Block argues for the Sinai covenant:
1. The distinction many make between the Abrahamic covenant as unconditional and the Israelite covenant as conditional is false. All covenants involve relationships, the health of which depends on the actions of each party vis-à-vis the other. As anticipated in Genesis 17:7, the Israelite covenant ratified at Sinai was the means by which the promise made within the Abrahamic covenant was fulfilled.
2. Although we read of God’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, this covenant is never referred to elsewhere as “the covenant of your forefathers.”
3. Leviticus 26:45 explicitly associates the “covenant of the ancestors”(brit rišanim), used here, with those “whom brought out of Egypt in the sight of the nations to be their God.”
4. In this chapter (esp. vv. 9-31), the central issue has been the covenant that Yahweh made with Israel at Horeb and that is embodied in the Decalogue.
5. Moses’ reference to Yahweh’s remembering his covenant with the forefathers deliberately contrasts his fixed memory with the Israelite lapse of memory (cf. v. 23).
6. Since Moses is speaking of the distant future (v. 30) and specifically refers to when “you have had children and grandchildren” (v. 25), “your forefathers” could refer to the exodus generation or even to the present generation.
7. While some cite the absence of an oath at Horeb as evidence for the Abrahamic covenant, we should note first that in the ancient Near East covenants would rarely have been made without an oath. Moreover, later prophetic tradition actually speaks of Yahweh’s commitment on oath to this covenant. [Note 35: “See Ezek. 16.8 and 20:5. Cf. Daniel I. Block, Ezekiel Chapters 1-24 (NICOT, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1997), 625-26.”]
8. Finally, borrowing heavily from Deuteronomy, Jeremiah explicitly identifies the exodus generation as the forefathers with whom Yahweh made a covenant (34:13).
Block, Deuteronomy, NIVAC, 134-35.
In response:
1. While all covenants include responsibilities for both parties, some covenants are unconditional while others are conditional. For instance, there are responsibilities for humans in the Noahic covenant, but their failure to keep those responsibilities does not negate the promised blessing of the covenant. That blessing is unconditional. On the other hand, the Mosaic covenant conditions the covenant blessings on obedience and prescribes covenant curses for disobedience. The Mosaic covenant is a conditional covenant. The cutting of the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis 15 shows it to be an unconditional covenant.
2.a. However, in Deuteronomy 4:37, the very next time אָב is used, “fathers” refers to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It refers to Yhwh choosing their seed and, as a result, Moses says Yhwh “brought you out of Egypt.”
2.b. What is more, the first occurrence of אָב in Deuteronomy defines the fathers: “Go in and take possession of the land that Yhwh swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give to them and to their seed after them.’” (Dt 1:8, ESV, alt.; cf. Dt. 1:35).
2.c. After Deuteronomy 1, Deuteronomy 4:1 contains the next occurrence of אָב. That verse refers back to Deuteronomy 1:8, 35 by connecting the giving of the land to Yhwh as “the God of your fathers.”
2.d. Though there is debate over the referent of fathers in Deuteronomy 5:3; 8:3, 16, 18, the proper referent is arguably Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. A contrast is being drawn between the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants.
2.e. Throughout the rest of Deuteronomy, when fathers is used of the forefathers of this generation, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are in view.
2.f. Thus it is immaterial that the phrase is not used of the Abrahamic covenant elsewhere. (In fact, this precise phrase only occurs in this verse.)
3. Leviticus 26:45 speaks of a yet future generation. So their forefathers could include the very people that Moses is speaking to in Deuteronomy 4. It seems safest to define בְּרִ֣ית אֲבֹתֶ֔יךָ in Deuteronomy 4:31 by the usage of אָב in Deuteronomy rather than by בְּרִ֣ית רִאשֹׁנִ֑ים in Leviticus 26:45.
4. It is true that the making of the Mosaic covenant at Horeb is central to this passage, but throughout those verses Moses place the current generation in solidarity with the generation that came out of Egypt by using the second person singular to describe those events: “And he declared to you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform” (Dt. 4:13; cf. vv. 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 20, 21, 23, 33, 36, 37). The use of the second person plural continues through Deuteronomy 4:29–31. The you in this chapter thus encompasses the first generation to leave Egypt. The fathers are distinct from both generations.
5. Israel is not to forget the Sinai covenant even as Yhwh will not forget the Abrahamic covenant. Verses 25–28 predict that Israel will forget the Sinai covenant and come under its covenant curses. Veress 20–31 notes that despite Isreal’s forgetfulness of the Sinai covenant, Yhwh will not forget the Abrahamic covenant. It would not make sense to refer to him not forgetting the Sinai covenant at this point; that is what verses 25–28 recount. Yhwh’s remembering the Sinai covenant means that he brings the curses of the covenant on Israel as a disobedient people. Yhwh’s remembering the Abrahamic covenant grounds the redemption of Israel.
6. This is a fair observation. However, note the continuity of the second person you throughout this passage. Further, this observation does not overturn the arguments made in responses 1–5.
7. I agree with Block on this point; I would not deploy the argument he is countering.
8. Jeremiah 34:13 is not the only place where a covenant with the fathers refers to the Sinai covenant. See also 1 Kings 8:21; 2 Kings 17:15; Jer 11:10; 31:32. However, this is beside the point. To be sure the Sinai covenant was a covenant made with the fathers of subsequent generations. Block is treating this phraseology as if it were a technical term with a unified referent whereas the referent needs to be determined contextually.
Leave a Reply