What is going on with the Levites

Recently a listener to the podcast brought this question to a message board:

What was going on with the Levites during all these different apostasies? Are they the priests that are willingly sacrificing to false idols?

I have read that the Levite lineage has been preserved to some degree in Israel, how did that happen through all this?

I wanted to share my response.

Great question! I think to answer this, we have to start with assumptions. What are our assumptions that we bring to the text? How historical are the accounts of the Levites in the texts that we have? How important are the Levites to the story as it is found in the Restoration? What about the message of the Levites and their importance in the Book of Mormon? Could the accounts as we have them be memories of a distant past, mixed with myth, memory, legends, and hopeful expectations of the prophets, poets, and scribes that produced, copied, and disseminated them in days long ago?

Things to consider:

I do not see an emphasis on the Levites or their authority in the Book of Mormon as it is now constituted (I acknowledge that Martin Harris is responsible for a significant loss of text that may give further light). There is no reference to the Levites in the Book of Mormon as I understand it at this time. There are, however, five references to Melchizedek and his authority associated with him being a “high priest after this same order” (Alma 13.14), an order that transcended time. This order, as Alma explained, is without beginning or end, and is an order that is “after the order of his Son,” meaning the Son of God (Alma 13.7). I am not commenting about the Aaronic Priesthood as it is now constituted today. My comments are solely examining the Hebrew Bible and the record of history. I do not question the authority given to Joseph Smith by John the Baptist, as I have a witness of Joseph’s authority as given to me by the Spirit. I am simply “looking at history” and “looking at texts” in this comment.

So this being said, let me begin by simply stating that I have more questions than answers on this topic. A couple of books that may help in your quest to further understand the complexities of what we think is going on in the text are:

David Carr, The Formation of the Hebrew Bible: A New Reconstruction (Oxford University Press, 2011); Richard Elliot Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible? (Harper One, 1997) and Mark Leuchter, The Levites and the Boundaries of Israelite Identity (Oxford University Press, 2017).

I will also preface my comments by stating that I do not see the Hebrew Bible as a history book per se, at least how we moderns use the term. I also do not take all of the Deuteronomistic History (Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, 1-2 Kings) as history, at least in the sense that we understand it. These writings were textualized at a time by individuals with a certain worldview, and with certain hopes. I have spoken much about this in earlier episodes of our podcasts.

In Leuchter’s book, he examines the presentation of the Levites in the Golden Calf narrative contained in Exodus 32, the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy 32, and Hosea’s prophecies, and he works to make the case that these texts all come to us from the Northern Kingdom (R. Friedman in Who Wrote the Bible? does some excellent work on the Exodus 32 narrative as well – see p. 70-74). Leuchter submits that these traditions created by the Levites were used as counter narratives, contributing to the gist of what would become the Deuteronomistic tradition.

Leuchter sees the Deuteronomists’ attitudes (we have discussed this extensively in our previous podcasts, see Episode 30 1 Nephi 1-7 and our recent podcast on Deuteronomy [Ep 153] and the one on Josiah’s reforms – Episode 161) as reflecting northern, Levitical roots, when he says that “the author of 2 Kings 17 was a member of the Deuteronomistic group, a circle of scribes in the late seventh century responsible for the production of the book of Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic History (Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1-2 Sam, 1-2 Kings). Leuchter seems to fall in line with other scholars that see that when the Assyrian Empire conquered the northern kingdom, a “significant number of refugees fled south to Judah for asylum, including the Levites” (p. 157). He submits that the Levites were involved in the composition of the Book of Deuteronomy. Those Levites who acted as scribal experts had fled to Judah after the fall of the northern kingdom (p. 159). These scribes were most likely highly educated, literate individuals who would have been capable of producing a sophisticated scribal work such as Deuteronomy.

Leuchter (as well as several other scholars: M. Barker, M. Weinfeld, R. Friedman) makes the case that King Josiah’s reform, which highlighted again the importance of Deuteronomy, would have conferred special responsibilities upon the Levites as representatives of Yahweh and stressed the reforms of Josiah as well. It has been often highlighted by several scholars that the reforms of Josiah coincide with the theological views of Deuteronomy (see our podcast Episode 30). We read in 2 Kings 22–23 the discovery of the “book of the law” which lead to King Josiah’s reform in the seventh century BCE, and this (to Leuchter) highlights the role of the Levites even more.

I find it interesting that part of the reforms of Josiah is that he “put down the idolatrous priests” (2 Kings 23.5). The text says that he put down הַכְּמָרִים “the chemarim,” in what can be read as “The Melchizedek Priests.” At least this is one way of reading it (see: Stephen Ricks and John Tvedtness, The Hebrew Origin of Some Book of Mormon Place Names, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, vol. 6, number 2, article 15, 1997. Christian priests are referred in modern Hebrew by the term כומר komer.)

What if the chemarim that Josiah put down were actually righteous priests, after the order of Melchizedek? We don’t know. But we do know this: Lehi was preaching the truth, that Jerusalem was going to be destroyed if the people didn’t repent. Lehi had visions of God. Those in authority, the “elders of the Jews” (1 Ne. 4.22, 27) wanted to kill Lehi (1 Ne. 2.1). Laman and Lemuel reject Lehi’s authority, as well as his visions and they are described as “like unto the Jews who were at Jerusalem” (1 Ne. 2.13). One scholar posits that Laman and Lemuel portray all the characteristics of the Deuteronomists (see: Rappleye, The Deuteronomist Reforms and Lehi’s Family Dynamics: A Social Context for the Rebellions of Laman and Lemuel, Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-Day Saint Faith and Scholarship, 16 (2015), p. 87-99) I see a connection here. There was tension in Jerusalem in 600 BCE over who represented Yahweh and the true principles of religion. It is good to remember that those in power in Jerusalem in 600 BCE did not have true authority, at least from what Lehi and Nephi tell us.

This leaves us with Jeremiah. I am not in a good position to comment on this right now, other than to say that there are clues that show that the redactors who worked with the Deuteronomistic history did some work on the oracles of Jeremiah.

Not to make things overly complicated, but then we must examine who the Levites were in the first place. Were the Levites “the sons of Aaron” or were they “the tribe of Levi”? Were they both? Evidence in the Hebrew Bible suggest that there were actually two groups: the Levites and the “House of Aaron” or the Aaronids as they are generally designated. So we must then we get into the rivalry between these two priestly groups in the Bible: The Levites and the Aaronids. The Aaronids were members of the tribe of Levi who also claimed descent from Aaron, the first high priest as recorded in Exodus. Exodus 32 portrays Aaron as bad and the Levites as true followers of God (especially when we read how they take care of things at the end of the chapter!) The Golden Calf narrative (we think) was textualized by the Levites partly as a jab at the authority of Aaronids and as a reminder of what happens to apostates (at least from the perspective of the Levites).

It is really challenging to know with certainty the history of the Levites since the literature produced by this group of priests has its own agenda. We do see evidence of priestly rivalries in the text, and many scholars see these stories as religious arguments and systems that were effectively retrojected back into the text of Israel’s past by archaized narratives. We do see in 1 Kings 2.26-27 how Solomon banished the Levites from Jerusalem, specifically Abiathar, and the rest of the Deuteronomic history from Solomon to Hezekiah makes no mention of Levites as priests in Jerusalem. It is noteworthy that Zadok becomes Abiathar’s replacement (1 Kgs 2.35), as Zadok is a direct descendant of Aaron, hence an “Aaronid.” The house of Zadok occupies the high priesthood for much of the Second Temple Period. Many years after Zadok’s presentation as the high priest in Jerusalem, with the Levite led Deuteronomic reform under Josiah (2 Kings 23- around 622 BCE), the Levitical priesthood arose (or did it reemerge?) in Jerusalem. What we probably know is that the writings of the Deuteronomistic Historian of the 7th century BCE work to present the Levites as the sole officiating priests at the centralized altar in Jerusalem (and yet there were several altars outside of Jerusalem, at least according to the archaeological record. Read William Dever’s scholarship on this). Deuteronomy 10.8-9 and 18.1-5 portray Yahweh as choosing the Levites to serve him and officiate at his temple in Jerusalem.

On the other side of this rivalry are the Aaronids. Many of their texts portray Yahweh claiming just the opposite, demoting the Levites to servant roles, as simply ministers of the officiating priests, who are now only those Levites descended from Aaron, hence the scholarly term “Aaronids” (See: Numbers 3.5-10; 16.8-11; 17; 18.1-7). All of these passages from Numbers are written by the Aaronids, and these texts are also commonly referred to as the “P text,” or the “Priestly text” of the Pentateuch. These passages show Yahweh declaring an eternal covenant that only Aaron’s descendants may serve as priests and serve Yahweh at his altar (Numbers 4.19, 8.19, 16.40, 18.1). The Levites, on the other hand, are appointed to serve the Aaronid priests and come near the vessels of the sanctuary, acting as servants to the Aaronids (Numbers 18.1-3). It may seem troubling when first presented with this material, that we have (we think) two rival factions writing their texts into the stories of Israel, each presenting a slightly different view regarding who has authority to represent God at his temple. But it shouldn’t be too troubling, because Nephi seems to indicate that those in authority in Jerusalem in his day are doing things wrong. The vision of the tree of Life in 1 Nephi 8-11 can be read as a polemic against those in authority (see: David Butler, Plain and Precious Things: The Temple Religion of the Book of Mormon’s Visionary Men, 2012).

Not only is a rivalry between priesthoods happening in the Book of Mormon (1 Nephi 1-11, Mosiah 11), we also see it in history, that is, in the history of Christianity. The Reformation was a push back against those claiming authority from God in a day when some considered the word to be more authoritative than the clergy. We shouldn’t be too worried when we read texts written by the House of Aaron (Aaronids) that portray God as declaring their supreme authority over the Levites (Numbers 18.1-3), just as we read texts by the Levites that denigrate the House of Aaron (Exodus 32). These clues are all over the place in the Hebrew Bible, and many of the wrinkles in the text are ironed out by the prophetic authors of the Book of Mormon, while other questions remain unanswered.

To get to the original question: Did the Levites sacrifice to idols? I do not know if I can answer this question. If I had to guess, I would say that the northern and the southern priests were sacrificing to God as they understood him. I see the things going on in the north as priests working to understand God in their time and place. What they were doing is described as evil and wrong, but we must remember that the authors of these accounts were writing from their perspective. The northern kingdom disenfranchised a group of priests in the north around 920 BCE, who then came south and wrote an attack against the northern kingdom and priests there. What we read in the Hebrew Bible is a minority report by those who are telling the story to us. It does not give us all the details. One thing is certain: the authors of the DH (Deuteronomistic History) work to denigrate the northern kingdom, portraying them as idol worshipping apostates. But they also work to denigrate their own people, any and all worship outside of Jerusalem, all the “high places” and “groves” described so many places in the DH. This description of these people who worship outside of Jerusalem would put Lehi into the camp of apostates. It would also put all the others that we have described in the podcasts previous who offered sacrifice outside of Jerusalem “The place where the Lord will choose to put his name” (Deut. 12.5) as apostates (for example Samuel’s sacred shrines at Mizpeh and Ramah – 1 Sam. 7. See also 1 Sam. 14.35 where Samuel builds an altar, as well as 1 Sam. 16.1-5 and 1 Sam. 11.15 at Gilgal where sacrifices are offered).

So what I am trying to say is that things are seriously complicated and the report that we now have in the Hebrew Bible is a seriously edited explanation that does not present us with any perfect version of the story. Multiple apostasies occurred throughout the record, for example, the story as we have in the Book of Judges is one repeated series of apostasies, without any real prophetic direction throughout. We move into prophetic direction time periods with Samuel and Nathan, but even then Samuel’s own children (as well as Eli’s) are portrayed as apostates. We have a brief period during the united kingdom of Israel with some semblance of peace and order, only to have it devolve rapidly with the death of Solomon and the split between north and south. To think that the Levites were “in charge” would probably be an error.

How did this all happen? We don’t have the whole picture, rather, we have an edited account of multiple times when the Lord worked with his prophets to guide the people, and through them (and a handful of righteous kings) the Lord taught the people of the land what they were able to handle, according to their language and culture (D&C 1.24). That is the best answer I can offer, and if we try and make the Hebrew Bible a perfect record, never contradicting itself throughout, we will have to do a lot of mental gymnastics along the way to make everything fit. Because the Hebrew Bible is messy (I have written some posts on the “messiness of scripture” that you can access here). Things inside the text often don’t make sense, partially because the views of the authors of the text had differing views on theology, God, how to be saved, the “right” priesthood, etc. So with this in mind, I would bring us back to the beginning of my answer. We must examine our assumptions. We must ask ourselves if we can grab any handhold onto what is truth, what position will give us the best shot at approaching what was going in 700-600 BCE when much of the DH was constructed. To me, the best thing we have is the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon will tell us the nature of God, how quickly priests can go astray (Mosiah 11-17) how an entire society can get derailed in a matter of a couple of generations (4 Nephi 1), and the importance of the redeemer Jesus Christ. When Nephi is speaking about plain and precious things removed from scripture, I believe he is speaking about how Jesus Christ is removed from the Hebrew Bible as he had it in his day. This is at least part of what he is talking about. The apostasy was ongoing in his day. So at least from Nephi’s perspective, he would probably say that the priests in Jerusalem, while offering sacrifices to God, did not view things the way he did, because Nephi had tasted the fruit of the Tree of Life. Nephi had actually seen Jesus (2 Nephi 11.2), something the authors of the DH denied could happen (Deut. 4.12, 15).