⬅ Back to Bible page
Introduction to Deuteronomy
Deuteronomy, meaning "Second Law" as derived from the Septuagint's translation of the Hebrew phrase "Mishneh Torah" found in Deuteronomy's Law of the King, where it more properly means "a copy of the law." Early Jewish perspetive of the book is that it is Moses's rehearsal of the Torah; according to Deuteronomy, Moses, shortly before he dies, revisits the earlier laws and narratives of the Tetrateuch and teaches Israel about them.
Deuteronomy directly addresses the problem of the distnace between past and present, between tradition and the needs of the contemporary generation, between revelation and interpretation. In that way, it is a remarkably modern text that instructs its audience in how to become more thoughtful readers of scripture.
Deuteronomy arose in its present form at a later period of Israelite history; the main sections of the book fit best in the seventh century BCE as a text compiled by the scribes of Jerusalem's royal court. It is likely the case that the account of major religious reform carried out by King Josiah of Judah in 622 BCE (2 Kings 22-23) that refers to a "scroll of the Torah" as the basis for new laws regarding temple worship is referring to a discovery of some form of the book of Deuteronomy, the similarities between the laws in the text and those claimed to have been implemented by Josiah numerous in nature.
Josiah's reform, with Deuteronomy as its catalyst, was much more a revolution than a simple return to older forms of worship, as the book of Kings suggests. Previously, it had been entirely legitimate to sacrifice to God throughout the land [. . .], indeed, earlier biblical law stipulated that God would grant blessing "in every place where I [God] cause my name to be remembered" (Ex 20.24). Deuteronomy challenged that older norm, prohibiting sacrifice "at any place" and restricting it to a single site, implicitly Jerusalem (Deut 12.13-14). It is therefore striking that Deuteronomy presents itself as both an explication of the prior covenant (1.1-5) and as a supplement to it (29.1). Deuteronomy justifies itself in these two ways, yet neither description acknowledges the extent to which Deuteronomy actually challenges and revises earlier law in support of its new religious vision.
Josiah's reforms were predicated on a desire for Judean cultural, political, and religious autonomy in the wake of Assyrian domination of the region; Deuteronomy, apparently written sometime during this historical crisis, likewise reflects the desire to preserve Judean cultural and religious integrity. Its authors were convinced that older conventions of worship and social organization were no longer viable. If the religion of the Lord was to survive the crisis, renewal and adaptation were necessary. The collection of laws that form the core of Deuteronomy (chs 12-26) provides a remarkably comprehensive program for cultural renewal.
The covenant struture of the text closely corresponds to Neo-Assyrian state treaties that have been recovered from this period, the most famous of which are the Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon (672 BCE). At a number of points, the authors of Deuteronomy seem consciously to have patterned their covenant after such treaties, treaties that had been repeatedly imposed upon Judah in the late eigth and seventh centuries BCE. From this perspective, Deuteronomy is a countertreaty: Its authors turned the weapon of Assyrian imperialism into a bid for Judean independence, shifting its oath of loyalty from the Assyrian overlord to their divine sovereign.
Employing Moses as their spokesperson and author of their new text, the Israelites of this period thus established a link with tradition at precisely the time when tradition, for the sake of survival, had to be transformed.
The decision to conclude the Pentateuch with the postexilic appendix that is Deuteronomy interrupts and delays the logically expected climax of the larger narrative of Genesis through Numbers: the conquest of the land. This narrative climax was instead deferred to the books of Joshua and Judges. The final form of Deuteronomy also contains supplemental material that seems to reflect postexilic concerns.
Author of this introduction, Bernard M Levinson, here introduced a chart depicting Deuteronomy's structure:
1.1-4.43: I. The first Discourse of Moses
1.1-5: A. Editorial Heading
1.6-3.29: B. Historical Review
4.1-40: C. Exhortation to obey the teaching of Moses
4.41-43: D Appendix: Cities of refuge in Transjordan
4.44-28.68: II. The second discourse of Moses
4.44-49: A. Introduction
5.1-33: B. The revelation of the Decalogue at Sinai/Horeb
6.1-11.32: C. Preamble to the laws: the requirement of loyalty to God
12.1-26.15: D. The legal corpus: Deuteronomy's transformation of earlier Israelite religion
26.16-19: E. Formal conclusion: the reciprocity of the covenant
27.1-26: F. Ceremonies at Shechem upon entry into the land
28.1-68: G. The consequences of obedience or disobedience: blessing or curse
29.1-30.20: III. The third discourse of Moses: the ratification ceremony for the covenant on the plains of Moab
29.1: A. Editorial heading: the relation between Moab and Horeb
29.2-9: B. Didactic review of Israel's history
29.10-29: C. Imprecation to ensure loyalty to the covenant
30.1-10: D. Reassurance of restoration
30.11-14: E. The accessibility of Moses's teaching
30.15-20: F. The necessity of choice
31.1-34.12: IV. The death of Moses and the formation of the Book of the Teaching
31.1-29: A. Moses makes arrangements for his death
31.30-32.43: B. The Song of Moses
32.44-47: C. Double conclusion to the Song
32.48-52: D. Moses commanded to die
33.1-29: E. The blessing of Moses
34.1-12: F. The death of Moses
Deuteronomy challenges its readers actively to confront the problem of the relation between revelation and interpretation, and breaks down conventional boundaries between scripture and tradition. It makes paradox central to its structure: the book distinctively narrates the process of its own formation (31.1-12) while also anticipating its prior existence as a complete literary work (17.18; 28.58; 30.10). At many points, the authors of Deuteronomy reinterpret earlier narratives (see 6.1n) and laws (particularly from the Book of the Covenant or Covenant Code in Ex 20-23). Moreover, the process of the book's editing intentionally preserves conflicting perspectives on a full range of issues central to Israelite religion: on whether the revelation of the Decalogue at Horeb was direct or required the mediation of Moses (5.5n.); on the stature of Moses relative to other prophets (34.10n.); on the nature of divine punishment for sin (5.9-10n.; 7.10n.); on whether God rules as head of a pantheon or is the only God who exists (4.7-8n., 15-31n., 35n.; 32.8n.); and even on Deuteronomy's own setting in time and place (1.1n.; 2.12n.; 3.11n.). The editors of Deuteronomy opted against closure: they preserved these different schools of thought. Accordingly, there is in Deuteronomy no access to God in the covenant without entering into this debate. The modern reader of Deuteronomy must become, like the authors of Deuteronomy, an interpreter.
Deuteronomy
Deut 1.1-4.43: The first discourse of Moses.
Deut 1.1-5: Editorial heading. The references place the editor west of the Jordan, in Canaan; Moses is said to have never made it to the Promised Land, as such, medieval Jewish commentators already recognized that not all of the Pentateuch could be attributed to Moses.
Deut 1.6-3.29: Historical review. Moses rehearses the events of the Exodus and revelation at Sinai. At a number of points, this narrative diverges from that of Exodus-Numbers.
Deut 1.9-18: The creation of a miltiary-judicial system to share the burden of leadership is placed here, after the departure from Sinai, thus retconning Jethro's involvement with the matter. Sorry, Jethro, you were my favorite.
Deut 1.13: Highlighting the quality of wisdom, suggesting the influence of wisdom literature upon Deuteronomy's authors.
Deut 1.19-46: From Horeb to Kadesh.
Deut 1.37: Here Moses is not punished for his own sin, but instead vicariously bears the punishment due Israel for its sin.
Deut 2.1-3.29: The circuit via Transjordan.
Deut 2.12: Wording represents the conquest anachronistically as having already happened.
Deut 3.11: The Rephaim, a race of Giants, much like the Anakim and the Nephilim, Og's bed specifically is said to have been around 13ft tall. Worth mentioning that Wikipedia cites that stone dolmen within the area noted could have played into the historical notion of Og's bed.
Deut 3.24: 'What god . . . can perform,' the assertion of God's superior power, relative to other gods 'in heaven,' assumes the existence of other gods.
Deut 4.1-40: Exhortation to obey the teachings of Moses. While preceding the Decalogue (5.6-21), this unit provides a later theological reflection upon it, focusing on the instructions regarding idols in 5.8-10 and broadaning its significance. Admonitions to obedience (vv. 1,40) frame the unit, which systematically contrasts obedience (vv. 5-24)/disobedience (vv. 25-31); remembering/forgetting (vv. 9,23); the Lord/other gods (vv. 7,34); Israel's revealed Torah/the laws of other nations (vv. 8,28); and God/idols (vv. 12-20). The correct worship of God is aniconic: images (whether of God or of objects in nature) should play no role in Israelite religion. This becomes so strong a theme that idolatry by itself is asserted to be the cause of the nation's exile from its land (vv. 25-31). The explicit reference to exile suggests that the unit is a late theological explanation for the Babylonian Exile in the early sixth century BCE. The focus on idolatry as the basis for the divine punishment diverges significantly from the perspective elsewhere in the book that views failure to heed "all his [God's] commandments and decrees" as the cause of exile (28.15; cf. 28.1,45,58-59).
Deut 4.2: Admonition not to alter Moses's word. Funny how that turned out. Such an admonition parallels similar admonitions in wisdom literature (Prov 30.6; Eccl 3.14; 12.12-13; Sir 42.21; cf. Rev 22.18-19).
Deut 4.5-8: The author here challenges the prevailing Near Eastern idea that wisdom was a royal perogative; for example, the ancient Babylonian 'Laws of Hammurabi' (ca. 1750 BCE) praised the "just decisions" of its "wise" king (cols 47.1; 4.7), while here it is the nation Israel who will be internationally renowned as "wise" for its "just" laws (vv. 6,8).
Deut 4.7-8: Israel is distinguished both by its god and its law; the two ideas are interlocked. Scripture can be seen as evidence of the Justness and validity of the god of Israel.
Deut 4.9-14: The revelation at Horeb is recalled in order to instruct the generation that did not experience it.
Deut 4.9: To not forget and to educate the children is to overcome the distance of the past so as to maintain a source of identity. Moses refers to the events as if, in collective, those being spoken to had themselves seen and heard the events at Horeb; this is likely evident of a different source or literary layer of Deueteronomy.
Deut 4.13: A subtle reinterpretation of Sinai: The specification of that event as one where God proclaimed ten commandments occurs only here, at 10.4, and at Ex 34.28. There is no special number of or name for the commandments in Ex 19-20 or Deut 5. The rationale for two stone tablets (as at 5.22) derives from ancient Near Eastern treaties, whereby both sovereign and vassal would retain a separate complete copy of the treaty.
Deut 4.15-31: Reinterpretation of the commands regarding idol worship in 5.8-10. The Decalogue concedes the existence of other gods, while prohibiting Israel from worshipping them (5.7; cf. 32.8; Ex 15.11; Ps 8.21). This distinction is dissolved here, as the exilic writings of Deuteronomy that compose this section represent a later theological perspective in which emphasis is placed solely on the rejection of idols, presuming that no other gods exist.
Deut 4.16b-19a: This catalogue follows the order of creation in Gen 1 in reverse order, consistent with ancient scribal practice when quoting an earlier text.
Deut 4.19: 'Sun . . . host of heaven' may reflect images derived from foreign forms of worship brought into the Jerusalem Temple by Manasseh but removed by Josiah (2 Kings 21.5; 23.4-5; Jer 8.2). The idea of idols or of celestial phenomena literally being worshipped sharply distorts ancient Near Eastern religion, which regarded such phenomena as visible manifestations or emblems of a deity, not as themselves divine. This polemic, with the idea that God 'allotted' the celestial phenomena to other nations while reserving Israel as "his very own possession" (v. 20; cf. 7.6n), reinterprets the earlier idea that God, as head of the pantheon, assigned other nations to the supervision of lesser gods but retained Israel as "the Lord's own portion," "his alloted share". The author deanimates those gods, reducing them to lifeless celestial objects.
Deut 4.27-28: These verses allude to the policies of Assyrian and Babylonian exile, indicating how the age of the text post-dates that of the events themselves despite the narrative framing.
Deut 4.35: 'There is no other', this affirmation of full monotheism (contrast v. 7; 5.7) corresponds to the thought of the exilic Second Isaiah (Isa 43.10-13; 44.6-8; 45.6-7,22).
Deut 4.41-43: An appendix. Concerning the cities of refuge to be established in Transjordan; these verses are most likely an editorial appendix composed after the completion of ch 19. Similar disconnected appendixes often appear in the Bible at the conclusion of longer literary units (e.g., Lev 27).
Deut 5.1-33: The revelation of the Decalogue at Sinai/Horeb. Ostensibly a retelling of Ex 19-20, this version introduces significant changes in both detail and theology. The central idea is that God publicly reveals the law to the entire nation across boundaries of gender, ethnicity, and class. Near Eastern legal collections, in contrast, were attributed to a human monarch and were concerned to preserve class distinctions. Moreover, a deity disclosing himself to an entire nation was unprecedented. The Decalogue has God address each Israelite individually using a singular form of "you," rather than the expected plural form. In contrast to Near Eastern law, the prohibitions are universal and absolute: the aim of the law is to transform society by creating a moral community in which murder, theft, etc. will no longer exist.
Deut 5.1-5: Making the past present.
Deut 5.3: 'Not with our ancestors . . . but with us', once more inconsistent on the point of how revelation applies to each generation; this is, however, seemingly intentional, the author aiming to overcome the limits of historical time and place via participation in the covenant.
Deut 5.5: Inconsistent framing once more.
Deut 5.6-21: The decalogue. This version differs at several points from that in Ex 20.2-17.
Deut 5.9: Punishment for sins against God extends across three generations. This principle of vicarious punishment contrasts sharply with the Israelite norm for civil and criminal law, whcih restricts punishment to the agent alone (24.16).
Deut 5.18: Punishment for adultery would have been decided by the husband (as mirrored in such Near Eastern law corupuses as the Laws of Hammurabi) in ancient Israel, but here it is considered a transgression against God and the community as a whole. Following this version of the Decalogue, a diagram is presented showing the numbering of the Decalogue in Deuteronomy 5.8-21, I will not be repeating it here, but it is interesting to contrast to that of Exodus 20.
Deut 6.1-11.32: Preamble to the laws: the requirement of loyalty to God.
Deut 6.5: The paradox of commanding a feeling (as in Lev 19.17-18) is resolved with the recognition that covenantal "love" is not private emotion but loyalty of action toward both deity and neighbor.
Deut 7.1-10.11: Risks to covenantal fidelity upon entry to the land; confrontation of natives as well as the risk of complacency in the event of succesful habitation.
Deut 7.1-26: The war of conquest.
Deut 7.1: The nations to be conquered listed are anachronistic, differing from lists elsewhere in the bible and contradicting the historical record—the enumeration of seven once again signifies completion.
Deut 7.2: Total destruction is never attained in initial conquest, as multiple of the nations listed are only dealt with later on in the narrative, long after entry into the land. Elsewhere merely 'expulsion' is indicated.
Deut 7.5: 'Pillars', stone momuments that marked places where God appeared and were thus origionally legitimate in worship. Only later was such worship banned. 'Sacred poles' are also noted, the 'Asherim'; preserving the name of Asherah, an important Canaanite goddess, popular in ancient Israel.
Deut 7.10: The vicarious punishment of prior decalogue repetitions is here revised, instead each individual that rejects God is repaid in their own person.
Deut 8.1-20: The temptation to pride and self-sufficiency in the land. Success in Canaan will tempt the Israelites to forget the wilderness lesson of complete dependence upon God.
Deut 8.11-20: The peril of posterity.
Deut 8.11: Disobedience of Deuteronomy's laws becomes tantamount to forgetting God and transgressing the Decalouge's prohibitions in 5.7-9.
Deut 9.1-10.11: The already broken and renewed covenant. God does not give the land to the people as a reward for righteousness, for in the wilderness they acted rebelliously.
Deut 10.1-11: The second ascent of the mountain.
Deut 10.1-3: These verses reflect a tradition that Moses made the ark, directly contradicting the narrative of its construction detailed prior.
Deut 10.6-9: Editorial insertion concerning Levites.
Deut 10.12-11.32: Obedience as the condition for prosperity in the land.
Deut 11.1-32: Loyalty to the covenant provides the condition for life in Canaan. Responsibilities listed in this section are communal in nature; they exist for the people as a whole.
Deut 11.2: The frequent word 'today' in Deuteronomy emphasizes the contemporaneity of the covenant.
Deut 11.6: No mention of Korah's rebellion (Num 16.3-11), which was added to Num 16 by the Priestly school after this abstract was made.
Deut 11.10-12: Though the Nile provided sufficient water, the Nile valley had to be irrigated through human effort, since rainfall was minimal; Canaan's crops are irrigated by seasonal rainfall. The difference is mentioned to stress Israel's dependence upon God, who gives and withholds rain, as well as the sanctity of the land of Israel.
Deut 11.29-30: These verses represent an editorial intrusion, hinting ahead to ch 27.
Deut 12.1-32: Centralization and purification of worship. Restriction of sacrificial worship of God to a single sanctuary and removal of foreign influence represent two of the most distinctive features of Deuteronomy's idea of religion and law.
Deut 12.2-7: Israel must reject the Canaanite precedent of multiple sanctuaries.
Deut 12.2: The chapter alternates between plural and singular, suggesting a long compositional history.
Deut 12.5: Biblical narrative reflecting a tradition in which Jerusalem played no role in Israel's history until the period of King David; consequently the city cannot be named explicitly without undermining the literary form of Deuteronomy as an address by Moses. Interesting amount of foresight on the part of the scribes. Also mentioned is God 'putting his name' there, rejecting the idea that a nation's God would inhabit the Temple (contrast 1 Kings 8.12-13).
Deut 12.13-16: Two important, revolutionary distinctions: First, between sacrificial worship at random sites, 'any place', rejected as illegitimate, and legitimate sacrifice performed at a single sanctuary, 'the place that the Lord will choose'. This contrasts with previous norms, when altars were common throughout the land (Gen 12.17; 35.1-7; 1 Sam 3.1; 7.17; 1 Kings 18.20-46). Second, between ritual sacrifice and secular slaughter of domestic animals for food. According to the biblical account, prior to Deuteronomy all slaughter, even for food, was sacrificial and took place at an altar. With altars throughout the land, that rule imposed no burden upon Israelites. The prohibition of all local altars, however, created a real difficulty for those without easy access to the central sanctuary. The permission granted here for local, secular slaughter answers that need. By analogy to the rules for hunting wild game (gazelle or deer), domestic animals may be slaughtered throughout the land, on condition that their blood is poured out 'on the ground like water' (cf. Lev 17.13). Blood symbolizes "life" (v. 23; 15.23; Gen 9.4-5; Lev 17.14; 19.26).
Deut 12.20-28: Permission for secular slaughter is now justified by the expansion of Israel's boundaries.
Deut 12.32: Text appended with an ancient Near Eastern scribal forumla often included in the epilogues of treaties, inscriptions, and law collections to protect them from being defaced or altered.
Deut 13.1-18: Unconditional loyalty to God. Provides various hypothetical sitauations including conflict of covenant loyalty.
Deut 13.1-5: Prophecy is here regulated, with Moses' status as the founder of Israelite prophecy setting the standards in Deuteronomy by which the people should act; should subsequent prophets contravene Dueteronomy's teachings, they are to be executed. I'm sure this will never be complicated by any potential future prophets.
Deut 13.1: Dreams and omens or portents, two sources of religious authority also mentioned in the nearly contemporary Neo-Assyrian 'Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon', indicating widespread recognition of the practises.
Deut 13.9: Summary execution here conflicts with the call for witnesses and a trial in other transgressions mentioned elsewhere in Deuteronomy; this likely arises from the presumed grave threat to the covenant.
Deut 13.10: Stoning, a punishment reserved for violation of fundamental values. Those named correspond to prohibitions from the Decalogue.
Deut 13.15-17: Religious infidelity of an Israelite population is met with the same ban (genocide—previously, ousting) as that of the Canaanites.
Deut 14.1-29: The obligations of holiness. Special status entails special obligations, one of which is dietary. Lists permitted and prohibited foods.
Deut 14.3-21: Deueteronomy's dietary restrictions differ from the more detailed list of permitted and prohibited foods provided by the Priestly source (Lev 11.2-23). Clean versus unclean here, once more, refers specifically to ritual propriety. Note too that the creatures listed correspond to those groupings mentioned within the creation narrative.
Deut 15.1-18: Remission of debts and manumission of slaves. On accession to the throne, ancient Near Eastern rulers would sometimes grant one-time cancellation of debts, return land confiscated by the crown, and free indentured slaves. That custom, Akkadian 'duraru', is reflected in the Hebrew 'deror,' 'jubilee,' or 'release,' of Lev 25.10; Isa 61.1; Jer 34.15,17. Deuteronomy's conception of the covenant between Israel and God entails a similar fresh start as a covenantal obligation that recurs every seven years, adjusting earlier laws in the Book of the Covenant (Ex 21-23) to the innovation of centralization of worship.
Deut 15.1-6: Cancellation of debts.
Deut 15.12-18: Manumission. Laws regulating slaves are here reworked in the face of centralization of worship.
Deut 16.1-17: The festival calendar. Here, passover (and thus the sacrifice of the paschal lamb) has been centralized to the (yet to be built) Temple, as such, this blood ritual is merged with the festival of unleavened bread, also celebrated in early spring. Contrast to Leviticus where such ceremonies are considered as distinct.
Deut 16.7: Provision to 'cook' (read: boil) the paschal offering conflicts with the stipulation that the paschal offering be 'roasted over the fire,' not 'boiled in water' (Ex 12.8-9). The two inconsistent requirements for preparing the Passover are harmonized at 2 Chr 15.13.
Deut 16.18-18.22: Laws of pubic officials. The proposed government has judicial, executive, and religious branches: local and central courts (16.18-17.13), kingship (17.14-20), levitical priesthood (18.1-8), and prophecy (18.9-22).
Deut 16.18-17.13: The organization of justice.
Deut 16.21-17.1: Prohibitions against Canaanite cultic objects.
Deut 17.8-13: Justice at the local sanctuary. In the pre-Deuteronomic period, legal cases in which there was an absence of physical evidence or of witnesses were remanded to the local sanctuary wherein the parties would swear oaths. The laws listed in these verses fill in the judicial void created by the centralization of worship; all cases that require recourse to the altar must now be decided at the central sanctuary. The tribunal gathered at such cases includes both priestly and lay members.
Deut 17.14-20: The law of the king. Deuteronomy greatly restricts royal authority. The monarch is subject to the law and required to read it daily: contrast with the general rule of Near Esatern monarchs promulgating law alone.
Deut 18.1-8: The levitical priesthood. Centralization also affected the Israelite priesthood. Deuteronomy conflates what the book of Leviticus had initially bifurcated into two distinct categories: the 'Levites' and the 'Priests'. Here they are instead described as one, the 'Levitical priests'.
Deut 18.6-8: When the local altars became outlawed, it is clarified that the Levites must be provided for as they transition to the centralized sanctuary. This emphasis underscores that the countryside altars were not entirely Canaanite sanctuaries (as 12.2-4 asserts).
Deut 18.9-22: A prophet like Moses.
Deut 18.9-14: Divination is here branded as foreign and abhorrent, 'prophecy' is instead the given alternative. Elsewhere, however, divination is not typified as foreign (1 Sam 28.3-25; Isa 8.19-22; 29.4). Thus, describing the practice as foreign may actually cloak a condemnation of Israelite popular religion.
Deut 18.11-12: Here, necromancy and divination (integral as they would have been to the practice of ancient family religion) are considered abhorrent and illegitimate; the efficacy of them is not mentioned, however, as it is likely that the Israelites believed in the power of such acts even if condemning of it.
Deut 18.15-22: Deuteronomy transforms prophecy, viewing the prophet as the spokesperson of Torah and defining Moses at the paradigmatic prophet.
Deut 18.15: Prophecy by divine election. That God alone appoints the prophet makes the prophet independent of all institutions and able to challenge them. The laws in vv. 20-22 emphasize various cases in which the prophets are to be executed, however, curbing their potential for radical change—specifically in terms of reversing Deuteronomy's laws. More than one prophet is clearly suggested/intended.
Deut 18.20-23: Having estbalished an Isrealite model of prophecy, the law provides two criteria to distinguish true from false prophecy. The first is that the prophet should speak exclusively on behalf of God, and report only God's wprds. The second makes the fulfillment of a prophet's oracle the measure of its truth (Jer 28.9). That approach attempts to solve a critical problem: If two prophets each claim to speak on behalf of God yet make mutually exclusive claims (1 Kings 22.6 versus v. 17; Jer 27.8 versus 28.2), how can one decide which speaks the truth? The solution offered is not free of difficulty. If a false prophet is distinguished by the failure of his oracle to come true, the nmaking a decision in the present about which prophet to obey becomes impossible. Nor can this criterion easily be reconciled with 13.2, which concedes that the oracles of false prophets might come true.
Deut 19.1-14: Cities of refuge. Once more, due to the previous places of refuge being the local altars, now outlawed, here three "neutral" cities are outlined.
Deut 19.15-21: The integrity of the judicial system.
Deut 20.1-20: Rules for waging holy war. In contrast to other legal collections, which include only brief sections concerning military engagement (Ex 23.23-33; 34.11-16; Num 35.50-56), Deuteronomy, reflecting a literary setting of Israel about to enter the land, concerns itself extensively with the laws of holy war. Seizing the spoils of war, including human prisoners, is prohibited; all had to be devoted exclusively to God. A contemporary inscription, the Moabite Stone (ca. 850 BCE), establishes that similar theologies of holy war were shared by some of Israel's neighbors. In Deuteronomy, the conception of the conquest of the promised land as a holy war represents a highly schematized idealization, formulated half a millennium after the settlement, at a time when ethnic Canaanites would long have assimilated into the Israelite population.
Deut 20.11: The use of defeated people for 'forced labor' was widespread. Later, David's cabinet will be said to have an official responsible for such forced labor. Slavery is fine when it's the enemy, guys!
Deut 20.15-18: Text clarifies here that such takings of defeated peoples for forced labor applies only in situations of foreign war.
Deut 21.1-9: Atonement for unsolved murder and assigned rituals.
Deut 21.10-25.19: Miscellaneous civil and family laws.
Deut 21.10-14: Legal obligations toward female captives. This procedure most likely originally applied to the Canaanite population.
Deut 21.15-17: Legal protection of the less-favored wife.
Deut 21.18-21: The rebellious son. Flagrant and sustained disobedience towards parents is a capital offense.
Deut 21.22-23: Treatment of the executed. The concern to avoid defilement of the land by demonstrating respect for the corpse even of someone convicted of wrongdoing shows the close connection between criminal law and ritual purity in Deuteronomy. Note, 'for anyone hung on a tree is under God's curse'. Judas wept!
Deut 22.1-12: Various moral and religious responsibilities of citizenship.
Deut 22.1-4: Moral duties toward the nighbor.
Deut 22.5-12: Miscellaneous laws.
Deut 22.5: Prohibition against cross-dressing seeks to maintain gender boundaries; a similar concern for boundaries is evident in vv. 9-11.
Deut 22.13-30: Volations of marriage law.
Deut 22.13-21: False accusation of breach of marital contract.
Deut 22.22-30: Adultery and rape. Adultery as defined by biblical law is the instance of a man having sex with a woman betrothed or married to another man. This is a violation of the Decalogue and a capital offense.
Deut 23.1-8: Restrictions on access to Israel's assembly.
Deut 23.1: No crushed testicles or severed penises! What was in Leviticus only a qualification required of the priesthood is here applied to all of Israel.
Deut 23.9-14: Special rules for the military camp. Includes sexual abstinence.
Deut 23.15-25.19: The heightened moral responsibilities of the covenant community.
Deut 23.15-16: Prohibition of the return of escaped slaves. Rejecting the almost universal stipulation within the ancient Near East, escaped slaves are here allowed to retain their freedom and shall not be returned.
Deut 23.17-18: Restrictions on prostitution. Illegal for the Israelites—many such sad cases! The regulations also seek to preserve the Temple's sanctity.
Deut 23.17: 'Temple Prostutite' (Hebrew "qedeshah"), the translation reflects belief in the existence of sacred prostitution in Israel and the ancient Near East, for which there is scant evidence; more likely 'qedesha' is a standard euphemism for the coarser term for prostitute (v. 18). The same alternation between the two terms appears in Gen 38.15,21. The word might better be translated as "one set aside."
Deut 23.19-25: Financial ethics, vows, gathering by the needy.
Deut 24-25: Laws promoting social harmony.
Deut 24.14-15: Deuteronomy's ethics are based upon the conviction that God identifies with and vindicates the oppressed.
Deut 25.3: 'Your neighbor', the criminal, despite his judicial status, retains human dignity.
Deut 25.5: An exception here to the incest prohibition of marrying a sister-in-law found in Leviticus presents an interesting question on the notion of what these various case instances might represent in terms of questions on the imperative—suppose I'll come back to this later.
Deut 25.18: These details are not found in Ex 17.8-16; they may have been supplied by the Deuteronomic author in order to justify the extirpation of Amalek.
Deut 26.1-15: Concluding liturgies.
Deut 26.14: 'Offered any of it to the dead', the duty of the living to care for dead ancestors through food offerings at their place of burial was widely assumed in the ancient Near East (see the Ugaritic 'Aqhat' epic), is confirmed archaeologically, and continued to be carried out in Second Temple times (Tob 4.17). This practice is not condemned here; it is viewed as improper only in relation to sacred donations, because of the impurity associated with death (Lev 22.2-4).
Deut 26.16-19: Formal conclusion: the reciprocity of the covenant, representing the legal corpus as a mutually binding relationship between God and Israel.
Deut 26.17-18: 'Obtained', the past tense point to an already completed ritual, not preserved in Deuteronomy, in which both Israel and God explicitly assented to the covenant and affirmed the mutuality of the obligations that each will undertake. This reciprocal model contrats with the Sinai covenant in Exodus, which was unilaterally offered by God (Ex 19.3-6) and unilaterally agreed to by Israel (Ex 19.8; 24.3,7). Deuteronomy invokes the language of the Sinai covenant as a model while revising it significantly in the process.
Deut 27.1-26: Ceremonies at Shechem upon entry into the land. Provides several competing traditions about how and where the covenant between God and Israel was concluded: at Sinai; or on the plains of Moab; or at Gilgal immediately upon entering the land; or at the important northern shrine at Shechem. Editorial revisions abounds!
Deut 27.1: Moses is referred to in the third person, interrupting is own first-person address. He is joined by the elders, who nowhere else in Deuteronomy address the people with Moses as they do here.
Deut 27.4: Mount Ebal, the tallest mountain in the region stands in central Canaan and is situated directly adjacent to the city of Shechem; it would be impossible for the Israelites to reach Shechem in a day as mentioned. The most logical explanation is that Josh 4 points to the original form of the verses, with Gilgal as the site where Israel complied with this command.
Deut 27.5-7: These verses are an insertion that reinterprets the plastered stones on which the teaching is to be inscribed as an altar of 'unhewn stones', following Ex 20.25. Such an altar, outside of Jerusalem, conflicts with the centralization requirement of ch 12, and further suggests the antiquity and the independence of this tradition from the rest of deuteronomy.
Deut 27.9: 'This very day' contrasts statements that define the bond as previously formed.
Deut 27.14: 'Levites', contrast Deuteronomy's normal term, "levitical priests".
Deut 28.1-68: The consequences of obedience or disobedience: blessing or curse. This chapter has several close parallels to the Neo-Assyrian 'Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon (VTE)', dating to 672 BCE. The disproportion between the sections devoted to blessing (vv. 1-14) and to curse (vv. 15-68) may be a reaction to the Babylonian conquest, deportation, and exile of Judah (597 and 586 BCE), here recast as a prophetic warning.
Deut 28.1-2: The poem emphasizes the conditionality of the exalted status of Israel, perhaps because of the exile.
Deut 28.9: 'The Lord will establish . . . if you keep', holiness is conditional upon obedience, a shift from other passages where Israel's holiness is not future but present, and not conditional but unconditional.
Deut 28.15-68: Consequences of disobedience.
Deut 28.21-44: This section echoes treaties that the Neo-Assyrian empire imposed on its vassal states, suggesting that the curse section of these state treaties, perhaps in Aramaic translation, provided a model for this chapter. Judah was a vassal to the Assyrian empire (2 Kings 8.13-18) and both Neo-Assyrian and Judean officials spoke Aramaic, the international language of diplomacy (2 Kings 18.26-27).
Deut 28.23: 'Bronze . . . iron', echoing language of the 'Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon'; "May [the gods] make your ground like iron . . . Just as rain does not fall from a bronze sky."
Deut 28.47-57: Scenario of foreign invasion. A later appendix, outside the frame provided by vv.45-46.
Deut 28.58-68: Undoing the exodus.
Deut 28.58: 'This book', how the commandments have become transformed from oral proclamation to written text is unexplained, since it is not until 31.9,24 that Moses commands that his teaching be put into writing. Also, 'HaShem', an important circumlocution for Yahweh, God's personal name.
Deut 28.63: Even the unconditional divine promises of Gen 12.7; 13.17 may be contrevened.
Deut 29.1-30.20: Third discourse of Moses. The ratification ceremony for the covenant of the plains of Moab. Israel is formally adjured to enter the covenant: To swear to obey the laws of chs 12-26 under penalty of the sanctions of ch 28.
Deut 29.1: The laws of Deuteronomy are here presented as a covenant that exist in addition to the covenant established at Sinai.
Deut 29.20: 'Blot out', the erasure of a tablet or scroll (Num 5.23), given a theological cast: Following Mesopotamian models, the divine decree of human fate is recorded in a heavenly book, with erasure symbolizing punishment (9.14; Gen 6.7; Ex 17.14; 32.32; 2 Kings 14.27; Ps 9.6).
Deut 29.25: Here, the covenants of Sinai and Moab are conflated as one.
Deut 29.26: Gods are allotted to the various peoples of the region; Yahweh is Israel's, the existence of other gods is thus conceded within this polytheistic framework. Contrast 4.19, where it is rather only inanimate "stars . . . that God has allotted," which reinterprets the polytheistic image from the later perspective of monotheism.
Deut 29.28: Temporal slip-up here, 'as is now the case' implies that this chapter was composed subsequent to the Babylonian exile.
Deut 30.1-10: Reassurance of restoration. This section, with its emphasis on restoration, does not logically follow ch 29 and is most likely a later insertion that serves the religious needs of a community different from that of the book's original audience.
Deut 30.5: The 'You' here explicitly refers to the Judean exiles in Babylon rather than the desert generation whom Moses is supposed to be addressing.
Deut 30.10: The book refers to itself once more, contradicting the narrative.
Deut 30.11-20: The original continuation of ch 29.
Deut 30.11-14: Challenging the idea of wisdom being above the layperson, Deuteronomy here presents itself as divine but eminently communicable, so as to bolster its legitimacy to the common man.
Deut 31.1-34.14: The death of Moses and the formation of the Book of the Teaching. With the conclusion of the treaty between God and Israel in ch 30, Deuteronomy now returns to Moses, the mediator of the treaty. His life is ending, and the question of succession is given a two-fold answer, since Moses was both political and religious leader of Israel. Joshua will be his politcal and military successor (31.1-8,14-15,23; 32.44,48-52; 34.9), and "a book . . . of this law" (31.24) will instruct the nation in religion. Deuteronomy thus ends in paradox: Moses, ostensibly the book's narrator, narrates his own death (ch 34), and the Book of the Teaching, alread presupposed (29.27), nevertheless provides an account of its own formation (31.9-13,24-29). The conclusion of Deuteronomy also ends the Pentateuch. As they set Deuteronomy as the conclusion of that larger work, later editors with the background of the Exile added perspectives on the function of the entire Torah in the people's life. Finally, the Pentateuch's literary precedent of a patriarch deathbed bequest and blessing (Gen 27; 48-49) led to the incorporation of "The Song of Moses" (32.1-43) and of "The blessing of Moses" (ch 33), each of which likely circulated independently. The resulting text thus blends several viewpoints. Themes like the appointment of Joshua begin, then begin again from a different perspective, and then are continued only after a digression, which marks the insertion of new material.
Deut 31.1-29: Moses makes arrangements for his death. Multiple competing narratives mingle here, with verse-to-verse incongruencies about the exact sequence of events and who did what.
Deut 31.14-15: Tent of meeting, again, conflicting traditions on whether the tent is outside or inside the camp.
Deut 31.30-23.43: The Song of Moses. The Song is a late insertion that reflects upon Israel's history, probably presupposing the Exile.
Deut 32.8: 'Most High', or 'Elyon', the title of El, the senior god who sat at the head of the divine council in the Ugaritic literature of ancient Canaan, as seen in Genesis.
Deut 32.9: The Lord here is contrasted somewhat to that of Elyon, with Elyon aportioning the nations and assigning the disparate peoples their own gods from which the Lord received his share; the NRSV translation has added 'own' to 'his [own] share' (not present in the original hebrew) in order to identify Yahweh with Elyon so as to avoid the impression that he is merely a member of the pantheon.
Deut 32.24: 'Burning consumption,' a common noun in postexilic Hebrew, 'Resheph', refers to the Ugaritic god of war and pestilence, worshipped by the Israelites as a minor god during the polytheistic period.
Deut 32.43: 'All you gods,' had been removed from the preserved hebrew, but reconstructed with the dead sea scrolls; their absence was likely intentional, reflecting the development and importance of later Israelite monotheism.
Deut 32.44-47: Double conclusion to the Song.
Deut 32.48-52: Moses commanded to die.
Deut 33.1-29: The Blessing of Moses. In the vein of a father's blessing of his progeny on the deathbed, here, Moses blesses all the tribes of Israel as if they were his own sons. Clearly imitating victory hymn of the divine warrior.
Deut 34.1-12: The death of Moses.
Deut 34.1: Mount Nebo and Mount Pigsah, two narrative locations posited to be the site of Moses's death, are here conflated by the editor to preserve both traditions.
And that is it for Deuteronomy. A shame about the month's worth of a gap there, but hey, that's life. I have to say, the Song of Moses and its footnotes have been the most interesting portion of the OT to me so far, that intersection of layered revision and obfuscated meaning reframing an older text within a different narrative, and all in the retrospective context of the exilic era too! All in all, quite dense, the addition of this second covenant to the first, that's a lot to take in—understanding, of course, the revisionist nature of such a covenant as outlined in the introduction to this particular book. Great stuff. Historical books next.
Hear me, dust of my lifeblood,
faithful and obedient,
constellations so gilded:
Seek not the stars but those which
were promised you, for bereft
of light will be your exile.
Introduction to Deuteronomy
Deuteronomy, meaning "Second Law" as derived from the Septuagint's translation of the Hebrew phrase "Mishneh Torah" found in Deuteronomy's Law of the King, where it more properly means "a copy of the law." Early Jewish perspetive of the book is that it is Moses's rehearsal of the Torah; according to Deuteronomy, Moses, shortly before he dies, revisits the earlier laws and narratives of the Tetrateuch and teaches Israel about them.
Deuteronomy directly addresses the problem of the distnace between past and present, between tradition and the needs of the contemporary generation, between revelation and interpretation. In that way, it is a remarkably modern text that instructs its audience in how to become more thoughtful readers of scripture.
Deuteronomy arose in its present form at a later period of Israelite history; the main sections of the book fit best in the seventh century BCE as a text compiled by the scribes of Jerusalem's royal court. It is likely the case that the account of major religious reform carried out by King Josiah of Judah in 622 BCE (2 Kings 22-23) that refers to a "scroll of the Torah" as the basis for new laws regarding temple worship is referring to a discovery of some form of the book of Deuteronomy, the similarities between the laws in the text and those claimed to have been implemented by Josiah numerous in nature.
Josiah's reform, with Deuteronomy as its catalyst, was much more a revolution than a simple return to older forms of worship, as the book of Kings suggests. Previously, it had been entirely legitimate to sacrifice to God throughout the land [. . .], indeed, earlier biblical law stipulated that God would grant blessing "in every place where I [God] cause my name to be remembered" (Ex 20.24). Deuteronomy challenged that older norm, prohibiting sacrifice "at any place" and restricting it to a single site, implicitly Jerusalem (Deut 12.13-14). It is therefore striking that Deuteronomy presents itself as both an explication of the prior covenant (1.1-5) and as a supplement to it (29.1). Deuteronomy justifies itself in these two ways, yet neither description acknowledges the extent to which Deuteronomy actually challenges and revises earlier law in support of its new religious vision.
Josiah's reforms were predicated on a desire for Judean cultural, political, and religious autonomy in the wake of Assyrian domination of the region; Deuteronomy, apparently written sometime during this historical crisis, likewise reflects the desire to preserve Judean cultural and religious integrity. Its authors were convinced that older conventions of worship and social organization were no longer viable. If the religion of the Lord was to survive the crisis, renewal and adaptation were necessary. The collection of laws that form the core of Deuteronomy (chs 12-26) provides a remarkably comprehensive program for cultural renewal.
The covenant struture of the text closely corresponds to Neo-Assyrian state treaties that have been recovered from this period, the most famous of which are the Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon (672 BCE). At a number of points, the authors of Deuteronomy seem consciously to have patterned their covenant after such treaties, treaties that had been repeatedly imposed upon Judah in the late eigth and seventh centuries BCE. From this perspective, Deuteronomy is a countertreaty: Its authors turned the weapon of Assyrian imperialism into a bid for Judean independence, shifting its oath of loyalty from the Assyrian overlord to their divine sovereign.
Employing Moses as their spokesperson and author of their new text, the Israelites of this period thus established a link with tradition at precisely the time when tradition, for the sake of survival, had to be transformed.
The decision to conclude the Pentateuch with the postexilic appendix that is Deuteronomy interrupts and delays the logically expected climax of the larger narrative of Genesis through Numbers: the conquest of the land. This narrative climax was instead deferred to the books of Joshua and Judges. The final form of Deuteronomy also contains supplemental material that seems to reflect postexilic concerns.
Author of this introduction, Bernard M Levinson, here introduced a chart depicting Deuteronomy's structure:
1.1-4.43: I. The first Discourse of Moses
1.1-5: A. Editorial Heading
1.6-3.29: B. Historical Review
4.1-40: C. Exhortation to obey the teaching of Moses
4.41-43: D Appendix: Cities of refuge in Transjordan
4.44-28.68: II. The second discourse of Moses
4.44-49: A. Introduction
5.1-33: B. The revelation of the Decalogue at Sinai/Horeb
6.1-11.32: C. Preamble to the laws: the requirement of loyalty to God
12.1-26.15: D. The legal corpus: Deuteronomy's transformation of earlier Israelite religion
26.16-19: E. Formal conclusion: the reciprocity of the covenant
27.1-26: F. Ceremonies at Shechem upon entry into the land
28.1-68: G. The consequences of obedience or disobedience: blessing or curse
29.1-30.20: III. The third discourse of Moses: the ratification ceremony for the covenant on the plains of Moab
29.1: A. Editorial heading: the relation between Moab and Horeb
29.2-9: B. Didactic review of Israel's history
29.10-29: C. Imprecation to ensure loyalty to the covenant
30.1-10: D. Reassurance of restoration
30.11-14: E. The accessibility of Moses's teaching
30.15-20: F. The necessity of choice
31.1-34.12: IV. The death of Moses and the formation of the Book of the Teaching
31.1-29: A. Moses makes arrangements for his death
31.30-32.43: B. The Song of Moses
32.44-47: C. Double conclusion to the Song
32.48-52: D. Moses commanded to die
33.1-29: E. The blessing of Moses
34.1-12: F. The death of Moses
Deuteronomy challenges its readers actively to confront the problem of the relation between revelation and interpretation, and breaks down conventional boundaries between scripture and tradition. It makes paradox central to its structure: the book distinctively narrates the process of its own formation (31.1-12) while also anticipating its prior existence as a complete literary work (17.18; 28.58; 30.10). At many points, the authors of Deuteronomy reinterpret earlier narratives (see 6.1n) and laws (particularly from the Book of the Covenant or Covenant Code in Ex 20-23). Moreover, the process of the book's editing intentionally preserves conflicting perspectives on a full range of issues central to Israelite religion: on whether the revelation of the Decalogue at Horeb was direct or required the mediation of Moses (5.5n.); on the stature of Moses relative to other prophets (34.10n.); on the nature of divine punishment for sin (5.9-10n.; 7.10n.); on whether God rules as head of a pantheon or is the only God who exists (4.7-8n., 15-31n., 35n.; 32.8n.); and even on Deuteronomy's own setting in time and place (1.1n.; 2.12n.; 3.11n.). The editors of Deuteronomy opted against closure: they preserved these different schools of thought. Accordingly, there is in Deuteronomy no access to God in the covenant without entering into this debate. The modern reader of Deuteronomy must become, like the authors of Deuteronomy, an interpreter.
Deuteronomy
Deut 1.1-4.43: The first discourse of Moses.
Deut 1.1-5: Editorial heading. The references place the editor west of the Jordan, in Canaan; Moses is said to have never made it to the Promised Land, as such, medieval Jewish commentators already recognized that not all of the Pentateuch could be attributed to Moses.
Deut 1.6-3.29: Historical review. Moses rehearses the events of the Exodus and revelation at Sinai. At a number of points, this narrative diverges from that of Exodus-Numbers.
Deut 1.9-18: The creation of a miltiary-judicial system to share the burden of leadership is placed here, after the departure from Sinai, thus retconning Jethro's involvement with the matter. Sorry, Jethro, you were my favorite.
Deut 1.13: Highlighting the quality of wisdom, suggesting the influence of wisdom literature upon Deuteronomy's authors.
Deut 1.19-46: From Horeb to Kadesh.
Deut 1.37: Here Moses is not punished for his own sin, but instead vicariously bears the punishment due Israel for its sin.
Deut 2.1-3.29: The circuit via Transjordan.
Deut 2.12: Wording represents the conquest anachronistically as having already happened.
Deut 3.11: The Rephaim, a race of Giants, much like the Anakim and the Nephilim, Og's bed specifically is said to have been around 13ft tall. Worth mentioning that Wikipedia cites that stone dolmen within the area noted could have played into the historical notion of Og's bed.
Deut 3.24: 'What god . . . can perform,' the assertion of God's superior power, relative to other gods 'in heaven,' assumes the existence of other gods.
Deut 4.1-40: Exhortation to obey the teachings of Moses. While preceding the Decalogue (5.6-21), this unit provides a later theological reflection upon it, focusing on the instructions regarding idols in 5.8-10 and broadaning its significance. Admonitions to obedience (vv. 1,40) frame the unit, which systematically contrasts obedience (vv. 5-24)/disobedience (vv. 25-31); remembering/forgetting (vv. 9,23); the Lord/other gods (vv. 7,34); Israel's revealed Torah/the laws of other nations (vv. 8,28); and God/idols (vv. 12-20). The correct worship of God is aniconic: images (whether of God or of objects in nature) should play no role in Israelite religion. This becomes so strong a theme that idolatry by itself is asserted to be the cause of the nation's exile from its land (vv. 25-31). The explicit reference to exile suggests that the unit is a late theological explanation for the Babylonian Exile in the early sixth century BCE. The focus on idolatry as the basis for the divine punishment diverges significantly from the perspective elsewhere in the book that views failure to heed "all his [God's] commandments and decrees" as the cause of exile (28.15; cf. 28.1,45,58-59).
Deut 4.2: Admonition not to alter Moses's word. Funny how that turned out. Such an admonition parallels similar admonitions in wisdom literature (Prov 30.6; Eccl 3.14; 12.12-13; Sir 42.21; cf. Rev 22.18-19).
Deut 4.5-8: The author here challenges the prevailing Near Eastern idea that wisdom was a royal perogative; for example, the ancient Babylonian 'Laws of Hammurabi' (ca. 1750 BCE) praised the "just decisions" of its "wise" king (cols 47.1; 4.7), while here it is the nation Israel who will be internationally renowned as "wise" for its "just" laws (vv. 6,8).
Deut 4.7-8: Israel is distinguished both by its god and its law; the two ideas are interlocked. Scripture can be seen as evidence of the Justness and validity of the god of Israel.
Deut 4.9-14: The revelation at Horeb is recalled in order to instruct the generation that did not experience it.
Deut 4.9: To not forget and to educate the children is to overcome the distance of the past so as to maintain a source of identity. Moses refers to the events as if, in collective, those being spoken to had themselves seen and heard the events at Horeb; this is likely evident of a different source or literary layer of Deueteronomy.
Deut 4.13: A subtle reinterpretation of Sinai: The specification of that event as one where God proclaimed ten commandments occurs only here, at 10.4, and at Ex 34.28. There is no special number of or name for the commandments in Ex 19-20 or Deut 5. The rationale for two stone tablets (as at 5.22) derives from ancient Near Eastern treaties, whereby both sovereign and vassal would retain a separate complete copy of the treaty.
Deut 4.15-31: Reinterpretation of the commands regarding idol worship in 5.8-10. The Decalogue concedes the existence of other gods, while prohibiting Israel from worshipping them (5.7; cf. 32.8; Ex 15.11; Ps 8.21). This distinction is dissolved here, as the exilic writings of Deuteronomy that compose this section represent a later theological perspective in which emphasis is placed solely on the rejection of idols, presuming that no other gods exist.
Deut 4.16b-19a: This catalogue follows the order of creation in Gen 1 in reverse order, consistent with ancient scribal practice when quoting an earlier text.
Deut 4.19: 'Sun . . . host of heaven' may reflect images derived from foreign forms of worship brought into the Jerusalem Temple by Manasseh but removed by Josiah (2 Kings 21.5; 23.4-5; Jer 8.2). The idea of idols or of celestial phenomena literally being worshipped sharply distorts ancient Near Eastern religion, which regarded such phenomena as visible manifestations or emblems of a deity, not as themselves divine. This polemic, with the idea that God 'allotted' the celestial phenomena to other nations while reserving Israel as "his very own possession" (v. 20; cf. 7.6n), reinterprets the earlier idea that God, as head of the pantheon, assigned other nations to the supervision of lesser gods but retained Israel as "the Lord's own portion," "his alloted share". The author deanimates those gods, reducing them to lifeless celestial objects.
Deut 4.27-28: These verses allude to the policies of Assyrian and Babylonian exile, indicating how the age of the text post-dates that of the events themselves despite the narrative framing.
Deut 4.35: 'There is no other', this affirmation of full monotheism (contrast v. 7; 5.7) corresponds to the thought of the exilic Second Isaiah (Isa 43.10-13; 44.6-8; 45.6-7,22).
Deut 4.41-43: An appendix. Concerning the cities of refuge to be established in Transjordan; these verses are most likely an editorial appendix composed after the completion of ch 19. Similar disconnected appendixes often appear in the Bible at the conclusion of longer literary units (e.g., Lev 27).
Deut 5.1-33: The revelation of the Decalogue at Sinai/Horeb. Ostensibly a retelling of Ex 19-20, this version introduces significant changes in both detail and theology. The central idea is that God publicly reveals the law to the entire nation across boundaries of gender, ethnicity, and class. Near Eastern legal collections, in contrast, were attributed to a human monarch and were concerned to preserve class distinctions. Moreover, a deity disclosing himself to an entire nation was unprecedented. The Decalogue has God address each Israelite individually using a singular form of "you," rather than the expected plural form. In contrast to Near Eastern law, the prohibitions are universal and absolute: the aim of the law is to transform society by creating a moral community in which murder, theft, etc. will no longer exist.
Deut 5.1-5: Making the past present.
Deut 5.3: 'Not with our ancestors . . . but with us', once more inconsistent on the point of how revelation applies to each generation; this is, however, seemingly intentional, the author aiming to overcome the limits of historical time and place via participation in the covenant.
Deut 5.5: Inconsistent framing once more.
Deut 5.6-21: The decalogue. This version differs at several points from that in Ex 20.2-17.
Deut 5.9: Punishment for sins against God extends across three generations. This principle of vicarious punishment contrasts sharply with the Israelite norm for civil and criminal law, whcih restricts punishment to the agent alone (24.16).
Deut 5.18: Punishment for adultery would have been decided by the husband (as mirrored in such Near Eastern law corupuses as the Laws of Hammurabi) in ancient Israel, but here it is considered a transgression against God and the community as a whole. Following this version of the Decalogue, a diagram is presented showing the numbering of the Decalogue in Deuteronomy 5.8-21, I will not be repeating it here, but it is interesting to contrast to that of Exodus 20.
Deut 6.1-11.32: Preamble to the laws: the requirement of loyalty to God.
Deut 6.5: The paradox of commanding a feeling (as in Lev 19.17-18) is resolved with the recognition that covenantal "love" is not private emotion but loyalty of action toward both deity and neighbor.
Deut 7.1-10.11: Risks to covenantal fidelity upon entry to the land; confrontation of natives as well as the risk of complacency in the event of succesful habitation.
Deut 7.1-26: The war of conquest.
Deut 7.1: The nations to be conquered listed are anachronistic, differing from lists elsewhere in the bible and contradicting the historical record—the enumeration of seven once again signifies completion.
Deut 7.2: Total destruction is never attained in initial conquest, as multiple of the nations listed are only dealt with later on in the narrative, long after entry into the land. Elsewhere merely 'expulsion' is indicated.
Deut 7.5: 'Pillars', stone momuments that marked places where God appeared and were thus origionally legitimate in worship. Only later was such worship banned. 'Sacred poles' are also noted, the 'Asherim'; preserving the name of Asherah, an important Canaanite goddess, popular in ancient Israel.
Deut 7.10: The vicarious punishment of prior decalogue repetitions is here revised, instead each individual that rejects God is repaid in their own person.
Deut 8.1-20: The temptation to pride and self-sufficiency in the land. Success in Canaan will tempt the Israelites to forget the wilderness lesson of complete dependence upon God.
Deut 8.11-20: The peril of posterity.
Deut 8.11: Disobedience of Deuteronomy's laws becomes tantamount to forgetting God and transgressing the Decalouge's prohibitions in 5.7-9.
Deut 9.1-10.11: The already broken and renewed covenant. God does not give the land to the people as a reward for righteousness, for in the wilderness they acted rebelliously.
Deut 10.1-11: The second ascent of the mountain.
Deut 10.1-3: These verses reflect a tradition that Moses made the ark, directly contradicting the narrative of its construction detailed prior.
Deut 10.6-9: Editorial insertion concerning Levites.
Deut 10.12-11.32: Obedience as the condition for prosperity in the land.
Deut 11.1-32: Loyalty to the covenant provides the condition for life in Canaan. Responsibilities listed in this section are communal in nature; they exist for the people as a whole.
Deut 11.2: The frequent word 'today' in Deuteronomy emphasizes the contemporaneity of the covenant.
Deut 11.6: No mention of Korah's rebellion (Num 16.3-11), which was added to Num 16 by the Priestly school after this abstract was made.
Deut 11.10-12: Though the Nile provided sufficient water, the Nile valley had to be irrigated through human effort, since rainfall was minimal; Canaan's crops are irrigated by seasonal rainfall. The difference is mentioned to stress Israel's dependence upon God, who gives and withholds rain, as well as the sanctity of the land of Israel.
Deut 11.29-30: These verses represent an editorial intrusion, hinting ahead to ch 27.
Deut 12.1-32: Centralization and purification of worship. Restriction of sacrificial worship of God to a single sanctuary and removal of foreign influence represent two of the most distinctive features of Deuteronomy's idea of religion and law.
Deut 12.2-7: Israel must reject the Canaanite precedent of multiple sanctuaries.
Deut 12.2: The chapter alternates between plural and singular, suggesting a long compositional history.
Deut 12.5: Biblical narrative reflecting a tradition in which Jerusalem played no role in Israel's history until the period of King David; consequently the city cannot be named explicitly without undermining the literary form of Deuteronomy as an address by Moses. Interesting amount of foresight on the part of the scribes. Also mentioned is God 'putting his name' there, rejecting the idea that a nation's God would inhabit the Temple (contrast 1 Kings 8.12-13).
Deut 12.13-16: Two important, revolutionary distinctions: First, between sacrificial worship at random sites, 'any place', rejected as illegitimate, and legitimate sacrifice performed at a single sanctuary, 'the place that the Lord will choose'. This contrasts with previous norms, when altars were common throughout the land (Gen 12.17; 35.1-7; 1 Sam 3.1; 7.17; 1 Kings 18.20-46). Second, between ritual sacrifice and secular slaughter of domestic animals for food. According to the biblical account, prior to Deuteronomy all slaughter, even for food, was sacrificial and took place at an altar. With altars throughout the land, that rule imposed no burden upon Israelites. The prohibition of all local altars, however, created a real difficulty for those without easy access to the central sanctuary. The permission granted here for local, secular slaughter answers that need. By analogy to the rules for hunting wild game (gazelle or deer), domestic animals may be slaughtered throughout the land, on condition that their blood is poured out 'on the ground like water' (cf. Lev 17.13). Blood symbolizes "life" (v. 23; 15.23; Gen 9.4-5; Lev 17.14; 19.26).
Deut 12.20-28: Permission for secular slaughter is now justified by the expansion of Israel's boundaries.
Deut 12.32: Text appended with an ancient Near Eastern scribal forumla often included in the epilogues of treaties, inscriptions, and law collections to protect them from being defaced or altered.
Deut 13.1-18: Unconditional loyalty to God. Provides various hypothetical sitauations including conflict of covenant loyalty.
Deut 13.1-5: Prophecy is here regulated, with Moses' status as the founder of Israelite prophecy setting the standards in Deuteronomy by which the people should act; should subsequent prophets contravene Dueteronomy's teachings, they are to be executed. I'm sure this will never be complicated by any potential future prophets.
Deut 13.1: Dreams and omens or portents, two sources of religious authority also mentioned in the nearly contemporary Neo-Assyrian 'Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon', indicating widespread recognition of the practises.
Deut 13.9: Summary execution here conflicts with the call for witnesses and a trial in other transgressions mentioned elsewhere in Deuteronomy; this likely arises from the presumed grave threat to the covenant.
Deut 13.10: Stoning, a punishment reserved for violation of fundamental values. Those named correspond to prohibitions from the Decalogue.
Deut 13.15-17: Religious infidelity of an Israelite population is met with the same ban (genocide—previously, ousting) as that of the Canaanites.
Deut 14.1-29: The obligations of holiness. Special status entails special obligations, one of which is dietary. Lists permitted and prohibited foods.
Deut 14.3-21: Deueteronomy's dietary restrictions differ from the more detailed list of permitted and prohibited foods provided by the Priestly source (Lev 11.2-23). Clean versus unclean here, once more, refers specifically to ritual propriety. Note too that the creatures listed correspond to those groupings mentioned within the creation narrative.
Deut 15.1-18: Remission of debts and manumission of slaves. On accession to the throne, ancient Near Eastern rulers would sometimes grant one-time cancellation of debts, return land confiscated by the crown, and free indentured slaves. That custom, Akkadian 'duraru', is reflected in the Hebrew 'deror,' 'jubilee,' or 'release,' of Lev 25.10; Isa 61.1; Jer 34.15,17. Deuteronomy's conception of the covenant between Israel and God entails a similar fresh start as a covenantal obligation that recurs every seven years, adjusting earlier laws in the Book of the Covenant (Ex 21-23) to the innovation of centralization of worship.
Deut 15.1-6: Cancellation of debts.
Deut 15.12-18: Manumission. Laws regulating slaves are here reworked in the face of centralization of worship.
Deut 16.1-17: The festival calendar. Here, passover (and thus the sacrifice of the paschal lamb) has been centralized to the (yet to be built) Temple, as such, this blood ritual is merged with the festival of unleavened bread, also celebrated in early spring. Contrast to Leviticus where such ceremonies are considered as distinct.
Deut 16.7: Provision to 'cook' (read: boil) the paschal offering conflicts with the stipulation that the paschal offering be 'roasted over the fire,' not 'boiled in water' (Ex 12.8-9). The two inconsistent requirements for preparing the Passover are harmonized at 2 Chr 15.13.
Deut 16.18-18.22: Laws of pubic officials. The proposed government has judicial, executive, and religious branches: local and central courts (16.18-17.13), kingship (17.14-20), levitical priesthood (18.1-8), and prophecy (18.9-22).
Deut 16.18-17.13: The organization of justice.
Deut 16.21-17.1: Prohibitions against Canaanite cultic objects.
Deut 17.8-13: Justice at the local sanctuary. In the pre-Deuteronomic period, legal cases in which there was an absence of physical evidence or of witnesses were remanded to the local sanctuary wherein the parties would swear oaths. The laws listed in these verses fill in the judicial void created by the centralization of worship; all cases that require recourse to the altar must now be decided at the central sanctuary. The tribunal gathered at such cases includes both priestly and lay members.
Deut 17.14-20: The law of the king. Deuteronomy greatly restricts royal authority. The monarch is subject to the law and required to read it daily: contrast with the general rule of Near Esatern monarchs promulgating law alone.
Deut 18.1-8: The levitical priesthood. Centralization also affected the Israelite priesthood. Deuteronomy conflates what the book of Leviticus had initially bifurcated into two distinct categories: the 'Levites' and the 'Priests'. Here they are instead described as one, the 'Levitical priests'.
Deut 18.6-8: When the local altars became outlawed, it is clarified that the Levites must be provided for as they transition to the centralized sanctuary. This emphasis underscores that the countryside altars were not entirely Canaanite sanctuaries (as 12.2-4 asserts).
Deut 18.9-22: A prophet like Moses.
Deut 18.9-14: Divination is here branded as foreign and abhorrent, 'prophecy' is instead the given alternative. Elsewhere, however, divination is not typified as foreign (1 Sam 28.3-25; Isa 8.19-22; 29.4). Thus, describing the practice as foreign may actually cloak a condemnation of Israelite popular religion.
Deut 18.11-12: Here, necromancy and divination (integral as they would have been to the practice of ancient family religion) are considered abhorrent and illegitimate; the efficacy of them is not mentioned, however, as it is likely that the Israelites believed in the power of such acts even if condemning of it.
Deut 18.15-22: Deuteronomy transforms prophecy, viewing the prophet as the spokesperson of Torah and defining Moses at the paradigmatic prophet.
Deut 18.15: Prophecy by divine election. That God alone appoints the prophet makes the prophet independent of all institutions and able to challenge them. The laws in vv. 20-22 emphasize various cases in which the prophets are to be executed, however, curbing their potential for radical change—specifically in terms of reversing Deuteronomy's laws. More than one prophet is clearly suggested/intended.
Deut 18.20-23: Having estbalished an Isrealite model of prophecy, the law provides two criteria to distinguish true from false prophecy. The first is that the prophet should speak exclusively on behalf of God, and report only God's wprds. The second makes the fulfillment of a prophet's oracle the measure of its truth (Jer 28.9). That approach attempts to solve a critical problem: If two prophets each claim to speak on behalf of God yet make mutually exclusive claims (1 Kings 22.6 versus v. 17; Jer 27.8 versus 28.2), how can one decide which speaks the truth? The solution offered is not free of difficulty. If a false prophet is distinguished by the failure of his oracle to come true, the nmaking a decision in the present about which prophet to obey becomes impossible. Nor can this criterion easily be reconciled with 13.2, which concedes that the oracles of false prophets might come true.
Deut 19.1-14: Cities of refuge. Once more, due to the previous places of refuge being the local altars, now outlawed, here three "neutral" cities are outlined.
Deut 19.15-21: The integrity of the judicial system.
Deut 20.1-20: Rules for waging holy war. In contrast to other legal collections, which include only brief sections concerning military engagement (Ex 23.23-33; 34.11-16; Num 35.50-56), Deuteronomy, reflecting a literary setting of Israel about to enter the land, concerns itself extensively with the laws of holy war. Seizing the spoils of war, including human prisoners, is prohibited; all had to be devoted exclusively to God. A contemporary inscription, the Moabite Stone (ca. 850 BCE), establishes that similar theologies of holy war were shared by some of Israel's neighbors. In Deuteronomy, the conception of the conquest of the promised land as a holy war represents a highly schematized idealization, formulated half a millennium after the settlement, at a time when ethnic Canaanites would long have assimilated into the Israelite population.
Deut 20.11: The use of defeated people for 'forced labor' was widespread. Later, David's cabinet will be said to have an official responsible for such forced labor. Slavery is fine when it's the enemy, guys!
Deut 20.15-18: Text clarifies here that such takings of defeated peoples for forced labor applies only in situations of foreign war.
Deut 21.1-9: Atonement for unsolved murder and assigned rituals.
Deut 21.10-25.19: Miscellaneous civil and family laws.
Deut 21.10-14: Legal obligations toward female captives. This procedure most likely originally applied to the Canaanite population.
Deut 21.15-17: Legal protection of the less-favored wife.
Deut 21.18-21: The rebellious son. Flagrant and sustained disobedience towards parents is a capital offense.
Deut 21.22-23: Treatment of the executed. The concern to avoid defilement of the land by demonstrating respect for the corpse even of someone convicted of wrongdoing shows the close connection between criminal law and ritual purity in Deuteronomy. Note, 'for anyone hung on a tree is under God's curse'. Judas wept!
Deut 22.1-12: Various moral and religious responsibilities of citizenship.
Deut 22.1-4: Moral duties toward the nighbor.
Deut 22.5-12: Miscellaneous laws.
Deut 22.5: Prohibition against cross-dressing seeks to maintain gender boundaries; a similar concern for boundaries is evident in vv. 9-11.
Deut 22.13-30: Volations of marriage law.
Deut 22.13-21: False accusation of breach of marital contract.
Deut 22.22-30: Adultery and rape. Adultery as defined by biblical law is the instance of a man having sex with a woman betrothed or married to another man. This is a violation of the Decalogue and a capital offense.
Deut 23.1-8: Restrictions on access to Israel's assembly.
Deut 23.1: No crushed testicles or severed penises! What was in Leviticus only a qualification required of the priesthood is here applied to all of Israel.
Deut 23.9-14: Special rules for the military camp. Includes sexual abstinence.
Deut 23.15-25.19: The heightened moral responsibilities of the covenant community.
Deut 23.15-16: Prohibition of the return of escaped slaves. Rejecting the almost universal stipulation within the ancient Near East, escaped slaves are here allowed to retain their freedom and shall not be returned.
Deut 23.17-18: Restrictions on prostitution. Illegal for the Israelites—many such sad cases! The regulations also seek to preserve the Temple's sanctity.
Deut 23.17: 'Temple Prostutite' (Hebrew "qedeshah"), the translation reflects belief in the existence of sacred prostitution in Israel and the ancient Near East, for which there is scant evidence; more likely 'qedesha' is a standard euphemism for the coarser term for prostitute (v. 18). The same alternation between the two terms appears in Gen 38.15,21. The word might better be translated as "one set aside."
Deut 23.19-25: Financial ethics, vows, gathering by the needy.
Deut 24-25: Laws promoting social harmony.
Deut 24.14-15: Deuteronomy's ethics are based upon the conviction that God identifies with and vindicates the oppressed.
Deut 25.3: 'Your neighbor', the criminal, despite his judicial status, retains human dignity.
Deut 25.5: An exception here to the incest prohibition of marrying a sister-in-law found in Leviticus presents an interesting question on the notion of what these various case instances might represent in terms of questions on the imperative—suppose I'll come back to this later.
Deut 25.18: These details are not found in Ex 17.8-16; they may have been supplied by the Deuteronomic author in order to justify the extirpation of Amalek.
Deut 26.1-15: Concluding liturgies.
Deut 26.14: 'Offered any of it to the dead', the duty of the living to care for dead ancestors through food offerings at their place of burial was widely assumed in the ancient Near East (see the Ugaritic 'Aqhat' epic), is confirmed archaeologically, and continued to be carried out in Second Temple times (Tob 4.17). This practice is not condemned here; it is viewed as improper only in relation to sacred donations, because of the impurity associated with death (Lev 22.2-4).
Deut 26.16-19: Formal conclusion: the reciprocity of the covenant, representing the legal corpus as a mutually binding relationship between God and Israel.
Deut 26.17-18: 'Obtained', the past tense point to an already completed ritual, not preserved in Deuteronomy, in which both Israel and God explicitly assented to the covenant and affirmed the mutuality of the obligations that each will undertake. This reciprocal model contrats with the Sinai covenant in Exodus, which was unilaterally offered by God (Ex 19.3-6) and unilaterally agreed to by Israel (Ex 19.8; 24.3,7). Deuteronomy invokes the language of the Sinai covenant as a model while revising it significantly in the process.
Deut 27.1-26: Ceremonies at Shechem upon entry into the land. Provides several competing traditions about how and where the covenant between God and Israel was concluded: at Sinai; or on the plains of Moab; or at Gilgal immediately upon entering the land; or at the important northern shrine at Shechem. Editorial revisions abounds!
Deut 27.1: Moses is referred to in the third person, interrupting is own first-person address. He is joined by the elders, who nowhere else in Deuteronomy address the people with Moses as they do here.
Deut 27.4: Mount Ebal, the tallest mountain in the region stands in central Canaan and is situated directly adjacent to the city of Shechem; it would be impossible for the Israelites to reach Shechem in a day as mentioned. The most logical explanation is that Josh 4 points to the original form of the verses, with Gilgal as the site where Israel complied with this command.
Deut 27.5-7: These verses are an insertion that reinterprets the plastered stones on which the teaching is to be inscribed as an altar of 'unhewn stones', following Ex 20.25. Such an altar, outside of Jerusalem, conflicts with the centralization requirement of ch 12, and further suggests the antiquity and the independence of this tradition from the rest of deuteronomy.
Deut 27.9: 'This very day' contrasts statements that define the bond as previously formed.
Deut 27.14: 'Levites', contrast Deuteronomy's normal term, "levitical priests".
Deut 28.1-68: The consequences of obedience or disobedience: blessing or curse. This chapter has several close parallels to the Neo-Assyrian 'Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon (VTE)', dating to 672 BCE. The disproportion between the sections devoted to blessing (vv. 1-14) and to curse (vv. 15-68) may be a reaction to the Babylonian conquest, deportation, and exile of Judah (597 and 586 BCE), here recast as a prophetic warning.
Deut 28.1-2: The poem emphasizes the conditionality of the exalted status of Israel, perhaps because of the exile.
Deut 28.9: 'The Lord will establish . . . if you keep', holiness is conditional upon obedience, a shift from other passages where Israel's holiness is not future but present, and not conditional but unconditional.
Deut 28.15-68: Consequences of disobedience.
Deut 28.21-44: This section echoes treaties that the Neo-Assyrian empire imposed on its vassal states, suggesting that the curse section of these state treaties, perhaps in Aramaic translation, provided a model for this chapter. Judah was a vassal to the Assyrian empire (2 Kings 8.13-18) and both Neo-Assyrian and Judean officials spoke Aramaic, the international language of diplomacy (2 Kings 18.26-27).
Deut 28.23: 'Bronze . . . iron', echoing language of the 'Vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon'; "May [the gods] make your ground like iron . . . Just as rain does not fall from a bronze sky."
Deut 28.47-57: Scenario of foreign invasion. A later appendix, outside the frame provided by vv.45-46.
Deut 28.58-68: Undoing the exodus.
Deut 28.58: 'This book', how the commandments have become transformed from oral proclamation to written text is unexplained, since it is not until 31.9,24 that Moses commands that his teaching be put into writing. Also, 'HaShem', an important circumlocution for Yahweh, God's personal name.
Deut 28.63: Even the unconditional divine promises of Gen 12.7; 13.17 may be contrevened.
Deut 29.1-30.20: Third discourse of Moses. The ratification ceremony for the covenant of the plains of Moab. Israel is formally adjured to enter the covenant: To swear to obey the laws of chs 12-26 under penalty of the sanctions of ch 28.
Deut 29.1: The laws of Deuteronomy are here presented as a covenant that exist in addition to the covenant established at Sinai.
Deut 29.20: 'Blot out', the erasure of a tablet or scroll (Num 5.23), given a theological cast: Following Mesopotamian models, the divine decree of human fate is recorded in a heavenly book, with erasure symbolizing punishment (9.14; Gen 6.7; Ex 17.14; 32.32; 2 Kings 14.27; Ps 9.6).
Deut 29.25: Here, the covenants of Sinai and Moab are conflated as one.
Deut 29.26: Gods are allotted to the various peoples of the region; Yahweh is Israel's, the existence of other gods is thus conceded within this polytheistic framework. Contrast 4.19, where it is rather only inanimate "stars . . . that God has allotted," which reinterprets the polytheistic image from the later perspective of monotheism.
Deut 29.28: Temporal slip-up here, 'as is now the case' implies that this chapter was composed subsequent to the Babylonian exile.
Deut 30.1-10: Reassurance of restoration. This section, with its emphasis on restoration, does not logically follow ch 29 and is most likely a later insertion that serves the religious needs of a community different from that of the book's original audience.
Deut 30.5: The 'You' here explicitly refers to the Judean exiles in Babylon rather than the desert generation whom Moses is supposed to be addressing.
Deut 30.10: The book refers to itself once more, contradicting the narrative.
Deut 30.11-20: The original continuation of ch 29.
Deut 30.11-14: Challenging the idea of wisdom being above the layperson, Deuteronomy here presents itself as divine but eminently communicable, so as to bolster its legitimacy to the common man.
Deut 31.1-34.14: The death of Moses and the formation of the Book of the Teaching. With the conclusion of the treaty between God and Israel in ch 30, Deuteronomy now returns to Moses, the mediator of the treaty. His life is ending, and the question of succession is given a two-fold answer, since Moses was both political and religious leader of Israel. Joshua will be his politcal and military successor (31.1-8,14-15,23; 32.44,48-52; 34.9), and "a book . . . of this law" (31.24) will instruct the nation in religion. Deuteronomy thus ends in paradox: Moses, ostensibly the book's narrator, narrates his own death (ch 34), and the Book of the Teaching, alread presupposed (29.27), nevertheless provides an account of its own formation (31.9-13,24-29). The conclusion of Deuteronomy also ends the Pentateuch. As they set Deuteronomy as the conclusion of that larger work, later editors with the background of the Exile added perspectives on the function of the entire Torah in the people's life. Finally, the Pentateuch's literary precedent of a patriarch deathbed bequest and blessing (Gen 27; 48-49) led to the incorporation of "The Song of Moses" (32.1-43) and of "The blessing of Moses" (ch 33), each of which likely circulated independently. The resulting text thus blends several viewpoints. Themes like the appointment of Joshua begin, then begin again from a different perspective, and then are continued only after a digression, which marks the insertion of new material.
Deut 31.1-29: Moses makes arrangements for his death. Multiple competing narratives mingle here, with verse-to-verse incongruencies about the exact sequence of events and who did what.
Deut 31.14-15: Tent of meeting, again, conflicting traditions on whether the tent is outside or inside the camp.
Deut 31.30-23.43: The Song of Moses. The Song is a late insertion that reflects upon Israel's history, probably presupposing the Exile.
Deut 32.8: 'Most High', or 'Elyon', the title of El, the senior god who sat at the head of the divine council in the Ugaritic literature of ancient Canaan, as seen in Genesis.
Deut 32.9: The Lord here is contrasted somewhat to that of Elyon, with Elyon aportioning the nations and assigning the disparate peoples their own gods from which the Lord received his share; the NRSV translation has added 'own' to 'his [own] share' (not present in the original hebrew) in order to identify Yahweh with Elyon so as to avoid the impression that he is merely a member of the pantheon.
Deut 32.24: 'Burning consumption,' a common noun in postexilic Hebrew, 'Resheph', refers to the Ugaritic god of war and pestilence, worshipped by the Israelites as a minor god during the polytheistic period.
Deut 32.43: 'All you gods,' had been removed from the preserved hebrew, but reconstructed with the dead sea scrolls; their absence was likely intentional, reflecting the development and importance of later Israelite monotheism.
Deut 32.44-47: Double conclusion to the Song.
Deut 32.48-52: Moses commanded to die.
Deut 33.1-29: The Blessing of Moses. In the vein of a father's blessing of his progeny on the deathbed, here, Moses blesses all the tribes of Israel as if they were his own sons. Clearly imitating victory hymn of the divine warrior.
Deut 34.1-12: The death of Moses.
Deut 34.1: Mount Nebo and Mount Pigsah, two narrative locations posited to be the site of Moses's death, are here conflated by the editor to preserve both traditions.
And that is it for Deuteronomy. A shame about the month's worth of a gap there, but hey, that's life. I have to say, the Song of Moses and its footnotes have been the most interesting portion of the OT to me so far, that intersection of layered revision and obfuscated meaning reframing an older text within a different narrative, and all in the retrospective context of the exilic era too! All in all, quite dense, the addition of this second covenant to the first, that's a lot to take in—understanding, of course, the revisionist nature of such a covenant as outlined in the introduction to this particular book. Great stuff. Historical books next.
Hear me, dust of my lifeblood,
faithful and obedient,
constellations so gilded:
Seek not the stars but those which
were promised you, for bereft
of light will be your exile.