Deuteronomy - Lesson 8

In this session, we are moving into Moses’ second address. In our biblical text the ending of the first address is signaled in chapter four, verse 44, “This is the Torah that Moses set before the sons of Israel.” That points backwards. Then the next line has a new heading, which introduces what follows. If you don't do this, you've got two headings, unprecedented anywhere in scripture, two, in some ways conflicting headings.  

Then we have in verse 45 of chapter four. (Chapter division is in the wrong place. This often happens in scripture. The kind bishop who was responsible for chapter and verse division obviously sometimes did his homework on the way to church, and at this point his horse stumbled and he put the line in the wrong place. The division should be between verse 44 and 45 of chapter four.) Verse 45 is the beginning to the second address, which carries on then through chapter 11. This is the second address. It's double the length of the first address, more than double the length. And then the third address will be almost double the length of the second address. So, he's really waxing more and more eloquent as he works his way through these three addresses. The fourth address is a short one. 

But this address begins with, in your translations, “These are the testimonies and the statutes and ordinances that Moses spoke to the sons of Israel when they came out of Egypt.” Well, we've got three words there that we should talk about, and I'm going to give more time to them later. Testimonies is a, in my view, pathetic translation. It communicates all the wrong things about what is happening here. We'll talk about it later. But statutes and ordinances, though that combination of two words is shorthand for all the revelation associated with the covenant given at Mount Sinai. Statutes and ordinances, or I tend to do, ordinances and stipulations, of the covenant. These are the expectations of God for His people. We'll have a chance to talk about those words more particularly.  

What follows then at the rest of chapter four in our Bibles, is simply another declaration of the context in which this was given. They have come out of Egypt and they're on the plains of Moab, on the eastern side of the Jordan River.  

And then in chapter five of our Bibles, you have the beginning of the actual speech of Moses, “Then Moses summoned all Israel and said to them.” So, it's a new gathering. Wake up, folks. The camp bell has rung, and now it's time to assemble everybody.  

And you will notice that it begins with a shama, Hear, O Israel. The second address is divided into three or four sections based on shama. You have one here, shama, Israel, Hear O Israel.  

Then in chapter six, verse four, (again, the chapter division is out of place), Hear, O Israel.  

And then chapter nine, verse one, Hear, O Israel.  

And then the next break is not a Hear, O Israel, but it is in chapter ten, verse 12, vᵊatâ Israel, And now, Israel. It's the same way chapter four had introduced a new section in the first address. And now Israel, what does the Lord, your God require of you? And you know that he's come to the climax of that one.  

So, it's a very well organized, structured, big sermon in a Russian worship service consisting actually of three or four sermons. Just this section.  

Well, he starts out this extended worship service then with a biblical text which we call the Ten Commandments. Now, I will say, you call the Ten Commandments; I don't. And by the time we're done, you'll know why. And I've hinted at it already in previous sessions. But we’ve got to start here.  

Our daughter lived in Georgia at the time. She sent this picture one morning. Here's what her kids call Ten Commandments toast. And of course, the moment you see that, that stereotypical image of the Ten Commandments is in your head. You understand this - the Ten Commandments. Look at this. And I'm asking here simply, what's wrong with this picture? And by the time we're done, I'm going to devote two sessions to the Decalogue, that's the Bible's word for it. By the time we're done, you'll have ten answers to that question: What's wrong with this picture? There is so much wrong here. So much wrong.  

But I want to talk about the Decalogue as a sort of ancient Israelite bill of rights. You know, we think we're quite brilliant in this country for having founded a nation with a statement of the basic rights of all its citizens. That’s very, very modern. And it comes as a shocker to us to realize that we're not the only ones who have bills of rights. Canadians have one, too. Singaporeans have one, too. There are lots of countries in there. And of course, some of it is imitation of the American system.  

But I want you to understand, by the time we are done with this lecture that the Israelites had a bill of rights long before we ever dreamed of it. And I call the Decalogue a bill of rights. The question will be, by the time we're at the end, is why would you call this a bill of rights, and whose rights are being protected here? That becomes the important issue. 

 So, let's talk about the Decalogue. We will talk more about the preamble to it, but for this first session, I'm going to talk about the document itself that we, you, call the Ten Commandments. Decalogue means ten words.  

What does the Bible call this document? Well, first of all, it calls it the words of Yahweh. You have this in a couple of places. Chapter five, verse five, you have, “While I was standing between the Lord and you at that time, to declare to you the word of the Lord, you were afraid.” And He said, “Do not go up the mountain,” Then, “He said.” Notice it's not, “He commanded.” “He said.”  

But if you go back to the Exodus version in Exodus chapter 20, there you have the original event and you have the formal heading. “Then God spoke all these words, hadděbārîm.” That's what it calls what is about to follow. These are not called commandments. They are, commands, as we will find, they are commands. But that's not the label he gives it. These words.  

“These are the words that Yahweh,” chapter five, verse 22 at the end of the Decalogue, “These are the words that Yahweh proclaimed with a loud voice to the entire assembly on the mountain, from the midst of the fire, the cloud and the deep gloom – these and no more. Then He inscribed them on the two stone tablets and gave them to me.” These are the words of Yahweh.  

Second, they are the ten words. “He declared to you His covenant,” We saw this yesterday in 4:13, “He declared to you His covenant, that is, He commanded you to put into practice the ten words.” That's the Hebrew and the Greek, deka rhēmata, “and then he wrote them on two stone tablets.” They are the ten words. We’ll encounter that expression again in 10:4. And we have it in Exodus 34 as well.  

Third, once, only once is this document associated with the word tôrâ, which we usually translate law. But here it is, Exodus chapter 24. “Then Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Come up to me.’” This is after they have signed, sealed, and delivered the covenant. They've sprinkled the altar. The people have said for the third time, all that the Lord has spoken, we will do. And then Moses sprinkled the people with the blood and that bound them to the covenant. And they've banqueted in the presence of God. You remember that story? That's the climax of a covenant ceremony.   

“Then Yahweh said to Moses, ‘Come up to me on the mountain and wait there, so I may give you the tablets of stone, ‘” that is the tôrâ, i.e. the command, “ ‘which I have inscribed for their instruction.’ ” Well, tôrâ and instruction are the same word, same root. So, if anything, if you're going to translate that into a different English word rather than transliterate it as I've done tôrâ, then it should be, that is the instruction, the command, that I have inscribed for their instruction.  

He gave you the Decalogue that He might discipline you. And discipline here does not mean spank. It means direct you in the right course. And that's what this is. Direct you in the right course.  

The Ten Words. Chapter ten, verse three. So, after Moses has smashed the tablets, we'll come back to this again tomorrow or in a future session. “So, I made a chest of acacia wood and carved out two stone tablets. like the first ones, and I climbed the mountain with the two tablets in my hands. Then Yahweh inscribed on these tablets the same text as the previous ones, namely the Ten Words.” And now the Greek here has deka logous rather than deka rhemata, a synonym for Decalogue. Here's one place where the Septuagint got it absolutely right. “The Ten Words that Yahweh spoke to you on the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly, and Yahweh gave them to me.” Well, these are the Ten Words.  

Why ten? Probably for the sake of memorization. We have ten fingers and this is a basic foundational document that is easily remembered. You shall have no other gods. You shall not bear the name of the Lord Your God. Honor your father and your mother, you know, keep the sabbath. So, one for each finger as you're reciting it. You don't need to have a text of this in front of you. Anybody can learn it in 15 minutes. It's a very handy base text and it gives people a worldview that introduces you to covenant living. Well, it's the Ten Words.  

We should also talk about the word ‘words.’ In Hebrew, the word ‘words’ bears a wide range of meanings. It can mean ‘word.’ The, t-h-e, is a word. ‘Word’ is a word. It can mean that, and the dictionary definition always starts there. But it can also mean simply statement. Idea. An object.  

You remember Ehud, who stabs Eglon, the fatted calf, the Moabite King. He says I have a secret, davar, for you, same word. And later he says, I have a davar from the Lord for you, and he stabs him and he got the point. Oh, that's bad. But in any case, there davar means object. It's an object. It is that special sword that he had made. It's a davar. It's an object. ‘Word’ can mean story. It can mean an event. The exodus is a word from God, a collective word.  

So, this has a wide range of meanings. And I think the Decalogue actually does have Ten Words, but it has lots more than that in terms of lexicography. But there are – I call this – the ten principles of covenant relationship. Ten foundational principles of covenant relationship. I think that's the way. 

Now, the moment you're doing that doesn't mean they're less authoritative than if you call it commandments. We tend to think that authority depends upon the word we use. It's a command, therefore you have to do it. No, these are principles of covenant relationship that are as authoritative as if we had used the word commandment. If God says it, that means it's authoritative. And so.  

So, it's the words of Yahweh. It's the Ten Words. It's the Torah. But then there are lots of other covenantal expressions. We have expressions like, “these are the words of the covenant.” The “tablets of the covenant,” or simply “His covenant,” or the box is called the “ark of the covenant of the Lord.”  

This is a very covenantal moment, a covenantal document. And so don't just limit it to commands. The theology of this piece of stone goes far beyond as a covenant document. 4:13, “He declared to you His covenant, that is, He commanded you to put into practice the Ten Words.” So, the two are virtually synonymous. There will be more to come, but the Ten Words represent a sampling, enough to create a picture of covenant righteousness and provide a foundation for future revelation. And there will be lots more.  

We already had this picture up yesterday a couple of times. This is the beginning of a portrait of a worldview that expands in ever more detail. The Decalogue, ten principles of covenant relationship, The document of the covenant (Exodus 21 to 23). These are fleshing it out some more. The guidebook on holiness, fleshing it out some more; and then the Torah of Moses in Deuteronomy. Fleshing it out. It's all the same picture. It's all the same picture. And of course, we'll see in the end, Jesus reduces it to the great command. We'll get there in a moment.  

Now we need to talk about the Decalogue as a covenantal document. These are the words of the covenant, the tablets of the covenant. In what sense is the Decalogue itself, the Ten Words, a covenant document? Well, it contains many of the features of ancient treaties. We've seen this with the Hittites and the Assyrians. There's a preamble. I am Yahweh, the Lord. Now I'm using the word intentionally. The suzerain introduces himself to the vassal. I am Yahweh.  

Then there's a historical prologue, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. That's the preamble. That's the gospel that precedes the commands that is fundamental to the relationship that is being created. This is not simply a relationship of slave owner and slaves; slaves doing what the slave owner tells them to do. No, it is a relationship of covenant.  

Then you have the stipulations, detailed outline of the response. These are now the actual ten commands.  

Then the document clause which arranges for the transcription of it, and it's on the tablets of stone.  

Blessings and curses and covenant witnesses. We have hints of blessing and curses and we’ll see in a moment in the Decalogue itself. And at this point, I don't think there are any hints of covenant witnesses, but we'll see how that plays itself out.  

So, the covenantal structure in the Decalogue. It begins with a preamble identifying the suzerain, I am Yahweh. Remember the prayer yesterday, “Oh, my god whom I know or do not know”? The first thing about covenant relationship is the Lord has introduced Himself to you by name. Welcome.  

Second, you've got the historical prologue summarizing the history of the relationship, “who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.” That's where you were. Now in other covenants, it was who beat the tar out of you. Cowered you into submission. Not so here. I rescued you from those who were mistreating you and invited you to become My servants. Same Hebrew word, but with a totally different connotation. It is My privileged vassals, the agents of My great plan of redemption and revelation.  

And then third, the stipulations, these summarize the divine suzerain’s expectations in the Decalogue.  

And now we have to talk about different kinds of laws. There are laws. These are laws. You heard me use the word, and I feel badly using it because we've so abused it. But on the other hand, let's talk. Let's use the word law. There are different kinds of laws. In scholarly terms, we talk about casuistic and apodictic laws. The simple everyday expression is simply conditional and unconditional.  

For instance, here a conditional law, Exodus 21. This comes out of this document here. Many in this document are of the casuistic order, that is the covenant document. Well, in this case, notice “If an ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox shall surely be stoned, its flesh shall be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall go unpunished.” Or Exodus 22 from the same document, “If you take your neighbor's cloak as a pledge, you are to return it to him before night, for that is his only covering. It is his cloak for his body. What else shall he sleep in?” That's casuistic law form.  

But now look at the unconditional apodictic. “You shall have no other gods before me.” Period. “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor,” period. “Honor your father and your mother,” if they're good parents. No, it doesn't say that. Hmm.  

Notice that they are quite different. We can contrast the features. The first is conditional, the second one unconditional. The first begins with if, when; in such and such a case, this is the response. It's case law. In the other it begins with the verb in the imperative. Do this or don't do this. A declarative versus imperative mood. Usually third person – if a person steals a sheep, rather than if you steal a sheep. Whereas apodictic, the unconditional always in second person, you shall honor your father and your mother. Don't commit adultery. You shall not murder.  

The conditional or the casuistic ones are typically very specific based on actual cases, and they often have a motive clause or an exception – in order that or to prevent that, lest. Whereas apodictic law is often usually general without qualification. But Paul picks it up; isn't it in Ephesians where he says, “this is the only command with a promise”? “Children obey your parents in the Lord”, the only command - And that's true in the Decalogue. “Honor your father and your mother that it may go well with you in the land.” That is uncharacteristic of apodictic law. And Paul picks it up and he makes a point out of it.  

Usually, conditional is positive in form. If this, then that. Whereas apodictic are often negative in form; don't do this, don't do that. Whatever. Setting the boundaries of human behavior.  

Now, the other thing we should note is that (it's too small for you to read from where you are, probably) but we need to notice that with reference to the Decalogue, we are uniquely blessed because we have two versions of the same document in the Bible. You have the original version in Exodus 20 verses 2 to 7. (I think the original; critical scholars turn them around and say, Deuteronomy came first. I don't think so actually.) But you have the original version, Exodus 20 and now Moses’ recitation of that at the beginning of his second address. This is the text for a second sermon. It's like we preachers do; we open with a scripture text, and he begins by reciting the Decalogue. But in that second sermon, he never gets past the first command. It's a sermon on the first command, really, the whole thing.  

But here you notice in this that the Exodus version and the Deuteronomy version of this one are virtually identical up to “you shall not bear in vain the name of the Lord your God.” They're virtually identical. But something happens after that. Moses is adding and subtracting and changing. And you have to ask, Moses, what are you doing? You just told us in chapter four, you shall not. But of course, Moses is in a different position. Moses is the pastor. He is trying to make this document relevant for this. And so, and I think also he's not reading. He doesn't have the tablets in his hand as he's giving this. He's not allowed to. They're stuck in the box in the Holy of Holies. Nobody has access to them, but he has it in his mind. Thy word have I hidden in my heart that I might not sin against Thee. I mean, it's hidden in his heart. And here, you know, the changes are minor. Remember, the Sabbath we are supposed to observe. I mean, he changed the word.  

Earlier I tried to sing, “Thank you, Lord, for saving my soul. Thank you, Lord, for making me whole. Thank you, Lord, for giving to me thy great salvation.” So… Now? Depends on where you live. If you're in Kentucky, you'll sing it one way, rich and free. Or if you're in Illinois, you'll sing it another - full and free. I like full and free better because it's alliteration.  

Well, I mean, the point is the same. It's not contradictory. There are some Psalms that you have in the first book of the Psalter that are repeated in the second. The difference is they've changed the name for God. One has Yahweh and the other one has Elohim. Otherwise almost the same. So, this is what happens if you're in a different hymn book. They use this word.  

So here, observe the Sabbath. Oh, but the green here. These are additions in Deuteronomy. Moses adds, As Yahweh, your God has commanded you or your ox or your donkey that’s new, or that your male and female, the female servant, may rest as well as you.  

But then when you come to the Sabbath, it's very different. The Deuteronomy version. We'll talk about this some more later. The Deuteronomy version of the Sabbath ordinance, “You shall remember that you were slaves in the land of Egypt.” Really? The grounding of the Sabbath in Exodus is creation because God had a seven, six plus one rhythm in His life; we are to have His six plus one rhythm. Here it says he doesn't say anything about that. He says you were slaves in Egypt. You know what it means to live without a day of rest. Don't treat your people that way. And so immediately, you see, it's a very humanitarian tone that he gives it.  

Well, when you come to the last ones, honor your father and your mother again, as Yahweh, your God commanded you. But in Deuteronomy, he adds a second promise, “that your days may be prolonged,” That's in Exodus, oh, “and that it may go well with you.” So, he adds that. It’s not like he's contradicting. 

“You shall not testify falsely” becomes “uselessly.” “You shall not covet your neighbor's house.” He changes the order here, and “you shall not covet your neighbor's wife.” And then he changes the word for covet.  

But anyway, we can do some interesting studies and we ask ourselves. Now, if you're a redaction critic, you ask yourselves about the theological significance of the changes that are made. This isn't accidental. Moses is a pastor, and you can tell he is functioning pastorally here by seeing to it that the people get the point.  

Well, these are the stipulations of the Decalogue. Two versions of it. The question is, who is the addressee? Who is the you? You shall have no other gods. You shall not commit adultery. You shall honor your father and your mother. Who's you?  

Student: The nation.  

Dr. Block: The nation? Everybody? “You shall not covet your neighbor's wife. You shall not…” I mean, is this a six-year-old? No, it's not. It's an adult male who is head of the household. Have you ever thought about that before? And of course, this leads to my point. It's a bill of rights. Whose rights?  

Now David Klein has written an essay on this. And this really got me going because I was so upset with what he did. He turns the whole thing upside down. He says this whole thing is to secure the rights of the head of the household. Everybody is to fall in line with him. And this is why you tell other people how. It is the opposite. The head of the household is the primary threat to the well-being of the community. It's a shocker when you start looking at it that way. And the assumption here is in order to have a healthy community, you need to have healthy heads of households. So, let's look at this.  

The addressee - to whom is it addressed? And here, as a bill of rights addressed to the head of a household, “I am Yahweh, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.” Well, this is the gospel basis of this bill of rights. I brought you out of Egypt and that's why you behave a certain way. But then you shall, here's the command number one, “You shall have no other gods before me,” or is it besides? “You shall not make for yourself a carved image. You shall not bow to them or serve them.” Why? Yahweh has the right to your exclusive allegiance. And of course, we can unpack that.  

On what grounds does Yahweh have the right to the Israelites exclusive allegiance? Based on the Exodus version, you could say, because He created everything. He made it, including you. And therefore, He’s the boss. It's all about His rights.  

But for the Israelites, what's the primary grounds of God's right to absolute exclusive allegiance? We saw this yesterday or in the previous session we saw it. “You shall not make for yourself any of these images, idols, for the Lord has brought you out of the land of Egypt, and He has made you His special treasure.” That's why you don't make idols. God has the right to the Israelites’ exclusive allegiance because He is their Savior, their Redeemer. If it weren't for Him, it wouldn't be for them. They'd be gone. They'd be gone. They owe their very existence to Him. So, it's gratitude for salvation.  

“You shall not bear the name of the Lord your God in vain.” Now, here again our translations have a long history of missing the point. When I was growing up this means you don't cuss. I think it means that you don't swear. And to this day, I cannot believe it when I hear Christians say, Oh, my God. That is the flippant use of the name of God, and that is blasphemy. You don't use the reference to God as simply a punctuation mark. We weren't allowed to say, Gee. Because that's an abbreviation for Jesus. And our mouths would be washed with soap if we did. And it shocks me when I hear people talk just like the world with their expletives. No, but it's not a verb; it's not primarily a verbal thing. The word here doesn't say you shall not speak the name of the Lord your God in vain. It’s nāśā’, which means to carry, to wear.  

You've got a cap on. What does it say on your cap? Rustic Ridge. Why do you wear that? Why does the company want you to wear that?  

Student: Advertising?  

Dr. Block: Absolutely. You're bearing the name. That's the point. That's the point. You're bearing the name.  

Underlying this command, “You shall not bear, wear, carry the name of the Lord your God” is the notion in the ancient world of branding your possessions with your name.  

If you needed a new pot - you broke a pot in the kitchen and you need a new one - you go down to the potter and you request to potter to make for you a new cooking pot. And then before he fires up the clay, he asks, Oh, by the way, would you like for me to put your name on it in case it goes lost or you loan it to somebody? I've lost lots of books because my names weren’t branded in there, and sure, fine, do that. And so, he stamps it with your name. Why? So that everybody knows to whom that pot belongs.  

Now, if you are an upper-class person and you need a new pot, there's another reason why you'd want them to brand that pot. You would then want that person to make you a special pot, not just an ordinary clay pot. So that that pot, wherever it goes, it advertises your status, your significance. That's what's involved here. You shall not wear the name of the Lord your God in vain, which means you shall not claim to belong to the Lord Yahweh, and act as if you belong to Baal. That's false advertising. And of course, this is a universally biblical notion.  

When we get to chapter 28, we will see that when you are behaving yourselves and the Lord is blessing you richly, then the nations will call the name of the Lord upon you. No, they will see that you are called by the name of the Lord. Or translations have, they will read over you the name of the Lord. Come on. Makes no sense. No, it really means, then they will see that you wear the name of the Lord. In the ancient world, if you were an employee at the temple of the god Marduk you would be branded with the name of Marduk. They did this. Slave owners branded their servants with their names.  

I grew up on the farm in northern Saskatchewan. We had a community pasture and every spring when the grass was turning green, end of June, then we would bring our young stock to a community pasture, it was in the river hills. It was no good. It was too rocky and the terrain too irregular for farming, so it was all fenced up miles and miles of this along the river hills. But you'd bring your cattle there and the first thing they would do is brand everybody's cattle with your name so that you go in to check that during the summer how your animals are doing. You can spot yours because they belong to you. But it's also rather embarrassing for some people because the people who are really good farmers, their stock was always top notch. Wow, look at that Hereford or whatever it was. But people who were pathetic farmers, they'd bring their scrawny and scraggly cattle there. And they are a total reflection on their owner.  

That's what this is. You shall not bear the name. Don't proclaim to belong to Yahweh and act like... I feel a sermon coming on – wearing the name. We are baptized into the name of Christ, which means that after, everywhere we go, we're advertising Jesus. That's the name we bear. In that time, they were called Christians. They bore his name. The Lord has the right to proper representation. That's the point. And if you're representing him falsely, you are bringing shame to the name of God. 

Remember the Sabbath. Well, the Exodus version has the Lord has a right to your time and your trust. But in Deuteronomy, your servants, your sons and daughters, your male and female servant, your ox and your donkey, do you remember that? He added your ox and your donkey. He didn't add sheep. Why? Why not?  

Student: They’re not a work animal. 

Dr. Block: They're not a draft animal. These are the animals that work for a living. Sheep just are sheep. They produce wool and milk or whatever. But in any case, even the animals have the right to humane treatment. Rest one day in a week that they may be refreshed. Where else do we go with this? And this is where Deuteronomy is so humanitarian, humane. It highlights that. It recognizes the propensity of the head of the household to exploit everything, everybody and everything in his household for his self-interest. And so, this is to protect them from him.  

Well, honor your father and your mother. Now, again, we're talking to an adult male. We're not talking to a teenager. We're talking to an adult male. Honor. your father. Notice that does not say, worship your father. The Canaanites were all around; ancestor worship is prevalent all over the place. And the Israelites were tempted to go that route too. It doesn’t say, worship your father, but honor your father and your mother. Parents have the right to people's respect. And in this case, and care, because presumably this is a multi-generational household unit.  

The first command is, “for the Lord visits the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.” That is not this chain link, you know, so long after the father is gone the kids are suffering the consequences. No. Treat this horizontally. Why three or four generations? That's the maximum you can have in one - living at the same time - in one household. We'll have a picture of this later on. But that's why three or four generations, everybody is affected by the behavior of the head of the household.  

You shall not murder. Others have the right to life. Notice that doesn't say, be sure to carry a gun to protect yourself. That's such twisted thinking. You don't protect a society by banning guns. You don't. You protect a society by ensuring that you've got people with integrity. That's the problem. So, others have the right to life.  

And I would apply this, for instance, to the issue of abortion. The moment of conception, God has begun creating for Himself an image of Himself. It's human life from the very beginning. It's interesting. Genesis six says For whoever sheds human life by human means, blood be taken. It’s never monkey blood. It's never any other kind of blood. It's always human blood. But God, this is the theological point, God has begun the process of creating another image of Himself, and we're telling God this is a mistake. It's the height of treason. You shall not take another person's life.  

You shall not commit adultery. The next person has a right to a pure and secure marriage. 

 You shall not steal. The next person has the right to his property. You don't have a right to it.  

You shall not bear false witness. The next person has the right to honest reputation and representation, especially in court. This is legal language, but of course, in colloquial terms, rules, we can say God don't dig lying. As it was in the musical, you know, 20, 30 years ago for kids. God don't dig lying. No, this is honesty and a true reputation.  

A man's neighbors have a right to freedom from fear. Now we're getting to the heart of things, aren't we? It's not just don't take stuff from the next person, don't even think about it. Because the problems always start in the heart and in the mind.  

And so, the last two are about freedom from the thought that other people might be wanting. So, padlock your house, have alarm systems. No, that's not the answer to a sick world. The answer to a sick world is everybody's transformed heart. This is what we call covenantal ethics. Covenantal ethics.  

Now we tend to think that the Decalogue is two-dimensional. You've got the vertical dimensions and you've got the horizontal. It's much more complicated than that. I see at least four dimensions here. You have the first couple of commands relayed to an Israelite and his God, and I'm being very intentional. There is a footnote why I use ‘his.’ It's a patris-centric world and it is talking to a male adult who is the head of the household. Where it becomes applicable to others is when others assume that status everything applies to them. This is anybody in leadership position, really. But the document itself is talking about a household in that world.  

So, the first is about, I am Yahweh, your God, no other gods.  

The second is about we are Yahweh’s people. Yahweh has no other people. These are the two sides of the covenant. I am your God. You are my people. So, the first two protect. This is about an Israelite and his God.  

This one is about an Israelite and his household. Remember the sabbath, especially the Deuteronomy one. It's the household, and honor your father and your mother. It's the household that's at issue here.  

And then in the third column, you have the Israelite and his neighbors. You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, shall not steal. You shall not testify falsely against your neighbor.  

And then the last one, the Israelite and his heart. They all start in the heart. But of course, here the issue is, is your heart right with God? And when the heart is right with God, then you're not a threat.  

And of course, now suddenly we realize that Jesus had it absolutely right. He said all the commands boil down to a single one in two dimensions. You shall love Yahweh your God with all your heart and mind. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Oh really? The first two are loving the Lord with all our hearts. Nothing left over for anybody else. We'll get to the shama in a little bit.  

And the Sabbath is transitional. In Exodus, sabbath is a vertical one. In Deuteronomy, sabbath is horizontal. So, it's transitional. Number three. And then these are horizontal.  

But now again, you recognize what love means. It was intentional that we spent a little time on what the word love means. Love is covenant commitment, demonstrated in action in the interest of the other person. Who's the addressee? A potential pharaoh. He talks about you shall not covet your neighbor's house. This is the household in which every head of a household is tempted to become a little pharaoh. Don't become to those in your charge what pharaoh was to you. Everybody has the right to humane treatment. And so that's what this is. You shall love the Lord your God and your neighbor as yourself. This means covenant commitment, demonstrated it in action in the interests of my neighbor. And it's actually self-sacrificing love. So that the other person's interest always triumphs over self-interest. Always.  

Let's just look at the one on honor your father and your mother. Well, it doesn't say if your parents are good parents. I know in our world we’ve got… What does the Lord do with all these dysfunctional worlds that we have created for years for ourselves? But it is interesting that the text does not say honor your father and your mother if they were good parents.  

I mean, our son is adopted. He doesn't know his biological parents. Until at the age of 21, he discovered a little bit. We only have a little bit of information on them. Until he discovered that his parents were decent human beings, he imagined himself to be the worst scum. That's who he is. But no, no, this is about the well-being.  

And in matters like honoring parents, it's very difficult; it's very complicated. How can you honor a parent who has been abusive? It's really tough. It shows you how upside down our world is, having lost the covenantal ethic. True democracy assumes a responsible citizenry that values the well-being of the next person, always more important than your own. Jesus said, Take up your cross. Follow me. That's what He - Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus. I mean, this is it. And of course, here, the key to a healthy state of Israel, community of Israel, is each domestic unit being healthy.  

It's a profound document and it is a bill of rights. And it ain't my rights that are protected. It assumes I am the threat to other people's rights and I better get my house in order. I should say myself in order, in order that you all are protected. This is the way biblical leadership is.  

But now we have to talk about one other thing, and that is why do we need two tablets?  

Student: Two covenanters.  

Dr. Block: Two, because there are two parties to the covenant. That's why. It is not because the first tablet has the vertical commands. You hear this all the time. And even a good friend of mine who is an Old Testament scholar in Britain, I won't name him on the record, he talks about the first tablet in terms of you shall have no other gods besides me; you shall not bear the name of the Lord your God in vain, and keep the Sabbath. I mean, that's the first tablet. No, it's not. Has nothing to do with those divisions. But that's a very ancient tradition that goes back all the way to Philo and Josephus. It's very ancient. But it's because we lost the significance of the place of a covenant document in the life of a covenant community. So now we have to talk about this.  

Why two tablets? Well, this is the way it's stereotypically represented. We've got two tablets. Notice they have different text, if you can read that, I mean, it's not, it's imaginary, too. But Charlton Heston's tablets have different texts, so that one tablet has certain text. I mean, it's too much to put on one tablet. No, it's not. There are only a few words. Here's a very short document. You can put the whole thing. And yet the text in Exodus says that these tablets were inscribed on both sides front and back. Why? So that nobody can add anything. If that's all He said and they’re front and back, why two stone tablets? And so here we have this. Bring it back there.  

This is the way we number them. You may already have got upset with my misnumbering of them. I have the numbers different. Did you notice I had my numbers different than you probably do? I have the numbers different than I had them 20 years ago because I was where you are. But I've read my Bible. And I've analyzed this linguistically, and it's interesting that the Reformed have, “you shall have no other gods before me, you shall not take make any graven images.” That's number two. “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. Remember the Sabbath} and the rest of it. Notice those are the verticals and these are the horizontals. That's why we divide them.  

Here's the Catholic, and Orthodox Christian, and Lutheran; they got it right. So that number one is, “I'm the Lord your God, you shall have no other gods in my place”. Number two, “you shall not bear the name.” The last two are divided. “You shall not covet.” Those are two different commands, discoursed linguistically. They are set up as two separate commands, not one. And so, in both numbering, we've got ten, but they land up differently.  

Well, let's talk about the function of tablets in covenant relationships. Here's from the Hittites, a treaty between Suppiluliuma of Hatti and Shattiwaza of Mitanni. (But anybody here have friends who are pregnant and looking for names for kids? This will work. Suppiluliuma.) A duplicate of this tablet, this happens at the end of the covenant document, is deposited before the Sun-goddess of Arinna, since the Sun-goddess of Arinna directs kingship and queenship. Also, in the land of Mitanni, a copy is deposited before the Storm-god, Lord of the kurinnu of Kaḫat.  

So, each party to the covenant gets a copy. And you take it home, your copy, you take it home, and you deposit it in the temple in the presence of the god. And the god is the guarantor of the other person's fidelity. It's interesting; we’ll come there. There are differences. Yeah, let me make that comment.  

When Ramesses II and Ḫattušili finally had enough of fighting, they made two copies of the covenant and each of them took a copy home and preserved it. So, we actually have the copies of a Hittite version, up in Asia minor they discovered it, and we have it on the walls of Ramesses’ temple, this same covenant. The interesting thing is the copy that's on the walls in Egypt of Ramesses’ temple is with the voice of the Hittite king. He took home the version that had the Hittite king's name as the speaker. So, what is on his temple wall is guaranteeing the loyalty of the Hittite, who is far away but the gods take care of him. If this Hittite king ever breaks the covenant, the god, my god is going to invoke the curses. And so, they flip. You sign a copy and give the other person the copy with your signature. And the deity becomes the guarantor of the fidelity of the signatory.  

Well, there are differences here from that custom. Whereas the two Hittite documents were deposited in different countries in the temples of different gods, both Israelite temple tablets were deposited in a single place in a box; the ark of the covenant has two tablets. So, they're in the same place.  

Second. Whereas the Hittite tablets were to be retrieved periodically for covenant renewals (I could have read a text on that), the Israelite tablets were permanently stowed away, inaccessible to human eyes. Those tablets of stone were for God's eyes alone. Only God ever saw it. It's in the box, stuck away in the Holy of Holies. You don't go in there. Even on the Day of Atonement. We have no record that on the Day of Atonement, they open the lid and check to see that everything is right. No. On the Day of Atonement, they simply sprinkle blood on the top cover. It's covered. And that secures the ongoing covenant relationship represented by this.  

The significance. So now when we've got two tablets in one box, we have to ask what function are they performing? And, in my view, one represents Israel's commitment to Yahweh, and the other one represents Yahweh’s commitment to Israel. The copy that figuratively bore Israel's signature is handed to the covenant partner who happens to be Yahweh, Israel’s suzerain, within the disparity covenant relationship. By placing this tablet before Yahweh, the Israelites invoke Him as the guarantor of their own fidelity. (Singing) Oh, He sees all you do. He hears all you say. My Lord’s a watching all the time. God sees what we are doing, and He will guarantee due process for covenant violation. So, Yahweh as Israel's God, is the guarantor of Israel's fidelity. And if they go off track, He will hold them accountable.  

The other one is Yahweh’s tablet. But now it's different. This is also Yahweh’s temple. The copy that bore Yahweh’s signature is handed to the Israelites who deposited in the temple of their God Yahweh. In so doing, they invoke Yahweh as the guarantor of His own fidelity to them. I mean, there are no other gods. Yahweh can’t swear by any other gods, which is why we often have ḥay ‘ǎnî, as I live, or, actually, Greenberg is right, by my life. May my life be taken if I ever violate this. It's a self-imprecation.  

We had passing between the two parts of the critter yesterday. The torch representing God, that's what He’s doing. That's a nonverbal way of saying this verbal thing, ḥay ‘ǎnî, by my life. God is the guarantor.  

And of course, what's so comforting to Israel is they know that these tablets of stone are it. God is seeing that. And God knows He has to be faithful. He will not abandon Israel, even as they also know God holds us accountable. He's a suzerain, this is not a parity treaty. It's a suzerain and vassal treaty. But the same gracious God guarantees both. So that’s part of it.  

Well, Exodus 31:18, “And when He had finished speaking with him on the mountain, He gave to Moses, the two tablets of the ‘ēdūt, tablets of stone transcribed by the finger of God.” And of course, there are lots of, I've got so many questions. How did God do this? The Charlton Heston movie has, you know, the zapping of light and everything else. I have no idea how this happened. God doesn't have fingers. And yet we talk about it. The moment you have text, you assume the only way to get text is for fingers to do it. And so, they describe it in that metaphorical way.  

Or Exodus 32, “Moses went down the mountain with the two tablets of the ‘ēdūt,” that's always translated testimony. Makes no sense. To us a testimony is that which; I mean, we got this case going on, the George Floyd thing right now. People have presented testimony, that's what we do with testimony. And if you call these tablets of the testimony, what in the world is that?  

And the word ‘ēdūt with this vocalization, ‘ēdūt. It occurs in other contexts, but in this context, it's got to be something else. “Tablets that were inscribed on both sides; on the front and back, they were inscribed. The tablets were the work of God and the inscription, the inscription of God inscribed, engraved on the tablets.” 

Or Exodus 34, “Write down these words for yourself, for in keeping with these words I've made a covenant with you and Israel. So, he remained there with Yahweh for 40 days and 40 nights. … And he transcribed on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Words. When Moses came down from Mount Sinai, with the two tablets of the ‘ēdūt in his hand, he didn't know that the skin of his face shone because he'd been talking with God.” I love the image here. This is fabulous. But what is this ‘ēdūt? Testimony? Makes no sense. It makes zero sense. But there's one place in scripture where this same word is used where it makes sense. And I think that is our key to this usage.  

“In the seventh year, Jehoiada sent for the chiefs and the hundreds of the Carites and of the guards who had come to him in the temple of Yahweh. He made a pact with them, imposing an oath of loyalty upon them in the temple. Then he presented to them the king's son. Then the priest gave King David’s spears and quivers that were kept in the temple to the chiefs of hundreds. With their weapons ready, all the guards stationed themselves around the temple from the south in the north to guard the king on all sides. Then Jehoiada had brought out the king's son and placed upon him the diadem and the ‘ēdūt.” Same word. Same word. “And they anointed him and proclaimed him king and they clapped their hands and shouted, ‘Long live the king!’” What is this thing? “And Jehoiada instituted the covenant between Yahweh, on the one hand, and the king and the people. on the other – as well as between the king and the people – that they should be the people of Yahweh.” Not the people of the king. It's the people of Yahweh. It's a fabulous text.  

We have just watched the burial of Prince Philip. But of course, it reminds us of that great moment. Was it in 1953? I can vaguely remember. I was a ten-year old when Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth was crowned. She's the same age as my oldest brother. But in any case, in the course of the coronation, they present to her formally all these symbols of her status, insignias of office, insignias of covenant, insignias of the relationship. That's what the tablets represent. These are the icons, not to be worshiped. They're stuck away in the Holy of Holies there. But these are the icons that God perceives as the symbolic, iconic, emblematic, declarations of His irrevocable covenant to them and their accepting that covenant for themselves. These are symbols of the covenant, icons of the covenant, guarantees of the covenant by symbolizing that notion. I think that's what's going on here.  

So now let's talk about what's wrong with this picture. You can't actually see this. I'm sorry about that.  

Student: The two tablets aren’t identical.  

Dr. Block: Well, the two tablets should be identical. They're different. That's number one. What else? How about the Ten Commandments? That’s not biblical. It should be the Ten Words.  

And then the other question I have is why commandments? Why do we have that French ending on that word? We never use that in everyday speech. Never. And any translation of scripture that continues to use commandments is archaic. Can't be up to date. What do we say?  

Student: Commands.  

Dr. Block: Commands. Period. Save the ink, save the trees. Commands. Why commandments? What else is wrong?  

Student: They are words, not commands.  

Dr. Block: Yes. What else?  

Student: They are not on both sides.  

Dr. Block: They’re what?  

Student: It's not on both sides.  

Dr. Block: Not on both sides. It's on one side.  

Look at the numbers. Roman numerals. Why do we do that? Why? We think it gives gravitas. But the document was written in everyday Hebrew. And if anything, they should be the archaic Hebrew letters of the alphabet. So why Roman numerals? It's a different language from the text itself. That's wrong. Shouldn't be different language from the text. It's Roman numerals. We're English. We're Americans. We don't do that.  

“Thou shalt have.” That's old English. It's archaic. People don't talk that way this year. What planet are you from?  

We lived in Germany for one year. I grew up in a household where German was the mother language and every morning we'd have devotions at the breakfast table. My father would read from Luther's German Bible for devotions every morning. And we get to Germany, it’s 1968, 69. And the people say, You sound just like Luther, nobody talks that way in Germany these days. They don't. It’s King James English. And so, no. Thou shalt have.  

What else is wrong? By my numbering, the numbers are wrong. If you look at the text itself, the Lutherans had it right and the Catholics have it right and the Orthodox have it right. But the Calvinist Reformed folks, they messed it up for us. Sorry about that.  

What else is wrong with that? Where's it located?  

Student: Out in the public’s eyes. 

Dr. Block: It's in a park out in the public. Where does it belong?  

Student: Where only God can see it. 

Dr. Block: Where only God can see it. People don't need monuments of this up to our piety. What do they need? They need to see our piety, our life. The Israelites would never have thought of doing it. It was buried away there. You should have that word written on your heart. That's why Ten Words so, you can memorize it and you can live it.  

It's all wrong. Everything is wrong here. And our debates about whether or not we should have this document in our courthouses and in our schools is all misplaced. Who's the addressee here?  

Oh. The biggest problem is it leaves out the gospel. Did you notice that? The gospel. Where does it start? “You shall have no other gods besides me.” That's absurd. Covenant documents always include, they're not just commands. If you do this it's sheer moralism. It's sheer moralism.  

The Decalogue was not given to Egyptians. It wasn't given. The problem in our world is not that they don't keep the Ten Commandments. The problem is our people have never left Egypt. This is not unique. There are those who will say, Reformed and Lutheran folks, who will argue that while we are not under the rest of the laws, the Decalogue is universal and that distinguishes it from the rest of the laws. No, it doesn't. It is as parochial and specific and the audience is identified as all of us. “I'm Yahweh your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt.” It's written to the redeemed.  

I don't expect the world to live like this. The problem with the world is not that they don't keep the commandments. The problem is they're still in Egypt, stuck dead in trespasses and sins. And what they need is embodiments of the gospel and embodiments of the fidelity. The hypocrisy of what we do with this is just absurd.  

You think that putting this up makes your school a Christian school? No, it doesn't. It's the Christian teachers and the Christian students and the Christian parents that make it a Christian school. That's where we should be and we should not be pretending that we need to get everybody to keep the Ten Commandments. I don't expect Washington to act in the church's interest. A lot of people do. I don't. It's the kingdom of this world. We're of the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ and it makes all the difference in the world.  

Well, the name is wrong. Style is wrong. The numbers are wrong. The location is wrong. The commands are incorrectly numbered. It misinterprets a reference to two tablets. The isolation of the Decalogue from the rest.  

Why don't we have all of Deuteronomy on that document? Why don't we post all of Deuteronomy in our schools? There are far more allusions and references to Deuteronomy in the New Testament than to the Decalogue. Far more. This is the authoritative Torah. And the message is wrong. That's the saddest of all.  

We were down in Indiana at the Amish. They do such wonderful woodwork stuff. And I love the way they’ve got this Ten Commandments, that's what they call it, too - change the name. I love the artistry of that. But again, they start where this one starts and I can't buy it. People don't need more commands. They need Jesus. And that's where we should be with our proclamation of the gospel.  

Anyhow, that's it for this lesson.