Explore the vast range of titles available.

Just as in the rest of Hebrews, the warning passage in Hebrews 10:26–31 contains numerous references to the Old Testament. The passage has, among others, two explicit quotations from the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy 32 (Dt 32:35a in Heb 10:30a; Dt 32:36a in Heb 10:30b), and one clear allusion to the legislation in Deuteronomy 17 (Dt 17:6 in Heb 10:28). The current article argued that Deuteronomy plays an even bigger role in the passage than has previously been noted. Moving from the clear to the less clear by discussing quotations from, allusions to, echoes and applications of, and conceptual and intertextual parallels with Deuteronomy, the intertextual study found that there are possible traces of Deuteronomy in every verse of Hebrews 10:26–31, and strikingly, that all these traces come from Deuteronomy 17 and 32. The article concluded by reflecting on the correlation between Deuteronomy 17 and 32, and how the author of Hebrews employs words and reminiscences from these chapters in order to warn his addressees against apostasy.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implicationsThe article contributed to the investigation of the Old Testament in the Book of Hebrews, and more specifically, the investigation of the occurrence and use of the Book of Deuteronomy in Hebrews.

This article studies the Torah’s depictions of God’s descent on Sinai, ‘the Day of the Assembly,’ within Exodus 19–20 and across Deuteronomy to argue that Israel’s failure to go on the mountain in Exodus 19:16 is sin. The Torah’s cumulative depictions of this moment convey the Torah’s theology of how God and man approach each other. After a brief contrast with Kibbe’s recent study, this article examines the plausibility and profitability of interpreting Exodus 19 as a discussion of two covenantal relationships between God and Israel by testing its ideas through summary exegesis of Exodus 19–20 and Deuteronomy 4, 5, 9, 10, 18. The Torah revisits Israel’s fear to transform that one moment into a larger story of how God changes the human heart. Israel’s request for God’s words to become Moses’ words sets Moses’ written mediation as the key to His people living with God. Exodus’s and Deuteronomy 5’s accounts of that day unveil the people’s movement from a bad fear of God, which disobeys Him, to a good fear of God, which heeds His words, with the Ten Words standing between the narratives. Deuteronomy 9–10 characterize the trembling of Exodus 19:16 as sin, and Deuteronomy 18 connects that day’s transformation to the request for the Prophet Like Moses and the promise of His victory over death. While Moses could not overcome death, Moses’ book promises the Prophet Like Moses who will overcome death and bring God’s people into God’s presence in the end.

In separate traditions in the HB, the Rephaim are presented either as a living group of gigantic warriors or as shadowy figures of the underworld of Sheol. They are referred to as the rp’um in earlier Amorite Ugaritic texts, in which their role and status are much debated. This paper offers a hypothesis that, first, tracks rp’um/Rephaim antecedent traditions from the Sumerian heroic and funerary practices adopted by the Amorites to the tradition of the rp’um of the Ugaritic literature, and then tracks them on to the HB, through the Amorite connection to Mlk/Molech, in two different regional traditions found in the HB. Literary analysis and cross-cultural evidence regarding the Amorites are used to demonstrate the plausibility of this hypothesis. This paper also puts forth that: the name Hammurapi is a reference to a funerary practice and is a titular name; rpi is employed in its more basic sense of meaning “to restore/mend”; rp’um, following Good, is the passive participle, “restored/healed ones”; and Deut 2:10–11 and the biblical King Og texts do not support the Israelites having encountered living Rephaim warriors. Tracking the heroic and death-culture traditions shows that the antecedents to the biblical Rephaim were likely originally heroic-age warriors who, upon death, were cared for and were appealed to through funerary rituals for some benefit. However, these Amorite traditions were not fully understood by the Israelites when they encountered them and appropriated aspects in their representation of the Rephaim.

Deuteronomy portrays Yahweh as both willing (e.g. Dt 28:63) and unwilling (Dt 4:31; 10:10) to destroy Israel, which creates one tension worthy of exploration. Of the three most prominent verbs of destruction, two [שׁמד and אבד] are constantly used in affirmative statements, and one [שׁחת] is continuously negated. However, these elude being divided into two levels of severity. Beyond that, in some verses (e.g. Dt 4:26) it appears that Israel is threatened with annihilation for idolatry after they cross the Jordan while their continued existence is also noted in the context, which creates another tension worthy of exploration. Secondary literature does not always seem aware of these tensions or the need to address them. This article sought to explore the tensions of Yahweh’s willingness and unwillingness to destroy Israel and whether the annihilation of Israel is in view in these verses (e.g. Dt 4:6), as well as the role these verbs play in these matters. This study used a literary approach for secondary sources. A theory-driven data-informed method of analysis and Discourse Analysis, both emanating from Cognitive Linguistics (CL), were used to analyse the Hebrew text. The study found that when שׁמד and אבד are used for future judgement for idolatry once Israel crosses the Jordan (e.g. Dt 4:26), they never refer to the annihilation of Israel. Although the judgement described there does involve severe casualties, the focus is on being removed from Canaan rather than the nation being annihilated. In Deuteronomy 9, however, שׁמד does refer to annihilation since it is coordinated with verbs of annihilation, indicating Yahweh’s intent to wipe Israel out at Horeb.ContributionThis article grounds previously obtained semantic insight to address two mostly unidentified tensions in Deuteronomy and also explores the role that specific verbs play in addressing them. It also provides insight into divine judgement by destruction in the book of Deuteronomy.

Matthew 7:21 is an exegetically challenging verse: it provides a complex formulation of Matthew’s election theology. Simultaneously, this text is systematically theologically challenging, due to its emphasis on doing the will of God. This article argues that Matthew 7:21 and Matthean election theology must be understood within the matrix of Deuteronomy and Deuteronomistic perspectives on election. Entrance into the kingdom of God is a divine gift, which finds fulfilment in Jesus Christ. This divine and incongruous gift, however, must be accompanied by doing the will of God. Faith is not merely a cognitive matter but also an active calling to be perfect (Mt 5:48). The recipients of this election can be identified primarily as the Jews, but in Christ, the circle of the divine family is extended to include the Gentiles. Matthew’s concept of election can thus be described as Christological, complex, consonant with the Old Testament, and ethically active.ContributionBy studying and contextualising Matthew’s election theology, this article contributes to a richer and more dynamic understanding of election in Reformed theology.

Abstract The law of Deuteronomy 23:2-9 (MT), stipulating who is to be excluded from the Assembly of God, envisaged a need to explain its absolute exclusion of two foreign nations (the Ammonites and the Moabites), alongside its more lenient approach towards members of two other foreign nations (the Edomites and the Egyptians), as expressed in their temporal exclusion from the Assembly. The eternal exclusion of the Ammonites and the Moabites is justified by their historical, unfriendly treatment of Israel on its march from Egypt to the Promised Land. The immediate question, however, is whether the other two nations mentioned in this law treated Israel any better, prior to that march and during its course. Indeed, answering this question in the negative appears to be the goal of another Pentateuchal text, Numbers 20:14-21. Underlying the criticism of Deuteronomy 23:4-9 in Numbers 20:14-21 is the Priestly-Deuteronomic fundamental controversy over the meaning of the covenant of circumcision.

This article concerns the role of covenant in early rabbinic literature in relation to biblical and especially Second Temple-era predecessors. The first part establishes that the Qumran sectarians and earlier circles were drawn to the concept of covenant because it represented, especially through the mechanism of covenant renewal, a powerful tool for defining and supporting group identity. The second part shows that for the rabbis, the importance of covenant lay chiefly, instead, in its capacity to conceptualize the notion of Israel as a collective body defined by corporate responsibility. The third part suggests that this novel deployment of covenant arose in part to counter the individuating force of halakah as law, another innovation of the rabbis.

Abstract The scope of this article is to present an explanation for the enigmatic translation of zemer into kamelopardalis in Deuteronomy 14:5. A possible reason for this translation is the Hieroglyphic and Demotic zoonym sr, which in the Ptolemaic period was applied to both sheep and giraffes.

The study deals with a difficult and much-debated text in Paul's Letter to the Romans, 9:30-10:21. The study in particular analyses Paul's use and interpretation of Deuteronomy 30:12-14 in Romans 10:4-17. Scholars have characterized Paul's exegesis here as idiosyncratic, fanciful, baffling, and arbitrary. By a comparison with Jewish writings near Paul in time, such as the writings of Philo of Alexandria and Baruch, the thesis is argued that Paul's treatment of Deuteronomy 30:12-14 can be located within Jewish exegetical method, expository structure, terminology as well as content and context. In comparison with Baruch and Philo, it has been shown that Paul's handling of Deuteronomy 30:12-14 can be placed within a Jewish context as to the way the biblical quotations are rendered. The thesis is substantiated that Paul's expository rendering of Deuteronomy 30:12-14 follows the method of exegetical paraphrase of a biblical quotation. So, in comparison with Baruch and Philo, Paul's interpretative rendering of Deuteronomy 30:12-14 falls within a form of exposition, in which words, phrases and sentences from the Old Testament quotation are either repeated or replaced by interpretative terms and supplemented with other qualifying terms. Thus, Paul's christological exposition of Deut 30:12-14 can be located within the method of exegetical paraphrase, with a parallel in Baruch's application of this OT Scripture to the personified 'Wisdom'.

Abstract This essay engages Idan Dershowitz's recent attempt to rehabilitate the Deuteronomy fragments Moses Wilhelm Shapira offered for sale in 1883. After summarizing the contents of Dershowitz's volume, this paper evaluates Shapira's fragments in relation to the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Moabitica and other forgeries connected to Shapira. It considers the implications of Shapira's transcription of the text, which Dershowitz uses to demonstrate Shapira's innocence. To counter Dershowitz's hypothesis regarding the \"proto-biblical\" origin of the fragments, it is proposed that the composition is better understood as a post-biblical pastiche. Dershowitz has endeavored to sever the text from the possibilities allowed by 19th century European scholarship; the present article contextualizes the find within the religious world of 19th century Jerusalem. While the allure of significance can encourage scholars to overcome doubts and accept the authenticity of suspicious objects, Shapira's fragments remain very dubious indeed.