CHAPTER 14<\/p>\n
Divine Allotment<\/p>\n
The divine transgressions of Genesis<\/a> 3<\/a> and 6<\/a> are part of a theological prelude that frames the rest of the Bible. These two episodes, along with a third we\u2019ll cover in this<\/span> chapter, are core components of the supernatural worldview of ancient Israelites and the Jewish community in which Christianity was born.<\/p>\n Taken together, these episodes are a theological morality tal<\/span>e about the futility and danger of trying to recover Eden on any terms other than those God has set. After Eden, God still intended to dwell with humanity. But there would be opposition. Divine beings in service to Yahweh could defect. Enemies of Yahweh and his<\/span> rule, from the human to the divine to something in between, lurked over the horizon. Heaven and earth were destined to be reunited, but it would be a titanic struggle.<\/span><\/p>\n In the meantime, any effort to recapture God\u2019s original intent apart from God\u2019s own strategy and will for restoring Eden would end in disaster. There would be no Edenic u<\/span>topia revived by human beings or other gods. It would be a painful lesson.<\/p>\n FROM THE FLOOD TO BABEL<\/p>\n There are several features of Genesis 6<\/a> that an Israelite would have picked up on that informed his reading of other passages in the Torah. Verse 4<\/a> is especially noteworthy:<\/p>\n Th<\/span>e Nephilim were upon the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God went into the daughters of humankind, and they bore children to them. These were the mighty warriors that were from<\/span> ancient times, men of renown.<\/p>\n The Nephilim are cast as \u201cmighty warriors\u201d (gibborim<\/span>) and \u201cmen of renown\u201d\u2014literally, \u201cmen of the name (shem<\/span>).\u201dI am aware that the terms nephilim<\/em> and gibborim<\/em> could be distinguished, and that certain Jewish texts and translations take that route (see Stuckenbruck, \u201cThe \u2018Angels\u2019 and \u2018Giants\u2019 of Genesis 6:1\u20134 in Second and Third Century BCE Jewish Interpretation: Reflections on the Posture of Early Apocalyptic Traditions,\u201d Dead Sea Discoveries<\/em> 7.3 [2000]: 354\u201377, and Brian Doak, The Last of the Rephaim: Conquest and Cataclysm in the Heroic Ages of Ancient Israel<\/em>, Ilex Series 7, Ilex Foundation; Center for Hellenic Studies [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013]). Viewing the terms as labels for one group is also grammatically and syntactically viable. That option is preferable, and really the only coherent choice, given the Mesopotamian context for Gen 6:1\u20134<\/a> we\u2019ve discussed earlier. The apkallus<\/em> were both<\/em> giant in stature and the culture heroes who transmitted the sacred divine knowledge that resulted in civilization. It makes sense to see the biblical writer, as he created a polemic against them, using both terms of one group. „>1<\/a> The terms gibbor<\/span>(im<\/span>) and shem<\/span> appear in several places <\/span>in the Old Testament story.The word gibbor<\/em> is the singular of gibborim<\/em>. „>2<\/a><\/p>\n Immediately after the flood, Nimrod (whose name most likely means \u201crebellion\u201d) is called a gibbor<\/span>.See the companion website<\/a> for more on Nimrod in Gen 10<\/a>. Nimrod has not successfully been identified with a known historical figure from Mesopotamian texts. Other scholars consider the name a wordplay on rebellion and consider the description of him as a gibbor<\/em> to be a clue to another polemic against Babylon. In other words, Nimrod would not be a historical figure but a theological swipe at Babylon and her gods, since the name and the word gibbor<\/em> point back to the Nephilim\/apkallu<\/em> polemic. The parenthetical comment about Nimrod would be the biblical writer\u2019s way of saying that Babylon and her religious knowledge that survived after the flood are evil. Nimrod has also been identified with the constellation Orion\u2014the giant hunter in the sky, the realm of the gods. The connection of Nimrod to the giant Nephilim is the backdrop to several odd Jewish traditions about Abraham, including that his family lineage went back to the giants (Pseudo-Eupolemos, quoted from Alexander Polyhistor by Eusebius, <\/a>Praeparatio Evangelica<\/em><\/a> 9.18.2<\/a>). An excellent essay on Nimrod traditions is Karel van der Toorn, \u201cNimrod before and after the Bible,\u201d Harvard Theological Review<\/em> 83.1 (1990): 1\u201329. „>3<\/a> Nimrod is cast as the progenitor of the civilizations of Assyria and Ba<\/span>bylon (Gen 10:6\u201312<\/a>). Once again, as with Genesis 6<\/a>, the Mesopotamian context is transparent. Assyria and Babylon are the two civilizations that will later destroy the dream of the earthly kingdom of G<\/span>od in Israel, dismantling, respectively, the northern kingdom (Israel) and southern kingdom (Judah).<\/p>\n The language is not coincidental. It links Babylon back to Genesis 6<\/a> and its divine transgression. <\/span>The Nimrod description in Genesis 10<\/a>, in the so-called Table of Nations, is therefore a theological bridge between the violation of Genesis 6:1\u20134<\/a> and the next momentous event in the Torah that will fr<\/span>ame the entire story of Israel.The language also points forward. After Yahweh divides the nations \u201camong the sons of God\u201d at Babel and declares Israel his own \u201cportion\u201d (Deut 32:8\u20139<\/a>), he calls Abram. The intention is not only to start over with a people through whom God will restart the rule of God on earth. In Gen 12:1\u20133<\/a> we learn that Yahweh will make Abram\u2019s name (shem<\/em>) great. This is but one aspect of the Abrahamic covenant. Other parts of the covenant description connect a \u201cgreat name\u201d to divine protection and blessing. The lemmas used in the covenant language appear in the meeting between Abram and Melchizedek (Gen 14<\/a>) and in the patriarchal blessing of Judah by Jacob, in which the well-known prophecy of kingship is found (Gen 49:10<\/a>). See the companion website<\/a> for discussion. The Nephilim, called gibborim<\/em> and \u201cmen of the name,\u201d are the ancestors of the giant clans encountered by Moses and Joshua centuries later in the struggle to claim the land Yahweh had allotted as the inheritance of his people (Num 13:32\u201333<\/a>; 21:31\u201335<\/a>; Deut 1\u20133<\/a>; Josh 11:21\u201322<\/a>; 14:12\u201315<\/a>). See chapters 23\u201325<\/a>. „>4<\/a><\/p>\n THE TOWER OF BABEL<\/p>\n The famous story of the building of the Tower of Babel is about much more than an ill-fated construction project and language confusion. The episode is at the heart of the Old Testa<\/span>ment worldview. It was at Babylon where people sought to \u201cmake a name (shem<\/span>) for themselves\u201d by building a tower that reached to the heavens, the realm of the gods. The city is once again cast as the <\/span>source of sinister activity and knowledge.<\/p>\n Genesis 11:1\u20139<\/a> reads:<\/p>\n 1<\/a> Now the whole earth had one language and the same words. 2<\/a> And as people migrated from the east they found a plain in the land of Shi<\/span>nar and settled there. 3<\/a> And they said to each other, \u201cCome, let us make bricks and burn them thoroughly.\u201d And they had brick for stone and they had tar for mortar. 4<\/a> And they said, \u201cCome, let us buil<\/span>d ourselves a city and a tower whose top reaches to the heavens. And let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered over the face of the whole earth.\u201d<\/p>\n 5<\/a> Then Yahweh came down to see the city a<\/span>nd the tower that humankind was building. 6<\/a> And Yahweh said, \u201cBehold, they are one people with one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. So now nothing that they intend to do <\/span>will be impossible for them. 7<\/a> Come, let us go down and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand each other\u2019s language.\u201d 8<\/a> So Yahweh scattered them from there over the face of th<\/span>e whole earth, and they stopped building the city. 9<\/a> Therefore its name was called Babel, for there Yahweh confused the language of the whole earth, and there Yahweh scattered them over the face of th<\/span>e whole earth.<\/p>\n You\u2019ll notice right away that there\u2019s the same sort of \u201cplural exhortation\u201d going on in verse 7<\/a> as we saw in Genesis 1:26<\/a>. The verse has Yahweh proclaiming, \u201cLet us<\/em> go down and confuse <\/span>their language.\u201d As was the case in Genesis 1:26<\/a>, the plural announcement is followed by the actions of only one being, Yahweh: \u201cSo Yahweh scattered them\u201d (11:8<\/a>).<\/p>\n It\u2019s at this point that most Bible re<\/span>aders presume there\u2019s nothing more to think about. That\u2019s because other Old Testament passages that speak of this event tend to be omitted from the discussion. The most important of these is Deuterono<\/span>my 32:8\u20139<\/a> (English Standard Version „>esv<\/a>):<\/p>\n 8<\/a> When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,<\/p>\n when he divided mankind,<\/p>\n he fixed the borders of the peoples<\/p>\n according to the number of the sons of God.<\/p>\n 9<\/a> But the Lord\u2019s <\/span>portion is his people,<\/p>\n Jacob his allotted heritage.<\/p>\n Deuteronomy 32:8\u20139<\/a> describes how Yahweh\u2019s dispersal of the nations at Babel resulted in his disinheriting<\/em> those nations as his people. This is the O<\/span>ld Testament equivalent of Romans 1:18\u201325<\/a>, a familiar passage wherein God \u201cgave [humankind] over\u201d to their persistent rebellion. The statement in Deuteronomy 32:9<\/a> that \u201cthe Lord\u2019s [i.e., Yahweh\u2019s] por<\/span>tion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage\u201d tips us off that a contrast in affection and ownership is intended. Yahweh in effect decided that the people of the world\u2019s nations were no longer going to be in relationship<\/span> to him. He would begin anew. He would enter into covenant relationship with a new people that did not yet exist: Israel.<\/p>\n The implications of this decision and this passage are <\/span>crucial to understanding much of what\u2019s in the Old Testament.As we\u2019ll see in later chapters, the worldview that extends from this passage factors into Israelite ritual, sacred space, wars of conquest, the destiny of the nations, and the progression of the gospel and the nature of the church in the New Testament. „>5<\/a><\/p>\n Most English Bibles do not read \u201caccording to the number of the sons of God\u201d in Deuteronomy 32:8<\/a>. Rather, they read \u201caccording to the num<\/span>ber of the sons of Israel.\u201d The difference derives from disagreements between manuscripts of the Old Testament. \u201cSons of God\u201d is the correct reading, as is now known from the Dead Sea Scrolls.For a discussion of the Hebrew text and manuscript support for \u201csons of God,\u201d see Michael S. Heiser, \u201cDeuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God,\u201d Bibliotheca Sacra<\/em> 158 (January-March 2001): 52\u201374<\/a>. The esv<\/span> and NRSV have incorporated the reading of the scrolls into the running translation. Other English translations leave it in a footnote. „>6<\/a><\/p>\n Frankl<\/span>y, you don\u2019t need to know all the technical reasons for why the \u201csons of God\u201d reading in Deuteronomy 32:8\u20139<\/a> is what the verse originally said. You just need to think a bit about the wrong<\/em> reading, the<\/span> \u201csons of Israel.\u201d Deuteronomy 32:8\u20139<\/a> harks back to events at the Tower of Babel, an event that occurred before<\/em> the call of Abraham, the father of the nation of Israel. This means that the nations of <\/span>the earth were divided at Babel before Israel even existed as a people<\/em>. It would make no sense for God to divide up the nations of the earth \u201caccording to the number of the sons of Israel\u201d if there wa<\/span>s no Israel. This point is also brought home in another way, namely by the fact that Israel is not listed in the Table of Nations.<\/p>\n THE DEUTERONOMY 32<\/a> WORLDVIEW<\/p>\n So what happened to the other nations? What does it mean that they were apportioned as an inheritance according to the number of the sons of God?<\/p>\n As odd as it sounds, the <\/span>rest of the nations were placed under the authority of members of Yahweh\u2019s divine council.It is interesting to note that the number of the nations listed in Gen 10<\/a> is seventy (see Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis<\/em> [JPS Torah Commentary; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989], 69<\/a>). This is precisely the number of the sons of El in the divine council at Ugarit. This number, in the context of the disinheritance of the nations, will surface later in our discussion of the Gospels. „>7<\/a> The other nations were assigned to lesser elohim<\/span> as a judgment from the Most High, Yahweh.<\/p>\n That this interpr<\/span>etation is sound is made clear by an explicit parallel passage, Deuteronomy 4:19\u201320<\/a>. There Moses says to the Israelites:<\/p>\n 19<\/a> And do this so that you do not lift your eyes toward<\/em> heaven and observe the <\/span>sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of the heaven, and be led astray and bow down to them and serve them, things that Yahweh your God has allotted to all of<\/em> the peoples under all of<\/em> the heave<\/span>n. 20<\/a> But Yahweh has taken you and brought you out from the furnace of iron, from Egypt, to be a people of inheritance to him, as it is this day.<\/p>\n Deuteronomy 4:19\u201320<\/a> is the other side of God\u2019s punitiv<\/span>e coin. Whereas in Deuteronomy 32:8\u20139<\/a> God apportioned or handed out the nations to the sons of God, here we are told God \u201callotted\u201d the gods to those nations. God decreed, in the wake of Babel, that t<\/span>he other nations he had forsaken would have other gods besides himself to worship. It is as though God was saying, \u201cIf you don\u2019t want to obey me, I\u2019m not interested in being your god\u2014I\u2019ll match you up with some other god.\u201d <\/span>Psalm 82<\/a>, where we started our divine council discussion, echoes this decision. That psalm has Yahweh judging other elohim<\/span>, sons of the Most High, for their corruption in admini<\/span>stering the nations. The psalm ends with the psalmist pleading, \u201cRise up, O God, judge the earth, because you shall inherit all the nations.\u201d<\/p>\n It might seem that God\u2019s response at the tower of Babel in<\/span>cident was overly severe. But consider the context. The point is not that Yahweh was a glorified building inspector.<\/p>\n As we noted in an earlier chapter, gods were perceived to live on mountains. The to<\/span>wer of Babel is regarded by all scholars as one of Mesopotamia\u2019s famous man-made sacred mountains\u2014a ziggurat. Ziggurats were divine abodes, places where Mesopotamians believed heaven and earth intersected.<\/span>As Nahum Sarna notes, the ziggurats at Nippur and Asshur were, respectively, named \u201cThe House of the Mountain\u201d and \u201cThe House of the Mountain of Heaven and Earth.\u201d The ziggurat at Babylon was named \u201cThe House of the Foundation of Heaven and Earth\u201d (Sarna, Genesis<\/em>, 82<\/a>). „>8<\/a> The nature of this structure makes evident the purpose in building it\u2014to bring the divine down to earth.<\/p>\n The biblical writer wastes no time in linking this act to the earlier divine transgressi<\/span>on of Genesis 6:1\u20134<\/a>. That passage sought to portray the giant quasi-divine Babylonian culture heroes (the apkallus<\/span>) who survived the flood as \u201cmen of renown\u201d or, more literally, \u201cmen of the name [shem<\/span><\/span>].\u201d Those who built the tower of Babel wanted to do so to \u201cmake a name [shem<\/span>]\u201d for themselves. The building of the tower of Babel meant perpetuating Babylonian religious knowledge and substituting the<\/span> rule of Babel\u2019s gods for rule by Yahweh.<\/p>\n Yahweh would have none of it. After the flood God had commanded humanity once again to \u201cbe fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth\u201d (Gen 9:1<\/a>). These words r<\/span>eiterated the original Edenic intention. But instead of obeying and having Yahweh be their god, the people gathered to build the tower. The theological messaging of the story is clear. Humanity had shunned Yahweh and<\/span> his plan to restore Eden through them, so he would shun them<\/em> and start again.<\/p>\n While the decision was harsh, the other nations are not completely<\/em> forsaken. Yahweh disinherited the nati<\/span>ons, and in the very next chapter of Genesis, he calls Abram out of\u2014you guessed it\u2014Mesopotamia. Again, this is not accidental. Yahweh would take a man from the heart of the rebellion and make a new nation, Israel. But in his covenant with <\/span>Abram, God said that all the nations of the earth would be blessed through Abram, through his descendants (Gen 12:1\u20133<\/a>).<\/p>\n The covenant language reveals that it was<\/span> God\u2019s intention, right on the heels of his decision to punish the nations, that the Israelites would serve as a conduit for their return to the true God. This is one of the reasons Israel is later called \u201ca kingdom of priests\u201d (<\/span>Exod 19:6<\/a>). Israel would be in covenant with \u201cthe God of gods\u201d and the \u201cLord of lords\u201d (Deut 10:17<\/a>). Those disinherited would be in spiritual bondage to the corrupt sons o<\/span>f God. But Israel would be a conduit, a mediator. Yahweh would leave a spiritual bread-crumb trail back to himself. That path would wind through Israel and, ultimately, Israel\u2019s messiah.<\/p>\n From the fate<\/span>ful decision at Babel onward, the story of the Old Testament is about Israel versus the disinherited nations, and Yahweh versus the corrupt, rebel elohim<\/span> of those nations. The division of the nations <\/span>and their allotment under other elohim<\/span> is behind the scenes in all sorts of places in biblical history. I\u2019ll give you a glimpse of what I mean in the next chapter.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n CHAPTER 15<\/p>\n Cosmic Geography<\/p>\n In the last chapter we got our first exposure to Deuteronomy<\/a> 32:8\u20139<\/a>, Yahweh\u2019s disinheritance of the nations. This was the theological lens through which an ancient Israelite viewed her own nation with respect to all others, and her elohim<\/span>, Yahweh, against the gods of those nations. By definition Yahweh was superior. He was Most High (elyon<\/span>)\u2014the title used in Deuteronomy 32:8\u20139<\/a>.Most critical scholars believe Israel\u2019s faith evolved from polytheism and contend that Yahweh and Elyon (Most High) are separate deities in Deut 32:8\u20139<\/a>. Though some critical evangelical scholars would file that idea under \u201cprogressive revelation,\u201d I reject the evolutionary idea. For a discussion of the issue, see Michael S. Heiser, \u201cDoes Divine Plurality in the Hebrew Bible Demonstrate an Evolution from Polytheism to Monotheism in Israelite Religion?\u201d Journal for the Evangelical Study of the Old Testament<\/em> 1.1 (2012): 1\u201324<\/a>. „>1<\/a><\/p>\n The Old Testament therefore describes a world where cosmic-geographical lines have been drawn. Israel was holy ground because it was Yahweh\u2019s \u201cinheritance,\u201d in the language of Deuteronomy 32:8\u20139<\/a>. The territory of other nations belonged to other elohim<\/span> because Yahweh had decreed it. Psalm 82<\/a> told us that these lesser elohim<\/span> were corrupt.As we\u2019ll see in subsequent chapters, particularly when we discuss the conquest under Joshua, the Old Testament also makes it clear that the descendants of Nephilim of Gen 6:4<\/a> occupied territory within those nations. „>2<\/a> We aren\u2019t told how the elohim<\/span> Yahweh assigned to the nations became corrupt, only that they were. It is clear from Deuteronomy 4:19\u201320<\/a>; 17:3<\/a>; 29:25<\/a>; and 32:17<\/a> that these elohim<\/span> were illegitimate for Israelite worship.<\/p>\n This cosmic-geographical perspective explains several odd passages in the Bible, and provides dramatic theological backdrop to others. Some of the most startling are in the New Testament. I\u2019ll hold those until we reach the time of Jesus and the apostles. For now I\u2019ll illustrate the point with some short, but fascinating, examples.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n DAVID\u2019S PREDICAMENT<\/p>\n After his anointing by Samuel and victory over Goliath (1 Sam 16\u201318<\/a>), David spends a good deal of time trying to escape the blind rage of King Saul. During the time he\u2019s on the run<\/span>, David occasionally must flee into territory outside the borders of Israel. In one of the episodes where David finds Saul in a vulnerable situation and could have killed his pursuer, we read the following conversation:<\/span><\/p>\n 17<\/a> Then Saul recognized David\u2019s voice and said, \u201cIs this your voice, my son David?\u201d And David said, \u201cIt is my voice, my lord the king.\u201d 18<\/a> Then he said, \u201cWhy is my lord pursuing af<\/span>ter his servant? For what have I done? And what evil is in my hand? 19<\/a> And so then, please let my lord the king listen to the words of his servant: If Yahweh has incited you against me, may he delight<\/span> in an offering; but if it is mortals, may they be accursed before Yahweh, for they have driven me away today from sharing in the inheritance of Yahweh, saying, \u2018Go, serve other gods!\u2019 (1 Sam 26:17\u201319<\/a><\/span>).<\/p>\n One of the points of David\u2019s distress is that he has been driven away \u201cfrom sharing in the inheritance of Yahweh.\u201d The \u201cinheritance\u201d language is the same as that found in Deuteronomy 32:8\u20139<\/a>, where <\/span>Jacob (Israel) is Yahweh\u2019s inheritance, the land and the people Yahweh \u201ctook\u201d for himself (Deut 4:19\u201320<\/a>).<\/p>\n Is David ignorant of the fact that the God who made heaven and earth can be anywhere? No. In D<\/span>avid\u2019s mind, being driven outside Israel meant not being able to worship Yahweh. Note that he does not complain of being driven from the Ark of the Covenant, located at Kiriath Jearim (1 Sam 7:2<\/a>), or <\/span>from the Tabernacle, apparently located at Nob (1 Sam 21\u201322<\/a>). His complaint is being expelled from the \u201cinheritance\u201d of Yahweh\u2014the holy land of his God. David can\u2019t worship as he should if he is not o<\/span>n holy ground. The lands outside Israel belong to other gods.<\/p>\n NAAMAN ASKS FOR DIRT<\/p>\n Another fascinating story that illustrates the Israelite cosmic-geographical worldview is the story of Naaman, the commander of the army of Syria, a foreign country just beyond Is<\/span>rael\u2019s northern border. Naaman also happened to be afflicted with leprosy.<\/p>\n According to 2 Kings 5<\/a>, at the suggestion of a captive Israelite servant girl, Naaman decides to seek the prophet Elisha for <\/span>a cure for his condition. He travels to Israel, but Elisha doesn\u2019t even come out to talk to him in person. He sends a messenger to tell the military hero to wash himself in the Jordan seven times if h<\/span>e wants to be healed. Insulted, Naaman at first resists, then relents at the encouragement of his servants. He does as instructed and emerges cleansed from the skin disease. Naaman returned to the prophet, who this time chose to speak with the Syrian. Picking up the story:<\/span><\/p>\n 15<\/a> When he returned to the man of God, he and all of his army, he came and stood before him and said, \u201cPlease now, I know that<\/span> there is no God in all of the world except in Israel. So then, please take a gift from your servant.\u201d 16<\/a> And he said, \u201cAs Yahweh lives, before whom I stand, I surely will not take it.\u201d Still he urged<\/span> him to take it, but he refused. 17<\/a> Then Naaman said, \u201cIf not, then please let a load of soil on a pair of mules be given to your servants, for your servant will never again bring a burnt offering and<\/span> sacrifice to other gods, but only to Yahweh.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n<\/span><\/div>\n