The structure of Leviticus

By Roland Elliott 2019

Abstract: Despite a general consensus that Leviticus is well-structured, there is little agreement
on the details of this structure. Some proposals fail to adequately account for the “difficult”
parts of the book, while others attempt to fit it into an insufficiently motivated presupposition
about structure or themes. Nevertheless, most, if not all, proposals make valid insights that are
worth preserving. In this paper, I propose a fresh account of the “double-chiastic” structure of
Leviticus, based on an inductive study of organizational markers found within the book itself,
with the aim of combining the valuable insights of existing proposals while avoiding their
pitfalls.

Introduction
There is a general consensus that Leviticus is a well-structured book, but the details of that
structure do not enjoy anywhere near the same level of agreement. Indeed, with little
exaggeration we could say that there are as many proposed structures as there are commentators.
Walton (2001) has the following to say on this:

It is not difficult to understand how this state of affairs came to be. While the major
sections are clearly enough delineated, some of these sections, such as the story of the
blasphemer in chap. 24, seemingly defy any attempt to identify a cohesive logic.
Chapter 23 on the festivals is also often seen as isolated… and chap. 27 is almost
unanimously treated as an add-on appendix. When I teach Pentateuch each year and
ask my students to produce a one-page paper on the structural design of each book, it is
Leviticus that frustrates and baffles them.

In what follows, we will propose a structure of Leviticus that attempts to combine insights from
previous proposals while avoiding their pitfalls. We will begin by surveying existing proposals,
in order to familiarize ourselves with the trends they exhibit and the content of the book. Then,
using this context, we will outline our own proposal in detail, which proceeds inductively from a
study of the high-level organizational features found in the final form of Leviticus. As we will
see, Leviticus is made up of two large chiastic sub-substructures, each of which spans multiple
chapters, and which can help us make sense of the thorny sections mentioned by Walton.

Existing proposals
At the highest level we can distinguish between linear and concentric proposals for the structures
of Leviticus. On a linear structure, Leviticus is understood as addressing various topics relevant
to Israel since God began living among them, or as a logical progression of regulations and
events that build upon one another. On a concentric structure, it is rather understood as being
built around a central section as the thematic focal point.

Starting with linear structures, Hartley (1992) proposes a six-part division based on explicit
markers in the text that seem to indicate distinct sections: chs. 1–7 and 27 are distinguished as
separate sections by the presence of clear introductions and conclusions; chs. 8–10 are
distinguished from what comes before and after by their narrative genre; the distinctive address
to Moses and Aaron (which occurs only in 11:1, 13:1, 14:33, 15:1) and the common subject
matter distinguish chs. 11–15; the Day of Atonement is bookended by a narrative introduction
(16:1) and concluding calendrical material (16:29–34a). Chs. 17–26, however, are kept as one
unit because this section “lacks the structural signals that mark off the other divisions” (1992,
xxxiv). This is a perplexing statement, since this section has markers just like those identified by
Hartley elsewhere, such as common subject matter (chs. 18–20), explicit introductions with
conclusions (23:1–2 with 23:44, and 25:1 with 26:46), and changes in who is addressed (a point
to which we will return shortly).

For Hartley, then, Leviticus is structured in six sections, which relate to one another in a logical
progression. The first three sections present the regulations for offerings (chs. 1–7), the
ordination of the first priests and the consequent setting of the cult into operation (chs. 8–10),
and the laws of ritual purity (chs. 11–15, cf. 10:10–11). These culminate in the fourth section, the
Day of Atonement (ch. 16), which also forms the basis for transitioning to the topic of holy
living in the next section (chs. 17–26), and an appendix on voluntary gifts and offerings (ch. 27).
Despite it not being structurally central, Hartley notes that the Day of Atonement is the keystone
of Leviticus, connecting the operation of the cult with laws on holy living.

The rationale for the ordering of the sections, the centrality of the Day of Atonement, and the
shift in emphasis after the Day of Atonement are particularly enlightening observations. But as
we have already noted, grouping chs. 17–26 into a single section is ill-motivated. And likewise
for the classification of ch. 27 as an appendix, which Hartley argues for as follows:

The sixth division, on vows, voluntary gifts, and tithes (chap. 27), is an appendix.
Since such gifts are voluntary, it is appropriate that the regulation for them come at the
end of the book, for all that precedes is mandatory. From the theological perspective, a
holy life moves a person to be generous. (1992, xxxv)

However, it cannot be their voluntariness that connects these regulations, since the procedures
firstborn animals (27:27–27) and tithing (27:30–33) are mandatory.
Wenham (1979) proposes a linear structure similar to Hartley’s, but with four sections: the laws
on offerings (chs. 1–7), the institution of priesthood (chs. 8–10), uncleanness and its treatment
(chs. 11–16), and prescriptions for practical holiness (chs. 17–26, with ch. 27 being an
appendix). He also recognizes a shift in focus halfway through the book, with the first sixteen
chapters focusing on Israel’s priestly duties and the remaining chapters focusing on their national
holiness (1979, Kindle locations 77–81).

Hill (2000) likewise sees four sections, but they differ quite significantly from Wenham. Hill sees
the first section as dealing with approaching a holy God (chs. 1–10), the second as dealing with
living in the presence of a holy God (chs. 11–25), the third as dealing with covenant blessings
and curses (ch. 26), and the fourth as an appendix dealing with laws about vows and gifts
(ch. 27). The first two sections are further divided into chs. 1–7 and 8–10, and chs. 11–15 and
16–25 respectively. This distinction between approaching God and living in his presence
provides a helpful way of characterizing the high-level progression in the book. Both Hartley and
Wenham characterize this progression by the content of the laws in either half (from cultic/
priestly operation to national holiness), but Hill’s characterization shows us some reason for the
progression: once Israel are able to approach God properly they can begin to live in his holy
presence. It is surprising, however, that Hill sees the transition between these two halves
occurring in chs. 10 and 11 rather than chs. 16 and 17. After all, the concern for approaching the
tabernacle is clearly found in the purity laws in chs. 11–15 (12:4, 13:46, 15:31), and it forms the
introduction of the Day of Atonement (16:1–3).

Sklar (2014) proposes a linear structure with eight sections. First, there are the laws on offerings
(chs. 1–7), which are then put into action with the beginning of public worship at the tabernacle
(chs. 8–10). In light of the access to God at the tabernacle, the priests were to teach the people
about when they could and could not approach the tabernacle, lest they defile it with their ritual
impurity, and so the next section deals with the causes and treatment of ritual impurity (chs. 11–
15). In light of the danger of defiling the tabernacle, the Day of Atonement is introduced as an
annual mechanism for atoning the tabernacle and the people (ch. 16). The laws on slaughtering
and eating of animals and the proper use of their blood (ch. 17) serve as a transition between
chs. 1–16 and 18–20, by dealing with similar topics like the former, and prohibiting illicit cultic
practice like the latter. This leads to laws on living as God’s holy people, distinct from the other
nations (chs. 18–20), and then to laws on showing reverence to God’s holy things and times
(chs. 21–24). Finally, the book ends with laws anticipating the life that Israel will have in the
promised land (chs. 25–27). Notably, Sklar does not see ch. 27 as an appendix, instead seeing a
single chiastic structure spanning all of chs. 25–27.

The final linear structure we will consider is proposed by Walton (2001). Instead of summarizing
the content in an outline (as the above proposals do), he suggests that Leviticus is structured in
terms of movement through zones of sacred space, sacred status, and sacred time. At the highest
level, chs. 1–23 deal with equilibrium between God and Israel (divine equilibrium), whereas
chs. 24–27 deal with equilibrium within Israel itself (human equilibrium). The first part starts in
the central zone where offerings are given (chs. 1–7) and move outward through the priestly
enclosure zone (chs. 8–10) to the entire camp (chs. 11–15). The Day of Atonement resets the
equilibrium for the entire nation, and involves going all the way to the core in the Holy of Holies
and removing the uncleanness from the camp (ch. 16), and then finally there is the matter of
when things outside the camp should be brought inside (ch. 17). Having dealt with sacred space,
Leviticus then turns to sacred status, and moves inward from the camp as a whole (chs. 18–20)
through the priestly enclosure (chs. 21–22a) to the central zone again (ch. 22b). Sacred time is
then discussed in the form of annual festivals (ch. 23). The second part, about human
equilibrium, also deals with the sacred space in the center zone (ch. 24a), sacred status with the
scene of the blasphemer (ch. 24b), and sacred time with the Sabbath and Jubilee years (ch. 25).
Next it deals with God’s prerogative for maintaining or disrupting the equilibrium with the
covenant blessings and curses (ch. 26), and the book ends with how things move through the
zones when being redeemed from God (ch. 27).

Like Sklar, Walton does not relegate ch. 27 to an appendix, and the recognition of multiple zones
of holiness seems to be confirmed by the leprosy purification process. 1 However, the
assignments of sections of Leviticus to parts of the conceptual framework seems tenuous at
times. The laws for offerings (chs. 1–7) are not more central than the ordination of the priests
(chs. 8–10), since both happen at the entrance of the tabernacle (cf. 1:3, 3:2, 4:4 with 8:3, 8:35)
with a priest occasionally entering (cf. 4:7, 6:30 with 9:30). (It seems more natural, therefore, to
explain the progression of sections in chs. 1–16 as we saw in previous proposals.) The temple
rites in 24:1–9 have more to do with covenantal status than space, and as we will see below the
Sabbath and Jubilee years in ch.25 have more to do with possessions than with time. Finally,
chs. 18–20 have as much to do with space as with status (cf. 18:2, 24–25, 20:22), which suggests
that these categories do not underly the structure of the book.

Turning to concentric structures, we said that these are built around a central section as a focal
point for Leviticus, with other sections being added around it. Concentric structures are
commonplace throughout the Old Testament, so it should not surprise us to find Leviticus
structured in this way. However, each of the proposals we will consider succumb to the same

1This process starts with something like a miniature day of atonement outside the camp (14:1–
8a), after which the leper can re-enter the camp but cannot approach the tabernacle (14:8b–9).
Then, after eight days they go to the tabernacle to do all the necessary offerings (14:10–20).
Thus, this process recognizes at least three concentric zones within the structure of the camp.
pitfall: in order to fit their structures they need to divide Leviticus in ways that seem to ignore the
divisions suggested by the text, and connect sections via themes that do not always do justice to
the text’s main emphases.

Milgrom (2004) repeats the ring structure originally proposed by Douglas (1995), which sees
Leviticus start and end in the same thematic place with ch. 19 acting as a central turning point
mirrored in ch. 26.2 The former deals with equity between people, while the latter deals with
equity between God and people. Moving outward from the center are sections dealing with
sexual prohibitions (chs. 18 and 20), chiastic sections dealing with blemishes in animals and
priests, leprous and other sources of impurity, and holy days (chs. 11–16 and 21–23), narrative
sections about defilement of the tabernacle (ch. 10) and of God’s name (ch. 24), and the outer
pair of sections dealing with the holy offerings (chs. 1–9) and the holy land (ch. 25). As
mentioned, ch. 26 is the logical ending of the book and on the “opposite side” of the ring to
ch. 19.

Regarding the remaining two chapters, ch. 17 isn’t part of the concentric structure, but acts as a
bridge between the two parts of Leviticus (chs. 1–16 and 18–27). And ch. 27 is appended after
the logical ending in order to complete the ring structure by returning to the theme of the
beginning, namely holy things offered to God. Unfortunately, this proposal makes some tenuous
connections in order to fit Leviticus into its envisioned structure. The issue of defilement is
ubiquitous in Leviticus, leaving nothing distinctive to relate ch. 10 with ch. 24 other than their
shared narrative genre. Furthermore, the narrative of ch. 10 actually begins in ch. 8, and when
seen as one section it clearly deals with the installment of the priesthood rather than the
defilement of the tabernacle. Though ch. 16 has a calendrical note in its conclusion, its focus is
the ultimate cleansing of the nation and tabernacle rather than the celebration of annual holy days
as such (which is a theme unique to ch. 23). Additionally, chs/ 1–9 and ch. 25 are only connected
in that they deal with “holy things,” which again is ubiquitous in Leviticus. Moreover, the fact
that ch. 17 (and the first half of ch. 24) has no real place in the structure indicates that this
proposal is missing something important.

Kline (2015) proposes an intricate concentric structure which also places ch. 19 centrally, with
eighteen sections around it.3 Together these form a multi-layered chiasm, exhibiting related
structural features along multiple dimensions. Space does not permit us to give a detailed
overview of this proposal, but we can note that it is subject to the same two pitfalls as Milgrom’s.

2 We associate this proposal primarily with Milgrom because Douglas has since proposed a linear
structure not covered in this paper (1999).
3 This is a development of an earlier proposal from Kline along the same lines (2006).
For example, the proposal connects ch. 12 with 22:26–33 on the basis of shared themes of birth
and the mention of seven days followed by an eighth. But this misses the points of each passage:
the former (like the rest of chs. 11–15) focuses on the process of purification and the avoidance
of profaning holy things, whereas the latter (like the rest of 22:17–30) is concerned with when an
animal is acceptable to be brought as an offering.

Moreover, as with ch. 17 in Milgrom’s proposal, chs. 13–15 do not fit the concentric structure
covering the rest of the book, but need to be justified separately. Kline does so by interpreting the
structure as an analogy for the high priest’s experience on the Day of Atonement, moving into
and out of the inner sanctum of the tabernacle. “In order to enter the inner sanctum, the high
priest/reader must move aside the screen that hides it (cf. Lev 16:2, 12), represented by [Lev 13–
15]. This unit deals with impurities that are forbidden in the holy precincts.” (2015, 256) Kline is
to be commended for taking seriously the incompleteness of his concentric structure, but his
proposed fix is problematic for at least three reasons. First, chs. 13–15 is not the only section that
deals explicitly with impurities that are forbidden in the holy precincts (cf. chs. 11–12, 21–22),
so it is still left unexplained why this section should correspond to the screen. Second, it requires
that we understand these chapters to function very differently to chs. 11–12 for the sake of the
structure, despite the distinctive addresses and common subject matter that we’ve already seen
strongly suggest these five chapters should be understood as one unit. And third, the analogical
reading makes the Day of Atonement thematically central to the entire book, but the resulting
structure does not.

Recognizing the centrality of the Day of Atonement (ch. 16), various concentric structures see it
(or chs. 16–17) as the focal point of Leviticus (Morales 2016). As a representative example,
Morales proposes that the Day of Atonement is at the center, acting as the fulcrum between the
two halves of the book. In his explanation of these two halves we see the same shift in emphasis
seen in the linear structures above: “The first half deals primarily with the approach to God
through blood, while the second half is taken up with life in God’s presence through increasing
holiness, the overall goal being fellowship and union with God.” (Morales 2016, 29–30,
emphasis mine) On this proposal, if we work our way out from the center we find personal laws
(chs. 11–15 and 17–20), then priestly laws (chs. 8–10 and 21–22), and finally sanctuary laws
(chs. 1–7 and 23–27). The centrality of the Day of Atonement, the recognition of the shift in
emphasis, and the lack of “out-of-structure” sections or appendices all commend this proposal,
but it does not pay close enough attention to the variety of content in some of its sections. In
particular, it is difficult to see how the blasphemy narrative in ch. 24 or the regulations about
land and slaves in ch. 25 could be classified as sanctuary laws, or how laws explicitly directed to
the people and sojourners of Israel in 22:17ff could be classified as priestly laws.
Despite the variety among existing proposals, when considered together certain key trends
appear. There is broad agreement on the first few sections of Leviticus, as well as recognition of
a high-level progression from approaching God to living in his presence. Though not always
consistently applied, there is also a recognition that explicit markers in the text could guide us in
distinguishing its sections. The challenge comes in consistently dividing sections on the basis of
these markers, and then determining how these sections are supposed to fit together into a
coherent structure.

A double-chiastic proposal
Rather than approach the question of structure with an a priori commitment to a primary theme,
conceptual framework, or presumption about its form, we shall proceed inductively. First, we
will identify the sections of the final text, paying attention to any explicit markers that it
provides. Second, we will consider how those sections might be connected with one another,
keeping in mind the variety of structures and ideas that have already been discussed. Finally, we
will attempt to explain the organization as a whole.

The clearest section marker is when it is bracketed by an introduction and a conclusion. The holy
festivals are introduced by the divine address (23:1–2) and concluded by the statement of
fulfillment (23:44). Likewise, the Day of Atonement is introduced with a divine address to
Moses to instruct Aaron on approaching the Holy of Holies (16:1–3), and concludes with the
calendrical comment and statement of fulfillment (16:34). The Sabbath and Jubilee year
regulations together with the blessings and curses (chs. 25–26) are all part of a single divine
speech which is introduced and concluded with reference to Mount Sinai (25:1 and 26:46).

Coherence of subject matter further confirms that chapters 25 and 26 should be grouped together:
fellow Israelites were to be released in the year of Jubilee because they were God’s servants
whom he brought out from slavery in Egypt (25:42, 26:13), and the curses culminate in them
returning to living under foreign rule (26:33); the land, which also belongs to God (25:23), was
to rest in the Sabbath and Jubilee years (25:5, 11), and would receive this rest as a consequence
of Israel being excised from it by the curses (26:34–35, 43).

The regulations on the redemption of vowed things (ch. 27) are introduced with a divine address,
and although it is not entirely clear whether the conclusion in 27:34 is meant to refer to the entire
preceding book or just to these final regulations, in either case these regulations would be their
own section.

The laws on offerings (chs. 1–7) are introduced with a reference to God speaking to Moses from
the tent of meeting (1:1), and concluded with, “This is the law of the burnt offering, of the grain
offering, of the sin offering, of the guilt offering, of the ordination offering, and of the peace
offering, which the LORD commanded Moses on Mount Sinai, on the day that he commanded the
people of Israel to bring their offerings to the LORD, in the wilderness of Sinai.” (7:37–38) Sklar
(2014) argues that this conclusion is only for the priestly regulations (6:8–7:36), since (1) the
word used for “law” only appears in these regulations and (2) the order of the offerings (except
for the ordination offering) corresponds to the order given in the priestly regulations rather than
the regulations for the laity (1:1–6:7). But the lack of any identifiable conclusion prior to this, 4
and the inclusion of the phrase about the people of Israel bringing their offerings5 suggest that
we should take the conclusion to cover all of the regulations as a whole.

The divine addresses are themselves important organizational elements in Leviticus, even when
explicit conclusions are not present. They may be grouped in terms of whom the address is
toward, as well as common subject matter. As noted above, the laws given in chs. 11–15 are the
only place where Moses and Aaron are addressed together (11:1, 13:1, 14:33, 15:1),6 and they all
deal with ritual purity. Chs. 17–22 can be divided using the same criteria. Ch. 17 is an address for
Aaron and his sons and to all the people of Israel (17:1–2) regarding the place of sacrifice and
prohibition of eating blood. Chs. 18–20 then switch to contiguous addresses for the people of
Israel (18:1–2, 19:1–2, 20:1–2) regarding how they are to live with God and avoid the sinful
practices of the nations. This grouping is further confirmed by how chs. 18 and 20 bracket ch. 19
with their common subject matter. Then, 22:1–22:16 is made up of contiguous addresses to
Aaron and his sons (21:1, 16–17, 22:1–2) regarding the standards they must uphold as Israel’s
priests. Finally, 22:17–33 are contiguous addresses for Aaron and his sons and the people of

4Hartley effectively makes this point when he acknowledges that the conclusion belongs
primarily to the priestly regulations, but that “in the setting of the book [it] concludes the entire
sacrificial corpus.” (1992, 95)
5 As Milgrom notes, “Lev 7:37–38 distinguish between the torah instructions imparted to Moses
on Mount Sinai (chaps. 6–7) and the commands given to the Israelites (not the priests, 6:2 [Eng.
9]) concerning their sacrificial duties — an unmistakable reference to chapters 1–5, the
sacrificial laws directed to the Israelites (1:2; 4:2).” (2004, Kindle locations 1216–1218)
6 It should be recognized that 12:1 and 14:1 address Moses only, but (1) are interspersed with
addresses to Moses and Aaron together and (2) deal with the common subject or ritual purity
laws, suggesting that we should not separate them out.
Israel (22:17–18) regarding the animals they bring for offerings, that they not profane God’s
name in bringing the wrong ones (22:31). 7

The remaining two sections can be left as they are: chs. 8–10 make up a single narrative of the
ordination of the priesthood and their first offerings, and ch. 24 will be examined in more detail
below. Thus, overall there are twelve sections:

1. Laws on offerings for laity and priests (chs. 1–7).

2. Institution of the priesthood (chs. 8–10).
3. Ritual purity laws (chs. 11–15).
4. The Day of Atonement (ch. 16).
5. Laws about the proper place for sacrifice and the proper use of blood (ch. 17).
6. Laws about living with God and not like the other nations (chs. 18–20).
7. Laws about priestly standards (21:1–22:16).
8. Laws about standards of offerings for both priests and laity (22:17–33).
9. Holy festivals to God (ch. 23).
10. Ch. 24, still to be discussed.
11. Sabbath and Jubilee year regulations, with corresponding blessings and curses (chs. 25–26).
12. Laws on the redemption of things vowed to God (ch. 27).

As for how these connect to one another, note that both sections 1 and 8 deal with offerings, and
involve addresses to both the priests and the laity. Moving inwards, both sections 2 and 7 deal
with the priesthood itself. This suggests a concentric structure covering sections 1–8, which we
can confirm by considering the remaining two pairs of sections more carefully.

Sections 3 and 6 deal with the purity of the camp, insisting that Israel not profane God’s name or
sanctuary by means of their uncleanness. In section 3 the concern is that the people not approach
the tent of meeting when in a state of uncleanness, lest they thereby defile and profane it (12:4,
13:46, 15:31). Thus, it is important for them to know how they might become unclean and the
process by which to cleanse themselves. But just as the tent of meeting is holy in comparison to
the rest of the camp, the camp as a whole is holy in comparison to the other nations. The

7 I take it that the lack of mention of whom the address is for in 22:26 implies that it is a
continuation of the previous address. At first glance, 22:31–33 looks as though it is a concluding
statement, like we saw for chs. 16, 23, and 25–26. But it is still part of the divine speech, and acts
like more of an exhortation than a summary. Its primary function seems to be to emphasize that
the commands in 22:17ff are given so that the people of Israel would not profane God’s name, a
claim that has not yet appeared in this divine speech.
uncleanness related to this latter case is the focus of section 6. In this case, if a person becomes
unclean, then they are simultaneously bringing this uncleanness into God’s presence (since he
dwells in the camp), and therefore profaning his name and sanctuary. Accordingly, there are no
provisions for becoming clean again, but simply the judgement of being cut off from one’s
people.8

Sections 4 and 5 deal with atonement and sacrifice. It is easy to see that section 5 deals with the
place of sacrifice (17:1–9) and the proper use of blood (17:10–16), and in fact section 4 exhibits
a parallel structure. It begins with a reminder of the death of Aaron’s two sons who had died
when they drew near to God improperly, and the instructions for how Aaron is to approach
properly (16:1–5). Once at the tent of meeting, it instructs him how to make atonement with the
blood of the animals that he has brought (16:6–34). Thus, the first sub-section of section 4
describes the proper way of approaching God with offerings, while the first sub-section of
section 5 explains that this is the only appropriate way to make offerings. The second sub-section
of section 4 explains in detail how the high priest is to use the blood of the sin offerings to atone
the holy places, while the second sub-section of section 5 emphasizes that this is the only
appropriate way for blood to be used, and that any other usage will result in uncleanness or being
cut off from the people.

Having identified a concentric structure for sections 1–8 (chs. 1–22), if we consider this first part
of Leviticus as a whole we see the shift in emphasis noticed by commentators mentioned above,
from concerns for approaching God to concerns for living with him. This is most clearly seen in
the two purity law sections: the laws in section 3 are concerned with the state of the people as
they approach God at the tent of meeting, while section 6 is concerned with the state of people as
they live with God in the camp. A similar shift can be seen with the other pairs of sections:
section 1 discusses the process of bringing offerings to God, while section 8 presupposes this
process and focuses on how to avoid profaning God’s name while living with him; section 2
narrates the ordination of priests and their first time approaching the tent of meeting, while
section 7 focuses on the daily lives of the priests as stewards of the tent of meeting; and section 4
explains how Aaron is to approach the Holy of Holies once a year, while section 5 explains how
Israel are to live properly with God in light of his gift of atonement.

The progression of sections 1–4, as noticed by various commentators above, explains why this
shift in emphasis occurs. Leviticus begins with God having to dwell among the people of Israel.

8 The exact meaning of this phrase is unclear, but Ex 31:14 suggests it involves the death penalty.
Wenham proposes that it involves direct divine judgement (1979, Kindle location 1647), and
Milgrom proposes that it might also involve being denied life in the hereafter (2004, Kindle
location 1177).
Thus, regulations about offerings (section 1) are a natural starting point, which leads into the first
offerings and ordination of the priests (section 2). In the wake of the deaths of Aaron’s two sons
and the distinctions made in 10:10, we are given the first purity laws which tell Israel how to
properly approach the tent of meeting (section 3). And after all of this is clarified, we see Aaron
being taught how to approach the Holy of Holies properly to make atonement for the entire
nation (section 4). Once all of this is in place, God’s presence among Israel in the tent of meeting
is established, and Leviticus turns to regulations that safeguard God’s presence among them —
preventing them from misusing his institutions or profaning his name. We may speculate, then,
that in the final composition, sections 5–8 were added from what material the final editor had
available in order to complete the chiastic structure of this part Leviticus by mirroring the
progressions of the first four sections.

This leaves sections 9–12 (chs. 23–27) to be explained. Perhaps the most striking feature of these
sections is the high frequency of the phrase “to the LORD” (‫ )ליהוה‬in the outer two sections (17
times in section 9 and 12 times in section 12) compared to the much lower frequency in the inner
two sections (3 times in total). This gives us a clue as to the overarching theme of this part of
Leviticus, suggesting that it might also be structured chiastically.

Section 9 deals with God’s annual appointed festivals. The section begins with a reminder of the
Sabbath day (23:3), which acts as a paradigm for the festivals that follow. As on the Sabbath, for
each of the feasts throughout the year Israel were to rest from work and dedicate time to God.
Each festival gives them an opportunity to remember their dependence upon God: on the Sabbath
day that he sanctifies them (Ex 31:13); at Passover and feast of Unleavened bread that he
redeemed them from slavery in Egypt (Ex 12:1–20, 13:3–10); in the feasts of Firstfruits and of
Weeks that he provides for them (Lev 23:10); in the feast of Trumpets that he dwelt among them
(Ex 19); in the Day of Atonement that his holiness demands their atonement; and in the feast of
Booths that he brought them out Egypt through the wilderness (Lev 23:42–43). The main point
of this material is to highlight the continual honor Israel were to show the God of their salvation
and blessing throughout their lives with him.

Section 12 also deals with dedications to God, but here things are dedicated rather than festivals.
The section explains how these dedicated things are evaluated, and under what conditions they
can be redeemed (“bought back”). It first deals with special dedications which could be done
freely by an Israelite whenever they wished, which could involve persons (27:1–8), animals
(27:9–10), houses (27:14–15), possessed land (27:16–21), or bought land (27:22–25); and
second, it deals with dedications that are either regulated, or for which there is never any
redemption, namely firstborn animals (27:26–27), permanently dedicated things (27:28–29), and
tithes (27:30–33). The common theme among all these dedications is that they are to God, as
with the festivals of section 9.
The relationship between the remaining two sections is far less clear. Indeed, section 10 (ch. 24)
has perplexed many commentators, both in its content and its placement in the book of Leviticus
(Master 2002). Hartley even goes so far as to say that this chapter “seems to be arbitrarily
dropped in between chaps. 23 and 25.” (1992, 396) Various possible explanations have been
suggested, but I suggest that its presence and grouping can be explained precisely in relation to
section 11 (chs. 25–26).

Section 11 is made up of four sub-sections. First there is the Sabbath year regulations (25:1–7),
and then the introduction of the Jubilee year as happening every seven Sabbath years (25:8–22).
The third sub-section covers commands about the land and Israelite slaves (25:23–55). Here God
commands his people to seek redemption, and the repeated motivation for this is that the land
and Israelites ultimately belong to him. Because God is the true owner of the land, the Israelites
are merely sojourners with him (25:23), and are not in the position to reject the redemption of the
land (25:24). And because the Israelites are most truly the slaves of God (25:42, 55), they are not
to take each other as slaves (25:35–46) and they are to seek the redemption of those taken as
slaves by foreigners (25:47–55). The final sub-section, ch. 26, discusses the blessings Israel will
enjoy if they obey his commandments and honor him, and the curses they will experience if they
disobey his commandments and reject him.

Section 10 is also broken down into four sub-sections, which parallel the four sub-sections of
section 11. First, there is the command to keep the lamp stand burning daily (24:1–4), after
which comes the command to offer the bread every seven days (24:5–9). Notably, the
relationship between these two practices parallels the relationship between the Sabbath year and
Jubilee year: the first is done at regular intervals, and the second is done every seventh iteration
of the first. The parallels continue as we trace through the remaining sub-sections. Both the
blasphemy narrative in section 10 (24:10–16) and the redemption regulations in section 11
(25:23–55) are concerned with respecting things that are God’s: his name in the former and his
lands and slaves in the latter. Both the principle of justice (24:17–23) and the covenant blessings
and curses (ch. 26) deal with what we might call a “principle of response”: Israel’s response to
each other with the principle of justice, and God’s response to Israel based on their loyalty to the
covenant.

So, just as with sections 4 and 5, section 10 is structured as a parallel to the statutes of section 11.
The reason for this is not immediately evident, but we may speculate that it was to give a smaller
and more familiar framework for understanding the statutes in section 11. It is easier to think
about things done daily or weekly than it is to think about things done every seven years or once
in our lifetime; it is easier to think about a name belonging to God than it is to think about the
whole land or all the people belonging to him; and interactions between fellow Israelites (which
play out over days and weeks) would be much more familiar than interactions between God and
his people (which play out over generations). Ch. 24, then, acts as a rubric to help the Israelites
think about the grand scheme of their relationship with God. It is ironic that today this chapter is
so mysterious to us, if it was originally intended as a clarification.

As with the first part of Leviticus (sections 1–8, chs. 1–22), the second part (sections 9–12,
chs. 23–27) also forms a chiasm wherein the two central sections parallel one another. The whole
of the second part deals with the reverence due to God: he is not just another person living
among Israel, but the supreme creator and powerful redeemer to whom they owe everything and
to whom they must dedicate everything.

And as with the first part, we can distinguish a shift in emphasis between the two halves of this
chiasm. Sections 11 and 12 discuss the reverence due to God in terms of the Israelites’
belongings, which is why these two sections discuss the redemption of those belongings. Section
11 emphasizes that they and the land ultimately belong to God, and so they must respect the
redemption laws he has put in place to safeguard them, while section 12 deals with the
dedications of their belongings (whether people or things) and the bounds of redemption.
Sections 9 and 10 are more difficult to pin down. The continual dedications to God (every day,
every week, and throughout the year) serve to humble Israel before him by being constant
reminders that he is their savior, provider, and the initiator of this gracious covenant with them.
Especially with the feasts and Sabbath days, they are to give up their time in honor of God. It is
this stance of humility before God that the blasphemer perverts by cursing God’s name. If this is
correct, then whereas sections 11 and 12 deal with dedications to God in regard to one’s outer
belongings, sections 9 and 10 could be dealing with dedications to God in regard to one’s inner
being, one’s heart and soul.

Conclusion
I have suggested that Leviticus is divided into two parts, each of which has a chiastic structure.
The first part is thematically about approaching and living with God, and covers much of the
Levitical system that made communion with God in Israel possible. The second part builds upon
this, and instructs Israel how they are to dedicate their lives to the God who has made a way to
live with them.

This proposal has a number of features that commend it for serious consideration: it proceeds
from clear organizational indicators within the text itself, and makes no upfront assumption
about how many parts it should have; it does justice to the well-recognized high-level
progression from laws about approaching God to laws about living with him; it accounts for
every section in the book, and does not relegate ch. 27 to an appendix; and it provides an
explanation for the role of ch. 24 within Leviticus.
We can summarize this proposed structure as follows:

%
References
Douglas, Mary. 1995. “Poetic Structure in Leviticus.” Pomegranates and Golden Bells: Studies
in Biblical, Jewish, and Near Eastern Ritual, Law, and Literature in Honor of Jacob Milgrom,
239–56.

———. 1999. Leviticus as Literature. OUP Oxford.

Hartley, John. 1992. Leviticus. World Biblical Commentary. Zondervan.

Hill, Andrew E, and John H Walton. 2000. A Survey of the Old Testament. Harper Collins.

Kline, Moshe. 2006. “The Literary Structure of Leviticus.” Biblical Historian 2 (1): 11–28.

———. 2015. “Structure Is Theology.” In Current Issues in Priestly and Related Literature: The
Legacy of Jacob Milgrom and Beyond, edited by R. E. Gane and A. Taggar-Cohen, 225–64.
Resources for Biblical Study. SBL Press.

Master, John R. 2002. “The Place of Chapter 24 in the Structure of the Book of Leviticus.”
Bibliotheca Sacra 159: 415–24.

Milgrom, Jacob. 2004. Leviticus: A Book of Ritual and Ethics: A Continental Commentary.
Fortress Press.

Morales, L Michael. 2016. Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of
the Book of Leviticus. New Studies in Biblical Theology. InterVarsity Press.

Sklar, J. 2014. Leviticus: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament

Commentaries. InterVarsity Press.

Walton, John H. 2001. “Equilibrium and the Sacred Compass: The Structure of Leviticus.”
Bulletin for Biblical Research, 293–304.

Wenham, Gordon J. 1979. The Book of Leviticus. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.