to be in our Bible to show how crazy the Jews had become in their rituals. If I explain Leviticus as a book that shows the devotion of the Jews or their penchant for ritual, etc., it is easier than saying "this is really the mind of God on Leprosy and sacrifice", etc.). By extension, the whole issue of animal sacrifice seems human, too. I don't mean to sound anti-Bible...I am a Christian, and I CAN see these things through the eyes of faith and accept them personally. Still, I would have to be a little dishonest if I said I felt a strong affinity for this chapter or for the rituals that it describes. Any more ideas on how I can get a better comfort with this? If not, I DO thank you for taking time to answer!

David

 

[marktheblake]

why do we have this book in the Bible

Well one big reason is that it was one of the original Hebrew holy books, combined with the clear statement Jesus made that we shall not disregard a single word from those scriptures. Mat 5:17-20

Personally I would not consider it wise to suggest to any new Christian to read Leviticus- even the most faithful Christians can be bewildered by some of it. (i have not read it from cover to cover as such, just in sections)

The Scene for Leviticus is - the Israelite people have just escaped from 300 odd years of Ejyptian rule and law. Whilst Moses is the leader, with Joshua, the one who is really in charge is God, as Moses is simply following instructions. This makes the nation a Theocracy.

As this is all a part of Gods major plan for salvation, he needs to set in motion a series of steps to bring forward a society and culture that will accept the Messiah.

In doing so he implements a series of traditions, laws, culture and standard of living and these are very specifically detailed in Leviticus. Some are plainly obvious, do not Murder. Clearly this is a law that would have existed in many nations, we know in Egypt this was a crime, because Moses ran away after he called the Egyptian. So the same would apply to many other of the listed crimes and misdemeanors, but not all.

Some were included for reasons of health. It is not explained why in Leviticus, but many are scientific fact now, like washing your hands, disposing of your 'body waste', avoiding certain types of food, sick people holding their hand over their mouths and so on.

Some laws were included not because the Israelites had a habit of these things, but surrounding cultures around them did, like sins of a sexual nature, and God made it clear that such behaviour would be harmful to the nation that needs to bring forward the Messiah.

Other laws put into place are simply to implement traditions which represent the prophecy of the coming of the Messiah, such that when Jesus came, people would recognise him because these things have being instituted into their culture. The passover is a one of those.

Now along with all this laws and statutes is the legislated punishment. This is so everyone knew where they stand, and obviously for some of these laws, it would have been a significant deterrent, and according to the government (God) that was deemed necessary. That is not much different to the laws of my country.

Not sure if that answers your question though

 

[cyberlizard]

just to pick up on an issue in the post above where it mentions 'leprosy'. Here you're paying the price by and large for reading the english. Tz'arat (the word translated leprosy), was not what we think. It was a degenerative condition affecting everything from building stone to clothing to people. It was a physical observation that a person was in rebellion against God and needed to repent.... i can't explain it much better at this time in the morning, but it is explained very well by a bible study i have on the subject and in the book everyman's talmud (I think i read it there, will check when i get back from work.)

the reason animal sacrifice feels so man made is that the temple is no longer here so we have a very anti-temple/anti-blood theology (and some twisted theology regarding the korbanot).


Steve

 

[newadam]

Thank you both for your great replies! In essence, my concern is that Leviticus made sense to SOMEONE at the time it was written. That it made sense to the Jews is easy to accept. That it made sense to God is confusing. In many instances, it begs deeper philosophical questions. For instance, how is the carnage of a sacrifice a "sweet savor"? Why did One Who created from nothing require the destruction of SOMETHING? For sure, I feel the answer lies in realizing a Spirit is communicating to flesh (people), so some of the reasons get lost in translation. I will think about your answers and respond better when I have more time. Thanks again.

David

 

[marktheblake]

Why did One Who created from nothing require the destruction of SOMETHING?

The whole purpose of sacrifice is for our benefit not God's

I guess he could have done something different, like donate the Goat to the temple, much like we do today (we do not burn 10% of our money do we), but the sacrifice of the shedding of blood was necessary. Remember its all about leading up to Jesus - who after his blood was shed, no more sacrifice needed.

 

[cyberlizard]

if no more sacrifices were needed, then we have a problem. Firstly Paul brought a blood sacrifice in the temple long after his 'conversion' at the behest of the other apostles, secondly, if sacrifices were no longer required, why did it take God 40 years to destroy the temple, and thirdly, there is more to the sacrifices than the remission of sins.... not all sacrifices were for sin.

and finally

the OT prophets clearly indicate that in the messianic age, the messiah will (have to) rebuild the temple, and the three pilgrimage feasts will be celebrated (and one of them being passover demands the death of lambs.)

of course the sacrifices point towards Jesus, they did before he came, and they continued to point towards him after he had been. Sacrifices do not stand in opposition to Jesus, they compliment his work.


Steve

 

[Steve Petersen]

Leviticus shows us that God can only be approached on HIS terms, not on ours.

 

[sleepythesahm]

Leviticus shows us that God can only be approached on HIS terms, not on ours.

thats a really great way to word it. I think that point got lost in my novel lol

 

[NaLuvena]

Greetings to everyone...my first post on your site.

Forgive me if I'm in the wrong section of this extensive forum site.

In reading Leviticus in my devotions yesterday, I found myself trying to figure out how I would explain it to a skeptic of the Bible. It is highly ritualistic to the point that it sounds very much like the product of men. If I view it as a document written by men and included in the Bible as an example of the lengths humans go through to try to rid themselves of sin, it's not so hard a chapter to accept. If, on the other hand, I take it as God-breathed to the men of that time, I start to feel like God has a lot of human in Him. Said differently, Leviticus makes more sense when I view it as a portrait of the Christ to come(from when Leviticus was written), but it seems almost ridiculous--and, again, human--in the depth of ritual if taken as a stand-alone book.

So, to ask my question: why do we have this book in the Bible, and do you feel it sounds more human than Heavenly?

Thank you in advance for any insights you can give.

Sincerely,

David

To show us our sin, and our need for God's salvation. To show us that we cannot fulfill the Law, that we cannot be perfect, without God doing the perfecting work within us.

 

[jamiel]

To me, Leviticus can be symbolic with all of its rules, etc. It's a very dry, but underrated book.

God delivered His people from being slaves in Egypt. Now He has to teach them what it means to be truly human and no longer a slave (to sin). Leviticus is part of that for them.

They have to be seperate, holy, for God is seperate, holy and they are His chosen people. This is what it means to have God in such close proximity to fallen humanity.

This is where the symbolism comes in. All of it is to prepare the way until the Messiah comes and the law will be written on their heart instead.

That it made sense to the Jews is easy to accept. That it made sense to God is confusing. In many instances, it begs deeper philosophical questions. For instance, how is the carnage of a sacrifice a "sweet savor"? Why did One Who created from nothing require the destruction of SOMETHING? For sure, I feel the answer lies in realizing a Spirit is communicating to flesh (people), so some of the reasons get lost in translation.

I'm not an expert regarding Leviticus, but it seems to me it's about what God requires of a sinner.

It's not the actual animal sacrifice that matters -- but that a sacrifice (according to the law) has been made. The "sweet savor" to God is an anthropomorphism the Bible engages in about God to describe God in human terms so we can understand better, not in actuality, literally what God is doing.

Why does God require all this? That's one of the mysteries of God. We don't require it, but then we're not God. His ways, thoughts, standards are far, far higher than ours.

God is holy, which means seperate. He is wholly Other and righteous. He can be no other way. I see it as what it means to be "God".

 

[SummaScriptura]

As I see it, the rules recorded in the Book of Leviticus were inspired by God with a primary purpose to convict Israel that they were not able to approach God just as they were, their sin and uncleanesses needed to be addressed first. God was to be held as holy and themselves not; therefore they needed to approach God with a rigorous attention to the requirements placed upon them by Him. In this light, the laws of Leviticus were a blessing to Israel embodying the definite promise God could be approached.

 

[newadam]

Wow! Thank you all for so much attention to my odd sort of question. Have any of you ever read anything by Jonathan Kirsch? It is unnerving reading to me, but I've read at least 3 of his books. What is most bothersome about his writing is the different set of lenses he uses to examine the Bible. I can't think of his having dealt with Leviticus in particular, but I am sure his line of reasoning would be along the one I've intoned here. That is, if you believe that the Bible is written by a God every bit as capable of explaining the space shuttle as creating thunder, how do you reconcile the notion that this same Being thought there was something of significance in describing the caul or dung of animals that are sacrificed? As one of the responders mentioned, there IS mystery in the way God thinks, and I don't want to sound too proud to accept that God could set things up any way He wanted. But if I allow myself to wear a skeptics hat, I have to admit that there seems to be something more philosophical to be achieved by all the jumping-through-hoops rituals in Leviticus. Was it just that the Jews, in particular, were that persnickety about form and ritual that God allowed them all this? When Paul comes along in the New Testament, there are many places where he seems, almost, to frame all fleshly prohibitions in the context of a heart-attitude. (e.g. some of you regard days...some of you don't--you're both right if your hearts are toward God in the matter..(my paraphrase, obviously. ). So, with that in mind, is Leviticus a book that would have made perfectly good sense to a Jew back then but now stands in our Bible as a testament to the ridiculous lengths mankind will go to try to atone for his sins, so to speak?

Thank you all, again, for answering. Sometimes the power of your answers is felt when the various thoughts mingle. You are all keeping a fairly consistent line in your answers, and I think that's great! Thank you.

David

 

[MrPolo]

St. Augustine said "in the victims of those animals which the Jews offered to God lies the prophecy of that victim still to come, which Christ offered to the Father in the great sacrifice of the cross." The Old Testament points toward Jesus, and is fulfilled in Him. So the Old covenant sacrifices tell us about the New covenant sacrifice in Jesus. The Levitical tribe itself is a line of priesthood, which is characteristic of New Testament priests.

So what sacrifice can a priest in the New covenant make? When Catholics celebrate mass, the priest stands in for Christ, offering the ONE sacrifice of Christ through time and space in an unbloody manner. It is Christ who actually performs the sacrifice of the mass, His one sacrifice. That is also how is fulfilled the prophecy of

Malachi 1:11 - For from the rising of the sun, even to its setting, my name is great among the nations; And everywhere they bring sacrifice to my name, and a pure offering; For great is my name among the nations, says the LORD of hosts.​

​

The "pure offering" is in contrast to the Old Testament animal sacrifices that prefigured it. Here is an article on Leviticus from a Catholic professor for more perspective.

 

[SummaScriptura]

By the way, NewAdam, your initial post casued me to recollect for the first time in decades, I had your same take on Levitus the first time I read it!

But now, (please don't think I'm weird), Leviticus is my starting place when after having fallen into a period of neglect, I start back to reading the Bible. I know, it's weird.

 

[tz620q]

So what sacrifice can a priest in the New covenant make? When Catholics celebrate mass, the priest stands in for Christ, offering the ONE sacrifice of Christ through time and space in an unbloody manner. It is Christ who actually performs the sacrifice of the mass, His one sacrifice. That is also how is fulfilled the prophecy of

This is one thing that I got out of reading Leviticus as well. It struck me that to transfer their sins into the sacrificial animal, the person put their hands on the animal's head in a gesture similar to the epiclesis that the priest makes over the eucharist as he consecrates the host.

It also struck me that this transfer required physical contact with the sacrifice. I asked myself, "When do we make contact with Christ's sacrafice?" The eucharist came back as the logical answer. Looked at in this way, the meaning of why Christ instituted the Lord's Supper is clearer to me.

 

[newadam]

Thank you all, again, for sharing your ideas. It seems clear to me that it's really hard--if not impossible--for you to view the book with critical eyes. Certainly, this IS a Christian website, so what else would I expect of you, right?! I'll take it that none of you are familiar with Jonathan Kirsch's books?? Again, he hasn't written anything specifically on Leviticus, but, being an atheist-Jewish(?Hebrew)-lawyer seems to allow him to admit the seeming absurdity in some of the directives. I'm not saying I agree with the thrust of his ideas (that the books show the clear fingerprints of human beings), but I AM challenged to think critically about my penchant for denying that anything in the Bible could strike me as flat-out crazy at first reading. I'm working within myself to find out where intellectual honesty ends and apostacy begins. That may be a thought for a post somewhere else sometime.

Thank you all, again, for spending a limited substance on me: your time.

Gratefully,

David

 

[SummaScriptura]

Thank you all, again, for sharing your ideas. It seems clear to me that it's really hard--if not impossible--for you to view the book with critical eyes. Certainly, this IS a Christian website, so what else would I expect of you, right?! I'll take it that none of you are familiar with Jonathan Kirsch's books?? Again, he hasn't written anything specifically on Leviticus, but, being an atheist-Jewish(?Hebrew)-lawyer seems to allow him to admit the seeming absurdity in some of the directives. I'm not saying I agree with the thrust of his ideas (that the books show the clear fingerprints of human beings), but I AM challenged to think critically about my penchant for denying that anything in the Bible could strike me as flat-out crazy at first reading. I'm working within myself to find out where intellectual honesty ends and apostacy begins. That may be a thought for a post somewhere else sometime.

Thank you all, again, for spending a limited substance on me: your time.

Gratefully,

David

We're not looking at this as critically as you would like? I thought you were seeking input; I did not realize you were trying to guide us in a certain direction. Sorry to disappoint.

You might find Elaine Pagels of interest too, sort of creative writing with some history for seasoning.

 

[newadam]

No, no, Summa...I wasn't meaning to clandestinely lead this group. Please forgive me for seeming that way. More, I was looking to find someone who would start from a skeptic's point of view and explain how he/she adjusted his/her mental construct of the book in the direction of an appreciation for Leviticus. As Christians, we all agree here--including me--that Leviticus makes perfectly good sense as the foresager of the Final sacrifice ("that they without us should not be made perfect"). We've all got that...and, really, what else do WE need! I thank you all for that. Only one, though, has admitted that it's a really odd book in many instances. Again, that's probably because we are all Christians and feel like our starting point in discussing the book (and the Book) begins with our faith in its veracity. Also, I'm from a Fundamentalist background, so there's a lot of emphasis on every wording--almost every punctuation mark--as being meant by God to be there. That is, there's not typically a lot of room given to take certain parts of the Bible as allegorical or having a more indirect meaning than you read on the page. I take for granted (incorrectly!) that many of you don't feel that constraint and, therefore, don't stumble as much over Leviticus as I do. Be reassured that at the close of the day, I don't "throw out the baby with the bathwater" where the Bible is concerned just because *I* can't wrap my mind around all its parts. Thank you all for sharing!

Sincerely,

David