The Babylonian Exile was a historical catalyst compelling Jewish authors of the Second Temple period to deal with their respective situations in the course of history according to – or against – various predicaments from which they suffered in an unprecedented manner. Second Temple Jews were faced with the most fundamental uneasiness: it seemed that God abandoned his people owing to their breaking of the covenant. Therefore, it was important to reconceptualise their worldview into which creation, history, and covenant could be incorporated and which could vouchsafe the ongoing relationship with God to their respective situations.
Since the Babylonian Exile, Jewish authors of the Second Temple period (515 BCE–70 CE) attempted to make sense of their respective situations in the course of history according to – or against – various predicaments from which they suffered in an unprecedented manner. The most fundamental issue was that the Second Temple Jews believed that their God abandoned his people owing to their breaking of his covenant. In other words, they experienced feelings of despondency in their respective situations resulting from the perception that the covenant God was no longer functional and relevant. Therefore, it was most important to reconceptualise their worldview, into which creation, history and covenant were incorporated and which would vouchsafe the ongoing relationship with God in their respective situations. In doing so, Jewish authors of the Second Temple period could manage to militate against such despondency. The thesis of this study is that Deuteronomy 31–32 could furnish a framework of history in the Second Temple period. This study thus aims to make clear in what sense and to what extent the Song of Moses would play a constitutive role in establishing the hermeneutics of history in Second Temple Judaism.
Crawford (
The Song of Moses (hereafter the Song) in Deuteronomy 32, along with the narrative section in Deuteronomy 31 (as an introduction to the Song), ‘constitutes a poetic summary of Israel’s history of apostasy, punishment and grace’ (Braulik
the Song was meant to prescribe the people’s reaction, both to guard them from acting like the sinful generation of the Song and to lead them in responding to any evil that was brought upon it. (p. 424)
Weitzman (
[t]he combination of didactic and legal elements within the proverbs of
He comes to the conclusion that the Song should be understood as ‘Moses’ final teaching to the thankless children of Israel’ (Weitzman
[t]he notion of Deuteronomy 31–32 as a textual witness or memorial helps resolve the paradox that the general meaning of the narrative is clear but that the details of narration, chronology, and focus are confusing. (p. 141)
In other words, the Song should be understood as didactic and timeless. Despite that there are two scholarly viewpoints concerning the genre of the Song, it stands to reason that they have some commonalities. One may thus argue that the theology of the Song is both didactic and timeless.
The Song is concerned with the relationship between God and his elected people, Israel. It deals with ‘a meditation on divine justice in history’ in a didactic and timeless manner. In doing so, ‘a character portrait of YHWH’ comes to the forefront in the Song (Britt
[w]ithin its canonical context it represents a canonical
It becomes clear when we look at the content of the Song in terms of the faithfulness of God to his elected people, Israel. In this regard, the Song best represents the Deuteronomic view of Israel’s history. This is known as the sin–judgement–restoration pattern running not only through Deuteronomy but also through all books influenced by this tradition (e.g. the
Given that Deuteronomy 31–32 furnished a framework of history in the Second Temple period, I now turn to how other Jewish authors of Second Temple Judaism used Deuteronomy 31–32 as a framework of history in their respective contexts in order to find meaning in their contexts.
The survey that follows is not exhaustive, but hopefully representative of how authors used the Song. It is fair to say that it will be conducive to show to what extent and in what manner Jewish authors of the Second Temple period adapted and adopted the Song in their theologising when managing their respective situations.
The Song is given ‘special attention within the Qumran community’ (Waters
Dt 32:28:
CD 5:17:
Dt 32:28: ‘For they are a nation lacking in counsel, and there is no understanding in them’.
CD 5:17: they are folk bereft of advice, in that there is no intelligence in them. For in ancient times there arose
It is of interest to note that, in the original context of Deuteronomy 32, it appears to be ambiguous whether the referent in Deuteronomy 32:28 is Israel’s enemy or apostate Israel (cf. Mayes
CD 5:17–19: they are folk bereft of advice, in that there is no intelligence in them. For in ancient times there arose (18) Moses and Aaron, by the hand of the prince of lights and Belial, with his cunning, raised up Jannes and (19) his brother during the first deliverance of Israel.
Briefly put, the immediate context of CD 5:17–19, in which Deuteronomy 32:28 is alluded to in the beginning, illustrates that it is tinged by the influence of the
Secondly, it is possible that Deuteronomy 32:33 may be alluded to twice in 1QHa 13:10 (i.e. the Hodayot) and 13:27 (Suk 5:10 and 5:27; DJD 40. 13:10 and 13:27):
Dt 32:22: ‘Their wine is the venom of serpents, And the deadly poison of cobras’.
1QHa 13:10: teeth are like a sword, whose fangs are like a sharpened spear. Vipers’ venom is all their scheming to snatch away. They lay in wait, but did not
1QHa 13:27: a lying tongue, like vipers’ venom that spreads to the extremities, like crawlers in the dust they shoot to gra[b,] serpents’ [poison]
The immediate context of 1QHa 13 is also similar to CD 5:17–19 in that ‘[t]he Hodayot mentions Belial’s torrents (1QHa 3:31) and contains a thanksgiving to God, who had protected from such, venom included (1QHa 5:10, 27)’ (Uusimäki
Thirdly, Deuteronomy 32:22 is alluded to twice in 1QHa 11:31 (Suk. 3:31; DJD 40. 11:32) and 4:13 (Suk. 17:13; DJD 40. 4:25):
Dt 32:22: For a fire is kindled in My anger, And burns to the lowest part of Sheol, And consumes the earth with its yield, And sets on fire the foundations of the mountains.
1QHa 11:31: and the tract of dry land; the bases of the mountains does he burn and converts the roots of flint rock into streams of lava. It consumes right to the great deep […]
1QHa 4:13: [Even though you burn] the foundations of mountains and fire [sears] the base of Sheol, those who … in your regulations.
As with Deuteronomy 32 in 1QHa 13, 1QHa 11, in which Deuteronomy 32:22 is alluded to in 1QHa 13:31, revolves around the scheme of Belial. It is worth noting that Sheol imagery in 1QHa 4:13 illustrates that Jewish theologians in the Second Temple period would make use of Deuteronomy 32:22 in their attempts to make sense of ‘an eschatological destruction’ (Uusimäki
Fourthly, Deuteronomy 32:42 is alluded to twice in 1QM 12:11–12 and 19:4 (i.e. the War Scroll):
Dt 32:42: I will make My arrows drunk with blood, And My sword shall devour flesh, With the blood of the slain and the captives, From the long-haired leaders of the enemy.
1QM 12:11–12: collect your spoil, Performer of Valiance! Place your hand on the neck of your enemies and your foot on the piles of slain! Strike the peoples, your foes, and may your sword (12) consume guilty flesh! Fill your land with glory and your inheritance with blessing: may herds of flocks be in your fields /silver/ gold, and precious stones.
1QM 19:4: [of the dead! Strike the peoples, your foes,] and may your sword consume flesh! Fill your land with glory and your inheritance with blessing: [may herds]
Most scholars view Israel’s enemy as the referent of God’s vengeance in Deuteronomy 32:42. However, the possibility that it refers to apostate Israel remains. Notwithstanding this, it is clear that the referent in 1QM 12:11–12 and 19:4 includes apostate Israel among the enemies of the writer who will experience God’s vengeance (Bell
In summary, it is made clear that the Song, or at least some of its phrases, plays an important role in substantiating the theologoumena of the Qumran community (Bell
Weitzman (
[I]t is not because the latter [= the Song of Moses] ends with Moses’ prediction of Israel’s original settlement in the land, whereas Tobit’s foresees the corresponding re-settlement of exiled Israel in the land, but because the Song of Moses was widely understood as itself predicting Israel’s restoration after [the] exile. (p. 142)
It is interesting to note that Tobit’s pilgrimage during his exile acts as a beacon for Israel’s destiny. Tobit’s pilgrimage during his exile reaches its climax in Tobit 13. Tobit 13 can be divided into two subsections: Tobit 13:1–8 and Tobit 13:9–18 (cf. Fitzmyer
Dt 32:39: ‘See now that I, I am He, and there is no god besides Me; It is I who put to death and give life. I have wounded, and it is I who heal; and there is no one who can deliver from My hand’.
Then Tobit wrote a prayer of rejoicing, and said: ‘Blessed is God who lives for ever, and blessed is his kingdom. For he afflicts, and he shows mercy; he leads down to Hades, and brings up again, and there is no one who can escape his hand…’ (
Then, it is clear that Tobit’s lamentation in Tobit 3:4, which bears the curses of Deuteronomy 28, will be finally revoked.
For they disobeyed thy commandments, and thou gavest us over to plunder, captivity, and death; thou madest us a byword of reproach in all the nations among which we have been dispersed. (
In summary, by way of evoking the Song linguistically and conceptually, Tobit would attempt to bring out the hope of Israel’s future convincingly in that ‘the divinely woven patterns of Israel’s past continue into Israel’s exilic present’ (Weitzman
The
An episode that appears to be the culmination of this historical survey tells of the resolve of a Levite and his seven sons to die rather than betray their ancestral faith (9:1–7). There follows an eschatological hymn that portrays the destruction of the evil one at the hands of Israel’s guardian angel (10:1–2), cataclysmic cosmic events (10:3–6), and the exaltation of Israel in the end of days (10:7–10). (OTP 1:919)
Tromp (
Was the
He answers then that the latter may be the case.
In summary,
Philo designated the Song as either ‘the Great Song’ (e.g.
Having discoursed thus suitably to his subjects and the heir of his headship, he proceeded to hymn God in a song in which he rendered the final thanksgiving of his bodily life for the rare and extraordinary gifts with which he had been blest from his birth to his old age. He convoked a divine assemblage of the elements of all existence and the chiefest parts of the universe, earth and heaven, one the home of the mortals, the other the house of immortals. With these around him he sang his canticles with every kind of harmony and sweet music in the ears of both mankind and ministering angels. (
It seems that
Then, in
Thus is his post amid the ethereal choristers the great Revealer blended with the strains of thankfulness to God his own true feelings of affection to the nation, therein joining with his arraignment of them for past sins his admonitions for the present occasion and calls to a sounder mind, and his exhortations for the future expressed in hopeful words of comfort which needs must be followed by their happy fulfilment. (
The Song in
Then indeed, we find him possessed by the spirit, no longer uttering general truths to the whole nation but prophesying to each tribe in particular the things which were to be and hereafter must come to pass. Some of these have already taken place, others are still looked for, since confidence in the future is assured by fulfilment in the past. (
Lierman (
In summary,
Although Harrington (
In summary, despite the fact that the ‘pattern of history of Deuteronomy 32’ can be found (Harrington
Although
When it comes to such a ‘dynamic interplay of prospection and retrospection’ taken place in the engagement of the rabbis, Fraade (
our experience of and actions in the present are determined to a large extent by our memories and retellings of the past and our anticipations, whether in hope or in fear, of the future. (p. 126)
According to Fraade, this is the case with the rabbis’ dealings with
R. Meir says: When Israel was meritorious, they gave witness against themselves, as it is said,
It is of interest to note that
From the verses,
While
Scripture’s notice of Moses’ call to heaven and earth to hear his song is placed by the
In sum, in
[t]he contrast between God’s seeming historical absence and the presence of the song
It was observed that the Song in Deuteronomy 32 is centred on God’s faithfulness and righteousness in his dealings with Israel, without losing sight of the faithlessness and sin of Israel and their enemies. God’s faithfulness and righteousness attested in the course of Israel’s past history can be introduced in a didactic and timeless manner as ‘a textual witness’ for Israel’s subsequent generations. Jewish authors of the Second Temple period appear to have regarded the Deuteronomic view of history in Deuteronomy 31–32 as a framework of history in their attempts to understand their respective situations. Nonetheless, it is also worth noting that the ways in which Jewish authors of the Second Temple period appropriated the Song and applied it to their respective situations are not monolithic. In other words, Jewish authors of the Second Temple period appear to have borne their own characteristics whenever they had the recourse to the Deuteronomic view of history in Deuteronomy 31–32. In CD 5:17, 1QHa 13:10, 27; 11:31; 4:13 and 1QM 12:11–12; 19:4, the Deuteronomic view of history in Deuteronomy 31–32 is intertwined with dualism or dualistic ways of thinking of the Qumran community. Tobit is depicted as the second Moses in Tobit 12–13, in which Israel’s past history is summed up in terms of the Deuteronomic view of history in Deuteronomy 31–32. In doing so, the hope of Israel’s future is interlaced with Israel’s exilic present. The author of
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
All authors contributed equally to the writing of this article.
A.G-F., Old Testament Studies, Faculty of Theology and Religion, University of Pretoria, provided funding for this study.
Weitzman (
For the sin–judgement–restoration pattern in the
However, Abasciano (
If not noted otherwise, the translation of García Martínez and Tigchelaar is used for the Qumran texts.
1QHa has the three different numbering systems available at present. This study follows the text and numbering of García Martínez and Tigchelaar, but we will also present the other two in parenthesis; they are Sukenik’s (Suk) and the one adapted in Discoveries in the Judean Desert series (DJD).
Uusimäki follows Sukenik’s text.
The textual relationship between Deuteronomy 32 and Jeremiah goes beyond the scope of this study. For a discussion of this relationship, see Lundbom (
For example, ‘the Sheol of Abaddon’ in 1QHa 11:19. 1QHa 11 is also concerned with eschatological destruction.
Revised Standard Version (RSV)
For the allusion of Deuteronomy 30:1–10 in Tobit 13:5–6, which is concerned with restoration in terms of the covenantal blessings and curses, see Henderson (
OTP is an acronym of the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha.
Cf. Harrington’s (
Philo of Alexandria (20 BCE–50 CE) is a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher living in Alexandria. By using philosophical allegory, he was at pains to harmonise the Torah with Hellenistic philosophies in an apologetical manner.
For example,
LCL is an acronym of Loeb Classical Library.
Titus Flavius Josephus (37–100 CE) is a Jewish historian and hagiographer. His works give us a certain glimpse into the contours of Judaism in first-century period.
The translation of
For example, the resurrection is also mentioned both in 2 Maccabees 7:6 (i.e. 2 Mac), in which Deuteronomy 32:36 is alluded to, and in 4 Maccabees 18:18–19 (i.e. 4 Mac), in which Deuteronomy 32:39 is alluded to.