Leviticus and Deuteronomy

One of the bonuses of doing biblical research is that you get to learn all manner of interesting things that you might not have learnt otherwise, especially about parts of the bible that you don’t normally find yourself in. For example, Leviticus is usually the book where the bold plans many Christians have of reading the whole bible come grinding (or crashing) to a halt. Chapter upon chapter of laws about cleanliness and animal sacrifice is on a par with the genealogies at the beginning of Numbers and 1 Chronicles – they tend to put modern readers to sleep as they lack the features of stories that we are used to. Deuteronomy has the problem of being more or less a repetition of what has already been said in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers (much like 1-2 Chronicles is a repetition of 1-2 Samuel and 1-2 Kings). So all in all, Leviticus and Deuteronomy are unlikely to be anyone’s favourite biblical book (but if they are, let me know).

However, throughout the course of my research I have found myself developing an increased respect for these two Old Testament law books. You may ask why I am spending any time in them at all considering I am doing my phd on blessing in Luke’s Gospel (which is in the New Testament, not the Old) and you would be right to do so. At face value there doesn’t seem to be much connection between them at all. But if there is one thing to know about the phd research journey, it is that it leads you into strange places that you might never have thought to end up. One of those places I have ended up is the books of the Torah, particularly Leviticus and Deuteronomy because they have a lot to say about blessing which I can’t ignore.

When I was an undergraduate student, I did an introductory course on the Old Testament and first up was the Torah – Genesis through to Deuteronomy. It was in this course that I learned (briefly) about the documentary hypothesis which argues that there are four main sources to the Torah. These four sources are called J (Yahwist), E (Elohist), D (Deuteronomist) and P (Priestly) and refer to sections of the text which have different emphasises. I am no expert on their hypothesis but recently I have been re-introduced to it so I know some of the details. For example, the Deuteronomist (D) is found mainly in Deuteronomy and anywhere else the sort of themes and ideas found there come up. Leviticus is made up of mainly priestly (P) material. The first 16 chapters focus on the duties of the priests which chapters 17-27 focus on holiness and are often seen as a distinct course called the Holiness Code (H). Most scholars see strands or influences of these four sources throughout the Torah. Most of these sources are considered to have originated many centuries after the entry in to the land. Since my undergraduate studies, I have considered this to be the majority opinion among scholars. 

The reason I reason I remembered the documentary hypothesis (despite not doing any other in depth study in the Torah) is that disciplines like redaction (tracing how a document has been edited over its history) and source (trying to discover a document’s sources) criticism have never really appealed to me. I find that so much time is spent arguing over the possible sources or the history of a text that the text itself may be ignored or not given the depth of treatment that I think it should. The documentary hypothesis theory stuck with me because I disagree with its focus on the sources rather than what the text is saying.

So when I came to look at scholarly opinion of the dating and authorship of Deuteronomy and Leviticus, I was surprised to find that there are still scholars who argue that Moses was responsible for, not all but considerable portions of, Leviticus and especially Deuteronomy. After all, Deuteronomy itself claims to have been written by Moses (Deut 1:1) and Leviticus to be the words of Moses (Lev 1:1-2). Others argue that the traditions behind both books have to be traced back to Moses even if the actual words on the page might not exactly what he said. There was I expecting to find long explanations of the documentary hypothesis. I am glad I was wrong about that.

Now, these scholars who argue for either Mosaic authorship or Mosaic tradition behind these books do not deny that the books have been edited and changed throughout their history. It is hard not to. One only has to read the last chapter of Deuteronomy (chapter 34) to discover that Moses could not have written an account of his own death. That would be asking too much of anyone. So someone else has at least come along and added such important details as that to Deuteronomy. The same is likely to be the case for Leviticus as well.

Part of the reason I was looking into questions of authorship is because I wanted to figure out which of the two books was written first. Both have a chapter dedicated to rewards and punishments for covenant obedience and disobedience (Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28) and I was looking into which one may have been written first to see if the later could have used the earlier in writing this chapter. So, when were these two books likely written?

If Moses was the author then Leviticus was likely written first as the laws written in it were likely given not long after the events of the Sinai (according to the Torah’s internal chronology where Leviticus is placed before Deuteronomy). Deuteronomy recounts the final speeches of Moses to the Israelites before they cross the Jordan into the land, an event that happened at least 40 years after Sinai.

Interestingly, even without the arguments for Mosaic authorship, Leviticus is still more likely to have reached to form we have it in today before Deuteronomy. There are solid arguments that Leviticus was finished before the exile of Israel and Judah in the 8th and 7th centuries BC. Not the least is the fact that the prophet Ezekiel (a prophet of the exile) appears to allude to material from it on several occasions (Ezek 20:11; 22:26; 34) and that there is no focus on issues that were important after the exile. For example, there is no focus on the problem of foreign wives which plagued the returnees (Ezra 9-10; Neh 13:23-31). For these reasons it is possible to argue that some of the material in Leviticus goes back to Moses who may have written down most of it and that is reached its current form in the 8th or 7th century BC.

Deuteronomy’s history is a little more drawn out. It is highly likely that Deuteronomy is the book of the law found by the priests during the reign of Josiah (2 Kings 22). It may have been present in the tabernacle and temple since the time of Moses as Deuteronomy itself contains commands to keep a copy of the book of the law with the ark of the covenant (Deut 31:24-26). This could be the case if Deuteronomy is this book of the law and it was placed in the tabernacle before crossing the Jordan. Unlike Leviticus, the history of Deuteronomy continues from the reign of Josiah through to the return from exile in the 6th century when it is most likely that it reached the form in which it exists today. This places the final form of Deuteronomy about 2 centuries after Leviticus.

This exploration shows how even a study into some of the most ignored books of the Old Testament can produce fascinating insights (at least for me). No matter how the dating of Leviticus and Deuteronomy is approached, Leviticus comes out as the first written and completed. 

So if there is any dependency between the two books (which was the original questions I was researching), it is going to be of Deuteronomy on Leviticus. However, in the case of the rewards and punishments in Lev 26 and Deut 28, there is no dependency of one on the other. Instead, both use an ancient treaty form to write their own lists of covenant rewards and punishments but more on that some other time.