Original Meaning

AS ALREADY NOTED, DEUTERONOMY 12:1 marks the transition from the exposition of the Supreme Command (chaps. 5–11), to the exposition of the stipulations of the covenant in chapters 12–26. As elsewhere (4:45; 5:1; 26:16–17), “the decrees and laws” represent the covenantal obligations that Yahweh revealed at Sinai. Continuing the second address begun back in 5:1, this opening statement echoes many of the expressions found in 11:32, the conclusion to the previous section. Using familiar phrases this opening makes four points.

1. Moses specifies the genre of the material to follow. Although they will be presented in a profoundly hortatory way, these are “decrees and laws.”

2. He declares his goal—to govern conduct: “Keep them by doing them” (pers. trans.).3

3. He links his instructions with the gift of land: They are to be obeyed in the land that “the LORD, the God of your fathers, has given you to possess.”4

4. He identifies the context to which they apply: They are to be obeyed “as long as they live in the land.”

Deuteronomy 12:1 actually performs a dual purpose, introducing readers to the chapters 12–26 as a whole, but also to the following literary subunit (12:2–27). This interpretation is buttressed by verse 28, which, together with verse 1 creates an effective frame around these verses. Structurally 12:2–27 divides into two parts, virtually identical in size.5 The first involves sacrificial slaughter (vv. 2–14), while the second authorizes profane slaughter throughout the land. Functioning as two sides of a coin, these texts are held together by the word “place,” the tenfold repetition of “there,”6 and the sixfold repetition of the “place formula,” by which Yahweh calls for worship at a single shrine, the place that he will choose. These six are evenly distributed: three in the first panel (vv. 5, 11, 14), and three in the second (vv. 18, 21, 26).

Deuteronomy 12:1–14 subdivides further into three parts: two invitations to celebration in the presence of Yahweh (vv. 2–7 and 8–12) and a concluding exhortation (vv. 13–14). The invitations are remarkably symmetrical in length7 and structure, consisting respectively of negative charges (vv. 2–4; vv. 8–9) and positive invitations (vv. 5–7; vv. 10–12). Like most translations, the NIV treats this unit as a series of legal prescriptions, despite the sermonic injunctions that punctuate it (vv. 4, 8–9, 13–14).

The First Invitation to Celebrate in the Presence of Yahweh (vv. 2–7)

LIKE THE DECALOGUE AND the Book of the Covenant, Moses’ discourse on the decrees and laws begins with instructions on Israel’s vertical relationship with Yahweh. This first version of the invitation anticipates two phases of application: purging the land of any vestiges of Canaanite idolatry (vv. 2–3) and replacing these pagan practices with those approved by Yahweh (vv. 5–7). Verse 4 is transitional.

Moses’ charge to clear the land of Canaanite worship consists of three parts: an emphatic general command to destroy all pagan cult centers (v. 2), a specific command to destroy all cult paraphernalia (v. 3a–d), and a sweeping command to eliminate all the claims that Canaanite deities might have to the land (v. 3e). He refers to Canaanite places of worship as “places . . . where the nations . . . worship their gods,” in contrast to “the place” (singular) that Yahweh will choose to place his name. The triad of expressions—“all the places” where the nations worship their gods, “on the high mountains and on the hills,” and “under every green tree”—highlights the pervasiveness, intensity, and futility of pagan worship in the land (cf. 4:28).

Because verse 3a echoes 7:2–5, we need only to reiterate our earlier comment that ancient approaches to religion were concretized in specific places and acts rather than in abstract systems of belief. Moses assumes that obliterating the physical symbols of paganism will reduce the temptation of idolatry. Thus, he commands the Israelites to obliterate the name of their gods from every place where they are worshiped. This action will remove all reminders of their existence, delegitimize the sites as centers of worship, neutralize the respective divinities’ claim to the sites and the surrounding regions, and set the stage for Yahweh’s election of a place for himself, and with this his exclusive claim to the land.

Moses concludes with a simple but direct command not to behave like the people whom the Israelites will displace (v. 4). The warning not to treat Yahweh like this means that they are not to serve Yahweh the way Canaanites served their gods—multiplying shrines and constructing all kinds of cultic accoutrements for their worship.8 Moses follows this general proscription with a positive alternative in verses 5–7, a remarkably gracious invitation to a more personal relationship with Yahweh their God. This invitation is dominated by five verbs: “you may make a pilgrimage to the place” (dāraš),9 “there you may come/enter” (v. 5), “there you may bring your offerings” (v. 6), “there you may eat” (v. 7a), and “there you may rejoice in all activities” (v. 7b; all pers. trans.).

Verse 5 contains the first of twenty-one occurrences of “the place formula” in Deuteronomy: “the place the LORD will choose to put his Name.”10 The formula occurs in a variety of forms, ranging from the most elemental (16:16; 31:11) to the most complex (12:5).11 The present form of a formula makes four fundamental statements concerning “the place.” (1) It is a place that Yahweh will choose.12 The verb bāḥar (“to choose”) represents the most explicit term for “election” in Deuteronomy. Moses does not say how that choice will be revealed, but this eventually happens to David through Gad the prophet (2 Sam. 24:18–25; 1 Chron. 21:18).

(2) The place will be chosen “from among all your [pl.] tribes,” a comment rendered only slightly more concrete by “in one of your [sing.] tribes” in verse 14. “Your tribes” refers to the territorial tribal allotments predicted in Numbers 34 and fulfilled by Joshua in Joshua 14–19. Although Exodus 20:24 seems to allow for the simultaneous worship of Yahweh in more than one sanctuary, it does not demand this interpretation. It may simply envision the adaptation of Israelite worship to changing circumstances.13 In verses 4–14 Moses clarifies the ambiguity of the earlier statement, ensuring that in the future the people will have regular access to Yahweh.

(3) The place will have Yahweh’s name on it. As in 12:21 and 14:24, the phrase “to put his Name there”14 indicates divine ownership. Just as a person who bears the name of Yahweh is recognized as belonging to Yahweh,15 so the place bearing the imprint of his name is recognized as his possession.16 The expression alludes to the practice of inscribing the name on the foundation stone by the founder of a building, in this case validating the location and declaring it to be a locale where he could be worshiped and invoked.17

(4) The place will be the goal of Israel’s pilgrimages. Translating the verbs at the end of verse 5 modally, “you may make a pilgrimage and you may come there” (pers. trans.), this statement represents a gracious invitation by Yahweh to come to the place where he has set his name. The choice of the verb “to come” (bôʾ) rather than “to go” (hālak) reinforces this interpretation, suggesting these instructions are given from Yahweh’s point of view. Moses hereby offers his people regular access to Yahweh, just as the previous generation had enjoyed at Sinai.18

Verses 6–7 declare the purpose of Yahweh’s invitation by explaining what is to happen at the place Yahweh establishes for his name. Again the choice of verbs and the nature of the activities suggest that this paragraph should be interpreted as an invitation rather than a law. Not only are the Israelites invited to “come” to the place (v. 5), but they are also invited to “bring” rather than “take” their offerings. Both verbs view the movement of the Israelites from the perspective of the person at the destination rather than the person beginning the journey.

Although verses 6–7 provide the fullest statement of the purpose of the place to which Yahweh invites his people in the book, occurrences of the place formula elsewhere suggest the Israelites are invited to the place for a variety of reasons. (1) Moses invites the Israelites to bring all their sacrificial gifts to the place. Here he lists seven types of offerings: (a) “[whole] burnt offerings,” animal sacrifices in which the entire carcass was consumed by fire on the altar (Lev. 1:1–17; 6:8–13[1–6]); (b) “sacrifices,” a general expression for animal sacrifices in which the blood and fat were burned on the altar and the meat eaten by the worshiper and the priests in the presence of Yahweh (Lev. 7:11–18); (c) “tithes,” the tenth part of the crops and livestock (cf. 14:23); (d) “sacred donation of your hand” (NIV “special gifts”), contributions dedicated to Yahweh; (e) “votive offerings” (NIV “what you have vowed”) presented in fulfillment of a vow;19 (f) “freewill offerings,” spontaneous expressions of happiness;20 (g) “the firstborn of your herds and flocks,” defined elsewhere as “what breaches the womb” (Ex. 13:2, 12–15; 34:19–20; cf. Deut. 15:19–23). The list is obviously not exhaustive,21 because Moses is not presenting a comprehensive manual for worship. Rather, he offers his people a theology of worship.22 To have the chosen people offering specially chosen gifts in the place chosen by Yahweh—this is the key to maintaining the covenant relationship established at Sinai in the land.

(2) Moses invites the Israelites to eat in the presence of Yahweh their God. In the ancient world, eating together was an act of fellowship and communion, often the culmination of a covenant-making ritual (Gen. 31:54; Ex. 24:5–11). In this instance, the food would be taken from offerings that were not wholly consumed on the altar (v. 6). The location of the meal “there, in the presence of the LORD your God” (v. 7), is crucial for grasping the significance of this act. As Yahweh’s vassal, Israel eats in his presence, but not with him.23 The place that Yahweh chooses for his name ensures a means of communion with all Israel in perpetuity, analogous to his communion with them at Horeb, except that here Moses democratizes the experience. At Horeb only a privileged few ate in Yahweh’s presence; here Moses opens fellowship with him to everyone (vv. 12, 18; 31:10–12).

(3) Moses invites the Israelites to celebrate the blessing of Yahweh on their work. Linking human efforts with the blessing of God, he coins a new phrase: “that to which one extends one’s hand” (pers. trans.). The expression refers either to one’s labor or to the products of one’s labor24 and heightens the contrast with pagan idols in verses 2–3, described elsewhere as man-made (4:28; 27:15). Moses views worship as the joyful and celebrative response of everyone in the community to Yahweh’s invitation to his presence.25 He seems to have seized on Leviticus 23:40, which contains the only occurrence of a verb for joy or celebration in the Sinai legislation and made it normative for any worship that transpires before Yahweh.

The Second Invitation to Celebrate in the Presence of Yahweh (vv. 8–12)

THIS PARAGRAPH CLARIFIES THE key issue raised in verses 2–7: the centralizing of national worship, beginning with an appeal to stop current problematic practices (vv. 8–9). Although the first part of the exhortation answers to verse 4, in substance it corresponds to verses 2–3. Apparently the people were worshiping how and where they pleased—doing as everyone saw fit; despite the permanent ordinance restricting sacrifice to the “Tent of Meeting” (Lev. 17:1–9), unacceptable forms of worship persisted in the camp. Centralizing worship is presented as the answer to Canaanite evils and current Israelite malpractices.26

The motive clause in verse 9 recognizes that Israel is still in a transitional historical stage. Only when they have come to their “resting place” and the “inheritance” of land Yahweh has reserved for them will the ideal of exclusive devotion to Yahweh (6:4–5) be matched by exclusive worship at a central shrine. Speaking of security, that is, freedom from fear of enemies outside and tranquility and prosperity inside (Isa. 32:16–18), Moses envisions a time when the covenantal triangle (Yahweh—Israel—the land) will exist in perfectly harmonious relationship.

In verses 10–12 Moses returns to positive instructions regarding Israel’s future worship in the land. Echoing verses 5–7, he reiterates that Yahweh will choose the place for his name to reside (v. 11a). In verse 10 he establishes the context for Yahweh’s revelation of the place he has chosen for his name, specifying four preconditions: the Israelites have crossed the Jordan, they occupy the land that Yahweh has apportioned to them as their inheritance, Yahweh has given them rest, and they live safely in the land.27 As Moses celebrates in his final benediction (33:27b–28a), that security is achieved by Yahweh, who has taken care of the enemies.

In verses 11b–12 Moses describes the nature of worship at Yahweh’s chosen place. Building on verses 6–7, he reiterates that it will involve sacrifices to Yahweh and rejoicing in his presence. The new catalogue of sacrifices includes most of those found earlier, but by prefacing the list with “everything I command you,” he reminds his audience that the list is not necessarily complete. At the end of verse 11, he expands on the votive offerings: they are “choice possessions” that the worshiper has vowed to Yahweh.

Moses ends this second invitation by specifying those whom Yahweh invites to “rejoice” in his presence. The persons listed are those who normally make up “the families” or households in verse 7 (sons, daughters, male and female servants), but he expands the invitation to Levites who live within towns but have no tribal allotment or land grant (naḥ^alâ, NIV “inheritance”; cf. 18:6–8).28 Given the association of Levites with aliens, orphans, and widows elsewhere,29 “the Levite who is in your gates” (pers. trans.) represents all whom established Israelites might marginalize.30

A Concluding Exhortation (vv. 13–14)

MOSES CONCLUDES THE PRESENT instructions on worship with a warning not to make decisions regarding worship practices on the basis of personal preferences, and a specific charge to offer their sacrifices only at the place that Yahweh chooses. The former begins like many exhortations in the book, (lit.) “guard yourselves lest,”31 which reinforces the sermonic tone of this entire chapter. Anticipating future temptations for them to perform sacrificial rituals “anywhere you please,” Moses warns his people not to pervert or forget the divine choice in the place formula that follows. Responding to the indiscriminate and ubiquitous worship of their gods by the Canaanites in verse 2, he reiterates that Israelites are to worship Yahweh only at the place he will choose within one of the tribal allotments. “There” (šām occurs twice) they shall present their sacrifices and perform all the other rituals as Moses has commanded them.

Bridging Context

THE PLACE FORMULA. MANY scholars associate the centralization of worship called for here with the religious reforms of Josiah (2 Kings 23), and many view this ordinance as a revolutionary theological notion. Whereas people previously believed that Yahweh actually resided within the sanctuary—as symbolized by the Shekinah Glory—in Josiah’s day Yahweh was seen to reside only in heaven. The temple was not the actual residence of deity, but a place where worshipers could deliver their prayers to God, who lives in heaven. Supposedly this revolution aimed to eradicate the notion that Yahweh sits enthroned above the cherubim and to eliminate the inherent corporality of this imagery. Furthermore, sacrifice was transformed from an institutional to a personal practice, functioning as a humanitarian occasion for sharing with the poor and as an expression of gratitude to God for his blessing.32 The “place” that Yahweh would choose obviously refers to Jerusalem, which Josiah made the center of all worship by eliminating all competing shrines outside this city.

However, this interpretation reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the place formula.33 (1) The expression “to put the Name there” does not express an abstraction of God, but declares his claim to ownership and authorization of the place as a cult center.

(2) Rather than abstracting the presence of Yahweh and focusing on divine transcendence, the expression “in the presence of the LORD” (lipnē yhwh) actually heightens the sense of his real presence.34

(3) The emphasis here and elsewhere in Deuteronomy is not on the place itself, but on Yahweh’s right to determine the place of worship and his freedom regarding his own worship.

(4) The deuteronomistic historians acknowledged the fulfillment of the place formula in a succession of locations: Shechem, Shiloh, Bethel, and ultimately Jerusalem.35

(5) Even if Deuteronomy 12 had emphasized Yahweh’s transcendence, the notion of Yahweh dwelling in the temple need not conflict with the notion that Yahweh actually dwells in heaven. The theology of the tabernacle reflects the same tension, even in the designations for the structure: “Holy Place” (miqdāš) highlights his transcendence, while “dwelling place” (miškān) highlights his immanence.

(6) The theory interprets the text anachronistically. Since Jerusalem and the temple were at the heart of Josiah’s reforms, it is odd that neither should ever be mentioned in Deuteronomy. And the reference to Yahweh choosing the place “from among all the tribes” (12:5, 14) makes no sense in later times.36

While all scholars assume that Deuteronomy 12 played a crucial role in Josiah’s reforms, the earliest allusion to this passage does not occur in 2 Kings 22–23.37 It would be a mistake to read later highly developed Zion theology into Moses’ vague reference to the place that Yahweh would choose, but the one who inspired him in this address ultimately had Jerusalem in mind, even as he would have David in mind in 17:15.38 After David had brought to Jerusalem “the ark of God, which is called by the Name, the name of the LORD Almighty [Yahweh Sabaoth]” (2 Sam. 6:2) and after “the LORD had given him rest from all his enemies around him” (7:1), David thought the time had come to build a temple for Yahweh. The use of “to give rest” suggests the narrator viewed the construction of the temple as a fulfillment of Deuteronomy 12.39 Moreover, 2 Samuel 7:13 links Yahweh’s covenant with David with the construction of a house for Yahweh’s name and associates Yahweh’s residence with the kingship and residence of David.

Solomon’s prayer consecrating the temple in 1 Kings 8 repeatedly alludes to the place formula in Deuteronomy. In verse 16 Solomon recognizes that along with choosing a “city” from all the tribes of Israel to build a house for his name, Yahweh has chosen a man, David, to be over his people Israel. In verses 17–21 he acknowledges that from David he has inherited the privilege of building a house for the name of Yahweh and preparing a place for the ark, which contained the “covenant of the LORD.”40 But Solomon recognizes that, although he has built a house for the name of Yahweh, Yahweh’s true residence is in heaven—for no earthly construction can actually house Yahweh.41 In 1 Kings 9:3 Yahweh responds to the prayer, declaring that he has consecrated the temple that Solomon built by putting his name there forever. First Kings 11:36 expressly applies the place formula to Jerusalem (cf. 14:21; also 2 Chron. 6:20; 12:13).

Jeremiah frequently alludes to the place formula. Speaking of Jerusalem, in 3:17 he predicts a time when all nations will be gathered to the city “to honor the name of the LORD” (NIV). In chapter 7, after identifying Shiloh as the place where Yahweh made his name dwell at first (7:12), Jeremiah deals in considerable length with the temple in Jerusalem (7:9–14, 30).

No text demonstrates the significance of the place where Yahweh’s name dwells more dramatically than Daniel 6:10[11]. Even though the city of Jerusalem and the temple lay in ruins, Daniel prayed toward this place three times a day. His passion for the city is evident in 9:17–19, where he pleads with Yahweh to take note of the desolation of the city that is called by his name and to act for his own sake because his people and his city are called by his name.

Yahweh’s initiative in inviting Israel to worship in his presence contrasts sharply with worship in pagan religions, where images represent human responses to the need for divine presence. Whereas iconographic religions offer symbols of presence, the gods are absent. Yahweh requires no physical representations of presence—indeed he forbids them—yet he offers his real presence. This notion seems to underlie Jesus’ response to the Samaritan woman in John 4. Whereas Samaritans associated the “place” with Mount Gerizim, they acknowledged that for the Jews, the “place” was Jerusalem (John 4:20). However, Jesus announces the time when all these debates about place will be irrelevant. A day is coming when those who worship God will do so in spirit and truth. Apparently commenting on the current state of affairs in Gerizim and Jerusalem—where worship apparently was not driven by the Spirit and lacked integrity—he anticipates a time when it will have both.

This does not mean that Israel’s worship was never true worship or that it was never driven by the Spirit; rather, it means that the vision of spiritual and true worship envisioned by Moses will be recovered because once again worshipers will focus on the object of worship—Yahweh incarnate in Christ—rather than the place itself.42

Contemporary Significance

THEOLOGY OF WORSHIP. FOR contemporary readers, Deuteronomy 12:1–14 offers a profound theology of worship. (1) This text declares that Yahweh, the creator of heaven and earth, the God of Israel, and Redeemer of humankind, who appeared among us as the divine incarnate Son, Jesus Christ, is the only legitimate object of worship. Whether they be the man-made forms like those created by ancient Canaanites or the cleverly devised idols of moderns, all other objects of worship are not only illegitimate; they are abominable. As envisioned here, true worship perceives God alone as the divine host, with redeemed human beings as his guests.

(2) Worship must be designed to please the object of worship, not the worshipers. If Moses had to call a stop to the Israelites of his day worshiping in any way they pleased (v. 8), the same is true today. In the end, the divine verdict on our worship is the only verdict that matters. True worship involves an audience with the divine King and transpires in God’s place by God’s invitation on God’s terms. Contrary to some, ultimately acceptable forms and styles of worship are not determined by worshipers, let alone the unregenerate or marginally spiritual. The invitation to enter the presence of God is extended to those who worship him with their lives (Deut. 10:1; Pss. 15; 24; Isa. 1:2–17; Mic. 6:6–8) and is to be accepted with humility and awe.

(3) In true worship the location has always been less important than the presence of the divine host. Deuteronomy suggests that Jesus’ words on the location to the Samaritan woman in John 4:21–24 may not have been as radical or revolutionary as we tend to imagine. Whatever else “in spirit and in truth” means, worship “in spirit” involves worship driven by the regenerating and animating work of the Spirit of God. Worship “in truth” is worship with integrity—participation in actions that please God and arise out of lives that please him as well. As Stephen declared in Acts 7:47–50, Israel’s spiritual pilgrimage took a wrong turn when they lost sight of the divine Resident and became preoccupied with his earthly residence.

(4) The redeemed anticipate worship with both delight and sobriety. On the one hand, those who worship God in spirit and in truth realize the incredible grace that God has lavished on them, first in his redemption, and second in his invitation to enter his presence (cf. Ps. 95:1–5). On the other hand, those who worship God in spirit and in truth are awed by the responsibility. True worship is never flippant or casual.

(5) True worship is communal rather than private. While we recognize that for believers all of life should be worship and that private basking in the presence of God is a great privilege and delight, when God’s people gather for corporate worship, they gather to bring collective praise or petition to God. This text also emphasizes the inclusion of the marginalized. Those who are genuinely grateful will share their gifts with the less fortunate and marginalized believers and invite them to walk with them into the presence of God.

This issue has become especially acute in our day. Reflecting on the ethnic make-up of congregations, authorities on worship have often said that the worship hour on Sunday morning is the most segregated hour of the week. Whereas in the past the comment lamented the division of God’s people on ethnic and racial grounds, to these fractures in recent times we have added segregation based on age and maturity. When churches split their services on the basis of race or age or musical tastes, the enemy has achieved his goal—a house divided. Worshipers who are overwhelmed by their own unworthiness on the one hand and the grace of God on the other will be more concerned about worship that pleases him than about pleasing themselves. If God’s people are united about anything, it should be about the joy and privilege of worshiping him—together!