INTRODUCTION
1. Name
The name Deuteronomy results from a mistranslation of Dt 17:18. For the Hebrew “a copy of this law,” the LXX and the Vulgate have terms meaning “the second law” or “a repetition of this law.” Internal data locate the book as beginning in the desert east of the Jordan in Moab on the first day of the eleventh month of the fortieth year—forty years after the Exodus from Egypt (1:3). This was after Moses and the Israelites had defeated Sihon and Og, kings of the Amorites in Transjordan (1:4).
2. Character and Author
In addition to the many statements about Moses’ speaking these words are statements made within the book itself that indicate he was the author (cf. 1:5; 31:9, 22, 24, 30). Other OT books assert Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy (1Ki 2:3; 8:53; 2Ki 14:6; 18:6, 12), as do Jesus and writers of the NT (Mt 19:7–8; Mk 10:3–5; 12:19; Jn 5:46–47; Ac 3:22; 7:37–38; Ro 10:19).
Deuteronomy can be approached from several angles: (1) as a “Book of the Law”; (2) as a series of addresses given by Moses, repeating much of the earlier legal material in the Pentateuch and adding various other elements; (3) as a covenant-treaty between the sovereign Lord and his people, similar in both form and content to other covenant-treaties that have been found in the ancient Near East (having a preamble, historical prologue, various laws, arrangement for depositing treaty copies and for regular reading of the treaty, witnesses, and curses and blessings); (4) as a compendium of directives that the Lord gives through Moses to the Israelites as they are about to enter Canaan. Of these four, it is primarily a covenant renewal document, to prepare the new generation of God’s covenant people to live responsibly and joyfully under the Lord’s rule in the Promised Land (i.e., the third purpose).
3. Purpose
The purpose of Deuteronomy is distinctly stated as “Hear, O Israel,” “These are the commands,” and “Be careful to do” (4:1–2, 5–6, 9–14, et al.). Such exhortations are often followed by reasons for obedience to the Lord. The basic existential occasion grew out of the rescue of the people from Egypt and their position on the southeastern border of Canaan—poised to enter and to occupy that land as their own in fulfillment of the promises first made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and now reiterated to the descendants of the I patriarchs. It was the intention of God to form their nation and give Canaan to them as their national homeland (cf. 6:18).
The book of Deuteronomy calls for the enactment (renewal) of the covenant as the Israelites prepared to enter Canaan to conquer and occupy it, and it presents the way of life that they were to follow in the Promised Land. Incidental to this covenant enactment are the curses that would fall on Israel if they failed to observe the stipulations and the blessings they would receive when they obeyed the Lord.
4. Theological Values
The theological values of Deuteronomy can hardly be exaggerated. It stands as the wellspring of biblical historical revelation. It is a prime source for both OT and NT theology. When the prophets speak of God, they speak of the God and the message of Deuteronomy and of the relationship embodied in its covenant-treaty. The warnings of doom in the prophets (esp. Jeremiah) are the warnings and curses of Deuteronomy. The promises of blessing for the Israelites when they live in faith, love, and obedience to the Lord are the blessings of Deuteronomy.
The way of life for the people of God forms the basis of all subsequent revelation of the way of life that is acceptable to him. God has redeemed his treasured inheritance from the bondage of Egypt, and he is about to fulfill his promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by giving them the Promised Land. The later NT teachings on the love of God, the redemption offered through Christ, the saved as the inheritance of God, and the fulfillment of the promises of God to the saved as their inheritance from him rest on Deuteronomy.
God in this book is personal, eternal, omnipotent, sovereign, purposeful, loving, holy, and righteous. The knowledge of his person and will is communicated by propositional, directive, exhortative, informative, and predictive revelation. No other god exists.
The most important element of subjective theology in Deuteronomy is that of absolutely unqualified, total commitment of the people of the Lord. Nothing else is acceptable, especially no syncretism with other gods or other religious practices. The people belong to the Lord alone!
EXPOSITION
I. Preamble (1:1–5)
1–5 The terms used here indicate the nature of the book. “These are the words” suggests a suzerain-vassal treaty preamble. “All that the LORD had commanded him” indicates the source of the material in the book, the nature of Moses’ ministry as communicator of the Lord’s commands rather than that of an author, and the authoritative character of the addresses as commands of the Lord.
“The LORD [GK 3378],” “The LORD our God,” “The LORD your God,” “The LORD, the God of your fathers” (1:3, 6, 10, 11, et al.) all signify a strong emphasis on the Lord as the originator of everything that follows in Deuteronomy. He transcends any king (or any god) in the suzerain-vassal treaties (where gods are mentioned as empowering the kings), because he is not only superior to all other gods but he is the supreme author, enactor, and benefactor of the covenant-treaty.
A crucial, stirring moment in the experience of the new nation was at hand. It was time for the Israelites to realize the Lord’s promises from the past—a time for the fulfillment of the hope that began at the Exodus. The Lord’s concern—and Moses’—was to prepare the people for the conquest and occupation of Canaan. Now, on the brink of crossing the Jordan, Moses reviewed the salient historical events and Israel’s covenant-treaty with the Lord.
The geographical references in these verses were evidently known in Moses’ time. Perhaps these locations identify a few of the places where Moses had earlier imparted some of “these . . . words” to the people. Laban and Hazeroth appear to be two stations on the journey from Egypt to Canaan (Nu 33:18, 20–21). Mount “Horeb,” which is interchangeable with Mount Sinai, is used more often in Deuteronomy (1:2, 6, 19; 4:10, 15; et al.) but also occurs elsewhere in the OT. “In the fortieth year” marks the terminal point of the generation that disobeyed the command at Kadesh.
Sihon and Og were kings of Amorite peoples (cf. 2:24–3:11; ZPEB, 1:140–43). Heshbon was the capital city of Moab, but Sihon had captured it and made it his capital. Bashan was the territory east of the Lake of Galilee. Ashtaroth, Og’s capital, was a little more than twenty miles east of the Lake of Galilee while Edrei, where Israel defeated Og, was a little less than twenty miles southeast of Ashtaroth. Canaan proper, west of Jordan, is labeled “the hill country of the Amorites” (vv.7, 19, 20, et al.). Sihon controlled southern Transjordan and Og the northern sector, mainly the area east of the Lake of Galilee. So here, “east of the Jordan,” Moses began his sermon.
II. First Address: The Historical Prologue (1:6–4:43)
A. Experiences From Horeb to the Jordan (1:6–3:29)
1. The command to leave Horeb (1:6–8)
6–8 Moses began by reciting God’s order to leave Horeb and go to Canaan, though what the Lord commanded the people was a new bit of information (its content is given only here; cf. Nu 10:11–13). The Lord’s gift of Canaan to Israel and his command to them to enter and to possess the land are cardinal elements of the book. The description of the extent of the land coincides with that promised on oath to the fathers (Ge 15:18). The geographical terms delimit the land by sections: “The Arabah” is the Jordan Valley from Lake Galilee to the area south of the Dead Sea; “the mountains,” the central hill country; “the western foothills,” the slopes toward the Mediterranean; “the Negev,” the area north of the Sinai peninsula but south of the central hill country; “the coast,” the land along the Mediterranean; “the land of the Canaanites” and “Lebanon, as far as . . . the Euphrates,” the northern section.
The promise of the land was given “to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob—and to their descendants.” The land, then, first promised to Abraham, was given Isaac as the “only” son of Abraham and Sarah and then limited to Jacob and his sons, the heirs of the promise (Ge 12:7; 15:18; 26:3–4; 28:4, 13–15). This promise was reaffirmed at the burning bush (Ex 3:8, 17).
2. The appointment of leaders (1:9–18)
9–14 The increased number of Israelites presented too many problems for Moses to care for alone. Consequently, political and juridical appointments were initiated. No mention is made here of the instigation of this procedure by Moses’ father-in-law (cf. Ex 18:13–26); here Moses simply stated that he saw the need for “judges” [GK 9149] in political and judicial activity as his assistants. While Exodus suggests that Moses himself appointed these leaders, it is apparent from v.13 that the people chose the leaders as representative of the various tribes, and then Moses appointed them to their several tasks (vv.15–18). The leaders were to be characterized by wisdom, understanding, and experience.
15–18 The use of the word “commanders” [GK 8569] and the size of the groups—thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens—suggest a military arrangement. The need, however, was for assistant judges, not for military men. The context begins and ends with reference to a judicatory. The designation of these men as commanders, tribal officials, and judges seems to indicate three distinct classes. This arrangement seemed to be satisfactory to the people.
Four matters regarding the administration of justice are mentioned: (1) disputes between fellow Israelites or with foreign inhabitants in the land were to be arbitrated; (2) directives for making decisions include no partiality—small and great were to be heard on an equal basis; (3) judges were not to fear human beings because juridical process rested on the realization that “judgment belongs to God”; and (4) cases too difficult for the judges were to be referred to Moses.
3. The spies sent out (1:19–25)
19–23 After leaving Horeb, the Israelites went “as the LORD . . . God commanded” (cf. v.7) toward the hill country of the Amorites. This difficult journey of more than 150 miles through the Desert of Paran brought them to Kadesh Barnea on the southern perimeter of the Land of Promise. “That vast and dreadful desert” was a forbidding limestone plateau: hot, dry, rugged, and usually bare of any sustainable vegetation. There Moses reiterated the Lord’s command (v.8) to take possession of the land God was giving them and exhorted them not to be afraid, obviously indicating that the Israelites were afraid. The people suggested that some men be sent into the land to scout it out. In light of Nu 13:1–3, apparently the people first suggested that this reconnoitering be made; Moses then approved the idea, referred the request to the Lord who agreed to it, and ordered that each tribe send out one representative.
24–25 Moses, recalling that event, left out details and descriptions, saying only that the spies returned with a report that the land was good and that they brought back some fruit from the Valley of Eshcol as evidence (cf. Nu 13:3–33).
4. The rebellion against the Lord (1:26–46)
26–31 In spite of the good report and evidence of the productivity of the land, the people refused to enter because the rest of the report discouraged them. The size and strength of the inhabitants, the high fortifications of their large towns, and the presence of the Anakites made the Israelites so fearful that they rebelled against the Lord, misconstrued his attitude toward them, and refused to believe in his promises. Grumbling in their tents, they said, “The Lord hates us,” when in truth he loved them. They claimed that the LORD brought them from Egypt to have them destroyed by Amorite hands; but the contrary was true. Again Moses urged the people not to be afraid, asserting that the Lord their God would go ahead of them as he had in Egypt and Sinai. Before their very eyes God had carried them along (cf. Nu 11:12).
32–36 In spite of the promise of the Lord’s leadership, the people refused to enter the land; so the Lord declared that they would not see that good land. Out of the vast throng of Israelites, only those under twenty, plus Caleb and Joshua, would enter it (cf. Nu 14:30–31). Caleb “followed the LORD wholeheartedly”; he was totally committed to the Lord and obeyed him fully. God promised him the area he had explored.
37–38 Moses told the people that the Lord was angry with him also “because of you”; so Moses himself would not be allowed to enter the land. This must refer back to the experience of the Israelite quarrel with the Lord at the waters of Meribah (Kadesh). There the Lord said that Moses and Aaron would not enter the land because they did not honor him (Nu 20:12). Moses here looked behind his own failure and referred to the cause of his action: the people’s criticism of the Lord’s provision of food. Joshua is called Moses’ assistant (lit. Heb., “he who stands before you”); he would lead the Israelites in taking the land.
39–40 The children of this rebellious generation would acquire the country that that generation had faithlessly failed to invade and possess. That generation was condemned to return to the desert. The way of the Red Sea was doubtless a well-known route through Sinai and does not necessarily imply destination.
41 Being sent back into the vast, dreadful desert (v.19) was more than the people could take; so they confessed their sin, put on their weapons, and presumptuously went up into the hill country. This admission of their guilt was frivolous. Without due consideration of the Lord’s later command, their action of going up into the hill country, now without the Lord’s approval, was foolhardy.
42–43 Not only did the Lord declare that he would not go with the people, he also prophesied their defeat. But the Israelites’ obstinacy was such that they would not listen; so they marched up to battle against the Amorites in an action of presumption, rashness, and arrogance.
44–46 The Amorites met the Israelite army somewhere north of Kadesh Barnea and then routed the Israelites toward the south or southeast. The Amorites’ pursuit “like a swarm of bees” describes numerical greatness, persistence, and ferocity. “You came back and wept before the LORD” means that the Israelites returned to the tabernacle of the Lord and wept there. The Hebrew time phrase in v.46 expresses a long, indefinite period and suggests that a large part of the next thirty-eight years was spent there.
5. The journey from Kadesh to Kedemoth (2:1–25)
1–7 In obedience to the Lord’s command in 1:40, the chastised Israelites returned to the desert, between Kadesh and the Seir range. The period probably encompassed both departures from Kadesh recorded in Nu 14:25 and 20:22. The phrase “for a long time” (cf. 1:46) suggests that the time spent at Kadesh and around Seir took up the period between the abortive attempt to enter Canaan from Kadesh and the end of the wanderings that brought them to the Jordan River opposite Jericho. It was a “long time” because the Lord had decreed punishment on the nation for their disobedience at Kadesh.
If the command to go northward was given in Kadesh, then the order gives the general direction only, for it was necessary to go south and east before marching north. With the exception of Caleb, Joshua, and Moses, the generation of men twenty years old or more who had refused to enter Canaan at the Lord’s command were now dead (vv.14–15); and Moses also would die soon. Therefore, the Lord said that they had gone around the hill country long enough.
Approaching Edomite lands brought Israel in or near the area the Lord had promised to Esau and his descendants. So the Lord commanded the Israelites not to make war on their Edomite relatives; neither were they to take their land or anything in it; they were to buy food and drink with “silver.” Before this the Israelites had lived off what the Lord had supplied. Manna did not completely cease until the day after the first celebration of the Passover in Canaan under Joshua (Jos 5:10–12; cf. Ex 16:35).
8–9 The order of the journey reviews the travel from Ezion Geber or Elath at the head of the Gulf of Aqaba northward to the plains of Moab. As the Lord had forbidden Israel to attack the Edomites because they were blood brothers, so now he warned them not to fight with the Moabites. They were descendants of Lot, and he had given them the land they controlled.
10–12 The mention of these territories elicited historical references to former inhabitants, which the Moabites (vv.9–11), Ammonites (vv.19–21), Edomites (vv.12, 22), and Caphtorites (v.23) had displaced. These ancient nations are described as numerous, tall, and strong. Yet they were destroyed by invading brothers of the Israelites—surely a suggestion that Israel too would succeed in conquering the land they were about to invade. The reference to Israel’s destruction of former inhabitants may indicate the point of view of Moses referring to the conquest of Transjordan.
13–15 Since the fighting men of the generation that had failed to enter the land had died off, the Lord’s hand was no longer against Israel. He directed the new generation to cross the Zered, which flows into the southern end of the Dead Sea from the east, and then to cross the Arnon (v.24). This brought them into the area controlled by the Amorites.
16–19 When the Israelites came near the northeastern border of Moab at Ar, they were next to the territory occupied by the Ammonites, who at that time lived east of the Amorites. Sihon controlled the area between the Arnon River on the south, the Jordan on the west, the Jabbok on the north, and the border of the Ammonites on the east. The Israelites were not to disturb the Ammonites but were to turn northwestward into the country of Sihon. The Ammonites were the descendants of Lot, and the Lord had given that country to Lot and his descendants (see comment on v.9).
20–23 This parenthetical portion mentions how the Lord had destroyed the Zamzummites (a nation of large people who could be called giants; cf. 3:11) and had given their land to the Amorites. He had also destroyed the Horites, the Avvites, and the Caphtorites and had given their land to the descendants of Esau. Evidently the Lord through Moses was establishing belief in his control over the Canaanite groups of the past to inspire Israel for the conquest ahead.
24–25 While Israel was not to disturb the Edomites, Moabites, or Ammonites, such prohibition did not extend to the Amorites. The Lord declared that he had put Sihon and his kingdom into Israel’s hands. The conquest was certain; it was only for Israel to accomplish it. They were to cross the Arnon into Amorite territory and confidently engage Sihon’s army in battle. God would put the fear of Israel into all the nations in the area (Cf. 11:25; also Ex 15:15–16; 23:27).
6. The conquest of Transjordan (2:26–3:20)
a. The defeat of Sihon (2:26–37)
26–35 Though the Lord had said that he had given Sihon into Israel’s hands (v.24), Moses approached Sihon with messengers bearing a request to pass peaceably through his country. But Sihon, from a heart made stubborn by the Lord, refused the request and came out to battle against the Israelites. Sihon, his sons, his army, his people, and his towns were destroyed. So southern Transjordan was subjected to total destruction, except that the Israelites kept for themselves the “plunder” instead of giving it over to the Lord by destruction. Such exceptions were not allowed when the Lord required a strict following of the total-destruction principle (cf. Jos 7; 1Sa 15).
36–37 So all the territory from the Arnon Gorge on the south to Sihon and Og’s boundary in Gilead on the north, and from the upper course of the Jabbok River on the east to the Jordan on the west fell to the Israelites. They did not, however, encroach on any of the Ammonite land, which the Lord expressly commanded them to avoid (see v.19).
b. The defeat of Og (3:1–11)
1–3 The conquest continued by pressing north to engage Og king of Bashan in battle because the Lord had signified that his army and territory would also become Israel’s. Og was vanquished; and both population and cities were destroyed, but the livestock and valued goods were kept by the Israelites (v.7).
4–7 The geographical limits of the country of Og that was conquered are in general clear, though certain specific designations are not. The description of the sixty cities as “fortified with high walls and with gates and bars” indicates that they were formidable obstacles and that their capture was a remarkable success (cf. Nu 32:33; Jos 9:10; Pss 135:10–11; 136:18–22). “City” (GK 6551) need not imply a place with a large population; some cities had a population of only a few hundred.
8–11 Prior to allocating the captured lands to the Reubenites, Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, Moses described the whole area taken from the Amorite kings. The names Sirion and Senir for Mount Hermon occur elsewhere in the Scriptures (1Ch 5:23; Ps 29:6; SS 4:8; Eze 27:5). Salecah and Edrei apparently fix the southern border of Bashan. His iron bed might have been a black basalt sarcophagus, many of which have been found in that country.
c. The division of the land (3:12–20)
12–15 The geographical description of the territories given to the two and a half tribes is difficult to follow in its entirety. In the NIV this half of the tribe of Manasseh is called “the half-tribe of Manasseh”; Makir was their progenitor (cf. Nu 26:29; 32:40). The other half, which received its allotment in Canaan proper, is not mentioned as often and is not designated “the half-tribe of Manasseh.” The Geshurites and Maacathites were two smaller kingdoms that Israel did not drive out. Those people continued to live on their land under Israel (Jos 13:11, 13).
“The rest of Gilead” (v.13; a northern part other than that given to Reuben and Gad) is given to the half-tribe of Manasseh (simply “Gilead” in vv.15–16). Gilead sometimes refers to the area between the Jabbok and the Yarmuk (the northern sector), sometimes to the central area south of the Jabbok but north of Heshbon and the Dead Sea, and sometimes to the area including both sections. Jair’s area was in the northern sector of Gilead, beyond the Yarmuk Valley up to the territory of the Geshurites and Maacathites who occupied the land east of Lake Galilee and the Waters of Merom. The boundary between Gilead and Bashan is not clearly defined. The territory of Jair seems to be in both Gilead and Bashan.
16–17 Verse 12 says that the Reubenites and Gadites’ area included half the hill country of Gilead. This makes the southern part of Gilead the northern part of Reuben and Gad, the southern border of Reuben and Gad being the Arnon Valley, and the eastern border being the Jabbok River from its headwaters in the south. The eastern border continues northward until the river bends and flows westward to the Jordan. Its western border was that part of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea that closed the gap between the northern and southern borders.
“Kinnereth” (cf. Gennesaret in Lk 5:1) is an older name for Lake Galilee, a town on its northwest perimeter, or the entire area. The western border of the Gadites and Reubenites’ allotment extended from Kinnereth along the Jordan and the eastern side of the Dead Sea as far as the Arnon Gorge, approximately half the length of the sea.
18–20 Moses reminded the men of the two and a half tribes of their responsibility to cross the Jordan with the rest of the Israelites to win the land there before they settled down in their Transjordanian possessions. All the “able-bodied men” had to represent a special body of soldiers. Surely some men, also armed, must have remained in Transjordan to protect the women and children.
7. Moses forbidden to cross the Jordan (3:21–29)
21–29 After encouraging Joshua with the assurance that God would fight for him in Canaan as he did in Transjordan, Moses referred to his appeal to God that he might go into “the good land beyond the Jordan.” The Lord refused this request (cf. 1:37; 3:26; 4:21) and directed him to ascend to the top of Pisgah so that he might look over the Promised Land, even though he would not enter it; this was fulfilled after Moses had delivered the messages of Deuteronomy (see 31:7–8, 14, 23). Joshua, not Moses, was to lead the people in conquering the land.
B. Israel Before the Lord (4:1–40)
1. Exhortation to obey the Lord’s commands (4:1–14)
1–2 Moses next turned to the stipulations of the covenant-treaty. This beginning section is largely hortatory, though what the Israelites were exhorted to do necessitates introductory reference to the stipulations. Moses emphasized the importance and necessity of adhering to the codes that the Lord had given the people. What he declared was sufficient to guard their lives and to guarantee their possession of the land. The phrase “I am about to teach you” indicates the nature of the Deuteronomic messages. Coupled with these expositions of the law are the exhortations to “follow” (GK 6913) the laws and to “keep [GK 9068] the commands of the LORD.”
3–6 Failure to follow the Lord would result in death (cf. Nu 25; cf. Ps 106:28; Hos 9:10). “Baal Peor” designates both the place and the god of the place. The worship of the Canaanite Baal involved sexual acts and continued to be a serious breach of the first commandment among the Israelites and, consequently, of the covenant. Loyalty to the Lord was an absolute requirement for those who would follow him; failure to heed the warnings about the “other gods” of Canaan would result in immediate destruction. Only those who held fast to the Lord could expect to remain alive. Obeying the Lord’s codes would also make them known to the nations, who would esteem the Israelites as wise and understanding people.
7–8 Moses pointed up the distinctive character of these codes: the Lord was near them when they prayed, and no other nation had such righteous laws. Since these laws were communicated through prayer, the giving of them brought Israel close to God. The Lord’s presence in the center of the camp was symbolized in the glory over the ark of the covenant and the tabernacle (tent) in which the ark was placed and in the pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (Ex 40:34–38; Nu 23:21).
9–14 Moses was concerned that the generations to follow would be taught what he was teaching to the people; this communication involved memory and observance. But knowledge was not enough; the people had to “follow them” (vv.1, 5, 13–14) and “observe [GK 6913] them carefully” (v.6). Active obedience was essential. Israel was called on to remember the day at Horeb (Sinai) when the Lord spoke to them “out of the fire.” They were to remember his presence through “the sound of words . . . only a voice.” This is elaborated further by such terms as “his covenant [GK 1382], the Ten Commandments,” and as what was written “on two stone tablets.” The “Ten Commandments” epitomize all the commands that the Lord gave to Israel through Moses. The “two stone tablets” are two tablets, each inscribed with the list of commands. This coincides with the two copies of a suzerain-vassal treaty, which each participant was to have.
2. Idolatry forbidden (4:15–31)
15–18 As an introduction to the exhortation to shun idolatry, Moses repeated his observation (v.12) that the people saw no form when the Lord spoke to them from Horeb. Because he has no physical form, no physical representation could be tolerated. The description of the forms of creatures is slightly more explicit than that in the second commandment (Ex 20:4; Dt 5:8) and reminiscent of the Creation narrative (Ge 1:20–26). The Lord is not like the idols of Canaan.
19 Neither were the Israelites to worship the sun, the moon, and the stars. “Things the LORD your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven” cannot mean that God gave these celestial bodies to the nations as objects of worship. Rather, these were given to all humankind for the physical benefit of the earth and were not proper objects of worship at all (Ge 1:14–18).
20 The use of metal by heating certain ores and then hammering the metallic residue or welding it to other parts while still hot may have appeared in the Near East in the first half of the third millennium B.C., but the manufacture of iron objects (usually weapons) was limited till 1500 B.C and later. Bringing Israel out of Egypt was like bringing her out of an iron-smelting furnace—the heavy bondage of Egypt with its accompanying difficulties and tensions being likened to the hottest fire then known. Israel had been brought out of Egypt “to be the people of his inheritance,” as they indeed were (cf. Ps 78:62, 71; Isa 19:25).
21 Moses, however, was to die in Moab; and for the third time he referred to the Lord’s refusal to let him cross the Jordan and enter Canaan proper (1:37; 3:26–27). Each time he spoke of the Lord’s anger toward him “because of you.” Moses seemed to feel that the Israelites were to bear the blame for his predicament. Certainly the repetitious reference to the Lord’s prohibition reflects his keen disappointment.
22–24 Since the people were about to enter the land, Moses reiterated his exhortation that they be very careful not to forget the covenant the Lord made with them. The central character is the Lord himself, who is “a consuming fire,” intolerant of idols in any form (5:9; 6:15; Ex 20:5; 34:14; cf. Jos 24:19; Na 1:2).
25–29 The spirit of the prophets moved in Moses as he looked into the future of Israel relative to idol worship. Seeing that the generations to come might become corrupt through idolatry, he called heaven and earth as witnesses of his warning of destruction against the Israelites, the scattering of them among the nations, and their extremely limited numerical survival. He seemed sure that such a situation would prevail because he proceeded to tell how, in those foreign lands, the Israelites would “worship man-made gods” but eventually would seek and find the Lord their God. The Lord would not abandon, destroy, or forget them—or forget his covenant with them (cf. vv.29–31). This indictment of idolatry portrays the spiritual nature of Deuteronomy. Idols have no senses but are only human fabrications using common, insensate materials. The only way out of any future predicament resulting from infidelity rested on unequivocal recommittal to the Lord (cf. 6:5; 10:12; 11:13; 26:16; 30:2, 6, 10).
30–31 The nation may fail to uphold the covenant; the people may forget their Lord; but when they turn back to him in faith and obedience, he will mercifully accept them. He will not forget the covenant based on his promises.
3. Acknowledgment of the Lord as God (4:32–40)
32 Waxing eloquent as he tried to press home the greatness of the Sinaitic experience, Moses grandly asserted by a series of questions that the revelation of the Lord at Horeb was the greatest event of history. From the creation of humanity until that time, nowhere else on earth had such an observable event happened.
33–38 God had spoken to the people out of the fire, and they still lived! Moses described what the Lord had done for them in Egypt and through the deserts. The “testings” (GK 4999) probably relate primarily to the plagues or “great trials” (cf. 7:19). This “testing” is immortalized in the experience at Rephidim where the Israelites tested the Lord’s patience by asking, “Is the LORD among us or not?” (Ex 17:7). The more or less synonymous expressions in v.34 indicate the extraordinary display of the Lord’s power. They all indicate that the Lord is God and that he is stronger than the gods of Egypt. Moreover, all these “awesome deeds” had been done for them “before [their] very eyes” with a specific intent. They were to (1) learn that he was the only true God, (2) be corrected of any false notions or wrong behavior, and (3) be prepared for entrance into the land of their inheritance.
The Lord’s love for his people finds its first mention here. The reference to the Lord’s choice of Israel, based on his love for their forefathers, and the reference to his gift of Canaan to them as an inheritance go back to the covenant with Abraham and to the promises of that covenant (Ge 12:3; 17:4–8; 18:18–19).
39–40 Moses again emphasized personal commitment to the Lord, based on the fact that he is the only God and that he exists both in heaven and on earth. Such a commitment would result in prosperity and continued possession of the land that the Lord was giving them. The Hebrew structure of the last clause in v.40 suggests purpose rather than result—in order that you may continue to live in the land.
C. The Transjordanian Cities of Refuge (4:41–43)
41–42 Bezer, Ramoth Gilead, and Golan are designated as sanctuaries—elsewhere “cities of refuge”—for whoever unintentionally and without premeditation killed someone (cf. 19:1–13; Nu 35:9–28). Only here are the names of the Transjordanian cities of refuge expressly mentioned (but see Jos 20:8).
43 The desert plateau extends eastward from the upper part of the Dead Sea. Bezer lies about twenty miles east of the northeast corner of the Dead Sea. Ramoth Gilead was about thirty miles southeast of Lake Galilee, and Golan, twenty miles east of a centerpoint on the east bank of Lake Galilee. Bezer, then, was accessible to the people in southern Transjordan, Ramoth Gilead to those in the central part, and Golan to the ones in the north. The identification and location of these places are not certain.
III. The Second Address: Stipulations of the Covenant-Treaty and Its Ratification (4:44–28:68)
A. Introduction (4:44–49)
44–49 As an introduction to the stipulations, this paragraph presents something of the character of what follows—namely, “stipulations, decrees and laws.” It mentions also the people, the time, the place, and a brief description of the extent of the lands they had captured.
Why another introduction? (Notice 1:1–5.) Perhaps this follows the procedure of updating the treaty at treaty renewal time. It may be an instance of the repetitive character of Deuteronomy as a device for emphasis and instruction.
B. Basic Elements of Life in the Land (5:1–11:32)
1. The Ten Commandments (5:1–33)
a. Exhortation and historical background (5:1–5)
1–2 Moses’ main address begins much as his introduction to the historical prologue (4:1). He urged the people personally to learn these decrees and laws and to adhere to them. He reminded them that they themselves had received the covenant from the Lord who had spoken to them out of the fire on Mount Horeb. Though the people he was then talking to were less than twenty years old (except for Caleb and Joshua) at the time of the Horeb experience, they were there and were now representative of Israel. The covenant-treaty was made by the nation represented at Horeb, and the covenant remained in force to all succeeding generations until abrogated or qualified by the Lord.
3 The “fathers” (GK 3) were not the people’s immediate fathers but their ancestors, i.e., the patriarchs (see 4:31, 37; 7:8, 12; 8:18).
4–5 The immediacy of the Lord’s relationship with the people is pointed up in the phrase “face to face” (cf. 34:10; Ex 33:11; Ge 32:30; Jdg 6:22). However, Moses explained that this relationship came through his mediatorship, because of their fear of the fire on the mountain. The character of Moses’ mediation can be seen in the contrast between the Israelites’ hearing the sounds of the voice of God (4:12, 15; 5:4, 22, 24; 10:4) but not with sufficient clarity to distinguish the words (Ex 19:7, 9; 20:19, 21–22; cf. Ac 9:7).
b. The commandments (5:6–21)
6–7 The Ten Commandments sit appropriately at the beginning of Moses’ elucidation of the basic legislation for the Israelites. These commands are not only to be learned but also to be obeyed. They come directly from the Lord their God, who brought them up from Egypt. Their relationship with God is rooted in history, and that history is one of God’s interventions for their benefit. The phrases “other gods” and “before me” also speak of the relationship of the people to God. God does not allow his people to have “other gods”—whatever they might be.
8–10 The proscription of making or using idols is total. Nothing in Israel’s environmental experience may be the basis for an idolatrous form to be honored and worshiped as God. The reason is definitely personal, both on the part of the Lord and on the part of the people. The people either hate the Lord or love and obey him, and they receive from him punishment or love commensurate with their hate or love and obedience. Those who adhere to the covenant-treaty stipulations get its promised benefits; those who do not adhere to them get its punishments.
The children of Israel are not punished for the sins that their fathers committed; they are punished for their own sins (cf. 24:16). The punishment, however, goes on “to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,” just as his love continues toward “a thousand [generations] of those who love me and keep my commandments.” The distinction between punishment to the third and fourth generation and love extended to thousands suggests that God’s love far surpasses his retribution.
11 The third commandment concerns the use of the name of the Lord God in oaths or vows. Oaths were part of the common process of making authoritative and firm statements or promises. The Israelites were not to use the Lord’s name to seal such declarations in a light or frivolous manner or without the intention of fulfilling the oath, vow, or promise. The “misuse” of the name of the Lord for an unworthy cause or in an unworthy manner destroys the proper use of that name in prayer, praise, and thanksgiving; and it substitutes a blasphemous manipulation of witchcraft and other supposed sources of power for a holy invoking of God’s name (cf. 18:9–14; cf. also Mt 5:33–37; Jas 5:12).
12–15 In the commandment on the Sabbath day, the emphatic statement “as the LORD your God has commanded you” looks back to the initial declaration in Ex 20. The prohibition against making animals work on the Sabbath is also more emphatic here than in Ex 20:10. All the Israelite animal holdings are included in “any of your animals.” Moses’ concern for the lower strata of society is tied to the exhortation to remember that the Israelites themselves were slaves in Egypt. The Lord’s bringing them out of Egypt does not preclude other reasons for the law of the Sabbath—as God’s rest on the seventh day (after Creation; Ex 20:11). The words “may rest, as you do” indicate concern for others’ well-being.
Ideas involved in the observance of the Sabbath are perpetuated in the NT by the analogy of the creating of a new people of God through the ministry of the Lord Jesus. The ritual elements of the Jewish Sabbath are superseded by the work of Christ and by faith in him. And the time reference has changed to the first day of the week, now called the Lord’s Day, to focus on the new life effected and epitomized by the resurrection of Christ Jesus (Mt 28:1–7; Mk 16:1–6; Lk 24:1–6; 1Co 16:2; Rev 1:10; cf. Eph 2:4–10; 4:24). However, even now the observance of the Lord’s Day must be in keeping with Col 2:16–17 (cf. Jn 20:1, 19, 26; Ac 2:1; 20:7).
16 To “honor” (GK 3877) one’s parents is to respect, glorify, and venerate them. Children are to hold parents in high regard because of their position in the family, a position not only in God’s scheme of authority in human relationships, but also in the covenant relationship that called for continuation of the people’s status with the Lord. Children’s regard for their parents led to regard for their parent’s relationship to God. Both father and mother are to be honored. The results of failure to honor parents can be seen in the law concerning an incorrigibly rebellious son (21:18–21).
The apostle Paul referred to the fifth commandment as “the first commandment with a promise,” the promise being “that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth” (Eph 6:2–3; see comment). The honoring of father and mother, together with its promise, carries over into all time and everywhere. However, the promise of an ultimate resting place (homeland) reaches its greatest fulfillment in “a new heaven and a new earth” (2Pe 3:13; Rev 21:1).
17 The NIV correctly translates the sixth command as a prohibition of murder rather than of killing. Murder is a personal, capital crime. Killing may be done as representative of the nation in judgment on a criminal or in war. In OT times persons were put to death in obedience to the command of God, but private or personal killing is murder and is proscribed.
Capital punishment is the penalty for willful homicide (Ge 9:6; Ex 21:12; Nu 35:16; Dt 19:12), the worshiping of other gods (Dt 17:2–7), and other acts of disobedience to the Lord (Dt 22:22; Jos 8:24–26; et al.). The Ten Commandments do not allow pandering the criminal who takes the life of a fellow human. Yet the person who accidentally kills another is protected (4:41–42). So the covenant-treaty restricts the passions that lead to murder but requires proper punishment of criminal homicides.
18 The starkly simple sentence “You shall not commit adultery” carries an immense load of social and spiritual implications and provides the basis for the later development of these implications. The marriage relationship continues throughout the OT as a figure of the covenant relationship between the Lord and his people (cf. Jer 3:8–9; Eze 16:15–63; Hosea). Apostasy is spiritual marital infidelity (figuratively), and total commitment must be Israel’s relationship to the Lord; human marriage under the covenant must be marked by the same faithful commitment (cf. Lev 20). Jesus declared that lustful thoughts also constitute adultery (Mt 5:27–28).
19 Throughout Scripture thievery is condemned. The right to personal property is basic to the whole Mosaic economy. The indictment of the eighth commandment extends to both kidnapping (stealing a person) and the theft of goods. The protection granted by the eighth commandment is still essential to a free society; the freedom from involuntary servitude and the right to hold property are protected by this law against theft. The commandment involves spiritual values also, which rest on the covenant relationship that the Lord proffers to his people.
20 Truth was an important matter in Israel. God is “the God of truth” (Isa 65:16; cf. Ps 119:142, 151), and he hates “a lying tongue” and “a false witness” (Pr. 6:17, 19). Judges were required by the Lord to make their decisions on the basis of truth (1:16–17). False testimony brought severe penalty (cf. 19:15–21). Both here and in Ex 20:16 this commandment is directed to bearing false witness against one’s neighbor (i.e., another Israelite).
21 The last commandment goes beyond what people do; it probes into their minds and desires. The prohibition against coveting catches wrongdoing at its source. Coveting stems from the seat of one’s soul, from one’s intentions, from one’s motivations, from one’s “heart.” The prohibition against coveting a neighbor’s land would have no meaning if family rights in marriage ties, domestic tranquility, and property ownership did not exist. To ensure family rights after Canaan was allotted, the Lord forbade coveting not only a neighbor’s wife, servants, animals, and whatever other goods he owned, but also his house and land, neither of which any of them had at that time.
c. Ratification of the covenant-treaty (5:22–33)
22 Moses’ declaration that these commands alone were spoken to the Israelites directly by God makes them more emphatic. The rest of the stipulations were given to Moses, who in turn gave them to the Israelites. The Ten Commandments constitute the basic behavioral code of the people and of all succeeding generations as well. No other short list of commands begins to compare with the effect that these have had in world history. In spite of being constantly broken, they stand as the moral code par excellence.
23–28 Moses referred to a strange inconsistency of the leaders of Israel that necessitated his mediatorial ministry. They acknowledged that they had seen the Lord’s glory and majesty and had heard his voice and yet remained alive. Nevertheless, they were afraid that continuous exposure would cause their death. No reason for this contradiction was offered, but they wanted Moses to be their intermediary. They asserted that they would do whatever God told Moses they should do. Moses reminded them that the Lord had accepted this arrangement, and Moses became the intermediary for the establishment of the covenantal stipulations. The people accepted that covenant (Ex 20:19; 24:3).
29–31 The best interests of his people are deep in the heart of God. He is a God of compassion, not vindictiveness. This glimpse into his heart is in harmony with the most compassionate depictions of Christ in the NT. The Israelites were directed to return to their tents. However, at the direction of God, Moses stayed to receive additional commands, decrees, and laws for the people to follow in the land.
32–33 Before once again stating and explaining the specific laws, Moses urged the people to do exactly what the Lord had commanded. The result of obedience would be long residence in the land of Canaan. Individual longevity may not be precluded from this promise for following the Lord, but the main reference was to the national welfare (cf. 6:2).
2. The greatest commandment: Love the Lord (6:1–25)
a. The intent of the covenant (6:1–3)
1–3 As the intermediary between the Lord and the people, Moses began to teach them what the Lord wanted them to do in the land across the Jordan. They and their descendants should “fear” (GK 3707) the Lord throughout their lifetimes. Standing in awe of God and holding him in utmost reverence and respect are essential to the understanding of “fearing God.” The reason for Moses’ teaching is elaborated by explaining why the people should hear and obey: to insure the nation’s well-being and to increase in number and wealth. “A land flowing with milk and honey” describes a land of plenty, a land of fertility.
b. The greatest command: total commitment (6:4–5)
4–5 The ineloquent Moses (cf. Ex 4:10) was used of the Lord to give the world some of the most eloquent declarations in all the history of speech when he extolled the being and nature of the Lord and described the relationship that his people should have with him. Various interpretations have been given to the shema (lit., “Hear”; GK 9048). Does the text teach monotheism? or monolatry for Israel? Or does it teach only a uniqueness in the Lord as over against various Baals and gods of other peoples? Some of the Israelites believed in the reality of other deities, but this declaration of the nature of the Lord does not admit of the real existence of other gods. The Lord is the only deity.
While the primary assertion is that there is only one true God, it is also asserted that this true God is Israel’s God. Thus, the Israelites should acknowledge no other god. The Lord cannot be known or acknowledged in many forms like the Canaanite Baals. There is only one Lord, and he alone is God, and they have entered into a covenant-treaty with him.
The exhortation to love “with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength” indicates the totality of one’s commitment in the purest and noblest intentions of trust and obedience toward God. The words taken together mean that the people are to love God with their whole selves.
Jesus taught that Dt 6:4–5 constituted the first, the greatest, and the most important commandment, and that by obeying it one would live (Mt 22:37–38; Mk 12:29–30; Lk 10:27).
c. Propagation of the command (6:6–9)
6–9 The people were not to concern themselves only with their own attitudes toward the Lord but were to impress them on their children as well. They were to talk about God’s commands always, whether at home or on the road. Since in Ex 13:9–16 the consecration of the firstborn is said to be “like a sign on your hand and a reminder on your forehead that the law of the LORD is to be on your lips” (v.9), it would seem that here also the tying of these words as symbols on their hands and binding them on their foreheads and writing them on their doorframes and gateposts should be taken metaphorically or spiritually rather than physically. The symbols drew attention to the injunctions in vv.5–7.
d. Ways to preserve the command (6:10–25)
10–12 Again Moses gave a warning in the context of history. The land that was to be Israel’s had been promised years before to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This promise was to be fulfilled in Israel’s experience. It involved much wealth: barns, houses, wells (cisterns), vineyards, and olive groves that they had not built, provided, dug, or planted. When they would eat and be satisfied, they might “forget” (GK 8894) the Lord who brought them out of Egypt, the land of slavery. The warning was wise, for the people later did exactly what Moses warned against.
13–19 The warnings continue, focused on the necessity of recognizing and obeying their God because of who he is and what he would do if they did not acknowledge and obey him. The people must adhere to him so that it may “go well” with them and so that they may thrust their enemies from the “good land.” If they do not devote themselves to him (“fear” him), worship and work for him only (“serve” him), and speak of him in their daily relationships to one another (“take your oaths in his name”) but instead follow other gods, his “jealous” (GK 7862) anger will destroy them as a nation. Many find the jealousy ascribed to God very difficult to understand because jealousy can be such a vicious sin in human beings, producing much grief and animosity. But one must recognize that the provocations that give rise to the Lord’s anger are most severe. Biblical history shows that such provocations frustrate the love of God until his patience with idolatry ceases to be a virtue. Only then does his jealousy call for redress (cf. 32:16–26).
20–25 The answer to a son’s query, “What is the meaning of the stipulations?” is a historical recounting of the Exodus, the making of the covenant-treaty, and the giving of the legislation for the nation, together with the Lord’s commands to obey and reverence him. The Lord had been active on their behalf in freeing them from Egypt and from the control of Pharaoh by his mighty hand, by miracles that taught lessons, and by wonderful acts that were great and terrible—an appropriate description of the plagues. God had brought them out of Egypt in order to bring them into Canaan, the country that he had promised to their forefathers. Obedience was necessary for their prosperity and continuance as a people in that land. Obedience to all the Lord’s legislation would constitute their “righteousness” (GK 7407; see 24:13). These items must be impressed on each succeeding generation.
3. Problems of achieving the covenant of love in the land (7:1–26)
a. Relations with the people of the land and with the Lord (7:1–10)
1–2 The Hittites mentioned here were remnants of the great Hittite Empire that began about 1800 B.C. and continued to 1200 B.C. Smaller Hittite states existed prior to this and after. The Girgashites were an otherwise unknown group; they are mentioned in Ugaritic literature. The Amorites were situated west of the Jordan near the Canaanites who were on the southwest coast on the Mediterranean (Jos 5:1). Canaanites lived farther north also (Jos 11:3; 13:4).
Apparently the Perizzites lived in the southern area allotted to Judah and Simeon (Jdg 1:4–5). However, they also appear to be in the area of Ephraim in the center of the country (Jos 17:15). At this time the Hivites were found in Gibeon (Jos 9:7; 11:19; cf. 2Sa 24:7). The Jebusites lived in Jerusalem and its surroundings (Jos 18:28; Jdg 1:21).
Israel would win the land from its inhabitants by driving them out and destroying the ones remaining (cf. 7:1, 2 2). The Lord would drive out the Canaanites and “deliver them over to” Israel (vv.2, 16, 23); but the Israelites would be the instrument used to accomplish this destruction—though the Lord might use other persuaders also, such as the hornet (v.20). The inhabitants who were not driven out of the country were to be destroyed. No treaty was to be made with them, no mercy shown to them. The covenant-treaty of the Lord with Israel excludes other treaties.
3–5 The young Canaanite men were not to be given Israelite daughters as wives, and young Canaanite women were not to be taken by Israelite men as wives. This would lead to forsaking the Lord and to worshiping other gods. Only by total commitment to the Lord and to the covenant-treaty could the unique status of Israel be preserved. The prohibition of intermarriage was not absolute. The regulation for the marriage of an Israelite man to a foreign woman taken as a prize of war is given in 21:10–14 (but cf. Ezr 9–10; Ne 13:23–27). “Destroy them totally” and “show them no mercy” (v.2) are explicated more fully by “break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, cut down their Asherah poles and burn their idols in the fire.”
6–10 The Israelites were the Lord’s “treasured possession” (GK 6035; a people of great value owned completely by him). Moses, concerned that Israel keep the right perspective in her relationship with the Lord, pointed out that the large number of people in the Israelite community was not the reason for the Lord’s choice of them as his people. They were few in number (in contrast to the large Near Eastern empires, or even in comparison with the seven nations they were to displace; cf. 4:38; 9:1; 11:23)—or perhaps the reference is to their small beginnings. Elsewhere Israel is said to be “as many as the stars in the sky” (1:10; 10:22) and “a great nation” (4:6; 26:5)—doubtless in fulfillment of the promise to Abraham.
Because he loved them and kept the promise of his covenant, the Lord brought the Israelites out of Egypt. It is the character of God rather than any excellence in the people that accounts for the choice. This is more evident by the reiterated assertion that the Lord their God was God, was faithful and true in himself and true to his covenant-treaty, and would be true in his covenant love toward his people into the distant future—“to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commands.” But those who hate him, who do not love and obey him, he will repay with destruction “to their face.” Both the singular suffix on “face” and the figurative use of “face” (GK 7156) suggest the meaning “to each one personally.”
b. Blessing of the conquest (7:11–26)
11–16 If the Israelites followed the Lord’s stipulations, he would keep his “covenant of love” with them (cf. vv.13–15). He would love and bless them with many children and with productivity in crops and animal husbandry. These blessings were of things close to the soil and natural productivity. Good health too would come to the obedient Israelites. Those terrible diseases they knew in Egypt would not come on them (Ex 15:26; 23:25) but would be inflicted on their enemies. To secure these advantages, the Israelites were to destroy without pity the Canaanites and their gods (cf. Ex 23:33; Jdg 2:3; Ps 106:36; cf. also Ex 34:12; Jos 23:13).
17–26 The Israelites were not to be intimidated by thinking that the nations of Canaan were stronger than they, making it impossible for them to drive out the Canaanites. They were to “remember” (GK 2349) what the Lord had done to Pharaoh and all Egypt. With their own eyes they had seen how the Lord had brought them out (cf. 4:34). He would do to the Canaanites what he had done to other enemies. He would also send the “hornet” among them so that even those who survived the onslaught and hid themselves would die (this likely refers to a sense of fear, panic, or discouragement that the Lord would inflict on the Canaanites; cf. 11:25). Moses reminded the people that the great and awesome Lord was among them; so they should not be terrified by the Canaanites. However, their driving out the Canaanites would be little by little because of the wild animals (cf. Ex 23:30–31).
Though the conquest was not to be immediate over the whole land, the Lord, nevertheless, would deliver the Canaanites into Israel’s hand. They would wipe out their kings’ names from under heaven, i.e., remove them from the earth. The destruction of the Canaanite idols was to be complete. Even their silver and gold were detestable to the Lord. “Utterly abhor and detest it” indicates the abhorrence the people were to hold toward the idols.
4. Exhortation not to forget the Lord (8:1–20)
a. The discipline of the desert and the coming Promised Land (8:1–9)
1–5 Moses first focused on the necessity of following every command of the Lord so that Israel would be able to enter and possess the Land of Promise. They were to remember the discipline of the forty years of the Lord’s leading in the desert, in order to teach them that “man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD” and that “as a man disciplines his son, so the LORD . . . disciplines” them. He had made them hungry, then fed them with manna (see Ex 16). Under his providence during those forty years, their clothes did not wear out and their feet did not swell, in spite of the desert.
6–9 The Israelites were urged to walk in the ways of the Lord and to revere him, not only as in the past days of hunger and thirst, but also when the affluence of Canaanite productivity became theirs. The country he was leading them into had great natural benefits. This contrasted both with Egypt proper and with Sinai. This good land would sustain them; they would lack nothing. The iron was probably that in southern Lebanon, in the mountains of Transjordan, and, perhaps, in the Arabah south of the Dead Sea.
b. Remembrance of the Lord who led them from Egypt to Canaan (8:10–20)
10–18 When the Israelites had eaten and were satisfied, after they were settled in the land, they were to praise the Lord for his goodness. In their prosperity they were not to forget him. They had lived through the hard life of that desert by God’s providence, but the future prosperity in a better land might lead them astray. In that desert experience the Lord had brought water out of the hard rock (cf. Ex 17:1–7; Nu 20:2–13); in Canaan they would find streams and pools. In that desert the Lord gave them manna. In Canaan bread would not be scarce. In their prosperity they might claim that their hands produced their wealth, not remembering that the Lord their God gave them the ability to produce wealth in confirmation of his covenant.
19–20 Once more Moses warned that forgetting and disobeying the Lord and turning to follow other gods to worship and bow down before them would mean the destruction of Israel as surely as those who followed other gods were destroyed by the Israelites.
5. Warning based on former infidelity (9:1–10:11)
a. The coming defeat of the Anakites (9:1–6)
1–6 Moses recognized the difficulties that the people would face in the country they were about to possess. The current inhabitants were greater and stronger than the Israelites (4:38), with large cities with walls up to the sky (cf. 1:28). But Moses had an adequate answer to the proverbial Anakite strength: The Lord would go across ahead of them (cf. Ex 13:21; Dt 1:30, 33, et al.). Almost in the same breath, Moses said that Israel would drive out the inhabitants and that the Lord would drive them out, indicative again that Israel’s abilities were from the Lord. At best they were the Lord’s instruments.
One of the most important things for the people to remember was that not Israelite righteousness but Canaanite wickedness was causing this Canaanite dispossession (Lev 18:1–30). As a matter of fact, Israel was an intractable people and, consequently, not deserving of the good land. They were receiving it by God’s grace.
b. The golden calf provocation (9:7–21)
7–14 Moses sought to impress strongly on the people that they must not provoke the Lord by disobedience as they began the conquest of Canaan. Continuing his warnings, Moses reminded Israel of their behavior from the time they left Egypt till they arrived at Jordan. He exhorted them to remember how they had rebelled against the Lord, provoking his anger and arousing his wrath. He had been angry enough to slay them at Horeb. Moses had gone up on the mountain to receive the Ten Commandments (Ex 19–20; 31:18). After forty days, the Lord told Moses to go back down to the people who had become corrupt with idolatry. God told Moses that the people were stiff-necked (cf. v.6) and asked Moses not to interfere with his intention to destroy them, offering to make Moses into an even stronger and more numerous nation.
15–17 Moses proceeded to tell how he went down from the fiery mountain, carrying the two stone tablets in his hands, or perhaps one in each hand. When he saw that the people had sinned against the Lord by making an idol, Moses threw down the two tablets, breaking them before the people’s eyes. The nature of their sin is indicated not only by the indictment of making the calf-idol but also by their turning away quickly from the Lord’s commands. The first two commands on the tablets that were physically broken by Moses had already been broken by the people.
18–21 Moses spoke of the second period of forty days and nights and also referred to two prayers on their behalf. Those two prayers are telescoped, a reference to the destruction of the calf-idol being at the end of the narrative. Moses said he feared the anger and wrath of the Lord because he was angry enough to destroy the Israelites (cf. v.8). But Moses’ intercession was successful both for the people and for Aaron. Moses destroyed the calf by heating it, grinding it to fine dust, and throwing the dust into a mountain stream. “That sinful thing of yours, the calf you had made” contrasts with the Lord himself as the Almighty Creator. Exodus 32:20 adds that Moses threw the dust into the stream and “made the Israelites drink” from the stream—surely an ignominious exercise!
c. Israel’s rebellion and Moses’ prayer (9:22–29)
22–24 Repeatedly the people had showed themselves rebellious and stiff-necked, and thus they angered the Lord. So Moses made the overall indictment: “You have been rebellious against the LORD ever since I have known you.” The source of this rebellion was their lack of trust in the Lord and, consequently, their disobedience to him.
25–29 Again Moses mentioned how he had interceded successfully for Israel (cf. Nu 14:13–19). From a most humble position, Moses addressed God as “Sovereign LORD” and prayed eloquently, reminding God that these were his people, his own “inheritance” (GK 5709), and that he had redeemed them from Egypt by his great power and mighty hand. He called on the Lord to remember Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—doubtless a reference to the covenantal promises. If God’s people were destroyed, the Egyptians would indict him for his inability to bring Israel into the land and for his trickery of leading them into the desert to slaughter them (because he hated them). Moses did not at all deny the people’s guilt but pled with the Lord to overlook their stubbornness, wickedness, and sin.
When he spoke to Moses about the people’s sin while he was on Horeb the first time, God called the Israelites “your people whom you brought out of Egypt” (v.12); but when Moses prayed, he said that they were “your people, your (own) inheritance.” Why this change of identification? God was probably trying to evoke Moses’ concern for his people by identifying them as Moses’ people whom Moses had brought from Egypt. Moses did show his concern by his great intercessory prayer in which he insisted that the people belonged to the Lord, and this brought the desired result.
d. New tablets (10:1–11)
1–5 Moses next rehearsed the second experience regarding the two stone tablets of the covenant (Ex 34:1–4). “At that time” refers to the period when Moses offered the prayer of 9:26–29. At the Lord’s command he had chiseled out two stone tablets similar to the first ones. God said that he would write on them the words that had been on the first tablets. Moses was also to construct a wooden chest for the tablets. In deference to tradition NIV uses the term “ark” (GK 778) for this particular chest. Exodus 37:1–9 reveals that the ark was built by Bezalel after Moses’ return, rather than that Moses made it himself before he went up the mount the second time, as could be implied here. It is not uncommon that a leader of a venture is said to do something when the actual physical accomplishment of it is done by someone else.
6–9 The “wells of the Jaakanites” is to be identified with Bene Jaakan, Moserah with Moseroth (Nu 33:31), and Gudgodah (v.7) with Hor Haggidgad (Nu 33:32). It appears that after leaving Kadesh, Israel went toward Edom and then later returned to Kadesh before starting on the last trip around Edom and up onto the plains of Moab. Consequently the order here is the reverse of that in Nu 33:31–33. Moserah was evidently a larger area that included Mount Hor. So it was correct to identify Aaron’s place of death as either Mount Hor (Nu 20:22–29; 33:38–39; Dt 32:50) or Moserah (Dt 10:6). Moserah means “chastisement” and might be Moses’ designation of the area, not a generally used name. None of the places mentioned has been located with certainty.
Verses 6–9 are a historical aside. Moses’ mind moved along the course of events relating to the ark and then proceeded to the Israelites’ journey beginning just before the death of Aaron and includes Aaron’s death, the succession of Eleazer, the ministry of the Levites relative to the ark, as well as their broader ministries and their special situation regarding landed inheritance (GK 5709; cf. 9:29). The Lord himself in a special way—not land—was to be their inheritance.
10–11 The climax of this recital is Moses’ declaration that the Lord listened to his plea on the Israelites’ behalf. It was not the Lord’s will to destroy them. The grace of God—not because they were numerous or righteous—kept them from destruction (cf. 7:7–9), and by his grace Moses’ orders were renewed to “lead the people on their way” to occupy the Promised Land.
6. Exhortation to revere and love the Lord (10:12–11:32)
a. The requirement of allegiance (10:12–22)
12–13 In answer to the question “What does the LORD your God ask of you?” five familiar phrases are piled one on the other. The people are urged to (1) “fear the Lord [their] God”; (2) “walk in all his ways”; (3) “love him”; (4) “serve” him; and (5) “observe [his] commands and decrees.” More or less synonymous with “observe” are the words and phrases “keep,” “obey,” “fix in your hearts and minds,” and “teach his commands, requirements, laws, and decrees.” All this was for their own good.
14–16 Although God, to whom the Israelites were to give their fealty, owns the farthest reaches of the “heavens, the earth and everything in it,” yet he set his affection and love on their forefathers and “chose” (GK 1047) these, their descendants, above all other nations. Because of this gratuitous position they had in relation to the true God, the Israelites were urged to circumcise their hearts and cease being stiff-necked (cf. 30:6; Jer 4:4). The circumcision of the heart—i.e., being open, responsive, and obedient to the Lord—contrasts with being “stiff-necked” (GK 6902 &7997)—i.e., being stubborn and rebellious.
17–22 The majestic sovereignty of the Lord is portrayed by the names ascribed to him as well as by the characteristics and acts attributed to him. “God of gods” and “Lord of lords” are Hebrew superlatives. The designations do not suggest that there are in reality other divine gods or lords over whom God rules. Rather, as God and Lord he is supreme over all. As the great, mighty, and awesome One, the Lord performed the “great and awesome wonders” that the people had seen with their own eyes. The majesty of the Lord extends to righteous behavior, showing no partiality, accepting no bribes. He defends the fatherless and the widows and loves the aliens, giving them food and clothing. The people were to be like the Lord; they too were to love aliens, for they had been aliens in Egypt.
Not only were the people to reverence and worship the Lord, they were also to hold fast to him and make oaths only in his name. Moreover, the Lord was to be the object of their praise because he had brought up out of Egypt the descendants of the seventy (Ge 46:27; Ex 1:5), who, while there, had become “as numerous as the stars in the sky.” In contrast to the few who went down into Egypt with Jacob, this generation had become numerous indeed.
b. Love and obedience toward the Lord (11:1–25)
1–7 The exhortations to love, remember, observe, worship (serve), obey, teach, and walk in the Lord’s ways are all here. The dominant personnel in the nation were those who had seen what the Lord had done for them in Egypt and in the desert. They were not of the generation doomed to die in the desert for their disobedience at Kadesh Barnea (1:35–36) but those who ranged from infancy to the age of twenty (Nu 14:29–30).
Moses focused his attention on those who were the leaders, repeating the exhortation formula: “Love the LORD . . . and keep his requirements.” Then, in a semi-negative way, he built up the responsibility of those who were under twenty years of age at Kadesh Barnea (1:35–36). They themselves had had the experiences in the Exodus and the desert and that should have taught them to love the
Lord and to keep his requirements. Though Korah was a leader of the rebellion described in Nu 16:1–35, he is not mentioned with Dathan and Abiram here. Perhaps Korah is not named because his sons were not destroyed (Nu 26:9–11).
8–15 In order to be able to conquer the land and to live long in it as a nation, the people were to observe the Lord’s commands. The description of the land has a new element. Not only was it “flowing with milk and honey”; it was a land that drank “rain from heaven.” It was not like Egypt, where the planted seed was irrigated by foot because water had to be brought from the Nile. Possibly an Egyptian would use his feet to clear a channel for the flow of water to where he wanted it in his garden. In Egypt water for growing grains, vegetables, and fruits depended on the people’s labors. In Canaan the water came in its season from the heavens by the providence of God; and if the people faithfully obeyed him, he would send the rain.
16–21 However, if the Israelites were enticed to turn away from the Lord and to worship other gods, he would shut the heavens so that it would not rain. Baal (Hadad) did not control the rains that brought fertility to Canaan; rather, it was the Lord who governed the incidence of rainfall. If the people did not worship and obey him, he would shut the heavens (28:23–24; Lev 26:19–20; cf. Mal 3:10).
22–25 The land that the people would acquire by obedience to the Lord under the covenant was limited in two ways: by “every place where you set your foot” and by geographic boundaries. The Lord confirmed this promise to Joshua (Jos 1:3). He also had made a particular promise of this sort to Caleb (1:36), a promise that was fulfilled in Jos 14:9–13. The geographical boundaries are generalized, in harmony with other such promises and prophecies (1:7; Ge 15:18).
c. Directives for the blessing and curse recital (11:26–32)
26–32 The most important addition to the highly repetitive directives of ch. 11 is that of the blessing and curse recital to be proclaimed from Mounts Gerizim and Ebal. The blessing was to be theirs for obedience and the curse for disobedience (cf. 27:9–28:68). The basic element is adherence to the Lord as God, and the basic error is following other gods. No doubt Gerizim and Ebal were chosen because of their centrality and natural adaptability for such an event. They are close to each other and are both about 3,000 feet above sea level. “West of the road” refers to the main north-south road, and “near the great trees of Moreh” indicates a location a little south of the center of the valley between the two mountains.
C. Specific Stipulations of the Covenant-Treaty (12:1–26:19)
1. For worship and ceremony (12:1–16:17)
a. At the place of the Lord’s choosing (12:1–32)
1–14 Chapter 12 presents some crucial elements for the Israelites’ national and individual spiritual lives. (1) The people were to worship the Lord their God in the place he chose to put his Name, the place he identified himself with and where his presence would be manifested (contrast vv.2, 5, 11, 13–14, 26, et al.). (2) The people were not to worship the gods of the Canaanites but were to destroy them, their articles, and their places of worship. (3) Israel was not to worship the Lord in the way or with the means that the inhabitants of Canaan worshiped their gods. (4) Israel’s burnt offerings, sacrifices, tithes, special gifts, vows, freewill offerings, and the firstborn of their flocks and herds were all to be brought to the place in the Promised Land where the Lord chose to put his Name.
“The resting place” (v.8; GK 4957) as a description of the land begins with Jacob’s blessing when he called the allotment of Issachar “his resting place” (Ge 49:15). Psalm 95:11 becomes the source for vital NT teaching; the psalmist says that the Lord had declared of the people who disobeyed him in the desert, “They shall never enter my rest.” According to the author of Hebrews, those who disbelieved, disobeyed, and rebelled did not enter his rest (ch. 3). To fulfill the promise of God, a rest was still to be provided. That rest was for the soul in Jesus as Savior from sin (Heb 4:3). Jesus is the “the resting place” for the believer.
15–28 While sacrificial offerings were to be brought to the central sanctuary, the butchering and eating of meat for regular sustenance could be engaged in anywhere. The only restriction on eating nonsacrificial meat (except for the rules relative to unclean foods) was the prohibition on eating blood (cf. Lev 3:17; 7:26–27; 19:26; and esp. 17:10–14). The blood was to be poured out on the ground like water. The nonsacrificial meat may be eaten by anyone—unclean or not.
The freedom enunciated in v.15 and repeated in vv.20–22 is conditioned by the prohibitions of vv.17–19. The life of the creature is its blood; so the spilling of the lifeblood is the giving of its life as the atoning sacrifice. This central characteristic of the sacrificial system in the OT becomes all important in the NT, where the typical aspects of the OT sacrifices are fulfilled in Christ by the shedding of his blood on the cross as atonement for sin (Ac 20:28; Ro 3:25; Eph 1:7; Heb 9:11–28; et al.)
Tithes, vows, and certain offerings were to be eaten only in the place the Lord chose. Notice that “you, your sons and daughters, your menservants and maidservants, and the Levites” fall under the prohibition.
29–32 The Israelites were to resist the influences of the Canaanite culture and were not to conform to Canaanite religious practices. Death was the penalty for anyone who sacrificed a child by passing him through the fire (Lev 18:21; 20:2–5). This section on the place of worship ends with Moses’ warning neither to add to nor to subtract from all that he had said (cf. 4:2; Pr 30:6; Rev 22:18–19).
b. Worship of other gods forbidden (13:1–18)
1–5 In order to hinder and thwart rebellion against the Lord and adherence to the deities of the country that they were soon to enter, Moses gave the Israelites directions on how to deal with insurrectionists from the Lord’s authority. Dreams were used in prophecy both legitimately (Nu 12:6) and illegitimately Qer 23:25). Moses said that illegitimate prophets were used by the Lord to test the people’s love for him. They were not to be followed (cf. v.4) but were to be put to death so that the evil would be purged from among the people. This test of the prophet overrides all others. The sine qua non of life is total love, commitment, and allegiance to the Lord. Elsewhere the fulfillment of prophecy establishes a prophet as a prophet. In such a case, however, the one who claims to be a prophet does so in the name of the Lord (18:19–22; Jer 28:9).
6–11 Not only rebellious prophets, but one’s closest relatives or friends who said, “Let us go and worship other gods,” were to be put to death, whether the enticement had been made secretly or openly. Moses spoke of the gods of the people who would be around the Israelites as “gods you have not known” or as “gods that neither you nor your fathers have known.” Neither the Israelites nor their fathers had ever acknowledged them as gods. They were not to yield to, listen to, show pity to, spare, or shield an enticer. Not only was the defector to be stoned to death, but the first stone was to be thrown by the near relative or friend that the defector had attempted to drive from the Lord. This extreme punishment was expected to produce good results. Clearly punishment—especially capital punishment—is a deterrent to crime.
12–18 Towns that defected to other gods were to be punished also. Allegations were to be investigated thoroughly and proven before a town was destroyed. Inhabitants, livestock, and all plunder were to be a whole burnt offering to the Lord, and the town was never to be rebuilt. This doom indicates how serious the Lord considered any defection from him. In other circumstances some alleviation of these rigorous rules for destruction was allowed, but under these circumstances no “condemned things” could be salvaged. If Israel kept the Lord’s commands and did what was right in his eyes, he would have compassion on them.
c. Clean and unclean foods (14:1–21)
1–2 Earlier, Moses had referred to the Lord as Israel’s father and to Israel as his son (1:31; 8:5). He had also said that they were holy to the Lord and were his treasured possession (4:20; 7:6). Now, on the basis of this relationship, they were commanded not to follow the ways of mourning for the dead that the nations of Canaan practiced (Lev 19:27–28; 1Ki 18:28).
3–21 Because the Israelites were the Lord’s children, they were not to eat any “detestable thing” (GK 9359; cf. Lev 11). As the chosen people of God and as his holy possession, they were to follow God’s injunctions to distinguish themselves from the surrounding peoples, because the pagan Canaanite culture was inimical to the holiness of the Lord and to the holiness required of his people. The reason for these injunctions about foods is basically spiritual, though there may be psychological and sanitary considerations as well. Some unclean animals had associations with Canaanite religions. Eating anything dead probably relates to the prohibition of eating blood. The meat would not be worth selling to a foreigner or giving to an alien if it were not edible.
In Lev 17:13–16 both Israelite and alien were not to eat meat with blood in it; yet here an Israelite was allowed to give such meat to an alien, and he could eat it. In Deuteronomy Moses prepared the people for the situation in Canaan, where they would be in a head-on clash with pagan culture in which the alien would not yet be integrated into Israelite culture. In Leviticus the alien comes within the culture of Israel and has the benefits of adhering to that culture.
The prohibition against cooking a young goat in its mother’s milk is apparently in reaction to an ancient Canaanite and Syrian custom dated as early as the fifteenth century B.C.
d. Tithes (14:22–29)
22–29 The “tithe” (GK 5130) is to be taken to the place the Lord shall choose as a dwelling for his Name, and there it is to be eaten joyfully in the presence of the Lord. Moses had already mentioned in 12:6 the tithes along with the other things that the people were to bring to the chosen sanctuary, where they should eat and rejoice. Surely the people in a few days would not consume a tenth of their total annual production! Having already given directions for the support of the Levites by the tithes (Nu 18:21–28), Moses here spoke of the festal communal meals that the people were to enjoy when the tithes were brought to the tabernacle.
Every three years these tithes were to be brought to local city centers where they were stored for the use of the Levites, the aliens, and the poor. This care for nonlanded people would lead to God’s blessing on the work of their hands. This garnering of tithes was to come during the third year and the sixth year. After the sixth year, the sabbatical year was observed as a year when the fields lay fallow, after which the cycle commenced again.
The logistics of transporting the tithes would be difficult—perhaps impossible—for families living at a distance from the tabernacle. Thus the people could turn the tithe into cash and then, at the place the Lord would choose, convert it into food and drink desired for the celebration of God’s blessing.
e. The year of canceling debts (15:1–11)
1–4 Israel was to have a very special internal relationship of brotherhood in its citizenry. If followed, there would be no poor or needy person among them because of the Lord’s blessing (vv.4–6, 10). The cancellation of debt itself would go a long way toward producing that blessing, and it would result in limiting the centralization of monetary assets in the hands of the more well-to-do. No evidence exists that the Mosaic economy in its details was ever fully implemented with its sabbatical years and years of Jubilee.
The assertion that “there should be no poor” among them at first glance may seem to conflict with v.7 and especially v.11. But apparently Moses proclaimed and urged the ideal while being doubtful that the ideal would be fully realized (cf. the same thing in 1Jn 2:1).
5–6 Israel would realize the ideal situation only if the people would fully obey the Lord. Obedience would not only bring rich blessings so that no poor would be among them, but they would also have monetary superiority over the nations around them.
7–11 Moses moved into the subjective bases for the Israelites’ behavior—their thoughts and emotions—when he said that they should not be hardhearted, but should freely lend a brother whatever he needs. They must exercise care not to harbor a base thought that would limit generosity, such as “the year for canceling debts is near.” They must give generously without a grudging heart. A warning is appended: the brother can appeal to the Lord, and the grudging-hearted will be found guilty of sin. The indictment “You will be found guilty of sin” may be one made directly by the Lord to the conscience or a formal one made by a priest (23:21–22; 24:15; cf. Lev 20:20; Nu 9:13; 18:22).
f. Freeing servants (15:12–18)
12–18 Those in servitude should go free after no more than six years of bondage (cf. Ex 21:2–6). But one’s liberality should go beyond manumission, for those freed should be given liberal supplies from their former owner’s flock, threshing floor, and winepress. If a servant did not want to be set free, the master was to push an awl through the lobe of his ear and into the door or doorpost, thereby marking him for a life of servitude (cf. Ex 21:6). Two reasons for this choice of life servitude are love for the master and the well-being of the servant under the master. In Ex 21:5 love for one’s wife and children acquired during servitude constitutes an additional reason. The servant who does not want to leave his wife and children, as the law required, chooses life servitude instead.
Anticipating possible reaction to the largess required of the master, the Israelites were to realize that the indentured servant during his six years of servitude has been worth twice as much as a hired hand. Perhaps what is meant is that through the years the servant’s labor was equivalent to that of a hired hand, yet he had not received the daily wage of a hired hand. Thus the servant was worth double because the owner not only had the service of the servant, but also did not have to pay out anything for that service.
g. Firstborn animals (15:19–23)
19–23 In addition to earlier directives on the firstborn (cf. 12:6–7, 17; 14:23–26), here it is said that the firstborn of herds should not be worked and the firstborn of sheep not sheared. They belong to the Lord and are not for private gain.
All the people were to eat and rejoice together at the annual festivals. The regulations of Deuteronomy are, generally, given to all the people, including the priests. The logistics of consuming all the specified parts of all the firstborn of herds and flocks annually might well demand the participation of the whole populace. Animals with serious defects were not to be sacrificed but were to be eaten as common food by the people, ceremonially clean or unclean, being careful to properly dispose of the blood. These regulations emphasize anew that God’s people were to follow a holy way of living.
h. Passover (16:1–8)
1–4 In Deuteronomy the whole Passover (GK 7175) Festival is in mind (cf. Ex 23:14–19; Lev 23; Nu 28:16–29:38), including the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and so the sacrificing of the Passover animal (or animals) includes animals from the herd as well as from the flock for the main Passover meal. Moreover, when they were settled in the land, the Passover was to be held in the place the Lord would “choose as a dwelling for his Name.” The historical occasion for the Passover would have an added significance—that of the agricultural year.
Yeast suggests decay and was unsuited for the symbolism of the Passover. Thus here bread without yeast, the bread of affliction (cf. Ex 3:7), was to be eaten because the Israelites had left Egypt in apprehensive haste. The statement “so that . . . you may remember the time of your departure from Egypt” makes it clear that the date of the Passover Feast rests on a historical basis rather than on the agricultural year. “On the evening of the first day” would be the beginning of the fifteenth of Nisan (March/April) (Lev 23:6).
5–8 After eating the Passover, the people were to return to their temporary residences where they were staying during their visit to the place the Lord would choose. The Passover meal was complete in itself; none of the meat sacrificed in the evening was to remain until the morning. The Passover-Unleavened Bread Festival ended with a special closing assembly.
In the NT the last Passover that Jesus ate with his disciples became the Lord’s Supper (Mt 26:17–29; Mk 14:12–25; Lk 22:7–22), and Christ’s death on the cross became the Passover sacrifice to take away sin (1Co 5:7–8; cf. Jn 1:29).
i. Feast of Weeks (16:9–12)
9–12 This feast was to begin seven weeks from the time the sickle was put to the standing grain. According to Lev 23:15, the count was to be made from “the day after the Sabbath, the day you brought the sheaf of the wave offering,” i.e., on the second day of the Passover Festival. The phrase “fifty days” in Lev 23:16 in the LXX led to the designation of the Feast of Weeks as Pentecost. In the NT the Feast of Weeks becomes significant as the time of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel 2:28–32 and the beginning of the NT church. The Feast of Weeks was a harvest celebration, and the freewill offering made at that time was to be commensurate with the blessing the Lord had given the people (cf. vv.16–17).
j. Feast of Tabernacles (16:13–17)
13–17 The Feast of Tabernacles or Booths was celebrated for seven days after the processing of the grain at the threshing floor and the grapes in the winepress. In Ex 23:16 and 34:22, it is called the Feast of Ingathering; and the time of the feast is more explicitly given in Lev 23:34, 36, 39, and Nu 29:12 as extending from the fifteenth to the twenty-first of the seventh month, which is Tishri (Sept./ Oct.). It was followed by an additional day with a closing assembly. This seven-day feast was to be a joyful occasion for everybody, because of God’s blessing on the work of their hands.
A summary and reiteration of the command that all Israelite men were to appear before the Lord for these three festivals annually concludes this review. One was not to attend the festivals empty-handed but was to bring a contribution proportionate to the Lord’s blessing on his labor.
2. National concerns (16:18–19:21)
a. Judges (16:18–20)
18–20 This section really belongs with ch. 17. Contemplating the new settlement in Canaan, Moses instructed the people to appoint “judges” (GK 9149) and other “officials” (GK 8853) in the towns the Lord would give them. The judges were civil magistrates, and the officials were subordinate leaders who implemented the decisions of the judges. The judges were to “judge the people fairly”; and the people were admonished to follow justice alone, so that they would be able to continue living as a nation in possession of the land. The judges were not to pervert justice or show partiality. Bribes blind the wise and twist the words of the righteous. The Lord demands pure justice.
b. Asherah poles, sacred stones, and flawed animals (16:21–17:1)
16:21–17:1 Moses once more warned of the idolatry Israel would find in Canaan. The worship of the Lord must not be with the paraphernalia of the gods of Canaan. An important element in proper worship was the quality of the offerings brought to the Lord; the firstborn offered had to be without “serious flaw” (15:21) and “without defect” (Lev 1:3 et al.); i.e., it had to be perfect. This rule is here applied to the sacrifice of any ox or sheep.
c. Procedures for punishment of covenant violators (17:2–13)
2–3 Deviations from the worship of the Lord are called “doing evil in the eyes of the LORD,” a “violation of his covenant,” and “contrary to my command.” Israel was not to worship the sun, moon, and stars of the sky either as physical entities or as representations of pagan deities. The sun, moon, and stars along with other physical elements show the glory of the Lord but are by no means idolatrous representations of him (Pss 8:3; 19:1; Ro 1:18–21; et al.).
4–13 Any alleged deviation from the worship of the Lord is to be thoroughly investigated. If it proves true (as in 13:14) on testimony of two or three witnesses—one witness being insufficient—the guilty party must be stoned to death, the witnesses being the first to throw stones. The seriousness of this defection and the purpose of the punishment are seen in the declaration, “You must purge the evil from among you (Israel).”
“The place the LORD will choose” is to be the juridical as well as the spiritual, social, and political center of the nation (cf. 16:18–20). All cases too difficult for local court decision were to be taken to the priests and the current judge at that chosen center. Their decision was final and was to be followed in detail. Contempt of court was a capital offense. When these procedures are followed, “all the people will hear and be afraid.” As in 13:11, capital punishment would be a deterrent to crime.
The local judges were not to decide in the cases that were appealed to the higher court; the higher court decision was then implemented by the local judges. The responsibility for the application of the law is on the whole populace. “The man who shows contempt” may be anyone in Israel—as is obvious from the idea that none of the people will be “contemptuous” when they learn of the one in contempt being put to death.
d. Appointment of and rules for a king (17:14–20)
14–15 The possible future institution of kingship does not rise out of the Lord’s immediate plan for government but out of a supposition that the people will want a king because of the surrounding peoples (see 1Sa 8:4–9). In developing revelation, the Lord revealed his eternal plan of using kingship as the vehicle of central importance in messianic prophecy and fulfillment. Given the desire for a king, the people were to find the one the Lord would choose, who must be a brother Israelite.
16–17 Restrictions too were placed on the king (cf. vv.18–20). The accumulation of horses is linked to the prohibition that the people were not to return to Egypt. Having many horses signified either riches or military resources or both. Doubtless both indicated a reliance on one’s own resources rather than on the Lord. A large harem also represented a likeness to the Oriental courts of other kingdoms, and having many wives envisaged the usual procedure of sealing treaties by marriage. Such wives would bring foreign cultures and idol worship into the palace and so lead the heart of the king astray. The accumulation of silver and gold would also tend toward reliance on riches rather than on the Lord (cf. 1Ki 10:1–11:13).
18–20 Following the procedures for vassal treaties, a copy of the covenant-treaty was deposited in the dwelling of the Lord. From this the king was to make a copy for himself and keep the copy with him, reading it regularly. This preoccupation with the “words of this law” had a threefold purpose—that the king may (1) learn to serve the Lord, (2) follow carefully all the words of the law, and (3) keep on the same level as his brothers before the law of the Lord. The result of this behavior would be a long reign.
e. Shares for priests and Levites (18:1–8)
1 A wide, sweeping presentation, telling of the support of the Levites, is added to the stipulations relative to judges and possible kings. The designations the “priests,” the “Levites,” and the “whole tribe of Levi” indicate that the priests and Levites were not always coextensive terms; the “priests” were those Levites who were the descendants of Aaron, and the “Levites” included all those who belonged to the tribe of Levi, whether or not they were descendants of Aaron (Nu 18:20, 23–24).
2 The Levites as a tribe were not to have a tribal allotment in Canaan, as the other tribes would have. The Lord was their inheritance, as far as material possessions were concerned. They would have certain cities and, under certain situations, could also have private holdings (see v.8; Nu 35; Jos 20–21). The Levites’ daily sustenance came from the offerings made to the Lord and from the firstfruits. Particular portions of the offerings were to be given to the priests, i.e., the sons of Aaron (Lev 7:31–35).
3–5 The word for “sacrifice” (GK 2284 & 2285), which normally refers to sacrificing animals for religious feasts, here includes the meals of the festivals that are in addition to the fellowship offerings (cf. 12:15, 21). “The share due the priests” was the portion established by the Lord for them because of their office and service. Designations of the Levites as the priestly tribe sometimes refer to their tribal position as a whole and at other times to the sons of Aaron, a more limited group.
6–8 When a Levite from elsewhere in Israel desired to move to the place the Lord would choose in order to engage in priestly service, he could do so; and he was to have an equal share in the benefits of his position. The benefits accrue to any Levite even though he may have other assets from the sale of family possessions—whatever they may be.
f. Detestable practices of Canaan (18:9–13)
9–13 References to these “detestable ways” (GK 9359) are not uncommon, but the list in vv.10–11 is fuller than elsewhere. Precise identifications cannot always be clearly discerned by the terms used. Comparison with other such prohibitions shows that several of the words are sometimes generalizations and at other times more specific or discrete. Not only was adherence to the false gods of Canaan proscribed, but also the means by which the Canaanites attempted to communicate with them were to be abhorred totally and rejected completely.
g. The prophet like Moses (18:14–22)
14–19 Israelite reliance was to be wholly on the Lord, who would send them “a prophet” (GK 5566) like Moses. These prophets would be selected by the Lord from their own brothers, and the Lord would put his words in their mouths. Being the spokesman for God is the central characteristic of a prophet. The Lord would call to account anyone who did not listen to the words spoken in his name. In the NT, this promise of the “prophet like you from among their brothers” was seen as prophetic of Jesus Christ (cf. Jn 1:21; 6:14; 7:40; Ac 3:22–23).
20–22 The prophet who presumed to speak in the Lord’s name (without authorization) or who spoke in the name of other gods was to be put to death. The latter broke the first commandment and merited capital punishment. But the former could be difficult to determine. The prescribed test was that if the prediction did not happen, the message was not from the Lord. This answer speaks of only one of the ways to determine the validity of a prophet and a prophecy; predictive proof alone cannot be used to distinguish a true prophet from a false one, because prediction that comes true when spoken in the name of another god is a capital offense (cf. ch. 13:1–5). Verse 14 clearly states that sorcery and divination were not permitted, which is the main way pagans get messages from their gods. Adherence to the Lord and his written word is the highest law; one should not be afraid of any false prophet or his predictions.
h. Cities of refuge (19:1–14)
1–4 Bezer, Ramoth, and Golan had already been established as cities of refuge for Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh east of the Jordan (4:41–43). Now Israel is commanded to set up three cities of refuge in Canaan proper when they occupy it. If Israel’s control would extend over the whole Land of Promise, which according to the oath to their forefathers apparently extended from Egypt to the Euphrates (Ge 15:18), three more cities were to be chosen (vv.8–9), making nine in all. But the third set of cities of refuge was never appointed because the people never fully controlled the larger territory.
The cities were to be centrally located in three divisions of the country so that any slayer would have reasonably close sanctuary. Cities of refuge constituted a means to thwart a hasty application of blood revenge, which might result in the death of an innocent man—one who killed another unintentionally and without malice aforethought (cf. Ex 21:12–14; Nu 35:6–34; Jos 20–21).
5–13 The shedding of innocent blood in Israel would bring guilt on the nation (v.10). It would be wrong to allow the innocent to be killed and the guilty to go unpunished (v.13). The process of determining the innocence or guilt is not given here—other than that the elders of the town of the accused should send for the killer to be returned from the city of refuge to which he had fled. If guilty, he was to be handed over to the avenger of blood for execution. Acquittal or guilt would be determined on bases indicated elsewhere (cf. v.15; Nu 35:9–34). That deliberate capital offenses were to be punished by capital punishment rigorously applied is seen in the declaration “Show him no pity” (cf. v.21).
14 Moses looked ahead to the time when Israel would be settled in the land within the tribal and family boundaries and when these boundaries could be subject to dispute. The boundaries once allotted in the original division of the land were to be inviolate; the Lord had given the land to the people. Their descendants were never to disturb the boundary stones. The right to hold property was a cornerstone of Israel’s inheritance from the Lord. It is still a primary right of free people on the earth.
i. Witnesses to a crime (19:15–21)
15 Jurisprudence must have rules of evidence, and in Israel witnesses were required to supply evidence or be punished (Lev 5:1). The rule for witnesses in capital offenses (17:7) is here applied to any crime or offense. Two or three witnesses are required (17:6; Nu 35:30; Mt 18:16; 2Co 13:1).
16–20 The designation of a false witness as “malicious” probably indicts one who uses harsh and injurious language. When one accuses another after this fashion, the two of them are to stand in the presence of the Lord before the incumbent priests and judges. “In-the presence of the LORD” refers to the tribunal meeting in the place in the central sanctuary designated for this purpose (17:9). The investigation must be “thorough” (cf. 13:14; 17:4); and if the accuser is proved to be a liar, the punishment for the accused will be meted out to the accuser.
21 The “lex talionis” (cf. Ex 21:23–25; Lev 24:18–20) is given as the guide to punish offenders. Jesus seemingly negated this rule for his disciples in Mt 5:38–42 and substituted the turning of the other cheek. It must be remembered, however, that Deuteronomy is the law that the officials of the nation were to follow to protect the public, to punish offenders, and to deter crime. Jesus, on the other hand, spoke to individuals about reacting to violence against themselves personally.
3. Rules for warfare (20:1–20)
1–4 The Israelites were not to be frightened by the panoply of their enemies, because the Lord who had brought them up from Egypt would be present with them. The priest was to prepare the army for battle by assuring the troops of the Lord’s presence to give them victory. The fourfold expostulation is dramatic: (1) Do not be fainthearted; (2) do not be afraid; (3) do not be terrified; (4) do not give way to panic.
5–9 The officers too were to speak to the inductees and articulate the ways to be excused from service. Only men ready and willing for battle were wanted. This was no conscripted army. The exemptions—acquiring a home and having the opportunity to live in it first; being able to enjoy the fruit of one’s vineyard; being able to enjoy a recent marriage (cf. 24:5)—generally relate to settled society and indicate settled life in Canaan. So that discouragement would not infect the ranks, the fearful and fainthearted were also exempt. When the troops were psychologically ready for battle, commanders were appointed. It is unclear as to who was to do the appointing.
10–15 When in the more distant future Israel would attack a city beyond the boundaries of Canaan proper, different rules would apply. The cities of Canaan were to be totally destroyed, but the distant cities were first to be offered peace. If they accepted that offer, they were to become a work force for the Israelites. In cities that refused a peace offer, the men were to be executed; but the women, children, livestock, and everything else were to become booty for Israel.
16–18 In contrast to this treatment, the cities within Canaan proper were subject to herem (cf. 7:26, “set apart for destruction”; GK 3051). “Anything that breathes,” as elsewhere (except in Ge 7:22), refers to human beings. All the inhabitants that remained in the conquered cities of Canaan were to be completely destroyed so that Israel would not be enticed into the supreme sin of defecting from the Lord and turning to other gods.
19–20 When Israel needed logs for building siege works, the immediate need was not to outweigh the long term value of fruit trees. Thus, they were not to be used for this purpose because of their value in producing food. Orchards were not common and were considered valuable.
All warfare is filled with violence, anguish, and inhumanity. These directions given to Israel must be measured relative to the world they lived in and to the heinousness of the sins of the cultures of Canaan.
4. Interpersonal relationships (21:1–25:19)
a. Atonement for unsolved murder (21:1–9)
1–5 When murder or manslaughter has been committed (Nu 35:32–33), the justice of God is affronted. There is an identification of the criminal with both the land and the people; and unless the criminal is punished, justice is not met. When the perpetrator of the crime cannot be detected, some method of removal of the guilt must be secured. First, the guilty area is determined by the elders and judges who measure the distance from the body to the nearby towns. Then the elders of the nearest town must make atonement for the bloodshed. An unworked heifer is to be led into an uncultivated valley that has a flowing stream. Presumably the place where the heifer is led is as near as possible to where the body lay. The priests need to be present, for they represent the Lord (10:8; 18:5).
6–9 Atonement is made for the bloodshed when the elders break the heifer’s neck and wash their hands over the heifer’s body while they declare that they, representing the people, are innocent of the homicide. Then they pray that the Lord’s redeemed people will be held guiltless. This action purges the people from the guilt of spilling innocent blood. The atonement mentioned is not an atonement within the sacrificial system, for the blood of the heifer is not offered. It is rather an atonement for justice; the heifer suffers death in place of the unknown criminal, to clear the land of guilt.
Major Social Concerns in the Covenant
1. Personhood
Everyone’s person is to be secure (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17; Ex 21:16–21, 26–31; Lev 19:14; Dt 24:7; 27:18).
2. False Accusation
Everyone is to be secure against slander and false accusation (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20; Ex 23:1–3; Lev 19:16; Dt 19:15–21).
3. Woman
No woman is to be taken advantage of within her subordinate status in society (Ex 21:7–11, 20, 26–32; 22:16–17; Dt 21:10–14; 22:13–30; 24:1–5).
4. Punishment
Punishment for wrongdoing shall not be excessive so that the culprit is dehumanized (Dt 25:1–5).
5. Dignity
Every Israelite’s dignity and right to be God’s freedman and servant are to be honored and safeguarded (Ex 21:2, 5–6; Lev 25; Dt 15:12–18).
6. Inheritance
Every Israelite’s inheritance in the promised land is to be secure (Lev 25; Nu 27:5–7; 36:1–9; Dt 25:5–10).
7. Property
Everyone’s property is to be secure (Ex 20:15; Dt 5:19; Ex 21:33–36; 22:1–15; 23:4–5; Lev 19:35–36; Dt 22:1–4; 25:13–15).
8. Fruit of Labor
Everyone is to receive the fruit of his labors (Lev 19:13; Dt 24:14; 25:4).
9. Fruit of the Ground
Everyone is to share the fruit of the ground (Ex 23:10–11; Lev 19:9–10; 23:22; 25:3–55; Dt 14:28–29; 24:19–21).
10. Rest on Sabbath
Everyone, down to the humblest servant and the resident alien, is to share in the weekly rest of God’s Sabbath (Ex 20:8–11; Dt 5:12–15; Ex 23:12).
11. Marriage
The marriage relationship is to be kept inviolate (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18; see also Lev 18:6–23; 20:10–21; Dt 22:13–30).
12. Exploitation
No one, however disabled, impoverished or powerless, is to be oppressed or exploited (Ex 22:21–27; Lev 19:14, 33–34; 25:35–36; Dt 23:19; 24:6, 12–15, 17; 27:18).
13. Fair Trial
Everyone is to have free access to the courts and is to be afforded a fair trial (Ex 23:6, 8; Lev 19:15; Dt 1:17; 10:17–18; 16:18–20; 17:8–13; 19:15–21).
14. Social Order
Every person’s God-given place in the social order is to be honored (Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16; Ex 21:15, 17; 22:28; Lev 19:3, 32; 20:9; Dt 17:8–13; 21:15–21; 27:16).
15. Law
No one shall be above the law, not even the king (Dt 17:18–20).
16. Animals
Concern for the welfare of other creatures is to be extended to the animal world (Ex 23:5, 11; Lev 25:7; Dt 22:4, 6–7; 25:4).
© 1985 The Zondervan Corporation
b. Family relationships (21:10–21)
10–14 Suppose in warfare with nations that were “at a distance” (20:15) an Israelite man desired to marry a foreign, unmarried woman captured in warfare. Since she would not be under the ban of herem (20:16–18), she and the man would be subject to the rules regarding the marriage of Israelites. This legislation would restrain the man from rape and allow the woman time to become adjusted to their new condition. Symbolic of casting off her former life, the woman was to remove her native clothing, shave her head and trim her nails, and put on new clothes. These cleansing rites (cf. Lev 14:8; Nu 8:7; 2Sa 19:24) initiated the woman into the Israelite family, but she would have a full month to mourn her separation from her natural family before she became the wife of the Israelite. She was also protected from being sold for money or treated as a commodity. After marriage, if her husband was not pleased with her, he must let her go free because he had intercourse with her.
15–17 Polygamy, while not officially approved, was condoned in ancient times; so problems relating to the responsibilities and privileges of succession would arise (cf. Ge 29:15–30:24). The rule here established for Israel existed elsewhere in the ancient Orient (cf. Middle Assyrian law). In Israel the responsibilities and privileges of the firstborn stayed with the firstborn regardless of the father’s desires. A father was not to make a will to frustrate this law or otherwise dispose of his property. The Hebrew idiom for “double share” (GK 9109 & 7023) became indicative of the position of successor (cf. 2Ki 2:9). “The first sign of his father’s strength” describes the first son as the first result of the father’s procreative power.
18–21 The rules for behavior in domestic and civil life generally provided protection for the less fortunate. In the case of a recalcitrant son, however, no mercy was allowed. This son was “stubborn” (GK 6253) and “rebellious” (GK 5286) in the face of remonstrance. These words describe incorrigible wickedness. Moreover, when the parents leveled charges against the son before the elders, they made the specific accusations of his being both a drunkard and a profligate. No hope remained for such a person.
His parents made their accusation before the elders sitting in the place of judgment in the gate of the city, and the punishment of being stoned to death was meted out by the townspeople so that evil would be purged from among them. The fear of punishment was expected to restrain each filial rebelliousness (13:11; 17:13; 19:20). This kind of rebelliousness was strictly forbidden by the fifth commandment (5:16; Ex 20:12; cf. Ex 21:15).
c. Relations to land, animals, and things (21:22– 22:12)
22–23 The body of a person put to death for wrongdoing and hung on a tree must not remain exposed overnight: the body is under God’s curse, and more exposure would desecrate the land. Hanging (cf. Jos 8:29; 10:26–27) exhibited the person to public humiliation. The criminal was under the indictment of death by God’s judgment.
The meaning of “under God’s curse” is not certain. Since judgment basically is God’s (1:17), the judgment that takes one out of the covenant community as a criminal and displays that judgment by the humiliation of hanging in public shows that that person is under God’s curse. The exposure of his body was the utmost desecration. But continued exposure would desecrate the land, possibly because of the effect the continual remembrance of the crime and its punishment
would have symbolically on the land. Paul’s citation of this verse to illustrate the extent of Jesus’ humiliation is very apt (Gal 3:13).
22:1–4 Straying domestic animals are not to be ignored but must be returned to their owner. When an owner does not live nearby, or for any other reason is unknown, the one who saw the stray must take it to his own place for safekeeping until the owner comes searching for it. Then the animal is to be restored to the owner. This same rule applies to anything one loses and another finds. Concern for an animal fallen on the road requires that anyone passing by should help it to its feet. This does not necessarily refer to an animal that had strayed; more likely it envisages an animal fallen under a load with the owner beside him (Ex 23:5). Because of the weight of the load, the owner alone is unable to assist the animal to its feet.
5 The prohibition against a woman wearing men’s clothing and vice versa can scarcely refer to transvestism. Most probably illicit sexual practices—including homosexuality (Lev 18:22; 20:13)—are included in this prohibition. Scripture considers the natural differences between male and female to be the Lord’s creation and so should not be disregarded.
6–7 The injunction here relates to a mother bird on her nest with eggs or newly hatched young. Concern of the “be kind to animals” type or for animal parenthood or for saving the mother in the interest of continuing productivity may have occasioned this legislation (but cf. Ge 1:28; 9:9–10). Long life and well-being follow obedience to this command (cf. 5:16).
8 Protection of self and property from the guilt of bloodshed underlies the concern for persons who may be on the flat roof of one’s house (Jos 2:6; 2Sa 11:2). A railing was to be built as a safety precaution. The roofs of houses were often used for various purposes. Consequently, without some kind of restraining wall, one could easily fall off and be hurt.
9–10 The prohibitions of mixing seeds for planting, plowing with diverse animals, and wearing clothes woven of differing threads expand slightly on Lev 19:19. The ancient rationale for these regulations is not known. Perhaps the distinctions that God ordained in Creation are to be preserved. Israelite behavior was to be differentiated from that of its neighbors. Possibly the mixing of animals pulling plows was thought to be unkind because of the differing strengths of the animals or ways of pulling under harness (see comment on Lev 19:19). Verse 9 declares that when vines and other plants are mixed, both the grapes and the other crop are “defiled” and no longer permissible for personal use. The aim of the legislation again seems to be to maintain the natural distinctiveness of Creation.
11–12 The mixing of kinds of thread is prohibited in Lev 19:19, but here the specific kinds of thread—“wool and linen”—are mentioned. Perhaps these are illustrative. In Nu 15:38–40 the regulation for the wearing of tassels includes the reason: “You will have these tassels to look at and so you will remember all the commands of the LORD . . . . Then you will remember to obey all my commands and will be consecrated to your God” (vv.39–40).
d. Marriage violations (22:13–30)
13–21 Divorce, though not God’s will (cf. Mk 10:5–9), was permitted under certain circumstances and restrictions. A husband’s charge of premarital infidelity on the part of his newly acquired wife followed certain procedures. If the husband, after lying with his bride, disliked her and declared that she was not a virgin when she came to him, her parents could come to her aid by displaying the proof of her virginity (apparently the blood-spotted bedclothes) to the town elders. If they decided that the man was guilty of defaming his bride, he must give a hundred shekels of silver to the girl’s father, and she must remain as his wife, never to be divorced. If no acceptable proof of virginity was presented, she was to be stoned at the door of her father’s house.
The law protected the innocent bride from the caprice of her husband and discouraged premarital infidelity among young women. It did not, however, protect young women from getting a husband who had previously had sexual relations. But other laws do concern themselves with men’s extramarital relations (e.g., vv.22–29).
22 The injunction “You must purge the evil from among you” or “from Israel” is given three times (vv.21, 22, 24) in this series of capital offenses—an indication of the seriousness of crimes against marital fidelity. Under the conditions expressed, adultery was not only forbidden but, as a capital offense, demanded the death penalty.
23–27 If one of the adulterous persons was a woman “pledged to be married” to someone else and the act occurred in a town, without any voiced protest by the woman, stoning was required. If rape occurred in the country, where a girl’s screams could not be heard, only the man’s life was required; the girl went free.
28–29 The law was more lenient with a man who forced a virgin who was not pledged in marriage to another. The penalty, however, was not light. The offender had to pay a fine of fifty shekels of silver, marry the girl, and keep her as his wife as long as he lived. It was customary to pay a purchase price for a wife (Ge 34:12; Ex 22:16; 1Sa 18:25; Hos 3:2).
30 The prohibition of intercourse with one’s father’s wife undoubtedly refers to a wife other than one’s own mother, since a father’s wife in this sense is in view elsewhere (27:20; Lev 18:8, 11; 20:11). Jacob condemned Reuben for his incest with Bilhah (Ge 35:22; 49:3–4). In Leviticus death was decreed for both persons involved in such incest (Lev 18:8, 29; 20:11).
e. Family, neighborhood, and national relationships (23:1–25:19)
1–2 Chapter 23 begins its miscellany of laws with three categories of persons who are excluded from the assembly of the Lord: eunuchs, illegitimate children, and Ammonites and Moabites. The assembly is expressly called “the assembly of the LORD” (vv.1–3, 8) and is probably restricted to the religious community. Any bodily defect was considered unacceptable to God—as were the results of sinful acts, whether personal (as illegitimacy) or national (as the behavior of the Ammonites and the Moabites).
The excluded eunuchs were those who were deliberately made eunuchs—probably those in dedication to foreign gods and those who had official positions under foreign governments; these rules were also against any deliberate mutilation abhorrent to the position of God’s people as holy. Isaiah predicted that in the future eunuchs who did what pleased the Lord would have a better name than the sons and daughters of Israel (56:4–5; cf. Ac 8:26–39).
Precisely who comes under the ban of those born out of wedlock is not clear (see NIV note, KJV). The passage hardly refers to all persons born out of wedlock because prohibited marriages are clearly delineated and fornicators were put to death, required to be married, or in some cases required to remain in protective custody of a family. This regulation might well be aimed at the offspring of cult prostitutes or of other promiscuous sexual practices related to the fertility religions of Canaan. It seems possible, however, that the law covers the offspring of all “forbidden marriages.” The reference “to the tenth generation,” as v.6 indicates, means as long as the nation exists.
3–6 Ammonites and Moabites were excluded because they failed to show concern for the Israelites when they moved toward Canaan. Israel had sought nothing except the right to purchase food and water (2:28–29). Because of a refusal, Israel skirted their lands and showed no hostility toward them (2:9, 16–19). But Moab hired Balaam, a Mesopotamian sorcerer, to curse Israel; and even though the Lord turned the curse to blessing (Nu 22–24; cf. Ge 12:3), Moab came under the indictment of not supporting the Israelites. The act of the king is naturally the responsibility of the whole kingdom because he represents and acts for the people.
Israel as a nation was never to seek peace or good relations with these two nations. The prophets also denounced the Ammonites and Moabites (Isa 15:1–16:13; Jer 48:1–49:6; et al.). Ruth, a Moabitess whose descendants included the Davidic line eventuating in the Messiah, was a notable exception.
7–8 Though Edomites and Egyptians also failed in kindness toward the Israelites—and even oppressed them—these two nations were not to be abhorred; Edom because of near kinship, and Egypt because Israel lived as an alien there. Great grandchildren could be integrated into the assembly of the Lord.
9–14 Rules for the holiness and cleanliness of the camp during military engagements are in mind here. A man who has an emission at night must go outside the camp and remain there until the next evening when, after washing himself, he may reenter at the going down of the sun. For the disposal of excrement, a place outside the camp was to be chosen. In addition to weapons, some sort of instrument like a spade was to be used for digging a hole. The excrement was to be covered over so that the Lord would not be offended as he went through the camp; this reference is most likely to the Lord’s personal, spiritual presence. Holiness is identified with cleanliness. Only the clean person can approach the Lord in worship (Ex 19:10–11; 30:18–21; Jos 3:5; Ps 51:7, 10).
15–16 A fugitive slave was not to be handed over to his master but was to be given asylum and the freedom to go anywhere he desired within the domain of Israel. These slaves had fled from foreign parts; they were not to be oppressed as the Israelites themselves had been oppressed in Egypt (Ex 22:21; Lev 19:33–34).
17–18 Temple prostitution was practiced among Baal worshipers. Israel was strictly forbidden to indulge in this demoralizing practice. The earnings of prostitutes are tainted and are not to be offered to the Lord to pay any vow (“vow” covers any contribution to the Lord). Whatever is acquired by evil means as well as what is evil in itself is not to be offered to the Lord.
19–20 When the nation was first established, the Israelite economy was by no means mercantile; loans were made primarily to help persons too poor to support themselves. Such assistance was to be given without interest. But since merchants from other nations might come for business reasons to Israel or might make loans on interest to Israelites, foreigners could be charged interest. This rule alleviated the plight of the poor and made it more possible for them to work themselves out of their low estate. Interest is also regulated in Ex 22:25 and Lev 25:36–37. The Lord’s blessing on the labors of God‘s people in the land was contingent on following this directive.
21–23 Vows were common in the OT world. They became a part of the OT system of offerings and are mentioned frequently with the sacrificial offerings. Vows were never required, however, but properly handled would have the Lord’s approval. Sometimes the payment of a vow was contingent on the occurrence of some specific event (cf. Jdg 11:30–31). Moses urged the people to fulfill vows with dispatch and stressed that the payment of vows cannot be escaped (cf. Nu 30:2). The Lord requires it; failure to pay is sinful. In Nu 30 certain persons within the family structure are not under responsibility to pay their vows unless certain conditions prevail.
24–25 The right to pick a few grapes from a neighbor’s vineyard or a few kernels of grain in his field appears to stand on somewhat the same level as gleaning during harvest. It is based on a concern for the immediate need for food. This advantage was not to be abused by putting grapes in a basket or putting a sickle to the neighbor’s grain. According to one Jewish tradition, these verses refer only to persons who were hired to work in the vineyard or field.
24:1–4 Divorce (GK 4135) appears as a fact of social life; while under certain circumstances it was permitted, it was to be regulated (Lev 21:7, 14; 22:13; Nu 30:9). Divorce could be initiated only by men, not by women. Verses 1–3 set the stage: a man marries a woman who subsequently displeases him because of some indecency. The man divorces the woman, and she remarries another man who also dislikes her and divorces her—or dies, leaving her without a husband. This law says that the first husband cannot remarry the woman because she has been defiled by the second marriage. This act of remarriage would be detestable in the Lord’s eyes and would bring sin on the land (cf. Jer 3:1; Mt 5:31–32).
The man who desires to divorce his wife must show that there is “something indecent” about her. Something less than adultery must be meant since the punishment for adultery is death (22:22–27; Lev 20:10). When grounds for divorce existed, the man must have “a certificate of divorce” served on his wife. Only then may he send her from his home.
5 In 20:7 a man engaged to a woman is exempt from military duty. Here exemption is extended to the newly married and lasts for one year, doubtless because in war he might be killed. Happy family life and family continuity were held in great respect in the Mosaic economy.
6 The millstones that ground the grain for a family were not to be taken as security for a loan. The family’s life was involved.
7 The death penalty would be exacted of one who kidnapped a brother Israelite for involuntary servitude or as merchandise. The victim’s free life was involved; so the death penalty was decreed for the culprit—life for life. Once more the relationship of crime to the responsibility of the commonwealth and to its moral condition is emphasized by the demand: “You must purge the evil from among you.”
8–9 Twice the people are exhorted to exercise special care to follow the commands of the Lord regarding skin diseases. The reference to leprous diseases presupposes acquaintance with Lev 13–14 (see comments).
10–13 The grant of a loan to a neighbor should be made discreetly. The security is to be chosen by the neighbor privately and brought to the one granting the loan. If the neighbor is so impoverished that his cloak, which serves as his bedclothes at night, has to be given as security, the cloak must be returned to him by sunset. God will approve this act as a righteous one, and the debtor will thank his creditor.
14–15 One was not to take advantage of the poor working man living in any Israelite town. Wages were to be paid each day because the worker needed to cover his daily expenses. In contrast to the thankfulness of the man whose garment was returned at sunset, the man who was denied his daily wage at sunset might cry to the Lord against his employer, and sin would be registered against him.
16 The law of individual responsibility under which the courts decreed punishment inflicts that punishment only on the criminal. Though shame and other consequences of crime fall naturally on one’s family and descendants according to the governance of God, the punishment to be exacted for a crime falls on the perpetrator alone. Therefore the Israelites as a community are not to put fathers to death for their children’s crime, but “each is to die for his own sin.” However, in some situations the group as a whole is implicated (cf. Jos 7), and the individuals in the group are either punished with the group or are benefitted by union with it.
17–18 Concern for the underprivileged (cf. 10:18–19; 14:29; 16:11; 24:6, 10–15) is based on Ex 22:21–24; 23:6, 9; and Lev 19:9–10; 23:22. Israel’s slavery in Egypt is said to be the reason for God’s commands that they act kindly toward the alien, the widow, and the orphan. The alien and fatherless are not to be deprived of justice, and the widow’s cloak must not be taken in pledge (but cf. vv.12–13).
19–22 The overlooked sheaf of grain was to be left for the underprivileged so that the Lord’s blessing may rest on the owner’s endeavors. Only once are the olive trees to be beaten with poles to harvest olives. The remaining olives were for the alien, the widow, and the orphan. In grape harvest also the vines were gone over only once so that the needy could have the remainder. Again, the Israelites were to remember that they had been redeemed from Egypt.
25:1–3 When a dispute arises between persons, they are to take the matter to court. The judge has been given the responsibility and the authority to make decisions and to make sure that the punishment, if any, is inflicted on the guilty party. The guilty must be beaten with the number of blows commensurate with the nature of the crime. Moreover, the number of blows must not exceed forty lashes because that would be inhumane; the person would be humiliated publicly. The guilty is to lie down in front of the judge and is to be flogged there so that the punishment will conform to the judge’s decision.
4 Animals too must be treated with kindness, keeping in mind their need of food. In the threshing process heavy animals were led around a threshing floor. The stalks of grain were laid on the floor, and the hoofs of the animals and sometimes a sledge drawn by animals would separate the kernels from the stalks (Isa 28:28; 41:15; Hos 10:11; cf. 1Co 9:9–10; 1Ti 5:18).
5–6 Levirate marriage, under which a brother (or nearest relative by marriage) takes a childless brother’s widow into his home to raise up a descendant, was of considerable importance to the continuity of the family and the distribution of landed property. Moses had already established that when no male heir existed, daughters would be heirs of their father’s property (Nu 27:1–8). So a basic reason for levirate marriage did not exist if a man died without a male heir but did have a daughter. The rule that the widow must not marry outside the family is similar to that which grew out of the experience of Zelophehad’s daughters (Nu 36:10–12). If the husband’s brother fulfilled the law of the levir, the first son (child?) the widow bore was to carry on the name of the dead brother; the estate would belong to him.
7–10 If the man did not want to marry his brother’s wife, the widow could bring the matter before the elders. There she would indict her husband’s brother for his refusal to carry on her late husband’s name. If the elders failed to break the man’s persistence, she was to take off one of his sandals, spit in his face, and denounce him as one who would not build up his brother’s family line. His family line would then be known as “The Family of the Unsandaled.” This procedure is given as law only here, but the narratives in Ge 38 and Ru 4 indicate similar practice. The legislation makes possible the release of the brother-in-law from his duty, while definitely discouraging such failure by shame.
11–12 Indecency in sexual situations is illustrated by the law against a woman laying hold of the private parts of an assailant of her husband. The circumstance would not be common but is rather a case law that would cover all such actions. The punishment was severe, necessitating the additional statement: “Show her no pity.” Once again the law and punishment appear to be used as a deterrent.
13–16 An Israelite was to be honest in any commercial dealing (Lev 19:35–36). A large weighing stone for buying (to acquire more for one’s money) and a small weighing stone for selling (to give less) were unlawful. Neither were the people to have differing quantitative measures in their homes—“one large, one small.” The Lord detests those who deal dishonestly, but those who follow his ethical standards will be rewarded with long life in the land (cf.Lk 6:38).
17–19 The Amalekites, descendants of Esau (Ge 36:15–16; 1Ch 1:36), were a nomadic tribe living in upper Sinai who attacked the Israelites at Rephidim (Ex 17:8–16). The Israelites eventually won those battles (Ex 17:16). Later, after Israel rejected the directive of the Lord to enter Canaan from the south, Israel suffered defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and the Canaanites (Nu 14:39–45). Moses called the Israelites to remember that the Amalekites attacked the “weary and worn” stragglers. In those attacks, the Amalekites showed “no fear of God.” The call to remember what the Amalekites had done and the Lord’s directive concerning them are emphasized by the totality of the destruction decreed: “You shall blot the memory of Amalek from under heaven,” and by the additional admonition: “Do not forget!”
The Amalekites disappeared from history after the time of Hezekiah (1Ch 4:43). Their incorrigible wickedness was such that annihilation was necessary. Besides, by their attacks on God’s people, the Amalekites indicated that “they had no fear of God.”
5. Firstfruits and tithes (26:1–15)
1–4 When the people were settled in the land, each family leader was to take some of the first produce to the place the Lord would choose. There each man was to say, in essence, to the priest, “I have received my part of the land as an inheritance according to the promise of God.” The landowner then was to present to the priest the produce as a token of the land’s fruitfulness, and the priest was to set the basket down in front of the altar. Since only priests were allowed in the tabernacle, that altar must be the altar of sacrifice outside the tent.
These tokens of the first produce together with the declarations, while similar to the regular offering of firstfruits (Ex 23:19; 34:26), surely refer to an initial offering after the first harvest in the land—subsequent, of course, to the years required by Lev 19:23–25.
5–6 The terse historical review (vv.5–9), replete with phrases and descriptive clauses used elsewhere, witnesses to the Israelites’ faith in the Lord their God. Jacob, the wandering Aramean, went down into Egypt with a few individuals but became a numerous and powerful people, who, after mistreatment and suffering, were brought out of Egypt by the Lord.
7–11 When he was to appear before the enslaved Israelites in Egypt, Moses was to identify the God who spoke to him and who directed him to lead his people out of Egypt as “the LORD, the God of your fathers” (Ex 3:16). The Israelites were to assert now that they cried out in distress to the God of their history, not to any newly found or newly revealed God, and that the God of their fathers had brought them out of Egypt and into the Promised Land. Israel’s escape from the oppression in Egypt and the trials of the Exodus and the blessings of residence in the land “flowing with milk and honey” (cf. 6:3) were all credited to the Lord with thankfulness, worship, and rejoicing. Levites and aliens were to be included as participants in this festivity.
12–15 Appended to this initial giving of the firstfruits is the rule for the setting aside of the tithe of every third year for the support of the Levites and the underprivileged. In substance the declaration says that the tenth of the produce had been removed from the donor’s premises and was given to the Levites and the underprivileged—aliens, orphans, and widows. Because the donor had obeyed the Lord’s command, he could pray for the Lord’s blessing on the people and on the land the Lord had given to the people.
The part of the produce of the land given to the Levites and the underprivileged is called the “tenth” or “tithe” (GK 6923 & 5130; see 12:6) and the “sacred portion.” This sacred tithe was not conceived of as a secular tax for the welfare of the poor but as an act inspired by the Lord. Both the giving of it and the reception of it were spiritual acts and were to be recognized as holy.
Several specific situations illustrate the speaker’s assertion that he himself had not eaten any of the tenth. He had not eaten any while in mourning (i.e., while he was unclean for that reason). In fact, he had not removed any of it while he was unclean for any reason. Neither was any of the food ever offered to the dead (putting food in a grave with a dead body was a common Egyptian and Canaanite practice, which the Israelites were not to emulate).
The worshiper reiterated that he had obeyed the Lord’s commands to the letter. The affirmation ended with prayer recognizing that God’s dwelling place is in heaven and that he had given the Israelites the land flowing with milk and honey as he had promised to their forefathers. Thus continued blessing on both people and land was requested.
6. Concluding exhortation and the declaration of the covenant-treaty compact (26:16–19)
16–19 This whole section (12:1–26:19) concludes with an exhortation to adhere carefully to the stipulations of the covenant-treaty the Lord has given to the Israelites. “This day” points to a particular day when the command to follow God’s decrees and laws with heart and soul was reiterated on the plains of Moab and when the people declared that the Lord was their God and the Lord declared that they were his people.
The Lord declared that the Israelites in a special sense were his people and were his “treasured possession” (GK 6035; see 7:6; 14:2). As the Lord was to be the object of their praise (10:21), so his people would be the object of the praise of the nations. They would have a name with a fame high above other nations.
D. Ratification of the Covenant-Treaty (27:1–26)
1. The law and the altar on Mount Ebal (27:1–8)
Chapters 27–28 constitute the instruction for impressing the covenant-treaty on the Israelites by two specific programs: (1) the setting up on Mount Ebal of stones on which the law was written and the building of a fieldstone altar on which burnt offerings and fellowship offerings were to be sacrificed for this event; (2) the presentation by the people of the curses and blessings on Mounts Ebal and Gerizim.
1 According to this verse, not Moses alone, but Moses and the elders of Israel commanded the people. Perhaps the elders are associated with Moses because of his imminent death and consequent absence from the ceremony at Gerizim and Ebal.
2–4 The temporal focus of being on the verge of entering Canaan is mentioned again. Large stones set up on Mount Ebal were to be coated with plaster and then inscribed with “all the words of this law.” What is meant by “all the words of this law” cannot be definitely determined. Most likely the salient parts of the laws reiterated in Deuteronomy would be all that was necessary. “Today” (v.1) limits the commands to what Moses had said to them in that twenty-four-hour period.
5–8 In addition to the stones to be set up on Mount Ebal for displaying the law, an altar of fieldstones was to be erected. In agreement with Ex 20:25, no iron tool was to be used in building this altar. This altar was for temporary use on a special occasion, like the altars erected by the patriarchs. “Burnt offerings” and “fellowship offerings” were to be sacrificed there, and the people were to eat the fellowship offerings while rejoicing in the presence of the Lord. Just as the people were instructed at the incidence of the giving of the law at Sinai, so now, at the renewal of the covenant-treaty, burnt offerings and fellowship offerings were to be made.
2. The curses from Mount Ebal (27:9–26)
a. The standing and the stance of the tribes (27:9–13)
9–11 The authority of the elders coupled with that of Moses began this series of directives (v.1); now that of the priests is added. The repetition of the declaration of the people becoming the people of the Lord their God is noteworthy. Basically three occasions of this declaration occurred or were about to occur: at Horeb (Sinai) (Ex 19:3–8), on the plains of Moab (Dt 26:16–19; 27:9–10), and on Mount Ebal (Jos 8:30–35). In every instance the important aspects of the treaty formula are present. Most notable is the relationship established between the Lord and Israel. Not only is the Lord the Creator of the people as human beings, but he is also the Creator of Israel as a political entity. Rewards and punishments stem from this relationship.
12–13 The tribes to stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people are all descendants of Jacob’s two wives, Leah and Rachel, while the tribes that uttered curses were Reuben and Zebulun, both sons of Leah, plus the tribes of the sons of the handmaids Zilpah and Bilhah. Preference is given to the sons of the wives of Jacob who had higher standing than the sons of the handmaids, though the division into two groups of six necessitated putting two sons of Leah with those of the handmaids.
b. Curses and response (27:14–26)
14 While vv.12–13 reveal that six tribes were to stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people and the other six on Mount Ebal to pronounce curses (GK 826), here we learn that the Levites were to recite the words and the people were to say, “Amen.” The Levites voicing the blessings and curses were apparently priests who cared for the ark of the covenant (Jos 8:33). The rest of the tribe of Levi was on Gerizim (v.12). The list of curses in vv.15–26 tells on whom and why the curses would fall. The actions that evoke the curses are illustrative rather than comprehensive.
15 The first curse covers an Israelite’s relationship to the Lord. No one was to make an idol, either carved of wood or cast in metal. This was detestable to the Lord God (cf. Ex 20:3–4).
16 The second curse falls on the one who dishonors his parents (cf. Ex 20:12; Dt 5:16).
17 The third curse relates to the division of the land. Each family’s allotment was to be respected; consequently, moving boundary stones came under God’s curse (see 19:14).
18–19 The next two curses concern the disabled and the underprivileged. Leviticus 19:14 prohibits putting “a stumbling block in front of the blind.” Here the curse falls on the one “who leads the blind astray on the road.” The next curse is on the man who withholds justice from the disadvantaged: the alien, the fatherless, or the widow. The requirement of equal justice for everyone is frequently stated (Ex 22:21–24; 23:9; Lev 19:33–34; Dt 10:17–19; 24:17).
20 Here the first of four curses involving incest is indicative of the importance of sexual morality in the Mosaic order. The “father’s wife” refers to someone other than one’s mother. The euphemism “dishonors his father’s bed” may mean that he violates his father’s marriage. Sexual relations are only for those lawfully married.
21 Having sexual relations with animals was not unknown in the ancient Near East. Among the Hittites bestiality was practiced to bring people into union with their gods. Exodus 22:19 and Lev 18:23; 20:15–16, as well as the reiteration by Moses here, indicate that was practiced in Canaan. When this sin was discovered, death was the penalty. If not discovered, the participants were nevertheless under the curse of God.
22–23 Curses eight and nine fall on those who commit incest with a half-sister or one’s mother-in-law (cf. Lev 18:9, 17; 20:14, 17).
24–25 The tenth and eleventh curses fall on those who kill secretly and those who accept fees for killing innocent persons. These actions, along with the preceding, appear to place a curse on criminal actions that are not publicly known. The Lord denounces that person, and the Lord’s curse ever hangs over him, eventuating in unknown punishment. Only here is a curse placed on anyone who accepts a bribe.
26 The last of the twelve curses sums up them all but includes more than the curses specified. The Israelites must “uphold,” or make effective (GK 7756), this law by following it. This covers all the law as enunciated by Moses on the plains of Moab. To the recitation of each curse, the people were to respond with a definite “Amen” (GK 589), a solemn assertion confirming the validity of the curses. The people declared that they were placing themselves under the consequences of breaking the covenant stipulations, which was tantamount to saying, “We formally accept the terms and agree to all the provisions.”
The Deuteronomic curses were warnings not to break the law, given with the intent that paying heed to the warning would keep Israel in good relationship with the Lord. Those living in OT times who were faithful to the Lord were not under the curse but had the witness from the Spirit of God that they were acceptable to him.
E. The Blessings and the Curses (28:1–68)
1. The blessings (28:1–14)
1–2 The oft-repeated reference to the “commands I give you today” (cf. vv.9, 13, 14, 15, 45, 58, 62) introduces “all these blessings” (GK 1388) for obedience. Full obedience to the Lord would result in blessing for his people. Among these blessings is eminence. If Israel obeyed the Lord, she would be set high above all the nations of the world (26:19). The blessings would come to the people and go with them, much like goodness and love in Ps 23:6.
3–4 Two sections of blessings and curses balance each other in vv.3–6 over against vv.16–19. The blessing or the curse would be nationwide, covering “city and country” (vv.3, 16). Every productivity would be under either the blessing or the curse: children, crops, and livestock, including both herds and flocks. The blessing of reproduction had been in the promise to Abraham and was repeated throughout the revelation through Moses (Ge 15:5; Ex 32:13; Dt 1:10).
5 Blessing or curse would extend to the Israelites’ daily sustenance (vv.5, 17), the basket and kneading trough being used to gather food products and to prepare them for meals. Among a desert-dwelling people food products were scarce, and hunger and thirst common. Abundant foodstuffs were a notable blessing indeed!
6 The Lord’s goodness would cover the Israelites’ daily labor. Going out and coming in is a common description of going about one’s daily tasks.
7–8 Further specification of the Lord’s blessing under the covenant tells of victory over enemies and utopian prosperity in the land. When enemies would come from one direction, they would flee in defeat in seven directions. External foes would be decisively disoriented and scattered, unable to carry on warfare. The Lord would eagerly command blessing to be on the Israelites’ barns (granaries) and everything they put their hands to.
9–11 Once again Moses conditioned Israel’s blessed relationship to the Lord on keeping his commands and walking in his ways. If Israel would do this, the Lord would fulfill his sworn promise to establish them. This establishment as the Lord’s holy people would make other people recognize that the Israelites were “called by the name of the LORD,” and this would make the nations afraid of them. The blessing of v.4 to be experienced in the land is expanded into “abundant prosperity.”
12 The particular blessing of rain would provide fertility to the soil and an abundance of crops to the farmer. The Lord promised to bless the people by opening the treasure house of the skies (cf. Job 38:22; Pss 33:7; 135:7). The prosperity of v.8 is now the Lord’s “bounty,” describing the goodness and sufficiency of his treasures of rain. Moses insisted that it was the Lord who would either bless Israel with abundant rain or withhold rain because of her disobedience. Because of the blessing of the Lord, Israel was destined to be rich and would “lend to many nations but borrow from none.”
13–14 Israel would move upward from her current status to that of the head among the nations. But this would be determined by the adherence of the people to the stipulations of the covenant-treaty that they had accepted from the Lord. They must “carefully follow them” and “not turn aside . . . to the right or to the left” from any of the commands Moses was rehearsing to them that day.
2. The curses (28:15–68)
15 As the blessings of the Lord seem to be personalized (v.2), so also the curses take on personal action; they would come and overtake a disobedient Israel (cf. v.45).
16–19 After the basic coverage of the curse, following the same plan as that of the blessings (vv.3–6), Moses developed—with about six times the length—the description of the disaster that would follow when Israel was disobedient to the Lord. Curses, confusion, and rebuke would fall on everything disobedient Israel did—until destruction and sudden ruin enveloped her.
20–21 The Lord would send plagues of many kinds. Some would attack the Israelites physically, and others would affect their lands and goods.
22–24 The bodily aspects of the curse that would come on the people include illnesses of various sorts and the shameful desecration of their dead bodies (v.26). Disturbance of their emotional and mental balance would follow. A precise identification of the diseases listed here is not possible. And not only were diseases to be the people’s punishment, but the physical land too would suffer. The nature of that curse is developed as drought and its accompanying evils. Just as the specific diseases mentioned relate in some way to the excessive heat of fever or inflammation, so the curse of the land mentions the heat of drought and its consequences: scorching heat from a bronze sky, drought producing dust rather than rain from the Lord, and soil made as hard as iron by the hot east wind off the desert (cf. Ge 41:6, 23, 27).
“Blight and mildew” is an idiom signifying disaster to the crops by contrasting degenerative actions. Together the words depict the dearth of productivity and the destruction of the crops.
25 Israel under the curse of disobedience would also suffer defeat in warfare. Under the blessing their enemies would come from one sector but flee in seven directions (v.7). Under the curse the opposite would be true. Israel would attack her enemies from one direction and flee in seven. Seven depicts complete, disorganized rout.
26 The Israelites’ dead bodies would not be given burial but would be eaten by the birds and wild animals, a shameful desecration. Jeremiah similarly portrayed the frightful future in the Valley of Hinnom, after which it would be called the Valley of Slaughter (Jer 7:32–33; cf. 1Sa 17:44, 46; 1Ki 14:11; Ps 79:2; et al.).
27 The “boils of Egypt” doubtless refers to the sixth plague (Ex 9:9–11). This may have been a form of leprosy. The “tumors” (GK 6754) were like those the Philistines later contracted when the ark of the covenant was held by them (1Sa 5–6). The Hebrew word is usually thought to be hemorrhoids, tumors, bubonic plague, or leprosy. The “festering sores” appear to be some kind of eruptive sore (cf. Lev 21:20; 22:22). The “itch” is some sort of skin disorder that induces scratching. These skin eruptions will be incurable.
28–29 Following on these diseases afflicting the skin come debilitating dysfunctions: madness, blindness, and mental confusion. This blindness will be so complete that in the brightness of noon the people will grope about. They will be unsuccessful in everything they do. Continually, they would be oppressed and robbed of whatever they labored for; and there would be no one to rescue them from their plight.
30 From this verse on, Moses portrayed the miserable existence and utter destruction of Israel as a nation. The possibility of a blessed future remained, but the possibility of the horrors of Israel because of infidelity seemed more sure.
To be pledged to be married was a more certain relationship than modern engagement; so having that status broken, probably by being taken captive and forced into sexual compliance, would be a very trying experience. Building a house would be useless labor. The same frustration would follow attempts at viticulture; not even the beginning of the enjoyment of the fruit would be experienced (cf. 20:6).
31–32 One’s ox would be slaughtered in plain view, but the Israelite owner, obviously helpless, would have none of it to eat. So also his donkey would be forcibly taken from him and never returned, and his sheep given to his enemies. Sons and daughters would be taken captive; and parents helplessly would wear out their eyes watching for the return of those who would never come back.
33 Instead of the abundance that an obedient Israel would receive from the soil (vv.4–6, 8, 11–12), disobedient Israel would have the people of an unknown land eat what their “land and labor” produced while they themselves would experience cruel oppression throughout their lives. “Another nation” in v.32 and “a nation unknown to you” in v.36 both signify foreign people.
34–35 Blow upon blow continues. What the people would see would drive them insane. The specifics of this dirge are picked up again. Painful, incurable boils that particularly afflicted the knees and the legs would spread from the soles of their feet to the top of the head (cf. Job 2:7–8; 7:3–5; et al.). This may have been a kind of elephantiasis.
36–37 So far Moses has said that disobedient Israel would be plagued until they were “destroyed . . . from the land” (v.21) and that their children would be given to another nation. Here he announces the fact of national captivity and then describes their situation in the foreign land in bold outline. The Lord would drive the Israelites and their king to a distant, foreign nation unknown to them or their fathers, and there they would worship idols. Among the nations they would become an object of horror, scorn, and ridicule (1Ki 9:7; 2Ch 7:20; Jer 24:9).
38–42 Again the curse on the land, resulting in unproductive farming, is elaborated. This time the produce itself is attacked, and the harvest is lost. Grain would not be harvested because grasshoppers would eat it. Grapes would not be gathered, and people would not drink the wine that might have been made—worms would eat the grapes. Olive oil would not be available. The locust swarms would take over the land. In this scene of unproductivity, the Israelites would not be able to keep their children either, because they would go into captivity.
43–44 In contrast to vv.12b–13a, aliens would lend to the Israelites, and they would be the head and Israel the tail The Israelite condition under the curse would be more of a curse than their blessing would be a blessing, because of their continual deterioration.
45–48 All these curses would not only come on the people and overtake them but would pursue them until they were destroyed for their disobedience. The Lord who had brought the Israelites out of Egypt by signs and wonders (4:34) would make the curses to be “a sign and a wonder” to them and their descendants forever. Because the people did not serve the Lord, they would serve the enemies he would send against them. In their prosperity, the people neglected to serve the Lord joyfully and gladly. Since they did not under these conditions serve the Lord, they would experience the dire consequences of the curse: hunger, thirst, nakedness, poverty, and servitude would come on them like an iron yoke, until they were destroyed.
49 The destruction of disobedient Israel was to come from a distant, foreign nation. This distant enemy would strike swiftly and unerringly like an eagle swooping on its prey (cf. Hos 8:1; Jer 48:40; 49:22). This foreign nation would have a language not understandable to the Israelite population (cf. Isa 28:11; 33:19).
In 1Co 14:21 Paul quotes Isa 28:11–12 and Dt 28:49 in reference to the tongues problem in the Corinthian church. The tongues mentioned in Isaiah and Deuteronomy were the regular languages of foreign peoples that were unknown by the Israelites.
50–52 This “fierce-looking nation” (cf. Da 8:23), without regard for either the aged or the young, would mercilessly eat up the choice livestock and the crops. That they would “besiege all the cities throughout the land” seems to include cities of any size or importance; however, only walled cities were subject to siege. Israel’s misplaced trust would be evident when the walls fell down.
53–57 The frightful horrors of the siege included children, given to the people under the blessing of God but now eaten by their parents. And when the flesh of children was insufficient to go around, there would be no sharing of flesh with a starving brother or sister. Women, raised in delicate fashion, at the time of giving birth would begrudge their husbands and older children the afterbirths of their wombs and the children themselves who were born during the siege, eating them as food. Not only rough, coarse characters would do such things, but the most gentle and sensitive would descend to this debased state (cf. 2Ki 6:24–31; La 2:20; 4:10). All these frightful experiences would result “because of the suffering that your enemy will inflict on you during the siege.” Three times this phrase occurs (vv.53, 55, 57), bearing down on the terrible experience the Israelites could expect if they disobeyed their Lord.
58–61 The Israelites would experience not only the diseases of Egypt but every other sickness or disaster as well—even all those “not recorded in this Book of the Law.” The people are told that they would fall under the curse if they did not carefully follow “all the words of this law, which are written in this book.” The capitalization of “this Book of the Law” signifies that a definite, particular written document is meant. While its precise contents are uncertain, it covered the basic laws and the historical episodes relating to the establishment of the covenant-treaty—so far as it was written. Failure to follow all the stipulations would result in failure to revere the glorious and awesome name: “the LORD your God.” This glorious and awesome name speaks of his essence, character, and reputation as the God of the promises, the true and living God revealed to the people, particularly at Horeb (Sinai).
62–64a Israel’s growth as a nation would also be reversed. Under the covenant flowing from the promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Israel had increased and would continue to increase in number as the stars in the sky (1:10; 10:22; 26:5); but under the curse a reversal would return them to being few in number. The promise of the land as their very own was central in the promise to Israel—a promise repeated again and again in this book. But under the curse the few people left would be torn from the land and scattered worldwide.
64b–68 Instead of following the Lord exclusively, the Israelites would turn from him and engage in idolatrous worship. Instead of the repose of the Promised Land, anxiety, wearisome longing, fear, constant suspense, and despair would be their lot among the nations. In the Promised Land under the blessing of the Lord, the nations would fear them (v.10); but under the curse in foreign lands, the Israelites would be in constant fear of the nations. So low would they sink that the offering of themselves as slaves in Egypt would be rejected. The psychological state of the people dispersed among the nations is depicted with no less descriptive power than the foregoing calamities.
IV. Third Address: The Terms of the Covenant (29:1–30:20)
The rest of the book of Deuteronomy concerns the ratification (renewal) of the covenant-treaty (29:1–15), the results of acceptance or rejection of it (29:16–30:20), Moses’ Song (31:19–32:43), his final blessing on the tribes (33:1–29), Joshua’s induction as Moses’ successor (31:1–8, 14–15, 23; 32:44; 34:9), and Moses’ death (34:1–12).
A. Recapitulation of Historical Background (29:1–29)
1. Introduction (29:1)
1 Moses differentiated between the two declarations of the covenant (Moab, Horeb). The covenant is one; the affirmations or renewals of allegiance to the Lord and the terms of the covenant could be several.
2. Recapitulation of desert situation (29:2–8)
2–3 In these culminating addresses of his life, Moses at first identified the people with the whole immediate past history. Many of those in front of him had not been in Egypt; they were born in the desert. However, many were under the age of twenty at Kadesh, two years after leaving Egypt, and were eighteen years of age or younger at the time of the Exodus (they were now thirty-nine to fifty-six years old). These had seen the “miraculous signs and great wonders” (4:34; 7:19) that the Lord had loosed on the Egyptians during the plagues, though the youngest of them would have no memory of what happened when they were infants. Moses’ message, however, was directed to the nation. The community had been in Egypt and had seen the wonderful things that the Lord had done for them. Even the specific mention of “your own eyes” is doubtless directed to the whole community comprising the nation, as vv.10–11 indicate.
4 When Moses said that the Lord had not given the Israelites the realization of his intervention in the experiences of their history, he did not deny that they had knowledge of his part in the action; rather, he was asserting that the ultimate directive and operative power in all their national life was the Lord himself. This, he said, they had not yet fully realized.
5–6 The Lord’s providence (cf. 8:4; Ne 9:21) included provisions of clothing and food. Specific miracles of supplying clothes and of keeping clothing from falling from their bodies in tatters are not mentioned, but uniting the durability of their clothing and sandals with the giving of manna and water puts this supply from the Lord on the same plane for the same purpose—“that you might know that I am the LORD” (cf. Ex 6:7; 7:5, 17; 10:2; 14:4, 18).
7–8 “When you reached this place” refers to the area immediately north of the Arnon, controlled by Sihon (2:24–37); so the plains of Moab were in Amorite hands until Moses conquered that area. Og had been king of the northern sector of Transjordan. He also was defeated by Moses (3:1–11). The allotment of these areas to Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh followed the defeat of the Amorites (3:12–17).
3. Clarification of covenant-treaty situation (29:9–21)
9–13 Moses emphasized the importance of adopting the covenant and following its stipulations in order to experience prosperity. All the Israelites standing in the presence of the Lord were called on to enter into the covenant-treaty with the Lord, who was sealing it with an oath. In this renewal the central characteristic and purpose of the covenant was again affirmed as the establishment of the people as the people of the Lord and their acceptance of him as their God in accordance with what he had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by an oath. The “oath” (GK 8678) in v.12 is like the oath to Abraham, and the formation of Israel as the people of God is in fulfillment of the promise to Abraham.
14–15 To focus on the national character of this covenant renewal—and the future benefits to the nation and the responsibilities of the national entity—Moses declared that not only those who were standing there at that time (notice the frequent “today”) but those who were not there at that time but would appear in later generations were involved in making this covenant-treaty (cf. 5:3; Ac 2:39).
16–18 The statements “how we lived in Egypt” and “how we passed through the countries on the way here” provide the locale and historic background for the people’s knowledge of the gods in those places and the nature of their worship. This is evident from the definite reference to the detestable images and idols that they saw among the people there. The Israelites were exhorted to “make sure” that no one’s heart turned away from the Lord and that there was no source in them to produce such “bitter poison.” The source of “bitter poison” was the person or persons who turned away from the Lord to worship the gods of Egypt and those of the other nations through which the Israelites passed on their journey from Egypt to the plains of Moab.
19–21 Moses, by the Spirit of God, expressed the thoughts of such a “bitter-poison” person when he heard “the words of this oath”; that is, the terms of the covenant-treaty, perhaps with special reference to its curses as a specific warning. Such a person invokes a blessing on himself saying, “I will be safe, even though I persist in going my own way.”
The punishment the Lord would send is noteworthy in two respects. (1) From the “no man or woman,” an individual apostate condition is considered. Individual apostasy could not hide in the blessed state of the believing community. One’s apostasy would bring disaster on the innocent. The individual apostate would feel the result of the Lord’s burning wrath and zeal. (2) No more dreadful state can be imagined than “the LORD will never be willing to forgive him” (cf. Heb 6:4–8; 2Pe 2; 3:16–17). The appalling results of apostasy would be heaped one on the other: all the curses in the book, the blotting out of one’s name on earth (cf. 25:19; Ex 17:14), and being singled out for disaster. All these results would fall on the apostate.
4. Results of the Lord’s anger on those who abandon the covenant (29:22–29)
22–24 Both the inhabitants and foreigners from distant lands would see the devastation and diseases resulting from the Lord’s punishment—a punishment likened to that of Sodom and Gomorrah (Ge 14:2; 19:24–29). Utter desolation would prevail. No more would the land flowing with milk and honey be so productive that “abundant prosperity” would be present (28:11). The Promised Land would become a burning waste of salt and sulfur—“nothing planted, nothing sprouted, no vegetation growing.” The pictorial representation is dramatized further by the reaction of later generations of Israelites and of the nations, who would ask the universal question when confronted by events that adversely affected lives or properties: “Why? Why did the Lord do this? Why was he so angry?” (cf. v.24).
25–28 The answer contains (again) the warning that Israel “abandoned the covenant of the LORD,” though the answer is cast in the form of accomplished prediction. The people did abandon the covenant; they did go off and worship other gods. Therefore, the Lord’s “furious anger” and “great wrath” uprooted them from their land and thrust them into another land.
29 The “secret” (GK 6259) or hidden things are at least the future experiences of Israel whether they are obedient or disobedient—experiences then hidden but eventually realized by future fulfillment. The hidden things of the future are known only to the Lord, but his people, nevertheless, have reason for great expectations allied with great responsibilities; they have the “things revealed” (GK 1655). These are within the area of their knowledge and that of their children forever, and for a definite, specific reason—that they should “follow all the words of this law.” So God knows all things, and human knowledge in comparison is severely limited (cf. Isa 55:8–9).
B. Prosperity After the Return to the Lord (30:1–10)
1–3 Moses looked beyond the period when Israel had a time of blessing and after a subsequent time when Israel would be under the curse of the Lord while dispersed among the nations. It is not clear whether the destruction by a nation whose language they would not understand (28:36, 49) is the same experience as the scattering among the nations in 28:64; 29:22; and 30:1. Neither is it clear that there would be two basic dispersions, as later Scriptures and history have shown—one after the destruction of the kingdom(s) culminating in 586 B.C. and another after A.D. 70. When the people dispersed among the nations returned to the Lord in obedience to the covenant with all their heart and soul, then the Lord, in compassion, would restore their fortunes after regathering them.
4–8 The hypothetical particle translated “even if” is often used to make a very strong assertion (cf. Nu 22:18). So here from the most extreme distance, the Lord will regather his people. This future return will be occasioned by the resolve of their heart and will be characterized by their wholehearted love for him and by their obedience to his commands. The Lord’s compassion makes possible the return from the most distant lands. That compassion not only returns the people to their land; it also rehabilitates them and makes them more prosperous and more numerous than their fathers.
The curses of disobedience will then fall on Israel’s enemies, not on Israel herself. The Lord will circumcise the people’s hearts so that they will love him with heart and soul. This work of God in the innermost being is characteristic of the spiritual nature of Deuteronomic revelation (6:5–6; 10:16; see comment on 10:14–16).
9–10 The initial promises that the Lord had been giving the Israelites as they were being prepared for entrance into Canaan will be renewed. They will be prosperous in everything they do. Fecundity will again mark their families, livestock, and crops (28:11). The Lord will again delight in his people; he will return to being pleased to make them prosper. This look into the future ends with a warning that prosperity will come only if the people return to the original demands of the covenant-treaty—obedience to the Book of the Law, i.e., total allegiance to the Lord their God.
C. The Covenant Offer of Life or Death (30:11–20)
11–14 Moses turned to the options for Israel as they stood by the Jordan facing the future in Canaan. He first set before them the availability of the resources for responding affirmatively to the commands he was giving them. The commands were neither too difficult nor beyond their reach. Their proximity and intimacy are illustrated by assertions and rhetorical questions. Even in these Moses emphasized the necessity of obedience. The positive assertion of the nearness of the revelation is even more specific: the word is in their mouth (i.e., they can repeat it) and in their heart (i.e., they can think it and understand and react to it). Obedience is possible!
15–20 Starkly clear, the Lord through Moses set the choice before his people: life and prosperity (for obedience) or death and destruction (for disobedience). The route of obedience is twofold. It requires one “to love [GK 170] the LORD” and “to walk [GK 2143] in his ways.” As in a covenant-treaty, the “love” required is the committal in loyal devotion to the Lord. It relies on faith in his saving grace and walking “in his ways” (GK 2006), i.e., obeying his precepts. That will lead to life; it will increase the size of the nation and bring the Lord’s blessing on them in the land. However, if the people turn their hearts away from the Lord, disobedient Israel will be destroyed. The nation separate from the Lord will not live long in the Promised Land.
After invoking both heaven and earth to witness that he has placed the options of life and death, blessings and curses, before Israel (4:26), Moses made his final appeal to his people. “Choose life!” (GK 1047 & 2644; see also comment on 32:44–47) he exhorted. Then they and their children will live; and they will love the Lord, listen to him, and hold fast to him. When they are committed wholly to him, he will give the nation many years in the land he promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
V. Concluding Narratives (31:1–34:12)
A. Charge to Joshua and Deposition of the Law (31:1–29)
1. Joshua to be leader (31:1–8)
1–2 Moses was 120 years old and unable to lead the people. This inability was not because his natural strength was gone (34:7) but because the time for Israel’s entrance into Canaan had come. Moses’ entrance was precluded by his arrogance at Meribah (Nu 20:24).
3–6 Though Moses himself was not to cross the Jordan, he encouraged the Israelites that the Lord himself would cross over ahead of them and that he would destroy the nations of the land as he had destroyed Sihon and Og. He exhorted them not to be afraid of the Canaanites. The Lord would not only go with them, he would never leave them nor forsake them. Moses would soon remind them, however, that this promise was contingent on their allegiance to him.
7–8 In the presence of “all Israel,” Moses repeated to Joshua personally what he had just said to the people, adding that Joshua was to divide the land among the people. What land each would receive would be that family’s inheritance. The exhortation “Be strong and courageous” given to Joshua and to the people by Moses at the end of his career is repeated by the Lord to Joshua after the death of Moses (Jos 1:6, 9) and also urged on Joshua by the people (Jos 1:18).
2. Recitation of the law at every seventh Feast of Tabernacles (31:9–13)
9 The time when Moses wrote down the law and what “law” is meant in each of the cases mentioned here cannot easily be determined. The “law” surely included all that was essential to the covenant-treaty documents referred to in Deuteronomy—and that includes historical, hortative, and legal elements, substantially all of Deuteronomy. The priests (designated as the sons of Levi) are also designated as those “who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD,” which was apropos especially to the wandering and residence in the desert.
10–13 The stated time for reading “this law” was at seven-year intervals, at the time of canceling debts (15:1; i.e., the sabbatical year). More specifically, it was to be during the Feast of Tabernacles of the sabbatical year, when all Israel was “to appear before the Lord at the place he [was to] choose” (i.e., where the tabernacle was placed).
Attendance at the feast was to be a joyous occasion for all (16:14). The law was to be read before all the people. The children were singled out for special mention because they did not know the law. This septennial reading does not obviate the teaching ministry of the home (6:1–9) or that of the priests (17:11; 24:8; Lev 10:11). It is meant, rather, to strengthen these other teaching procedures. It would also dramatize the learning of the law for those children and others who had not been reached by the other teaching procedures in home and tabernacle.
The reading of the law was to inspire the people to revere the Lord and to follow carefully all the covenant stipulations. That this process should go on “as long as you live in the land” is not to suggest that elsewhere knowledge of the Lord and his word was not necessary. Rather, the process of making known the revelation of God should never cease so that reverence for the Lord and obedience to his word would never cease.
3. Some last words on leadership transfer (31:14–23)
14–15 At the commissioning of Joshua, Moses and Joshua presented themselves before the Lord at the “Tent of Meeting”; and the Lord spoke of the future apostasy of Israel, not only to Moses, but in the hearing of Joshua as well. Thus Joshua too was warned to resist the tendency of the people to turn to foreign gods. The solemnity of the event is apparent in the description of the Lord appearing in the “pillar of cloud,” with the cloud standing over the entrance to the tent.
16–18 After mentioning that Moses was soon to rest with his fathers, the Lord told him and Joshua that the people would soon prostitute themselves to the foreign gods of the land they were about to enter. Turning to Canaanite gods had its counterpart in forsaking the Lord and breaking the covenant-treaty. When the people forsook the Lord, he would forsake them in anger against their wickedness and would hide his face from them. This is the converse of making his face to shine on his people and turning his face toward them (Nu 6:25–26). Many disasters and difficulties would come on them; and they would wonder about the reason for the disasters, indicating that they knew that the disasters came because God was not with them.
19 In view of the apostasy to come, the Lord told Moses and Joshua to write down this song. “Teach it to the Israelites and have them sing it” implies sufficient repetition to fix it in the minds of the people. Only then would they be able to sing it, and only then would it be a witness to the Lord’s admonition, not only to that generation, but to their descendants (v.21).
20–23 The apostasy was to come after the fulfillment of the promise made to the fathers concerning possession of the land flowing with milk and honey (Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5; et al.). Under affluence they would become apostate, turning to other gods, rejecting the Lord, and breaking the covenant-treaty. So when the disasters and difficulties come, the Song of Moses would testify against them.
Moses had shown his pessimistic view of Israelite allegiance to the Lord before. Here he reported that the Lord himself had the same expectation. The Lord said that he knew their disposition toward disobedience, which appeared even before they entered the Land of Promise. Therefore, this song was given and taught to the Israelites. The succession of Joshua, the writing down of the law, the prediction of the people’s rebellion with its attendant results, and the Song of Moses are intertwined in ch. 31.
4. The deposition of the law book and its witness (31:24–29)
24–29 Moses finished writing the book from the beginning to the end, a statement not made before. The command of the Lord to write down the song was given so that it would be a witness against sinning Israel (v.19). The Book of the Law as a witness (cf. v.26) suggests that the Song of Moses is included in this completed book.
The procedure for making the song known to the people seems to have three steps: Moses wrote it down (vv.19, 22), then he spoke these words in the hearing of the elders and officials (v.28), and finally he recited them in the hearing of the whole assembly (v.30). The instruction that the Lord gave Moses indicates that initially Moses directly taught the song to the Israelites (vv.9, 22; 32:44–45). Whether the song was recited originally as a poem or sung as a song is not certain. Moses’ last words are replete with warnings against apostasy, directed to all the Israelites (29:2, 16–28; 30:17–19; 31:30–32:47), to Joshua (vv.14–22), to the Levites (the priests) (vv.24–27), and to the elders and officials (vv.28–29).
The Book of the Law was to be placed beside the ark as a witness against the people, because the Lord knew how rebellious and stiff-necked the people were. The Lord had said to Moses (vv.14–18) that after his death the people would soon become apostate. Here Moses conveyed this pessimism in a more direct and personal way to the people by telling them that after he was gone they would be even more rebellious than when he was alive. His pessimism was well founded in experience and in predictive warnings from the Lord.
B. The Song of Moses (31:30–32:47)
After the call to listen (vv.1–2), the Lord is proclaimed and praised (vv.3–4). Then the people are chided for their reaction to the Lord (vv.5–6). This leads the speaker into a recital of the Lord’s goodness to Israel (vv.7–14), Israel’s response to that goodness (vv.15–18), his rejection of them (vv.19–20), and their estrangement and future punishment (vv.21–30) and that of their enemies (vv.31–35). The poem ends with the Lord’s salvation for his people and his judgment on his (and their) enemies (vv.36–43).
1. Moses’ recitation before the assembly (31:30)
30 The command to write down the song, to teach it to Israel, and to have them sing it (v.19) is said to have been obeyed (v.22). This is now made more explicit as an introduction to the song itself.
2. Literary introduction (32:1–2)
1–2 In his introduction Moses called heaven and earth to listen to what he was about to say (cf. Isa 1:2; 34:1; Mic 1:2; 6:1–2). Yet the message of the song is directed to the nation of Israel. The call to the heavens and the earth to listen is a poetic way of emphasizing the importance of the song’s themes. All creation is a witness to the covenant-treaty between the Lord and Israel.
The remainder of the introduction expresses Moses’ wish that his song would have a beneficent and pleasing reception and result. To this end he revealed his desire in four references to the beneficial results of water coming onto the land. Like rain, dew, showers, and abundant rain bringing fertility to the new grass and tender plants, Moses hoped that his words would prove pleasant and beneficial.
3. The theme: the proclamation of the Lord (32:3–4)
3 The song proper begins with the declaration that Moses proclaimed “the name” (GK 9005) of the Lord and called on others to ascribe greatness to him. Moses has proclaimed the name of the Lord throughout Deuteronomy. He has transmitted the third commandment and warned that such misuse of his name would bring punishment (5:11). The people were to make oaths only in the Lord’s name (6:13; 10:20). The priests were to bless the people in the Lord’s name (10:8; 21:5; cf. Nu 6:22–27); they were also to minister in the Lord’s name always (18:5, 7). It is this name, the glorious and awesome name, that Moses called the people to revere (28:58). Basically, the name of the Lord signifies his person.
The most common reference to “the Name” (cf. 26:2) in Deuteronomy speaks of the place the Lord would choose as a dwelling for his Name (12:5, 11, 21; 14:23–24; 16:2, 6, 11). In these places the Name most significantly relates to his person, his being. Consequently, the NIV in these places capitalizes Name. This not only signifies that the Lord (YHWH, “Yahweh”; GK 3378; NIV “LORD”) is God but that the he is the God of history, the God of the promises, the God who was fulfilling the covenant promises, the God whose people they were, under the covenant-treaty.
4 The metaphor “the Rock” (GK 7446) declares that the Lord is strong and stable, one who can be relied on. The following four parallel lines indicate how the Lord as “the Rock” stands in contrast to Israel who acted corruptly toward him (vv.5–6). The rest of the song suggests that the main “works” of the Lord are activities of creating, aiding, and guiding Israel. These “works are perfect, and all his ways are just” (cf. Ps 18:30). His character is marked by faithfulness; no wrongdoing exists in him.
4. The indictment of Israel (32:5–6)
5–6 The Lord’s governing of his people is on the highest moral and ethical level, but in contrast the Israelites “have acted corruptly.” While the Lord is always right in his handling of Israel, Israel has been wrong and devious in rejecting him. The idolatry of the golden calf illustrates this corruption that broke their relationship to the Lord so that they were “no longer his children.” This condition of no longer being his children was to their shame and disgrace. The people are described further by two synonyms that speak of twisting and turning from the right path. Though the Lord is their Father (i.e, the progenitor and originator of the nation as well as the one who has matured and sustained them), the Israelites turned from him to idols and consequently lost their status of sonship.
5. Israel as God’s inheritance (32:7–9)
7 The song calls on Israel to remember the past, to remember the divine acts of kindness. The people are urged to ask for information from their fathers and their elders (4:32; Job 8:8). They would “tell them” what had occurred. Then, supposing the people had asked for this explanation, the song proceeds to give it.
8–9 When speaking of God’s allocating geographical areas for the nations, he is the “Most High” (GK 6610; used only here in Deuteronomy), which is in contrast to his name “LORD” (see comment on v.3) as the God of Israel. Most High is an elative form (cf. Ge 14:18–20, 22). That Canaan was Israel’s inheritance by the Lord’s decree, based on the promise to Abraham, is of major importance in the developing doctrine of the Lord’s relationship to his people and his redemption for them and providence toward them. This inheritance was soon to be divided among the tribes. Thus ownership of landed property becomes a basic right of Israelite social structure and economy. And much more, ownership on the basis of inherent right describes the relationship of Israel to the Lord—and sometimes of the Lord to Israel. Israel is the Lord’s “inheritance” (GK 5709).
However, not only did the Lord give Canaan to Israel, he also gave certain lands to other nations. The Lord rules over the disposition of land to all nations in the sovereign exercise of his will in every generation (ch. 2). The latter part of v.8 probably means that the boundaries of the nations were determined with the intent that Israel would have Canaan because her numbers could be supported in that area. The use of Jacob for Israel contributes to the poetic style of the song.
6. The Lord’s early care of Israel (32:10–12)
10–11 In a bold, dramatic way it is said that Israel was found “in a desert land” and “a barren, howling waste.” This is part of the moving description of how the Lord found Israel in a desolate and desperate plight in the Sinai Desert (cf. Jer 2:2; Hos 9:10). Moses focused on the people as an unorganized body in an inhospitable environment at the time God entered into the covenant-treaty with them. There the Lord “shielded” them by surrounding them with his protection, and he attentively thought of them and concerned himself with them.
The Lord exercised his loving care for Israel like an eagle caring for its young, especially as they are taught to fly. The eagle by stirring up the nest thrusts the eaglets out into the air to try their wings but does not leave them altogether on their own resources. The parent eagle catches the fluttering little ones on its outspread wings and again deposits them in the nest. Similarly, the Lord took Israel out from Egypt into the deserts of Sinai but did not leave them without his help. His widespread wings supported them throughout the learning years in Sinai.
12 The gods of the Egyptians, the desert tribes, and the Canaanites were multiple. Not so the Lord! He was alone as the leader and supporter of Israel.
7. The Lord’s care of Israel in Canaan foreseen (32:13–14)
13 The Lord fed Israel with the finest foods, that which comes directly from God’s natural provisions. Causing Israel to ride on the high places of the land pictures their advance and conquest of Canaan, which was known as a high, mountainous country. The song views Israel as fed and nourished with the fruit of the fields (food, produce), honey from the rock, and olive oil from the trees in the flinty crags. Bees in Canaan often built their combs between the rocks. Olive trees flourished and produced bountiful crops of olives in the unlikely limestone soil in rocky places.
14 The animals too contributed to this good life, with curds and milk and the meat of the best of lambs and goats. Curds might refer not only to the curds of cattle’s milk but also to cream (Job 29:6) and butter (Pr 30:33). The fat of lambs describes the best of lambs, which is the meaning of “fattened lambs and goats.” Bashan produced fine livestock, being noted for bulls and cows (Ps 22:12; Am 4:1) as well as rams. In addition the people were to have the “fat of the kidneys of the wheat”—i.e., the choicest, richest, or finest wheat—and fine wine of the blood of grapes (blood indicating the red grapes of Canaan).
8. Affluent Israel’s rejection of God (32:15–18)
15 Israel’s condition sets the stage for their sinfulness. After eating fine foods and drinking choice red wine, Israel the Righteous (see NIV note on Jeshurun) grew fat, i.e., became affluent and then, rather than being thankful, kicked! Where there should be thankfulness and obedience, there is open recalcitrance. The last half of v.15 and on through v.18 shows how Israel kicked: you grew fat (NIV, “filled with food”), you became heavy, you became obese (“sleek”). In this state Israel “abandoned,” “rejected,” “angered,” “deserted,” and “forgot” the Lord and “made him jealous.” The God who had made Israel, who had fathered him and had given him birth, was maltreated in this way. Though he was called “God,” “Rock,” “Savior,” “Creator” (see v.6), and Sustainer of the nation, they made him jealous with their foreign gods and angered him with their detestable idols.
16–18 The gods they turned to were “foreign,” “detestable idols,” “demons,” “no gods,” and, “worthless idols” (v.21). They were gods they had not before acknowledged. In contrast to the Lord who as Creator is the God of history and the God their fathers worshiped, these gods appeared recently and were gods their fathers had not feared (i.e., reverenced).
9. God’s rejection of Israel (32:19–30)
19 The indictment of both sons and daughters for angering the Lord is unusual since it is common to include both sexes under the term “sons” (which could be “children”), as at the end of v.20. Perhaps this more sharply indicates the total participation of the people in worshiping other gods—the women being implicated as much as the men.
20 In his anger the Lord says, “I will hide my face [GK 7156] from them” (cf. 31:17–18). “I will . . . see what their end will be” does not suppose that the Lord did not know what would transpire. It is rather a declaration that he will see that those punishments do come. The two clauses—“I will hide my face from them” and “I will . . . see what their end will be”—are explicitly parallel. These two actions follow from the condition of the people—from their being a perverse generation, unfaithful children.
21 As the Lord has been roused to jealousy and anger by Israel’s worship of worthless no-gods, so he will rouse Israel to jealousy, anger, and humiliation by foolish, vile non-people. No specific nation seems to be intended, and several nations have fitted the description and fulfilled the prediction.
22–23 The result of the Lord’s anger is described as a world-embracing cataclysm of fire adversely affecting three entities: the realm of death, the earth and its harvests, and the very foundations of the mountains (Ps 18:7). The calamities of v.23 are those experiences that affect people adversely. These disasters will be heaped on Israel, and the Lord’s arrows will be used up against his people.
24 This general description is followed by specific calamities: famine, pestilence, plague, attacks by wild animals and snakes, as well as warfare. Each calamitous situation is further defined by appropriate descriptive words—not only famine (or hunger), but “wasting” famine (probably from desiccation, having all one’s flesh and energy sucked out by total lack of fluids and malnutrition); not only pestilence, but “consuming” pestilence. It is the fangs of the wild animals and the venom of vipers that will attack them.
25–27 Moreover, the sword (i.e., warfare) will reach Israel both “out in the streets” and “in their homes,” allowing them no place of safety. All ages will succumb; those who remain will be scattered so that no one will remember them as a nation. This is the punishment the Lord said he would send on the Israelites for their disloyalty. However, because Israel’s enemies might understand what was happening and attribute the devastation of Israel to their own prowess in warfare, there seems to be an unvoiced suggestion that this would in a measure stay God’s hand. The Lord’s compassion for his people in v.36 also affects the full application of his anger.
28–30 It seems best to interpret Israel as the subject of the poem in these verses. This section gives the reasons for the calamities described in the preceding section: the obtuse stupidity on the part of Israel and the wickedness on the part of their enemies. Israel’s stupidity derives from its lack of sagacity or wisdom, i.e., “without sense.” “No discernment” indicates that they could not discern what their end would be.
Because of their lack of wisdom, the people could not detect or understand their destiny. They did not believe what Moses had already told them and doubted that the Lord was the source of the miracles that brought them out of Egypt and through Sinai. In later years, however, for a long while the people had insufficient knowledge of the message of Deuteronomy to make a sound judgment, though they were never wholly without some revelation from the Lord.
The only answer to the rhetorical question of v.30, if any answer could be given, was, “There is no way one enemy warrior could chase a thousand Israelites if the Lord was on Israel’s side.” So when this happened, it was obvious that their Rock, whom they had abandoned, rejected, deserted, and forgotten, had now sold them (cf. Ge 37:36; 45:4–5) and “had given them up.” Israel would experience this rejection repeatedly (see Jdg 2:14; 3:8; 4:2; 10:7).
10. The punishment of Israel’s enemies (32:31–35)
31 The antecedent of “their” changes from Israel to the enemies of Israel. The pronoun “their” in v.30 is Israel; in v.31 it is their enemies. In v.30 “their Rock” is the Lord; in v.31 “their rock” is the enemies’ god, and even the enemies concede that the Lord is superior to “their rock” (cf. Ex 14:25; Nu 23–24).
32–33 Under the figure of vines, grapes, and wine, the wickedness of Israel’s enemies is described. Their vine (character) has its source in the vine of Sodom and Gomorrah—those wicked cities annihilated by the Lord (Ge 19:24–25). Their grapes were lethal, bitter, and venomous.
34–35 Once again the text of the song reverts to the first person, to the Lord speaking. He has kept in reserve the history of the acts of wicked nations against his people and has sealed this wicked history in his vaults. God’s avenging wrath rests on his sense of righteousness. He will mete out righteous judgment whether in punishment or in defense. “I,” God says, “will repay” (GK 8966; Ro 12:19 and Heb 10:30 interpret this as teaching that personal revenge against any wickedness is prohibited). The enemies may think that it was their decision and their strength that brought terrible punishment on the Lord’s people (v.27), but that was not really so. They were only the instruments of God’s punishment. But because they willfully and wickedly acted within the providence of God, their time of punishment would also come. It would come when the Lord’s time for it had arrived, the time when their foot slips (cf. Pss 17:5; 38:16).
The time when God acts against the wicked is indicated as near and soon. Even though he is a God of patience, he nevertheless moves quickly to punish the wicked. “In due time” does not contradict “their day of disaster is near” or “their doom rushes upon them” but rather explains it. When their foot slips, disaster and doom rush in (Heb 2:3).
11. The Lord’s compassion toward Israel and vengeance on the enemies (32:36–43)
36 “The Lord will judge his people” is not a declaration of punishment but expresses his vindication of them, having compassion on them and making atonement for both his land and his people (v.43; cf. Ge 30:6). (In the Hebrew, the first two lines of v.36 are quoted verbatim in Ps 135:14.) The Lord’s vindication comes when his people have no more strength and, hyperbolically, no longer exist (actually, they would no longer exist as a nation). From the following verses “no strength” doubtless labels the gods that they had relied on as likewise utterly impotent. “Slave or free” conveys the sense that the nation is so decimated that all classes of people are destroyed.
37–38 The Lord asks his people, in this dreadful condition, where those gods they took refuge in are—those gods that they thought were a rock and they worshiped. The fat of sacrifices and wine of drink offerings should have been offered to the Lord instead of to gods that could not help them. In irony, the Lord suggests that those gods should arise and help them and give them shelter.
39 The Lord speaks of himself as the only true God who controls all life and history. This section of the song (vv.39–42) begins with a personal assertion. “See now” (GK 8011) suggests strong feeling on God’s part; the word here means “understand.” What was Israel to understand? That the Lord is God! This statement is made the more emphatic by the repetition of the first person pronoun, “I, even I” and the simple but profound assertion, “I am he”—an assertion of the reality and uniqueness of the Lord as God. This reality is seen in what he does: he puts to death at his will and he gives life—a reference to his creative power and his power to rescue from death. The Lord stated that he was the one who had wounded Israel and that he would also heal his people. Moreover, no one would be able to rescue Israel’s enemies from his “hand” (i.e., power; see Job 10:7; Isa 43:13; Hos 5:14).
40 In a strong anthropomorphism the Lord applied to himself the taking of an oath by raising the hand toward heaven (Ge 14:22; Ex 6:8; Nu 14:30) and declaring, “As the LORD lives, I will” (cf. Jdg 8:19; 1Sa 14:39; et al.). The traditional oath formula is adjusted to the occasion by the Lord himself declaring, “As surely as I live forever” (cf. Nu 14:21, 28; Isa 49:18; Jer 22:24; Eze 5:11; et al.).
41–42 What the Lord declared as he used this strong figure must be taken as a statement of absolute certainty and received with the greatest seriousness. The Lord presented himself as a warrior, and the dramatic portrayal represented the terrible punishment to be meted out to his enemies. When he grasps his sharpened, flashing sword, it devours flesh, the heads of the enemy leaders; and he makes his arrows drunk with the blood, not only of those slain, but of the captives as well—signifying that no one will escape. The arrows that were before spent against Israel (v.23) now are turned on his enemies with devastating effect. None can withstand the Lord.
43 The song ends with a call to the nations to rejoice with Israel because the Lord will punish his enemies for what they have done against his land and his people.
12. Moses’ presentation of the song and his exhortation to obey the law (32:44–47)
44–47 The narrative about the Song of Moses comes to its conclusion here, which repeats 31:30 with an additional admonition to the people to command their children to obey “all the words of this law.” In 31:30 Moses is said to have recited “the words of this song.” In 32:44 Moses, with Joshua son of Nun, spoke “all the words of this song.” In v.45 Moses finished his recitation. It is evident that Joshua had been with Moses, since, at the command of the Lord, Moses had called Joshua and the two of them had presented themselves before the Lord at the Tent of Meeting for Joshua’s commissioning. Moses’ spiritual emphasis again appears in his admonition that the people “take to heart” all that he had said.
Previously Moses had said that the Lord was the people’s life (see comment on 30:20); here he said that “all the words I have solemnly declared to you,” “all the words of this law,” are their “life.” These words were not to be taken lightly. The Lord their God was their life, and his words were their life. Commitment to the Lord and to his word would ensure a long national life for Israel in the Promised Land.
C. Directives for Moses’ Death (32:48–52)
48–50 There was no lapse of time. On the very same day that the song was recited, the Lord’s directives regarding Moses were received. The Lord commanded him to ascend Mount Nebo, look over the land, and then die there (see also Nu 27:12–14, which has some slight variations). Mount Nebo is in the Abarim Mountains, a range running in a general north and south direction about ten miles east of the most northern part of the Dead Sea. It is 2,631 feet above sea level. From Nebo Moses could see Canaan in the north, on the west the mountains of Judea, and toward the south as far as the area south of the Dead Sea (Zoar). On Nebo Moses was to die “and be gathered to” his people (an idiom for death; see Ge 25:8, 17; 35:29; et al.), as Aaron had died on Mount Hor (Nu 20:22–29; 33:37–39).
51–52 The reason for the prohibition against Moses’ entrance into the Promised Land is more explicit here than in Nu 20:24, where it is simply stated that he and Aaron had rebelled against the Lord at Meribah. Here it is said that they “broke faith” with the Lord in Israel’s presence and “did not uphold my holiness among the Israelites.” Instead of speaking to the rock, they called the people rebels and struck the rock twice. The Lord denounced this action on the spot as a failure to trust him enough to honor him as holy. Thus, they were not permitted to bring Israel into the land (Nu 20:7–12; Ps 106:32–33), though Moses was to see the land “from a distance.”
D. The Blessing of Moses on the Tribes (33:1–29)
1. Introduction (33:1–5)
1 The blessings that Moses pronounced on the tribes is placed after his Song and between God’s directives to him regarding his death and the actual narrative of that death. This chapter presents these blessings as recorded by someone other than Moses. While Moses speaking or writing of himself in the third person is common in the Pentateuch, this chapter has every appearance of being reported by someone else. Very fittingly Moses is called “the man of God.” Never before in the Pentateuch had this designation been used. The second occurrence of this phrase also refers to Moses (Jos 14:6).
2 The encomium to the Lord begins with the theophany at Sinai. Deuteronomy usually speaks of Horeb as the mountain of the giving of the law, but here it is Sinai. The coming of the Lord on Mount Sinai was like the sun flooding the desert area bounded by Sinai, Seir, and Paran. The locations are not certain. The figure could be taken from the surrounding mountains and metaphorically related to the giving of the law on Mount Sinai with its thunder, lightning, earthquake, and darkness. In these meteorological elements the Lord is presented as the brightness of light. The Lord came not only as the light-giving sun but from the tens of thousands of his holy ones, that is, from heaven—or with myriads of his angels. The last line is especially difficult. The NIV interprets the Hebrew “from his right hand” as geographic, meaning “from the south” (cf. 1Sa 23:19, 24; Ps 89:12; et al.).
3–4 The encomium moves on to state the Lord’s love toward his people and their worshipful response to his instruction. It is the Lord, not some other god, who loves his people, “the holy ones” that are in his hand—a hand that both controls and supports them. At his feet they bow down and worship, and at his feet they receive the law that Moses gave them—the law that was their possession. Moses spoke of himself in the third person in v.4, a fairly common practice in this kind of literature.
5 In praise of the Lord, his kingship at the assembly at Sinai is declared—his kingship over Jeshurun, Israel the Righteous. The Lord’s kingship assumes supreme importance in the Mosaic economy. Without a hereditary monarchy or any other means than direct revelatory selection by the Lord, the Israelites had no way of recognizing a leader with the exception of the leadership invested in the high priest—a leadership that did not cover the power and responsibilities of Moses. Succession to Moses was established charismatically by the Lord’s choice of Joshua, but no evidence exists that the Lord revealed to Joshua who was to be his successor.
2. Reuben (33:6)
6 The order of the tribes in the blessings is not the order of the patriarchal blessings of Jacob, nor the order of birth of the tribal fathers, nor the order of their encampments, nor the order of either list in the census narratives in Numbers, nor the order of their tribal allotments in Transjordan and Canaan. For various reasons—some known and some unknown—all these differ from one another.
As in Jacob’s blessings, Reuben, the eldest, is mentioned first, though he had lost his birthright because of fornication with Bilhah, his father’s concubine (Ge 35:22; 49:4). Then comes Judah, who had been given the birthright, then the other sons of Jacob and his wives (Leah and Rachel), and finally the sons of Jacob with the handmaids. Simeon is not mentioned; for the most part the Simeonites found their future together with Judah and never realized a tribal patrimony except for certain cities in Judah (Jos 19:1–9). At least some of the Simeonites, however, did continue their tribal identity (see 1Ch 4:24–43). Though the tribe of Reuben lost its preeminent position, it was not to die but continued to live, though reduced numerically.
3. Judah (33:7)
7 As with Reuben, the blessing of Moses for Judah comes as a prayer couched in very general expressions. The cry of Judah, the defense by his own hands, and the plea for the Lord’s help all suggest a military situation. The hand of Judah, according to Jacob’s blessing, was to be on the neck of his enemies, and for this victory his brothers would praise him. The prayer of Moses that Judah should be brought to his people may relate to his victorious return to his people from battle.
4. Levi (33:8–11)
8–10 In Jacob’s blessing, Simeon and Levi are considered together. In Moses’ blessing, however, the status of Levi has changed remarkably because of the choice of Levi as the priestly tribe, the only appointment that gives every person in the tribe a special position in Israel. Not only all the men, but the women and the children too become beneficiaries of the support generated by the tithes and other emoluments. But the blessing of Moses speaks of Levi’s status of caretaker, teacher, and revealer of the covenant and will of God, and of bearing the priestly responsibility of offering the sacrifices of the ritual system, representing the people before the Lord and the Lord and his revelation to the people. Not only did the Levites have charge of the physical, inscripturated word placed beside the ark of the covenant and of the Thummim and Urim, but they were also to teach that word to the people at regular intervals (Lev 10:11; Dt 31:9–13). The one that the Thummim and Urim belonged to is called the godly man or “the man [God] favored.”
The strife that arose at Massah and Meribah over water points out the difficulties that Moses, Aaron, the leaders of Israel, and the leaders of the tribe of Levi suffered on the journey from Egypt to Moab. The special devotion of Levi to the Lord is said to be portrayed by the action of the Levites in purging the community of sin by killing many of their own relatives after they had worshiped the golden calf (Ex 32:26–29). Because of the Levites’ loyalty to the Lord on that occasion, they were set apart to him as the priestly tribe (Ex 32:29; Dt 10:8). Offering incense and whole offerings to the Lord are together descriptions of the entire sacrificial system.
11 Moses concluded his blessing on Levi with a prayer that Levi’s use of his skills may be blessed with accomplishments that result in the Lord’s being pleased with him. Moses also prayed that the power of Levi’s enemies would be destroyed—never to rise again.
5. Benjamin (33:12)
12 The blessing for Benjamin has a tenderness that differs markedly from the description of the Benjamites in Jacob’s last words (Ge 49:27). Moses asked that Benjamin as the one loved of the Lord and shielded continually by him would have a secure rest between the Lord’s shoulders, as a father might carry a son—a figure already used to describe how the Lord carried the Israelites all through the desert journeys (1:31). “The one the LORD loves” is a repetition of “the beloved of the LORD,” a device to signify the subject of the last line.
6. Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh) (33:13–17)
13–16a When Jacob blessed his sons just prior to his death, he included Joseph rather than Ephraim and Manasseh, even though he had placed his blessing on them and had made a particular point of indicating that these two sons of Joseph were to be reckoned as his (Ge 48:5–20; 49:22–26). Moses also blessed Joseph, but he mentioned the two tribes at the end of his statement about Joseph (v.17).
The blessing desired for Joseph is expressed in considerable poetic beauty. The words “precious,” “best,” “finest,” “fruitfulness,” and “best gifts” are all from the same Hebrew word (GK 4458). This blessing would be achieved by the application of the precious things from heaven and from under the earth—the dew, the springs, and the rivers. The “ancient mountains” and “the everlasting hills” exemplify the land of the Joseph tribes across the middle of Canaan. The fertility of the land would cover the mountains with eternal productivity.
All this is summed up in v.16a—“with the best gifts of the earth”—with the further explanation that this productivity would be in all fullness possible (the same phrase as occurs in 1Ch 16:32; Pss 24:1; 50:12). The Lord, the one who presented himself to Moses in the burning bush, is the one who will favor Joseph with this blessing of abundance (see Ex 3).
16b–17 The remainder of the Joseph blessing describes the character and prowess of these two tribes. The blessing is to rest as a crown on the head and brow of Joseph, “the prince among his brothers.” The reference to the majesty of the firstborn bull links v.17 with Joseph being prince among his brothers. And the end of v.17 explicitly says that the goring of the nations by the one metaphorically called the firstborn bull and wild ox refers to both Ephraim and Manasseh. Contrary to the usual poetic usage of citing thousands before ten thousands (1Sa 18:7), the ten thousands of Ephraim are mentioned before the thousands of Manasseh. So it is obvious that Moses recognized the superiority of Ephraim, though Joseph, not Ephraim, is the firstborn bull.
Manasseh was really the firstborn son, but here this prominence has become Ephraim’s later prominence. Ephraim became the dominant tribe in the northern kingdom and was often militarily the more powerful kingdom in Canaan in the ninth, eighth, and seventh centuries B.C. The extent of the military victories of Joseph, however, should best be taken as poetic hyperbole, signifying the greater relative strength and prowess predicated of the Joseph tribes.
7. Zebulun and Issachar (33:18–19)
18 Zebulun and Issachar, the last two sons of Leah, are mentioned together, the younger being placed first. The poetic parallelistic structure of the first two lines is to be understood as a play on the fairly common expression of one’s daily activity as “going out and coming in,” with “in your tents” being equivalent to “coming in.” So then the sense is “Rejoice, Zebulun, and you, Issachar, in all your activities.”
19 These tribes together were to “summon peoples to the mountain” and “there offer acrifices of righteousness.” “Mountain” may simply designate a place of sacrifice and worship. The “peoples” would certainly include other Israelites but may not be limited to them. Their sacrifices would be those Moses had given to them. No other sacrifices could be called righteous, nor could righteous acts by themselves apart from the sacrificial system be considered as sacrifices at this time.
These two tribes were to feast on “the abundance of the seas” and “the treasures hidden in the sand.” The boundaries of Zebulun and Issachar as allotted by Joshua did not give either Zebulun or Issachar access to the Mediterranean; but Moses is in harmony with the vision of Jacob, who saw Zebulun living by the seashore, a haven for ships, with his border extending toward Sidon (Ge 49:13). The influence of the tribes and the actual boundaries did not always remain where the original allotment placed them. Since sand is almost invariably the sand of the sea, that is, the seashore, it is likely that the two phrases are in synonymous parallelism referring to the same source of riches—maritime wealth.
8. Gad (33:20–21)
20 The blessing on Gad focuses first on the Lord himself, who enlarges Gad’s territory by giving the tribe what it requested after the conquest of the area east of the Jordan, which had been under the Amorite rulers Sihon and Og (Nu 21:21–35; 32:33; Dt 3:1–20; 29:7–8). Gad was known as warlike and aggressive. The tribe was able to hold onto the territory and to keep its tribal identification on the east of Jordan until it succumbed to Tiglath-pileser in the latter part of the eighth century B.C. (1Ch 5:23–26). This warlike character is portrayed as a lion that tears an arm and even the head of its prey. Jacob too saw Gad attacking its enemies (Ge 49:19), and 1 Chronicles describes some Gadites as having faces of lions (12:8), the least of which “was a match for a hundred, and the greatest for a thousand” (1Ch 12:14).
21 Gad chose the best of the land, or the leader’s part. Moreover, Gad was to fulfill the Lord’s righteous will that the assembly of Israel had required of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, that is, their cooperation in subduing the peoples of Canaan before they returned east of Jordan (Nu 32:1–33; Dt 3:18–20; Jos 1:12–18; 22:1–8).
9. Dan (33:22)
22 The blessing on Dan is a metaphor describing at least the inherent, ravenous character of a lion’s cub that springs on its prey. Jacob had likened Dan to a serpent, a viper. The reference to Bashan is not to Dan directly but to the lions of Bashan, an area somewhat removed from the area around Laish that was later occupied by Dan. Moses saw the Danite tribe leaping out of ambush like a ravenous lion to secure its prey.
10. Naphtali (33:23)
23 As with Dan, little is said of Naphtali; but what is said of Naphtali is approval. Naphtali will have the Lord’s favor in abundance and will be full of blessing—blessing that will be his because of the excellent and fertile land the tribe will inherit. His land will extend from the north of Galilee to the area west and south of the lake.
11. Asher (33:24–25)
24–25 Asher, declared to be a most blessed of sons, is to be favored above his brothers. Bathing his feet in olive oil (probably mixed with fragrant unguents) and having a secure residence behind gates bolted with iron and bronze bars, the tribe of Asher will grow in strength as its days increase in number.
12. Peroration of God and Israel, his people (33:26–29)
26 Moses’ final blessing returns to Israel as a whole—commencing with praise to the Lord as the God of Jeshurun (cf. v.5). The God of Jeshurun has a unique greatness—he rides on the heavens and on the clouds in his majesty to help his people (see also Pss 18:9; 68:33; Isa 19:1).
27–28 The “eternal God” was the God of their fathers. In many places Moses emphasized that he was sent by the God of their fathers. The Lord is the God who is the Creator of all things, the God of history, and the God of the promises to the patriarchs. The Lord was the dwelling of his people, and his everlasting arms were beneath them to keep them from harm, discouragement, and failure. They would not be left to rely on only their own strength. The Lord was to drive out the enemy before them with the command “Destroy!”
The promise that God would go before Israel to conquer the land has always in it the participation of the people in obedience to the Lord’s commands, but that participation is always to be understood as effective only as the Lord works with them and through them. The result will be victory that will leave Israel as a secure nation living in “safety,” relying on the Lord, who would give them victory and would sustain them.
Israel, Jacob’s spring (i.e., the descendants that flowed from Jacob), would live safely and securely in the land whose supply of grain and wine was symbolic of rich productivity and where the dew of heaven, representative of sufficient precipitation, would nourish their crops.
29 The blessing of Moses on the tribes ends with an exclamation, a rhetorical question, and a twofold affirmation of the Lord’s strength and help and of Israel’s triumph over her enemies. The exclamation “Blessed are you, O Israel!” comes as a fitting climax. The rhetorical question reinforces the exclamation by its obvious answer: No other nation was like Israel, the nation saved by the Lord. And the affirmation that follows reinforces the thrust of both the exclamation and the question.
As shield and helper, the Lord would defend the Israelites; as their sword of majesty or glory, he would give them victory over their enemies, thus indicating their superiority. The enemies will present themselves as vanquished in battle and consequently as inferior to their conquerors. Israel would be victorious over the enemies they would face on the other side of the Jordan.
E. The Death of Moses and the Succession of Joshua (34:1–12)
1–4 Before he died, Moses climbed from the plains of Moab up to the top of the Pisgah range, to the top of Mount Nebo, and from there the Lord showed him the whole land. The description indicates the area one would see from Nebo when looking first northward (from Gilead to Dan), turning his gaze northwest (all of Naphtali; the territory of Ephraim and Manasseh), and west (all the land of Judah as far as the western sea), and then looking southward (the Negev and the whole region from the Valley of Jericho, the City of Palms, as far as Zoar).
As Moses viewed Canaan from Nebo, the Lord told him that this was the land he had promised to Abraham’s descendants (see Ge 12:7; 13:14–17; 15:18; 17:8; 26:3; 28:4, 13). The Lord let Moses see the land with his eyes, but he did not permit him to cross over the Jordan into it. At 120 years of age, Moses looked out with eyes that “were not weak” (v.7), and—though he was still vigorous—his mission came to an end. What drama! What pathos! What sense of accomplishment mixed with disappointment must have been in Moses’ mind as he looked over the land the Lord had promised to Israel!
5–8 The “servant of the LORD” died and was buried in an unknown way, in an unknown grave, in the valley facing Beth Peor, where the Israelites were encamped (3:29). The thirty-day mourning for Moses conformed to the mourning period for Aaron (Nu 20:29).
9 Before the writer closed his remarks about Moses with a final eulogy, he mentioned Joshua the successor as one whose ability to lead rested on his ordination by Moses, an ordination that filled him with the spirit of wisdom. So Israel listened to (i.e., obeyed) Joshua—doing what the Lord had commanded them to do through Moses.
10–12 Deuteronomy closes eulogizing Moses as the greatest of all prophets, the one whom the Lord knew intimately, and the greatest miracle-worker. The acts of the Lord through Moses are said to be miraculous signs, wonders, and awesome deeds performed with mighty power (the terms used here are common in the narratives of Exodus and the desert journeys (see Ex 7:3; Nu 14:11, 22; Dt 4:34; 6:22; etc). These were done before Pharaoh, his officials, his people, and in the sight of all Israel. These were done to accomplish the task the Lord had called Moses to do in Egypt and on the journey to Canaan.
Not until the Lord Jesus Christ came (the one whom Moses spoke about, Jn 5:46) was there anyone greater than Moses, the emancipator, prophet, lawgiver, and father of his country.
The Old Testament in the New
| OT Text | NT Text | Subject |
| Dt 4:24 | Heb 12:29 | God is a consuming fire |
| Dt 4:35 | Mk 12:32 | No other God |
| Dt 5:16 | Mt 15:4; Mk 7:10; Eph 6:2–3 | Fifth commandment |
| Dt 5:17 | Mt 5:21; Ro 13:9; Jas 2:11 | Sixth commandment |
| Dt 5:18 | Mt 5:27; Ro 13:9; Jas 2:11 | Seventh commandment |
| Dt 5:19 | Ro 13:9 | Eighth commandment |
| Dt 5:21 | Ro 7:7; 13:9 | Tenth commandment |
| Dt 6:4 | Mk 12:29, 32 | Only one God |
| Dt 6:5 | Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30, 33; Lk 10:27 | Love God |
| Dt 6:13 | Mt 4:10; Lk 4:8 | Serve God alone |
| Dt 6:16 | Mt 4:7; Lk 4:12 | Do not test God |
| Dt 8:3 | Mt 4:4; Lk 4:4 | Not by bread alone |
| Dt 9:19 | Heb 12:21 | Moses’ fear |
| Dt 17:6 | Heb 10:28 | Two or three witnesses |
| Dt 17:7 | 1Co 5:13 | Purge out evil |
| Dt 18:15, 18–19 | Ac 3:22–23; 7:37 | The prophet |
| Dt 19:15 | Mt 18:16; 2Co 13:1 | Two or three witnesses |
| Dt 17:7 | 1Co 5:13 | Purge out evil |
| Dt 18:15, 18–19 | Act 3:22–23; 7:37 | The prophet |
| Dt 19:15 | Mt 18:16; 2Co 13:1 | Two or three witnesses |
| Dt 21:23 | Gal 3:13 | Curse of the cross |
| Dt 24:1 | Mt 5:31 | Certificate of divorce |
| Dt 25:4 | 1Co 9:9; 1Ti 5:18 | Not muzzling an ox |
| Dt. 25:5 | Mt 22:24; Mk 12:19; Lk 20:28 | A brother’s widow |
| Dt 27:26 | Gal 3:10 | Curse of the law |
| Dt 29:4 | Ro 11:8 | A misunderstanding mind |
| Dt 29:18 | Heb 12:15 | No root of bitterness |
| Dt 30:12 | Ro 10:6 | The word not in heaven |
| Dt 30:13 | Ro 10:7 | The word not in deep |
| Dt 30:14 | Ro 10:8 | The word near you |
| Dt 31:6 | Heb 13:5 | Faithfulness of God |
| Dt 32:21 | Ro 10:19 | Making Israel envious |
| Dt 32:35 | Ro 12:19; Heb 10:30 | God avenges sin |
| Dt 32:36 | Heb 10:30 | God judges his people |
| Dt 32:43 | Ro 15:10; Heb 1:6 | Rejoice, O nations |