What are the main theological concerns within the Book of Deuteronomy?
The book of Deuteronomy is one of the most important and extensive books within the Old Testament. Its content is diverse and explicit, focussing specifically on the introduction of an apparently new and radical theology. One of its primary aims was not, as many OT books had done previously, to initiate and educate a minority of the Israelite people, rather its aim was to teach and manifest the theology of the nation to the nation1; and promulgate a comprehensible religion proposing unrivalled belief in and devotion to YHWH.
Of the theological concerns within the book of Deuteronomy, the doctrine of God is easily the most important, and is explicitly referred to throughout the book. The Deuteronomic writers were trying to initiate the people to a new line of thought, to destroy the superstitious and magical elements present within Israel2. That there were many rival sects within Israel at that time was of great importance for the foundation of Deuteronomic theology. It tried to clearly express the nation's belief in one God, in order to curb the encroaching sects and cults. Chapter 6:5 explicitly asserts that there is in Israel one single God, namely YHWH, and that the Israelites are now part of a monotheistic nation3. From this God emanates power and love, a manifestation of the uniqueness of the God of the Israelites. Various scholars have noted that this was the first assertion of 'practical monotheism' within the Bible. In proposing that the people were now governed by a single God, the Deuteronomists then proceeded to emphasize the superiority of their God with regard to the Gods that were worshipped by the surrounding nations4. The superiority of YHWH necessarily supposed that the Israelites were obliged to obey him, thus re-affirming the Ten Commandments given to Moses by YHWH on Mt.Horeb. YHWH's position was portrayed to the Israelites as one of supreme power, but also one of abounding love and compassion towards his followers. This in turn allowed Deuteronomy to make reference to the punishments applicable to those who did not believe in the God of the Israelites (7:1-5). Such punishments were seen to be wholly necessary for those who turned against YHWH and refused to obey him5.
The refutation of polytheistic beliefs within Deuteronomy naturally led to the rejection of any symbol or object being erected by the people in the place of YHWH (5:8; 4:1-40). The Deuteronomists assumed that YHWH would never fully reveal himself to the Israelites and therefore refuted the formulation of images on the earth that were erected and worshipped as YHWH. Such icons and images were seen to 'impugn the sovereignty of God', representative of a re-working of the unknowable image of God into a specific form to suit the needs of the Israelites6. Such actions were seen as blasphemous by the Deuteronomists, as well as blatantly disregarding the Ten Commandments (5:6-21).
At this point it may be worthwhile to note that Deuteronomy, in the face of the myriad of rival polytheistic sects and cults within the vicinity, developed a rather harsh attitude towards those who were attracted to such cults (12:2; 13:1-5, 6-10; 12:12-18 etc.)7. The theology surrounding YHWH and his insistence on obedience was seemingly formulated with theses sects in mind. The hostility apparent in some parts of the Book (7:1ff, Ch13) was therefore seemingly conditioned by the possible dissolution of Israel through increased interest in other religions. Deuteronomy therefore undertook the task of promulgating belief in YHWH and a monotheistic religion, disowning rival cults and threatening the Israelites with extreme punishment and anguish (again 7:1ff and Ch13). The Israelites were expected to follow YHWH and no other God.
Deuteronomic theology then proceeded to re-formulate the previous theology that was promulgated by the Priestly (P) tradition. P had asserted that YHWH dwelled within the sanctuaries of Israel, and that he was present at the sanctuary at all times8. There are many anthropomorphic references to YHWH throughout P, and many references to the immediate presence of YHWH within the sanctuaries (Num.17:28)9. Deuteronomy refuted such declarations, proposing a more abstract theology. Deuteronomy specifically denied the presence of YHWH as a being within numerous sanctuaries throughout Israel, maintaining that there was only one place in Israel where he was to ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
Deuteronomic theology then proceeded to re-formulate the previous theology that was promulgated by the Priestly (P) tradition. P had asserted that YHWH dwelled within the sanctuaries of Israel, and that he was present at the sanctuary at all times8. There are many anthropomorphic references to YHWH throughout P, and many references to the immediate presence of YHWH within the sanctuaries (Num.17:28)9. Deuteronomy refuted such declarations, proposing a more abstract theology. Deuteronomy specifically denied the presence of YHWH as a being within numerous sanctuaries throughout Israel, maintaining that there was only one place in Israel where he was to be invoked10. This theology then proceeded to assert that only the name of YHWH dwelled in the one sanctuary, not YHWH himself, for YHWH's true dwelling place is heaven. Deuteronomy was trying to re-formulate the belief and superstition associated with YHWH residing in the sanctuary, and replaced it with the directive that the name of YHWH within the sanctuary was indeed enough for the Israelite people11.
The Ark, which was also previously surrounded in superstition and magic too loses its 'ethereal' qualities. The Ark now is not the dwelling place of YHWH; it is simply where the stone tablets of the Law were laid to rest; the tablets that were given to Israel by YHWH12. According to Deuteronomy YHWH is not within the Ark; the is the only link to his presence are the tablets recording the Ten Commandments (10:1-5; 31:26)13.
It is plain to see that the primary function of Deuteronomy was to expel the superstition and magic that was in danger of encasing and overcoming the religion of Israel. According to the Deuteronomists, YHWH is no longer, and has never been, appeased by sacrifices and offerings. YHWH is appeased by the knowledge that his subjects are truly grateful for his love and mercy that he has shown to them (12:6,11,17,26; 23:21ff)14. The emphasis now is placed on 'thought, feeling and will'; through these attributes, Israel can relate to YHWH. In other words, the Israelites now are commanded to reach out to the transcendent and immanent (23:14; 16:11 etc.) God through invocation at the sanctuary, but also through their minds and through their hearts15. The theology of YHWH within Deuteronomy, whether it be a new and radical theology, or the re-assertion and re-formulation of forgotten beliefs 'at one stroke combines ideas of divine transcendence, incorporeality, invisibility and universal sovereignty....'; it initiates the Israelites into a form of belief that was to last for many generations and would have a profound effect upon their covenant with YHWH16.
The Deuteronomists were at pains to stress the importance of the Israelite nation with regard to the rest of the world. The relationship of YHWH to the people was unique to the nation and is expressed quite clearly throughout the book (4:37; 7:6; 10:15; 14:2). Deuteronomy was concerned with clarifying the theology surrounding the issue of 'election', and therefore within the book there is 'a nationalistic exclusiveness that pertains only to Deuteronomy'17. Israel was elected by YHWH as a nation that was above all others; it was elected not through a medium appointed by YHWH, but by YHWH himself (7:6-11;14:2)18. This therefore pre-supposed that the Israelite people had entered into an agreement with YHWH, where he would maintain their elevated status and they, in return, would obey his laws. Thus Deuteronomy could now tackle the theology of the Covenant.
Many scholars argue that the theology of the Covenant was first propositioned within Deuteronomy19. There are, however, many ancient texts that refer to berit (Covenant), suggesting that the usage and tradition of a 'covenant' may have emanated from Mespotamian and Hittite treaties; indeed chs.5 and 29 may be assimilated to these sources20. However, Deuteronomy clearly outlined the basic functions of a Covenant, i.e. to maintain a relationship between YHWH and his people. The Covenant symbolized a unique relationship, initiated by YHWH (7:8) but beyond the Israelite's powers of understanding (29:29). Craigie notes some important points apparent within the text, namely that the Covenant relationship was a relationship that was constantly renewed every time the Israelites worshipped or accepted YHWH as their God21. It presupposed an agreement between the two parties, that through YHWH's mercy and love the Israelites had been freed from 'human vassaldom' and, in return YHWH demanded obedience and worship22. The Israelites, if they fulfilled their obligation to YHWH, would be blessed and would be held above all other nations (4:25ff; 39:1ff). Craigie too makes reference to the role of history within the Covenant. The Deuteronomic writers maintained (according to Craigie) that one of the Covenant's functions was to remind the Israelites of their indebtedness to YHWH, for it was he who brought them out of slavery and made them the people of God. It served to remind them too that the future of the Covenant laid in their hands; it was up to them to fulfil their role to maintain the relationship between themselves and YHWH23.
A major theological concern within the Book of Deuteronomy was that of the function, derivative and covenental purpose of the land of the Israelites. D maintains that Israel could not lay any claim or 'divine right' to the land, it was simply made available by its previous inhabitants who did not live up to the required standards (9:4-5)24. The land of the Israelites, therefore, according to Deuteronomy, was only given by YHWH on the condition that it's inhabitants would obey him (4:25; 6:18; 8:1; 11:8f; 11:18-21; 16:20). Without the land of Israel there would be no Covenant with the Israelite's; it was a divine gift to the people and therefore played an important role in the initiation of the relationship with YHWH25.
Whilst in the land given by YHWH, the Israelites had to obey the rules, statutes and laws that YHWH had enforced. The demand for obedience is obviously a major theme throughout the book of Deuteronomy, and is seen by many scholars to be the foundation of all Deuteronomic theology26. Deuteronomy was in fact 'a lawcode in form' before editing took place, and its specific aim was to create a just, devout and obedient community27. The Law itself within Deuteronomy was not wholly legal, it took upon itself the express aim to teach the Israelites about YHWH:
'In Deuteronomy there is a change in which the casuistic laws have been divorced from their original context in the actual administration of justice and [have been] applied to a didactic purpose'.28
It is paramount therefore to understand that the Deuteronomists did not want the book to be viewed as a simple legal document. The superstition surrounding the law was expelled within Deuteronomy; any disputes were now taken to the priests rather than the elders of the tribe (17:8-13)29. Within Deuteronomy there are ethical and humanitarian codes deriving from the previous legal laws. Such examples are apparent in the passages 15:12-18 (regarding treatment of slaves) and 24:14ff (treatment of the poor)30. These specific laws were passed in order to create or maintain a certain degree of moral order within the Israelite camp; they were carried out to fulfil the Covenant and because YHWH demanded it (15:12). Chapter 27 leaves the Israelites in no doubt whatsoever as to the limits of YHWH's tolerance. The list of prohibitions were simply included to remind the Israelites of their obligation to YHWH31. The Law therefore was to the Israelites another means of fulfilling and renewing the Covenant between themselves and YHWH.
We have already briefly highlighted the function of worship within the sanctuary and its function within Israel's religion. However. it is important to develop this theological concern a little further. Deuteronomy is the only book within the OT to develop the function of worship to such an extent that it only reached greater theological understanding and refinement within the NT32. Worship, for the Deuteronomists, was the sole activity that held the Israelite nation together; it was indispensable for the bonding of the nation under YHWH. Previous to the Book of Deuteronomy, worship was consistently seen as a performance of many superstitious and magical rites by one of the elders of the tribe. Failing that, it involved only the priests and the elders, and excluded the majority of the Israelites on the premise that it was beyond their understanding. Deuteronomy reverses this trend, focusing on the corporate nation; including all Israelites and all priests. It was now to be carried out at a specific place; a place where people would bring offerings (12:7) not to appease YHWH, but to offer thanks and gratitude; 'Deuteronomy consistently and carefully spiritualises and internalises the understanding of worship'33. Deuteronomy emphasises the importance of responding internally to YHWH in order to be grateful to him; the magicality of worship was now defeated, and replaced by a more spiritual form of worship; a form intended to realise the possibility of worshipping YHWH from the inside and in doing do making the worship on the outside even more significant.
Another concern within the Book of Deuteronomy is the idea of Kingship and brotherhood. 17:14 explicitly deals with kingship, reflecting the concept of divine election within Israel. The King, according to Deuteronomy, is not to be regarded as a member set apart from the rest of the tribe; a relation of YHWH that is above the tribe with regard to qualities and holiness. The King is to be seen as a brother of each Israelite, and is of equal standing. Admittedly, the notion of Kingship, along with the theology of the Land reveals the experiences and history of the Israelites, but now the King is to be regarded not as a demi-god, but as an elected member through which the Israelite nation is guided towards YHWH34. The King is an Israelite whose purpose is to teach the people about YHWH and the unique relationship they have with him. The notion of brotherhood (cf 2:26; 3:18,20; 10:9; 15:3,7,9,11 etc.) promotes a concept of equality at all levels amongst the Israelites35. Throughout the tribe each Israelite is regard everyone as 'blood brothers', to act towards them as they would towards their relations. In proposing such a theology, Deuteronomy does in fact promote the principle of love. This principle is to govern the relationship between men, but also the relationship between Israel and YHWH. This therefore fulfils the Commandments (5:6-21), in which the underlying concept is also one of love36. Deuteronomy succeeds in promulgating a new set of ethical beliefs and a new moral code which would in turn regulate the Israelites' life in a profound way.
In summation, the main theological concerns within the Book of Deuteronomy are that of God, Land, Election and Covenant, Law and Worship. All concerns are expressed with ultimate aim of stressing the importance of obedience to YHWH. Although Deuteronomy at times exudes an air of harshness (7:1ff) and sometimes is demanding, scholars still maintain that the teachings of Deuteronomy were more suppositional than propositional. It was concerned with maintaining and renewing the relationship between the Israelites and YHWH, whilst at the same time spiritualising the law and demythologizing the religion as a whole. The religion of the Israelites, after the writing of Deuteronomy, was profoundly changed and made more accessible; the whole nation was now able to understand and believe in its content - YHWH was now accessible to all.
Bibliography
R.E.Clements, Deuteronomy, (OT Guides; JSOT: 1989)
G.von Rad, Old Testament Theology, vol.1 (SCM: 1965)
G.von Rad, Deuteronomy, (SCM: 1966)
R.E.Clements, God's Chosen People, (SCM: 1968)
A.D.H.Mayes, Deuteronomy, (MMS: 1979)
M.Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School,(Oxford University Press: 1972)
P.C.Craigie, Deuteronomy, (William B. Eerdmans, 1976)
The Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed.R.E.Brown, J.A.Fitzmyer, R.E.Murphy, (Geoffrey Chapman: 1970)
J.G.McConville, Law and Theology in Deuteronomy, (JSOT Press: 1984)
R.E.Clements, Deuteronomy, p49
2 ibid., p50
3 ibid., p51
4 ibid., p51
5 A.D.H.Mayes, Deuteronomy, p58
6 R.E.Clements, God's Chosen People, p51ff
7 A.D.H.Mayes, Deuteronomy, p58
8 M.Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School, p191ff
9 ibid., p191ff
0 R.E.Clements, Deuteronomy, p53
1 M.Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School, p193
2 G.von Rad, Studies in Deuteronomy, p40
3 R.E.Clements, Deuteronomy, p54
4 A.D.H.Mayes, Deuteronomy, p58ff
5 G.von Rad, Studies in Deuteronomy, p43
6 R.E.Clements, Deuteronomy, p53
7 A.D.H.Mayes, Deuteronomy, p63
8 R.E.Clements, Deuteronomy, p57
9 A.D.H.Mayes, Deuteronomy, p66
20 ibid., p58
21 P.C.Craigie, Deuteronomy, p37
22 ibid., p37f
23 ibid., p38ff
24 R.E.Clements, God's Chosen People, p51
25 J.G.McConville, Law and Theology in Deuteronomy, p11
26 ibid., p18
27 A.D.H.Mayes, Deuteronomy, p71
28 ibid., p71/2
29 R.E.Clements, Deuteronomy, p64
30 J.G.McConville, Law and Theology in Deuteronomy, p18
31 A.D.H.Mayes, Deuteronomy, p74
32 R.E.Clements, Deuteronomy, p60
33 ibid., p61
34 ibid., p60ff
35 J.G.McConville, Law and Theology in Deuteronomy, p19ff
36 P.C.Craigie, Deuteronomy, p42