Original Meaning
Righteousness in the Assembly of Yahweh (23:1–8)
THE PHRASE TO “ENTER the assembly of the LORD” (qehal yhwh) occurs six times, leaving no doubt that guarding the sanctity of the congregation is the primary concern of verses 1–8. The expression “assembly of the LORD” refers to those who have gathered before Yahweh for an audience with him, that is, to hear him speak. Whereas earlier texts had highlighted the inclusive nature of worship (12:7, 12; 16:11, 14), for the first time Moses raises barriers to the assembly. His text divides into two unequal parts, verses 1–6 and verses 7–8. The first part erects walls around “the assembly of the LORD,” while the second opens the doors to outsiders.
Defending the sanctity of the assembly of Yahweh (vv. 1–6). Moses erects three barriers to the assembly, each of which is intended to protect the sanctity of the community. The first category of excluded people is emasculated men. The male organs of procreation could have been mutilated either by crushing the testicles2 or surgically removing them.3 Whether the cause of deformity was accidental, intentional, or a birth defect, the restriction recalls earlier proscriptions on sacrificing animals with any kind of defect (15:21) or of admitting candidates with any defects to priestly service (Lev. 21:17–23). Moses does not explain why men with deformed genitalia should be excluded. In ancient times prisoners of war, slaves,4 and men who had committed adultery or engaged in homosexual acts were often castrated,5 but this prohibition seems has been influenced by pagan religious rites of self-castration, perhaps as an ascetic act of self-torment or in pious imitation of the gods.6 The reference to males only reflects the exclusively male character of Israel’s priestly classes.7
Moses’ second exclusion identifies the subject by the rare word mamzēr (NIV, one “born of a forbidden marriage,” v. 2a). While the etymology of the word is uncertain, linked to the preceding this seems to refer to offspring of prostitutes (cf. vv. 17–18) who lived at pagan cult sites. Moses’ earlier warning concerning improper worship (12:30–31) and the linkage of the tenth generation in verse 2b with Ammonites and Moabites in verse 3b reinforce this interpretation. Since Israelites traced both of these peoples to an incestuous act (Gen. 19:37–38), mamzēr may refer to one conceived through incestuous intercourse (prohibited in Lev. 18), or more broadly to one born of illicit sexual relationships (Deut. 22:13–29). Such persons were banned from the assembly to the tenth generation, which verse 3 clarifies as “forever.”8 Since children are not responsible for the circumstances of their conception, the ban seems harsh. However, viewed from God’s perspective, they are products of abominable unions, and to admit them violates the righteousness that governed Israel as a holy people belonging to Yahweh.9
The permanent exclusion of Ammonites and Moabites from “the assembly of the LORD”10 seems odd (vv. 3–6) in light of the more sympathetic disposition toward Edom in verse 7. Although Moses could have grounded this policy in these peoples’ incestuous origins (Gen. 19:30–38), he cites their refusal to greet the Israelites with bread and water when they came up from Egypt and their engagement of Balaam to curse them.11 Verse 5 is a parenthetical addition, reminding the people of the debt of gratitude they owe to Yahweh for their very existence. Frustrating the Moabites’ plan by refusing to use Balaam to curse Israel on Balak’s behalf, Yahweh had transformed intended curses into blessings, which become more effusive with each utterance (Num. 23:7–10, 18–24; 24:3–9, 15–19).
The motive clause at the end of verse 5 reminds Israel of the motif that drives the entire book of Deuteronomy: “because the LORD your God loves you.” Previously Moses had noted Yahweh’s love as the motivating force behind his election and rescue of Israel from Egypt (4:37; 7:8) and his lavish blessing (7:12), but here it underlies Yahweh’s protection from hostile military and spiritual forces. Because the Moabites and Ammonites had opposed Yahweh and his agenda regarding the Israelites, the Israelites are never to seek their peace or their welfare. Since “a treaty of friendship” functions as a general expression for well-being in covenantal contexts, this may be a ban on treaties with Ammonites and Moabites.12
Opening the doors to the assembly of Yahweh (vv. 7–8). Having closed the door to particular groups in verses 1–6, verse 7 invites the people eventually to open the assembly of Yahweh to outsiders. Moses opens the door with a remarkable statement: “Do not abhor an Edomite/Egyptian.” Moses grounds this more tolerant disposition toward the Edomites on Israel’s kinship with them (cf. Gen. 25:19–26; cf. Deut. 2:4–7).13 This conciliatory tone toward Edom (via-à-vis Moabites and Ammonites) may reflect Yahweh’s special interest in the direct descendants of Abraham (cf. Gen 27:39–40; 36).
The invitation to Egyptians is even more remarkable, especially in view of the abuse the Israelites had suffered at their hands. However, this disposition is rooted in their role as hosts to Israel: “because you lived as an alien in his country.” Here their status as gēr (“alien”) should be understood favorably (cf. Gen. 26:3). Because the Egyptians hosted them during a precarious phase of their history, they are rewarded by being granted admission to the assembly of Yahweh.14 Verse 8 qualifies the openness of Israelites toward Edomites and Egyptians. In three generations, presumably once those who were alive at the time of Israel’s exodus and desert sojourn have died, their descendants may be welcomed into Yahweh’s assembly, provided they, like genuinely pious Israelites, were devoted exclusively to Yahweh (cf. 6:4–5) and lived in keeping with the covenant.
Bridging Contexts
ENTERING THE ASSEMBLY OF Yahweh. Allusions to Moses’ appeal to guard the assembly of Yahweh (vv. 1–8) can be heard in several later texts. When David publicly declares his desire to build the temple, he refers to those gathered in Jerusalem as “the assembly of the LORD” (qehal yhwh) and appeals to them to pursue covenant righteousness by obeying the commands of Yahweh their God (1 Chron. 28:8). If 1 Kings 11:1–2 has this ordinance in mind, the narrator has lumped Egyptians, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hittites with Moabites and Ammonites and grounded intermarriage with foreigners on their exclusion from the assembly of Yahweh.
Allusions to Deuteronomy 23:1–5 are clearer in Nehemiah 13:1–3, where the public reading of this very text results in the exclusion of all foreigners from Israel, the expulsion of Tobiah the Ammonite from his temple apartment (vv. 4–9), and apparently the annulment of the Jews’ marriages to Ashdodites, Ammonites, and Moabites (vv. 23–26). Lamentations 1:10 identifies Nebuchandezzar’s forces with the nations whom Yahweh had forbidden to enter “the assembly belonging to you” (haqqāhāl lekâ). Similarly Ezekiel 44:5–9 bans all foreigners from the temple.22
However, Isaiah 56:3–8 provides the most striking adaptation of this text. The prophet anticipates a day when “eunuchs” will particpate fully in the worship of Yahweh:
Let no foreigner who has bound himself to the LORD say,
“The LORD will surely exclude me from his people.”
And let not any eunuch complain,
“I am only a dry tree.”
For this is what the LORD says:
“To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths,
who choose what pleases me
and hold fast to my covenant—
to them I will give within my temple and its walls
a memorial and a name
better than sons and daughters;
I will give them an everlasting name
that will not be cut off.
And foreigners who bind themselves to the LORD
to serve him,
to love the name of the LORD,
and to worship him,
all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it
and who hold fast to my covenant—
these I will bring to my holy mountain
and give them joy in my house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and sacrifices
will be accepted on my altar;
for my house will be called
a house of prayer for all nations.”
The Sovereign LORD declares—
he who gathers the exiles of Israel:
“I will gather still others to them
besides those already gathered.”
Although Isaiah characterizes eunuchs as outcasts of Israel, they are obviously committed to righteousness and the life of covenant fidelity as outlined in Deuteronomy. Isaiah envisions an eschatological day when these old barriers will be torn down. Why then should Moses ban eunuchs and Moabites and Ammonites permanently from the assembly of Yahweh? Apparently for him “eunuchs” serves as a cipher for all who oppose wholeness and order in creation and who oppose God’s redemptive plan. Isaiah 25:6–7 raises similar questions regarding the categorical and eternal rejection of Moabites and Ammonites. Whereas Isaiah 56:7 predicts a future in which Yahweh’s house will be a house of prayer for all peoples, 25:6–7 envisions Yahweh hosting a lavish banquet on his mountain to which all peoples are invited.
Ruth, the Moabite. What about Ruth, a Moabite whose status is reiterated seven times in the short book that goes by her name?23 Interpreted literally, according to Deuteronomy 23:1–5, David, the king of Israel and principal organizer of temple worship, should have been refused admission to the assembly of Yahweh, as should Jesus the Messiah himself (Matt. 1:1–17). Both were descendants of Perez. Like the eponymous Moab and Ben Ammi, Perez was conceived through an incestuous relationship between Judah and his Canaanite daughter-in-law, Tamar. Perhaps more seriously, being only three generations removed from Ruth, the blood in David’s veins was one-eighth Moabite. How could the present ordinance have been violated so flagrantly? And how could Ruth have taken her place alongside Leah and Rachel (Ruth 4:11) and come to be viewed as the supreme paragon of covenantal virtue,24 even having a canonical book named after her?25
It cannot be argued that since the genealogy of David (Ruth 4:18–22) traces the line through males (4:18–22), Ruth’s national background is irrelevant. Not only does Deuteronomy 23:2–5 not distinguish descendants on the basis of gender, but the book of Ruth makes a great deal of Ruth’s Moabite identity. Perhaps this book illustrates what has been true from the beginning: there have always been two Israels. One Israel is defined by blood and consists of all who are physical descendants of Jacob, while the other is defined by faith and includes all who share the faith of Abraham and Moses as laid out in Deuteronomy. Those in the former category are also excluded from the assembly of Yahweh because they are spiritual eunuchs. Those in the latter are invited because they live by the commitments expressed in Isaiah 56:3–8 and, like Ruth, have declared, “Your people will be my people and your God my God” (Ruth 1:16–17). Just as Rahab repudiated her spiritual Canaanite identity in Joshua 2:8–13, so Ruth repudiated her Moabite spiritual allegiances and found shelter under the wings of Yahweh (Ruth 2:12).
The spiritualization of the issues involved in verses 9–14 is evident already in the Old Testament, which applies words for human excrement to iniquitous behavior (Prov. 30:12; Isa. 4:4). But Jesus speaks explicitly on these issues in Mark 7:14–23:
Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a man can make him “unclean” by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him “unclean.”
. . . Don’t you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him “unclean”? For it doesn’t go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body. . . .
What comes out of a man is what makes him “unclean.” For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man “unclean.”
Contemporary Significance
A SPIRITUAL BODY. DEUTERONOMY 23:1–8 reminds modern Christian readers that the true Israel is primarily a spiritual body, a community of persons belonging to Yahweh, admitted to his assembly by his gracious invitation, and conditioned on their fidelity to him in life. The psalmists ask, “Who may ascend the hill of the LORD? Who may stand in his holy place?” (Ps. 24:3), and, “Who may dwell in your sanctuary? Who may live on your holy hill?” (Ps. 15:1). The issue here is: “Who is invited to worship in God’s presence, and whose worship will God receive favorably?” The answer is clear: “He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to an idol or swear by what is false” (Ps. 24:4), which is concretized in specific behaviors in 15:2–5.
While the call to salvation is unconditional (by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone), the call to worship is conditioned by faith demonstrated in righteous action. Elsewhere Moses speaks of the internal qualification as being circumcised of heart (10:16; 30:6), though in both contexts that disposition is expressed in demonstrated love for God and one’s neighbor. Centuries later Paul declared, “A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise is not from men, but from God” (Rom. 2:28–29). As a spiritual body, the true Israel recognizes the boundaries that separate this community from the world at large. The assembly of Yahweh welcomes those of genuine faith, but it maintains the highest standards of holiness. Those who stand in opposition to covenantal standards by personal conduct, religious compromise, or indifference and opposition to the work of God are not at home in the church.
God’s clean temple. But this passage also reminds us that when outsiders confess and demonstrate faith in Yahweh, the walls of separation based on race or class come down. The portrayal of Edomites and Israelites here provides a paradigm for treating those whom many would dismiss as outsiders by virtue of ethnic background or grudges that derive from relationships in past generations. This text invites readers to bury hatchets, to seek the peace and well-being of those who have no control over what their ancestors have done, and to move on.26
Although the New Testament frequently speaks of the agenda of the church in military terms (esp. Eph. 6:10–20), in 1 Corinthians 3:16–17 Paul refers to the church as “God’s temple,” in which “God’s Spirit lives.” Therefore, just as the camp of Israel was to be kept pure from defilements (vv. 9–14), so the church must be kept pure and free from sin. Again, the danger does not come from outside; it lurks within.
When I was growing up in a Dutch Mennonite community, we were often told “cleanliness is next to godliness.” This dictum may be more biblical than we realize.27 Within the history of medicine, few events have been as revolutionary as the discovery that many diseases are caused by germs and other microorganisms that flourish in human wastes. Nevertheless, although the practices prescribed here have obvious implications for physical health, this paragraph is not concerned primarily with personal or communal hygiene, but the spiritual well-being of the community. Israel’s victory in the battles of Yahweh depended on the ritual purity of the troops and the camp in which they lived. And so it is for us. God’s presence among his people requires diligent attention to issues of holiness.
Original Meaning
Maintaining Righteousness in the Camp of Israel (23:9–14)
THIS IS THE SIXTH of seven war texts in Deuteronomy. Whereas the others tend to highlight humanitarian (20:4–9, 10–15; 21:10–14; 24:5) or environmental issues (20:19–20), this text is concerned with theological and spiritual realities: the integrity of the military camp when Israelites go out to battle. Structurally the paragraph divides readily into three parts.
Theme: a call for purity in the camp (v. 9). Although texts like Exodus 13:18 and 14:19–20 suggest the Israelites as a whole marched out of Egypt as a massive military force, here “camp” refers to the actual fighting force. When they go out on campaigns, they are to guard against anything “impure” (lit., “every evil/bad thing/event”). The expression could refer to a threatening military situation, but in this context the danger is internal and theological; the Israelites are to guard themselves against every spiritual danger.
Exposition: the procedure for maintaining purity in the camp (vv. 10–13). Instead of identifying the danger directly, Moses charges the soldiers to guard against it by scrupulously observing purity laws within the camp. While Leviticus 15 identifies bodily discharges as the primary threats to purity,15 the present concern is the well-being of the army as they anticipate engaging the enemy in the upcoming wars of Yahweh.
Moses begins with instructions regarding seminal emissions (vv. 10–11). When a man out in the field away from his wife becomes unclean through a nocturnal emission of semen, he must leave the camp and remain outside until evening. As evening approaches he shall bathe himself in water, and as the sun is setting he may reenter the camp. This policy would obviously exclude those in this state of impurity from military action. However, concern for holiness superseded concern for military efficiency. Impurity itself is perceived as an active malevolent force whose power can only be checked by ablutions.16 Even in battle the holy people of Yahweh were to be represented by holy troops.
In verses 12–13 attention shifts to defecation, a daily source of impurity. The Torah has little to say about human excrement,17 but the present association with nocturnal emissions suggests its impurity derives from its source inside the human body rather than the repulsive nature of feces. When the army sets up camp, they (presumably the commanders) are to mark a place outside the camp18 where the men could relieve themselves. When warriors go out there, they must carry a tool from their kits to dig a hole and bury their feces.19
Rationale: the importance of purity in the camp (v. 14). In verse 14 the tone and style change from clinical and hygienic objectivity to theological principle: untended human excretions threaten the very presence of Yahweh. Although some see here a reference to Yahweh accompanying the Israelites into battle,20 the expression he “moves about in your camp” differs significantly from “he walks with you” in 20:4.21 The purpose statement, “to protect you and to deliver your enemies to you,” reinforces the importance of purity: Yahweh’s presence within the camp is the precondition to military victory. These clauses portray him as a divine commander inspecting his troops; if he finds any cause of defilement as he walks about the camp, he will abandon them, forcing them to fight their own battles with their own resources. The expression “anything indecent” expands these instructions to anything that causes contamination: corpses, other bodily excretions, unclean animals, and so on.
Bridging Contexts
ENTERING THE ASSEMBLY OF Yahweh. Allusions to Moses’ appeal to guard the assembly of Yahweh (vv. 1–8) can be heard in several later texts. When David publicly declares his desire to build the temple, he refers to those gathered in Jerusalem as “the assembly of the LORD” (qehal yhwh) and appeals to them to pursue covenant righteousness by obeying the commands of Yahweh their God (1 Chron. 28:8). If 1 Kings 11:1–2 has this ordinance in mind, the narrator has lumped Egyptians, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hittites with Moabites and Ammonites and grounded intermarriage with foreigners on their exclusion from the assembly of Yahweh.
Allusions to Deuteronomy 23:1–5 are clearer in Nehemiah 13:1–3, where the public reading of this very text results in the exclusion of all foreigners from Israel, the expulsion of Tobiah the Ammonite from his temple apartment (vv. 4–9), and apparently the annulment of the Jews’ marriages to Ashdodites, Ammonites, and Moabites (vv. 23–26). Lamentations 1:10 identifies Nebuchandezzar’s forces with the nations whom Yahweh had forbidden to enter “the assembly belonging to you” (haqqāhāl lekâ). Similarly Ezekiel 44:5–9 bans all foreigners from the temple.22
However, Isaiah 56:3–8 provides the most striking adaptation of this text. The prophet anticipates a day when “eunuchs” will particpate fully in the worship of Yahweh:
Let no foreigner who has bound himself to the LORD say,
“The LORD will surely exclude me from his people.”
And let not any eunuch complain,
“I am only a dry tree.”
For this is what the LORD says:
“To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths,
who choose what pleases me
and hold fast to my covenant—
to them I will give within my temple and its walls
a memorial and a name
better than sons and daughters;
I will give them an everlasting name
that will not be cut off.
And foreigners who bind themselves to the LORD
to serve him,
to love the name of the LORD,
and to worship him,
all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it
and who hold fast to my covenant—
these I will bring to my holy mountain
and give them joy in my house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and sacrifices
will be accepted on my altar;
for my house will be called
a house of prayer for all nations.”
The Sovereign LORD declares—
he who gathers the exiles of Israel:
“I will gather still others to them
besides those already gathered.”
Although Isaiah characterizes eunuchs as outcasts of Israel, they are obviously committed to righteousness and the life of covenant fidelity as outlined in Deuteronomy. Isaiah envisions an eschatological day when these old barriers will be torn down. Why then should Moses ban eunuchs and Moabites and Ammonites permanently from the assembly of Yahweh? Apparently for him “eunuchs” serves as a cipher for all who oppose wholeness and order in creation and who oppose God’s redemptive plan. Isaiah 25:6–7 raises similar questions regarding the categorical and eternal rejection of Moabites and Ammonites. Whereas Isaiah 56:7 predicts a future in which Yahweh’s house will be a house of prayer for all peoples, 25:6–7 envisions Yahweh hosting a lavish banquet on his mountain to which all peoples are invited.
Ruth, the Moabite. What about Ruth, a Moabite whose status is reiterated seven times in the short book that goes by her name?23 Interpreted literally, according to Deuteronomy 23:1–5, David, the king of Israel and principal organizer of temple worship, should have been refused admission to the assembly of Yahweh, as should Jesus the Messiah himself (Matt. 1:1–17). Both were descendants of Perez. Like the eponymous Moab and Ben Ammi, Perez was conceived through an incestuous relationship between Judah and his Canaanite daughter-in-law, Tamar. Perhaps more seriously, being only three generations removed from Ruth, the blood in David’s veins was one-eighth Moabite. How could the present ordinance have been violated so flagrantly? And how could Ruth have taken her place alongside Leah and Rachel (Ruth 4:11) and come to be viewed as the supreme paragon of covenantal virtue,24 even having a canonical book named after her?25
It cannot be argued that since the genealogy of David (Ruth 4:18–22) traces the line through males (4:18–22), Ruth’s national background is irrelevant. Not only does Deuteronomy 23:2–5 not distinguish descendants on the basis of gender, but the book of Ruth makes a great deal of Ruth’s Moabite identity. Perhaps this book illustrates what has been true from the beginning: there have always been two Israels. One Israel is defined by blood and consists of all who are physical descendants of Jacob, while the other is defined by faith and includes all who share the faith of Abraham and Moses as laid out in Deuteronomy. Those in the former category are also excluded from the assembly of Yahweh because they are spiritual eunuchs. Those in the latter are invited because they live by the commitments expressed in Isaiah 56:3–8 and, like Ruth, have declared, “Your people will be my people and your God my God” (Ruth 1:16–17). Just as Rahab repudiated her spiritual Canaanite identity in Joshua 2:8–13, so Ruth repudiated her Moabite spiritual allegiances and found shelter under the wings of Yahweh (Ruth 2:12).
The spiritualization of the issues involved in verses 9–14 is evident already in the Old Testament, which applies words for human excrement to iniquitous behavior (Prov. 30:12; Isa. 4:4). But Jesus speaks explicitly on these issues in Mark 7:14–23:
Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. Nothing outside a man can make him “unclean” by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him “unclean.”
. . . Don’t you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him “unclean”? For it doesn’t go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body. . . .
What comes out of a man is what makes him “unclean.” For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man “unclean.”
Contemporary Significance
A SPIRITUAL BODY. DEUTERONOMY 23:1–8 reminds modern Christian readers that the true Israel is primarily a spiritual body, a community of persons belonging to Yahweh, admitted to his assembly by his gracious invitation, and conditioned on their fidelity to him in life. The psalmists ask, “Who may ascend the hill of the LORD? Who may stand in his holy place?” (Ps. 24:3), and, “Who may dwell in your sanctuary? Who may live on your holy hill?” (Ps. 15:1). The issue here is: “Who is invited to worship in God’s presence, and whose worship will God receive favorably?” The answer is clear: “He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to an idol or swear by what is false” (Ps. 24:4), which is concretized in specific behaviors in 15:2–5.
While the call to salvation is unconditional (by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone), the call to worship is conditioned by faith demonstrated in righteous action. Elsewhere Moses speaks of the internal qualification as being circumcised of heart (10:16; 30:6), though in both contexts that disposition is expressed in demonstrated love for God and one’s neighbor. Centuries later Paul declared, “A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise is not from men, but from God” (Rom. 2:28–29). As a spiritual body, the true Israel recognizes the boundaries that separate this community from the world at large. The assembly of Yahweh welcomes those of genuine faith, but it maintains the highest standards of holiness. Those who stand in opposition to covenantal standards by personal conduct, religious compromise, or indifference and opposition to the work of God are not at home in the church.
God’s clean temple. But this passage also reminds us that when outsiders confess and demonstrate faith in Yahweh, the walls of separation based on race or class come down. The portrayal of Edomites and Israelites here provides a paradigm for treating those whom many would dismiss as outsiders by virtue of ethnic background or grudges that derive from relationships in past generations. This text invites readers to bury hatchets, to seek the peace and well-being of those who have no control over what their ancestors have done, and to move on.26
Although the New Testament frequently speaks of the agenda of the church in military terms (esp. Eph. 6:10–20), in 1 Corinthians 3:16–17 Paul refers to the church as “God’s temple,” in which “God’s Spirit lives.” Therefore, just as the camp of Israel was to be kept pure from defilements (vv. 9–14), so the church must be kept pure and free from sin. Again, the danger does not come from outside; it lurks within.
When I was growing up in a Dutch Mennonite community, we were often told “cleanliness is next to godliness.” This dictum may be more biblical than we realize.27 Within the history of medicine, few events have been as revolutionary as the discovery that many diseases are caused by germs and other microorganisms that flourish in human wastes. Nevertheless, although the practices prescribed here have obvious implications for physical health, this paragraph is not concerned primarily with personal or communal hygiene, but the spiritual well-being of the community. Israel’s victory in the battles of Yahweh depended on the ritual purity of the troops and the camp in which they lived. And so it is for us. God’s presence among his people requires diligent attention to issues of holiness.