“The Law” (tôrâ) is the title for a five-book corpus. Some would explain the division into five books as simply due to practical necessity, for a very long scroll would be unwieldy to use. This approach is questionable, and Rolf Rendtorff insists that each of the five books has an individual character and that their division is not arbitrary.

The name “Torah” (tôrâ) does not have to suggest that Genesis to Deuteronomy contains nothing but legislation for the nation of Israel, though it does highlight the Sinaitic didactic portions (e.g., Ex. 20–23; Leviticus; Num. 1–9) that are given a central position in the Pentateuchal corpus. The usual English rendering of the word “law” has a legalistic ring that is not present in the underlying Hebrew word, which is closer to “instruction.” The word Torah, first used to designate Deuteronomy (e.g., Josh. 1:8; 8:31), was later reapplied to the Pentateuch as a whole (e.g., Ezra 6:18; Neh. 8:1). This suggests that all five books should be read through the lens provided by Deuteronomy, a book that emphasizes God’s love for Israel and the love response required in return (6:4–5).

Seeing that Deuteronomy is a highly theological book, it could be argued that it should set the tone for a convincing biblical-theological evaluation of the Old Testament.

Looking in the other direction, the strategic position of Deuteronomy suggests that it is the bridge between the Pentateuch and the rest of the Old Testament. Its pervasive influence is not due to its canonical location, but its placement does prompt the reader to look for and to discover its influence.

• The depiction of the conquest in Joshua picks up certain themes from Deuteronomy, themes such as the land, the religious danger posed by Canaanite culture, instructions on warfare, and tribal unity.

• The later history of the turbulent relationship between kings and prophets recounted in Samuel and Kings elevates in importance the passages in Deuteronomy that deal with the offices of king (17:14–20) and prophet (18:15–22), though there is no hint in Deuteronomy that the incumbents in these two offices will clash.

• It is no surprise that themes and modes of expression in the speeches of Moses are reused in the proclamations of later prophets, for Moses is the paradigm for the later prophetic office (18:15, 18).

• Many links can be found between Deuteronomy and the wisdom thinking exemplified in Proverbs (e.g., the “fear of the Lord” ethic).

The key point is that the final position of Deuteronomy in the Pentateuch suggests a way of reading the Pentateuch as a whole as lessons for future generations, and encourages the search and discovery of various kinds of inner-biblical connections.

The Pentateuch Book by book#

The average Bible reader is probably aware of this five-book grouping but has not thought about how the five books might be connected or interact.

• Genesis is a family history, but the emphasis on progeny in Genesis prepares the reader for the family to become a great nation (“the Israelites”) in the opening chapter of Exodus (1:7).

• The Sinai events are preceded and succeeded by an account of the wilderness wanderings, which lead the people from Egypt to Sinai and from Sinai to the edge of the promised land (Ex. 15–18; Num. 10–21).

• Leviticus has the same setting as the book of Exodus (Sinai), but from Leviticus 1:1 onwards, the Lord speaks to Moses from the tent of meeting and no longer from the top of the mountain.

• Dennis Olson proposes that Numbers has a bipartite structure and that there is a shift of focus from the old generation, who experienced the exodus and Sinai events (Num. 1–25), to the new generation, who replaced the old in the desert forty years later (Num. 26–36).

• There is an implied ethic based on the difference between the disobedience of the old generation and the (hoped-for) obedience of the new. Deuteronomy picks this up and makes homiletical use of the idea of successive generations.

Genesis#

Genesis is a book of origins, the origin of the world and of Israel, and it is scarcely possible to understand the rest of the Bible without a knowledge of this book. The heavens and the earth spring into being due to the sovereign word of the Creator. God saw all that he had made and declared that “it was very good” (Gen. 1:31). Here, “good” means beneficial for humanity, as made clear in 2:9 (“good for food”), and 1:31 and 50:20 form an inclusio around the book of Genesis as a whole, which is about human flourishing due to the providential care of the Creator God.

It is important to view Genesis as a unified work. The book begins with eleven chapters that tell of the creation of the world but then recount how sin dreadfully changed and perverted that world. It is a tale of sin’s rampant increase and the judgment and misery it produced. Chapters 12–50 tell the story of the family history of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. The two blocks of material that together make up the book are essentially related.

The stories of the patriarchs, beginning with Abram’s obedience to God’s command to leave his homeland (bound for Canaan), reverse the theme of expulsion, alienation, and scattering that marks human experience in chapters 1–11.

The toledot formula (“This is the history of.”) is followed by either a genealogy or a narrative. A narrative is introduced in 2:4, 6:9, 11:27, 25:19, and 37:2, which are the five major movements into which the storyline of the book is subdivided. The implication of this repeated formula is the continuity of the history, which must not be threatened by overemphasizing divisions, for example, wanting to separate off the primeval history (chs. 1–11) from what follows. This also suggests a two-part division of primeval history, namely, the Adamic age (Gen. 2:4–6:8) and the Noahic age (6:9–11:26), with Noah depicted as a second Adam figure when the human race starts afresh after the flood. The same can be said of Abraham, for in his case, likewise, God makes a new beginning with one man and his family. The ultimate second Adam is, of course, Jesus Christ, the new head of the human race, who repairs the damage done by the transgression of the first Adam (Rom. 5:12–21).

The Themes of Genesis#

The main themes of Genesis are the promises to Abraham (land, blessing, and offspring), covenant, and the universal scope of God’s salvation that aims to repair the created order.

After dealing with world events, one individual is chosen by God (ch. 12). Three promises are made by God to Abram: he is promised descendants, a land, and worldwide blessing (12:1–3, 7). Due to human sin, the world is under God’s curse (mentioned five times [3:14, 17; 4:11; 5:29; 9:25]), but the emphasis at the start of chapter 12 is on blessing, mentioned five times in its first three verses.

Here is the gospel in the Old Testament, for Paul writes that the Scripture “preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, ‘In you shall all the nations be blessed’” (Gal. 3:8). It is made clear that God alone has the answer to the problem of human sin.

The three themes of land, blessing, and offspring are introduced in the opening section of the book (Gen. 1:1–2:3). They each receive their initial sounding in the primeval history (chs. 1–11) and fuller development in the ensuing chapters, such that the promises to the patriarchs are to be read as reaffirming the primal divine intentions for humanity. As the book progresses,

• The word “land” (’ereṣ) shifts in meaning from “the earth” to the land of promise, Canaan;

• Divine “blessing” that at first shows itself in fertility and procreation becomes the blessing to come to the world through Abraham.

• The theme of “offspring” (zera’) may be less noticeable in Genesis 1 but is found in references to “plants yielding seed (zera’)” and “fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed (zera’ )” (1:11–12). This theme leads to the patriarchal promise of offspring

Throughout Genesis, care is taken to trace the line of descent, and hence the recording of the genealogies from Adam to Noah (ch. 5), and from Noah’s son, Shem, to Abram (ch. 11). On the other hand, humanity seems bent on self-destruction, for Cain kills his brother (4:8), Lamech slays a mere youth (4:23), and the earth is “filled with violence” (6:11). The wives of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob each had trouble in bearing children (11:30; 25:21; 29:31), and Sarah, Rebekah, and Rachel give birth due only to divine intervention (21:1; 25:21; 30:22). The continuation of the line of Abraham is wholly due to God’s enabling.

Genesis 12–50 traces the three divine promises through the line of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. All the events in the lives of the four patriarchs in one way or another deal with one or more of the promises about descendants, land, and blessing. It is, however, the theme of descendants that dominates. A series of divine pronouncements helps give unity to Genesis.

• The promises made to Abram at the outset of his story (12:1–3) are repeated to him on five other occasions and appear at crucial junctures in the stories of Isaac (26:2–4) and Jacob (28:13–14; 35:9–12).

• Through Jacob they are connected with the story of Joseph (46:1–4).

• The blessing of God passes down to younger sons—Isaac, Jacob, and Judah—defying social convention, and in so doing foregrounds the key element of divine choice in the train of events.

Genesis, however, is not to be viewed as merely an introduction to Exodus and the rest of the Pentateuch. Though the author of Genesis does aim to prepare readers for the exodus deliverance (see, e.g., Jacob’s [49:28–33] and Joseph’s last words [50:24–26]), Genesis is a literary unit, having its own themes and its own beginning, middle, and end.

The story of Joseph occupies a disproportionately large space in Genesis and functions as the completion of everything preceding it. In these chapters, we witness a return to universalism. The famine threatens the survival not only of Egypt, and of the family of Jacob, but of the whole earth (41:57). As anticipated in the divine promises, the family of Abraham, in the person of Joseph, brings blessing to the nations (39:5), and Joseph embodies the human ideal as summed up by Pharaoh: “Can we find a man like this, in whom is the Spirit of God?” (41:38). The whole earth is saved from extinction and blessed through Joseph, who is indwelt by the Spirit who hovered over the waters at the dawn of creation (1:2). The life-giving Spirit of God is here working through Joseph to sustain life on earth (cf. Ezek. 37:14; Ps. 104:30).

The first mention of the actual word “covenant” in the Bible is in the context of God’s instructions to Noah about preparing for the flood (Gen. 6:18), and what is anticipated (“I will establish my covenant with you”) is fulfilled in Genesis 9, when God says to Noah, “I now establish my covenant with you” (9:9). It takes the form of a unilateral decree (“my covenant”), God declaring that the earth and its creatures will “never again” be destroyed by floodwaters (9:9–11, 15). The covenant is not made with Noah alone but with all living creatures. The Adamic connection is shown by the reissued and renovated Adamic charge given to Noah and his sons in 9:1–7, mentioning propagation, rule over the animal kingdom, food, and the image of God (cf. 1:28–30). These similarities are no evidence of a covenant in Genesis 1, for a covenant was not needed in the pre-sin situation.

A covenant does not initiate a relationship; rather, it presupposes such a relationship (God’s past dealings with Noah) and confirms it by giving it quasi-legal backing. This covenant provides formal support for the divine resolution to ensure that life on earth will be sustained and will flourish (Gen. 8:21–22). The sign of the covenant is the bow (9:12–13), the arch of which may imitate the domed firmament that holds back the waters from above (7:11; 8:2); it is first of all a sign for God (“I will see it”), the bow reminding him of his promise and eliminating the possibility of divine forgetfulness, even though that is an impossible possibility.

God promises that he will “remember” his covenant (9:15, 16), and the onus is on what God obligates himself to do in a largely one-sided arrangement. However, in a secondary sense the sign of the bow is also for humanity, for in their fallen state, humans find it hard to trust in God and too easily fear that God might forget what he has promised.

The two-part charge to Abram (Gen. 12:1–3) consists of two parallel segments, each starting with an imperative (“Go…, and be a blessing”), followed by a statement of divine purpose (“so that I may make you a great nation… so that I may bless those who bless you”), and a final statement of intended result (12:3b: “thus, by means of you, all the families of the earth will be blessed”) (our translations).

• In the first segment (12:1–2a), the focus is the promise of nationhood, contingent on Abram’s obedience to the command to leave his homeland.

• In the second segment (12:2b–3a), the theme is the blessing of the world’s families through the one blessed family.

Coming after a silence of some thirteen years (17:1; cf. 16:16), chapter 17 is marked as especially significant. The key promise is that “nations” and “kings” (17:4–6, 16, 20 [“princes”]) will spring from (renamed) Abraham and Sarah.

In 17:2, the covenant is spoken of using the future tense (“and I will make my covenant”) and 22:15–18 is to be understood as the making of that promised covenant.

Chapter 17 stresses the obligations of Abraham (17:1), filled out by the instructions concerning circumcision (17:9–14), underlining the permanent character of the “everlasting covenant” (17:7, 13, 19). The expression “my covenant” (17:2, 4, 7, 10, 13, 19, 21) reflects the unilateral nature of this covenant as one imposed on the patriarch with terms devised by God alone. By means of the Akedah (“binding”) incident of chapter 22, Abraham is subjected to the ultimate test of the covenant obligation laid upon him in 17:1, and with the test passed with flying colors, the eternal covenant announced in chapter 17 is at last established (22:16–18).

The covenants with Abram/Abraham have both conditional and unconditional elements.

• The unconditional nature of the promises is stressed in chapter 15, with the obligation distinctly one-sided: God alone (represented by the flaming torch) passes between the divided animals (Gen. 15:17), this being an enacted self-curse by God of what will happen to him if he fails to do as obligated (15:5, 18–21), though the faith response made by Abraham (15:6) shows that there is a conditional element as well.

• In chapter 17, the “as for you” element is more prominent (vv. 9–14) but comes only after God has made his covenant commitment (vv. 2–8), marking the requirement of circumcision as a response to this gracious initiative.

The reason God gives for ratifying this covenant is the demonstration of Abraham’s obedience (22:18, “because you have obeyed my voice”), so that the required response is fidelity to the covenant commands.

The Ethics of Genesis#

Formulaic language is used in Genesis 1 to delineate the sequence of divine generative acts in seven paragraphs, each corresponding to one of the six days of God’s active work and the culminating seventh day (2:1–3). Whether the Hebrew word bārā’ (“to create”) technically means creatio ex nihilo or not, it must mean that in 1:1, given that what is created (“the heavens and the earth”) encompasses all that is. The use of the term in 1:21 for the creating of the first living creatures and in 1:27 (three times) for the creating of humanity supports the meaning “to make something special,” with human beings the most special creatures of all. The first week climaxes in the Sabbath day (2:1–3), with God ceasing from his work. Coming soon after the statement that humans are made in the image of God (1:27), God resting on the seventh day is a model that humans are meant to follow.

What “rest” means is pictured in the idyllic garden of Eden (Gen. 2:4–25), where the work assigned to humans would have been free of the stress, strain, and frustration that often spoil our enjoyment of work.

The divine command for humanity to be fruitful and multiply (Gen. 1:28) is picked up in the genealogies of chapters 5 and 11, where it is repeatedly stated that so-and-so “had other sons and daughters,” and the patriarchs are repeatedly assured that they will have many descendants (e.g., 13:16; 15:5). By divine appointment, humans rule as God’s vice-regents on earth (1:26; 9:2), and this foreshadows the promise that there will be kings among Abraham’s descendants (cf. 17:6, 16) and, more specifically, that “the scepter shall not depart from Judah” (49:10). We cannot blame the Bible for the ecological crisis, though God made provision for food (1:29–30; 9:3), there are several famines in the book (12:10; 26:1; 43:1), but God sent Joseph to Egypt to keep many alive (45:5; 50:20). Adam’s disobedience made human life precarious (3:17–19), but the promise to the patriarchs offers hope of an eventual return to the plenteous provision of Eden.

Genesis 1:28 views human procreation positively (“Be fruitful and multiply”), but in chapter 2 the focus is on the relationship between husband and wife, not the production of children (2:18–25). The woman is created to meet the man’s need of companionship, and to be a helper “matching him”, which is perhaps the symbolism behind the taking of woman from his “rib/side.” The rest of Genesis demonstrates that monogamy is God’s original design, seeing that polygamy produces strife in marriages—between Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar (ch. 16); and between Jacob, Leah, and Rachel (chs. 29–30). The ideal marriage in Genesis 2 is soon spoiled by the entrance of sin, with the woman usurping the initiative (3:6), and the harmony between the two becoming blame-shifting (3:12). There is also the prospect of long-term conflict, in part resulting from the woman’s frustrated desire to rule over her husband (3:16; cf. 4:7). Sarah (Gen. 16) and Rebekah (Gen. 27) are examples of wives who try to rule their husbands, though Abraham and Jacob are hardly exemplary husbands. The pain of childbirth (3:16) is illustrated in the agonies of Rebekah (25:22) and Rachel (35:16–19).

It is not just the primeval history that displays a universalistic concern (e.g., the Table of the Nations in ch. 10), for the patriarchal stories provide details of the links of the family of Abraham (and so of later Israel) with its near-neighbors, notably Moab and Ammon (19:30–38), the Ishmaelites (25:12–18), the Philistines (21:22–34), the Hittites (ch. 23), the Edomites (ch. 36), the Hivites (ch. 34), the Canaanites (ch. 38), and the Egyptians (chs. 39–50). The stories are not anti-Canaanite. For the most part, the family’s relationship with foreign peoples is portrayed positively; sometimes foreigners are more noble than God’s own people (e.g., 12:18; 20:9); and Egypt and the family of Jacob are indebted to each other for their survival.

Genesis in the Storyline of Scripture#

The work of creation by an omnipotent God proceeds by means of performative speech, “And God said,…” (Gen. 1:3, 6, 9, etc.). Genesis 1 provides the archetype of the command-fulfillment pattern, such as seen in other sanctuary-building accounts, particularly the making of the ark (6:13–22), in which God commands and Noah obeys, and the erection of the tabernacle (Ex. 39:32–43), wherein Moses is the one who carries out God’s instructions.

The Old Testament describes a God who speaks, acts, and feels as if he were embodied, though the Old Testament theophanies (appearances of God) do not amount to incarnation. This could suggest (but does not prove) that the incarnation was part of God’s plan from the beginning, whether or not sin arose to spoil creation. Moreover, the ten injunctions uttered by God (“And God said,…”) may anticipate the Decalogue (Ten Words) of Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5, and establish God’s credentials as ruler and legislator of a universal kingdom.

The narrative in Genesis 2 is not, as often supposed, a second creation account, but provides a different and complementary vantage point and is human-centered in a way that Genesis 1 is not. It describes the planting of a garden near the top of the world mountain from which the headwaters of a great river flow and divide into four rivers that fructify the four corners of the earth (2:10–14). Later, this typology of the mountain sanctuary will be taken up and applied to Sinai and Zion. The man is placed in the garden “to work it and keep it” (2:15 ESV), a reference to agricultural labor, but the two verbs also have the priestly or Levitical nuances of serving and guarding within God’s sanctuary (cf. Num. 3:7–8; 8:26; 18:5–6), such that the garden is a kind of inner sanctum. The word “garden” (gan) denotes an area fenced off by a wall or hedge (e.g., Jer. 39:4; Neh. 3:15). In the ancient Near East, parks of trees were planted by and for kings (Ezek. 31:8; Est. 7:7; Eccles. 2:4–6), so here is a royal enclosure, with the first man depicted as creation’s king.

With regard to “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Gen. 2:9, 17), “knowing good and evil” refers to the ability to discern good and evil in a judicial situation and is a divine prerogative (3:5). Genesis 3, therefore, concerns moral autonomy, our first parents sinfully taking upon themselves the responsibility of trying to determine whether something is right for them or not. In other words, the man and the woman decide to be self-legislating. The serpent’s prediction that their eyes would be opened is ironically fulfilled (Gen. 3:5), but what the couple see is that they are naked (before God; 3:7), and their covering up and hiding among the trees (3:8) indicates the spoiling of their relationship with God. Their expulsion from Eden, that is entered (and exited) from the east (3:24), shows its sanctuary character (cf. Ezek. 47:1), as does the placing of the guardian cherubim at the entrance (cf. Ex. 25:18–22; 26:1; 1 Kings 6:23–29).

The creating of humans takes place on the sixth day (Gen. 1:24–31), such that we share our birthday with the animals, and so we have some kind of kinship with them, though humanity is far more than a highly successful and adaptable mammal. At this point, what has been a terse account becomes prolix, and the divine self-exhortation in 1:26 before taking the step of creating “male and female” (1:27) is a way of underlining the importance of what is about to be done (cf. 3:22; 11:7). The use of the first-person plural (“Let us make man”) is intriguing and may be phrased the way it is because God is stirring himself up, so to speak, to act in a decisive way; or it may be viewed as the voicing of God’s plan in council (cf. Isa. 6:1–3, 8; 1 Kings 22:19–22), God speaking with his (angelic) courtiers (though angels are not as such mentioned in Genesis 1), or God speaking to his Spirit, who is mentioned in 1:2—and the close association of God and his Spirit is part of the foundation for the Trinity laid by the Old Testament but only clearly revealed in the New Testament.

The image/likeness of God in 1:27 is not defined—hence the argument by scholars over what the terms may refer to—but its purpose is made clear: “that they may have dominion…” (v.28 [our translation]; the Hebrew syntax expresses purpose), so that the exercising of dominion is not the image as such. Male and female both share the image (Gen. 1:27: “male and female he created them”). As Rosner explains, personal identity is not autonomous; rather, our relationships - especially our relationship with God—help us to discover our true selves.

Exodus#

The promise to Abraham of numerous offspring has been ostensibly fulfilled, for the family has become a nation (Ex. 1:7), but Israel is enslaved (ch. 1). Moses is rescued from the waters of the Nile (2:1–10), and through Moses God brings his people safely through the waters of the Red Sea (ch. 14). What would later become Johannine terminology of faith/signs punctuates the narrative (Ex. 4:1, 8, 9, 30, 31) and finds a climax in 14:31 (“Israel saw the great work which the Lord did against the Egyptians, and the people feared the Lord and they believed in the Lord and in his servant Moses”).

The sequence of plagues reaches a high point with the last and worst of the plagues at the Passover (chs. 11–13)—something anticipated as early as 4:22–23—and the death of the Egyptian firstborn forces Pharaoh to release the Israelites. The Red Sea crossing belongs to the same literary section as the plagues, given the similar motifs in chapter 14: Pharaoh’s heart was hardened (14:4a); YHWH’s aim is that “the Egyptians shall know that I am YHWH” (14:4b); and Moses stretches out his hand (14:16, 26).

The formula “Let my people go, that they may serve me” (Ex. 7:16; 8:1, 20; 9:1) speaks of the need for the Hebrews to formalize their relationship with YHWH by serving him through offering sacrifices (5:17; 8:25–28).

At the burning bush, Moses is commanded not to come any closer and to remove his sandals, since it is holy ground (3:5). The theophanic display of fire makes the place God’s sanctuary (cf. Isa. 60:13: “the place of my sanctuary” = “the place of my feet”), and Moses is a quasi-priest in Exodus 3. Israelite priests ministered (apparently) with bare feet, for there is no mention of footwear in the priestly wardrobe (Ex. 28). The immediate goal of the divine rescue is the cultic gathering of the people at “the mountain of God” where the call of Moses was given (3:12: “you [plural] shall serve God on this mountain”). The hard service rendered to Pharaoh (1:13–14; the root ‘bd is used five times) is replaced by their service of God in the tabernacle cult (chs. 25–40).

The Themes of Exodus#

The main themes of Exodus are the revelation of God’s name, his kingship (God as rescuer and ruler), his sanctuary, and Israel as the corporate priest-king.

The divine self-identification as “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” in 3:6 recalls 2:24. What God is doing in heaven (he is concerned for his suffering people), he now reveals on earth. Moses is commissioned to act as God’s messenger (ambassador) from king to king (“I will send you to Pharaoh”). Moses pretends not to be the right man for the job (3:11) but receives God’s assurance: “I will be with you” (3:12). Moses requests to know the name of the God who sends him on this difficult mission.

God initially evades the question (3:14), for the main use of the idem per idem formula is to be vague, defining a thing by itself: “I am who I am” (cf. Gen. 43:14; Ex. 33:19). God hints at the divine name by punning on the verb “to be” (root hyh), and the name is given only in Exodus 3:15, namely, the divine tetragrammaton, the four sacred letters (YHWH), with the first consonant (yod) indicating that it is a third-person imperfective name. The name recalls the promise of 3:12, “I will be with you” (cf. 4:12, 15), God’s characteristic of being with his people (cf. Lev. 26:12).

Exodus 15 is pivotal in the structuring of the book as a whole. The first part of the Song of the Sea (15:1b–12) provides a theological commentary on the deliverance already effected (chs. 1–14) and the second part (15:13–18) anticipates the journey to Sinai and the land. The climax of the song is the acclamation of God’s eternal kingship (15:18: “The Lord will reign forever and ever”). There is no difficulty in positing a theology of God’s kingship at this early stage and before Israel had its own experience of a king (Saul, David, etc.), for the Israelites had suffered under a king (1:8, 15, 17, 18; 2:23; 3:18), but by his defeat of Pharaoh and his forces at the sea, YHWH is demonstrated to be Israel’s King.

The designation of the people of Israel as “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” in Exodus 19:6 is a crux interpretum. These important words form the climax of a brief divine declaration given to Moses (19:4–6a), which he is twice instructed to relay to the people of Israel on his descent from Mount Sinai (19:3b, 6b), and the obedience of Moses (19:7), the positive response by the people (19:8a), and the communication of this fact to YHWH (19:8b) are all recorded, indicating the importance of the substance of this divine communication, as does its elevated poetic style (e.g., parallelism, most importantly “kingdom of priests//holy nation”) and the metaphor of God carrying his people on eagles’ wings (19:4).

• Verse 4 provides a summary of the exodus and wilderness experience from the perspective of divine action and initiative, with Israel pictured as caught up to heaven as the invited guests of God (“and brought you to myself”).

• Verses 5–6a have the structure of a conditional sentence, with verse 5a as the protasis (“Now, if [’im] you will pay heed to my voice, and keep my covenant”) and the apodosis commencing at verse 5b (“then you will be mine…”)

• The protasis is a declaration requiring a response, which comes in verse 8a with the pledged commitment by the people.

The reference to “my covenant” anticipates the new Sinai arrangement inaugurated in Exodus 24, just as the mention of “my covenant” in Genesis 6:18 looks forward to 9:8–17. The people agree to heed whatever YHWH may subsequently utter, and this provides the basis for the detailed instructions of Exodus 20–23.

The covenant people are described by God as “my own possession” (sĕgullâ). The secular usage of this term refers to the personal treasure of the king (e.g., 1 Chron. 29:3; Eccles. 2:8), but its common use in the Hebrew Bible is as a metaphorical designation of Israel as the special possession of the divine king (Deut. 7:6; 14:2; 26:18; Mal. 3:17; Ps. 135:4), enjoying a status that is unique among the nations. The Israelites will uniquely belong to God in the capacity of “a kingship of priests and a holy nation.” This is not a reference to an Israelite ruling class (its cultic officials) but a metaphorical designation of all Israel as those who in some way have attributes of kingship in an active sense and are also identified as priests. In other words, this is an honorific democratization of the notions of both royalty and priesthood.

As to the meaning of Israel being a king, Davies finds an analogy in ancient Near Eastern accounts of a royal or divine grant of kingly authority. By analogy, Israel will be a corporate monarch under the patronage of YHWH. Davies views the position as strictly honorific, with the associated grant of priesthood fitting Israel to participate in the royal court of the divine king (which is what the cult and its procedures symbolized). The combination of kingly and priestly images in 19:6 reflects a cultural background in which the two functions were connected (e.g., the priest-king Melchizedek [Gen. 14:18]). The rest of Exodus 19 is taken up with preparations to ready the Israelites to encounter YHWH (e.g., washing clothes in vv. 10 and 14). The encounter at Sinai was anticipated as early as 3:12 (“you [plural] shall serve God on this mountain”), and the meeting with God is one in which the people as a whole, not just Moses, participate.

The washing and waiting (three days) in chapter 19 is analogous to the rite of passage in Leviticus 8 for the ordination of priests (cf. Lev. 8:6, 33, 35), and the objective of all the preparations of chapter 19 is for Israel “to meet God” (Ex. 19:17), but all that happens is a renewal of earlier warnings (19:21–25). Matters are picked up in the events of chapter 24, which relate explicitly to the “covenant” that God is making with Israel (24:7–8; cf. 19:5). In 24:1–2, Moses and his associates are summoned to ascend and approach God, and 24:9–11 recounts the anticipated ascent and vision of God and the meal in his presence, and between these verses, 24:3–8 describes the covenant ritual.

In Exodus 24:1–2, we have an echo of the earlier invitation given by YHWH to Moses and Aaron (19:24), but now broadened to include two sons of Aaron and “seventy of the elders of Israel,” representing the people as a whole (cf. Num. 11:16–17, 24). The blood manipulation rite in Exodus 24:6–8, sprinkling blood on the altar (representing YHWH?) and on the people, binds the covenant partners together, and between these two aspects of the blood ritual is the reading of “the Book of the Covenant” (cf. 24:4), which must be the Decalogue, the Covenant Code, or some other summary of Israel’s obligations. The affirmative response of the people in 19:8 is echoed with minimal change in 24:3 and 7, but the intervening four chapters enable this to be a well-informed commitment. It is to be understood as an explicit response to the condition laid down in 19:5 (“if you will . . . obey”), and the sprinkling of the blood on the people is a kind of priestly inauguration (cf. Ex. 29:20–21; Lev. 8:23–24, 30). In other words, the sacrifices that take place at the base of the mountain are the rites by which Israel is consecrated to be a “kingdom of priests” to YHWH. The leaders gain access to God and receive a vision of “the God of Israel” as the representatives of the priestly nation. In effect, all Israel through its representatives participates in the experience of being invited guests in the court of the heavenly king. Their eating and drinking (Ex. 24:11) following the references to “covenant” (vv. 7–8) may signify that the meal is part of the formal ratification of the covenant with God (cf. Gen. 26:26–31; 31:44–54).

The Ethics of Exodus#

The instructions of Exodus 20–23 can be viewed as enlarging on “if you will. . . obey my voice and keep my covenant” (19:5). The two injunctions are synonyms, but with the second placing the concept of obedience in an explicit covenant framework. The bracketing of the instructions by chapters 19 and 24 has the same effect. The preface to the Decalogue also makes clear its framework of grace (Ex. 20:2: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of [bondage]”).

While Torah (tôrâ) is commonly translated “law” in English Bibles, the word really means “teaching” or “instruction.” Translating the Hebrew word tôrâ as “law” conjures up a legalistic mindset that is not present in the Old Testament text.

• God informs Moses that he will be given the tablets written by God on which are “the law [tôrâ] and the commandment” in order “to teach them” (using the same yrh root; Ex. 24:12).

• The Decalogue (20:1–17) and the Covenant Code (20:22–23:33) are summed up as “all these words” (20:1; 24:8), and the expression “the [ten] words” becomes a standard term for the Decalogue (34:1, 27–28).

The instructions of the Covenant Code have strong links with the preceding narrative of deliverance and find their rationale there (e.g., 22:21b: “for you were strangers in the land of Egypt”), and the instructions about the humane treatment of slaves (21:1–11) have been shaped by the precedent of God’s action of rescuing the Israelites from slavery. What is more, anticipating what will become a prominent theme in Deuteronomy, there is a concern for the “poor” person, who is designated a “neighbor” to those better off (22:25–27).

A parallel is usually drawn between the Sinai covenant and the suzerainty (or vassal) treaties of the second and first millennia BC, but John Davies is right to argue that a better analogy is found in the grant of royal favor to individuals of a royal or priestly office. The enacting of a covenant is a legal or quasi-legal process whereby persons become “father,” “son,” or “brother” to another for a range of beneficial purposes. YHWH says that Israel is his “son” (Ex. 4:23), and this speaks of a preexisting relationship between God and the forebears of national Israel, which the Sinai covenant serves to strengthen and confirm.

The people hear the Ten Words spoken aloud by God (Ex. 20:1–17), but as a result, in fear they ask Moses to act as mediator of God’s will. The position of this request between the Ten Words and the Covenant Code turns Moses into the interpreter of God’s instructions, an image of Moses expanded in Deuteronomy (1:5).

The Ten Words have the following two-part structure

The “land” context of the Ten Words is plain, both the land (of slavery) they left and the (promised) land to which they are going. Again, the mass of words in the commandment about graven images shows its importance (Ex. 20:4–6). The same two emphases are present in the Covenant Code that follows. The Code begins with instructions about the altar upon which no tool is to be wielded, lest it incorporate in its design graven images (20:22–26), and so it is an application of 20:4–6. The Code ends with the sabbatical commandments of 23:10–19, the annual feasts being an extension of the Sabbath principle, followed by an exhortation about the capture of the land (23:20–33; cf. the summary of the Covenant Code in 34:11–26). In sum, these instructions are to be kept in the holy land, whose center is the altar, and in that land they will enjoy their Sabbath rest.

Exodus in the Storyline of Scripture#

The preface to the section on the tabernacle (Ex. 24:15–18) shows that the role of the tabernacle is to extend the Sinai experience. Moses sees the glory of the Lord (24:16), which is “like a devouring fire on the top of the mountain,” and he enters the cloud (24:18). There is also the creational-sabbatical motif of six days of cloud cover and a voice from the cloud on the seventh day (24:16). On the mountain, Moses receives the tabernacle plans in seven divine speeches, each beginning with “The Lord said to Moses” (25:1; 30:11, 17, 22, 34; 31:1, 12). Everything is to be made according to the pattern shown on the mountain (25:9, 40; cf. 26:30; 27:8), such that the resulting tabernacle is a portable Sinai. The tabernacle is a miniaturized and portable reproduction of YHWH’s sanctuary, of which Israel has caught a glimpse (24:9–11), as is clearly seen in the reference to the theophanic cloud which settles on and fills the completed tabernacle (40:34–35; cf. 24:15–18).

Instructions are given for the tabernacle and its furnishings, as well as for Aaron’s and his sons’ priestly garments (Ex. 28), and for a seven-day ordination procedure for the priests (29:35–37). All is to be made by Spirit-endowed Bezalel (31:2–3; 35:30–31) and his assistant Oholiab (31:6). The seventh speech (31:12–17) is a command to observe the Sabbath. Here is sketched the Sabbath-rest ideal for the people of God, with YHWH dwelling in their midst as King.

First, in two speeches, Moses commands the people (35:1–3, 4–19), followed by a lengthy narrative recording their obedience (35:20–39:43). Moses’s two speeches sum up God’s revelation to him in chapters 25–31; more particularly, his first speech about the Sabbath (35:1–3) reflects the seventh divine speech of 31:12–17,74 and Moses’s second speech (35:4–19) recalls the long first divine speech of 25:1–30:10. By the device of inverted parallelism, the whole of chapters 25–31 is summarized.

The theological meaning of the tabernacle is as the “tent of meeting” where YHWH meets with Israel in his capacity as King (Ex. 25:22; 29:42; 30:6, 36), shown by the rich furnishings of the tent and by its ritual, which is exaggerated royal protocol (e.g., restricted access [cf. Est. 4:11; 5:1–2]). The worship arrangements symbolize their reverent approach to the king in his palace, and the provision of YHWH’s needs (e.g., lamps, table with bread) emphasizes the fact of the divine presence among his people. The ark is YHWH’s footstool or throne (cf. 2 Sam. 6:2). The people bring materials and precious things for making the tabernacle and priestly garments. The task of building a temple for the deity in the ancient Near East is usually that of a king (e.g., David in 2 Sam. 7:1–7), who supplies materials needed for the project (cf. 1 Chron. 18:8; 22:14),76 but in Exodus this royal role is taken by the people, who voluntarily supply the materials and labor (Ex. 25:1–9; 35:4–29; 36:1–7).77 The emphasis is on God “stirring” their hearts and making them willing (35:21, 22, 26, 29).

Moses’s third speech (Ex. 35:30–36:1) reflects the sixth divine speech of 31:1–11 and appoints Bezalel and Oholiab as the tabernacle builders. They are Spirit-filled, so that the tabernacle is a sanctuary erected by God’s Spirit, as was the original creation house of Genesis 1 (cf. Gen. 1:2). Exodus 39 describes the making of the priestly garments, again with the sabbatical/creational motif, for seven times it is said, “as the Lord had commanded Moses” (39:1, 5, 7, 21, 26, 29, 31). The priestly clothes are made of the same materials as the tabernacle and thus are mini-tabernacles.

The final paragraph of chapter 39 is heavy with creational themes: the work is “finished” (39:32; cf. Gen. 2:1); Moses “sees” all the work (Ex. 39:43; cf. 40:33; Gen. 1:31); and he “blessed them” (Ex. 39:43; cf. Gen. 2:3). This indicates that the tabernacle is a mini-cosmos.

The goal of the exodus is reached with the glory-cloud filling the tabernacle, signifying God’s presence (Ex. 40:34–38).

The incident of the golden calf (chs. 32–34) comes as a jarring break between the instructions of God about the tabernacle (chs. 25–31) and their communication to Israel (35:1–19). In response to their sin, God threatens that his presence will not go with them (32:34; 33:2–3, 5, 15–16; 34:9), implying that the tabernacle will not be needed. Their gross rebellion in the matter of the golden calf is a parody of the command in Exodus 20:2–6, for the people make an idol and say, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt” (32:4). The story of the golden calf is structured by two parallel descents by Moses with the tables of the law (32:15; 34:29), the first descent signaling the broken covenant and the second its restoration. The people’s forgiveness is shown by the making of two new tables and the reissue of a summary of their covenant responsibilities (34:10–26). God is not obligated to forgive his wayward people under the terms of the covenant; rather, their forgiveness is explained by God’s gracious character (34:6–7). God prefers to forgive rather than to punish.

Moses’s shining face and veil show that he is the one true Israelite, who stands in the presence of the Lord and receives revelation (Ex. 34:29–35). Moses is the ideal man, reflecting the glory of God, but sinful Israel receives only a veiled revelation through the mediation of Moses. Only Moses now enjoys the full benefit of the exodus deliverance and subsequent covenant. In chapter 24, the seventy elders (as representatives of all Israel) go up onto the mountain, but chapter 32 reveals the national heart, and the incident of the golden calf precipitates a change in the nature of Israel’s covenant relationship with God. Various features of chapters 33–34 indicate that the presence of God is now mediated through Moses:

1. the tent of meeting used by Moses is pitched “outside the camp” (33:7–11);
2. the theophanic manifestation is vouchsafed to Moses alone (33:12–34:9);
3. Moses alone enjoys intimacy with God (34:29–35).

Moses is now the recipient of the divine presence removed from Israel. The ideal of corporate access of God in 19:5–6 is not withdrawn but becomes a matter for eschatological fulfillment (2 Cor. 3:12–18).

Leviticus#

Leviticus is closely connected to the preceding book, as can be seen by comparing the final paragraph of Exodus with the opening words of Leviticus: “The cloud covered the tent of meeting” (Ex. 40:34) . . . “The Lord called Moses and spoke to him from the tent of meeting” (Lev. 1:1). When the book ends (27:34), the people of Israel are still at Mount Sinai, but Leviticus is differentiated from the books that surround it.

The principle stated in 10:3, namely, that the holiness of God must be recognized and that God must be glorified by priestly obedience, is extended to the people in 22:32. Sanctifying YHWH becomes the responsibility of Israel as a whole, and this is what is taught by means of detailed instructions in chapters 17–27.

The Themes of Leviticus#

The main themes of Leviticus are the holiness of God and his people, the hope and danger of drawing near to God, and the Sabbath. Leviticus has three main parts.

• The first encompasses chapters 1–10, within which chapters 1–7 describe the different kinds of sacrifices to be offered, and chapter 8 the ordination and installation of the priests. All the instructions of chapters 1–9 aim to prevent the disaster of 10:1–7.

• In the second part, chapters 11–15, instructions are given so that Israel may be separate from everything unclean, climaxing in the purging of the tabernacle from all such defilements by a ritual on the Day of Atonement (ch. 16).

• The third and final part of the book sets out the laws of holiness (chs. 17–27).

Israel was redeemed to be a holy people, and every aspect of community life is to reflect this fact.

In terms of a theology of sacrifice, the five main types of offerings are enumerated, namely:

• burnt offering (Lev. 1:3–17)
• grain offering (ch. 2)
• peace offering (ch. 3)
• sin offering (ch. 4)
• guilt offering (5:1–6:7)

The instructions have a lay focus (1:2: “When any man of you brings an offering, . . .”), and this can be called the didactic order of sacrifices. Then, the same five offerings are described again, but this time the focus is on how the priest is to handle the sacrifices. The sacrifices are in a different order, and this can be called an administrative order. The order is burnt offering (6:8–13), grain offering (6:14–23), sin offering (6:24–30), guilt offering (7:1–10), and peace offering (7:11–36).

Leviticus provides virtually no interpretations of the rituals that it describes and prescribes, but the book insists that the priests have a monopoly on the process of atonement. A better explanation of the silence is that a theory of sacrifice is not possible until there is a sacrifice that actually achieves something (Heb. 10:4) and, therefore, it is not until the New Testament, and most fully in Hebrews 9–10, that an explanation (of Christ’s sacrifice) is provided.

The order of the sacrifices in 9:22 is the most theologically significant order, given the climactic importance of this section:

1. sin offering (that heals the breach between God and humanity caused by sin);

2. burnt offering (expressing commitment to God);

3. peace offerings accompanied by meals enjoyed with fellow worshipers (denoting the fellowship with God that results).

This is the basic order of the offerings in chapter 9, which verse 22 summarizes.

The notion of drawing near to God, in order to serve him, is central to Israel’s conception of the priestly office (Ex. 19:22; 28:35; Num. 16:5, 7; 1 Sam. 2:28; Deut. 33:8–11), and, according to Richard Nelson, the priesthood is defined by the issue of “access” (Lev. 10:3). Priests in Israel and the ancient Near East enjoyed a semi-royal status, and the vestments of the priest are regal in character; for example, the jewel-studded breastplate (Ex. 28:15–30) can be related to the king of Tyre, who is portrayed as the primal man adorned with precious stones (Ezek. 28:12–13), and, as well, the priest wears a turban with a “crown” as do kings (Ex. 29:6; 39:30; Lev. 8:9). The anointing of the priests with oil (Ex. 29:7; 40:12–15; Lev. 8:12) is also similar to what was done to some kings (1 Sam. 10:1; 16:13; 2 Sam. 2:4). The priests are exalted persons with a royal dignity and a right of access to the divine realm.

The distinction between clean and unclean discussed in Leviticus 11 and following is a separation process (root bdl) that recalls the separations of Genesis 1:4, 6, and 14. The priest sees the infected person (Lev. 13:3, 5, 6), just as God “saw” that what he made was good (Gen. 1:4, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31), and there is also a repetition of the “evening” motif from Genesis 1 (e.g., Lev. 15:6, 10, 18). One of the chief tasks of the priest is to “distinguish between the holy and the common, and between the unclean and the clean” (10:10; cf. 14:57) and to teach this cultic distinction to the Israelites, for whom it was of vital importance. The various rules on this subject are given in chapters 11–15, and the aim of these instructions is stated in 15:31a (“Thus you shall keep the people of Israel separate from their uncleanness”). This is important, for as 15:31b warns, “lest they die in their uncleanness by defiling my tabernacle that is in their midst.” This half-verse prepares for chapter 16, the purging of the tabernacle from defilement.

Chapter 16 is, then, the climax of the second part of the book, 16:32–33 sums up the chapter, and the statement found at 16:34 brings closure: “And Moses did as the Lord commanded him”. The cleansed tabernacle at the center of a cleansed people is a theological ideal.

Similar to the structuring of chapters 1–7, the instructions on holiness in chapters 17–20 have a lay focus (“If any one of the house of Israel . . .” [17:3]), and those in chapters 21–22 a priestly focus (“Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them . . .” [21:1]). The behavior of God’s people is carefully prescribed, and the standards required of the priests are especially high. In the theological model set up in these chapters, the priest is like the ideal man in paradise: “none of your [descendants] throughout their generations who has a blemish may approach to offer the bread of his God” (21:17). The underlying theology is of the priest as an ideal man in God’s sanctuary. The motivation for obedience is the covenant relationship (e.g., 18:2: “I am the Lord your God”). It is also made clear that sanctification is not a meritorious achievement but the result of the gracious choice of God to dwell in the midst of Israel (22:32: “I am YHWH who sanctifies you”).

The remaining instructions have a sabbatical focus (Lev. 23–26) and end with the command, “You shall keep my Sabbaths and reverence my sanctuary: I am the Lord” (26:2). Some of the references to the Sabbath in these chapters are: rest on the seventh day of the week (23:3); the seventh day of holy convocation on Passover week (23:8); the Day of Atonement is “a Sabbath of solemn rest” (23:32); the memorial bread is changed every Sabbath (24:8); the seventh year is “a Sabbath of solemn rest for the land” (25:4); and in the curses section there is the expression, “the land shall enjoy its Sabbaths” (26:34, 43).

Leviticus 27:34 is virtually identical to 26:46, suggesting that chapter 27 has the character of an appendix. This concluding chapter provides instructions about gifts for the tabernacle. The tithe of the produce of the land is holy to YHWH, for the land as a whole is God’s sanctuary, not simply the tabernacle. This final chapter softens the impact of the dire threats of expulsion from the land for disobedience found in chapter 26. The final picture of Leviticus is of a member of God’s people making a voluntary vow out of gratitude to God for his gift of life in the land.

The Ethics of Leviticus#

There has been difficulty in explaining the rationale of why certain types of food are declared to be unclean (Lev. 11). The reason does not seem to be a concern for health or hygiene. Moreover, there are natural and unavoidable processes such as childbirth (ch. 12) and bodily discharges (ch. 15) that render a person ceremonially unclean. There is less mystery in the case of skin diseases and of mildew (chs. 13–14), but we should avoid simply identifying cleanness with cleanliness or uncleanness with dirtiness.

The contents of chapter 19 reflect the Decalogue and the Covenant Code, including the motivation provided by the exodus deliverance (19:34, 36), and the love commandment is extended to the alien (19:34). In addressing the situation of the alien, these instructions are a bridge to the application of the Ten Words to Gentiles, without any need for recourse to the problematic concept of natural law.

The dietary laws (ch. 11) replicate the order of the creative acts in Genesis: listing prohibited animal foods on the earth (11:2–8), in the waters (11:9–12), and in the air (11:13–25). In describing different animals, the focus is on mode of locomotion. An extension of the rule of avoiding blood is to forbid the consumption of blood-eating animals and carrion-eaters, for these predators have ingested blood, and the crawling animals represent the victims of predation. The forbidden species which are not covered by the instruction against blood either have something lacking (like joints, legs, fins, or scales)—on the assumption that all sea creatures are supposed to have scales—or have something superfluous, like a burden on their backs (e.g., the camel). In this way, the forbidden species exemplify either the perpetrators of violence or those who suffer violence. The principle enunciated is that holiness is incompatible with predatory behavior. An avoidance of contact with carcasses and cadavers (11:24–40) has similar moral implications, namely, avoiding the death of persons and the unnecessary death of animals (cf. Gen. 1:27–28; 9:1–7).

The New Testament abolition of the clean/unclean distinction (e.g., Mark 7:14–23) is no indication that the Old Testament law is discounted but serves to confirm the essentially symbolic nature of the food regulations.

With regard to the manipulation of blood in some sacrificial rites, the nearest attempt at describing the significance of blood in respect to atonement comes in the much-quoted Leviticus 17:11 (“The life of the flesh is in the blood, . . . for it is the blood that makes atonement, by [reason of] the life”). Despite what is routinely said by scholars about blood being a life symbol, blood is best understood as representing death, namely, shed blood is a sign of the loss of life, with the Old Testament forging an essential link between atonement and death. This becomes the background to the apostolic explanation of the death of Christ and what it achieves.

In the Old Testament, God’s instructions are never generalized religious, social, or moral commands, but an expression of life in relationship with God, that is to say, they concern the life of Israel in the land that is God’s sanctuary, wherein Israel will enjoy Sabbath rest in the presence of God. The priest bears the names of the tribes of Israel inscribed on the gemstones on his shoulders, for he represents the whole community before God (Ex. 28:12; 39:6), but there is also a realization that the ideal cannot be met by Israel. What follows, therefore, is a reminder of the blessings of holy living (Lev. 26:3–13) and of the curse that falls on people who disobey God (26:14–45). “I will make my dwelling among you, and my soul shall not abhor you. And I will walk among you and will be your God, and you shall be my people” (26:11–12). This promise is conditional upon holy living. The nation is threatened with loss of the land because of uncleanness, with the land enjoying its Sabbaths as God’s people go into exile (26:34), in parallel with Adam’s expulsion from the garden sanctuary. The intent of Leviticus 17–26 is to instruct God’s people so that they will not be expelled from the land.

Leviticus in the Storyline of Scripture#

At the holy mountain, in a series of speeches, Israel is impressed with the need to be “a holy people.” As in the book of Exodus, tabernacle, Mount Sinai, and the land are linked closely in Leviticus. If the people neglect God’s instructions, they will be expelled from the holy land (ch. 26). A holy land demands holy people. “Be holy, for I am holy” is the motto of the book (11:44, 45; 19:2; 20:7, 26),113 indicating that only holy people can approach God (cf. Matt. 5:48; Heb. 12:14). “I am YHWH your God” (e.g., Lev. 18:2; 19:31; 23:22) is a refrain, and there is the repeated reminder that God saved them from Egypt (11:45; 19:36; 22:33; 23:43; 25:38, 42, 55; 26:13, 45). The invitation to and demand for holiness is not legalism, for the response called for is obedience out of gratitude for God’s salvation.

Persons or objects are holy to YHWH (Lev. 20:26) or, in one instance in the Old Testament, holy to Baal (2 Kings 10:20). In other words, “holy” is a positive relational term: holiness is being like God, being sanctified by God, and experiencing nearness to God. In essence, it is a return to Adamic perfection and Eden-like fellowship with God, God walking among his people (Lev. 26:12).

Central to the cult is the notion of holiness as characteristic of the realm associated with God, with the accompanying concept of graduated orders of holiness. This graduation is most easily demonstrated in spatial terms: the arrangement of the wilderness camp (Num. 1:52–2:31), with the tabernacle at center, an inner ring of Levitical families, and an outer ring of the other tribes. Likewise, the tabernacle has three levels of holiness: the outer court or “entrance to the tent of meeting,” the holy place, and the most holy place (Ex. 26:33; 29:4; 33:10). The degree of spatial holiness increased as one moved (if permitted) from the outside to the inside. The plan of the tabernacle distinguished three zones, separated by physical boundaries (e.g., curtains) and variations in the materials used for their construction (e.g., gold, silver, bronze). The symbolism is that of the tripartite universe of heaven, earth, and sea; hence, to gain access to the innermost room of the tabernacle, in effect, was to gain access to heaven itself.

Numbers#

The book of Numbers recounts the journey of the Israelites from Sinai to the plains of Moab, and in so doing, sketches the history of some forty years. By the end of the book, Israel is on the border of the promised land. The book has two main parts, based on the shift of focus from the old generation, who experienced the exodus and events at Sinai (chs. 1–25), to the new generation, who replaced the old in the desert (chs. 26–36). The beginning of each section is signaled by the census reports in chapters 1 and 26. If the two census lists are the key to its structure, the Greek title for the book, Numbers (arithmoi) is appropriate. One generation ends in failure and death (chs. 1–25), and a second generation replaces it whose fate is not yet determined (chs. 26–36).

The Hebrew title of the book, běmidbar (“in the wilderness”), based on its opening words (1:1), serves to foreground the years of wilderness testing occupying the central section of the book (chs. 11–21). It is these chapters that give the book its separate identity compared to the books on either side of it.

The Themes of Numbers#

The main themes of Numbers are holiness, conquest (in prospect), and inheritance. The book presents a theological model: the sacred order of the wilderness camp (ch. 2). The focal point of the camp is the tabernacle, and arranged around it, in two concentric circles, according to the degree of holiness, are the Levitical families and then the other tribes. The Israelite camp is set apart from everything profane, for God dwells in their midst (5:3). All the instructions given are connected to the theme of holiness (chs. 5–10).

The dates in 1:1 and 7:1 help to identify these as the openings of two subsections within the first ten chapters. In fact, 7:1 and 9:1 refer to a period prior to 1:1, so there is a theological structuring of the material rather than straight chronology. These chapters are in two parallel subsections (chs. 1–6; 7:1–9:14), with 9:15–10:10 as an appendix, and all their contents are oriented to preparing for the camp to be on the move.

Here is a breakdown of the first subsection (chs. 1–6):

• the census of the tribes as an army; the Levites are exempted because of their role of caring for the tabernacle (ch. 1);

• the organization of the camp around the tabernacle (ch. 2);

• the census and service of the Levites, emphasizing their role in the transportation of the tabernacle (chs. 3–4);

• the exclusion of unclean persons from the camp (ch. 5);

• the law of the Nazirite, who is a radical example of separation to the Lord (ch. 6), with the Aaronic blessing as the climax to this subsection (6:22–27).

In the second subsection (7:1–10:10) we find:

• the offerings of the twelve princes for the altar, the same persons as in chapters 1–2 (ch. 7);

• the Levites are separated, purified, and at work (ch. 8), with 8:16–19 drawing on terminology from chapter 3;

• instructions about the Passover, stressing the cleansing procedure (9:1–14);

• an appendix that explains about the movement of the glory cloud (9:15–23) and the silver trumpets used to signal that it is time to break camp (10:1–10).

This appendix prepares for the movement of the next subsection of the book. The carefully structured repetition makes a theological point: the camp of Israel is a picture of the ideal state of a holy community, with God dwelling in their midst.

In chapter 10 the camp sets out; the army of Israel is on the move. But at 11:1 there is an abrupt break in the narrative (“And the people complained…”). The people crave for meat (ch. 11), and then Miriam and Aaron speak against Moses (ch. 12). The unrivaled stature of Moses as God’s servant is supported by the fact that he is filled with God’s Spirit to a unique degree (11:25). Chapters 11–25 are dominated by a series of rebellions, plagues, and deaths. When the spies bring an evil report about the land, the people fail to trust (14:11) and despise God’s promise to help them (chs. 13–14). This is a decisive episode, as was the sin of the golden calf (Ex. 32–34). Again, Moses intercedes for the people, and he cites the earlier revelation of God’s gracious character in creedal form (Ex. 34:6–7; cf. Num. 14:18–19), and due to his “kindness” (ḥesed), God does pardon the iniquity of the people (14:20), and the punishment is mitigated. God will not destroy the whole nation as threatened (14:12; cf. Ex. 32:10), but the rebellion seals the fate of the wilderness generation (Num. 14:21–35). A final rebellion, the episode of Baal-Peor, leads to the death of the remnant of the first generation (Num. 25).

A new generation takes over (Num. 26:1: “After the plague . . .”), and God calls for another census of the people (26:2), and the people are listed according to tribe. The issue of inheritance is uppermost: the inheritance of the eleven tribes (26:52–53) and the non-inheritance of the Levites (26:62). The new generation is offered what the former one had forfeited. The census makes clear that an entirely new generation has arisen to replace the old (Num. 26:63–65).

The final portion of the book is a unity (Num. 27–36), as suggested by the inclusio regarding the question of the inheritance of “the daughters of Zelophehad” (chs. 27, 36).

• Joshua is appointed to lead God’s people into their inheritance (27:12–23).

• The stages of Israel’s journey are reviewed (ch. 33), signaling that their journeying is behind them (33:49).

• Instructions are given for the time “when you pass over the Jordan into the land of Canaan” (33:51).

• The inhabitants of the land are under the ban (33:50–56); the boundaries of the land are demarcated (34:1–15); a leader from each tribe is appointed to organize the land division (34:16–29); the Levitical possessions and the cities of refuge are mandated (35:1–8, 9–28); and the problem of the pollution of the land by blood is addressed (35:29–34).

These arrangements and regulations presuppose the holy character of the land they will enter and possess. In other words, in terms of biblical theology, the land of promise is like the wilderness camp (cf. 5:3).

The Ethics of Numbers#

The account of the rebellions and punishments in Numbers 11–25 supports the holy ideal of the earlier chapters. The nation sets out in battle array, with the ark going before them. Chapter 21 shows that they need not fear any outside threat or enemy, noting as it does so their victories (even over a Canaanite king [21:1–3, 26, 29]) and the beginning of land-possession in the Trans-Jordanian region. The implication is that only Israel herself can threaten her possession of the land.

The loss of the right of entry by this evil generation is contrasted with a stress on “when you come into the land…” (15:2, 18; etc.) and with the refrain, “throughout your generations” (15:15, 21, 23, 38). The offerings specified in chapter 15 have as their aim that “all the congregation of the people of Israel [might] be forgiven” (15:26). All the congregation punishes a man who profanes the Sabbath (15:32–36), and tassels are prescribed as a reminder to them of the Lord’s commandments (15:37–41). Chapters 18–19 form another interlude, taking up issues raised by the rebellion of Korah (chs. 16–17), God confirming Aaron and his family in their exclusive role as priests (18:7: “Anyone else who comes near [shall be] put to death”; cf. 17:13; 18:22 [NIV]). The red heifer rite provides an ongoing means of atonement for anyone who is unclean (ch. 19). Israel is furnished with the means of avoiding the contamination that was experienced by their fathers in the wilderness.

At the close of the book, Israel is encamped at the edge of the promised land (Num. 36:13). The new generation at the end of Numbers has not progressed any further than the old generation (cf. 22:1). It faces the same challenge of living as God’s holy people, and it stands under the same promises and threats as the past generation. The older generation had reached the edge of the promised land but had gone no further (chs. 13–14), whereas the destiny of the new generation remains undecided. In fact, their future is unresolved at the end of the Pentateuch as well. The open-ended character of Numbers has the effect of putting readers in the same position as the second generation, with the implied ethic that they need to decide whether they will trust and obey God.

Numbers in the Storyline of Scripture#

Numbers is pivotal in the arrangement of the Pentateuch, for in it Israel moves from Sinai (the location at the start of the book) to the border of the land (the location at its end). It does physically what the next book, Deuteronomy, does by means of the homiletical exhortation, as Moses in his sermons applies the instructions first given at Sinai to their future situation in the land. The mediating role of Numbers is also seen in the way it combines the pictures of Israel as a sacerdotal community centered on the tabernacle (ch. 2)—as in Leviticus—and as a military camp (ch. 1)—as in Deuteronomy, which has the coming conquest in view.

In Ezekiel’s vision of the future, the land is apportioned among the tribes (48:1–7, 23–29), with the scheme of allotment patterned on the old divisions (Josh. 13–21), though adjusted under the influence of the organization of the battle camp in Numbers, for the new temple is now in the center of the land (seven tribes to the north and five tribes to the south) and it is surrounded by the portion of the tribe of Levi. In this way, the wilderness camp becomes a theological symbol of the holy land yet to be occupied.

Deuteronomy#

Meredith Kline says that “Deuteronomy is a covenant renewal document which in its total structure exhibits the classic legal form of the suzerainty treaties of the Mosaic age.” Kline is thinking of second-millennium Hittite treaties. Though Deuteronomy has affinities with international treaty texts, as Kline stresses, it is not the text of a treaty as such, for in terms of actual content, it is a series of hortatory sermons. The book is also in the style of a “valedictory speech” by Moses, anticipating as he does his death, and so the treaty analogy goes only so far as a heuristic guide to the meaning of this important biblical book. With an eye to the sermonic form of the book (1:5), it may be divided into four main speeches by Moses (Deut. 1:6–4:40; 5:1–26:19; 27:1–28:68; 29:1–30:20).

The Themes of Deuteronomy#

The main themes of Deuteronomy are the role(s) of Moses, the land, God’s instructions, and the office of the king. It would be hard to overestimate the importance of the figure of Moses in Deuteronomy. The book begins by identifying all its words as “the words that Moses spoke to all Israel” (1:1).

• Moses is the teacher of Israel (4:1, 5, 14; 5:31; 6:1), and in that role, he stands between God and the people, mediating the revelation of God (5:30–31).

• Elsewhere in the Pentateuch, Moses is portrayed as the recipient of what looks like a prophetic call (Ex. 3), and in Deuteronomy he becomes the paradigm for the later prophets. He is both a model for future prophets (Deut. 18:15, 18 [“like me/you”]) and greater than any subsequent prophet (34:10: “And there has not arisen a prophet since in Israel like Moses”), for YHWH communicated with Moses “face to face” (cf. Ex. 33:11; Num. 12:7–8 [“mouth to mouth”]), a phrase presumably connoting unmediated revelation, and Moses did many more miraculous wonders than they did (cf. Deut. 13:1 about prophets who do wonders).

• Moses has the role of intercessor, and he recalls what occurred in Exodus 32–34 and Numbers 13–14, when his prayer saved the rebellious nation from destruction (Deut. 9:7–29; 10:10–11). A second aspect of his prophet-like function is that of suffering servant. Moses suffers vicariously for the people (1:37: “Even with me the Lord was angry on your account”; cf. 3:26; 4:21–22).

• Moses is also portrayed as a military leader (chs. 2–3), and this function is taken over by Joshua, whose career in various ways parallels that of Moses (31:1–8). Neither in Deuteronomy nor elsewhere in the Pentateuch is Moses depicted as a king, despite Philo’s Life of Moses, which provides a successive treatment of Moses as a king (over 50 percent of the whole work), lawgiver, priest, and prophet.

In the book of Deuteronomy, the land is a primary theme, as is to be expected of sermons delivered on the edge of the land. The instructions lay down the required way of life in the land to be possessed (e.g., 7:1–2: “When the Lord your God brings you into the land. . . . You shall . . .”). It would be possible to write a theology of Deuteronomy using the motif of land as the integrating point, for just about everything in Deuteronomy links to this major theme.

• The land is a gift from God (e.g., 1:39; 3:18; 4:1) and not due to Israel’s size or conduct (9:4–8).

• God’s promise to the fathers (patriarchs) is understood primarily in terms of the land (1:8, 35; 6:10, 18, 23).

• To possess the land will require military conflict (7:17–26; 9:1–5), but it is God’s intervention that will be decisive, and so the successful conquest is the basis for recognizing that YHWH is the supreme God and that “there is no other” (4:37–39).

• Israel will be blessed and will enjoy long life in the land (15:4; 28:8; 30:16).

• The land is eulogized (6:10–11; 8:7–10) and contrasted with the land of Egypt (11:10–11). The Israelites will eat and be full, hence the prominent eating aspect of the festivals, in which everyone must be enabled to join (e.g., 12:7, 12, 18; 16:11).

• The land is their “inheritance” and is described in paradisiacal terms as “flowing with milk and honey” (Deut. 6:3; 11:9; 26:9, 15; 27:3; 31:20).

• Israel’s life in the land is envisaged as one of “rest” from enemies (3:20; 12:10; 25:19).

• The land is the place where Israel must do what the Lord requires (4:5, 14; 5:31; 6:1; 12:1), and this is the condition for their ongoing life in the land (4:25–26; 6:18; 8:1).

• The land remains in their possession only through obedience, and there is the added motivation provided by threats of perishing (11:17: “You will perish quickly off the good land that the Lord is giving you”).

The worst punishment that Israel can suffer is expulsion from the land.

In Deuteronomy, the institution of kingship is an optional rather than a mandated part of the polity of the Israelite nation. On the other hand, the divine permission given in response to an anticipated popular request for a king is by no means grudging (17:15: “you may indeed set a king over you . . .”). This foreshadows the development described in 1 Samuel 8, in which the Israelite elders ask for the appointment of a king, and the inner-biblical connection of the passages is reinforced by the recurrence of the phrase “like all the nations” in the book of Samuel (8:5, 20; cf. Deut. 17:14). This phrase in Deuteronomy does not need to be viewed as polemically colored, but is better understood as setting up the ensuing divine response in which the role of the king does not conform to typical ancient Near Eastern expectations of kingly rule. Like surrounding nations, Israel may have a king, but the king chosen by God is not to act like the kings of other nations.

The role of the Israelite king is circumscribed in ways that exemplify the teaching of Deuteronomy (17:16–17). All of this suggests that the aim of these restrictions is not the diminution of the power of the king as such, even if that is one marked effect, though that is the motivation often imputed to this legislation. The positive counterpart to these prohibitions is that of YHWH’s choice of the king (17:15a), in line with a theology of divine choice on show in Deuteronomy more generally (e.g., YHWH’s choice of Israel and of the place where he will set his name), and the king must be someone “from among your brothers” (v. 15b). Rather than viewing the picture of the king as idealistic or utopian, it is better to recognize that his restricted role reflects the fundamental theology of the book that Israel is a covenant community and a brotherhood (e.g., 15:7, 9, 11).

The Ethics of Deuteronomy#

In Deuteronomy, the covenantal way of life is firstly discussed in outline (chs. 5–11), Moses urging total consecration to YHWH, and the repeated use of “today” signals that the nation of Israel is at the point of decision (e.g., 4:8, 26, 39, 40). More specific instructions follow (chs. 12–26), and the ordering of the material in these fifteen chapters reflects the order of stipulations in the Decalogue. The detailed instructions provide examples of how to apply the moral principles enunciated in the Decalogue. The exposition of the Decalogue shows that each of the Ten Words is, in fact, a global moral principle.

With regard to the meaning and application of the Ten Words, using the exposition in Deuteronomy 12–26 as a guide, the First and Second Words (5:7–10) concern proper worship and are expounded and applied in 12:1–31. The divine command to destroy all foreign places of worship (Deut. 12:2–3) and the prohibition of Canaanite cultic places (12:29–31) frame laws dealing with the sacrificial cult at the one sanctuary of Israel. The formula “the place that YHWH your God will choose” occurs in 12:5, 11, 14, 18, 21, 26, and becomes a pervasive theme in the book (e.g., 14:25; 15:20; 16:2, 6, 7, 11).

The Third Word (Deut. 5:11) aims to protect the sanctity of God’s name (13:1–14:27), and the idiom in 5:11 means, “You shall not take upon your lips the name of YHWH your God in vain” (cf. Pss. 16:4; 50:16). It warns against the misuse of the divine name in cursing, perjury, or insincere oaths (cf. 2 Sam. 14:11; Jer. 7:9; Hos. 4:2).

The Fourth Word, about the Sabbath (Deut. 5:12–15), is applied to tithes, the seven-year rest, and the three great annual festivals (14:28–16:17). There is a similar broadening of what is, in effect, a Sabbath principle in Exodus 23:10–14 and Leviticus 23–25. Time for the Israelites is punctuated by divinely mandated interruptions of work that remind the community of their dependence on God. Just as the primary concern of the Fourth Word is to provide rest for powerless people (5:14), the Feast of Weeks makes special provisions for the community’s most vulnerable members (16:11). The social dimension of Old Testament ethics is to the fore in all these instructions.

The Fifth Word (Deut. 5:16), about honoring father and mother, is expanded to cover such authority figures as judges (16:18–17:13), the king (17:14–20), the priesthood (18:1–8), and prophets (18:15–22). Just as authority is shared by the two parents, not centered in the father alone, this model of a distribution of authority carries over into a sharing of authority among judges, kings, priests, and prophets, with the limitation of power most notable in the case of the king.

In expounding the Sixth Word (Deut. 19:1–22:8), the principle about unlawful killing (5:17) is applied to such things as manslaughter (19:1–13) and warfare (ch. 20). There is the onus on Israelites to promote the safety and well-being of others (e.g., 22:1–4, 8).

The Seventh Word, about adultery (5:18), is shown to cover sexual ethics in general.

The Eighth Word (5:19) includes property theft (23:19–24:7) but particularly has in mind the stealing of people (24:7; cf. Ex. 21:16), just as Joseph says that he was “stolen out of the land of the Hebrews” (Gen. 40:15; cf. 1 Tim. 1:9–10 [“enslavers,” i.e., kidnappers]). A wider application to property is also made, for theft is a serious crime in a subsistence economy (e.g., Deut. 24:6).

The Ninth Word (5:20) is applied to false speech of many kinds (24:10–25:4), though the prohibition has a law court focus (24:17), for making a false accusation in court leads to serious consequences (cf. 19:18–19).

Finally, the Tenth Word (5:21), about coveting, is widened (25:5–26:19) and includes the dishonesty that can result (25:13–16). Deuteronomy’s distinction between a person’s wife and other objects of desire shows a high valuation of women and their rights, consistent with the humane strain of the teaching of Deuteronomy in general.

Deuteronomy is called “this Book of the Law” (31:26). Its call to obedience is a call to follow divine guidance (4:6–8), with instruction (tôrâ) and wisdom identified (4:6). Moses shows great concern for future generations (1:36, 39; 4:40; 5:9, 29; 6:2), viewing the commandments at Horeb as available and binding for all time to come. The father’s answer is framed in terms of “our/us/we,” so that past events are made present, and each new generation is made to feel that they personally experienced what their forefathers did.

Deuteronomy can be classified as a “memory-producing agent,” Moses making use of storytelling, cultic ritual, and song to reinforce his teaching about their obligation to God.God’s instruction embodies the principle of the exodus (Deut. 10:19) and so necessitates care for the oppressed and the powerless. This is the origin of Deuteronomy’ “humanism” (the term used by Weinfeld) rather than the result of late wisdom influence (see below). Instruction is brought into relation to covenant, such that “covenant” in Deuteronomy 4:13 and 23 appears to mean the Decalogue. Therefore, “covenant” means their obligations under the covenant, as well as the freely chosen obligations that YHWH has placed upon himself (7:9).

Deuteronomy in the Storyline of Scripture#

In Deuteronomy, there is no hint that Jerusalem is the place intended as the center of worship, and the only place specified as a location where sacrifice is to be offered is Mount Ebal (Deut. 27:1–8). The real thrust of Deuteronomy 12 is to eliminate idolatry and guard against “other gods” (5:7; 6:14; 7:4; 8:19), and the limiting of the offering of sacrifices to one place aimed at achieving this goal. The danger of “other gods” is a recurrent problem in the books that follow (e.g., Judg. 2:19; 10:13; 1 Sam. 8:8; 1 Kings 11:4; 14:9; 2 Kings 17:7; 22:17).

Though Israel is obviously enough the focus of attention in Deuteronomy, the issue of the nations is not ignored. Being a “theology of the land,” the question of what to do with the Canaanites who presently inhabit the land is a live issue (Deut. 7:1). Canaanite religious practice is condemned holus-bolus, with no attempt to understand its details or logic (e.g., 12:2–3). The term “nations” is used in Deuteronomy when foreign peoples are viewed as a threat (e.g., 29:16, 18), and “peoples” is used as the more neutral term (2:25). Deuteronomy stresses that Israel is chosen from among all the peoples as God’s “treasured possession” and “holy people” (7:6–7; 14:2; 26:18–19), and the “peoples” are depicted as the worldwide audience for God’s dealings with Israel (4:5–8; 28:9–10, 25, 37). Such Mosaic teaching must be viewed as a reflection upon the programmatic statements in Exodus 19:5–6. The mission of Israel in the Old Testament period was to be distinct from and an example to other nations, with the nations being the intended audience of Israel as she lived according to God’s instruction (e.g., Deut. 4:6: “in the sight of the peoples”).

Central Themese of the Pentateuch#

The notion of the canonicity of the Old Testament is relegated by critical scholars to a late date in biblical history, beginning at the Josianic reforms (linked to the discovery of the book of Deuteronomy), or even in the postexilic period (e.g., Ezra, who returned to Jerusalem from exile and supposedly brought with him some form of the Pentateuch). However, the concept of canon is not a late imposition on the Old Testament but accompanied the formation of the Scriptures from their inception (e.g., “the Book of the Covenant” [Ex. 24:7] that features in the covenant-making ceremony led by Moses at Mount Sinai).

Meredith Kline finds the formal roots of biblical canon in the treaty documents by which ancient Near Eastern international relations were administered, wherein the suzerain’s authoritative words to the vassal were put in writing. Kline believed that the treaty pattern supplied the structure of the Decalogue and of Deuteronomy as a whole, such that the origin of the canon coincided with the founding of “the kingdom of Israel” (Kline’s expression) by covenant at Sinai. In other words, the concepts of canon and covenant are inextricably connected.

The foundations of covenant as a major biblical-theological theme are laid down in the Pentateuch, in which a series of covenants are made by God, with the family of Noah and all creatures, with Abraham, and with Israel. The Noah covenant reaffirms and guarantees the original divine intention for creation. It shows that God will not allow human sin to permanently defeat his gracious purposes for his creatures.

The ancient Near Eastern treaties of grant of land or house (= dynasty) are a likely parallel for the biblical covenants, particularly the Abrahamic (Gen. 15:7, 18; 17:8; 26:4–5) and the Davidic (2 Sam. 7:11). In addition, the office of priesthood, usually closely associated with kingship, was considered the gift of kings or deities (Num. 18:7), and on that basis, the Sinai covenant can be viewed as a grant of collective priesthood. Weinfeld identifies the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants as belonging to the grant or promissory category of covenant, but he considers the Sinai covenant to be of the suzerainty or “obligatory” type whereby a set of legal ordinances was imposed on the people. This sharp contrast between the conditionality of the Sinai covenant (with its obligations) and the unconditionality of the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants (with their lack of obligations) is a widely held position. The contrast, however, is open to question, for God delivers his people from Egypt because of “his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob” (Ex. 2:24), such that the covenant arrangements at Sinai are a vehicle for the fulfillment of Abrahamic promises, especially that of land.

In turn, the Davidic arrangement takes up the sonship and kingship of the nation and applies them to an individual (and his household) and for the benefit of that nation (Ex. 4:23; 19:6; cf. 2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7). The Abrahamic covenant also is not without its expectation of faithful service (Gen. 17:1; 18:19).

Following the example of the authors of the New Testament, Christians view various Old Testament passages as pointing forward to and throwing light on Jesus Christ, and such passages are not exhausted by a few classic texts in the Prophets (e.g., Isa. 7; 9; 11) and the Psalter (e.g., Pss. 2; 110). The expectation of a future ideal king (= Messiah) also finds a place in Old Testament narrative, including the stories and teaching of the Pentateuch through the theme of seed (= offspring). The term “seed” is a Leitwort (major motif) in Genesis (used 59 times), and the line of Abraham’s seed, through Sarah, will give rise to royal offspring (Gen. 17:6, 16 [“kings shall come from you . . . kings of peoples shall come from her”]). On that basis, the first use of this key word as applied to humanity (3:15), is justly seen as important, and this text is not to be dismissed as irrelevant to an exploration of messianism, though neither should it be overinterpreted, for it is not explicit that “the seed of the woman” is a king figure or even an individual.

The royal dimension of the Abrahamic promise is reiterated to Jacob (Gen. 35:11: “kings shall spring from you” [our translation]). It is also noteworthy that at the close of Genesis, kingship of some sort is associated with the tribe of Judah (49:8–12), for the dying patriarch speaks of the coming ascendancy of Judah among his twelve sons in these terms: “The scepter shall not depart from Judah” (49:10). Later in the Pentateuch, the theme resurfaces in Balaam’s oracle of Israelite victories over Moab and Edom (Num. 24:17: “a scepter shall rise out of Israel”), and finally the same theme is sounded in Moses’s instructions about the future shape of Israelite kingship in Deuteronomy 17:14–20. The Pentateuch anticipates that human kingship will be an aspect of the future constitution of Israel. It both predicts the rise of kingship and dictates what form it will take.

The Ethics of the Pentateuch#

As made plain in the biblical presentation, the call of Abram was a response to the more general problem of human sinfulness and its disrupting effect on the created order. On that basis, redemption is to be classified as the repair of the creation. After the early chapters of Genesis, the doctrine of creation makes only brief appearances in the Old Testament, but where it is used, it is theologically foundational (e.g., allusions in the Psalms; the hymnic pieces in Amos 4:13; 5:8–9; 9:5–6). If the goal of God’s saving plan is the renewal of the created order (cf. Eph. 1:21–23; Col. 1:15–20), biblical ethics covers the physical well-being of people as well as their spiritual welfare, and it is necessarily broad, embracing such areas as environmental ethics (creation care), social ethics (justice for the poor), and personal ethics (e.g., sexual morality).

The exclusion of Deuteronomy’s partner, the book of Joshua, from the Pentateuch, and its placement with the books that follow (Former Prophets), is a confessional statement, for it indicates that possession of the promised land was not constitutive for the faith of Israel but is a divine promise to be realized and embodies an eschatology of hope (cf. Heb. 4:8–10; 11:10, 13–17, 39 [they “did not receive what was promised”]). At the conclusion of the Pentateuch, Israel is stationed at the edge of the river Jordan rather than in possession of the land of promise. The people of God are effectively in the same position (outside the land) at the close of two other Hebrew canonical sections: Former Prophets (2 Kings 25) and the Writings (2 Chron. 36). Though enjoying higher privileges than the Old Testament people of God (e.g., a greater measure of God’s Spirit), God’s people today wait for the return of Jesus and the fullness of his kingdom, and, therefore, are in a similar position to their Old Testament counterparts. In other words, God’s people have always lived by faith in promises of blessing not yet fully experienced.

The need to exercise faith is key in the time of Moses, not only of Abraham. Moreover, the summons to obey God applies to Abraham and Moses and to the family/nation they head, with obedience understood to spring from faith. What might be classified as Deuteronomic phraseology is used to speak of the patriarch’s required response to God (“because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws” [Gen. 26:5]). The same terms would later come to denote God’s instructions given through Moses (e.g., Deut. 5:31; 12:1). In addition, Abraham’s responsibility to instruct his children (Gen. 18:19) is also stressed in Deuteronomy (e.g., 6:7; 11:19). This shows that faith and works are not opposed; rather, keeping the commandments is an expression of faith in God and his promises. The unbelief of the people of Israel and their leaders (Moses and Aaron included) demonstrates the failure of the Sinai covenant and (according to Sailhamer) engenders a hope in the coming of a new covenant.

The ethic of love and justice in Deuteronomy is the culmination of the instructions in the Pentateuch on the subject of human relationships within the covenant community. The response of God’s people to his undivided love for them (“the Lord is one”) is that they should love him in return (Deut. 6:4–6). The influence of Deuteronomy on later books such as Hosea (e.g., 3:1; 11:1) and Malachi (1:2–6) is in part shown by their common emphasis on the love of God for his people. Proper relations between fellow Israelites is summed up in Deuteronomy by the word “justice” (16:20), especially the requirement that the just claims of the poor be upheld and their needs met, and so the call for justice is, in effect, a call to love one’s neighbor (cf. Lev. 19:18). The social justice ethic of Deuteronomy picks up and affirms what is found earlier in the Pentateuch (e.g., Ex. 23:4–9; Lev. 19:9–18). The patriarchs make an effort to live in peace with their neighbors.

The Pentateuch in the Storyline of Scripture#

The Pentateuch is theologically foundational for the rest of the Old Testament in a number of ways. The canon starts with an account of creation (Gen. 1), and the plan of salvation that occupies the rest of the Bible can, therefore, be categorized as re-creation and will not be complete until the new heavens and new earth (2 Pet. 3:13). The book of Revelation is given special prominence by its placement in final position in the biblical canon, where it forms an inclusio with the first book of the Bible.

Genesis describes the creation of the world and the entrance of evil to spoil it, and Revelation matches Genesis by forecasting the final defeat of evil and the renewal of the created order (Rev. 21–22).

In line with this, the opening of John’s Gospel echoes Genesis 1:1 (“In the beginning . . .”), and so the Fourth Gospel can be read as showing the central role of Jesus in the renewing of the whole of creation. The story of the Bible is not, however, fully told until the book of Revelation supplies its ending.

Without claiming that God’s kingship is the center of Old Testament theology, but only asserting that it is central, the metaphor of God as king is pervasive within the Old Testament. The kingship of YHWH is connected to creation, for in creating the cosmos he was creating a realm to rule (cf. Pss. 29:10; 74:12–17; 93:2–5), and the world is depicted as his sanctuary-palace (Gen. 1) whose center is the garden of Eden (Gen. 2). The kingship of YHWH is intended to be recognized as the theological presupposition behind the narrative of the exodus rescue and its aftermath. God’s position as King explains why he was able to do what he did for his people, and in turn his powerful deeds as the divine warrior provide evidence of his kingly status, this being the logic of the position of Exodus 15:18 as the finale of the Song of the Sea (“The Lord will reign for ever and ever”).

Like the great kings of the ancient Near East who organized their empires by means of treaties with subject rulers, God makes a “covenant” with his people at Sinai. The worship regulations of Exodus and Leviticus reflect the ideal of oriental royal protocol, the proper way in which to approach the exalted personage of the king. Moses anticipates that Israel will have the institution of kingship (Deut. 17:14–20), something that does not happen until the time of Saul and David. Neither Moses nor Joshua are depicted as royal figures. The later prophets see themselves as the ambassadors of the divine King and use the appropriate messenger language (“Thus says the Lord”; cf. 2 Kings 18:19), and, like Moses, their role is to insist on the crown rights of God within the kingdom of Israel.

The creation backdrop to events in the Pentateuch (Gen. 1) gives a universalistic focus to those events, indicating that God is King over the whole of creation, including all of humanity. The disastrous consequences of the fall and the spread of sin affect all humanity, something most obvious at the flood (6:5–9:28) and Babel (11:1–9). The divine call of Abram (12:1–3) is presented against the background of humanity under the curse, so now, after a series of human failures, God introduces a new phase of history that has as its aim the mending of this situation. The climactic expression in 12:3 speaks of Abram as the means of blessing for “all the families of the earth,” so that the focus, from this point on, on the family of Abraham (Gen. 12–50) and then on the nation of Israel (from Exodus 1) does not mean that the rest of humanity is forgotten. Likewise, Sarai is renamed Sarah, and God announces that “she will be the mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her” (17:16 NIV).

Israel has the unique status of being the “possession” (sĕgullâ) of the divine King, and she is chosen out of all the peoples of the world (19:5: “for all the earth is mine”). This is not a mission text and should not be taken to mean that Israel’s status as the corporate priest-king involves mediating the knowledge of God to the rest of the world; rather, this refers to her special access to the presence of God (Ex. 24:9–11). The theme of the nations is repeatedly sounded in the Pentateuch, though often Israel’s relations with them are strained. The battle with Amalek (Ex. 17:8–16), Israel’s defeat of Sihon and Og (Num. 21), and their vengeance on Midian (Num. 31) each anticipate what they will face in the promised land. Balaam’s fourth and final oracle (Num. 24:15–24) speaks of Israel’s dominion over certain nations and says, “a scepter shall rise out of Israel” (24:17). The story of God’s purposes begun in the Pentateuch and continued in the following books cannot be reduced to a history of Israel.