Studies in Deuteronomy Gerhard Von Rad
Studies in Deuteronomy Gerhard Von Rad
Studies in Deuteronomy Gerhard Von Rad
r v
'^$}'^fe>#>4<h i-
{
V/'!;^'^/ c/
;^''f
fl
^l!
^ *jV^'>*f'\^ \
ll
1
;
i
'> '*'< '"i
*tfe% xO^'V'..'^
I i4v$/#>
iJ.i
'
U^lW UV
*'
//'?
'',
v
.I^V/,
f
,
l
fP % fVy^X
'
.//'
V'
v
tV"S
^
;
'
>/' Vv/f^v'
^W.Ai-
1
"%<fl
f
,
"
';'
.
;/
1 i
.".".
?"!'
v
;/
A
/;
'
!(
.
j
'A
'
'
(/ s> '
^/p
r^
;
*sf
'
./ ?f< r ^'^^4i^ ?y\ (
w*
jK*ffi$^
222.15 R12s 62-14378
Rad
Studies in Deuteronomy
STUDIES IN
DEUTERONOMY
GERHARD VON RAD
Translated by
DAVID STALKER
V THEPROVENANCE OF DEUTERONOMY 60
Heidelberg,
nth December^ 1952
CHAPTER ONE
THE CHARACTER OF DEUTERONOMY
AND ITS SACRAL TRADITIONS
FROM THE POINT OF VIEW
OF FORM-CRITICISM
IF we are to make a fresh attack on the problem of Deuter-
onomy, it will best serve our
purpose to begin with a quite
general statement: Deuteronomy is composed as a speech
of Moses to the people. 1 That is something striking and,
in fact, unique, in the law books of the Old Testament.
Both the Book of the Covenant and the Holiness Code, as
well as the laws of the Priestly Document, purport to be
utterances of God to Moses, Disregarding the Book of the
Covenant, since it was obviously not composed as an
utterance of God, and the subsequent adaptation has had
absolutely no effect on the corpus itself, the picture of the
Priestly Document, viewed as a whole, is as follows:
i. Jahweh addresses Moses. 2. The decrees received are
12
Sacral Traditions and Form-Criticism
14
Sacral Traditions and form-Criticism
style.
1
Now this suggests a definite line of interpretation
for the component parts as well. Only to-day are be- we
ginning to see how accurate Klostermann's diagnosis of
the situation was years ago, when he declared that Deut.
12 S was c
not a law book
3
, but a 'collection of material for
the public proclamation of the Law'. 2 So our task is to
take the laws in Deuteronomy too and consider them still
more critically from the standpoint of rhetoric and homi-
letics as, indeed, is particularly approprkte to the pare-
netic form in which even the so-called law-code itself in
1938, pp. 23
2 N.F. (1907) p. 344.
A. Klostermann: Pentateuch,
3
Horst: Das Vrivilegrecbt Jatwes, Gottingen, 1930, pp. 59, 65.
15
Studies in Deuteronomy
shut thine hand from thy poor brother; 8. But thou shalt
'
16
Sacral Traditions and Form-Criticism
nln?
ma la TO n^s nt2?i nia? nln^ nain-^^ 17,1
? nsjrtf ? 22 5a>
? 10
TJDSJE? #3*?r) tf
1
? n
A woman shall not wear men's clothes.
A man shall not put on women's garments.
Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with two kinds.
Thou shalt not yoke ox and ass together in the plough.
Thou shalt not clothe thyself with a garment made of
wool and flax.
1
Horst: op. cit., pp. 98
Studies in Deuteronomy
Kin
rrn nr 11
20
Sacral Traditions and Form-Criticism
c
him away from thee free', and Jahweh thy God will
. . .
21
Studies in Deuteronomy
tic and ritual toroth of the priests deriving from the speci-
23
Studies in Deuteronomy
1
That makes it very questionable if D. can be designated simply
'the most considerable .
priestly collection of laws' (G. Holscher,
. .
the kind. This is not gainsaid by the fact that the parenetic
sections at the beginning and the end are in the *y e? form,
c 3
while the corpus itself is in the thou form. The corpus is^ to
be interpreted in the sense that the statute in v. 6, which
alone is written in the *ye' form, presents the chief com-
mandment, properly speaking
nearly related to him by
'None approach any that
shall is
cult law in chapter 17. Here v. 3 f sets forth the chief regu-
lation, properly speaking. Verses 5-7 add nothing in the
way of real amplification; they only give its reason and add
points of detail. A new commandment comes only with
v. 8 f. 3 deals with killing of animals in general, v. 8
If v.
deals with a specific sacrificial act: both make it necessary
to go to the shrine. Verse 10 brings a further chief norm,
1 1
O ? U ** ~~
?!! tf?
12a
13b
1
16a
16b
.3 UK hbn
Thou shalt not oppress thy neighbour.
Thou shaltnot rob.
Thou shalt not keep the
wages of a hireling with
thee the morning.
till
? 19b
"rn
.. T^
.*
n*?sr~" tf
1
?
29
Studies in Deuteronomy
? 26b
26c
28a
have been compiled here; the nlfT? "US which sounds especi-
ally frequently
in them may be due
to the redactor of the
Holiness Code, or it may well have belonged to the original
form and then spread from here throughout the Holiness
Code: but there can certainly be no doubt about the funda-
mental conclusion.
One question may however be asked. Is what we have
here really series in the old sense as in Deut. 27.15 ff or
Ex. 20.2 ff, or is it not rather a case of an undoubtedly old
form being employed by a more or less late generation ? If
that were so, then the SiP^ im Leben for these units would
3
Form-Criticism of the Holiness Code
na^r nla
naT nia
insn ft$rn$
*i
h
ntfs ETK
3^T n^x^nKy
^
25tzr nt2?'x B^K
10
n
T . .. .
y .
'nav nta* ^K
injs'fig 25^? ifjs
12
nla) 1a$~H3-1x
nla) nj^ mfK-nn: ns^'?"i^ ^
naT
1
20
'nia Inii^n^; 13^ "i^s ^""K
THK
1
nla 11*5 B^ 21
1
nt??K-nK rii? :
death.)
Whoso committed! adultery with his neighbour's
wife shall die the death.
Whoso lieth with the wife of his father shall die the
death.
Whoso lieth with his daughter-in-law shall die the
death.
Whoso lieth with a man as one lieth with a woman
shall die the death.
Whoso marrieth a wife and her mother as well shall
die the death.
Whoso hath intercourse with a beast shall die the
death.
32
Form-Criticism of the Holiness Code
1
Is it by chance that the series comprises ten commandments con-
cerning sexual matters ?
G 33
Studies in Deuteronomy
('
. that
. .he profane not my sanctuaries ) quite obviously
betray themselves as later adaptation.
The analysis of chapter 22 has little to contribute to our
purpose either. Verses 2-16 are again pure teaching for
priests, and the composition as an utterance of God in the
first and last sentences, (as well as in w. 3 and 8 f), comes
34
Form-Criticism of the Holiness Code
which was perhaps the older, for parenesis only uses what
is given, which, as such, is not direct speech of Jahweh.)
None which have
the less, as a collection of older statutes
been interspersed with parenesis, the Holiness Code is very
closely akin to Deuteronomy. The parenetic style is thus
not peculiar to Deuteronomy, and so it is not a suitable
starting-point for an investigation of the special nature of
Deuteronomy and its provenance. Nevertheless, there are,
of course, plenty of differences to be found.
CHAPTER THREE
DEUTERONOMY'S 'NAME THEOLOGY 3
37
Studies in Deuteronomy
traditional and fixed views, and yet avoid all arbitrary re-
constructions. We shaE attempt in what follows to note
characteristics of Deuteronomy
briefly the most outstanding
which are, in our view, certain and palpable.
How and where will Israel, which is, in fact, only ap-
have communion with
proaching her own consolidation,
Jahweh? How and where will her intercourse
with the
God by whom she was conscious of being chosen, be con-
summated? It is well known that Deuteronomy gives this
the whole existence of Israel
question, on which plainly
will choose a place
depended, a definite answer Jahweh
to 'cause' his name to 'dwell there' (]5?r?) or to 'put'
(D
1
2
Ex. 16.10; 29.43; Num. 14.10; 16.19; 17.7; 20.6.
39
Studies in Deuteronomy
old view still, that very fact allows it to be seen how bound
Deuteronomy was to the Ark tradition, and how obliged
it was somehow or other to come to terms with it. Another
40
9
'Name Theology and 'Kabod* Theology
teristicsof the Jehovistic Sinai pericope, on the one hand,
and Deut. 27.12 S on the other, shows us that that cultic
celebration, the Gattung of which can be fairly exactly re-
constructed, was the great Covenant Festival of the Jahweh
amphictyony at Shechem. We thus arrive at the first firm
conclusion which we can make in regard to the provenance
of the Deuteronomic traditions. Deuteronomy stands in
the tradition of the old Jahweh amphictyony of Shechem.
Or rather, it
proposes to re-introduce this old cultic tradi-
tion in its own advanced period and to set it forth as the
form obligatory upon Israel for its life before Jahweh.
The same cannot be maintained for the Priestly Docu-
ment. In the form in which that work now lies before us,
it is, of course, of late date, and therefore a
very compre-
hensive production, in which traditional elements of many
kinds, some, too, of very varied origin, are fused together.
Thus, for instance, P., too, has given the Ark no unimpor-
tant function in its cultic
arrangements. But the view taken
of the Ark has really been changed considerably in relation
to earlier conceptions because of the dominant Kabod-Moed
theology. The mercy seat of the Ark is now the most holy
place, in which the mysterious meeting of Jahweh with
Moses takes place, and out of which Jahweh speaks to
Moses when he has appeared Kabod. 1 A further
in the
indication that the theological point of view which P.
wished to promote and with it alone are we concerned here
clearly derives from a different stream of tradition, lies
in the fact that, from the point of view of form-criticism,
the construction of the Sinai pericope has no recognisable
relations with the Covenant Festival at Shechem. The
1 2 Ezek.
Ezek. 1.25 ff; 8.4, 9.3. 1.4; 10.4.
* 4 Esek.
Ezek. 43.4, 7. 48.35.
5
K. Mohlenbrink: Der Tempel Salomos, p. 136. i Kings 8.12;
2 Kings 19.15.
6
Ex. 33.7 8; Num. 11.24 ff; Deut. 31.14 f (E).
4*
9
'Name Theology and 'Kabod* Theology
within the other old Hexateuch traditions prompts the
question whether an addition from some quite different
sphere of tradition is not present here. Is it not possible
that the Tent, which was obviously
foreign to the Shechem
amphictyony, belonged originally to the South, perhaps as
the sanctuary of the old amphictyony of the six tribes in
or near Hebron?1 Hempel has postulated the presence of
Hebron traditions in P. on other grounds. 2 At that rate it
would therefore be an old tradition observed in South
Israel which appears resuscitated in Ezekiel and P. The
reason
why research into these matters is so difficult is that
we know so little about the old
specifically southern
Israelite institutions. The traditions about them were first
of all completely overlaid by the much more puissant
traditions of the Shechem amphictyony, and then, later, the
written tradition was once more subjected to criticism and
interpreted by the school of Deuteronomy. What a thorough
Deuteronomic re-editing there has been, for instance, of
the accounts of the building, furnishings and consecration
of Solomon's temple, and what a different picture would
conceivably rise before us, were we to succeed in re-
moving the weight of this all-powerful later tradition! Is
itnot significant that we hear a clear rejection of the Temple
in favour of the Tent from the mouth of the prophet
Nathan, that is, once more, a south Israelite ? 3 This protest
cannot have been made on the basis of the actual practice
of the amphictyony, since the Ark had been resting, as we
know, in a temple for generations. We find in the Psalms,
on a relatively broad basis, a well-nigh mystical spiritual-
isation of the place of refuge concept:
1
Similarly Lohr has maintained that the empty Tent belongs to 'South
Israel* as sanctuary, theArk to North Israel. OX.Z., 1926, pp. 5 f ; cp.
further R. Kittel, Religion des Volkes Israel^ (2nd ed.), p. 45. the On
amphictyony of the six tribes see M. Noth: Das System der
Stdmme Israels, pp. 75 flf.
2
J. Hempel: Die althebrctische I^iteratur^ pp. 152 f.
8 2 Sam. 7.6.
43
Studies in Deuteronomy
44
CHAPTER FOUR
DEUTERONOMY AND THE HOLY WAR
WE were able in what has gone before to maintain with
confidence that, in respect of its broad legal basis, its whole
form and, last, its conception of the dwelling of Jahweh in
Israel, Deuteronomy renews the cultic tradition of the old
Shechem amphictyony. But an important question now
arises. These elements restored by Deuteronomy, of which
we have so far spoken, are far from comprehending the
whole character of the amphictyony and its institutions.
The amphictyony was not, in the last analysis, a religious
union assembling simply for the communal performance of
sacrifice and for hearing the rules which God gave it for
its life. Rather was it a band of tribes which, besides en-
45
Studies in Deuteronomy
time of David. But after that the old sacral form of warfare
apparently broke down under the impact of rational and
tactical, that is, secular, considerations. This does not
mean, of course, that odd elements of this old institution
did not persist for long enough. But as a totality in its
great obligatory sacral form it was obsolete. To deal with
c
the inexorable utopian' demands of the prophets who,
regardless of all the changes that had taken place, declared
that old patriarchal form of defence binding for their own
time too, would require a chapter for itself.
Not every recourse to arms in the older time was a Holy
War. It is obvious that a very clear distinction was drawn
i Ex. 15.3.
46
Deuteronomy and the Holy War
between a "n ^y^ which was a secular undertaking, and
y
belongs here too. Holy Wars proper are called 'Jahweh's wars*, i Sam.
18.17; 25.28.
2
i Sam. 28.6; 30.7; 2 Sam. 5.19, 23.
3
Judg. 3.27; 6.3; i Sam. 13.3; Judg. 7.15.
4 i Sam.
21.6; 2 Sam. n.ii; Isa. 13.3; Jer. 6.4.
5 6
Deut. 23.10-15. (E.V., 9-14.) Deut. 23.14; Judg. 4.14.
7 8 Sam. 13.15 ff; 14.6, 17.
Judg. 5.2, 9. Judg. 7.2 ff; i
47
Studies in Deuteronomy
1 Sam. 7.10;
Josh. 10.10; Judg. 4.15; i 5.11, etc.
2
Num. 14.9; Judg. 7.3; Ex. 14.14.
3
Josh. 6.17 ff; i Sam. 15.3.
48
Deuteronomy and the Holy War
the cattle are excepted. It is doubtful whether the usage as
a whole can be brought within the category of the vow; if
itcan, then that would certainly be a more mature concep-
tion1 ; it presupposes also that men are free to choose
whether they wifl perform the ban or not. The conception
in i Sam. 15.3, where the banning originates in a demand
from Jahweh and where it appears as the real purpose of
the war, is certainly more ancient. The most important
thing for us is that the obligation to put under the ban was
conceived by the Jahweh faith as an act of acknowledgement
of Jahweh and his help. How Saul was thereby brought
into a status confessionis and then resiled, is shown in the
story in i Sam. 1 5 .
D 49
Studies in Deuteronomy
1
On the officers (D*HC?ttf) as the officials charged with the recruit-
ment of the levy, see most recently E. Junge: Der Wtederaufbau des
Heenvesens des Ejsiches Juda mter Josia, 1937, pp. 48 ff.
51
Studies in Deuteronomy
jective condition of
the warriors. The question about fear
is really already akin here to a question about the warriors'
faith. Finally, the priest's address is added,
completing the
impregnation of the whole with the ideology of the Holy
War. Here then we can very easily mark the stages in the
growth of a religious revival, which was also, in this case,
a spiritualisation.
Our concern is with the last strand, in which, of course,
Deuteronomy's aim to conceive war as a Holy War in the
sense of the old institution is quite clearly expressed. The
procedure in
is
principle exactly the same as we recognised
it to be in the case of the cultic laws' of Deuteronomy: old
5*
Deuteronomy and the Holy War
from its Sify im Leben, the actual usages of the cult. But in
spite of that this analysis is undoubtedly correct. 2
There however, some passages in the great block
are,
made up of chapters 6-n which are extremely difficult to
fit in with the sketch just given. For example, 7.16-26:
1
Consider Deut. 31.10-13, and the custom of reading the law at
the Feast of Tabernacles; A. Alt, op. cit. y pp. 53 f.
2 A.
Klosterrnann : Der Pentateuch, N.F., p. 273. v. Had, Das
S.
formgescbicbtUcbe "Problem des Hexateucb, pp. 27
53
Studies in Deuteronomy
with which Jahweh thy God led thee out. So will Jahweh
thy God deal with all the peoples of whom thou art afraid.
Moreover Jahweh thy God will send disheartening1 against
them, until they that are left and hide themselves from thee
are perished. Be not in dread of them, for Jahweh thy God
in thy midst, a mighty and terrible God. And Jahweh thy
is
God will drive out these peoples before thee bit by bit;
thou canst not destroy them quickly, else the wild beasts
would become too many. Jahweh thy God will deliver
them to thee. He will cause a great panic (H/MTUD Oft^T),
until they are destroyed, and he will put their kings into
thy hand and thou shalt obliterate their name under heaven.
None will be able to hold their own before thee, until thou
hast destroyed them. The images of their gods
shall ye burn
with fire, thou shalt not desire the silver and gold that is
upon them, and shalt not take it unto thee, that it may not
become a snare to thee, for it is an abomination for Jahweh
thy God. And an abomination shalt thou not bring into
thy house, lest thou fall forthwith under the ban (Q^D
0*7'7]y
Thou shalt banish it from thee with abhorrence and
1
54
Deuteronomy and the Holy War
the enemy from what is under the ban. Do not
abstain
these completely delineate the whole range of the concep-
tions connected with the Holy War? And further: is it not
conceivable that this is the kind of language which would
actually have been used in a period whose chief aim it was
to re-introduce sacral regulations of periods long past?
One is all the more inclined to answer this question in the
affirmative when it is seen that this passage of ours is not
the only one of its kind in Deuteronomy, but that there are
several similar 'formularies' as speeches concerning war.
"Hear, Israel, thou art this day to pass over the Jordan,
to go in and overthrow peoples that are greater and stronger
than thyself, great cities that are fortified up to heaven, a
of whom thou hast heard said, Who can stand before the
Anakim? But thou wilt this day know that it is
Jahweh
thy God who goeth before thee as a consuming fire. He
will destroy them, he will cast them down before thee, that
thou mayest drive them out and quickly destroy them, as
Jahweh hath promised thee. Think not to thyself, when
Jahweh thy God dispossessed them before thee, for my
desert hath Jahweh brought me in, to take this land in
55
Studies in Deuteronomy
'
6.18: ... ye shall keep the commandments of Jahweh
. . . that thou mayest come into the fair land and take . . .
your God will himself expel them before you and drive them out before
you, and ye shall take possession of their land, as Jahweh your God
hath promised you ... a single man of you chases a thousand before
you; for Jahweh your God himself fighteth for you, as he hath pro-
mised you*. Josh. 23.5, 10. We find the direct continuation of this
tradition in the war speeches of the Chronicler's work: 2 Chi on. 1 5.1 flf;
16.71!; 2o.i5fT; 3 2.7 If. Cp. von Rad, 'Die levitische Predigt in den
Bucbern der Chronik\ festschrift Otto Proeksch, 1934, pp. 113 ff.
57
Studies in Deuteronomy
them into thy hand, thou shalt utterly put them under the
ban <tnn5 cnnn).'
lf ye fulfil this whole law ... ,
c
11.23 S
(E.V., 22 fi):
all these peoples before you, and ye
Jahweh will drive out
will overcome peoples that are greater
and stronger than
19.1:
c
When Jahweh thy God cutteth off the peoples,
whose 'land Jahweh thy God will give thee, and thou
overcomest.
20.16 f : 'But in the cities of these people, which Jahweh
shall give thee for an inheritance, thou shall
not
thy God
leave alive anything that hath breath, but
thou shalt utterly
58
Deuteronomy and the Holy War
from the pages of Deuteronomy who have a very pressing
concern with over against foreign nations ;
Israel's existence
it is for that reason that the
question too of delimitation
outward plays so great a role, 1 that the possibility of an
extension of the territory occupied by Israel is envisaged, 2
etc. Deuteronomy is making a bold bid for the unification
of all departments of life in IsraeL In a previous work I have
tried to show how this was effected by means of stressing
the idea of a national community, an idea which comes to
expression throughout and which has been subsequently
imposed even upon the very much older legal material.
3
1
23.1 ff; 7.1 ff.
2
12.20; 19.8.
3
v. Rad: Das Gotfesvolk im Deuferonomum, Stuttgart, 1929. The
59
CHAPTER FIVE
THE PROVENANCE OF
DEUTERONOMY
So far, the results of our whole examination are by no
means unambiguous. We saw in Deuteronomy a great deal
of old cultic material worked over and presented homilet-
ically. Who were the people who had access to such a wide
range of this matter and who possessed, further, the full right
to make so incisive and striking an interpretation of these cul-
They can only have been priests. On the other
tic traditions ?
61
Studies in Deuteronomy
two covenants, the one hand between Jahweh, the king and the
on
people, and on the other between the king and the people? But fy\
rather to be regarded as simply ditto-
DSJTJ
pDI l^SH in v. ijb is
country took
districts a stand against the syncretism pre-
vailing in the capital. What political consequences the
reform had we are not told, but they were seemingly a
drastic curtailment of the king's absolute powers.
Taken all in all, the accounts reveal a serious crisis in the
life of the Judean state, which did not
develop fully because
of the active intervention in politics of the Q 5?. And T^H
when we now go on add that king Joash, too, later
to
turned his attention to the Temple, 1 the whole thing looks,
does it not, like a little prelude to what took place after-
wards under Josiah? Even by this time the political tension
between Jerusalem with its court and officials "on the one
hand, and the peasant full-citizens of the country districts
on the other, was already considerable, and in the two
centuries following it can only have been still further
intensified.
The parallels between the two incidents compel attention
when we call to mind the part played by the peasant pro-
prietors in the time of Josiah. Josiah's father, Amon, fell
victim to a palace revolution, the background of which we
do not know. Here, too, the VD$5 E5? intervened. They
set aside the Jerusalem clique of traitors, that is, they
baulked their political programme (which is not known to
2
us) and raised Josiah to the throne. Now, it is manifestly
impossible to miss the connection between this elevation of
Josiah to the throne by the f p$H QS? and the whole policy,
including the reform, which this king pursued. Oest-
reicher and, after him, Procksch, have shown convincingly,
the latter in detail, that it was a foreign policy of emanci-
pation and national self-determination, and at the same
time one of internal renewal. 3 How definitely national inde-
pendence was the goal at which the T^O
&? aimed with
1 2
1 Kings 12.4 S. 2 Kings 21.24.
3 Proksch: Kon. Josia, festschrift fur TL Zabn, pp. 19 ft
65
Studies in Deuteronomy
66
The Provenance of Deuteronomy
It may be
objected that, in defining the provenance of
Deutetonomy as we have, we have taken no account of the
possibility that it might have originated in prophetic circles.
But seriously possible to consider the prophets, of any
is it
Especially Deut 18.15 f; but cp. also the picture of the suffering
1
THE PURPOSE OF
DEUTERONOMY
DEUTERONOMY purports to be Moses' farewell speech to
Israel. Now this which is addressed by Moses is, of
Israel
70
The Purpose of Deuteronomy
1
e.g., 6.18; 8.1; ii. 8 ff; 16.20; 19.8
2 M. Noth: In piam memoriam (A. ^ulmerinc^). Abbandlungen der
Herder-Gesellschaft md des Herder-Institutes %u Riga, 6 Bd., Nr. 3,
ff.
1938, pp. 127
7*
The Purpose of Deuteronomy
73
CHAPTER SEVEN
it merits without
qualification the rare and exalted title of
historical writing. On the one hand, all kinds of older
historical material have been gathered together and com-
bined into a thematic unity by means of a comprehensive
framework. On the other, the choice of material is obviously
restricted,and for all that lies beyond the theology of
history which is to be demonstrated, the reader is continually
directed to the sources. This is the exercise of the function of
the historian in the strictest sense of the word. It is cer-
74
The Deuteronomistic Theology of History
that in every respect a new section begins for the Deuteronomist with
Solomon, and it is only then that the histories come to their real
subject.
3
How
completely different is the way in which the author of the
history of the succession of David is able to let the reader see the
import of the political and human complications in which the king was
involved as a chain, of sombre necessity 1 von Rad: Archivfur ~Kultur-
geschichte, 1944, pp. 33 S.
75
Studies in Deuteronomy
kings.
1 of the kingdom of
Especially in the great epilogue to the fall
Israel in 2.
Kings 17.7 flf.
77
Studies in Deuteronomy
(i) Prophecy:
Fulfilment:
'
i
Kings Jahweh hath fulfilled the word that he
8.20:
1
Josh. 21.45; 2 3 I 4J J
Kings 8.56; 2 Kings 10.10.
2 word
Deut. 32.47: Jahweh's is not Vain'
7
The Deuteronomistic Theology of History
(2) Prophecy:
i
Kings 11.29 ff: Ahijah the Shilonite: ten tribes will
be taken from Solomon's kingdom, because he has
forsaken Jahweh, worshipped other gods and not
walked in Jahweh's ways.
Fulfilment:
i
Kings 12.15^: Rehoboam rends the kingdom, bring-
ing on the catastrophe: "but the cause was from Jahweh
n
to establish (2 |?n) the word which he spake
by Ahijah
the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat/
(3) Prophecy:
1
Kings 13 An unknown prophet: At Bethel a descen-
:
(4) Prophecy:
i
Kings 14.6 Ahijah the Shilonite: Jeroboam, whom
ff:
(5) Prophecy:
i
Kings 1 6. i ff: Jehu ben Hanani: Baasha, raised by
Jahweh to be prince over Israel, has walked in the ways
of Jeroboam and made Israel to sin, therefore it will
befall him in his house as befell the house of Jeroboam*
79
Studies in Deuteronomy
Fulfilment:
i
Kings 16.12: "Thus did Zimri destroy all the house
of Baasha, according to the word of Jahweh which he
had spoken to Baasha by the prophet Jehu/
(6) Prophecy:
Fulfilment:
i
Kings 16.34: Hiel rebuilds Jericho: 'At the cost of
his first-born Abiram did he lay the foundation, and at
the cost of his youngest Segub did he set up the gates,
according to the word of Jahweh which he had spoken
by Joshua the son of Nun/
(7) Prophecy:
i
Kings 22.17: Micaiah ben Imlah: Israel will be scat-
tered and without shepherds; let every man return to
his house in peace.
Fulfilment:
i
Kings 22.35 f: (without being specially pointed tfut
by the Deuteronomist) Ahab succumbs to his wound.
Every man to his house!
(8) Prophecy:
(9) Prophecy:
2 Kings 1.6 :
Elijah: Ahaziah of Judah will not recover;
he must die.
80
The Deuteronomistic Theology of History
Fulfilment:
2 Kings 1.17: Ahaziah died 'according to the word of
Jahweh that Elijah had spoken'.
(10) Prophecy:
2 Kings 21.10 ff: Unknown jptophets Because of
c
the
:
Fulfilment:
2 Kings 24.2: Jahweh summons the Chaldeans, etc.,
against Judah, 'according to the word of Jahweh which
he had spoken by his servants the prophets'. 2 Kings
23.26 is also important: in spite of Josiah's reform
(n) Prophecy:
2 Kings 22.15 ff: Huldah: Josiah will be gathered to
his fathers and not see die evil that comes upon
Jerusalem.
Fulfilment:
2 Kings 23.30: The body of Josiah, who had fallen at
81
Studies in Deuteronomy
accounts of Elijah, Elisha and Isaiah, as Noth does (pp. tit., p. 121),
seems very questionable to me. At least the literary question is then
completely different, for, contrary to what we find in the other accounts,
in the account of Ahijah the Deuteronomist's hand has had the decisive
part. Ahijah's prophecy now stands entirely within the context of the
specifically Deuteronomistic question as to Jahweh's plans with the
heirs to the throne and kingdom of David.
1
e.g. in i
Kings 14.10, 15; 16.4; 2 Kings 21.13.
2 i
Kings 14.11; 16.4; 21.24.
82
The Deuteronomistic Theology of History
1
i Kings 14.16:
'(Jahweh) shall give Israel up because of the sins
which Jeroboam committed and which he led Istael to commit.*
8?
Studies in Deuteronomy
not rend away all the kingdom; one tribe will I leave to thy
son, for David my servant's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake,
which I have chosen/
Ahijah the Shilonite says to Jeroboam in Kings 11.32:
i
"... but the one tribe shall remain to him for David my
84
The Deuteronomistic Theology of History
85
Studies in Deuteronomy
him with all his heart, doing only what was well-pleasing to
Jahweh ptn pn nfosft m'rte ^08
15.3 : David's heart was perfect with Jahweh.
22.2 :
Josiah walked wholly in the way of his ancestor
David.
This list, too, is wholly made up of sentences of the
Deuteronomist. The picture has only one conceivable
meaning: it is David, and not, as was often said, Solomon,
88
The Denteronomistic Theology of History
this strong tradition the Deuteronomist has
gone farthest
from the theological rock whence he was hewn, namely
1
Deuteronomy and the large place which the Deuterono-
;
mist gives this tradition in his work shows that the Deuter-
onomic tradition had not been able to assert itself in all its
purity. The Messianic cycle of conceptions, which was
obviously very strong, had forced its way into it and made
itself good. The
attempt so deliberately to set the whole
business of the temple to David's credit is truly astonishing.
Perhaps there was something which made it necessary for
the temple tradition with its comprehensive cultic content
to be brought still more under the aegis of David and so
gain fresh authorisation.
Finally, the Deuteronomist for his part was only being
true to the tradition given to him. There was given to him
as a principle creative in
history not only the word of
Jahweh's curse upon the transgressors of his command-
ments, as appears in Deuteronomy, but also the prophetic
it
c
1
According to the Deuteronomist's writing, the representative
concern for maintaining the relation between God and people lies* on
the king (Noth, op. #>., p. 137), a thoroughly undeuteronomic idea.
Studies in Deuteronomy
in the end? Was the word of grace after all the weaker
and was it finally driven from the field of history
coefficient
Noth in his essay has already cut the ground away from
verdicts which in the main are absolutely unfair to this
historical writing. Refusal to enter into the great problems
of internal politics is not to be explained simply as incapa-
city on the part of the Deuteronomist. What the Deuter-
onomist presents is really a history of the creative word of
Jahweh. What fascinated him was, we might say, the
functioning of the divine word in history.
2
And so, in
reality, there lies in this limitation a tremendous claim. The
decisive factor for Israel does not lie in the things which
ordinarily cause a stir in history, nor in the vast problems
inherent in history, but it lies in applying a few very simple
theological and prophetic fundamental axioms about the
nature of the divine word. And so it is only this word of
Jahweh which gives continuity and aspiration to the
phenomenon of history, which unites the varied and in-
dividual phenomena to form a whole in the sight of God.
Thus the Deuteronomist shows with exemplary validity what
saving history is in the Old Testament: that is, a process
of history which is formed by the word of Jahweh con-
tinually intervening in judgement and salvation and directed
towards a fulfilment.
c
1 The verses contain a note which allows for
hope in God's grace*.
L. Kohler: Theol. d. A.T., p. 77.
2
The Deuteronomist makes King Solomon give clear expression
to this relation of correspondence between word and history 'what thou
:
9
hast promised with thy mouth, thou hast fulfilled with thy hand, i Kings
8.24.
INDEX OF BIBLICAL REFERENCES
Bible R*f. Page
Exodus
14.14 48 n
*5-3 46 a
16.10
17.11 57*
19.24 14
20.2 ff 30
2O.24 38
2I.2-II 21
21.22-23 21
22.6-7 21
22.8 21
23.1 ff 18
23.21 38n
25.22 41 n
29.43 39 n
29.45 40 n
42 n
Leviticus
6.8 ff ii n
10.8 ff 11 n, 12 n
IO.IO f 24 n
13 12 n
14.33 ff 12 n
16 ii n
18 26
31
20 II ff'
21 33 f
21. 1 ff
22 34
22.2 ff
34
24 34
*5 34 f
25.23 16 n
93
Index of Biblical References
94
Index of Biblical Referents
95
Index of biblical References
BttkRef. Page Bible Ref. Page
i
Kings cont. 2 Chronicles
15. iff 57 n
16.7 ff 57 n
20.15 ff 57 n
32.7 ff 57 n
35-3 I4 ] n
Ezra
4>3 I4
4 8 . 14
4 I8 I4
Nehemiah
8.7 f 13
Psalms
-5 44 n
85 n
i-ai 88 n
J 3-3 47 n
30^7 38 n
.
Jeremiah
3.16 f 39 n
6.4 47 n
Ezekiel
1.4 4^ n
1.25 ff 42 n
8.4, 9, 3 42 n
10.4 42 n
23.4 44 n
43-4, 7 42 n
48.35 42 n
CD <
5m
126592