The Privilege of Calling: The Mosaic Paradigm for Missions (Deut. 26:16–19)

By Daniel I. Block

[Daniel I. Block is Professor of Old Testament, Graduate Biblical and Theological Studies, Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.

This is the final article in a four-part series “Rediscovering the Gospel according to Moses,” delivered by the author as the W. H. Griffith Thomas Lectures at Dallas Theological Seminary, February 3-6, 2004.]

For almost two decades George W. Peters, one of the great missiological statesmen of the previous century, held high the torch of missions not only on the campus of Dallas Seminary but also around the world.[1] In his teaching he emphasized the contrasts between the missiological strategies in the Old and New Testaments. Although one may recognize a universal agenda in both Testaments, the differences in the strategies may be summed up in the phrases “centripetal universality” and “centrifugal universality.” He wrote, “Centrifugal universality is in effect when a messenger of the gospel crosses frontiers and carries the good news to the people of no faith. Centripetal universality, often mistaken for particularism, operates like a magnetic force, drawing distant peoples to a central place, people, or person. The latter is the methodology of the Old Testament, with Israel and the temple as the center designed to draw people to themselves and to the Lord.”[2]

The centripetal feature of God’s missiological strategy in the Old Testament is seen in the Lord rescuing Israel from slavery and drawing Israel into a covenant relationship with Himself as a glorious trophy of grace so that the world might know that He alone is God and that He alone can meet their deepest needs if they cast themselves on Him.

Although Deuteronomy 26:16–19 is not cited by Peters in his book on missions, this remarkable passage can help in developing a theology of missions that is truly biblical. This short passage is not an isolated text. On the contrary it is intimately linked both to Moses’ preceding exposition of the Law revealed at Sinai and to what follows, that is, the covenant blessings and curses in chapter 28. Deuteronomy 26:16–19 functions as a critical hinge in the overall flow of this second address. But these verses are also linked to Exodus 19:3–6. It seems that as Moses made this profound statement in Deuteronomy, words he had heard from the Lord forty years earlier at the top of Sinai were ringing in his ears: “This is what you shall say to the family of Jacob and declare to the descendants of Israel: ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to Myself. Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, you shall be My treasured possession [סְגֻלָּה] among all peoples, for all the earth is Mine; and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the descendants of Israel” (author’s translation).

It is not difficult to see in this utterance the Lord’s missionary goal for Israel in a nutshell. This Exodus text is obviously linked with Deuteronomy 26:16–19 both by its vocabulary and its themes, which presented to the Israelites in barest outline (a) the basis of Israel’s calling, (b) the essence of Israel’s calling, and (c) the keys to the fulfillment of Israel’s calling.

The Literary Context, Structure, and Style of Deuteronomy 26:16–19

The significance of these four short verses is quite out of proportion to their length. They provide a summary of several of the key theological issues of the book, and they also function as a hinge between Moses’ exposition of the specific stipulations of the Lord’s gracious covenant with Israel and the recitation in chapter 28 of consequences for the nation depending on their response. Verse 16 brings to a conclusion what is generally referred to as the “Deuteronomic Law Code,” and verses 17–19 serve as a reminder of the primary goals of the covenant the Lord established with His people.

The style and vocabulary of verse 16 are typically deuteronomic. In verses 1–15 Moses had looked forward to the time when Israel would be well established in the land. But with the opening phrase, הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה, “this day” (v. 16), he brought the attention of his hearers back to the present moment of decision on the plains of Moab. Like the other sixty-one occurrences of הַיּוֹם, “today,” in the Old Testament,[3] in Deuteronomy this expression highlights the “emphatic contemporaneity” of the entire book.[4] In this instance Moses reminded those gathered before him that in his address they were actually hearing the revelatory voice of the Lord their God.[5] Whereas everywhere else in the book Moses presented his words as his own commands, here he spoke of the Lord commanding the people directly.[6]

The reference to “these decrees and laws” links this verse with several earlier texts where decrees and laws have been combined. Specifically this pair of substantives, combined with the verbs שָׁמַר, “to keep,” and עָשָׂה, “to do, practice,” links this statement stylistically and thematically with 12:1. Deuteronomy 12:1 and 26:16–19 serve as bookends to Moses’ exposition on the specific ordinances the Lord had revealed at Sinai and that Moses now sought to apply to Israel’s life in the Promised Land. The word pair “decrees and laws,” which occurs nine times in Moses’ second pastoral address (chaps. 5–26),[7] also serves as a shorthand expression for the revelation received at Horeb. Of course this does not mean that chapters 12–26 are merely a recitation of the Sinai revelation or even a restatement of the laws given there. Like chapters 5–11, the genre of chapters 12–26 is best represented by the term תּוֹרָה, “instruction,”[8] and “decrees and laws” refer specifically to the laws that underlie this second address, whose relevance for life in the land across the Jordan Moses sought to impress on the people through this address.

If 26:16 displays strong lexical and thematic links with the first part of the second address (chaps. 5–11), these connections are even more pronounced in 26:17–19: (a) “to walk in His ways” (v. 17; cf. 8:6; 10:12; 11:22; also 28:9; 30:16); (b) the threefold designation of the covenant stipulations, “His decrees, His commands, and His laws” (26:17 [author’s rendering]; cf. 5:31; 6:1; 7:11; 8:11; 11:1; also 30:16); (c) “listen to [obey] His voice” (26:17; cf. 9:23; also 28:1; 30:2, 8, 20); (d) to become His “treasured possession” (26:18; cf. 7:6; also 14:2); and (e) “a holy people belonging to the Lord your God” (26:19; cf. 7:6; also 14:2, 21; 28:9). Besides looking back, these verses also look forward, particularly to 28:1. “If you diligently obey the Lord your God, being careful to do all His commandments which I command you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth.”[9]

The Basis of Israel’s Calling

According to Exodus 19:4–6 Israel’s missionary calling was based on the Lord’s previous gracious actions on her behalf. Through Moses the Lord had done three things for which the Israelites should be eternally grateful: (a) He rescued them from the Egyptians; (b) He took care of the Israelites throughout their history, but especially during the last weeks and months; and (c) He brought Israel to Himself. Herein stands an important principle of missions. Those who are called to missionary service are the products of God’s gracious saving and covenantal action. The last expression is especially important for understanding Israel’s place in God’s scheme of things. God did not call Israel basically to a code of conduct but to a relationship with Himself.

In Deuteronomy 26:17–19 Moses alluded to the ceremony by which the Lord and the present generation of Israelites had confirmed their covenant relationship. These verses catch the reader by surprise, in both their syntax and their content.[10] In accord with the general tone of the entire second address Moses’ goal here was to emphasize that Israel’s obedience to the Lord was not to be driven merely by the sense of duty on the part of a vassal toward the suzerain, but by keen awareness of the special nature of their relationship. In so doing Moses alluded to a formal juridical procedure by which the Lord and the generation of Israelites that stood before Moses had formalized their covenant relationship.

The previous chapters leave few clues as to when this might have occurred. A logical place would have been between 11:32 and 12:1, that is, between Moses’ extended appeal for loyalty and adherence to the Great Commandment (exclusive love for the Lord) in chapters 5–11 and his exposition of the specific covenant stipulations. In 11:26–32 Moses explicitly set before the people “today” the options of blessing or curses, depending on their response to the Lord’s claim to exclusive allegiance, demonstrated by their obedience to His will.[11] In Exodus 19:4–6 the Lord announced the covenant and made a general declaration of its demands and privileges.

When God revealed His will in the Decalogue (Exod. 20:3–17) and the Book of the Covenant (chaps. 21–23), the people declared their acceptance of it (“All that the Lord has spoken we will do”), and Moses relayed this back to God (19:8). However, the dialogical and reciprocal ceremony implied in Deuteronomy 26:17–19 also recalls the covenant blood ritual at Sinai. Whereas in the present instance the two parties to the covenant had apparently declared their commitments to each other verbally, according to Exodus 24:5–8 these had been declared by the nonverbal gesture of sprinkling the blood of the sacrificial animals first on the altar (representing the Lord), and then on all the people.

Deuteronomy 26:17–19 divides into two parts, which are un-equal in size but otherwise display a remarkable parallelism. The corresponding features are highlighted in the following synopsis of a fairly literal translation.

v. 17

Today you have accepted the Lord’s declaration: to be your God [and pledged] to walk in His ways, and to keep His decrees, laws, and commands, and to listen to His voice.

v. 18 v. 19

Today the Lord has accepted your declaration: to be His treasured people, just as He promised you, and to keep all His commands, and [pledged] to set you high above all the nations that He has made—for praise, renown, and honor—and for you to be a people holy to the Lord your God as He promised.

The opening declaration of each part is particularly striking because they represent the only occurrences in the entire Old Testament of the hiphil form of אָמַר, “to say, declare,” which raises special problems of interpretation.[12] Based on the normal significance of the hiphil stem one would expect a causative sense in each case: “You have caused the Lord to say this day,” and “The Lord has caused you to say this day.”[13]

Although these statements are remarkably parallel, the following verses demonstrate that the parties involved in these declarations (Yahweh and Israel) are far from equals, and it would be quite out of place for a human vassal to force the divine Suzerain into saying anything.[14] It is preferable, therefore, to assume a softer sense, something like “You have had or let the Lord say” (or even “You have accepted or acknowledged the Lord’s declaration”) “that He will be your God,” and “the Lord has had or let you say,” that is, “Yahweh has accepted or acknowledged your declaration that you will be His treasured people.”[15] Even though the term בְּרִית, “covenant,” is missing from this paragraph, it is evident from the declarations that follow that these verses involve the formalization of a covenant relationship. Thus the hiphil of אָמַר is best interpreted in a quasi-juridical sense, in which each party hears the other party declare its commitment to the stipulations of the agreement.

The mutuality of these declarations is remarkable, though not without precedent either in the making of ancient Near Eastern treaties or in the establishment of personal covenantal relationships. This phenomenon is illustrated by the treaty between Rameses II of Egypt and the Hittite king Hattusili III in the thirteenth century b.c. The treaty has been preserved in both the Egyptian and the Hittite versions.[16] The former, which represents a translation into Egyptian of the Akkadian original, was carved in Egypt on the walls of the Temple of Amon in Karnak and the Ramesseum, while the latter has been preserved on three fragmentary cuneiform tablets discovered at Boghazköy. The procedure underlying these texts seems to have transpired as follows: (1) Diplomats representing both states settled on the terms of the agreement. (2) Representatives of each side produced a version styled as the words of the respective monarchs. (3) These versions were inscribed in cuneiform in the Akkadian language (the language of international diplomacy) on tablets of precious metal (silver in this case). (4) These tablets were exchanged and taken home. (5) The texts were translated into the native language, providing the Egyptians and Hittites respectively with constant reminders of the obligations to which the other parties had bound themselves. This explains why the version produced by the Hittite chancellery has been preserved in Egypt and vice versa.[17] Deuteronomy 28:16–19 seems to presuppose an oral version of this procedure in which Israel heard the Lord declare His commitment to them (probably through the mediation of Moses), and the Lord heard the people declare their commitment to Him.

Such declarations represented the means by which relations that did not exist naturally were created.[18] Thus when Israel heard the Lord declare orally His commitment to be their God, and when the Lord heard Israel declare orally that they would be His treasured people, the present generation standing before Moses was (re)constituted the privileged people of the Lord. Whatever the historical and chronological relationship between chapter 27 and the chapters before and after it, in 27:9 Moses and the Levitical priests formally declared the significance of this event: “Be silent and listen, O Israel! This day you have become a people for the lord your God.” This special covenant relationship provides the foundation for Israel’s call to reach the nations with the news of God’s grace.

The Nature or Essence of Israel’s Calling

Having observed how the present generation had confirmed their acceptance of the covenant relationship that God had promised Abraham and ratified with their parents at Sinai, one may now ask why this relationship had been created. To what had the Lord called Israel? The answer can be highlighted by plotting the privileges and obligations that Israel and the Lord heard one another affirm, as in the following synopsis.

Verse 17, What Israel Heard the Lord Declare
Privilege:	I promise to be your God.
Obligation:	You are to walk in My ways.
Obligation:	You are to keep all My commandments.
Obligation:	You are to listen to My voice.

Verses 18–19, What the Lord Heard Israel Declare
Privilege:	We accept our status as Your treasured people.
Obligation:	We will keep all Your commandments.
Privilege:	We accept our status above all the nations.
Privilege:	We accept our status as a holy people of God.

What Israel heard the Lord declare in verse 17 is much simpler stylistically (four simple infinitive construct phrases) and with respect to substance (a declaration of the Lord’s commitment to be Israel’s God followed by a triad of demands for obedience) than what the Lord heard Israel declare in verses 18–19. These three verses include four privileges for Israel.

Israel Had Been Called To Be The People Of The Lord

This privilege is declared from two sides. On the one hand the Israelites heard the Lord declare His commitment to be their God (v. 17). Moses already expressed Israel’s special relationship with the Lord more than three hundred times in Deuteronomy with the expression, “Yahweh your/our God” (including three times in verses 16–19). In addition the Lord had introduced Himself as the God of Israel in the preamble to the Decalogue (5:6). Remarkably the infinitive clause לִהְיוֹת לְךָ אוֹּהִים, “to be your God” (26:17), represents the first explicit reference to the covenant formula in the book. The bilateral nature of the Lord’s covenant relationship with Israel is presented more fully in 29:12–13 (Heb., 11–12). Here the goal of the covenant (בְּרִית) and the oath (אָלָה) that the Lord made with His people is stated as follows: “that He may establish you today as His people and that He may be your God, just as He spoke to you and as He swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” The promise to the ancestors to which Moses referred is recorded in Genesis 17:7: “I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you.” The present generation of Israelites heard the Lord declare His fulfillment of that ancient promise.

As the Creator of all, the Lord is indeed the master (אֲוֹדנָי, ʾăd̠ōnāy) of all; but by virtue of His saving and covenantal acts, He made Israel His people in a particular sense. According to one form of the Lord’s self-introduction formula, the goal of the Exodus was to establish Israel as the Lord’s own people. “I am the Lord who sanctifies you, who brought you out from the land of Egypt, to be your God; I am the lord” (Lev. 22:32–33). “But I will remember for them the covenant with their ancestors, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations that I might be their God. I am the lord” (26:45). “I am the lord your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt to be your God; I am the lord your God” (Num. 15:41; italics added in these three verses).

In the divinely inspired “National Anthem of Israel” (Deut. 32) the Lord claimed Israel in verse 9 as His portion (לֶק), His people (עַמּוֹ), and His allotted possession (נַחֲלָתוֹ). The reference to “His people” indicates that this relationship is also described from the other side as well. Not only had Israel heard the Lord commit Himself to be Israel’s God, but also He heard the Israelites commit themselves to being “His people” (26:18), that is, “a people of [or ‘belonging to’] the lord” (v. 19). Although the expression “people of the lord” is not found in Deuteronomy,[19] variations of the present construction, “a people belonging to the Lord,” occur in 7:6; 14:2, 21; and 27:9.

Whatever else it means to be “a people belonging to the Lord,” this should not be interpreted as a casual relationship. On the contrary this is an intimate covenantal association, analogous to the relationship between a husband and wife or a father and son (cf. 14:1).[20] Although the relationship between the Lord and Israel in Deuteronomy is often understood primarily as a covenant relationship between a divine Suzerain and His human vassals, the Sitz im Leben of the “covenant formula,”[21] to which the present declarations allude, may actually derive from the context of family law. It has long been recognized that the formula, “I will be your God and you shall be My people,”[22] bears a striking resemblance to both the ancient Hebrew marriage formula, “I will be your husband, and you shall be my wife,”[23] and the adoption formula, “I will be your father, and you shall be my son.”[24] These promises may seem to represent only the statements made by the husband in the marriage ceremony and by the father in the adoption ceremony.[25] But such contracts were mutual. Presumably the marriage ceremony would involve the husband saying, “I will be your husband, and you will be my wife,” to which the wife would respond, “I will be your wife, and you will be my husband.” Similarly in an adoption ceremony, the father would declare, “I will be your father, and you will be my son,” to which the son would respond, “I will be your son, and you will be my father” (cf. Ps. 89:26–27). Support for this interpretation may be found in Deuteronomy 14:1–2, where the words “You are the sons of the Lord your God” are followed with the words “You are a holy people to the Lord your God.”

Israel Had Been Called To Be The Lord’s “Special Treasure”

While Israel welcomed the Lord’s affirmation of Himself as their God, He no doubt delighted in hearing the Israelites declare their acceptance of their position with the words לִהְיוֹת לוֹ לְעַם סְגֻלָּה, “to be His treasured people” (26:18). This is the third and climactic occurrence of the expression “treasured people” in the book (cf. 7:6; 14:1). The word סְגֻלָּה is rare, occurring only eight times in the Old Testament. In six of these passages it is used in the present metaphorical sense (Exod. 19:5; Deut. 7:6; 14:2; Ps. 135:4; Mal. 3:17). But its concrete usage in the other two provides the key to its metaphorical significance. In 1 Chronicles 29:3 and Ecclesiastes 2:8 the word is used of valued possessions, especially the treasure of kings.[26] According to Deuteronomy 14:1 Israel was granted this status through divine election. Of all the peoples in the world Israel was chosen by the Lord for this privileged status. Israel’s acceptance of this status as God’s treasure alludes to Exodus 19:5, where this metaphor first occurs. “You shall be My [treasured] possession [סְגֻלָּה] among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine.” Just as the crown jewels in London reflected the glory of the monarchs of England, so Israel was specially chosen to reflect the glory of God among the nations.

Israel Had Been Called To Be A Light Of God’s Grace To The Nations

Isaiah used the words “light to the nations” to describe the mission of the Servant of the Lord (Isa. 42:1; 49:6). This metaphor is missing in Deuteronomy, but the concept is certainly present in 26:19, which represents one of the most remarkable statements in all of Deuteronomy. Despite her insignificant size (7:6–7) and her moral discredits (9:1–24), God assigned Israel a status superior to “all the nations which He has made.” Previous references in Deuteronomy to Israel’s relationship to the nations referred to the groups that occupied Canaan, over whom the Israelites would demonstrate superiority by defeating them and occupying their land (4:38; 7:1, 17, 22; 9:1, etc.). With the words, “to set you high above all nations” (26:19), the gaze was cast far beyond Canaan to the world as a whole—all the nations the Lord had made.

This interpretation is confirmed by the echo of this verse heard in 28:1.[27] There Moses stated that if Israel would scrupulously obey all God’s commands, then He would set them “high above all the nations of the earth.” The Song of Moses seems to provide further commentary on 26:19: “When the Most High [עֶלְיוֹן][28] gave the nations their grant, when He divided humankind, He fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God. But the Lord’s allotment is His people, Jacob His allotted grant” (32:8–9, author’s translation). Whereas other nations are governed through mediatorial agents,[29] the Lord claimed Israel as His special grant to be administered directly.

Deuteronomy 26:19 does not specify how Israel’s superiority over the nations would be expressed. However, in 15:6 Moses had provided hints of what this might mean. There the Lord’s full blessing of Israel was described in terms of economic hegemony (“You will lend to many nations, but you will not borrow”) and political hegemony (“You will rule over many nations, but they will not rule over you”). This sense is reinforced in 28:2–14, where Moses described in detail the blessings that would accrue to Israel if they were faithful to the Lord. Moses referred to the other nations explicitly only three times,[30] but the dimensions of Israel’s hegemony include economic (vv. 2–6, 8, 11–12), military (v. 7), and psychological (v. 10) superiority. Israel would be the head over all and the “tail” to no one (v. 13).[31]

Although 26:19 does not describe how Israel will be elevated above the nations, the verse does summarize the effects of God’s promise: לִתְהִלָּה וּלְם וּלְתִפְאָרֶת, “for praise and fame and honor.” The word תְּהִלָּה, “praise,” occurs elsewhere in the book only in 10:21, where Moses had said the Lord is Israel’s praise, because of all that He had done for them. In that context Israel’s experience of divine favor brought praise to the Lord. The word ם is literally “name,” but as in several other instances outside Deuteronomy (Gen. 6:4; 11:4; Job 30:8; Zeph. 3:20), here it denotes “renown or reputation.” The third term, תִּפְאֶרֶת, refers to “glory, fame, splendor.”[32]

However, scholars and translations disagree on how “praise, fame, and honor” are to be understood in this context. The New International Version rendering suggests that the honor is Israel’s.[33] To be set high above the nations for praise, fame, and honor describes a fate for Israel that is the opposite of that envisioned in 9:14, where the Lord threatened to destroy Israel and blot out her name from under heaven. This understanding seems to find support in Zechariah 3:19–20, where echoes of the present text can be heard by the use of the same three Hebrew words.

However, this interpretation of Deuteronomy 26:19 is not as certain as it seems. Some translations preserve the ambiguity of the original with readings like, “for him to set you high above all nations that he has made, in praise and in fame and in honor” (NRSV; cf. NASB, NJB). This allows for the praise and fame and honor to be ascribed to either Israel or the Lord. It seems preferable to see the glory being ascribed to God. The New English Bible and the Revised English Bible read, “to bring Him praise and fame and glory.” Three factors support this rendering.

First, Israel’s standing among the nations was never to be a source of national pride.[34] Moses repeatedly diffused any temptation to arrogance because of numerical (7:7) or moral superiority (9:4–24) or personal achievement (8:17–18).

Second, as already noted, in the only other occurrence of תְּהִלָּה in the book (10:21), Israel was to praise the Lord because of all that He had done for her. This interpretation is reinforced by Moses’ later comments in 28:9–10.

Just as in a later time the temple would be designed and designated in Isaiah 60:7 as “My glorious house” (ית תִּפְאַרְתִּי, literally, “house of My honor”),[35] so the Lord’s intention for Israel was that her well-being would reflect the glory and grace of the God whose name they bore, and the nations would fear them because of that name. According to Deuteronomy 28:1–14, because of the Lord’s blessing, Israel will be acknowledged worldwide as the most privileged nation on earth. But this would have nothing to do with any innate glory; it would be the consequence of divine favor alone.[36]

Third, Jeremiah 13:11 and 33:9 echo the present text, describing how Israel’s fortunes brought praise and honor to the Lord among the nations. Each of those two verses includes the same Hebrew words for name, praise, and glory.

Israel Had Been Called To Be A Holy People

A fourth privilege of the Israelites is that the Lord said they are a holy people belonging to the Lord. On three previous occasions Moses referred to Israel as a holy people belonging to the Lord their God. In both 7:6 and 14:2 her status as a holy people is associated with the Lord’s election of her to be His treasured possession. And in 14:21 the prohibition of consuming the meat of any animal that has died a natural death is based on her status as a holy people. Sojourners and foreigners may eat it, but Israel may not.

The present text does not explain what it means to be a holy people. However, as in verse 18 the added clause “as he has promised”[37] recalls Exodus 19:5–6, where the Lord promised Israel that if they would keep His covenant and listen to His voice, they would be the Lord’s special treasure, His kingdom of priests, and His “holy nation.”

This statement of Israel’s holy standing has great significance for understanding Israel’s missionary role. God did not separate Israel from the nations so that He might merely lavish His attention on her as if she were a pet kitten or a china dish on a shelf. Just as the Levitical priests were set apart to serve as the Lord’s agents of grace between Him and Israel, so Israel collectively was to serve as a link between God and the world. The need for mediation was created by the estrangement of the world from its Creator. The priests were to declare the light of His revelation to the nations and to intercede on their behalf before Him. The Levites were scattered throughout the nation in their assigned cities, presumably to represent the Lord where the people lived and to receive their entreaties.

The Burden of Israel’s Calling

Whereas God’s call of Israel to salvation was absolutely unconditional, the nation’s effectiveness in fulfilling her call to mission was conditional, as seen in Exodus 19:5–6: “If you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant.” The success of Israel’s mission as a light to the nations depended on her listening to the Lord’s voice and keeping His covenant. Deuteronomy repeatedly stresses the importance of Israel’s fidelity to the Mosaic Law.

With his emphasis on “doing” (Deut. 26:16) Moses declared that God’s will was not revealed to Israel simply to be stored in a museum or even to be displayed publicly as a source for pride. Nor did He intend merely to give them a resource for analysis or philosophical reflection. The purpose of the Law was to serve as a guide for conduct. This is seen in the words “you shall keep and do them with all your heart and your entire being” (author’s translation). The verbs “keep” and “do” function as a hendiadys, meaning “diligently apply,” which is then reinforced by an appeal to unqualified and total compliance with the will of God, the divine Suzerain.[38]

Israel’s obligations are summarized in verse 17 in three typically deuteronomic clauses: the Israelites must “walk in His ways,”[39] keep all the Lord’s commandments,[40] and “listen to His voice.”[41] To “keep all His commandments” (v. 18) summarizes the three obligations the Lord laid on them in verse 17.

Conclusion

With Moses’ final declaration of Israel’s holiness, he concluded his exposition on the stipulations of the covenant (Deut. 12:1–26:19). All that remained for him in this address was to state the consequences for Israel of her response to the challenge and privilege of this special covenant relationship with the Lord (chap. 28). The manner in which Moses concluded this section has profound implications not only for a biblical theology of the Law but also for a biblical understanding of Israel’s role in the divine program of revelation and redemption.

It is tempting to view God’s election of Israel and His revelation of His will to this people either as ends in themselves or merely to represent the means whereby Israel’s security and her possession of the land would be guaranteed. A superficial reading of the accounts of the Sinai revelation (Exod. 19-Num. 9) might support this interpretation. Apart from the Egyptians, from whose clutches the Lord delivered the Israelites, and the Canaanites, whose land the Lord was about to deliver into the Israelites’ hands, references to the world outside of Israel are rare. Twice the Lord declared that He had separated Israel from “the peoples” (Lev. 20:24, 26). On several occasions the nations were mentioned as witnesses to what the Lord was doing with Israel (Exod. 34:10; Lev. 26:45; Num. 14:15). In Numbers 24:8 Balaam foresaw Israel’s victory over the nations. However, the tables would be reversed in the covenant curses, in which the Lord warned Israel that if they would persist in infidelity they would be scattered and would perish among the nations (Lev. 26:33, 38).

Israel’s missionary function does not receive much space in the record of the Sinai revelation, but this does not mean it is lacking. On the contrary the Lord had set the context and parameters for His covenant at the very beginning when He promised Israel that if they would keep His covenant and listen to His voice they would be His treasured possession, His kingdom of priests, and His holy nation (Exod. 19:5–6). With the addition of “for all the earth is Mine” (v. 5) the Lord’s implicit universal concern is rendered explicit. And only from this perspective can Israel’s Law be understood. God gave the Law to His people in order to declare to the world what His glory and grace could accomplish in the lives of the destitute and enslaved (cf. Deut. 4:8).

In general, mention of the nations in Deuteronomy follows the pattern set by the Sinai revelation. References to Egypt and the Canaanite nations are frequent, but Israel’s relationship to other nations or the world at large receives scant attention. The Lord is said to have created the nations (26:19) and assigned to them their respective territories (32:8; cf. 2:1–25). Elsewhere they are presented as witnesses to the Lord’s actions on behalf of or against Israel (2:25; 4:6–8; 28:10, 37; 29:24) or as those who would tempt the Israelites to emulate them (4:19; 13:7; 17:14; 32:21). In a single poetic text Moses predicted that the tribe of Joseph would be victorious over the nations (33:17). Like the curses in Leviticus, Deuteronomy frequently refers to the nations as agents of divine judgment against Israel, and/or the place to which the Lord would drive them in His fury (4:27; 28:33, 36, 49–50, 64–65; 30:1, 3).

The nations are presented as the context from which the Lord chose Israel, and before whom He established them as His treasured and holy people (7:6–7; 10:15; 14:2), with the goal of setting them above all the nations. To achieve this goal the Lord would grant to Israel extraordinary prosperity and economic and political hegemony over the nations (7:14; 15:6; 28:12). However, as God Himself had expressed so forcefully in Exodus 19:5, this status and role would be contingent on their fidelity to Him, demonstrated in obedience to the covenant stipulations (Deut. 28:1).

According to Moses’ second address, four critical factors were to be involved in Israel’s life and service as the people of the Lord. First, they were the products of the Lord’s gracious and unmerited saving actions. By obeying Him they showed their gratitude for deliverance and their loyalty to their Deliverer. Second, Israel’s occupation of Canaan was contingent on their fidelity to Him. Apart from faith and obedience they would have no title to the land, as the covenant sanctions in chapter 28 demonstrated. Third, through their obedience to the will of the Lord, as revealed in His laws, the Israelites were to declare to the world not only how righteous are His statutes (4:6–8) but also how righteous and gracious is their God. Fourth, through their obedience to the Lord’s will they were to demonstrate the glorious privilege that attends their status as His special treasure and His holy people.

If these facts are not recognized, then the Law is distorted, either in antinomianism or in legalism. The Israelites would be the means of God’s blessing the whole world only if they walked in His ways and obeyed Him. When the Lord called Abraham to a covenant relationship with Himself, and when He made a covenant with Israel at Sinai and confirmed it on the plains of Moab, He had the nations in view.

In Deuteronomy the pattern for missions is fundamentally centripetal. While the world watched, the Lord delivered Israel from her Egyptian bondage, entered into a covenant relationship with her, put Canaan into her hands, and blessed her. As His covenant partner, His special treasure, and His holy people, Israel became an example of the power of divine grace and glory to the praise, renown, and honor of the Lord. What the Lord had done for Israel He sought to do for all, but like Rahab and Ruth they must come to Israel. Nowhere does the Pentateuch include a missionary mandate anything like the Great Commission in Matthew 28:18–20 that commanded His followers to go to the nations and proclaim the Lord to them. It should have happened more naturally. The prevailing formula was simple:[42] demonstrate gratitude for divine grace through loyal living and experience the Lord’s blessings, thereby attracting the attention of the nations, who would give praise and glory to the Lord and would join Israel in their covenant relationship with Him.

In the face of Israel’s failure and the resulting Exile, the missionary strategy in the New Testament changed. However, to conclude that a centrifugal approach displaces the centripetal strategy is too simplistic. Peter wrote in 1 Peter 2:9–12 that the missionary role of New Testament believers was similar in some ways to that of Israel. There is no hint here that the believers who were scattered among the Gentiles had traveled to Gentile lands in a conscious missionary effort. Rather, like ancient Israel among the nations, these Christians were residing in pagan communities. By their having experienced God’s grace and by their godly conduct they were to proclaim the excellencies of God who had called them out of darkness into His marvelous light.

Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:13–16 about believers being salt and light also suggest that believers are to engage in the centripetal aspects of missionary witness.

However, at the end of the Gospel of Matthew Jesus Himself shifted the strategy from “Come see what God has done for His people” to “Go tell the world what God has done for His people” (28:18–20)—from a centripetal focus to a centrifugal one. The community of believers then extended far beyond ethnic and territorial Israel,[43] and individuals such as Paul were called to carry the gospel of divine grace to the Gentiles. The Scriptures close with a glorious vision of people from every tribe and nation redeemed and gathered around the Lamb to worship Him (Rev. 5:9; 7:4). Ironically this represents the supreme example of centripetal strategy. May believers be faithful in proclaiming His grace wherever they are, and may many heed His call to go to the ends of the earth, so that everyone may know that the Lord, incarnate in Jesus Christ, is God and Lord of all—to the praise of His glory.

Notes

1. George W. Peters was the uncle of the author’s wife.
2. George W. Peters, A Biblical Theology of Missions (Chicago: Moody, 1972), 52.
3. The expression הַיּוֹם חַזֶּה occurs in Deuteronomy 2:22, 25, 30; 3:14; 4:20, 38; 5:24; 6:24; 8:18; 10:8, 15; 11:4; 26:16; 27:9; 29:3, 27; 32:48; and 34:6. For a listing of the remainder see J. G. Millar, “Living at the Place of Decision: Time and Place in the Framework of Deuteronomy,” in Time and Place in Deuteronomy, ed. J. G. Millar and J. G. McConville (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1994), 43 n. 61.
4. Gerhard von Rad, The Problem of the Hexateuch and other Essays, trans. E. Trueman Dicken (New York: McGraw Hill, 1966), 26.
5. Cf. Millar, “Living at the Place of Decision,” 42–44.
6. The participial construction, “Yahweh your God is commanding you,” with God as the subject, occurs only here. Elsewhere Moses is always the subject of the words “[am] commanding you.”
7. Deuteronomy 5:1, 31; 6:1, 20; 7:11; 11:32; 12:1; 26:16–17.
8. This designation for this address has been encountered earlier in 17:18–19 and was used in 27:3, 8, 23, 26; 28:58, 61; 29:21 (Heb., 20), 29 (Heb., 28); 30:10; 31:9, 11–12.
9. Chapter 28 may originally have been linked directly to chapter 26, with chapter 27 having been inserted between the two chapters in the final editing of the book.
10. Dale Patrick characterizes the style of these verses as “ponderous and overloaded,” but he fails to recognize their rhetorical and homiletical function (Old Testament Law [Atlanta: John Knox, 1985], 238).
11. This paragraph is framed by the words “I am setting before you today.” “This day,” is used in 26:17 and 18.
12. Most English versions misconstrue the significance of these statements not only by rendering this unique construction blandly as “declared” but also by attributing the respective statements to the wrong person.
13. Thus Richard D. Nelson, Deuteronomy: A Commentary, Old Testament Library (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002), 304.
14. Thus Norbert Lohfink, Great Themes from the Old Testament, trans. R. Walls (Edinburgh: Clark, 1982), 26. For Lohfink’s full discussion of the issues involved see “Dt 26, 17–19 und die ‘Bundesformel,’ ” in Studien zum Deuteronomium und zur deuteronomischen Literatur I (Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1990), 229–35; originally published in Zeitschrift für katholische Theologie 91 (1969): 530-35. Tigay rightly observes, “It would not make sense to say that Israel caused God to say that Israel will accept Him as their God and walk in His ways and obey Him (v. 17), or that God induced Israel to say that it would be His treasured people and that He will elevate it above the nations (v. 19)” (Deuteronomy, NJPS Torah Commentary [Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1996], 393 n. 47 [italics his]).
15. The New Jerusalem Bible and the New Revised Standard Version read, “You have obtained the Lord’s agreement/this declaration from the Lord.” For discussion of the form see T. C. Vriezen, “Das hiphil von אָמַר in Deut 26, 17.18,” Jaarbericht van het Vooraziatische-Egyptisch Geselschap ex Oriente Lux 17 (1964): 207-10.
16. These are conveniently juxtaposed in James B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969), 199–203.
17. The procedure is helpfully summarized by Gary Beckman, Hittite Diplomatic Texts (Atlanta: Scholars, 1996), 91.
18. According to Ze’ev W. Falk such utterances represented “a constitutive declaration,” by which a relationship could be created (Hebrew Law in Biblical Times: An Introduction, 2nd ed. [Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2001], 136). With reference to Deuteronomy 26:17–18 he adds, “The ceremony of covenanting between God and Israel … included perhaps a mutual statement of the stipulations implied in the covenant. This, again, is reminiscent of marriage” (ibid.).
19. The expression עַם יהוה, “the people of the Lord,” occurs only ten times in the Old Testament. In the Song of Deborah and Barak (Judg. 5:11, 13) the expression bears a pronouncedly military sense. In 2 Samuel 1:12; Ezekiel 36:20; and Zephaniah 2:10, “the people of the Lord” are seen in relation to foreign nations. Second Samuel 6:21 and 2 Kings 9:6 refer to kings appointed over “the people of the Lord.” The phrase appears three more times (Num. 11:29; 16:41 [Heb., 17:6]; 1 Sam. 2:24). Judges 20:2 and 2 Samuel 14:13 speak of Israel as עַם אַוֹּהִים, “the people of God.” Numbers 21:29 and Jeremiah 48:46 refer to Moabites as עַם כְּמוֹשׁ, “the people of Chemosh.”
20. Lohfink argues that in these contexts עַם יהוה should be translated as “family of the Lord,” rather than “people of the Lord” (Great Themes from the Old Testament, 117–33).
21. In 26:17 the Lord declared that He would be Israel’s God. On the formula see Rolf Rendtorff, The Covenant Formula: An Exegetical and Theological Investigation, trans. M. Kohl (Edinburgh: Clark, 1998); and Rudolf Smend, Die Bundesformel (Zurich: EVZ, 1963).
22. The basic wording of the formula is “I will be your God, and you will be My people” (Jer. 7:23). The clauses appear in reverse order in Jeremiah 11:4; 30:22; Ezekiel 36:28. In Exodus 6:7 the marital connection is rendered even more pronounced: “I will take you for My people, and I will be your God.” On the use of the words “I will take you for My people” as an expression for marriage see Seock-Tae Sohn, “ ‘I Will Be Your God and You Will Be My People’: The Origin and Background of the Covenant Formula,” in Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Judaic Studies in Honor of Baruch A. Levine, ed. R. Chazan, William W. Hallo, and L. H. Schiffman (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999), 364–68; and idem, The Divine Election of Israel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 11–16. Third-person variations of the formula (“I will be their God, and they shall be My people”) are even more common than second-person forms (Jer. 31:33; Ezek. 37:27; and in reverse order, Jer. 24:7; 32:38; Ezek. 11:20; 37:23; Zech. 8:8).
23. The formula is represented most clearly in the Elephantine papyri. See A. E. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Centuryb.c. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1923), #2 and #4. Cf. Bezalel Porten, Archives from Elephantine (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1968), 206. Hosea 2:2 (Heb., 4) suggests that the opposite action, namely, the breakup of a marriage, was formalized with the opposite formula: “She is not my wife, and I am not her husband.” For discussion of this text and these issues see Mordechai A. Freedman, “Israel’s Response in Hosea 2:17b: ‘You Are My Husband,’“ Journal of Biblical Literature 99 (1980): 199-204.
24. See 2 Samuel 7:14 (= 1 Chronicles 17:13); 1 Chronicles 22:10; and Psalm 2:7.
25. See the helpful evidence gathered by Sohn in “ ‘I Will Be Your God and You Will Be My People,’ ” 355–72; and idem, TheDivine Election of Israel, 62–73.
26. This interpretation is confirmed by the usage of its Akkadian cognate sikiltum in extrabiblical inscriptions. A second-millennium seal impression from Alalakh reads, “the servant of Adad, the beloved (na-ra-am) of Adad, the sikiltum of Adad” (Dominique Collon, The Seal Impressions from Tell Atchana/Alalakh [Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1975], 12–13). Note also the personal name, Sikilti-Adad, “Treasured one of Adad.” See also Moshe Greenberg, “Hebrew segullā: Akkadian sikiltu,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 71 (1951): 172-74; Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School (Winona Lake, IL: Eisenbrauns, 1992), 226 n. 2. For additional attestation see Erica Reiner, ed., The Assyrian Dictionary (Chicago: Oriental Institute, 1984), 15:244–45. The juxtaposing of “servant,” “beloved,” and sikiltum to describe the vassal relationship of the king to his god is especially telling. A similar usage is attested also in a thirteenth-century b.c. letter from the Hittite emperor to Ammurapi, the last king of Ugarit, in which the former reminds the latter that he is his servant and his sglt (Manfried Dietrich, Oswald Loretz, and Joaquín Sanmartín, eds., The Cuneiform Alphabetic Texts from Ugarit, Ras Ibn Hani and Other Places, KTV, 2nd ed. [Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 1995], 179). The rendering of the Hebrew term as “peculiar” in the King James Version is not to be understood as “odd or weird,” but in the sense of the underlying Latin, peculium, “personal/private property.” The Septuagint translates the words λαὸν περιούσιον, “a people of His special possession.” Titus 2:14 also uses περιούσιον. Compare also Ephesians 1:14 and 1 Peter 2:9 with the Septuagint of Malachi 3:17.
27. Deuteronomy 28:1 bears an even closer resemblance to Exodus 19:5 than to Deuteronomy 26:17, as the following translations of the texts demonstrate: “If you will conscientiously listen to My voice” (Exod. 19:6); and “If you will conscientiously listen to the voice of the Lord your God” (Deut. 28:1, author’s translations).
28. The divine appellation עֶלְיוֹן, “Most High,” provides a direct homonymous link with 26:19 and 28:1, both of which employ the term עֶלְיוֹן though in an adverbial sense, namely, “high.”
29. The translation “sons of God,” rather than “sons of Israel,” follows the reading in 4QDeutj and the Septuagint.
30. They are called “many nations” (28:12), “the peoples of the earth” (v. 10), and “your enemies” (v. 7).
31. The roots of the international concern of the present statement may also be found in Exodus 19:5–6, where the Lord not only claimed that the entire world is His own but also declared Israel’s exalted status among all the nations as His treasured people.
32. In Exodus 28:2, 40 this word is paired with כָּבוֹד, “glory,” to describe the magnificence of Aaron’s priestly vestments.
33. The New Living Translation is even more explicit. “Then you will receive praise, honor, and renown.” So also Tigay, Deuteronomy, 246; and McConville, Deuteronomy, 383.
34. Christopher Wright, Deuteronomy, New International Bible Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 272–73.
35. In 1 Chronicles 22:5 David commented that “the house that is to be built for the Lord shall be exceedingly magnificent, famous [לְם] and glorious [לְתִפְאֶרֶת] throughout all lands.”
36. Israel was recognized by the peoples to be the most privileged because they had a God who was near and responded to their cries to Him and revealed His will to them (Deut. 4:6–8).
37. For discussion of the significance of this expression see Jacob Milgrom, “Profane Slaughter and a Formulaic Key to the Composition of Deuteronomy,” Hebrew Union College Annual 47 (1976): 1-17, esp. 10.
38. The phrase “with all your heart and all your being” is typically deuteronomic, being applied elsewhere to unreserved love (אָהַב, 6:5; 30:6) for the divine Suzerain, unreserved rendering of vassal service (עָבַד, 10:12; 11:13; 13:3 [Heb., 4], unreserved obedience (שָׁמַע) to the voice of the Lord (30:2), unreserved turning to the Lord (v. 10), and unreserved searching (דָּרַשׁ) for Him (4:29).
39. This expression appears elsewhere in 8:6; 19:9; 28:9; 30:16 (cf. “to walk in all His ways,” in 5:30; 10:12; 11:22).
40. As in 6:5, the three words for commandments (חֻקָּיו, His “statutes” or “ordinances”; מִצְוֹתָיו, His “commandments”; מִשְׁפָּטָיו, His “laws”) express totality, in this case all the stipulations of the covenant. The use of the verb שָׁמַר, “to keep,” provides another link with Exodus 19:5–6, suggesting that “to keep His decrees, commands, and laws” should be interpreted as equivalent to the words “to keep My covenant,” in the earlier context.
41. The phrase “to listen to His voice” ties this verse even more tightly to Exodus 19:5–6, where the call to keep the Lord’s covenant is preceded by the charge to obey His voice diligently.
42. Jonah’s mission to Nineveh demonstrates that the centrifugal paradigm is not excluded in the Old Testament.
43. This pattern is illustrated dramatically in the Book of Acts with the successive outpourings of the Holy Spirit on Jews in Jerusalem (Acts 2), Samaritans (Acts 8), Gentile God-fearers in the land (Acts 10), and the Ephesians as representatives of Gentiles on foreign soil (Acts 19).