rclende at lifeway.com
Tue Dec 21 10:23:59 EST 1999
Ray Clendenen at BSSBNOTES
12/21/99 09:23 AM
>to the biblical text as it stands, not only was the cult already
>centralized when Lev. 17 was written, but Israel was living at the time
>surrounding the sanctuary.
This should of course indicate that Lev. (at least 17) was written in Judea
around the sanctuary at Jerusalem.
Not unless you presuppose this contrary to the text, in which the word
"indicate" would not be appropriate.
>If this was actually the case, this would
>explain why profane slaughter could be forbidden, since it could all be
>done at the sanctuary. Deuteronomy was written in preparation for entry
>into the land when the tribes would be dispersed.
I don't think you would really want to argue this strenuously. Take a look
at the move to centralize the cultus in Deut18:6-8. Clearly we are dealing
with the situation of living in Judea, having the smaller shrines around
Jerusalem and providing a means for the Levites to come to Jerusalem from
the towns with the smaller shrines. This would be well after the
hypothetical entry into the promised land.
There is no indication in Deut 18:6-8 that the purpose of the text is "to
centralize the cultus." Nor is any suggestion given of a time frame "well
after the...entry into the promised land."
>This is why Deut. would
>change the law for animal slaughter. In the historical context within
>the Pentateuch is written, the point of Deut 12 is not the institution of
>centralized cult but the maintaining of it in the face of Canaanite
And why can't the Deut material be earlier, ie that the other stuff marks
If we discount the historical framework in which the laws are set in the
Pentateuch and substitute an alternative account, then we could set the
Deut material anywhere we want.
More information about the b-hebrew