Subject: Re: Sacrificing at the High Places
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 00:26:32 +0000
To: "Hebraic Heritage Newsgroup"<heb_roots_chr@geocities.com>

From:          Daniel Lancaster
To:            heb_roots_chr@geocities.com
Subject:       Re: Sacrificing at the High Places

Dear Marvin,

You have made some very astute observations about worship at the High Places.
Because the function of the cult in and out of the sanctuary (that is
Temple/Tabernacle) is one of my favorite areas of inquiry, I too have tried to
reconcile these kinds of scriptures.  There are basically two schools of
thought.

1.  The Academic Theory.  According to ANE historians, archaeologists and
textual critics, the prohibition against sacrifice in the high places (which
are only explicit in Deuteronomy) came very late in Israel's history.  This
school of thought believes that King Jeroboam's reforms were actually the
first time that Jerusalem was declared the only kosher place to sacrifice.  In
a massive politcal power grab, Jeroboam payed off the priesthood or the
prophets to declare the worship at the high places illegal.  By denying the
people access to God except through the Jerusalem Temple, Jeroboam
consolidated the religious seat of power as well as the political seat.
Deuteronomy then, or the traditions preserved therein, would date back to that
point in history when the religious landscape of Israel changed dramatically.
This theory actually has a lot going for it.  It explains why we see men like
Gideon, Samuel, Saul and Solomon, not to mention the Patriarchs, all
sacrificing at designated high places where Canaanite religions were also
practiced.  (We would do well to remember that the Temple mount was also a
high place which both Abraham and David used.)  Oftentimes God appears to
these men at the high places, and as you observed, he certainly accepts their
sacrifices.  The problem with the theory is that it takes a rather low view of
the authenticity of Torah, and that's a big problem.

2. The Rabbinic Theory.  The Rabbis explain that when there was no central
place of worship, private altars were allowed.  This means high places.  It
was 14 years after entering the land until the Tabernacle was set up at Shiloh
and after Shiloh was destroyed and the ark was lost by Eli and his sons, it
was several years again until Solomon established a central place of worship
in Jerusalem.  During those interim periods, the high places became
temporarily kosher for sacrifice.  That's Rashi's interpretation as cited in
ArtScroll's Stone Edition on Dev 12:8-9.

3. A Third theory.  A third theory, which is mine, is kind of a combination of
the above two.  I believe Rashi is essentially correct, but I also believe
that the ancient Israelite's worshipped God regularily at the high places.
For the most part, they really believed that it was kosher.  After all,
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had used the high places.  It wasn't the high places
that were bad.  The porblem with the high places was that the Israelites
weren't the only one that used these holy shrines for worship.  They were also
used by the Canaanites for Baal worship and for worship of the sacred ashera
trees.  The result of the Israelites worshipping at the high places was that
they began to mingle with Canaanites, and their faith began to mingle.
Syncretism was inevitable, and soon the Israelites were burning sacrifices to
Baal/the LORD.  Eventually this led to paganism, idol worship and exile.

The situation in Christianity is much the same.  Everyone in Hebrew Roots is
quick to point out the pagan elements and pagan influences and pagan origins
of Christian institutions like Xmas trees and Easter bunnies.  Those are our
Ahsera trees to be sure.  But just as God honored the sacrifices of the High
Places, he can, will and does honor the intentions of true hearts that
earnestly are seeking him out even though they may be doing so in a less than
kosher way.  The danger, as with Israel, is that it does lead to syncretism.

Daniel

**************************************************************************