32:1–6 The first three verses are a prologue or exordium, given in the first person to a universal audience. They are similar to Psalm 49:1–4, which appeals to all people everywhere to hear the psalmist’s testimony of coming to understand the ways of God. The Song of Moses is a covenant setting that begins with the motif of the heavens and earth as bearing witness (cf. Deut. 30:19; 31:28). These words are like life-giving water. The song is a doxology (v. 3), giving praise to the wonderful works of Yahweh. His deeds are flawless, and he is always faithful. This is a contrast to Israel, who is corrupt, perverse, and foolish.

Verse 5 is challenging in structure, but when understood correctly it is a commanding poetic line. The key term is non-children (“no longer his children”), which has its parallel to non-gods in verse 17, non-faithfulness in verse 20, and non-gods and non-people in verse 21. These non-children are the subject of the verb “dealt corruptly.” The line is succinct and compelling: “His non-sons, their blemish, have behaved corruptly toward him” (AT). Those God has created to be his children have disowned their pedigree.

The rhetorical questions of verse 6 establish the key theological premise of the poem. The Rock is the Father and creator of Israel. The metaphor of fatherhood conveys the concept of procreation, as does the verb “create” (Hb. qanah). This word is used in Genesis 4:1 as the name of the firstborn son of Adam and Eve. As she says, “I have gotten [qaniti] a man with the help of the Lord,” so she named him qayin (“Cain”). Every child is a creation of God. Israel was created, made, and secured by God. This is what it meant for him to choose Israel, as Isaiah says repeatedly (Isa. 43:1; 44:1–2). Israel is not distinguished from other nations in being more special than they in her own right. Rather, her relationship to God is much more fundamental. Her very existence is by divine choice. It is a bitter irony that Israel could be so foolish as to repay their progenitor and sole provider with perverse rebellion.

32:7–14 These verses develop the theological premise that Israel holds a distinct role among the nations. It begins with an imperative to remember Israel’s origins. God assigned the territorial, familial, and national divisions of the entire human race, as explained in Genesis 10. The peoples listed number precisely seventy, representing all nations on earth. Genesis does not provide the enumeration, but the symbolism is clear. Seventy signifies the total of human families, all under the dominion of Yahweh. This number corresponds to the number of the “sons of Israel” (Deut. 32:8 MT; cf. ESV mg.). The sons of Jacob are counted as seventy when each of the names is counted (Gen. 46:27; Ex. 1:5; Deut. 10:22). God made the seventy sons of Israel his own possession. Israel has become the special assignment of Yahweh among the seventy nations. This is the fundamental premise of the poem.

This distinction of numbers raises exegetical questions that cannot be glossed over. Stephen says the number of the sons of Jacob is seventy-five (Acts 7:14), a number that he derives from the enumeration of individuals found in Genesis 46 in the LXX. This is a calculation determined by the placement of the five sons of Joseph. They can be considered as born in Egypt or can be included in the total of those who went down to Egypt. The Hebrew traditions have it both ways, but the number seventy-five does not conform to the seventy sons of Israel in verse 8. Other Hebrew texts do not include Israel in this verse. They say that God set the boundaries of the nations according to the sons of Elohim (cf. 4QDeutj [Dead Sea Scrolls] and most of the Greek tradition), meaning the number of members in the divine council. “Sons of God [elohim]” corresponds to the phrase used in Job 1:6, where the divine council gathers before God. Daniel 10:13 assigns heavenly princes to different nations. God has a court, as expressed in various psalms (Pss. 29:1; 82:1; 89:7). The various members of his court are given assigned territories. The distinction of Israel is that God has made its territory his own allotted space. It is not assigned to court members like the other nations.

The textual change of “sons of God” to “sons of Israel” in verse 8 is described by the rabbis as a tiqqun soferim (“change of the scribes”). There is a great deal of discussion over when the change was made to verse 8 and the possible reasons for it.84 This change requires the number of the sons of Israel be counted as seventy and not as seventy-five, in Acts 7:14. The theological statement is clear: Israel is the allotted territory God chose for himself when he divided the nations.

The image of God as a father caring for his children is developed by a description of Israel in the howling desert waste of Sinai, where he embraced her and fixed his attention on her as the apple of his eye. He guarded her as an eagle takes care of its nest. The Hebrew word ‘ir (Deut. 32:11) is found in Ugaritic with the meaning of “guard” or “protect,” which is the meaning that fits the poetic lines. This was a time when Israel was uncorrupted by other gods (v. 12), a confession to which Isaiah will call Israel to bear witness after the exile (Isa. 43:12). Virgin Israel was triumphant, riding the high hills, living from the produce of the field and drawing honey from the mountains. She enjoyed the richest of food from cattle and sheep, the fattest animals from the abundant hills of Bashan, thick kernels of wheat from the hills, and the juiciest grapes that provided wine. The father spared nothing in caring for his daughter.

32:15–18 The use of the name “Jeshurun” in the context of Israel’s rebellion is a potent poetic irony. The name carries the connotation of one that is upright (Hb. yashar), but the effect of all of God’s bounteous provision for Israel was like that of a fatted unruly animal that kicks against the person who cares for it. Israel replaced its maker with non-gods, referred to here as demons (shedim), which correspond to the protective spirits and household gods known in Akkadian as shedu.85 Instead of trusting the God they knew from experience as their Maker, they offended him with newly discovered non-deities. They forgot the Rock who had given birth to them, the one who had nursed them with honey from a stone.

32:19–25 The worship of non-gods vexes the Rock, who justly acts in accordance with the covenant. He turns away from the non-faithful and provokes them with those who are a non-nation, probably a reference to nomadic peoples such as the “Midianites and the Amalekites and the people of the East” (Judg. 6:2–6). The anger of God is described as a hot flame that burns to the roots of the mountains or sharp arrows that pierce to their core. Divine punishment comes in a succession of disasters of diverse kinds (cf. Section Overview, esp. discussion of Deut. 32:24). The metaphors of verse 24 use analogies characterized by local deities. The creeping vermin “in the dust” could be poisonous snakes, insects, or scorpions. Sword without and dread within will terrorize everyone—the best of men and maids, nursing children and the elderly.

32:26–31 The song transitions with a conditional statement stating the reason God did not fully destroy the nation he had made. He would have removed Israel from human memory had it not been for the attitude of the nations. The enemies of Israel misjudge the situation; they think their dominance is because of their own power. The nations do not recognize the judgment of the Lord against Israel because they are utterly devoid of understanding. Verse 29 introduces a second unreal condition. If the nations had any understanding, they would perceive the circumstances of their victory. Their “latter end” (Hb. ’aharit) here carries the sense of understanding why things have come about, the reasons for their situation. How was it possible for one soldier of Israel to rout a thousand of the enemy? The enemy has never considered this. Israel could be defeated only by its own betrayal of its Lord. The enemy should have discerned the work of the Rock, who had sold them to their enemies. The enemy should have recognized that the Rock of Israel is not as their rock, that is, their own god. The gods of the enemy could never have won such victories as they have witnessed for Israel.

The rendering of 31b, “Our enemies are by themselves,” renders an obscure poetic line. The difficulty is with the Hebrew word pelilim, which means either “judges” or “judgments.” It occurs in Exodus 21:22, where judges must decide the damages to be paid in the case of an injury. The enemy has made the wrong assessment in thinking its god (rock) has been victorious. If the nation of Deuteronomy 32:28 is taken to be Israel, then the reasoning of verses 29–31 applies to Israel as the misguided nation, and the judgment (pelilim) would be the reasoning of Israel concerning its enemies. This is the meaning of the ESV: Israel assesses its enemies to have no god (“our enemies are by themselves”; v. 31). Though the nation of verse 28 is ambiguous, the sequence could suggest it is the enemy that falsely considered itself triumphant.

32:32–35 The poem now turns to judgment upon the nations; God will judge the enemy as he has judged such arrogant attitudes in the past. The enemy will suffer the same fate as did Sodom and Gomorrah. They will drink the wine served from the same vines as those condemned cities. Clusters of grapes will be poisonous, and their wine will be like the venom of a snake. The mercy of God cannot be presumed. For the arrogant, who claim their own independent strength, poisonous wine is sealed up and stored away. One of the most common artifacts found in Judean fortified cities is pot handles stamped with the Hebrew lmlk (“to the king”), with the name of the king often included as well. These are fragments of wine and oil jars sealed and stored by the king in fortified cities to serve as reserves in either commerce or preparation for war. The Song of Moses uses this as the image for God’s storehouse when he goes to war.

Vengeance belongs to God alone (v. 35). This important concept is quoted by Paul (Rom. 12:19) and the writer to the Hebrews (Heb. 10:30) in their exhortations to Christians concerning the conduct they must exhibit when wronged. The same principle was true in the covenant of Deuteronomy for personal conduct (cf. Prov. 25:21–22). In the Song of Moses this phrase is applied to the enemies of Israel. Jesus applies this verse to speak of the future desolation of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Luke 21:22), a direct application of the concept in Deuteronomy.

32:36–42 Israel will be reduced to utter weakness; she will no longer have any leaders (Deut. 32:36). The expression “bond or free” (Hb. ‘atsur we‘azub) is usually taken as a merism to mean everyone, but it has the more technical meaning of “redeemer-savior”, referring to a king or leader. The construction is a hendiadys, in which two nouns or adjectives are joined to complement each other (e.g., “nice and warm”). The word ‘atsur means “ruler” or “restrainer” (e.g., 1 Sam. 9:17; “restrain”), while ‘azub is a word meaning “helper” or “deliverer” (e.g., Ex. 23:5; “rescue”). The meaning of redeemer-savior can be seen at 2 Kings 14:26. These terms are used in conjunction with the expression “every male” (lit., “everyone who urinates against the wall”) to speak of all the male members of a royal family (1 Kings 14:10; 21:21; 2 Kings 9:8; cf. 1 Kings 16:11).86 The concept of the poem is the same as that expressed in the judgments of Isaiah against Jerusalem in Isaiah 2:6–4:1: Jerusalem will be brought to utter loss of leaders before God establishes his rule on his holy mountain (Isa. 2:2–4). In the poem of Deuteronomy God points out the futility of Israel’s turning away from the Rock to serve other gods (32:37). In a taunting rhetorical question God demands to know how these gods will rise to serve as Israel’s protection.

The song returns to the fundamental statement Moses asserted earlier in his exhortation to Israel: “There is no god beside me” (v. 39; cf. 4:35, 39). The language of the absolute unity of God is used by Isaiah to confront blind Israel when she is helpless and despondent (Isa. 43:10–13). Israel is the witness to the truth that there can be no other God than the one who has delivered her. It is only this God who can give life, just as he is the one who brought the death of judgment.

God now takes an oath by himself (Deut. 32:40). He has sharpened his sword and will take vengeance against his enemies. His arrows will be drunk with the blood of the enemy when he grasps justice in his hand. The significance of the hairy heads of the enemy is not clear. The hair might indicate they are chiefs, or it might be a symbol of strength now defeated. It is unlikely, however, to be a reference to the story of Samson, since that would not be relevant in the context of the enemies of God.

32:43 The coda of the poem returns to the theme of the opening apostrophe in addressing the heavenly beings and calling on them to give praise. It concludes the theme of verse 41, which is that God will “take vengeance” on his enemies. It advances this thought by saying that God will cleanse the land that has been polluted by idolatries and other abominations, such as the shedding of innocent blood. Israel is freed not only from the calamities that it has so long endured but also from the sins that have been committed there.

There has been considerable textual corruption in the transmission of this verse. The Masoretic Text, which is found in most English translations, calls upon the nations to acclaim God’s deliverance and punishment of the enemy. Such a call to the nations implies the significance of the salvation of Israel for all the world.

The best-preserved version of the closing stanza is in a fragment of a Qumran scroll now identified as 4QDeutq.87 In this scroll, three-quarters of a final column contain Deuteronomy 32:41d–43. The stitching is still present to the right of the column. Six lines of verse 43 are preserved complete and clearly. The strophes of the parallel lines appear as follows:

    (1a) O heavens rejoice with him

    (1b) Bow to him all deities

    (2a) For he will avenge the blood of his sons

    (2b) Return vengeance on his foes

    (3a) Repay those who reject him

    (3b) Cleanse his people’s land.

The Masoretic Text is missing line 1b and 3a, which is quite clearly deficient, as it breaks up the parallelism of the strophes. The Greek translations have eight lines because they retain an alternate version of the first two lines. It is probable that some of these variations are due to the existence of more than one version of the poem, or at least the closing coda.

32:44 The subscription recapitulates the reference to the song in 31:22, 30. Moses comes from where he received instructions to teach the poem, or from where he wrote it, and teaches it to the people. According to the Masoretic Text, Moses is assisted by “Hoshea” in the reading of this poem. The name of the successor of Moses was changed to Joshua, according to Numbers 13:16. The difference between “Hoshea” and “Joshua” is the inclusion of the name of God at the beginning of the name.