Daws, the Early Story of the Navigators, A Review

Dawson Trotman (1906-1956) was the founder of the Navigators, one of the most influential evangelical missionary movements begun in the mid-20th century. Daws: The Story of Dawson Trotman, Founder of the The Navigators, written by Betty Lee Skinner in 1974, tells the story of this man who interacted with some of the leading figures of American evangelical Christianity of the 20th century.

Skinner, who had worked in communications with the Navigators ministry for years, died in 2013, about a year after I started to read this book. My wife and I had decided to visit friends in Colorado, but we took a few days to visit Glen Eyrie, the home of the Navigators, known for its famous castle built by the founder of the city of Colorado Springs, William Jackson Palmer, nestled in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains, next to the Garden of the Gods city park. We arrived at Glen Eyrie less than two weeks after the 2012 Waldo Canyon Fire had devastated several neighborhoods surrounding Colorado Springs. I climbed a ridge at the edge of the Glen Eyrie property and looked over to see hundreds of homes that had been completely wiped out by the fire, which came almost within a mile from the Glen Eyrie property.

It was an eerie setting to begin reading Daws. There was this sense that God protected Glen Eyrie from the fire in much the same way God protected and helped the ministry of the Navigators to flourish in those early years led by the energetic and single-minded Dawson Trotman.

Betty Lee Skinner’s Daws is an inspiring read, about the man who gave the evangelical world great tools for discipleship, like the Wheel Illustration, the Bridge Illustration, and Word Hand Illustration, and the Big Dipper. That man was Dawson Trotman.

 

Daws tells a remarkable story, but the book at just under 400 pages in fairly tight print, is pretty long, which explains why it took me so long to finish the book. Skinner peppers the text with so many names that it is difficult to keep track of who is who (How did Skinner, a close associate with Trotman, keep such detailed records?). All the minutia was a bit too much “TMI” for me (“Too Much Information”). Some twelve years later, I finally made it all the way through the book. For a quicker read, I would recommend Robert D. Foster’s The Navigator for a shorter survey of the life of this remarkable man. But I wanted to tackle Daws to get an in-depth feel for what made this man, Dawson Trotman, tick. Skinner’s attention to detail shows that Dawson Trotman was an amazing human being.

Dawson Trotman grew up in Southern California, becoming a fine athlete, the valedictorian of his high school, and the student body president. But after high school, Trotman floundered. He worked in a lumberyard, where he developed a penchant for gambling, learned how to be a pool shark at the billiard table, and got drunk with his friends more than once.

He had not grown up in much of a Christian family, only going to church every now and then, mostly spurred on by the influence of his mother, but not his father.  Yet his church going did not seem to keep his behavior in line. Even in high school, he had been stealing regularly from the school’s locker fund. He felt terribly guilty about what he had done, but he felt like there was nothing he could do about it.

After high school, after one night of getting drunk and picked up by the police, Dawson slipped away from his friends to attend a church meeting at a nearby Presbyterian church where there was a Scripture memory contest. There he promised to memorize ten Bible verses. He came back to the meeting the following week and he was the only guy who managed to memorize all ten verses.

One of the verses was John 1:12, which he had memorized in the King James Version: “But as many as received him, to them gave the power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.” While walking on his way to work one day, that verse came to mind. It was like the Apostle’s Paul “road to Damascus” experience or Saint Augustine of Hippo’s “tolle lege” moment, “take up and read.” By the time he made it to the lumberyard for his shift, his life trajectory had been set.

Within a few years, Trotman had taken a Bible class taught by legendary evangelist Charles E. Fuller, the future founder of Fuller Theological Seminary, on the Book of Romans and Ephesians. He wanted to give his whole life to full-time Christian work. Trotman developed this principle of learning to find simply one other man he could pour his life into, who could then go on to find another man who could do the same, based on 2 Timothy 2:2.

Scripture memorization was at the heart of such one-on-one encounters.  He had the greatest early success working with Navy sailors aboard the U.S.S. West Virginia. He married a woman he had known from high school who was also a Christian, Lila. They began Bible studies for Navy servicemen in their home. This was how the Navigators ministry was born.

It was a pivotal time between the two world wars. By the time the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in 1841, the Navigators were multiplying all across the Navy, and the Navigator ministry was spreading out among businessmen, nurses, and other groups. The U.S.S. West Virginia was one of first ships attacked at Pearl Harbor, and the Navigator men of that ship were dispersed across other ships in the Navy, inspired by Trotman’s example, replicating this multiplication method of disciple-making taught by Trotman.

Over those decades and even after World War 2, Trotman and other Navigator disciples developed various tools for training men to learn to follow Jesus. The “Wheel illustration” placed the life of “the obedient Christian in action” on the rim of the wheel, with Christ at the center hub, with four spokes supporting the wheel: Prayer, the Word, Witnessing, and “Living the Life” (or Fellowship with other believers). Each component of the wheel had a Bible verse or set of verses to be memorized to go along with the illustration.

The “Bridge illustration” showed a great chasm between two cliff edges. On one cliff edge was the “wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23) and on the other cliff edge was “eternal life” in Christ. The cross of Jesus was placed across the chasm, thereby enabling a person to cross the bridge from death to life. The “Hand illustration” showed a hand grasping the Bible, where each finger represents a principle: the little finger (hearing), the ring finger (reading), the middle finger (studying), the index finger (memorizing), and the thumb (meditation). Many like myself continue to use these tools today.

Reading Daws gives you the story of how these various discipleship principles and illustrations were spread out and copied across divergent Christian ministries of the 20th century.  Evangelist Billy Graham met Trotman and began to use these Navigator principles for follow-up in his crusade meetings. While driving out to California, a young Bill Bright picked up a hitch-hiker, who invited Bright, who was not yet a Christian, to spend his first night at the Navigator home of the Trotmans. Bill Bright would eventually become the founder of Campus Crusade for Christ, now called “CRU.”  Jim Rayburn, the founder of Young Life, became best friends with Dawson Trotman. Henrietta Mears, the highly influential Sunday School leader at Hollywood Presbyterian Church, mentored Trotman. Wycliffe Bible Translators’ Cam Townsend invited Trotman to train his staff in Scripture memory principles. Reading Daws for me was like going through a survey of “Who’s Who” in American 20th century evangelicalism, so wide was the reach of Dawson Trotman.

Dawson Trotman was a man with a singular focus and vision in life. This virtue enabled him to chart a life course and principles which continues to indirectly impact countless people well over a half century later. Yet it is also a characteristic which has not always appealed to others. He was highly disciplined, a quality that served well in the Navigator outreach to Navy personnel. But Daws would publicly call out men who had not memorized their verses at meetings, which spurred some to work harder at it, while alienating others. There is no doubt: Daws was an extroverted perfectionist.

For decades after his death, the personality of Daws could still be felt. When the Navigators tried to extend their outreach towards college students, the regimentation expected did not always suit the college environment that well, and by the late 1980s, the college ministry efforts of the Navigators began to shrink. In my college years, my friends often joked that the Navigators were more rightly called the “Never-Daters,” as they tended to encourage sharper lines in terms of male and female interactions in their ministry efforts. Unlike other ministries like Young Life, CRU, and InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, which all target specific age groups and different communities, the Navigators have tended to ebb and flow in their efforts to target specific communities.

But what Navigators has done and continues to do best, as set forward by Dawson Trotman’s example, is map out an effective strategy for one-on-one Christian disciple making, no matter what the cultural and community context.  Many Christians I have known for years take small note cards or sticky-notes, writing out Scripture verses on them, placing them on kitchen refrigerators, bathroom sinks, and car dashboards, to help with Scripture memorization, an idea taken from the Navigators Topical Memory System, which Dawson Trotman helped to pioneer. The Bridge illustration for sharing one’s faith with another person is an enduring classic still drawn out on paper napkins in coffee houses and restaurants somewhere in the world every day.

The story which Skinner tells about the acquisition of the Glen Eyrie property, for use as the Navigators headquarters, is inspiring on its own. Trotman was absolutely convinced that God wanted the Navigators to have Glen Eyrie, but there was no money for it when the acquisition was first proposed. Setback after setback continually arose in the months prior to the deadline for the sale. Yet at different stages of the process, money would come in just in the nick of time. Disaster loomed just near the closure of the deal, as the entire sum of the money that was raised was accidentally wired to the wrong bank, and the mistake was not uncovered until after the bank had closed for the day. But the owner of the bank was also a Navigators donor, and so he reopened the bank, enabling Trotman to finalize the sale in the last few hours. Trotman’s journey of faith was filled with suspense!!

In 1956, Dawson Trotman was a speaker at Jack Wyrtzen’s Word of Life camp at Schroon Lake, in upstate New York. Four days earlier, Trotman had given his last message to Navigator staff at Glen Eyrie on the Big Dipper illustration, summarizing all of the components of effective Navigator discipleship.

That afternoon at the Word of Life camp, Jack Wyrtzen took Trotman and a few campers on a boat ride to do some water skiing.  At one moment, the boat hit some choppy water, throwing both Trotman and a young female camper into the water. Trotman did his best to save the life of this young woman by holding her up to keep her from drowning, which he did. However, after years of driving a hard schedule, Dawson Trotman was mentally and physically exhausted. So in the process of trying to save the other camper, who apparently did not know how to swim, Trotman himself drowned, thus ending the life of one of American evangelicalism’s most influential leaders.  At his memorial service held at Glen Eyrie, Billy Graham stated that “Daws died the same way he lived—holding others up.”

Daws is also an examination of a much different spiritual climate during the early to mid 20th century. Soul-winning and discipleship making based on Scripture memorization made sense to an American society which was culturally Christian. But Daws rarely, if ever, discusses Christian apologetics, which is now so central to evangelistic work in the 21st century, when so many people have questions about the trustworthiness and clarity of the Bible. The early Navigators work simply assumed that most people they worked with believed the Bible to be true and straight-forwardly interpreted. Trotman never had to deal with the confusion of truth promoted by our current age of social media.

The challenge for discipling people back then among the Navigators was in the realm of application. Today, the cultural climate is a lot more skeptical about the truthfulness of the Christian faith, a step that needs to be addressed before you even get to the application of what the Bible teaches. Furthermore, young people today are looking for authenticity and trustworthiness, in an age when Christians are often viewed with some degree of suspicion. Technology can be both an aid to discipleship, as well as being a distraction undermining discipleship.

In other words, here in the 21st century we simply can not assume that drawing “The Bridge” illustration on a paper napkin while having lunch with an inquiring friend will be enough to woo a non-believer to pursue having a relationship with Jesus. Those days of assuming a biblically literate culture that Dawson Trotman worked in no longer make sense in a pluralistic society which is suspicious of the moral and metaphysical claims of the Christian faith. Human brokenness compound the problem, where many today live lives of isolation and loneliness to a greater degree than in Dawson Trotman’s day. Daws gave us some basic tools to work with, but nearly a century later we need to tweak and refine some of the those tools in order to sensibly connect with people who desperately need to know the Good News of Jesus.

The Navigators today are still a flourishing ministry, though a look at their website can tell you that there is no specific target cultural group or community that the Navigators are trying to reach. The vision is still all about one-on-one discipleship, equipping disciples with tools like Scripture memory, which is the core DNA of what made Dawson Trotman tick.

While Betty Lee Skinner’s Daws is on the rather long side, her book gives interested readers a studied look into the life of one of the great Christian leaders of the 20th century, whose influence continues on into the 21st century.

The follow videos explain several of the most helpful illustrations developed by Dawson Trotman and the early Navigators ministry.


Notes on Leviticus: By Michael Heiser. Part Three

Which parts of the Law of Moses found in the Book of Leviticus are still binding on the Christian today? Christians from diverse traditions debate this most controversial topic. Jonathan Edwards, perhaps America’s greatest theological mind, had this to say:

“There is perhaps no part of divinity attended with so much intricacy, and wherein orthodox divines do so much differ, as stating of the precise agreement and differences between the two dispensations of Moses and Christ.”1

Leviticus is essentially a law book, detailing the specifics of the Old Covenant, which defined the standards for the ancient Israelite community. But what exactly are the elements from that Old Covenant that have been brought forward into New Covenant? And even if particulars of certain Old Covenant regulations from Leviticus are not binding on New Covenant believers, might there still be lessons in Christian obedience to be learned from them today?

Protestant evangelicals are divided on such issues: Is tithing carried forward under the New Covenant?  Does the Bible allow Christians to get tattoos? What about Saturday Sabbath observance? Hebrew Roots Movement enthusiasts bring forward as much from the Old Covenant as they can, even without a standing temple in Jerusalem. Progressive Christians do just the opposite, and jettison as much of the Old Covenant as they can, when certain moral prescriptions are deemed out-of-date. The diversity of such practical applications in interpreting Leviticus can be bewildering.

I came across the teaching of the late Dr. Michael Heiser several years ago, through his Naked Bible Podcast. An expert in Semitic languages and the Old Testament, he did an audio series on the Book of Leviticus, which were transcribed to form the book Notes on Leviticus: From the Naked Bible Podcast. As the author of The Unseen Realm, one of the most groundbreaking books I have read in recent memory, having influence across multiple denominations and Christian traditions, Heiser walks the student of Leviticus through the text in ways that opened up the book for me, with a lens that helps to better understand so many other parts of the Bible. As I have noted at several points, I am not always convinced by Dr. Heiser’s thinking, but he is way far more right than wrong in what he says, and he challenges me to think more deeply on crucial issues concerning the Bible. The tens of thousands of thoughtful Christians who follow Heiser’s YouTube channel surely agree with me.

Heiser’s premise is that Christian readers have often read Leviticus through presuppositions they bring in from their understanding of the New Testament, often confusing things in the process. Alternatively, Heiser proposes that we should learn to read Leviticus from the perspective of an ancient Israelite. What did Leviticus mean to a follower of Yahweh centuries before Jesus came on the scene?

One of the major themes in Leviticus is the concept of atonement. I am publishing this post on Good Friday, which in the Christian calendar commemorates what Jesus accomplished on the cross for us. Many theologians link Good Friday to the concept of atonement, the focus of this final post in this series. But the exact meaning of atonement has stimulated a significant debate among scholars: What does it mean to say that Jesus died for our sins?

On the late Michael Heiser’s Naked Bible Podcast, this Old Testament scholar brings out important highlights, accessible to everyday Christians, who want to have a better grasp on Leviticus, one of the least studied, least understood, and least read books in the Old Testament.

Continue reading


CAMBRIDGE HOUSE: Spring Public Lecture, Next Wednesday, April 23rd, 7pm

Come on out next week for the annual spring lecture sponsored by the Cambridge House, the Christian study center near the campus of the College of William & Mary.  Cambridge House is about fostering dialogue about the historically orthodox Christian faith within the campus academic community, offering hospitality to students, faculty, staff, and friends of the study center in the Williamsburg area.

But I Meant Well: Unlearning Colonial Ways of Doing Good
Wednesday, April 23rd   |   7 PM   |   Ewell Hall, Room 107
Our spring lecture, “But I Meant Well: Unlearning Colonial Ways of Doing Good,” will be presented by Dr. Jim Thomas at Ewell Hall.

Jim has worked as an epidemiologist and ethicist in more than 40 countries. As a social epidemiologist, he studied how social forces, such as mass incarceration, shape the distribution of health outcomes in a community. As an ethicist, he was the principle author of the first American public health code of ethics and now advises other countries as they write their codes. While in Ghana to coordinate with the World Health Organization on data collection following an Ebola epidemic, he visited Elmina Fort. Elmina is where Africans were enslaved and held to be put on ships to the Americas. Seeing a church in Elmina was a shock to Jim’s Christian faith. On Wednesday, April 23rd, he will talk about how he processed that shock over the following years and how it affects his international work now.

Jim is an Emeritus Professor of Epidemiology in the Gillings School of Global Public Health at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. Additionally, he serves as an Adjunct Professor at the French École des Hautes Études en Santé Publique.

If you can come, take a minute and RSVP, so that we can have a semi-accurate head count!  See you next Wednesday!


Notes on Leviticus: By Michael Heiser. Part Two

A popular online video makes the rounds every now and then with a clip from The West Wing, a political drama television series broadcast from 1999 to 2006. It features a scene where the President of the United States, played by the actor Martin Sheen, has an interaction with either a Jewish or Christian call-in show host, with a PhD, where they have some back and forth regarding the interpretation of the Book of Leviticus, and a few other passages describing particulars of Old Testament Law.

The scene dramatizes a heightened conflict, concerning the instruction in Leviticus 18:22 prohibiting same-sex relations. The President challenges the doctor by quoting select verses, such as Exodus 35:2, which prescribes the death penalty for those who violate the Sabbath. Then there is Leviticus 11:7-8, which forbids an Israelite from touching the dead skin of a pig. Would someone playing football be required to wear gloves to avoid becoming unclean? What about Leviticus 19:19, which forbids planting two different kinds of crops within the same field, and wearing different kinds of fabric in their clothing?

The message of The West Wing video connects with many in our culture today, appealing to both non-believers and progressive Christians alike, who find the regulations described in the Book of Leviticus to be baffling, to say the least, if not overly harsh and rigid. At least on an emotional level, it is difficult to parse out why a prohibition against same-sex relations would be mixed in with odd requirements about not wearing two types of clothing (Leviticus 19:19). If historically-orthodox Christians seem so adamant about defending a definition of marriage restricted to one man and one woman for one lifetime, why is it that they seem so casual about wearing clothing made up of both cotton and polyester, when Leviticus addresses both subjects with disapproval?

Such a posture comes across to many critics today as needlessly judgmental, hypocritical, and not very loving. As a result, many progressive Christians (though not all) would rather lump the Levitical prohibition against same-sex acts in with instructions about not planting two different kinds of crops within the same field: Dismiss both of them!

The non-believer would go further and dismiss the whole Bible as a muddle of contradictions, an outdated moral system stuck in the Late Bronze age. Either way, the conclusion drawn by such critics and skeptics is the same: the regulations in Leviticus as a whole are a bunch of nonsense and no longer apply in today’s world. Get your morality from somewhere else other than Leviticus.

On the late Michael Heiser’s Naked Bible Podcast, this Old Testament scholar brings out important highlights, accessible to everyday Christians, who want to have a better grasp on Leviticus, one of the least studied, least understood, and least read books in the Old Testament.

 

Leviticus: An Outdated Relic from the Late Bronze Age?

Frankly, there are many conservative Christians, who while not being persuaded by such an impactful rhetorical argument, simply would not know how to respond to this kind of message. Disagreements between such progressive Christians and non-believers on the one side, and conservative and even moderate Christians on the other, are indeed very difficult to resolve. Is there any way to make sense of Leviticus? What would it have meant to an ancient Israelite many hundreds of years ago? Is there any kind of sensible application to make today for Christians? Or to put it bluntly: Are historically orthodox Christians really hopeless bigots?

I took the time to listen to Dr. Michael Heiser‘s Naked Bible Podcast series, covering the Book of Leviticus. I was surprised to learn that there are indeed ways in which scholars have been able to parse through such difficult texts, and make sense of them. Heiser’s teaching, where the transcripts of these podcasts have been put into book form, Notes on Leviticus: from the Naked Bible Podcast, while not a full-blown verse-by-verse analysis of every sentence in Leviticus, it nevertheless is an in-depth treatment of the Levitical system, exploring the logic of what is what in Leviticus, and what continues to be applicable today (and how) in a New Testament context, and what does not. While not every question I had in mind was answered, I gained a much better perspective as to how the Bible can be read within its historical, cultural context.

 

The Difference Between Ritual Impurity and Moral Impurity, in the Old Testament Jewish Mindset

In the previous post in this series, I reflected on Heiser’s teaching regarding “sacred space,” and the distinction between ritual impurity and moral impurity, despite the fact that both concepts of impurity often share the same language of “clean versus unclean.” Ritual impurities are simply things that happen in the normal course of life, and therefore, are not sinful, whereas moral impurities do qualify as sin, in the New Testament sense. The tabernacle/temple idea in Old Testament Judaism is about defining an area of “sacred space,” where God dwells. For someone to enter this “sacred space,” one needs to be fit to enter it, cleansed from both ritual and moral impurity.

One may easily see that the prohibition against same-sex relations is an example of a moral purity regulation as it is associated with the language of “abomination” (Leviticus 18:22). But it is difficult to understand how this relates to commands about mixtures in Leviticus 19:19, just one chapter later:

“You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material.”

A similar passage is found in Deuteronomy 22:9-11. The New Testament is silent about the Leviticus regulations on mixtures. Some scholars argue that since the prohibition against same-sex relations is repeated in the New Testament (1 Cor 6:9-10, Romans 1:26-27), and that the commands against mixtures are not repeated in the New Testament, that the prohibition against same-sex relations is applicable for Christians today but that the commands against mixtures are not. While there is strength to this argument, it does not help us much in understanding why these commands are different from one another. If the commands against mixtures are not related to moral impurity, what about them makes them related to ritual impurity? What is the logic behind both of these regulations: the one concerning homosexual practice and the commands against mixtures?

With respect to homosexuality, it can be easily established that male same-sex relations can imply a role and power imbalance, where one sexual partner dominates and penetrates the other. Outside of ancient Israel, same-sex relations were allowed, with caveats. Heiser notes that same-sex relations were still looked down, but in general, they were not severely punished, in comparison with what is described in the Old Testament. Outside of Israel, homosexual rape was condemned in certain cultures. However, pederasty, where Greek adult men would have sexual relations with younger men, was used as a method of training in the art of war. In this context, homosexual activity was not condemned. Israel was the exception in that all same-sex relations were condemned (Heiser, p. 231ff).

In citing the Jewish Old Testament scholar, Jacob Milgrom, Heiser concludes that homosexual practice goes against the creation order, in that it removes the possibility for procreation. While procreation is not the sole purpose of sex, as texts like the Song of Solomon celebrate human sexuality without reference to procreation, homosexual practice takes the procreative act out of sexual expression. Since the God of Israel is a God of life, to deny procreation from an Old Testament standpoint runs against God’s purposes for human sexuality.

The omission of any reference to lesbianism in the Old Testament is curious. Nevertheless, Paul’s inclusion of a prohibition against lesbian sexual expression in Romans 1:26-27 shows a parallel to male-male sexual relations. As Heiser summarizes:

These passages are not written so that space is devoted to being mean. They’re written to reinforce a worldview that elevated the production of and care for human life” (Heiser, p. 237).1

The commands which restrict mixtures in Leviticus,about wearing different types of clothing, planting different types of seed in a field, etc., are even more perplexing. Centuries later, in the time of David, the Bible mentions mules, which are bred with a mixture of horse and donkey (1 Kings 1:45-47). But the Bible never has anything negative to say about mules. So, how does a student of Scripture make sense of all of this? Thankfully, recent scholarship, particularly from the eminent Jewish scholar, Jacob Milgrom, which Michael Heiser relates to the reader/listener, can help to sort things out.

Continue reading


Notes On Leviticus: By Michael Heiser, Part One

It is said that the Book of Leviticus is where Bible reading plans typically die. You start off reading Genesis and then Exodus, as they are filled with compelling narratives. True, reading the genealogies can be slow going and the precise details about the tabernacle in Exodus can drag along. But the next book in order, Leviticus, is where people often get stuck and give up: Page after page of offering procedures and bloody sacrifices with bulls and goats. Not only does it seem repetitive, it sounds downright gross to modern readers.

Let us be honest. Leviticus can be a real sleeper….. ZZZZZZZZZ……

I have read through Leviticus several times, but I must confess that I have tended to skim read it. As a Christian, it is very easy to be dismissive of Leviticus, with all of its gory details, and multiple uncomfortable references to blood and semen. After all, the atoning work of Jesus on the cross has made the Levitical sacrificial system unnecessary. Jesus took care of everything. Next topic, please!

On the late Michael Heiser’s Naked Bible Podcast, this Old Testament scholar brings out important highlights, accessible to everyday Christians, who want to have a better grasp on Leviticus, one of the least studied, least understood, and least read books in the Old Testament.

 

Diving Into Leviticus…. and Really Learning Something!

Unfortunately, this all too common attitude towards Leviticus robs us from having a better understanding as to what the Levitical system was all about, according to the late Dr. Michael Heiser, an evangelical Old Testament scholar who has been very popular on YouTube, who sadly died of cancer in 2023. For Michael Heiser, it is very tempting to simply read Leviticus through the New Testament lens of Jesus’ atoning work on the cross, and conclude that Leviticus has no more relevance for the New Testament Christian. This would be a mistake.

Michael Heiser, on the other hand, wants us to get the ancient Israelite way of thinking into our heads. By understanding what Leviticus meant in its original context, we get a better sense of how the death of Jesus on the cross actually works for the Christian believer. Early on in his Naked Bible Podcast series, Heiser did a detailed study of Leviticus where the book simply came alive to me for the first time (A YouTube audio version is found here, in three parts: #1, #2, #3). This Naked Bible Podcast book study was transcribed and released in book form as Notes on Leviticus: From the Naked Bible Podcast.

Wow. Was I missing a lot of powerful stuff when I basically did a skim read of Leviticus!!

There is so much here, that I added two additional blog posts (the second, and the third) to this current exploration of Leviticus, following Michael Heiser’s Notes on Leviticus: From the Naked Bible Podcast.

One mistake that Christians often make about Leviticus is in thinking that the Levitical system is all about the atonement for sin, for the ancient Israelites. Unfortunately, this assumption is simply not true. While there is quite a bit in Leviticus about atoning for sin, there are a lot of details about offerings and sacrifices that have nothing to do with dealing with sin.

 

Atonement: Clean Versus Unclean?

If you are a bit skeptical, as I was when I first read Heiser, then consider Leviticus 8:15. There we have the altar being cleansed and “atoned” for. But it would be really odd to conclude that the altar had somehow “sinned” and that this required the altar to be atoned for in some way. Human beings sin but inanimate objects do not.

Heiser observes that the Hebrew word for “atonement” has a broad range of possible meanings, but that in general, atonement had to do with “purging,” or “decontamination.” Sin can indeed contaminate something, but ritual impurity could also contaminate, creating a situation which required a purging and/or decontamination, without necessarily implying some moral quality to it. This explains why inanimate objects, like an altar, or even walls on a house becoming infected with some type of mold or mildew (see Leviticus 14:33-53), can become ritually unclean, thereby requiring atonement in order to decontaminate the object.

Another set of verses right next to one another illustrates how confusing this can be:

“You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness while she is in her menstrual uncleanness. And you shall not lie sexually with your neighbor’s wife and so make yourself unclean with her” (Leviticus 18:19-20 ESV)

 

The second verse seems pretty straight forward in condemning adultery as sin. But what about the first verse? If a husband has sexual relations with his wife, while she is having her period, is this really a sin? Both verses talk about being “unclean.” So, what on earth is going on here?

 

Unlocking Leviticus: The Concept of Sacred Space

Heiser brings out the best of modern scholarship to observe that Leviticus makes an important distinction between moral purity and ritual purity. The former addresses what we would call “sin.” The latter deals with what an Israelite needed to do before entering “sacred space.” But the latter was not meant to deal with any particular sin, or sin in general. The tabernacle in the wilderness, and later with the temple in Jerusalem, was considered to be the sacred space where God dwells with his people. Because God was a holy God, it would be a dangerous affair to try to enter sacred space if one possessed ritual impurity.

This concept of “sacred space” can be a difficult idea to grasp for many modern, evangelically-minded Christians. The idea that one needs to be fit in order to enter sacred space saturates the thought world presented in the Book of Leviticus. You can get a sense of this in certain liturgical, historically-conscious Christian traditions, such as when one visits some of the great Christian cathedrals in Europe. The awe inspiring architecture of these majestic buildings, which rise above the neighboring landscape in many European towns and cities, is meant to draw a distinction between that which is common, normal everyday space, and the sacred space of entering a house of prayer and worship. Men are encouraged to take off their hats when entering a great Christian cathedral and women are discouraged from wearing skirts that are too short. Why? Because entering a worship area like this was designed to mirror what it might have been like for an Israelite to approach the sacred space of the tabernacle or the temple.

This is quite a different feel from entering many contemporary evangelical churches today, where people typically think of a church building as not much different from any other ordinary building, where people feel the casual freedom to bring their mugs of coffee into the worship room, something which still seems awkward to do when entering a great European church cathedral. Granted, things like whether or not to wear shorts to a church worship service are more about cultural concerns and not Scriptural concerns.

Still, having a sense of how we present ourselves in a worship setting can help the Christian to somehow imagine how it might have felt for Moses to approach the burning bush, where a voice beckons from the bush: “Moses… Do not come near; take your sandals off your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Exodus 3:4-6). If someone can capture this idea of “sacred space” in their mind, it can greatly aid in one’s understanding of something so foreign as the Book of Leviticus.

Like the concept of “sacred space,” ritual impurity is a conceptually intricate category which seems very foreign to modern peoples today, having to do with such things as reproductive fluids, like blood, which symbolizes life. So if a woman gave birth to a child, she would become ritually impure. For another example, in certain cases if you touched a dead person, that would make you ritually impure. Back to Leviticus 18:19, a woman in menstruation, as explained in further detail in Leviticus 15:19-24 where there is a release of blood, is in a ritually impure condition. Because the Old Testament taught respect for life, you could not bring death into God’s sacred space. In all of these examples, Leviticus provides a way of cleansing so that a person can become pure again, in the ritual sense.

But what is important to emphasize is that ritual impurity per se has nothing to do with a person’s sin. Giving birth to a child (Leviticus 12:1-8), a menstrual cycle, or touching a dead person (Numbers 19:10-22) are simply things that are part of normal human experience. Furthermore, having a certain kind of skin disease (Leviticus 13:1-14:32) can also make someone ritually unclean, but having a skin disease does not necessarily imply sin. None of these events describe any particular sin committed by a person at all. Nevertheless, one can not enter sacred space where God dwells without becoming ritually clean.

The closest thing relevant to contemporary life might be the taboo against eating food inside a restroom. Even modern people think that such activity would be regarded as unclean. In my mind at least, that does sound a bit gross. Likewise, the Levitical system in ancient Israel had serious concerns about ritual uncleanliness when someone sought to enter God’s presence, his sacred space, in the tabernacle (or later on in the Jerusalem temple).

Continue reading