Israel's Covenant compared to Hammurabi's Code of Laws
The ancient Mediterranean world, as well as some modern primitive societies, maintained a strong belief in the reality of a spirit world which continually interacted with the human world (Pilch, 20). They populated their surroundings with gods and goddesses of various natures in order to come to terms and gain some control over their environment and circumstances. Note that these gods/goddesses represented (were) powers of nature. In addition, Abraham came from a nomadic culture, in such cultures where central government is weak and/or ineffective the people have to look after themselves. When social equals are unable to help them, they seek someone with greater means who they expect to play the role of patron (Pilch, 79). A patron could be a neighboring king, vassal or other person of power (by means or wealth) who was willing to take the seeker in as part of his extended family, offering his help and protection. Abraham must have been delighted to discover a patron, God, who was seeking him. Given his cultural background, he may have initially accepted God based on his own primitive society's belief in divine communication. Through God's revelations, however, he came to understand and affirm that God was not as a natura
the law). Failure to behave in this manner was in violation of the law (NIV, Deuteronomy 13). At the center of the heart of the law, were the Levites, the priests. These were the designated ministers to God, servants of the people. They also maintained, at least originally, an enforced vow of poverty. The Levites by tradition, received no share in the inheritance of Israel, they subsisted only upon portions of offerings brought to God. "That is why the Levites have no share in the inheritance among their brothers; The Lord is their inheritance..." (NIV, Deuteronomy 10:9) The sacrificial system was such that the priest received the best of everything offered to God for their sustenance, they were well provided for. They occupied a privileged position with far reaching authority, the designated minister to God, and keepers of the law. They were entitled to no other inheritance (NIV, Leviticus 22). The law passed from parents to children, the earliest known form of formal education. Faith, however, is not transferable. Faith had to be acknowledged then either accepted or repudiated based on knowledge of what God had done. The covenant story was repeated to avoid situations in which succeeding generations would grow up and not know Yahweh , or the work he had done for Israel, such as is documented in the book of Judges 2:10. (Anderson, 166) In this law God provided a means for Israel to be "a light to the nations". The cultures who came in contact with them would be exposed not only to the most enlightened form of law then existing, but to a people who rejoiced and found pleasure in keeping the law. Imagine in our culture, seeking ways to keep the law, rather than evading it; paying fines and obeying regulations because it is what you most want to do. In barter trade type cultures the peoples of the area would be quick to see the advantage of accepting the covenant for the advantage in trade (the law contained requirements for honest dealings with brother Israelites). This effect was mediated because a confession of faith in the God of Israel was required. This in turn meant repudiation of the traditional worship of pagan gods. Any pollution of the Israelite settlement by "detestable" worship practices, or those who gave lip service to the covenant while retaining allegiance to false gods was a capital cri! l power, but rather that God used the powers of nature to achieve a historical purpose: to challenge Pharaoh, liberate a people from the bondage of slavery, and to open a path into the future (Anderson, 97). The Covenant is a Treaty, it has been likened in numerous works to the "suzerain" treaties that were common to the peoples in the area of the Fertile Crescent. In this covenant God was not legally bound to Israel, he was free to void them as "the people of God", Israel, however was bound to God (Anderson, 92). In describing the relationship between God and Israel, the term "patron" as used by John J. Pilch seems more accurate than as suzerain. Suzerain indicates only a legal, binding, relationship. The term "patron" includes the legal aspects of the relationship, but extends the meaning to include God as father and benefactor of an adopted family. I will use the term "Covenant" to describe the treaty used as it is unique to Israelites; suzerain forms were common only to settled peoples, not nomadic tribes (Anderson, 91). In addition, we must remember that the covenant was not one of God's mighty acts,
Some common words found in the essay are:
NIV Deuteronomy, , God Israel, NIV Leviticus, King Israel, Fertile Crescent, Note Deuteronomy, John Pilch, Ten Commandments, Village Elders, chosen people, extended family, god israel, niv deuteronomy, people god, subject law, law contained, law contained provisions, inheritance niv, witnessed god, term patron,
Approximate Word count = 2338
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page double spaced)
|