Welcome to the World of the Deuteronomist

When you began your reading of Deuteronomy today, was the shift from Numbers as startling as the shift between reading Mark and Luke? If so, know that you are not imagining things...

The first thing I noticed was that Moses' tongue has been loosened... Remember how in Exodus we kept hearing about how he had a speech impediment? and Aaron had to speak for him?  And even through Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers, Moses' own speaking was rather succinct. 

In stark contrast, Deuteronomy begins Moses offering a lavish historical recounting of the Israelites' journey of 40 years. 

Another thing you might have noticed: the reason Moses gives for his not being able to enter the Promised Land... He blames it on the unfaithfulness of the others... But you may remember that in Numbers 20, when folks were thirsty, God told Moses to raise his staff and speak to the rock (Moses, use your words!), and water would come out of a rock, but instead, Moses hit the rock twice with his staff...the water poured out, for sure... but Moses hadn't followed God's instructions, incurring God's displeasure...  All this seems to be forgotten in Deuteronomy.

So, what's happening? Recall early on we talked about source criticism, and the Documentary Hypothesis, about how different sources contributed different parts of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament, of which Deuteronomy is the fifth.)  The Deuteronomist is that source, "D" of "JEDandP."  

A theme we will encounter over and over with the Deuteronomist and Deuteronomistic History as a genre is the idea that if bad things happen to someone there must be a reason-- most likely that they were unfaithful to God, that they worshiped another god, or otherwise broke the Covenant between God and God's people. 

There's a reasonably good summary of the Deuteronomist as a source, and related biblical literature, called Deuteronomistic History, at this wikipedia page. I don't love wikipedia, but every once in a while it's useful...  Here is the link regarding the Documentary Hypothesis itself.  If you google "Documentary Hypothesis," you will find many other pages with information--some drier than others... If you find this intriguing, I encourage you to talk consider participating in Education for Ministry (aka EfM), a wonderful program that will give you more opportunities to enjoy learning about different theories of biblical scholarship.

Similarly, we reading through parts of Luke that, when offered in Matthew, were presented as part of the Sermon on the Mount. It's interesting to me that Luke placed these teachings in the narrative after Jesus has "set his face for Jerusalem."  We're also encountering a number of passages that are unique to Luke, such as the parable of the Good Samaritan--which is enriched by our having read all those laws the priest and Levite were trying to uphold by, well, not being a Good Samaritan. Had he been dead, then touching his body would have made them unclean.... and even if he was alive, touching his blood would have been problematic, too.

Did you notice also, the difference in Luke's rendering of the Lord's Prayer, vs. that in Matthew (back in Matthew 6 in his Sermon on the Mount)?  What might those differences suggest about Matthew and Luke, or their communities and audiences? Their intentions and priorities?

Thank you for being on this journey!

Peace,

Paige+