Book of Deuteronomy

I am currently revising and expanding the material presented in this paper in preparation for an upcoming Theopolis Explorations volume. The forthcoming book will explore some important areas that I was not able to cover at length in this paper, notably how the imago Dei relates to humanity's destiny as council as well as Enochic literature and other Pseudepigrapha.

This paper was first presented to Dr. Peter J. Leithart and Dr. James B. Jordan at Theopolis Institute on March 11, 2017.

My treatment of the Divine Council really is the exploration of a story.  In this story man was created by God as a child—an infant, really—and is steadily brought to maturity.  The fall of Adam immediately presents an obstacle to how this maturation is supposed to progress, but it does not frustrate God’s plan; instead it directs the story to an even more glorious conclusion.  This is the story of how God elevated mankind to his place in Council through Jesus Christ, the man.

The rhetorical impact of the explicit and allusive references to Gerizim and Jerusalem in the first seven books of the Hebrew Bible (Genesis-Judges) implies that all these writings originate from the territory of Ephraim, and not from Judah. Their rhetoric consistently highlights the importance of the central sanctuary of Yahweh in the region of Shechem in the territory of the tribe of Joseph/Ephraim, more and more clearly pointing to its location on Mount Gerizim. On the other hand, their allusive rhetoric presents the tribe of Judah, especially its historical capital in Jerusalem, in negative terms, thus conveying the idea of the superiority of the sanctuary on Mount Gerizim over the rival sanctuary on Mount Zion, as well as that at Dan.

This translation of Deuteronomy follows a similar approach to my translations of Genesis and Samuel. In this, as in my other translations, my priority was always to express the ideas in the text in the most natural way in English, and at the same time to capture the energy and rhythm of the original Hebrew. Compared with my other translations, this translation is "freer" and departs further and more frequently from the literal meaning of the text. This is especially true for the many laws in the middle portions of the book, which are written in a legalistic prose style that I could only reproduce by employing a more formal semi-legalistic vocabulary and syntax.

One unique aspect of this translation is that it jettisons the traditional chapter divisions and instead organizes the material according to the Masoretic parashot. Organizing the text in this way gets us closer to the ancient writers, and yields numerous insights into their composition approach.

The commentary accompanying the translation focuses primarily on issues of translation and language. After the commentary I provide an essay that summarizes my views on the composition history of Deuteronomy and that assigns each of the parashot to one of the four major compositional stages that I identify, which span a period of nearly three hundred years, from the late seventh century to the mid fourth century BCE.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike International 4.0 license. The full text can also be downloaded at the Internet archive at https://archive.org/details/deuteronomy_202008/mode/2up.

The print edition of this book is available at: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1733441573/

Deut 22:5 marks the single instance of a prohibition of transvestitism in the Bible, and in its whole cultural milieu. The context in which it is situated suggests that it may have been inserted there as an addition, after the Babylonian captivity. That helps to narrow down the range of speculations as to the original Sitz im Leben of the law and enables us to read it most of all within the canonical framework of the entirety of the Pentateuch. Hence, the precept pertains mainly to the principle of division of the human nature into the two sexes (Gen 1-2), the principle of retaining the order of creation (by not mixing kinds; Lev 19:19; Deut 22:9-11), and of keeping the procreational power, referred to here predominantly to masculinity (Gen 5:1-3; cf. Gen 1:28; 9:1.7).

The similarities between Noah's ark and the saving boat in Mesopotamian flood accounts are widely known. Likewise known are the links between Noah's ark and the chest of Moses (Exod 2:3). However, the connections between the "chest" of Noah and the "chest" of the testimony have not hitherto drawn adequate scholarly attention. The article explores these connections on both the linguistic and the conceptual level. Moreover, it investigates their function in hypertextual links of the Genesis flood account to earlier Israelite literary works, especially the book of Deuteronomy and the book of Joshua.

The Hebraic Concept of Time is non-linear, made up of repeating types and patterns. As opposed to Western chronology, the Gospels are not written in chronological order, but were written to show how Jesus is the fulfillment of types revealed in the Torah. They used the various books of the Torah upon which to model their individual books. Their main structural elements were typological.

This is my MA dissertation from 2011. A more recent (2016) examination of the same issue is offered in the Conference Paper entitled 'Ḥerem and the Deuteronomist'.

Ḥerem, the total annihilation of the conquered enemies of Israel, has exercised apologists and lay-people for centuries. The two standard responses – that it is God’s righteous judgment on an idolatrous people, or is a literary construct bearing little relationship to actual events – have failed to soothe the anxieties of many. In addition, the expanding field of biblical theology has largely disregarded the issue. This dissertation examines three novel theological models of ḥerem to investigate whether they contribute to the biblical theological understanding of the issue. Firstly, the work of Susan Niditch is considered. In addition to seeing ḥerem as judgment, she argues that it is a form of sacrifice, dealing with the guilt of the perpetrator, not of the victim. Secondly, Philip Stern describes ḥerem as the creation of order out of chaos, following Eliade’s understanding of land settlement as a cosmogonic event. Thirdly, Hyung-Dae Park has classified ḥerem into voluntary, instigated by a human act of piety, and mandatory, commanded by God. According to his classification, redemption is possible from mandatory but not from voluntary ḥerem. Finally, the work of René Girard is briefly considered, as it overlaps with the work of both Niditch and Stern.
The dissertation then considers whether these models might contribute to our understanding of the Cross. It is concluded that Niditch’s theory provides a paradigm for human sacrifice; that Stern’s order-out-of chaos is part of both the biblical theological trajectory of creation/recreation, and the Christus Victor model of the atonement; and that Park’s classification of ḥerem enriches the propitiatory atonement model by viewing Jesus as voluntary ḥerem in redemption of Israel which is mandatory ḥerem. Finally, considering whether the Cross can assist our reading of ḥerem, the dissertation concludes that Girard’s theory of scapegoating, despite limitations in its usefulness, encourages us to identify the victims of ḥerem with Jesus.

The presence of Numeruswechsel, the frequent switching between singular and plural in second-person address, is especially prevalent in Deuteronomy. Studies of the phenomenon as it relates to the book’s composition have led to mixed conclusions. This paper takes up again the singular-plural interchange in the deuteronomic core, in order to reconsider its value in identifying Urdeuteronomium. The paper explores the pericopes marked especially by the you-singular, and concludes with a proposal on the origins of ‘original Deuteronomy.'

God was faithful to preserve those who remained faithful to him. Moses emphasized the righteousness of God but also the empirically evidenced disobedience of his people, with himself included. The people were to learn that God’s law (and by implication, God himself) is and always has been righteous (Deut. 4:8) and historically, they had not been righteous. Even so, God remains near to them when they call upon his name (Deut. 4:7). The message is that God demands obedience and he remains near his  people.

On the one hand, the book of Deuteronomy strongly condemns the veneration of cult statues and all other embodiments of deities, including the aniconic standing stones (4:1-40; 5:8-10; 9:1-29; 16:21-22, etc). On the other hand, the book reveres cultic objects that record the words of God and Moses, such as the two stone tablets with the Decalogue (4:13; 5:6-22; 9:9-11,15,17-18; 10:1-5), the scroll on which Moses wrote his long speech to the people (31:9-13,24-26), the copy for the king (17:18), the stones on Mount Ebal (27:1-8), and the texts worn on the arms and the forehead or written on doorposts and gates (6:8-9; 11:18-20). It is not coincidental that the recommendation of the tablets with the Decalogue occurs in the same part of the book as the condemnation of the cultic images. The cult statues and standing stones may give the impression that the gods are close, but for the authors of Deuteronomy such lifeless, man-made representations show that the gods are dead and powerless. The ban on making images of YHWH is due to the idea that this God is completely different: powerful, active, close, caring, offended when people reject Him, and compassionate when they need Him. The uniqueness of YHWH and His wish that His people love and fear Him can only be expressed in words. This is the reason why Deuteronomy accompanies the ban on cultic images with the promotion of religious texts.

Moses Wilhelm Shapira’s infamous Deuteronomy fragments – long believed to be forgeries – are authentic ancient manuscripts, and they are of far greater significance than ever imagined. The literary work that these manuscripts preserve – which Idan Dershowitz calls “The Valediction of Moses” or “V” – is not based on the book of Deuteronomy. On the contrary, V is a much earlier version of Deuteronomy. In other words, V is a proto-biblical book, the likes of which has never before been seen. This conclusion is supported by a series of philological analyses, as well as previously unknown archival documents, which undermine the consensus on these manuscripts. An excursus co-authored with Na’ama Pat-El assesses V’s linguistic profile, finding it to be consistent with Iron Age epigraphic Hebrew.

V contains early versions of passages whose biblical counterparts reflect substantial post-Priestly updating. Moreover, unlike the canonical narratives of Deuteronomy, this ancient work shows no signs of influence from the Deuteronomic law code. Indeed, V preserves an earlier, and dramatically different, literary structure for the entire work – one that lacks the Deuteronomic law code altogether.

These findings have significant consequences for the composition history of the Bible, historical linguistics, the history of religion, paleography, archaeology, and more. The volume includes a full critical edition and English translation of V.

The biblical text is explicit that God revealed Ten Words to his people at Mt. Sinai (Exod 34:28), but uncertainty still remains as to the proper enumeration of these ten. Many recent studies of the Decalogue accept without discussion the traditional Reformed breakdown. Throughout the centuries, however, interpreters have questioned their proper itemization, debating issues of form, style, semantic content, and cantillation, especially with reference to the boundaries of “words” one, two, and ten. The problems are only intensified by the various distinctions between Exod 20:1–17 and Deut 5:5–21. Recent studies in grammar above the sentence level (textlinguistics or discourse grammar) open new doors for evaluating literary structure from a bottom-up rather than top-down approach. Utilizing a nuanced understanding of the form, meaning, and function of the Hebrew connector wa, asyndetic constructions, and pronouns, this study reevaluates the numbering of the Decalogue and argues that the Masoretic paragraph marking and the traditional Catholic-Lutheran enumeration most closely align with the formal text-grammatical signals and find strong support from the perspective of form, style, semantic content, and cantillation. God gave us Ten Words, and we should know how to count them.

This course introduces Old Testament biblical literature, hermeneutics, and literary critical methodologies with a primary focus on the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. Students learn to observe the overall structure of these books, their historical settings, and modern approaches to their literary analysis. Students learn to interpret individual texts within each book. Students study how Deuteronomy uses the material of Exodus to communicate God’s Word to a new generation.

The meaning, cause, and remedy of the biblical ‫צרעת‬ have been the source of much debate. Traditional translations have rendered the word as leprosy, usually with the somewhat confusing caveat that despite the retention of leprosy, it does not mean leprosy. The root צרע‬ yields our problematic ‫צרעת‬ , proper names, and three occurrences of a stinging insect capable of chasing out Hivites, Canaanites, Hittites, and two Amorite kings! Shapira's MSS sensibly suggests a more dangerous fiend to the Canaanites than a hornet-the dreaded ‫צרעת‬ .

This paper provides a thematic overview of Deuteronomy's message within the framework of whole-Bible theology. It argues that Moses would have agreed with Paul that the old covenant bore a ministry of condemnation in the hope of a new covenant that would bear a ministry of righteousness. Messiah Jesus is the telos of Deuteronomic hope and the one through whom Deuteronomy itself bears a lasting message for the new covenant church.

Die vorliegende Sammlung zahlreicher Beiträge aus ganz unterschiedlichen Gebieten des Alten Testaments verdeutlicht die enorme Quelle der Inspiration, zu welcher Hendrik Koorevaar über viele Jahre für seine Schüler und Freunde geworden ist. Orientiert ist der Titel »Das heilige Herz der Tora« an einem Aufsatz, den Hendrik Koorevaar in einem Themenbuch zur Theologie des Alten Testaments im Jahr 2007 veröffentlicht hat. 

Content:

ERSTER TEIL – HISTORIE UND HERMENEUTIK

Herbert H. Klement
Narrative Historie und Identität des Gottesvolkes: Zur Bedeutung von Geschichte und Geschichten im Alten Testament 3

Carsten Vang
Deuteronomy and the Notion of Exile 23

Walter Gisin
Adam, Eva und die Jakobsfamilie in Hosea 6,7-11a 41

G. W. Lorein
Dealing with Scripture and Circumstances in Nehemiah 9-10 61

Kristofer D. Holroyd
Multiple Speech Act Layers, Jeremiah, and the Future of Studies in
Structural Theology 79

ZWEITER TEIL – KANON UND STRUKTUR

Benjamin Kilchör
Zur literarischen und theologischen Funktion der An- und Absageformeln in den Pentateuchgesetzen 97

Raymond R. Hausoul
Leviticus 25-27 in de metafysische grootheid Exodus-Leviticus-Numeri 121

Gunnar Begerau
Strukturelle und inhaltlich-theologische Verbindungen der Ketuvim in der Anordnung der BHS 135

Walter Hilbrands
Die Bedeutung der Struktur und Integrität des Predigerbuches für dessen Theologie 153

Julius Steinberg
Das Hohelied – ein integrativer Ansatz 167

Hans van Nes
Traces of A Three Part Canon underlying 1 Peter 183

DRITTER TEIL – THEOLOGIE UND ETHIK

Jan L. Verbruggen
The History of Interpretation of Exodus 21:22-25 201

Eveline van Staalduine-Sulman
Impurity 237

Pieter A. Siebesma
Het boek Jona in de uitleg van de Middeleeuwse Joodse exegeten 257

W. Creighton Marlowe
Righteous People in Proverbs 267

Mart-Jan Paul
The Translation of Hebel in Ecclesiastes 285

Gie Vleugels
The Destruction of the Second Temple  in the Odes of Solomon 303

Patrick Nullens
Value Personalism as a Lens to Read the Ten Commandments 311

Siegbert Riecker
Altes Testament und allgemeingültige Ethik: Plädoyer für ein
Second Quest nach den Noachidischen Geboten 325

Key words:

Altes Testament; Historie; Hermeneutik; Kanon; Theologie; Ethik; Deuteronomium; Speech Act Theory; Kohelet; Abtreibung; Pentateuch; Ketuvim; Hoheslied; Hosea 6; Nehemia 9-10; Oden Salomos; 1. Petrus; Jona; Impurity; Noachitische Gebote.

This is the first book-length study to explore the Hebrew Bible, and specifically the Pentateuch, as a coherent book of political philosophy.

In Created Equal, Joshua Berman engages the text of the Hebrew Bible from a novel perspective, considering it as a document of social and political thought. He proposes that the Pentateuch can be read as the earliest prescription on record for the establishment of an egalitarian polity. What emerges is the blueprint for a society that would stand in stark contrast to the surrounding cultures of the ancient Near East -- Egypt, Mesopotamia, Ugarit, and the Hittite Empire - in which the hierarchical structure of the polity was centered on the figure of the king and his retinue. Berman shows that an egalitarian ideal is articulated in comprehensive fashion in the Pentateuch and is expressed in its theology, politics, economics, use of technologies of communication, and in its narrative literature. Throughout, he invokes parallels from the modern period as heuristic devices to illuminate ancient developments. Thus, for example, the constitutional principles in the Book of Deuteronomy are examined in the light of those espoused by Montesquieu, and the rise of the novel in 18th-century England serves to illuminate the advent of new modes of storytelling in biblical narrative.

Introduction Appended

In Rom 4:18, Paul cites the “promise” to Abraham in LXX Gen 15:5, “so shall your seed be” (οὕτως ἔσται τὸ σπέρμα σου) in relation to what it means to “become the father of many nations” from Gen 17:5. Modern scholars have traditionally understood the relationship Paul sees between these two texts quantitatively, as promising a multitude of descendants made up of Jews and Gentiles. Conversely, some early Jewish interpreters of Gen 15:5 (and related texts such as Gen 22:17; 26:4) such as Philo, Sirach, and the author(s) of the Apocalypse of Abraham understood the promise qualitatively, as speaking not only of multiplication but of transformation into the likeness of the stars and assumption of their power. Reading Paul’s use of Gen 15:5 in light of this qualitative interpretation places him within the context of already well-established deification or angelomorphic traditions in early Judaism that see the destiny of Abraham’s seed as replacing the stars as the divine or angelic inheritors of the nations. This tradition may provide a more fitting explanation of the relationship Paul sees between Gen 17:5 and 15:5 in the wider context of the argument of Rom 4. This reading could illuminate the relationship between a complex nexus of ideas that Paul sees implicit in the one promise to Abraham in Gen 15:5. The promise of becoming as the stars of heaven would encompass the inheritance of the cosmos, becoming a father of many nations, and the resurrection from the dead.

Most scholars read Peter's claim that it is unlawful for Jews to associate with Gentiles (Acts 10:28a) as an accurate statement on Jewish-Gentile relations according to Luke. However, Luke problematizes this view by showing Peter to be unaware of Jewish-Gentile interactions that preceded him, both in Israel's Scriptures and Luke-Acts. Rather than reflecting the exclusionary state of pre-Christian Judaism, Acts 10:28a constitutes a fallacy that Luke invalidates via intertextual references to ethnic inclusivity throughout biblical history. Peter's misunderstanding provides Luke with the theological rationale for Paul to take the missionary mantle from Peter as the apostle to the Gentiles.

A team of scholars recently announced the discovery of a lead amulet (defixio) in 2019 by wetsifting dirt excavated by Adam Zertal in archaeological seasons from 1982 to 1989. This article provides the basic story, a brief overview of the search for the elusive biblical Mount Ebal, and then considers the biblical Ebal narratives in the light of Moses Wilhelm Shapira's MSS and the recent discovery.

In his 2021 monograph "The Valediction of Moses", Idan Dershowitz argues that the manuscripts offered for sale by Moses Wilhelm Shapira in 1883, generally considered to have been forged, were genuine and contained a pre-exilic source text of Deuteronomy he refers to as V. Based on Dershowitz’s new critical edition of the text, this paper examines the historical and philological evidence for this thesis. V’s literary dependence on the Masoretic Text can be demonstrated on text-critical and linguistic grounds, which makes a pre-exilic date of composition highly unlikely. An analysis of the historical, literary, and linguistic arguments presented by Dershowitz moreover shows that nothing in V proves its authenticity, while the orthography and certain linguistic features strongly support the identification of this text as a forgery produced between 1870 and 1880.

This commentary for the first time in the history of its interpretation is uniting diachronic and synchronic readings and mediates them. The diachronic reading shows the Book of Deuteronomy standing at the beginning of the literary history of the Pentateuch in the 7th cent. BCE The synchronic reading shows Deuteronomy as the copestone of the Pentateuch. The exegesis of Deut 12-26 integrates the commendmants of Deuteronomy  into the biblical and ANE history of law and religion. The interpretation of the postexilic framework in Deut 27-34 shows Moses as the arch-prophet who  prophesies the accomplishment of Israel's history

Moses Wilhelm Shapira’s infamous Deuteronomy fragments have long been deemed forgeries, with Shapira himself serving as the obvious suspect. I provide new evidence that Shapira did not forge the fragments and was himself convinced of their authenticity. Indeed, the evidence for forgery is illusory. In a companion monograph, I show that the Shapira fragments are not only authen- tic ancient artifacts but are unprecedented in their significance: They preserve a pre-canonical antecedent of the Book of Deuteronomy.