INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH.
66 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
Figure 3.4. Comparison of Chronological Systems
LATE EXODUS
RECONSTRUCTIONIST
EARLY EXODUS
(SHORT SOJOURN)
EARLY EXODUS
(LONG SOJOURN)
2100
The Patriarchs
2166 – 1805
2000
Migration to
Egypt 1876
1900
The Patriarchs
1952 – 1589
The Patriarchs
1950 – 1650
1800
Egyptian Sojourn
1876 – 1446
Migration
to Egypt
1660
Migration to
Egypt 1650
1700
1600
Slavery
1730 or 1580
Egyptian Sojourn
1660-1446
Slavery 1580
1500
Egyptian Sojourn
1650 – 1230
The Patriarchs
1500 – 1300
Gradual migration
–
1400
Wandering
1446 – 1406
Slavery 1580
Wandering
1446 – 1406
1300
Egyptian Sojourn
1350 – 1230
1200
Conquest and Judges
1406 – 1050
Conquest
and Judges
1406 – 1050
Conquest
and Judges
1230 – 1025
Conquest and Judges
1230 – 1025
1100
1000
United Kingdom
1050 – 931
United Kingdom
1050 – 931
United Kingdom
1025 – 931
United Kingdom
1025 – 931
900
Early date for Exodus
and 430-year sojourn
in Egypt per Masoretic
reading of Exodus 12:40
Early date of Exodus
and 215-year sojourn
in Egypt per LXX reading
of Exodus 12:40
Late date of Exodus
and belief in historicity
of patriarchal events
Late date of Exodus
and reconstruction of
biblical history through
use of form criticism
1994), 99.
From John H. Walton, Chronological and Background Charts of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 65
دنیا کے
کولارات
ポータル5名(ダークブル
Snake
into Egyptian civilization. Examples of
this acculturation are that not long
Posto
after the exodus the Hebrews lapsed
424-
aralan-9_12_o
2014. 02. 2:133
inte orship of what may have been
an [ptian deity (Exod. 32:1-10);
duri the trek the people clamored D3L91-1aaa2-412
to Din to Egypt (Num. 11:4-6);
and in Pentateuch itself contains
perty-five Egyptian loan words.
Iron lly, the Exodus narrative pits
Moses and Yahweh against the pharaoh
and the gods of Egypt, with the central char-
The Egyptian Tale
acter, Moses, a former Egyptian courtier. (For more on Egyptian
p.
history, see “Historical Overview of Old Testament Times,” p. 181.
som
of Sinuhe.
Lenka Peacock,
courtesy
of the
British Museum
Pentateuchal Chronology
Although most of Pentateuchal history may be assigned to the Middle
Bronze and Late Bronze ages of ancient Near Eastern history, an exact
chronology for the Hebrew patriarchs remains problematic. Some bibli-
cal scholars place the characters in a fixed chronological framework,
dating Pentateuchal events precisely to the year. For example, Abram’s
birth is dated to 2166 BC, he began his sojourn in Canaan in 2091, he
offered the Mount Moriah sacrifice in 2056, and he died in 1991 BC. Oth-
ers place the Hebrew patriarchs on a relative chronological continuum,
assigning them broadly to the four centuries between 2000 and 1600 BC.
Carved on the wall of
Abydos, this is a list of
Egyptian pharaohs that
offers an early source for
chronology
Rudoll Ochmann/Wikimedia Commons, GNU 1.2/CC 2.5
TRAGGIO
co
INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 63
>
The suzerain covenants were granted by independent and powerful
overlords to dependent and weaker vassals, guaranteeing them certain
benefits including protection. In return, the vassal was obligated to
keep specific stipulations certifying loyalty to the suzerain alone.
In general terms, Old Testament law comprised declarative and
prescriptive covenant stipulations for the life of the Hebrew people
que literally in Deut. 30:15–17). The bulk of the Old Testament legal
trials is found in Exodus 20- Deuteronomy 33, and they stem from
crenant agreement or renewal ceremonies at Mount Sinai and Mount
Ni Several important subcategories may be identified:
Casuistic or case law, usually cast in a conditional “if..
then” formula, making reference to a specific hypothetical
Tegal situation. For example, “If a man is found sleeping
with another man’s wife; (then] both the man who slept
with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil
from Israel” (Deut. 22:22).
Apodictic law or direct affirmative and negative commands
setting the bounds of appropriate behavior in Hebrew soci-
ety. For example, “You shall have no other gods before me
(Exod. 20:3) or “Honor your father and mother, so that you
may live long in the land the LORD your God is giving you”
(Exod. 20:12).
Prohibition or a negative command referring to hypotheti-
cal offenses and stating no fixed penalty. For example, “Do
not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block in front of the
blind, but fear your God. I am the LORD” (Lev. 19:14).
Death law, a hybrid of the prohibition that makes a distinct
>
a
legal statement about specific crimes meriting the death
penalty. For example, “Anyone who attacks his father or
his mother must be put to death” (Exod. 21:15).
The curse, a development from both the prohibition and the
death law addressing crimes committed in secret. The curse
was designed to protect the covenant community from
uncleanness due to violation of covenant stipulation and
to bring divine judgment on the perpetrator of the crime.
For example, “Cursed is the man who moves his neighbor’s
boundary stone” (Deut. 27:17) or “Cursed is the man who
kills his neighbor secretly” (Deut. 27:24).
The content of ancient Near Eastern law may be summarized under
the traditional headings: civil law ceremonial law, and cultic law 3
The subdivisions of civil law included marriage and family, inheri-
tance, property, slaves, debt, taxes, and wages. Common subheadings
under ceremonial law were murder, adultery and rape, theft, sexual
3. Despite the limitations of
the terms and the ambigui-
ties caused by the obvious
overlap in the categories,
the traditional rubrics re-
main helpful categories
in discussing the function
of Old Testament law. See
further, T. Longman, Mak-
ing Sense of the Old Testa-
ment (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1998), 110-11; and C. J. H.
Wright, Old Testament Ethics
for the People of God (Down-
ers Grove, Ill.: InterVar-
sity Press, 2004), 288-301
(who classifies OT legisla-
tion under the headings of
criminal law, civil law, fam-
ily law, cultic law, and com-
passionate law).
е
OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH
deviation, false witness, assault, and liability. Cultic law organized leg-
islation under four major ideas including sacrifices, purification, mode
or object of worship, and festival observance.
a
of ancient
23
The Pentateuch as History
Historical Background
The five books of the Law narrate a time span from creation to the death
of Moses at Mount Nebo in Moab just prior to the Israelite conquest of
Canaan. Obviously, it is impossible to ascertain a date for the origin
of our earth and its solar system. While estimates for the date
of creation range from tens of thousands to billions of years, it
seems best to leave the creation event an “undated mystery.”
”
Roughly speaking, the Pentateuchal narratives from the call
of Abram (Gen. 12) to the death of Moses (Deut. 34) may be
assigned to the Middle Bronze and Late Bronze ages
Near Eastern history. On a basic chronological continuum this
means that the patriarchal period extended from approximately
2000 to 1600 BC, while Moses and the exodus date to about
1500 to 1200 BC (given the early [fifteenth century BC] and late
date [twelfth century BC] options for the Israelite exodus from
Egypt-see below under “Pentateuchal Chronology”).
The patriarchs emerged from Mesopotamian culture
founded by the Sumerians but reshaped by the Semitic
dynasties of Sargon of Akkad that conquered and absorbed
the decaying Sumerian civilization about 2400 BC. The later
kingdoms of Sumer and Akkad were in turn
influenced by the
continuing infiltration of the Amorites from the north and
west and the Elamites from the east.
Palestine in the Middle Bronze Age was dominated by
scattered Canaanite city-states much like Mesopotamia, though
not as densely populated or as urban. According to the Egyptian story
of Sinuhe, the fame of Palestine’s agricultural abundance was wide-
spread. The Canaanites, Amorites, Jebusites, and non-Semitic Hurrians
were among the more important people groups occupying Syro-Pales-
tine during this period. Later both the Egyptians and the Hittites influ-
enced Syro-Palestine as they vied for control of this key land bridge (as
witnessed by the Amarna tablets and the Boghazköy tablets).
The Egyptians were the most prominent people group shaping the
historical background of Pentateuchal history. Abraham’s sporadic
contact with the land of Egypt eventually gave way to the migration
and settlement of Jacob’s entire clan in the region of the Nile delta. The
Hebrews then resided in Egypt for several centuries, multiplying into
“great nation” while at the same time being thoroughly acculturated
This bronze sculpture is
thought to be Sargon,
King of Akkad, who
founded the first empire
known in world history, in
southern Mesopotamia
about 2350 BC.
Erich Lessing/Art Resource,
NY, courtesy of the Iraq
Museum, Baghdad, Iraq
a
INTRODUCTION TO
THE PENTATEUCH
Key Ideas
• Abrahamic covenant as unifying theological theme
Diversity of literary types and distinctive literary
features
– Issues related to the historicity of the narrative
texts
T
he term Pentateuch is commonly applied to the first five
books of the Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers, and Deuteronomy. This Greek expression simply
means “five scrolls” and apparently was popularized by the Hel-
lenized Jews of Alexandria in the first century AD. The Hebrew-
speaking Jewish community traditionally referred to these five
books as the “Torah” (or “instruction” in holiness). Other designa-
tions for the Pentateuch include the Book of the Law, emphasizing
the covenant stipulations as its defining feature; and the Law of
Moses, emphasizing the human mediator as its defining feature.
The Pentateuch was the first divinely prompted literary collection
acknowledged as Scripture by the Hebrew community. As such, it is
the most important division of the Hebrew canon. It always stands
first in the threefold division of the Old Testament: Law, Proph-
ets, and Writings. Its supreme rank in the Old Testament canon in
respect to authority and holiness is evidenced by its position and
separation from the other books in the Septuagint (the Greek trans-
lation of the Old Testament). The careful translation of the Hebrew
Pentateuch into Greek also confirms the high regard for the collec-
tion in the Hebrew community (in contrast to the incomplete and
more loosely translated divisions of the Prophets and Writings).
Shaxno
SALA LL
CLASS
endes
Nasy
ܓܘ ܘܟܓܝܢܢ
ܝ ܦܕܬܬܠ ܩ
ఆ అందం గురు
ܓܠܛܪ ܬܪܕܐ ܚܪܗܦ
AL : ཀ་ཆེན་ཆེས་མང ང་
ONE
1, Sཛག རིག་གནས༌ རེད། །
LONG
RO
ܐܰܬ݂ܛܬܬܐܛܢܫ
ܠܠܚ ܟ ܬܠ
ܓܢܢܝܗܽܘܝܳ
Theme and General Contents
The “five-book” division of the Pentateuch is really a secondary
partitioning of what was intended to be a unified, literary whole.
The Pentateuch is better understood as a “five-volume” book, a
five-part miniseries of sorts. D. J. A. Clines (1979) has convinc-
ingly argued that the Pentateuch has two basic divisions, Gen-
esis 1-11 and Genesis 12-Deuteronomy 34. In view of the fall of
humankind and the broken fellowship between God and humanity,
ܟ ܗܠܬܐܓ ܠܬܢ
ܟܦܬ ܂
be
–
57
3
INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH
A A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 69
consative scholars may also use these critical methodologies while
presupposing the supernatural origin and the historical reliability of
the cue Testament.4
So basally, the issue of historical reliability of the Pentateuchal (and
other Old Testament) narratives is one of preconvictions about the
nature of the biblical text. Proponents of historical reliability are gener-
ally committed to the divine inspiration of the biblical narratives assur-
ing an accurate history of Israel. Conversely, proponents of some form of
a “reconstructionist” view of Old Testament history generally discount
the divine or supernatural origin of the biblical narratives. This precon-
viction accounts for their critical stance toward the Old Testament as
a flawed human and prescientific document and explains the need to
reinterpret or recreate Hebrew history in light of extrabiblical literary
and archaeological data and contemporary sociopolitical models.
Interpretation of the Pentateuch
The Old Testament and the Christian Church
Ever since the time of the gnostic heretic Marcion (AD second century),
the church has been confronted with the problem of determining the
rightful place of the Old Testament in the Christian’s Bible. Marcion
represents one extreme, namely, utter rejection of the Old Testament
”
and its “inferior God.” Today the other extreme may be found among
those groups who recognize the absolute authoritative nature of the
Old Testament writings for the life and doctrine of the church. More
recently this application of the authority of the Old Testament, espe-
cially the Law, to the life of Christians has witnessed a resurgence in
the “theonomics” movement, or Dominion Theology.”
The problem of reconciling “law” and “grace” gave rise to multiple
methods of interpretation of the Old Testament during the Middle Ages.
Since it was believed that revelation was both expressed and hidden in
the text of the Bible, several hermeneutical or interpretive approaches
were used to understand the proper meaning of the Scriptures. Four
basic methods emerged: (1) the literal or plain, taking the Bible at
face value; (2) the allegorical or hidden meaning, uncovering “buried”
meanings for personal faith; (3) the moral or didactic, directing Chris-
tian behavior; and (4) the anagogical, focusing on the consummation
of faith and the ultimate hope of the Christian.
Since the Reformation, Protestant churches have attempted to
resolve the tension between the “law” of the old covenant and the
“grace” of the new covenant by one of two basic approaches. The first
heightens the discontinuity of the two covenants, in varying degrees,
by means of a “dispensational” interpretation that identifies seven self-
contained eras, or dispensations, of divine revelation. This approach
4. See Carl E. Armerding,
The Old Testament and Criti-
cism (Grand Rapids: Eerd-
mans, 1983), 1-19.
5. Greg L. Bahnsen, The-
onomy in Christian Ethics
(Nutley, N.J.: Craig Press,
1979). Bahnsen argues that
the predominate character
of Old Testament Law is
moral, hence its content is
still binding today. Cf. Wil-
liam S. Barker and W. Rob-
ert Godfrey, eds., Theonomy:
A Reformed Critique (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1990).
68 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
INTRODUCTION TO THE PENTATEUCH
a
C
>
conveys no historicity for the patriarchs, but merely reflects patriarchal
stories retold in a later age.
is should be noted here that a skeptical stance toward the Old Testa-
ment record as history is not peculiar to source analysis. Many pres-
ent-day scholars espousing the unity of the Pentateuch on the basis of
literary criticism also deny the essential historicity of the biblical nar-
ratives. They speak of “sacred history” and “prose fiction,” affirming the
theological truth of Scripture but denying that the message reflects his-
torical reality or dismissing the question of historicity as irrelevant.
Three primary reasons have been given for the source critic’s skep-
ticism toward historicity: (1) It is assumed that the oral traditions on
which the later written documents were based likely suffered from
faulty transmission; (2) the historical distance between the actual
events of Old Testament history and the documentation of those events
seriously undermines the reliability of the written record; and (3) the
historical events preserved in these later written documents were no
doubt heavily edited by the Hebrew community for theological and
political purposes.
Today there are essentially three schools of thought on the historical
reliability of the Pentateuchal (and other Old Testament) narratives. One,
usually called the orthodox or traditional approach, assumes the super-
natural origin of the Old Testament and the complete historical accu-
racy of the biblical record. The orthodox or conservative biblical scholar
appeals to extrabiblical and archaeological resources only to support and
elucidate the reliable history of Israel already provided in the Bible.
A second approach, the historical-archaeological, presumes that the
Pentateuch (and the Old Testament) is generally reliable. This means that
the Old Testament in large measure preserved historical traditions rather
than creating them. Archaeological data are employed as objective con-
trols to the accounts of biblical history in lieu of the subjective literary
and philosophical hypotheses. Those committed to this view believe that
ultimately a proper correlation between archaeological data and biblical
tradition will either support the historicity of the Old Testament narra-
tives or permit the proper reconstruction of Israelite history.
The third school of thought is that of the historical reconstruc-
tionist. This view takes a skeptical stance toward the biblical narra-
tives on the grounds that they are the work of prescientific ancient and
medieval historians. Generally, other ancient extrabiblical sources are
considered more reliable than the Old Testament narratives since they
are older documents and hence closer to the events they report. The
historical-critical scholar uses a variety of methodologies including
source, literary, form, and “tradition history” criticism to reconstruct
the history of Israel in holding that the biblical accounts themselves
cannot be taken at face value. Again, it is noteworthy that orthodox or
GENES!
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 81
a
the differences.
Comparative studies demand that we examine both the similarities and
When we undertake this type of analysis with the primeval his-
tory, we find that differences are considerable and that the similari-
ties can be explained more easily in other ways than by resorting to
theories of literary borrowing. As an example, the flood story found in
Mesopotamia follows a story line similar to that found in Genesis. A
person
is warned by deity to build a boat so that he can be spared from
an impending flood intended to wipe out the human population. The
boat is built; the storm comes; and after the waters subside, the boat
comes to rest atop a mountain. Birds are sent out to determine when the
inhabitants of the boat may safely disembark. The account ends with
the offer of a sacrifice and a blessing bestowed on the survivors.
But the differences must also be considered. Among these are the
type of boat, the length of the flood, the people who were saved, the
landing place of the boat, the outcome for the hero, and most impor-
tant, the role of the gods. Many who have done thorough linguistic and
literary analysis (e.g., A. Heidel, A. R. Millard, D. Damrosch) conclude
that literary dependence cannot be demonstrated. Here, as in most of
the parallels in the primeval history, it is considered more likely that
Mesopotamian and biblical traditions are based on a common source.
Some understand this common source to be a piece of more ancient
literature, while others consider it the actual event. In either case, the
Mesopotamian literature provides a background for understanding
some of the issues of the primeval history of Genesis in contradistinc-
tion to the theology of the ancient Near East.
Finally, it should be noted that often when similarities are noted
between the Old Testament and the ancient Near East, they can simply
be attributed to the fact that the Israelite conceptual world shares the
same foundation as surrounding cultures, so we would expect to find
them thinking in the same terms, and for that thinking to be reflected
in their literature in many ways.3
3. For an in-depth study
of this phenomenon see J.
Walton, Ancient Near East-
ern Thought and the Old
Testament: An Introduction to
the Conceptual World of the
Hebrew Bible (Grand Rap-
ids: Baker, 2006).
OLD BABYLONTAN
URII
Entrance
into
Canaan
ISIN LA R S A
Jacob Jacob to
to Haran Canaan
Hammurabi
destroys Mari
Syria/Mesopotamia
MIDDLE BRONZE IL B
BRONZEI
Abraham
MIDDLE BRONZE 11 A
Jacob and family
Isaac
to Egypt
Jacob
Canaan
Expulsion of
the Hyksos
2ND INTERMEDIATE PERIOD
-XIII Dynasty (Memphist
MIDDLE KINGDOM PERIOD
XI Dynasty (Thebes) + XII Dynasty (Lisht)
Asiatics
to Egypt
BC 2100
2000
1900
1800
Egypt
XVII (Thebes)-
1600
1700
GENESIS
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 91
chosen people.
.
more pious, or more deserving than any other family. His electing them
was an act of grace. Furthermore, while the covenant could not be rati-
fied until Abraham left his family, no clear conditions were placed on
the covenant itself. To be sure, the benefits of the covenant could be
Jost for periods of time, but no mention is made of the possibility of
cancellation. The family of Abraham, for good or ill, constituted God’s
In Christianity, when we speak of the church as God’s people, we
refer to those who have accepted salvation through faith, specifically
faith in Jesus Christ. The church could therefore be identified as the
people of God in a soteriological — i.e., salvational — sense. Undoubt-
edly many Israelites of the Old Testament could be identified as God’s
people by virtue of their faith in Yahweh. But their divine election
and the divine covenant made the Israelites the people of God only
in a revelatory sense. By this we mean that God chose them as his
instrument of revelation. God revealed himself to the world through
Israel — through the law he gave to them; through their history (which
demonstrates his benevolence, grace, faithfulness, and sovereignty);
through the writing of the Bible; and most of all, through the birth,
life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Pillars were erected in the
ancient world for a
number of different
purposes. In Genesis
28:18 Jacob sets one up to
mark what he has
discovered is sacred space.
This standing stone has
endured from the time and
place of ancient Shechem.
Copyright 1995-2009
Phoenix Data Systems
THE
GENEST:
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 93
I
gods were associated either to a temple in geographical proximity or to
left his land and his father’s house.
the family’s ancestral gods. Abraham left all of these behind when he
Also to be considered, however, is the question, “Which God did
Abraham worship?”. Though the personal name “Yahweh” occurs
frequently in Genesis, a problem arises when we read the opening
chapters of Exodus. In Exodus 6:2 – 3 God says to Moses, “I am the
LORD [Yahweh). I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God
Almighty (El Shaddai], but by my name the Lord [Yahweh] I did not
make myself known to them.” Though some scholars have suggested
that Yahweh and Shaddai were two originally independent deities that
became merged, the biblical texts unanimously accept them as alterna-
tive names for the same deity.
It seems most likely, from current research, that the patriarchs
would have identified their God as “El,” with both “Shaddai” and
“Yahweh” serving as epithets to describe certain aspects of El’s activ-
ity. Exodus 6:3 would then be understood as explaining that El
Shaddai was the name most appropriately connected with how God
interacted with the patriarchs and what he accomplished for them.
They did not experience firsthand the significance of the epithet Yah-
weh. It was Moses’ generation who would come to know (experience)
God as Yahweh.
The book of Genesis helps us see this distinction between Shaddai
and Yahweh in the theophanies attributed to each (fig. 4.1). A theo-
phany is a visible and/or audible manifestation of God. Both Abraham
and Jacob experienced one “Shaddai theophany” and one “Yahweh
theophany.” For both, the Yahweh theophany came first and at the ini-
tiation of the agreement between God and the patriarch. The emphasis
of the Yahweh theophany was on the land that would be given to the
patriarch (15:7-17; 28:13-15).
In contrast, the El Shaddai theophanies came when the patriarchs
accepted participation in the covenant. In the case of Abraham espe-
cially, the actual fulfillment was about to take place. The emphasis
was on the element that began to find fulfillment in the patriarchs’
lifetimes: descendants. Even in usage apart from the theophanies, the
name El Shaddai is most closely connected with descendants (28:3;
43:14; 48:3). Both Shaddai theophanies feature a name change for the
patriarch, showing that each considered himself in allegiance with El
Shaddai (17:1-8; 35:11-12).
The conclusions to be drawn from this differentiation are that the
name Yahweh was connected to the longer-term promises of God to the
patriarchs-specifically the land, which even Abraham was told would
be a long time coming. The patriarchs could truly be considered then
not to have “known” God by his name Yahweh, for the promises that
106 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
EXODUS
the century of transition between the Late Bronze and Early Iron ages
of ancient Near Eastern history.
The arguments for the two positions are summarized in figures 5.2a
and 5.2b.
At issue in the controversy over the date of the exodus is the inter-
pretation of the biblical and extrabiblical data. Proponents of the
Early Date position emphasize the literal interpretation of the bibli-
cal numbers recorded in Exodus 12:40; Judges 11:26; and 1 Kings 6:1
and selectively appeal to archaeology for support (e.g., both
cite archaeological evidence from Jericho and Hazor in support of
their positions). Those holding to the Late Date view understand the
camps
Figure 5.1a. Early Dating of the Exodus
Suggested early dates:
Date BC
1446
1440
1437
Reigning pharaoh
Amenophis II (1450 – 25)
Amenophis II (1450 – 25)
Amenophis II (1450 – 25)
–
Arguments for the Early Date
1. 1 Kings 6:1 indicates the Exodus occurred 480 years prior to the 4th year of Solomon’s
reign. His 4th year is variously dated at 966/960/957 BC, placing the Exodus at
1446/1440/1437.
2. According to Judges 11:26, Israel had occupied Canaan for 300 years before the judgeship
of Jephthah, which is dated between 1100 and 1050. This dates Joshua’s conquest between
1400 and 1350. Adding Israel’s 40 years in the desert puts the Exodus between 1440 and
1390.
3. Moses lived in exile in Midian 40 years (Acts 7:3; cf. Exodus 2:23) while the pharaoh of
the oppression was still alive. The only pharaohs who ruled 40 years or more were
Thutmose III (1504 – 1450) and Rameses II (1290 – 1224),
4. The Merneptah Stela (ca. 1220) indicates Israel was already an established nation at this
time.
5. The Amarna tablets (ca. 1400) speak of a period of chaos caused by the “Habiru,” very
likely the Hebrews.
6. The early date allows for the length of time assigned to the period of the judges (at least
250 years). The late date allows only 180 years.
7. The Dream Stela of Thutmose IV indicates he was not the legal heir to the throne (ì.e., the
legal heir would have died in the tenth plague).
8. Archaeological evidence from Jericho, Hazor, etc., supports a 15th-century date for the
Exodus.
9. Exodus 12:40 dates the entrance of Jacob into Egypt during the reign of Sesostris/Senusert
III (1878 – 43) rather than during the Hyksos period (1674 – 1567).
Adapted from Andrew E. Hill, Bakers Handbook of Bible Lists. Rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006), 63 – 64. Used
by permission.
a
EXODUS
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 105
largely limited to the modernization of archaic or technical terminol-
ogy and geographical place names (e.g., 15:23). Whether the rest of
the narrative and legislation of the book was composed by Moses or
dictated to scribes remains unspecified (cf. 25:1; 30:11, 17). Exodus
and the rest of the Pentateuch were probably cast in the form of
a unified, five-volume book sometime between the days of Joshua
and the elders of Israel (Josh. 24:31) and the era of Samuel (1 Sam.
3:19-21).
The Background
Date of the Exodus
The book records events from the birth of Moses to the completion
and dedication of the tabernacle at Sinai in the first month of the
second year after the exodus from Egypt (cf. 1:1; 2:1 -14; 19:1; 40:17).
Thus, the actual history of the book covers a span of about eighty-
five years.
The main problem for scholars has been
determining the century in which the events
associated with the departure from Egypt
actually took place. Pinpointing the date of the
exodus constitutes one of the major chronologi-
cal problems of Old Testament study, and the complex
issue remains a topic of debate. Two basic positions
have emerged from the discussions, the so-called Early
Date and Late Date views. The chronology of the exodus
is further complicated because the migration of Jacob’s
family to Egypt due to famine in Palestine cannot be
precisely calculated either. In an attempt to account for
the biblical and extrabiblical chronological and geographical data,
four chronological systems have been developed (see fig. 3.4).
Since only two pharaohs of Egypt ruled for more than forty years
(the length of Moses’ exile in the wilderness during the Hebrew
oppression), their reigns have become the focal points of discussion
for dating the exodus. The Early Date view identifies Thutmose III
(1504-1450) as the pharaoh of the oppression and Amenophis II
(1450-1425) as the pharaoh of the exodus. Both reigned during the
Eighteenth Dynasty of the period of Egyptian history known as the
New Kingdom era and date to the Late Bronze Age of ancient Near
“Aaron threw his staff
down in front of Pharaoh
and his officials, and it
became a snake” (Exod.
7:10b). This staff in the
a
form of a coiled serpent
was found bearing
incantations and
prescriptions to secure
good health. Serpents
were considered magical
creatures in ancient Egypt.
Werner Forman Archive/
Fitzwilliam Museum,
Cambridge
Eastern history.
The Late Date position identifies Rameses I (1320-1318) and Seti I
(1318–1304) as the pharaohs of the Hebrew oppression and Rameses
II (1304-1237) as the pharaoh of the exodus. All were kings of the
Nineteenth Dynasty of the Egyptian New Kingdom era and are dated to
104 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
EXODUS
authors-editors of the exilic or postexilic period (ca. 600-400 BC). (See
further, Appendix B.)
According to this hypothesis, the oral traditions on which the book
of Exodus was based underwent considerable expansion, revision, and
rewriting over the course of several centuries (i.e., the ninth to the
fifth centuries BC). For this reason critical Old Testament scholarship
maintains a stance of suspicion toward the book’s literary integrity and
skepticism toward its historicity.
An examination of the text of Exodus confirms Mosaic authorship
for at least four sections of the book. These four literary units were
apparently written in association with the events they record and
include the “memorial” of the war with the Amalekites (17:8-16; esp.
v. 14), the covenant code (19:1 – 24:18; cf. 24:4; 34:27), the Song of the
Sea (15:1-21), and the additional covenant stipulations (34:1–28;
esp. v. 27).
its present
The extensive third-person narratives of the book (including the
passage lauding Moses, 11:3), along with the parenthetical insertions
intended to bring a later audience up to date (e.g., 16:31-36), sug-
gest that someone other than Moses compiled Exodus
form. It seems reasonable to assume that the four passages cited as
composed by Moses were collected and arranged by a contemporary,
perhaps even his protégé Joshua. The book of Exodus stands substan-
tially as the literary product of Moses. Any later editorial activity is
.
“So they put slave masters
over them to oppress them
with forced labor. … They
made their lives bitter with
hard labor in brick and
mortar and with all kinds
of work in the fields”
(Exod. 1:11, 14). This wall
painting from the Tomb of
Rekhmire, vizier under
Thutmosis III and
Amenophis II (18th
Dynasty, New Kingdom),
depicts slaves making
bricks, as the Hebrews
were forced to do during
their sojourn in Egypt.
Erich Lessing/Art Resource, NY
EXODUS
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 107
Figure 5.1b. Late Dating of the Exodus
Suggested late dates:
Date BC
1350
1290
1280
1275
1225
Reigning pharaoh
Tutankhamen (1361 – 52)
Rameses II (1304 – 1237)
Rameses II (1304 – 1237)
Rameses II (1304 – 1237)
Rameses II (1304 – 1237)
–
.
Arguments for the Late Date
1. The 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 is a symbolic figure for 12 generations. Because a generation
is about 25 years, the actual figure should be 300 years, placing the Exodus around
1266/1260 BC.
2. The 300-year figure cited by Jephthah is merely an exaggerated generalization, since he
had no access to historical records.
3. The 40 years Moses spent with the Midianites is not a chronological figure, but a symbolic
figure indicating a long period of time.
4. The Merneptah Stela (ca. 1220) indicates Israel was in the land of Palestine by this date.
The name “Israel” does not occur in any other historical record or documents before
1220. This would be unlikely had Israel begun occupation of the land 200 years earlier,
in 1400.
5. The “Habiru” of the Amarna tablets cannot be identified with the Hebrews. The “Habiru”
were a diverse people, native Canaanites. They are attested from the 18th to the 12th
centuries BC.
6. With the overlapping of judgeships and the use of symbolic numbers (e.g., 40 years), the
period of the judges need not span more than 150 years.
7. That Thutmose IV was not the legal heir to the Egyptian throne in no way proves the legal
heir died in the tenth plague.
8. Archaeological evidence from Lachish, Jericho, Bethel, Hazor, Debir, etc., supports a 13th-
century date for the Exodus.
9. The 430 years of Exodus 12:40 from the late date for the Exodus places Jacob’s entrance
into Egypt during the Hyksos period (1730 – 1570). This period of foreign domination in
Egypt is a more likely time period for Israel’s entrance into Egypt.
10. The civilizations of Edom, Ammon, and Moab were not in existence in the 15th century,
thus it would have been impossible for Israel to have had contact with these nations if the
Exodus occurred in that century. Since Israel did have such contact, the Exodus must be
dated to the 13th century.
11. The Old Testament does not mention the Palestinian invasions of Seti l or Rameses II, very
likely because Israel was not yet in the land of Palestine.
12. The Israelites were building Pithom and Raamses (Exod. 1:11), cities of the delta region.
Raamses was founded by Seti I (1318 – 1304) and completed by Rameses II
(1304 – 1237).
13. Thutmose III was not noted as a great builder.
Adapted from Andrew E. Hill, Baker’s Handbook of Bible Lists. Rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006), 64 – 65. Used
by permission
–
–
108 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
EXODUS
1. E.g., the Late Date view
identifies the Arad of Num-
bers 21:1 with the modern
Tell Arad because it is an
Iron Age settlement and
lacks both Middle Bronze
and Late Bronze Age occu-
pation levels. By contrast,
the Early Date proponents
suggest that Arad should be
identified with Tell el-Milh
some eight miles south-
west of Tell Arad, since it
exhibits Middle Bronze Age
fortifications.
biblical numbers symbolically and place priority on the extrabibli-
cal historical information and archaeological evidence. The approach
adopted in this volume assumes the historical validity of the bibli-
cal numbers while recognizing the “slippery” nature of the evidence
garnered by both camps from the selective appeal to extrabiblical and
archaeological data.!
Rameses II, also known as
Rameses the Great, is one
of the candidates for the
pharaoh in the Exodus
narratives. He was the
most prominent of the
kings of the 19th dynasty
and had a reign lasting
several decades in the
13th century BC.
Frederick J. Mabie
Route of the Exodus
Our understanding of the Hebrew exodus is further complicated by
geographical considerations, as the exact route of the Hebrew desert
trek and the location of Mount Sinai remain uncertain. Three alterna-
tives have been advanced for the exodus route taken by the Hebrews:
the extreme northern Sinai route theory, the central Sinai route theory,
and the traditional southern Sinai route theory.
Arguments lending support to the northern route theory include
the tentative identification of Baal-Zephon with Ras Kasrun in the
northwestern area of the Sinai. Also, the northern route fits Moses’
request to Pharaoh for three days to journey to worship Yahweh (Exod.
3:18). The route also marks the shortest distance to Kadesh-Barnea,
the immediate objective of the Hebrews. Yet the
northern route is the most unlikely option of
the three theories, since it keeps the Isra-
elites so close to Egyptian territory.
Further, this view discounts the
biblical texts indicating that
Mount Sinai was an eleven-
day journey from Kadesh
(Deut. 1:2) and that God
EXO
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 109
е
Suggested Routes of the
Exodus
The Great Sea
(Mediterranean Sea)
Jordan R.
Sea of
Galilee
Jericho Rabbah
CANAAN
of Zin
On Great
Heshbon
Salt,
Sea of Reeds?
Mt. Nebo
Sea
GOSHEN
Beersheba
Migdol
Desert
Rameses
Zoan
Punon
Pithom
Kadesh
Succoth
Pyramids
Mt. Sinai?
at Giza
Bitter
SINAI
Lake
Memphis
Ezion Geber
EGYPT Marah
Elim
Wilderness
River
O Red Sea
of Sin
0
Red Sea
40 km.
Rephidim
0
40 miles
• Beni-Hasan
Mt. Sinai?
(Horeb)
Suggested Routes
of the Exodus
• El-Amarna
Red Sea
deliberately maneuvered the Hebrews away from the occupied areas
along the coast (cf. Exod. 13:17).
The central route theory locates Mount Sinai in northwest Arabia,
beyond Aqabah, partly on the grounds that the Exodus narrative of the
covenant experience describes an active volcano (19:16–25) and partly
because the same region is traditionally connected with the homeland
of the Midianites (cf. Exod. 3:1; 18:1). Today the central route alternative
has largely been discounted by biblical scholars due to the strength of
counter-arguments made in separate studies. First, it has been demon-
strated that the Sinai theophany is typical of other recorded ancient Near
Eastern divine manifestations that do not presuppose an active volcano;
there is therefore no need to place Sinai in Arabia, the nearest site for
volcanic activity. Second, Moses is identified as being related to the Ken-
ites as well as to the Midianites, and it is believed that the Kenites were a
nomadic Midianite clan whose presence in the Sinai region is well attested
(cf. Judg. 1:16; 4:11); so there is no need to place Moses in Arabia.
The traditional southern route exodus theory still accommodates all
the known biblical and geographical information most convincingly. It
seems likely the crossing of “the Sea of Reeds” took place somewhere in
the salt marshes and lakes between the Mediterranean Sea and the Gulf
of Suez. Lakes Menzaleh, Balah, and Timsah, along with the Great Bit-
ter Lakes have been suggested as possible candidates for the Reed Sea of
the Hebrew exodus. The northerly jog in the route is best accounted for
by the “wall” of the canal of Shur discovered in the eastern Nile delta.
110 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
EXODUS
Certainly the escaped Hebrew slaves would have avoided this Egyptian
fortification. Finally, Jebel Musa or Mount Horeb, in the southern Sinai
peninsula has been identified as the Mount Sinai of Moses’ revelation
by Christian tradition dating to the fourth century AD.
Purpose and Message
The message of Exodus is summarized in two passages: the commis-
sion of Moses (6:2-9) and the preface to the covenant ceremony at
Sinai (19:1-6). The three basic components of the message include
(1) the judgment of the oppressor nation Egypt, (2) the deliverance of
Israel from slavery in Egypt by the “mighty arm” of Yahweh, and (3) the
establishment of Israel as God’s special possession among all peoples.
Several themes or emphases unify the Exodus narratives. Judgment
and deliverance figure prominently in chapters 1-12, and Yahweh’s
paternal guidance in the wilderness and the promise of settlement
in Canaan follow in 13-18. Theocratic covenant and law combine to
form Israel’s charter as the people of Yahweh in 19-24, and the book
concludes with preparations for worship of the Holy One of Israel
(25-40).
The historical purpose of Exodus was the preservation of accounts
explaining how the Israelites came to be slaves in Egypt, their deliver-
ance, and their presence in the wilderness of Sinai. The Exodus narra-
tive forms a bridge between the patriarchal stories with the later history
of the theocratic nation taking possession of Canaan (cf. 6:4).
The basic theological purpose of the book is divine self-disclosure.
God has not only remembered his covenant promises to the Hebrew
patriarchs, but also has now revealed himself to Israel as Yahweh
(6:2-3). Although this revelation of Yahweh occurs in a variety of
manifestations, the end result is that he will take Israel for his people
and will be their God (6:7).
Last, the didactic purpose of the book includes instruction on the
importance of maintaining covenant relationship with Yahweh and the
importance of the law as an instrument for shaping and preserving
Israel’s identity as Yahweh’s people (23:20-23). Only through obedi-
ence to the covenant stipulations can Israel be a kingdom of priests to
Yahweh and a holy nation, fulfilling her divine destiny among
nations (19:5-6).
a
a
а
all the
Structure and Organization
The book of Exodus is easily arranged into three large blocks of narra-
tive material based on the sequence of geographical locations for Israel
as they journeyed from Egypt to Mount Sinai:
CURL 15
Men Shay
EXODUS
120 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
functioned as a general statement of criminal law for Israelite society,
delineating “serious crime” in relation to covenant with Yahweh. This
was essential to the well-being of the nation, because an offense against
Yahweh’s covenant jeopardized the entire covenant community.
In the New Testament, Jesus summarized the theological and
social dimensions of the covenant stipulations in the Decalogue in two
commandments (Matt. 22:36-39; cf. Deut. 6:5); and emphasized that
the essence of the Old Testament law is justice, mercy, and faith (cf.
Matt. 23:23).
The Presence of God
One important outcome of the covenant agreement between Yahweh
and Israel was the very presence of God accompanying the Hebrews
on their journey from Egypt to the plains of Moab via Mount Sinai.
Although this mysterious presence of God was made manifest to Israel
in alternative forms—a cloud and a pillar of fire—the essential thrust
of the Pentateuchal narrative is the “Lord dwelling in the midst of his
people” (Exod. 25:8).
The tabernacle structure described in Exodus 25–40 was designed
to symbolize the active presence of the Lord among the Hebrews. The
tabernacle was also called the Tent of Meeting, because there God con-
vened his assemblies with Israel, with the holy priesthood ordained to
represent the Hebrew people before Yahweh (cf. Lev. 1:1). In part, the
presence of God associated with the tabernacle restored the intimate
fellowship enjoyed by God and man and woman in the garden experi-
ence before the fall (Gen. 3:8).
The New Testament renews this theme of God’s presence among
humankind with the announcement found in John’s gospel that “the
Word became flesh and lived (or ‘tabernacled’) among us” (1:14; cf. Isa.
7:14). Perhaps this return of the “divine presence” to Israel fulfilled Hag-
gai’s prophecy about the latter glory of the temple being far greater than
the glory of the former (i.e., Solomon’s) temple (Hag. 2:9; cf. Luke 2).
LEVITICUS
Key Ideas
The holiness of God
– The purity of the covenant community
• The principle of substitution in the sacrificial ritual
• The principle of mediation in the service of the
priests
. The redeeming of time by means of the liturgical
calendar
Purpose Statement
The purpose of Leviticus is to provide a manual
or handbook on holiness designed to instruct the
Hebrew community in holy worship and holy living
so that they might imitate God’s holiness and enjoy
the presence and blessing of God.
Major Themes
• Holiness
• Sacrifice
• Sabbath Rest and Sabbatical Year
God’s Presence
Leviticus affirms God’s presence with his people
in the requirements of the sacrificial system (espe-
cially the fellowship offerings), the various purity
laws intended to establish a standard of holiness for
Israel appropriate to their covenant relationship with
God, and the legislation ensuring reverence for his
sanctuary in their midst. All this was necessary in
order that God might maintain his dwelling place
among the people and walk among them as their God
(26:11-12).
125
LEVITICUS
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 127
Dr. Tim Bulkeley, www.eBible Tools.com
Leviticus 1: Altars were the
center of ritual in the
ancient world. Many of
those found by
archaeologists had horns
on the four corners, such as
this limestone altar from
Beersheba. While the
symbolism of the horns is
not clear, fugitives of most
crimes (but not intentional
murder— see, for example,
1 Kings 2:28-32) could
find asylum by grasping the
horns of the altar in an
appeal to God’s mercy.
Cutting off the horns made
an altar useless for religious
purposes (Amos 3:14).
a
in the text (at least once in every chapter except 2, 3, 9, 10, and 26).
Orthodox Jewish and Christian scholars have traditionally attributed
the book to Moses, the lawgiver of Israel. Although no divine com-
mandment is given for the recording of this legislation delivered to
Moses, it is simply assumed by analogy to the book of Exodus that
Moses wrote down the words spoken to him by the Lord (cf. Exod.
17:14; 24:4; 34:27).
Scholars holding to the traditional Mosaic or single-author view set
forth two options for the date of writing of Leviticus: (1) those commit-
ted to an early date for the Israelite exodus from Egypt assign the work
to the first half of the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1400 BC), while (2) those
inclined toward a late date for the Hebrew exodus place the writing of
the book in the early Iron Age (ca. 1200 BC).
Biblical scholars who hold to some form of the multiple author-
ship or Documentary Hypothesis for the composition of the Pentateuch
assign the whole of Leviticus to the Priestly (P) source. This Penta-
teuchal literary strand is distinguished by the unmistakable priestly
and liturgical interests of the levitical order such as rituals, purity laws,
and genealogies. According to this theory, the P document was com-
posed by one or more unknown levitical priests between 550 and 450
BC. When the Priestly contributions were then added to the other docu-
ments or strands of written tradition (J, E, and D) about 400 BC, the
result was the complete Pentateuch as we know it today. (See further,
Appendix B.).
A third position on the authorship of Leviticus mediates between
the traditional Mosaic view and the Documentary approach. This
view maintains that the P source is preexilic in date but not Mosaic
in origin. Arguments supporting this alternative are grounded in the
1/
LEVITICUS
126 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
Offering
An Outline of Leviticus
1. Approaching a Holy God
A. Laws about Sacrifice (1-7)
1. Burnt offering (1:1-17)
2. Grain offering (2)
3. Peace offering (3)
4. Sin offering (4:1-5:13)
5. Guilt offering (5:14-6:7)
6. Instructions for priests 6:8-7:38
B. Laws about the Consecration of Priests (8-10)
1. Anointing of Aaron and his sons (8)
2. Aaron’s sacrifice (9)
3. Death of Nadab and Abihu (10)
II. Living in the Presence of a Holy God
A. Laws about “Clean” and “Unclean” Things (11-15)
(reaning
Laws
–
1. Food (11)
2. Childbirth (12)
3. Leprosy and skin diseases (13-14)
4. Discharges and secretions (15)
B. Laws about Holiness (16-25)
1. The Day of Atonement (16)
2. Taboo on eating and drinking blood (17)
3. Laws about sexuality (18)
4. Civil and ceremonial laws (19)
5. Various laws and punishments (20)
6. Laws for priests (21-22)
7. Feasts and calendar (23-25)
III. Covenant Blessings and Curses (26)
IV. Appendix: Laws about Vows and Gifts (27)
I
eviticus, the third book of the Pentateuch, is a manual of priestly
regulations and duties and a handbook of instructions prescrib-
ring practical “holy living” for the Israelite covenant community.
The Hebrew title of the book, “And he called,” is taken from the open-
ing verse of the text, “And the LORD called unto Moses” (KJV). The Eng-
lish name “Leviticus” derives from the Greek title Leuitikon, given in
the Septuagint and meaning “pertaining to the Levites.”
>
The Writing of the Book
The human author of Leviticus is not mentioned in the book. Yet the
phrase “the Lord said to Moses” occurs more than twenty-five times
130 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
LEVITICUS
• The highly ethical and moral nature of Hebrew religion in
contrast to the Canaanite fertility cult
• The holy and righteous character of Yahweh in contrast to
the capricious behavior of the pagan deities
• The prohibition of human sacrifice?
5
Purpose and Message
The central teaching of the book is summarized in the command to “con-
secrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy …” (Lev. 11:44-45).
The first part of Leviticus outlines the requisite procedures for wor-
shiping Yahweh (chaps. 1-10), and the second section prescribes how
the covenant people of God are to translate the idea of holiness into
daily living (chaps. 11-27).
Leviticus is basically a manual or handbook on holiness designed to
instruct the Hebrew community in holy worship and holy living so that
they might enjoy the presence and blessing of God (cf. Lev. 26:1-13).
The laws and instructions were to transform the former Hebrew slaves
into a “kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (cf. Exod. 19:6).
2. For discussions of simi-
larities and differences
between Israelite and an-
cient Near Eastern religion
and religious literature,
see J. Bottéro, Religion in
Ancient Mesopotamia (Chi-
cago: Univ. of Chicago
Press, 2001); J. Assmann,
In Search for God in Ancient
Egypt (Ithaca: Cornell Univ.
Press, 2001); R. S. Hess,
Israelite Religions (Grand
Rapids. Baker, 2007); J.
Walton, Ancient Near East-
em Thought and the Old
Testament (Grand Rapids:
Baker, 2006).
Structure and Organization
Leviticus is a natural extension of the narrative found in Exodus 25-40.
The Exodus account concludes with the assembly and dedication of the
tabernacle, and Leviticus begins with God addressing Moses from “the
tent of meeting” about the prescriptions for the worship and service to
take place there. The use of the simple conjunction “and” in Leviticus
1:1 (omitted in the NIV) indicates that the two books are to be read as
one continuous record. Finally, the distribution of the divine oracle
introductory formula “the LORD said to Moses” (e.g., Exod. 31:1; 33:1;
34:1; 39:1; 40:1; Lev. 1:1; 4:1; 6:1) and the concluding formula “Moses
did as the Lord commanded” supports the interrelatedness of Exodus
and Leviticus (e.g., Exod. 40:16; Lev. 8:13; 16:34).
The laws of Leviticus have affinity with the larger block of Penta-
teuchal legal material. First, like Exodus and Deuteronomy, the legis-
lation of Leviticus is cast within the framework of historical narrative
(e.g., chaps. 8-10; 24). Second, the divine oracle formula is repeated
consistently throughout Leviticus (in which the phrase begins twenty
of the twenty-seven chapters) and the Pentateuch as a whole. Third,
the repetition of key words and the opening and closing formulae are
used to mark literary units or related units of legislation. (For example
,
the phrase “this is the law” or “this is the thing” identifies chapters
6-17 as a literary unit (6:8; 7:1; 11:1; 17:2), and the recurring “I am the
LORD your God” is a standard refrain in chapters 18–26.) The formu-
a
LEVITICUS
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 131
lation of legislation to meet specific needs of the Hebrew community
remains a constant in Leviticus (e.g., 24:10–23; cf. Exod. 18:13-27;
Num. 15:16).
The presentation of the legislation in Leviticus is logically ordered
in connection with the construction and dedication of the tabernacle
in Exodus 40:1–33. A “tent of meeting” for Yahweh presumes religious
activity of some sort
and authorized personnel to conduct such activ-
ity. Leviticus documents the nature and purpose of Hebrew liturgy for
the tabernacle, including the various sacrifices (chaps. 1-7) and the
requirements for the priesthood in charge of the worship.
The remainder of the book contains laws regulating the life of the
Hebrew people so they might reflect God’s holiness as his people in
the routine of daily living (cf. Exod. 19:6). Chapters 11-16 address
various impurities inhibiting proper worship and community relation-
ships, while chapters 17–25 constitute practical guidelines for holy
living so that Israel’s religious and “secular” life might not be mutually
exclusive.
The last two chapters of the book (26–27) reinforce the covenantal
context of the levitical legislation. The basic purpose of the book is
outlined in chapter 26, including the recitation of the covenant bless-
ings and curses. This chapter also connects the legislation with the
covenant-making process at Sinai so that Israel might be his people
and Yahweh might be their God (26:45–46). The concluding chapter
appears to be an appendix, attached because covenant relationship is
2007
Rama/Wikimedia Commons, courtesy of the Louvre, CC 2.0/CeCILL
An Egyptian relief showing
a fellowship offering being
prepared. “You are to give
the right thigh of your
fellowship offerings to the
priest as a contribution”
(Lev. 7:32).
132 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
LEVITICUS
really “oath taking” before Yahweh (cf. the similarity in the conclud-
ing formulas in 26:46 and 27:34). The laws involving vows and gifts
further instruct the people on the solemn and sacred nature of their
vows before God.
C
Major Themes
Holiness
The central teaching of Leviticus is summarized in the command “con-
secrate yourselves and be holy, for I am holy” (Lev. 11:44-45). The first
part of the book gives the procedures for approaching the Holy One
of Israel in worship (chaps. 1-10). The second prescribes how those
joined covenantally to God translate the idea of Yahweh’s holiness to
the sphere of daily living (chaps. 11-27). The basic purpose of Leviti-
cus, then, was to provide instruction for the Hebrew community in
“holy worship” and “holy living,” so that as the covenant people they
might enjoy the blessing of Yahweh’s presence (cf. 26:1-13).
The Old Testament word holiness essentially conveys the notion of
“separation” from the mundane for service and/or worship to Yahweh,
who himself is wholly separate from his creation. The legislative holi-
ness of Leviticus could prove effective only as Israel practically imple-
mented the ideal of “the holy” into the everyday human experience. At
issue was discernment between the holy and the common and between
the clean and the unclean (10:10–11).
Applying the concepts of the holy, common, clean, and unclean to
the physical, moral, and spiritual realms of life was basic to the ancient
Hebrew worldview. The distinctions allowed the people to order their
relationship to the natural world in such a way that they might indeed
“be holy” as the Creator is holy.
On the basis of levitical law, everything in life was either holy, or
common for the Hebrews. Those things determined common were
subdivided into categories of clean and unclean. Clean things might
become holy through sanctification or unclean through pollution.
Holy things could be profaned and become common or even unclean.
Unclean things could be cleansed and then consecrated or sanctified
to be made holy. The relationship of these concepts is illustrated in
figure 6.1.3
Common (i.e., clean) things or persons devoted to God become holy
through the mutual efforts of human activity in sanctifying (or conse-
crating) and of the Lord as the sanctifier (cf. Lev. 21:8). Uncleanness
may be caused by disease, contamination, infection, or sin; it could be
cleansed only by ritual washing and sacrifice. Hence the importance
of the instructions regarding sacrifices in the book of Leviticus
. The
presence of the holy God resided in the Israelite camp within the tab-
3. Cf. Gordon J. Wen-
ham, The Book of Leviticus,
NICOT (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1979), 18-29.
134 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
LEVITICUS
F
“When anyone brings from
the herd or the flock a
fellowship offering to the
LORD,… it must be
without defect or blemish
to be acceptable”
(Lev. 22:21). The Standard
of Ur from the third
millennium BC shows
animal gifts being brought.
Michael Greenhalgh/ArtServe, courtesy of the British Museum
а
to the goodness of God, while the latter were necessary to purify the
holy place from the desecration brought on by sin. These purifying
sacrifices led to reconciliation with Yahweh and restored the penitent
sinner to fellowship with other persons and God.
According to Leviticus 17:11, the principle of life is represented in
the blood. Thus, blood upon the altar was necessary for the symbolic
cleansing of God’s presence (cf. Heb. 9:21-22). The word “atonement”
used here represents the word group related to the Hebrew root kpr.
In its verbal forms it refers to the purging of holy objects from the
effects of sin. So the altar would be purged on behalf of the offerer
whose sin or impurity had ritually tarnished it. The purpose was to
maintain the sanctity of God’s presence in their midst. The ritual,
like a disinfectant, is normally remedial but can be preventative. This
decontamination of the sanctuary renders the offerer clean and paves
the way for his reconciliation with God. The same term is applied to
the great Day of Atonement ritual of Leviticus 16, known today as
Yom Kippur.
The teaching in both the Old Testament and the New Testament
clearly indicates that animal sacrifices were not intended to save people
from their sins or to get them to heaven. Instead, they preserved the
holiness of God’s presence and a healthy relationship
between the
people and God. The believer under the old covenant was counted as
righteous on the basis of faith in Yahweh and faithfulness tɔ the cov
enant and its stipulations (e.g., Gen. 15:6; Hab. 2:4). The external act of
Figure 6.2. The Sacrificial System
LEVITICUS
Occasion or Reason
Reference
Other Portions
Portion Burnt
Animals
Name
Lev. 1
None
All
Burnt offering
Propitiation for general sin,
demonstrating dedication
Male without blemish;
animal according to
wealth
Lev. 2
Token portion
Eaten by priest
Meal offering or
tribute offering
Unleavened cakes or
grains, must be salted
General thankfulness for
firstfruits
Fat portions
Lev. 3
Lev. 22:18-30
Peace offering
a. Thank offering
b. Vow offering
c. Freewill offering
Shared in
fellowship meal
by priest and
offerer
Male or female without
blemish according to
wealth; freewill; slight
blemish allowed
Fellowship
a. For an unexpected blessing
b. For deliverance when a vow
was made on that condition
c. For general thankfulness
Lev. 4
Sin offering
Fat portions
Eaten by priest
Priest or congregation:
bull; king: he-goat;
individual: she-goat
Applies basically to situation
in which purification is
needed
Ram without blemish
Eaten by priest
Lev, 5:1-67
Guilt offering
Fat portions
Applies to situation in which
there has been desecration or
desacrilization of something
holy or there has been
objective guilt
From John H. Walton, Chronological and Background Charts of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 22.
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 13
136 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
LEVITICUS
ritual sacrifice was symbolic and representative of the internal attitude
and disposition of the heart. Psalmist, sage, and prophet reiterated the
truth that God does not desire sacrifice, but repentance leading to obe-
dience (cf. 1 Sam. 15:22-23; Ps. 51:16-17; Prov. 21:3; Isa. 1:12-17; Jer.
7:21-23; Hos. 6:6; Amos 5:21-24; Mic. 6:6-8).
In his lovingkindness God granted forgiveness to anyone mani-
festing “the broken and contrite heart” of sincere repentance (e.g.,
2 Sam. 12:13; Ps. 51:1, 16-17). The effectual removal of guilt and
forgiveness of sin were accomplished through confession and the
petition and intercession of prayer to the gracious and merciful
Lord (e.g., Exod. 32:11-13, 30–35; Isa. 6:5-7). Ultimately the
pur-
pose of Hebrew sacrifice was to worship God and to preserve God’s
presence in their midst. The rituals served to instruct the Israelites
in the principles of God’s holiness, human sinfulness, substitutionary
death as a response to human transgression, and the need for
repen-
tance. They provided cleansing and renewed fellowship within the
community and with Yahweh.
These rituals furnished illustrations and a basis for understanding
the redemptive work of Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah. John the Bap-
tist recognized and proclaimed Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes
away the sin of the world (John 1:29-34). Jesus himself understood
his role as the good shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep
(John 10:1-21). Elsewhere New Testament writers interpreted the
crucifixion of Jesus Christ as the “once for all” sacrifice for the sins
of humanity (e.g., Rom. 5:6-11; Heb. 10:10, 12). The writer to the
Hebrews in fact connected the Day of Atonement ceremony with
the
death of Jesus Christ, which became an atoning sacrifice through
the offering of his body (Heb. 9-10; cf. Lev. 16).
Finally, the New Testament writers found the new covenant
equivalent of ritual sacrifice in “spiritual sacrifices offered by Chris-
tians to God through Christ Jesus (1 Peter 2:5). These spiritual sacri-
fices include
.
“A man or woman who is
a medium or spiritist
among you must be put to
death. You are to stone
them; their blood will be
on their own heads”
(Lev. 20:27). Israel was not
the only ancient nation to
use capital punishment.
This Syrian “Hadad
Inscription” presented by
Panamuwa condemns any
member of the royal
household who plots
destruction to be stoned
by a same-sex relative.
Emily Katrencik, courtesy of the
Pergamon Museum, Berlin
• Generous and cheerful giving (Phil. 4:18)
Worship, especially praise and thanskgiving (Heb. 13:15-16;
cf. Ps. 50:13-14)
Prayer (Rev. 5:8; 8:3-4)
Evangelism (Rom. 15:16-17; cf. Isa. 66:20)
Selfless service to Christ-even to death (Rom. 12:1-2;
Phil. 2:17; 2 Tim. 4:6; Rev. 6:9)
Interestingly, all the levitical expiatory or atoning sacrifices were
for “unwitting” covenant violations. There was no specific sacrifice for
premeditated and malicious covenant transgression or rebellion.
LEVITICUS
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 139
wow,
Respect the
Sabbath’s
in the commands were responsible for the fall of Jerusalem and the
Hebrew exile in Babylon (cf. Jer. 25:8-14; 2 Chron. 36:17-21). Once
the sabbatical cycle was interrupted, the community naturally rejected
the legal instruction undergirding the sabbath principles. God had no
choice but to exile his people “until the land enjoyed its sabbath rests”
(2 Chron. 36:21; cf. Lev. 18:28).
TAMENT
NUMBERS
However, the references to Moses in the third person in the narra-
tive (e.g., Num. 12:3; 15:22–23) and the sporadic editorial insertions
designed to update a later audience (e.g., 13:11, 22; 27:14; 31:53) sug-
gest that the book took its final form sometime after Moses’ death. It
seems correct to assume that the substantial portions of the history and
legislation of Numbers originated with Moses during the thirty-eight
years of desert wandering that the book recounts (cf. Num. 33:38; Deut.
1:3). Whether he transcribed the words of Yahweh himself or dictated
them to a scribe is unclear. But Numbers and the rest of the Pentateuch
Wilderness Wanderings
Sea of
Galilee
The Great Sea
(Mediterranean Sea)
Bashan
Jordan River
Way to
Shechem
Jabboe
R
Caravan route
Plains of Moab
Rabbah of the Ammonites
Jericho
Abel Shittim
Jerusalem
Heshbon
Beth Jeshimoth
Kedemoth
Mt. Nebo Dibon
Jahaz
Salt
Arad Sea
МОА В
Arnon R.
Mt. Hor
ED OM
Tamar
King’s Highway
Bozrah
Kadesh Barnea
Hegev
Highlands
Mt. Seir
Punon
Vay of the Red Sea
Jebel Nebi
Haran
Route
Way of the Wilderness
Main roads
Timna
0
40 km.
0
7
40 miles
Ezion Geber?
Elath?
Red Sea
Outline
1. First Speech of Moses
A. Preamble (1:1-5)
B. Historical Prologue (1:6-3:29)
C. Introduction to Stipulations: Exhortation to Obey the Law
(4:1-43)
II. Second Speech of Moses
A. Introduction to Speech (4:44-5:5)
B. Stipulations (5:6-26:19)
1. The Decalogue (5:6-21)
2. Response of the people (5:22-33)
3. Elaboration of the Decalogue (6:1-26:15)
a. Commandment 1 (6-11)
b. Commandment 2 (12)
c. Commandment 3 (13:1-14:21)
d. Commandment 4 (14:22-16:17)
e. Commandment 5 (16:18-18:22)
f. Commandment 6 (19-21)
g. Commandment 7 (22:1-23:14)
h. Commandment 8 (23:15-24:7)
i. Commandment 9 (24:8-16)
j. Commandment 10 (24:17-26:15)
4. Concluding exhortation (26:16-19)
C. Document Clause (27:1-10)
D. Curses and Blessings (27:11-28:68)
III. Third Speech of Moses: Final Charge (29-30)
IV. Last Words of Moses
A. Miscellaneous Matters (31)
B. Song of Moses (32)
C. Blessing of Moses (33)
D. Death of Moses, Transition to Joshua (34)
T
he book of Deuteronomy does not give a “second law” as the name
suggests, but rather provides an important summary of the history
of the wilderness period and organization of the legal material.
Framed in the words of Moses shortly before his death, the book tries to
give the Israelites a broad perspective on the events of the previous gen-
eration as it affords the opportunity for the renewal of the covenant.
The Writing of the Book
The dating of Deuteronomy has served as the basis for two popular
critical theories of modern times: the Documentary Hypothesis of the
DEUTERONOM
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 165
a
FE, ETTEN
FESTES TIL-
TA_BE LETTERSISEMIT
HELT
EFFEKI TRIATH
ZI
西双
一手『《孕府必E-心人
一个更好了
pri STEELSE
BRITIESIF
Pentateuch (see pp. 764–69) and the theory of the Deuteron-
omistic History (see pp. 205–8). Both models have traditionally
dated Deuteronomy to the latter part of the seventh century
BC, contrary to the claims of the book itself, and viewed it as
the foundation document for the reforms of King Josiah in
622 (2 Kings 23:1-3). While its function in Josiah’s reform
is unquestioned, there is a growing opinion that Deuter-
onomy contains much material that must be viewed as
considerably earlier than the seventh century. As a result,
studies on the nature, content, and origin of the earliest
form of Deuteronomy abound.
One reason scholars have for not retaining Moses’
association with the book is that Deuteronomy teaches
that worship should be centralized at one sanctuary
(Deut. 12). It is maintained that such centralization
could not have been an issue before the temple was
built in Jerusalem. Furthermore, there is no historical
evidence for true concern about centralization until the
time of Josiah, or perhaps a bit earlier, in the reign of
Hezekiah. Also, these scholars contend that the warn-
ing about kingship (chap. 17) must have originated after
the founding of the monarchy.
These objections beg the question to the extent that
they deny Moses logically anticipating the issues that
would need to be addressed. We see no reason to deny that
the book is indeed an accurate record of the words of Moses.
It is not necessary that Moses personally committed them to
writing, but the nature of the book and its unity suggest that it was
written down quite close to the time when the speeches were given.
Moses can be affirmed as the dominant, principal, and determinative
voice in the book, and he is credited with at least some of the writing. A
few sections, such as chapter 34, might be better understood as having
been appended at a later time.
The unity of the book is evidenced by the fact that it takes the
structure of an ancient Near Eastern vassal treaty. More than fifty such
treaties have been discovered in the ancient Near East ranging in time
from the mid-third millennium to the mid-first millennium BC. Almost
half of them are from the archives of the Hittite Empire in the mid-
second millennium.
Studies have shown that each general time period tends to have its
own characteristic outlines for setting forth the terms of the treaty. It
has been argued that Deuteronomy follows the form of the mid-second
millennium treaties as compared with those of other time periods,
therefore demonstrating that the book can be dated with confidence to
“Do not move your
neighbor’s boundary stone
set up by your
predecessors in the
inheritance you receive in
the land” (Deut. 19:14).
Marked stones were often
used to separate one field
from another and to
indicate what land
belonged to whom. This is
a royal boundary marker
(kudurru) from the Kassite
period (second half of the
second millennium BC).
Marie-Lan Nguyen/Wikimedia
Commons, courtesy of
Bibliotheque Nationale de France
1. D. Block, “Recovering the
Voice of Moses: The Genesis
of Deuteronomy,” JETS 44
(2001): 385-408.
DEUTERONOMY
A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 171
Commandment 3: Commitment to Deity (Deut. 13:1 – 14:21)
”
“You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God.”
Commitment to God ought to be reflected in one’s conduct. Chap-
ter 13 introduces a hypothetical example of the most basic and blatant
offense—enticement to worship other gods. Whether the offense is
committed by a highly respected religious authority, a good friend, or
a large group of people, the wickedness must be purged. God does not
hold guiltless those who do not take him seriously, and neither should
the Israelites hold such people guiltless. While seriousness about God
requires severe action in blatant cases, it requires a response that is
above reproach in the more subtle areas of conduct. So chapter 14 uses
the dietary laws as an example. The truly committed person would
demonstrate that devotion in diet.
Phylacteries of one of the
modern Jewish sects.
“These commandments
that I give you today are
to be upon your hearts….
Tie them as symbols on
your hands and bind them
on your foreheads” (Deut.
6:6, 8).
Jack Hazur
174 A SURVEY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
DEUTERONOMY
a
person should not be intruding into the marriage of another; the integ-
rity of the family is sacred. So 22:12–30 treats different categories of
adultery. Chapter 23 moves to corporate Israel and situations that can
threaten the group’s homogeneity. The dignity of the group
is threat-
ened when it is infiltrated by persons who do not belong.
The dignity of personhood. It is common that people who have
been robbed express the feeling that they have been violated and
their privacy invaded, and they feel vulnerable. Deuteronomy
implies that such a phenomenon is not limited to circumstances
when tangible things are stolen, but is also characteristic when
intangibles are involved. Stealing someone’s freedom or self-respect
by ill treatment is just as serious and threatening as stealing one’s
possessions. Even when kidnapping is discussed (24:7), the empha-
sis is placed on how the victim was treated, showing again that the
dignity of the individual is at stake. It is clear, then, that the prohibi-
tion of commandment 8 is not intended to be limited to taking some-
thing that belongs to another, but is viewed in the larger context of
any invasion of privacy. Such actions have the effect of dehuman-
izing and threatening the dignity of personhood.
Commandment 9: Commitment to Humankind
(Deut. 24:8-16)
“You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.”
A primary commitment toward our neighbors is to deal truth-
fully with them. This involves both what we say to them and what
we say about them. The result of taking commitments seriously is
the development of mutual trust, and that is the common denomi-
nator in this section.
“Do not take a pair of
millstones — not even the
upper one-as a security
for a debt, because that
would be taking a man’s
livelihood as security”
(Deut. 24:6). The daily
grinding of grain to make
bread was done with
millstones, with the
upper
one being used to crush the
grain against the lower one.
Kim Walton, courtesy of the
Oriental Institute Museum
Commandment 10: Human Rights and Privileges
(Deut. 24:17-26:15)
“You shall not covet … anything that belongs to your neighbor.”
Coveting is desiring to have something that is possessed by another.
The legislation surrounding this commandment suggests that the rights
of individuals need to be protected. These include the right to justice,
the right to basic food and shelter, the right to bear children, the right
to fair treatment, and the right to a fair wage. Furthermore, it urges that
rights we enjoy ought not be taken for granted.
a
а
Summary
The importance of Deuteronomy is that it makes clear that the law was
never intended to be a mechanical list of inflexible rules. Rather, it provides
entry into the whole matter of true piety and true morality. It promulgates

Purchase answer to see full
attachment