18. Deuteronomy
His valedictory reflects the experiences of forty
years with the Israelites, and the hopes and fears
which these events had
begotten. The words are
the utterance of a wise statesman and
man of God.
The address was deliv-
ered in three instalments. (1) Re
hearsal of the history of the people
since the covenant was made with the preceding
generation at Sinai, for the
sake of the
evidence af
forded of both the goodness and the severity of Yah
weh to Israel, and as a motive for obedience to
Yahweh's laws
(Deut. i. 6-iv.
40, with supplemen
tary statement, 41-49). (2) Rehearsal of statutes
which concerned the people, with emphasis on the
spirituality of the laws and urgent insistence upon
their observance (v.-xxvi.). (3) Conclusion: di
rections for building an altar on Mount Ebal and
writing the law there on plastered stones; and
blessings and curses annexed to obedience and dis
obedience respectively (xgvii.-xxviii.). This great
address is closely followed by a brief speech at the
ratification by the new generation of the covenant
as thus proclaimed (xxix.-xxx.). This covenant,
like the former one at Sinai, was recorded in a'
book (xxix. 20, 21, 27, xxx. 10; of.
Ex. xxiv. 4 8).
The address is dated in the fortieth year,
eleventh month, and first day; and the place is
" beyond Jordan " or " on the oth6r side of Jor
dan " (i. 1, 3). The designation was an old gee
graphical term, inherited from theirance -stors. To
Abraham and the Canaanites it meant the region
east
of the river; and the rugged bluffs that rose
behind the camp were known as Abarim, that is,
the mountains of the other side. And the Jordan
still separated them from the country of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob. They were in the country " on
the other side." Naturally enough under these cir
cumstances the distinctive feature of the address
is preparation for the settlement in Canaan. (1) It
affects the language. With the occupation of the
land imminent, and with a part of it in actual pos
session, the wilderness is a memory of the past and
the thought is now of the new home. The speaker
talks much about houses, towns, and city gates,
about the cultivation of the soil and the fruits of
the orchard and vineyard. (2) It leads to the ad
justment of the laws to the new conditions, and to
the reciting of so much only of an ordinance as
applies to the new life. In reminding the people of
the law of foods the speaker omits the reptiles,
which are included in the earlier law among the
forbidden articles of diet (cf.
Lev. xi. 29, 30
with
Deut. xiv.); passing them by without mention
probably because the land of promise was before
him, a land flowing with milk and honey, a land of
corn and wine, of figs, pomegranates, and olives.
Its fertility east of the river had already been seen
by the people, and it was plain that there would be
no temptation in the new home to eat the grosser
forms of flesh. Again, the law which required animals that were slain for food to be slaughtered at
the door of the tabernacle would necessitate a long
journey on the part of those who dwelt in remote
districts. It was changed so as to permit the people to slay for food in the town where they resided
(
Deut. xii. 15, 21;
Lev. xvii. 3, 4).
To meet the
same difficulty a change was made in the law regarding the transport of certain tithes to the sanctuary (Deut. 22-25) and, apparently, in the age at
which the firstling of the herd and flock should be
offered (xv. 19, 20; cf.
Ex. xxii. 30).
The same
intention probably led to the omission of a clause
from the statute defining the procedure to be followed for legally confirming the Hebrew bondservant's
choice, who at the end of his period of
service should elect to remain with his master.
Henceforth he need not appear at the sanctuary
before the Lord
(
Ex. xxi. 5, 6;
cf. xxii. 8, 9) in
order to declare his voluntary relinquishment of his
right to go free; from this time on the ceremony
of attachment was alone required, and that act
was always performed at the master's own house,
in whatever part of the country it might be
(
Deut. xv. 16, 17).
(3) It leads to grave concern for the
tribe of Levi, in view of the peculiar situation in
which it would soon be placed: a tribe without an
inheritance. The entire tribe of Levi had been set
apart for service at the sanctuary. It was to receive no land in Israel; and was without support
except from the gifts of the people to the Lord for
the maintenance of worship. In his parting words
he dwells on their rights and privileges, refers repeatedly to their dependent condition and exhorts
the people to call them in as guests at their joyous
feasts, and never to forsake them nor leave them
in need (xii. 12, 18, 19 et passim). In alluding to
their perquisites (x. 8, 9, xviii. 1,8) he takes for
granted a thorough familiarity on the part of the
people with the distribution of duties among the
several families of the tribe, which had been adopted
in the wilderness, and accordingly he uses the general designation Levi and Levites (xviii. 1, 6); just
as the Hebrew historians often do who wrote after
the legislation
o'
Leviticus and Numbers had been
enacted, leaving it to be understood that each
order of ministers had its own peculiar duties and
privileges (ver. 7; cf.
Num. xxxv. 1,8;
Josh. xxi. 3-7, 8-11, 13-20;
I Kings xii. 31;
I Chron. xv. 2, 4, 11, 15;
II Chron. v. 4, 5;
Mal. ii. 1-10, iii. 3).
He uses also the designation "the priests, the
Levites" (xvii. 9, xviii. 1, xxiv. 8), as do subsequent historians and
prophets, even the latest
(
Jer. xxxiii. 18, 21;
Ezek. xliii. 19, xliv. 15;
II Chron. xxiii. 18).
It was eminently appropriate as a
means of distinguishing the legitimate priests, who
had just been restricted to the family
of Aaron,
tribe of Levi, from the former ministers among the
Israelites to whom it pertained to offer sacrifice
(Ex. xix. 22, xxiv. 5;
cf. xviii. 1, 12), and perhaps
also from civil ministers to whom the -title
kohen
applied (Paton,
JBL,
1893, pp. 1-14). (4) It leads
to insistence upon resort to the one altar by the
whole nation, located at the place which Yahweh
should choose out of all the tribes to put
his name
there (xii.), and the urgent exhortation to destroy
all heathen altars. The unity of the altar was in
tended to counteract the tendency of the people to
lapse into idolatry by preventing them from wor
shiping at the numerous local sanctuaries of the
Canaanites and by keeping the service of Yahweh
under proper control; to render the worship of
Yahweh a grander spectacle and of greater pomp
than the rites of the idols of the Canaanites by
uniting the numbers and wealth of the Hebrews at
one sanctuary; and to strengthen the national
feeling
and deepen the sense of brotherhood by
giving to every member of the nation a common
home and bringing all the tribes together at stated
seasons as a great family. The spirit of jealousy
between individuals and between tribes, the popu
lar proneness to idolatry, and the willingness of
large sections of the people to separate from their
brethren and settle in attractive pastoral regions
had already become manifest. And therefore the
old idea of the priestly legislation, "one God, one
sanctuary" (Wellhausen, Hist. of Israel, p. 34), the
idea of the book of the covenant also, is insisted
upon at this crisis. It was essential to the unity
of the nation and the continuance of the theocracy.
