The Classical Hebrew canon
tends to be divided, for the purposes of classification, into the Law, the
Prophets and the writings. Deuteronomy is
the final book of the Law, and the text articulates and threads together the
Jewish political vision as the Jewish people are about to cross the Jordan into
the much anticipated and longed for promised land. There is a very real sense
in which Deuteronomy is
the 1st political manifesto written in the West, and in this manifesto, an
ethical, liturgical and distinctive political agenda is clearly articulated.
The Jewish nation is offered a blueprint in Deuteronomy for both domestic and foreign policy issues. 
Moses seems to be the lawgiver for most of the book, and Moses’ enhanced and
enlarged view of the Jewish framework for running their new society cannot be
missed. Deuteronomy merely
means the second laws, the larger economic, social and political laws that were
meant to build on the Decalogue (10 Commandments) and the Shema (‘Love the Lord
Your God with All Your Heart, Soul, Strength and Mind’). The Shema and
Decalogue are foundational to the Jewish tradition, and, in many ways, don’t
raise the tensions that the larger history and 2nd set of laws entails.
Let us now turn to the tensions.   

Those who take the time to
sit with the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament cannot but be taken by a trying
tension and problematic dilemma. The problem is, at a primary level,
theological. God is, at times, merciful, just, long suffering, generous,
fatherly, shepherd like and compassionate. God is, at other times, angry,
brutal, warlike and destructive. It’s often difficult to know which aspect of
God will appear at what time and why. God seems no different from Zeus, Odin or
Jupiter in his warlike and hawkish tendencies at places in the textual
narrative. This has raised serious concerns and questions for those that take
the Bible with some level of seriousness. Is God truly a consistent and good
God, or does God’s willing and actions trump his goodness?  These tensions
have been duly noted by many thoughtful exegetes of the Hebrew canon. Peter
Craigie’s The Problem of War in the Old Testament (1978), Eric Seibert’s Disturbing Divine
Behaviour: Troubling Old Testament Images of God (2009) and Simone Weil’s Letter to a Priest (1942) are but three classics that probe and
ponder this difficulty. It is this perennial tension that the well known
Canadian theologian and philosopher, George Grant, grappled with much of his
life.  If God’s ways are above our ways, can God do anything and humans
have no right to question Divine behavior? If God is beyond good and evil, does
this mean that God can use unjust and immoral means to achieve a Divine end?
There are many passages in the Old Testament that seem to suggest this might be
the case. Many of these questions and issues are expressed clearly and
poignantly in Deuteronomy,
hence to Deuteronomy we
now turn to explore the ethical implications of such Divine behaviour.  

Deuteronomy was written as a political manifesto for the
Jews as they were about to cross the Jordan and enter the Promised Land. The
broader and fuller ethical vision of Deuteronomy goes well beyond the ‘Shema’ and the Decalogue.
Moses is the recipient of God’s guidance for a national people that are chosen
by God with a unique and special destiny. This is made abundantly clear by
Moses again and again in his final vision to be handed onto the Jewish people.
But, in this manifesto, all the seeds are sown for the conflict that will raise
serious questions about God and the Jewish nation in their unfolding journey.
There are two traditions at work in Deuteronomy, and the remainder of the Hebrew canon is torn
between which tradition will dominate, when and why. There is the nationalist
tradition that legitimates any sort of Divine and Jewish behaviour, and there
is the prophetic tradition that raises the ethical bar to a higher level. It is
in this clash between the nationalist and prophetic traditions within Biblical
Judaism that different paths are taken both in the Jewish past and contemporary
Jewish life in Israel. The secular Jewish state and the Christian Zionist
movement emerge from the nationalist tradition, whereas the Jewish prophetic
tradition exists also in the Bible and modern Jewish and Christian thought. Let
us touch on how these traditions in tension collide in Deuteronomy.          

The Jewish prophetic
tradition as found in Deuteronomy has
much to commend it. The ethical standards are high and worthy of emulation.
Judges are not supposed to show partiality between Jew and alien (1:15-18 &
16:18-20), and in the Decalogue (5:1-21) murder, theft and many other
questionable practices are opposed. The Jews are warned about going to war with
certain tribes (2: 5, 9, 18), and the aliens, fatherless and widows are meant
to be provided for at a basic material level (14:28-29). The Jewish nation is
expected to be generous with the bounty of their land (15:1-11) and servants
are to be freed from bondage to their masters (15-12-18). The King is expected
to live a life of integrity (17:14-20) and cities of refuge are provided for
those that have unintentionally killed someone (19:9-10). Even innocent and
young birds are to be cared for (22:6), and again the foreigner and fatherless
are to be warmly tended (26: 12-14). Work conditions are to be just for both
Jew and alien (24:14-22), and in the final section on ‘curses’, the passage
goes like this: ‘Cursed is the man who withholds justice from the alien, the
fatherless or the widow’ (27:19). The section on ‘curses’ (27) speaks firmly
and soundly about theological, familial, property, economic, community and
sexual issues. There is no doubt when reading through the major social concerns
in the covenant that God is making with the Jewish people that there is a lofty
and demanding ethic. It is these commands, decrees, laws and stipulations that,
if heeded and followed, will bring peace, prosperity and plenty to the Jewish
people. There is, in short, an ethic on the personal and public level that has
universal implications. Those who are drawn to this ethic cannot but be
confused when a more nationalistic and narrower moral position is also part of Deuteronomy. 

The nationalistic and more
racist ethic can be most worrisome, and it is quite legitimate to question
whether it is God passing on such a way of life. There is, in short, immense
ethical contradictions within Deuteronomy that cannot but create a sort of intellectual dissonance for
those that dare to ponder the dilemma, The earlier passages that hold high
peace collide with a hawkish notion of an aggressive and genocidal approach to
war (2:24-37 & 3:1-11).

We are informed, on the
one hand, that God has hardened the heart of Sihon against the Jews, and, on
the other hand, because of his hardness of heart, the Jews are to wipe out
(men, women and children—no survivors left) Sihon and tribe. The same treatment
(another genocide of gruesome proportions) is to be inflicted on Og, King of
Bashan and his people. How is it possible to reconcile the command not to kill
in the Decalogue with the wanton and violent destruction of another people? The
Decalogue also commands the Jews not to steal, but the crossing of the Jordan
and the military taking of another culture’s land is a form of theft and
stealing. How is it possible to hold high the notion of not murdering and
stealing yet being told by God to both murder and steal? The contradiction and
dilemma cannot be missed. The genocidal attitude is yet further developed
further in the book (7:16). The Jews are told not to intermarry (7:3 &
21:10-14)), and yet Moses did not marry a Jewish woman, and he consulted a
priest of Midian (Jethro) who was not Jewish. Although Abraham is seen as the
father and patriarch of the Jews, Abraham was blessed by Melchizedek (a
non-Jew). The Jews are encouraged to drive out other nations in an aggressive
manner (11:22-25, 29 & 25:17-19), and the death penalty is exacted for a
variety of reasons (13:8-9, 13:15, 17:5-7, 17:12, 18:20). The show no pity, eye
for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot (19:21) injunction does
run contrary to a merciful, patient and long suffering God. The Jews are told
not to sacrifice their child like other nations (12:31 & 18:10), and yet
they are quite willing to slaughter other children under the obedient banner of
nationalism. It is somewhat contradictory to oppose the way a foreign culture
sacrifices their children in worship to their view of god, and yet do the same
think in obedience to the Jewish God. There are also obvious points in Deuteronomy where the Jew is to care for the Jew first and
foremost and the foreigner and alien in a less just manner (14:21 &
23:19-20). 

It is essential to note,
by way of winding down Moses’ commands, that he made it clear that if the Jews
were true and faithful to the injunctions, commands and decrees given, good
would emerge, but if they violated the commands given, they would go into
exile. Moses had no doubts about the fact that the Jews would ignore the
injunctions offered; hence there would be serious consequences to face (28-29).
Such a tale is starkly recounted in the prophetic books in the Hebrew canon,
and, in a more updated form, in Daniel Berrigan’s The Kings and Their
Gods: the Pathology of Power (2008).
The historical tale of the Jewish people is well recounted in their historic
books: 1-2 Samuel, 1-2 Kings, 1-2 Chronicles. Berrigan
has poignantly unpacked, in a prophetic manner, the tensions between the
nationalist and prophetic tensions within Biblical Judaism in such poetic
classics as Uncommon Prayer: A Book of Psalms (1978),Daniel: Under the Siege of the
Divine (1998) and The
Kings and Their Gods (2008). There is
a great deal of affinity between Berrigan’s Christian and Roman Catholic
prophetic vision and the Jewish standard prophetic books by Buber and Heschel: The
Prophetic Faith and The
Prophets. Needless to say, Berrigan,
Buber and Heschel’s understanding of the prophetic way has little to do with ‘end
times’ speculations and an uncritical support for the secular state of Israel
and Christian Zionism.  

There is a false sentiment
within Christian and Jewish Zionism that seems to assume the Jews cannot be criticized
for their behavior, but most of the Jewish Bible is a sustained criticism by
the prophets of the fact the Jewish people are not true to the ideals given
them by Moses. It is somewhat ironic that those who claim the Jewish nation has
a right to the land fail to see that the right to the land is contingent on
heeding the ethical vision given to them by God. The tale and drama of the
Hebrew canon is one of constantly going into exile for the simple reason the
decrees were not followed. The true spirit of Judaism is prophetic, and at the
heart of the prophetic is the willingness to question and deconstruct the false
gods and hypocritical ideals of a people. When this is not done, the Bible is
distorted and misused to serve ‘the pathology of power’ that Berrigan has so
well described in The Kings and Their Gods. 

But, we have a problem in
making sense of all this. Will the prophetic or nationalist traditions of
Judaism prevail? Those who attempt to embrace both traditions inevitably face
trying contradictions that cannot be resolved. They also become agents of a
tragic support of injustice and brutality at a variety of levels. There are
many more points I could raise that highlight the differences between the
prophetic and nationalist impulses in Deuteronomy, but it is in these unresolved and, in some ways,
irreconcilable differences that two types of both Judaism and the Christian
read of the Jewish tradition emerge.    

The nationalist and
prophetic traditions are often pitted against one another in the Hebrew
tradition, but the major voice within Biblical Judaism is the prophetic. It
tends to stand firm, consistent and vocal against the nationalist tendency.
The oral, minor and major prophets never flinched nor were silent on the larger
peace, justice and ecological issues. Amos, Jonah and Hosea to name but three Minor Prophets hold high the
best of the Mosaic ethical vision. Jeremiah, Isaiah and Ezekiel make it abundantly clear that justice must be at the centre and
core of the Jewish way, and when worship or textual exegesis, life style or
spiritual searching does not place feet firm on the soil of compassion and
justice, then religion becomes a diversionary opiate. It is the Jewish prophets
that interpret the Mosaic decrees in a way that clearly separates the vicious
and warlike, genocidal and hawkish god of the nationalists from the God of
nations and peoples that longs for all to come to the New Jerusalem, where the
gates are always open. 

Most of the historic books
within the Hebrew canon tell the same tale again and again. The Kings and their
courtiers assume God, Nation and Kingship are the trinity that cannot be
doubted or questioned. God has chosen the Jewish people, given them land, and
His face will shine on them. But the prophets beg to differ with this unholy
threefold alliance. If the language of God is used to legitimate unjust
treatment of Jews or other peoples, God’s name is being used in vain and a form
of idolatry is in the making. The Jewish prophets made it clear many times that
the Jews were in exile to the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Medes and Persians
because of their lack of faithfulness to the ethical core given by Moses. This
was also the reason the 12 Tribes were divided into the northern and southern
kingdoms. The saddest and most affluent form of Jewish nationalism was lived
through in the Solomonic period. The distortions of the Mosaic tradition are
duly recorded and recounted, in an updated version, in Breuggeman’s The
Prophetic Imagination and Berrigan’s The
Kings and Their Gods. Solomon sowed the
seeds of the dissolution of the Jewish people by his indulgent life style that
was the opposite of the life of Moses and all he endured for the Jewish people.  

There is virtually no
whiff of a nationalist odor in the Beatitudes and Sermon of the Mount of Jesus.
The Beatitudes clearly sum up the Jewish prophetic tradition in a succinct and
compact manner. The warrior god is gone, eye for eye has disappeared, caring
for the enemy takes front stage, and Jesus chooses to suffer ill and death
rather than inflict it on others. It is in his resurrection that God in the
flesh embodies, incarnates and articulates a new kingdom that is summarized in
the Lord’s Prayer. 

In conclusion, the Jewish
tradition can move in different directions: prophetic or nationalist. These
tendencies are in Deuteronomy. The
Jewish prophets that followed Moses sifted the wheat from the chaff, the gold
from the dross of the prophetic and nationalists impulses. Jesus stood firmly
on the shoulders of the Jewish prophets in both his life and teachings in the
Beatitudes and Sermon on the Mount. The sad thing is that most Christians today
are more indebted to the Jewish nationalist perspective that the Jewish
prophets turned against and Jesus studiously avoided in the Sermon on the
Mount. It is as Christians immerse themselves, in thought, word and deed, in
the Sermon on the Mount that a genuine Christian prophetic ethos will be
nurtured and emerge. Surely we need such a counter cultural flare to be sent up
in our time when most Christians continue to bow the knee to a new form of
Constantinianism. 

Ron Dart