The influence of Deuteronomy upon subsequent books of the Old Testament is very perceptible.
On the other hand the better party among the priests, believing the ritual to be necessary, might undertake to moralize it; of such a movement, begun by Deuteronomy, Ezekiel is the most eminent representative.
His ritual code (xliii.-xlvi.), which in elaborateness stands midway between that of Deuteronomy and that of the middle books of the Pentateuch (resembling most nearly the code of Lev.
In both points it is followed by Deuteronomy.'
Collections of laws are found in Deuteronomy and in exilic and post-exilic writings; groups of a relatively earlier type are preserved in Exod.
Weighty reasons are brought also by conservative writers against the theory that Deuteronomy dates from or about the age of Josiah, and their objections to the " discovery " of a new law-roll apply equally to the " re-discovery " and promulgation of an old and authentic code.
Deuteronomy, where the several sources of the narratives are described.
Of this halakhic Midrash we possess that on Exodus, called Mekhilta, that on Leviticus, called Sifra, and that on Numbers and Deuteronomy, called Sifre.
- The book of Deuteronomy was the product of prophetic teaching operating on traditional custom, which was represented in its essential features by the two codes of legislation contained in Ex.
It is universally held by critics that our present book of Deuteronomy (certainly chaps.
The book of Deuteronomy, in conjunction with the reformation of Josiah's reign (which synchronizes with the rapid decline of Assyria and the reviving prestige of Yahweh), appeared to mark the triumph of the great prophetic movement.
We note (a) that though the book of Deuteronomy bears the prophetic impress, the priestly impress is perhaps more marked.
He was the first to foretell with clearness the return of his people from captivity foreshadowed by Jeremiah, and he set himself the task even in 1 Thus in comparison with the " book of the covenant," Deuteronomy adds the stipulation in reference to the release of the slave; that his master was to provide him liberally from his flocks, his corn and his wine (Deut.
2 - The oracles of Malachi clearly reveal the continued influence of the book of Deuteronomy in his day.
Seq.) meant to describe the discovery of Deuteronomy is evident from the events which followed; and this identification of the roll, already made by Jerome, Chrysostom and others, has been substantiated by modern literary criticism since De Wette (1805).
The book of Deuteronomy crystallizes a doctrine; it is the codification of teaching which presupposes a carefully prepared soil.
On the other hand, the book of Deuteronomy has a characteristic social-religious side; its humanity, philanthropy and charity are the distinctive features of its laws, and Josiah's reputation (Jer.
Its treatment of the monarchy is only part of a great and now highly complicated literary undertaking (traceable in the books Joshua to Kings), inspired with the thought and coloured by language characteristic of Deuteronomy (especially the secondary portions), which forms the necessary introduction.
Whatever reforms Josiah actually accomplished, the restoration afforded the opportunity of bringing the Deuteronomic teaching into action; though it is more probable that Deuteronomy itself in the main is not much earlier than the second half of the 6th century B.C.'
1 The view that Deuteronomy is later than the 7th century has been suggested by M.
There is also an unmistakable development in the laws; and the priestly legislation, though ahead of both Ezekiel and Deuteronomy, not to mention still earlier usage, not only continues to undergo continual internal modification, but finds a further distinct development, in the way of definition and interpretation, outside the Old Testament - in the Talmud.
They identify with Deuteronomy the law-roll which explains the noteworthy reforms of Josiah (§ 16); but since it is naturally admitted that religious conditions had become quite inconsistent with Mosaism, the conservative view implies that the " long-lost " Deuteronomy must have differed profoundly from any known Mosaic writings to which earlier pious kings and prophets had presumably adhered.
Then with the concentration of the cultus at Jerusalem represented by Deuteronomy, the celebration was restricted to the Judean capital, and its duration fixed at seven days, though its date was still left indeterminate.
The determination of a fixed date must therefore have been much earlier than Deuteronomy or the alleged period of the Priestly Code.
The reasons for believing that this roll was substantially identical with the book of Deuteronomy were already appreciated by Jerome, Chrysostom, Theodoret and others,' and a careful examination shows that the character of the reformation which followed agrees in all its essential features with the prescriptions and exhortations of that book.
8, io), and hence only some portions of Deuteronomy (or of an allied production) may be intended.
The great stature of Og is explained in the passage of Deuteronomy mentioned by the statement that he was of the remnant of the aboriginal Rephaim.
Thus in the Elohist and in Deuteronomy the date of the festival is only vaguely stated to be in the month of Abib, while in the Holiness Code and in the Priestly History the exact date is given.
A still more vital contrast occurs concerning the place of sacrificing the Passover; as enjoined in Deuteronomy this is to be by the males of the family at Jerusalem, whereas both in the presumably earlier Yahwist and in the later Priestly Code the whole household joins in the festival which can be celebrated wherever the Israelites are settled.
It may be observed however that the absence of a definite date in Deuteronomy must be accidental, since a common pilgrimage feast must be on a fixed day, and the reference to the seven weeks elapsing between Passover and Pentecost also implies the fixing of the date.
At the time of the reformation under Josiah, represented by Deuteronomy, the attempt was made to turn the family thank-offering of firstlings into a sacrificial rite performed by the priests in the Temple with the aid of the males of each household, who had to come up to Jerusalem but left the next morning to celebrate the Feast of Unleavened Bread in their homes.
Edom's hostility to Judah was incessant, but the feud reached its full intensity only after the time of Deuteronomy (xxiii.
Petri epistolam (1641), and also his commentaries on Genesis (1637) and on Deuteronomy (1658).
A See the Introduction to the Century Bible, " Deuteronomy and Joshua," by H.
- x.); " Malachi " writes under the influence of the earlier Code of Deuteronomy only, 4 and must therefore belong to a date prior to 444.
(also parallels in Deuteronomy); chap. i.
The doctrine of monotheism was formally expressed in the period immediately before and during the Exile, in Deuteronomy" and Isaiah; and at the same time we find angels prominent in Ezekiel who, as a prophet of the Exile, may have been influenced by the hierarchy of supernatural beings in the Babylonian religion, and perhaps even by the angelology of Zoroastrianism."
Driver's note in "Deuteronomy," Int.
36-48), giving rise to the command of Deuteronomy xxiii.
There was probably some tradition of a farewell address delivered by Moses, and the writer of Deuteronomy gave this tradition form and substance.
This is the fundamental thought which is insisted on and developed in Deuteronomy with great eloquence and power.
The style of Deuteronomy, when once it had been formed, lent itself readily to imitation; and thus a school of writers, imbued with its spirit, and using its expressions, quickly arose, who have left their mark upon many parts of the Old Testament.
The main part of the book of Deuteronomy was "found" shortly before 621 B.C. and about the same time appeared the prophets Jeremiah and Zephaniah, and perhaps the book of Ruth.
This involves the view that the historical traditions are mainly due to two characteristic though very complicated recensions, one under the influence of the teaching of Deuteronomy (Joshua to Kings, see § 20), the other, of a more priestly character (akin to Leviticus), of somewhat later date (Genesis to Joshua, with traces in Judges to Kings, see § 23).
The style of " P " is strongly marked - as strongly marked, in fact, as (in a different way) that of Deuteronomy is; numerous expressions not found elsewhere in the Hexateuch occur in it repeatedly.
The compiler is strongly imbued with the spirit of Deuteronomy; and the object of his comments is partly to exhibit the chronology of the period as he conceived it, partly to state his theory of the religious history of the time.
He carries through, as Astruc had done, the analysis of Genesis into (primarily) two documents; he draws the distinction between the Priests' Code, of the middle books of the Pentateuch, and Deuteronomy, the people's law book; and admits that even the books that follow Genesis consist of different documents, many incomplete and fragmentary (whence the theory became known as the " Fragment-hypothesis "), but all the work of Moses and some of his contemporaries.
In the criticism of the Pentateuch his most influential and enduring contributions to criticism are his proof that Deuteronomy is a work of the 7th century B.C., and his insistence that the theory of the Mosaic origin of all the institutions described in the Pentateuch is incompatible with the history of Israel as described in the historical books, Judges, Samuel and Kings.
(e) Debarim (" words ") R., independent homilies on Deuteronomy, of about A.D.
Nay more, the reception of the book of Deuteronomy by king and people in the eighteenth year of Josiah shows what a hold the prophetic teaching had on the popular conscience..
But the great prophets disallowed this claim, and the distinction which they draw between true prophecy and divination is recognized not only in the prophetical law of Deuteronomy but in earlier parts of the Pentateuch and historical books.
Commentary on Deuteronomy, Introd.
Next, the Judaean compiler regularly finds in Israel's troubles the punishment for its schismatic idolatry; nor does he spare Judah, but judges its kings by a standard which agrees with the standpoint of Deuteronomy and is scarcely earlier than the end of the 7th century B.C. (§§ 16, 20).