Thesis

                                                                      THESIS NO.5

            It is sometimes said that the `election theology' of Israel (Ex 19:3-8; Dt 7:6; Am 3:1-2) makes it an inward-looking religion. This does not do justice to the various strands that are found in the Pentateuch (e.g., Gen.12:1-3). Israel consciously reflected on its place and role in the community of nations. The prophetical writers of the Pentateuch retrojected their views on God and the human being, on the origin of sin and of evil into the Primeval History (Gen.1-11). The ancient Sumero-Akkadian myths which were adopted and adapted by the Biblical authors present a marked difference in their theology and anthropology in comparison with the biblical narratives. However, it is not without problems to call Israelite myths monotheistic.

The 4 traditions of the Pentateuch J E D P help us not to generalize and speak of an OT theology and will make us realize that there are various theologies in it, complementary, supporting and even correcting one another. Thus  we see that the same God speaks through different heralds at different times in different ways (Heb 1:1). considering the 4 various traditions of Pentateuch we can say that they propound to us in varying degrees of intensity that Yahweh, the God of Israel has a Universal plan of salvation for all nations. Although a shadow of inward looking nature can be traced before and after the Babylonian exile, nowhere that narrow perspective haunts the Israelite, is a truth.

Election Theology

            It is the religious conviction that God has chosen one out of a group. By this usage I understand the verb an isolation. The fact that Israel belongs to YHWH as his special possession makes it a nation. The new relationship is termed as covenant. The covenant made at Sinai was the decisive step in the creation of Israel as a people

The Deuteronomy

            It is most unfortunate that the D's teaching on the `Ban' concerning the inhabitants of the promised land has been taken as leitmotif not only in D's but of Israelites theology in general. We cannot prove that this ban has ever been practiced in historical times. It is not to be found in any other Israelites' tradition outside D. It is merely a gross semitic exaggeration in the context of the deuteronomist's polemics against all forms of syncretism. Therefore, it will be injustice if we take this motif as the Magna Charta of Israelites theology.

Ban/Herem

            It is connected with warfare. In hope of victory a vow was made devoting all spoils, animate and inanimate to the deity (Num 21:2-10). The unmitigated ban required slaughter of everything that breaths (Dt 20:16). The mitigated ban exempted women and children along with cattle and sheep (Dt 21:10-14; 2:34; Num 31:7-12).

            The Canaanites were devoted to destruction in order that Israel might not be seduced into idolatry. Actually it was only Wishful Thinking of a later time and it is not admitted that the Israel unable to carry out the destruction (1 kg 9:21). In the post-exilic time the ban was no longer applied as a military measure but was adapted as a means of eliminating undesirable elements from the community. When Ezra attempted to close the ranks of the returned exiles against the heathen influence on the people  of the land those who refused to co-operate has their property devoted i.e., confiscated and they themselves were expelled from the community (Ez 10:8). Thus the ban became a means of Ecclesial discipline.

What is the legislation for the distant nations?

            This ban is but only the second part of the law. The first part deals with nations outside the promised land. According to Dt 20:10-14 - when attack is made on a town first offer peace, but if it refuses the lay siege to it. YHWH will deliver it for you and you are to put all men folk to sword sparing women and children. Deuteronomic legislation so severe concerning the inhabitants of promised land : i) so that they may not teach all the detestable practices (Dt 20:18). ii) YHWH hates what they have done to gods - burning own sons and daughters in the fire for their God (Dt 12:31). iii) Sacred prostitution (Dt 23:18ff). iv) Magic ? Necromancy (Making children walk through fire, consulting ghosts, calling upon the dead etc. (Dt. 18:10-12).

            Historically speaking, this legislation on the ban presents many problems. It gives the impression that Israel is going to conquer the promise land in one single sweep, as in the book of Joshua. But the truth is far this as we see from the book of the Judges. It was a slow and painful process. Jebusites, for eg. were conquered only in the time of David (2 Sam 5).

            Therefore, the scholars today have recognized that the book of Deuteronomy as a later theology retrojected to the times of the pre-conquest days and placed in the lips of Moses. It seems to reflect the political resurgence of the time Josia when Assyria's power was on the wane. It also reflects antisyncretic tendencies and polemics of the prophets. Hence, the teachings of the D are not to be absolutized nor to be treated as typical of OT Theology.

            Although there is the spirit of intolerance regarding non-Israelites in D, he is also open to Ger (stranger). "Love the stranger for you were strangers in Egypt" (Dt 10:19). Ger is included in YHWH's covenant where Israel became chosen people (Dt 29:10). (e.g., The Edomites and Egyptians were admitted to Israelites cult). Though election is the most important subject of the D, it is not exclusive and not based on merit (Dt 18:12b; Gen. 15:16; Dt 30:17ff). God also has assigned inheritance to other nations. Therefore, God is concerned about other nations. In Dt 2 exclusively we see that while Israel pass through other nation's land, forbidden to declare war, ask permission to pass through, buy food and water etc.  Therefore, YHWH the same God of Israel has not excluded any nations but allotted them too with land. In all these YHWH's universal guidance of history is very obvious.

The J

            The Primeval History (Gen 1-11)

            The J account of creation is concerned mainly with Man (Gen 2:5).

            His theological perspective reaches out not merely to the ancestors of Israel, as in the case of E but to the sons of men as such. The great interest and love which YHWH shows for man and his mate is amply clear from the rest of the account. In the account of YHWH's covenant with Abraham is Gen.15:20 and in Num 24:21 the mention of 10 nations on the border of Israel shows the J is interested not only in Israel but also in her neighbours. According to J, Noah found favour with YHWH (Gen.6:8), after flood God assures `Man' of the stability of the universe (Gen.8:21), YHWH let himself be appeased by the sacrifice of Noah (Gen.8:21) and the so called oracle of Noah (Gen.6:26ff) also exhibits strong straits of universalism. This is a clear case of retrojection from the time of David's empire which subdued Canaan and gave protection to the Jebusites and the Hittites.

            In Gen. 10:8-9;25-30 the mention of the table of the nations shows the J's world wide vision (nations of Mesopotamia Canaan and the Arabian wastes including Egypt). In short we could say that he has kept a register of "all the families of the earth" then known to him. The story of the tower of Babel shows that YHW is not a tribal God but the God of the world (Gen.18:25) who judges the actions of all men (Gen.11:1-9).

The Patriarchal History

            Gen.12:3a seems to be a partiality on the side of God but the truth is far from this. But in Gen.12:3b we read " And in you shall all the families of the earth be blessed". This blessing reappears twice more in a slightly altered form in the case of Isaac (Gen. 26:4c) and Jacob (Gen.28:14c). Though mankind has forfeited the blessings showered on it by sin (Gen. 2:33) as a result of which the soil from which man had been created was once more. Therefore, the blessing given by YHWH to Abraham not only passes down the line of his descendants but simultaneously to all the families of the earth. It is shown in their behaviours.

Abraham

Gen.13:7-11 [Dispute b/w shepherds of Abraham and of Lot ... Abraham let Lot have the better pasture].

Gen. 18:22-23 [Abraham intercedes with YHWH on behalf of Sodom and Gomorrah... Lot is their ancestor... angels sent to forewarn Lot's family... thus blessing is passed on to Moab and Ammon which are non-Israelites].

Isaac

Gen.26:14-29 [Philistines sealed the wells dug by Abraham... Conflict b/w Isaac's people and Philistines... Isaac they sought covenantal peace with Isaac.. granted it & sent them in peace. so blessing is passed on to Philistines who are non-Israelites].

Jacob

Gen.30:27-30 [Laban the Aramaen explicitly acknowledges that YHWH blessed them because of Jacob and Jacob corroborates the statement of his uncle].

Joseph

Gen.39:5b & c [Potiphar realized Yahweh was with Joseph... makes him in charge of his household... The J comments "Yahweh blessed the household of the Egyptians because of Joseph"].

Exodus 12:38a

[When the sons of Israel bid for freedom under the protection of Yahweh they allowed people of various sorts to join them and share in their blessings. this implies that Israel did not segregate itself from other but kept itself open to others].

Conclusion

            Universalism of salvation is one of the main motifs of J. None of the chauvinism, parochialism or ghetto mentality of the latter times is to be found in this thought.

Sits-im-leben

            The J is exercising a critique of the political situation of the empire of David and Solomon. For we know from the book of Samuel of the oppressive tactics of David with regard to Ammonites which seem to reflect the harsh treatment meted out to the sons of Israel by the Pharaoh [2 Sam 12:30]. Similar account of this was of David with Moab, Aram and Edom where in stead of blessing passing from Israel to the nations, Israel is looting and oppressing the nations [2 Sam 8:1-14]. This is not how their fathers behaved - The J reminds his contemporaries.

The E:             The E is writing at the time of religious syncretism and crisis of faith in Yahweh as portiered in the episode of Elijah asks the people of Israel - " If Yahweh is God follow him and if Baal follow him". Naturally in such situation we cannot expect universalism as we see with J. Besides that the E is writing the national epic of Israel. But all the same we do find traces of universalism in this fragmentary tradition.

Abraham

Gen.20:7-17. Abraham who is portrayed in the grab of prophets is ready to intercede for Abimelech and his household... God hears his prayer and heals them.

Jacob

Gen.31:28-29. In the episode of Jacob and Laban we Yahweh although God of Israel deals with others [dream of Laban]... "On no account say anything to Jacob".

Joseph

Gen.50: 19-20. In the story of Joseph when the sons of Jacob are afraid... Joseph will take revenge at Jacob's death... Joseph reassures to trust him and in God saying "do not be afraid God can turn evil to good... as he has delivered numerous people". The numerous people are Egyptians and not sons of Israel for they are not yet numerous but just twelve families.

Exodus 18:12

Jethro [father-in-law of Moses] accepts the offer and Aaron and elders of Israel had to come to partake in the meal in the presence of God. We see thus even in the E Israel is called upon to share with other people the blessing which Yahweh granted her.

The P

            In the P narrative [not P code] we find a beautiful synthesis of all the attitudes of Israel towards the other nations.

            Theology: Monotheist implicitly affirms a universal God. Ex 6:2f identifies Yahweh with the God of patriarchs, El Shaddai, and with the God of all humans Elohim. The theology of P is same as that of second Isaiah. "I am the first and the last, there is no other God besides me" [Is 44:6].

            Creation Account: Gen.1:1-2:44. This unique and universal God has neither rival as in Babylonian Marduk who fought a duel with Tiamet; nor a helper [Demiurge] as the supreme Greek god.

            Flood Story: This unique creator God has also the role as judge of humans. In his opinions there were no exceptions to the universal sin. Quite naturally partisan theology of Israel tended to collapse of the Jewish nation on the gentile emperor Nebuchadnezar of Babylon. But the P stresses that Israel too has its due share of blame which means both Jew and Gentiles have sinned.

Anthropology

            Creation: As humankind has proved to be a communion of sinners so too humankind has a communion of origin. All human beings are the origin of God [Gen. 1:26]. According to him the blessings of God was given to all humans before they committed any sin [Gen. 1:28] and it was reiterated in the blessing to Noah, who is the second Adam to all humans after universal sin of the flood story [Gen. 9:1-7].

            Original Sin: "Humani Generis" [Encyclical of Pius XII 1950] Monogenis was imposed condemning the scientific theory of Polygenism. Also taught that Adam is the name of Individual. These are from the literal interpretations of the myths in Gen. 1-11. In Hebrew it is not `Adam' but `ha-adam' which means the man [Gen. 2:8, 20, 22-23] not individual. According to the teachings of the Church papal encyclicals are not infallible. The competent of positive sciences and theology should be respected.

            According to Vat II the Church teaches that all human beings are born without a right to receive grace which is the free gift of God. This is how the doctrine of Original Sin is interpreted. The Church never taught the dogma of faith that original sin was transferred in the act of generation. This was the opinion of St.Augustine. Sin and guilt cannot be a matter of inheritance. Sin is a free act of commission and omission. Original sin therefore, refers not to sin as such but consequence of mortal sin which is lack of communion with God.

Evil

            In the narrative of `fall' God shows a lot of understanding to man and woman and not at all to the serpent. This shows that the serpent is the symbol of something else. At the historical level it stands for the canaanite who mislead Israel by means of their fertility cult. At the existence level it represents the mystery of evil into whose hand human beings seems to have been handed over. In the decalogue for example, those things that are forbidden them rather God has forbidden them because they are evil. [That is ontological formation morality as the moral theologians call. But in practice we tend to think of God as someone who is keen in restraining and limiting our freedom]. This narration is found in the mythical garb in the dialogue between the woman and the serpent.

Retrojection

            One should not think that before the `fall' man did not have to sweat for his bread, woman had no labor pains or snakes walked erect. The author is merely reflecting on the existential human situation where life on earth is a drudgery. In fact, if we take the fall narrative literally we should have to the male domination as designed by god [Gen. 3:16]. this is really not a command which god gave to man rather it reflects the sorry state of affair in the patriarchal society where woman cannot survive expect by being subordinate to their husbands and fathers. In other words what the author intends to tell us is that life in this vale of tears corresponds to the sinful situation of human beings. The author also shows that in spite of the fact that God punishes human beings by driving them out of paradise, God as a mother clothing the human couple with garments of skin [Gen. 3:21]. Thus the narrative ends on a note of optimism and hope.

WHY IT IS DIFFICULT TO CALL ISRAELITE MYTH AS MONOTHEISTIC?

            Israelite Myth: Gen. 1:1 Monotheistic God [God created heavens and earth in an effortless manner]. Gen. 2:4 These are generations of heavens and the earth when they are created which points to Baalism [story of Enki, god of heavens and Ninhursag, the mother of lands]. Gen. 6:4 "Sons of god and daughters of men... bore children". Now to bear sons god's counterpart goddess must be there. Let us create men in our image, let us go down and confuse the people ... in Tower of Babel story and three men came to visit to Abraham ... blessed them with the child etc. Therefore, it is difficult to say Israelite myth as monotheistic.

DIFFERENCE

            Theology: Israelite God is a monotheistic who had no rival/no superior / no peers / no helper as in Sumero-Akkadian myths.

            Anthropology: In Israelite myth man is a creature, image and likeness of God, dependent of God and God's representative. God created man with mud and blown God's breath into man which shows his closeness towards God more than any other creatures, whereas in Sumero-Akkadian myth man is made out of blood of a god Kingu mixed with clay divine element mixed in the human being.

It is sometimes said that `election theology' of Israel (Ex 19:3-8; Dt 7:6; Am 3-2) makes it an inward-looking religion

            Ex 19:3-8, serves an introduction to the meeting between Yahweh and Israel at "the mountain." First, the meeting is an entry into "the holiness for the purpose of worship. This focus on worship makes this chapter pivotal for the entire book of Exodus.

God speaks to Moses, abruptly and with sovereign power. This speech is likely the most programmatic for Israelites faith that we have in the entire traditions of Moses. Yahweh's initial rescue is unconditional and without reservation, a sustained relation with Yahweh is one of rigorous for covenant. Israel is to be a community in which worldly power and holy purpose converge. Israel's holy distinctiveness depends on moment-by-moment listening to the God who commands and authorizes. Whenever Israel ceases to listen and to keep covenant, and presumes upon its "status" it forfeits its claim in that moment. Israel has agreed to its identity and status as subject and vassal of Yahweh, in the full expectation that it will become a new kind of kingdom and a new kind of nation. This pledge not only binds Israel unequivocally to Yahweh, but also sets Israel apart from all other peoples. Israel's response is an appropriate answer to the oracle (vv.7-8). The oracle and responsive oath seem to be something like the initial questions asked the bribe and grooms prior taking their vows, when each party states the intention and resolve for the relation.

THE THEOLOGY OF DEUTERONOMY

            The specific characteristic of the experience of god in the Old Testament has found its most typical expression in the so-called "covenant or allegiance" formula. With slight variations of different texts, it reads: "I will be your God and you shall be my people." The speaker is Yahweh, the God of Israel. He is not addressing individuals or all humanity, he is addressing members of the people of Israel. Yahweh and Israel have a unique, very close relationship. This relationship finds its realization in time: it has a history. This is why the covenant formula is often related to the date of the origin of Israel's history, the exodus from Egypt (being-led-of-Egypt).

            In the seventh century, the Neo-Assyrian empire was kept together mainly by a large number of treaties of various types. Oaths were fashion. Thus Asharhaddon, the suzerain of Manasseh of Judah, with the aid of his priests, drew up a covenant between the god Assur, himself and the Assyrian people. To a people uncertain of itself and living at the margin of the empire, covenants must have appeared to provide a guarantee of unassailable security. Therefore Deuteronomy accepted the structure of the covenantal documents. All spheres of life were covered by the treaty with Yahweh as the authentic suzerain. Precisely through this way of adjusting to declare the treaties formerly made with foreign rulers invalid.

            The exclusive relation between YHWH and Israel finds its concrete form in the so-called parenetic texts in Deuteronomy particularly in chapters 4-11 and 29-30- as well as in its cult legislation. As the seclusion and integrity of the people had obviously been lost to a great extent, even the earliest deuteronomic stipulations concerning the cult aimed at giving the people a new center in the one cult site. Yahweh's relation to Israel, which had formerly been understood in an undifferentiated, holistic manner, was to begin with localized. YHWH's exclusive claim, which had been understood in a general way, became particularized by the relation to a specific sanctuary. In the second place, the cult centralization was founded and legitimized through a divine act: YHWH's election of Israel.

            When Israel is compared to other nations, the incomparability of Israel is always ultimately founded on a gift of grace, as were, for instance, the wisdom of Solomon and of Joseph. It is precisely this which is intended to make the bitterly humiliated people of God aware of the fact that its election remains valid and to encourage it to accept and live in accordance with its exceptional position among the nations, in spite of every temptation to adapt itself to what was practiced everywhere else.

            Within the deuteronomic covenant theology, the demand to love God is only one of several versions of the "chief commandment," to honor YHWH alone and have no other gods. Given this connotation, the commandment to love YHWH finally determines the YHWH predicate of 6:4 - YHWH is neither one in the sense of undivided in himself nor the only god there is; he  is the only god among all the gods whom Israel - and not merely the individual Israelites - is to love as its own God. In other words, YHWH is the one and only as Israel's God; he is unique only as the God loved by Israel.

            For the monotheism of Deuteronomy is not an end in itself. According to Dt 4:40, monotheism is a prerequisite for Israel's being able to live in conformity with its social order - which in its turn entails a long and happy life in the promised land.