Leviticus 17: Location, Location, Location

“Any man from the house of Israel who slaughters an ox, lamb or goat and has not brought it to the [altar at the] entrance to the Tent of Meeting, to bring it as an offering to God before the tabernacle of God, blood shall be imputed upon him, for he has shed blood, and he shall be uprooted from his people. So that the children of Israel shall bring that which they slaughter… to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting to the Kohen. And they shall no longer slaughter their offerings to the demons after whom they stray” (Verses 3-9).אִישׁ אִישׁ מִבֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁחַט שׁוֹר אוֹ־כֶשֶׂב אוֹ־עֵז בַּמַּחֲנֶה אוֹ אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁחָט מִחוּץ לַמַּחֲנֶה. וְאֶל־פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֹא הֱבִיאוֹ לְהַקְרִיב קָרְבָּן לַה' לִפְנֵי מִשְׁכַּן ה' דָּם יֵחָשֵׁב לָאִישׁ הַהוּא דָּם שָׁפָךְ וְנִכְרַת הָאִישׁ הַהוּא מִקֶּרֶב עַמּוֹ. לְמַעַן אֲשֶׁר יָבִיאוּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת־זִבְחֵיהֶם אֲשֶׁר הֵם זֹבְחִים עַל־פְּנֵי הַשָּׂדֶה וֶהֱבִיאוּם לַה' אֶל־פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד אֶל־הַכֹּהֵן. וְלֹא־יִזְבְּחוּ עוֹד אֶת־זִבְחֵיהֶם לַשְּׂעִירִם אֲשֶׁר הֵם זֹנִים אַחֲרֵיהֶם חֻקַּת עוֹלָם תִּהְיֶה־זֹּאת לָהֶם לְדֹרֹתָם.Now that the Mishkan is fully functional, God establishes it as the exclusive point of worship. Rav Lichtenstein points out that the Torah needs to focus on idol worship as the motivation for Mishkan exclusivity because of the state of the people at this time. As evident from the sin of the Golden Calf, the people were still very much steeped in Egyptian pagan mythology. The Mishkan was a way to channel that energy towards the worship of God. In order to do that, all other outside forms of worship needed to cease. The struggle of the people to keep this ordinance appears throughout the books of Neviim even before the kingdom split after Shlomo. In fact, the pull of sacrificing on personal altars was so strong that before the construction of the Temple, there were long periods of time where bamot were allowed despite the existence of the Mishkan. These were usually times when the Mishkan was not in a fully established location. the Gemara (primarily Zevachim 112b–117a) explains the history of bamot. Before the Mishkan was erected, bamot were fully permitted, and individuals could offer any type of korban on personal altars because there was no central sanctuary yet (Zevachim 112b). From the construction of the Mishkan in Shiloh until the destruction of Nov and Givon, bamot were generally forbidden, except in the era of Nov and Givon, when only nedarim and nedavot (voluntary offerings) were allowed on bamot, while communal sacrifices and obligatory offerings still required the central sanctuary (Zevachim 117a). Once the Beit HaMikdash in Jerusalem was built, the Gemara states that Jerusalem became the permanent and exclusive place for sacrifices, and bamot were prohibited forever (Zevachim 112b, 113a). Later after the split of the Northern and Southern Kingdoms, King Yerovaam faced a dilemma. While his kingdoms ceded from the tribe of Yehudah, Yerushalayim and the Temple were still the central focus of korbanot and worship of God. To counter this, he built two new altars—one in the northernmost part of his territory and one in the south. His goal was to undo the commandment here in chapter 17 and to keep the people away from the Southern Kingdom. He took the reasoning behind this commandment and used it against God and the Southern Kingdom. This is why these two bamot are continuously referenced during the Northern Kingdom. As long as there was an alternative to the central location to worship God, the people easily returned to pagan worship of the world around them.