Original Meaning

The Specific Warnings against Spiritual Defection (13:1–18)

CHAPTER 13 REPRESENTS ONE of the most logically constructed literary units in the book. Critical scholars tend to interpret this chapter as an adaptation of late neo-Assyrian loyalty oaths.12 However, the style and wording of neo-Assyrian (and Sefire) oaths were conventional and rooted in a centuries-old literary treaty and loyalty oath tradition.13 Furthermore, the conceptual links of Deuteronomy 13 with second millennium BC Hittite loyalty oaths are as strong as, if not stronger than, the eighth–seventh century neo-Assyrian connections.14 Indeed, counterparts to virtually every feature of the present passage may be adduced from second millennium BC Hittite diplomatic correspondence. The parallels do not prove that Deuteronomy is dependent on Hittite loyalty treaties for its phraseology and its basic ideas, but they demonstrate that conceptually this chapter is at least as at home in the second millennium as in the first.

The unity of Deuteronomy 13 is evident in the form with which Moses presents the three seditious scenarios. Each is divided into three major parts: the protasis, introduced by an “if/when” clause in the third person; an apodosis in the second person, prescribing the appropriate response to the conspirators; and a complex motive clause.

It has been claimed that Deuteronomy 13 is “the only biblical law aimed at those who might proselytize for other deities.”15 While the classification of this chapter as law is questionable, the theological point is correct. In chapter 13 Moses moves from the soil in which the seeds of apostasy sprout (12:29–31) to three ways the seeds may be planted. In so doing he declares the dire consequences of spiritual sedition and prescribes a preventative strategy: undivided and unreserved love for Yahweh, demonstrated in obedience to his voice (vv. 3–4, 18) and in remembrance of his saving grace (vv. 5b, 10b).

Scenario 1: apostasy instigated by a prophet or an oneiromantic (vv. 1–5). False prophets represent the first potential source of spiritual sedition. This is the first occurrence in Deuteronomy of the word “prophet” (nābîʾ). The Old Testament has a rich vocabulary of prophecy,16 but nābîʾ is the most common expression. The word refers to “one summoned by God.”17 The primary role of prophets was to proclaim to divinely determined audiences messages they received from the deity (cf. Ex. 7:1–2; Jer. 23:16–22). Since the institution of prophecy was common throughout the ancient Near East,18 that a prophet might appear proclaiming a message antithetical to the will of Yahweh is not surprising. Indeed, the conflict between true and false prophets is a prominent motif in Israel’s later history.19

The second potential source of spiritual sedition is identified as a “dreamer of dreams,” that is, a professional who has access to the mind of deity through dreams. Oneiromancy (divination through dreams) was widespread in the ancient world.20 These dreams tended to be of two types: symbolic dreams that required interpretation by a gifted interpreter (Gen. 37:5–11; 40:9–19; 41:1–7; Dan. 2:1–49), and message dreams involving straightforward communication (Gen. 15; 28:10–22; 1 Kings 3:5–15 = 2 Chron. 1:6–12). Unlike Deuteronomy 18:15–19, the present context does not disapprove of dreams or prophecy in principle.21

In this context the dreamer makes a formal pronouncement (v. 3b) and then announces an authenticating sign. Moses casts the prophetic utterance in the form of direct speech,22 as the dreamer invites Israelites to join him in worshiping “other gods,” defined more closely as “gods you have not known” (cf. vv. 6, 13).23 Verse 7 specifies these as the gods of the Canaanites referred to in 12:29–30.

As in 8:2–3 and 16, that which is unknown functions as a test of Israel’s commitment to Yahweh (cf. v. 4). However, here the roles are reversed. Whereas with the manna the Israelites were challenged to cease relying on the familiar and trust in the unknown, here Moses challenges the Israelites not to abandon the known in favor of that which is foreign and new. The glorious truth for the Israelites was that Yahweh their God had actually revealed himself through word and deed (1:5–3:29; 4:1–40). By contrast, the gods of the nations were merely man-made images with mouths that could not speak, eyes that could not see, and ears that could not hear (4:28). To exchange the God of Israel for these figments of depraved imaginations (cf. 4:35, 39) is the height of treason (Moses’ principal point here) and folly. As new objects of devotion, they are rivals to Yahweh, in violation of the first principle of covenant relationship (5:7) and the people’s commitment expressed in the Shema (6:4–5).

Moses anticipates that prophets and dreamers who call for defection to other gods will try to prove their authenticity with an attesting “sign or wonder” (v. 2a; cf. 4:34). These expressions do not speak merely of an accompanying miraculous act (Ex. 4:1–9) but of a verbal wonder, a prediction of a specific natural or extraordinary event that would supposedly prove the person was a genuine divine messenger.24 For the sign to authenticate the medium’s call to worship other gods, the predicted event had to transpire within a short period of time. If an event would happen just as the prophet predicted, people whose faith was weak would be convinced that both the person and the message were genuine—even if it contradicted what they had been taught about Yahweh and the other gods. Perhaps recalling his own encounters with the magicians of Egypt (Ex. 7:11, 22; 8:7[3]), Moses recognizes that false prophets are sometimes able to work wonders.

In 13:3–5 Moses prescribes how the Israelites are to respond to prophets or dreamers who encourage defection from Yahweh. Focusing on the Israelites’ disposition toward the invitation, Moses explicitly charges the Israelites to refuse to give prophets or dreamers who incite spiritual sedition an ear (vv. 3–4). But then he offers a surprising theological explanation for the overture to defection. Like the manna in 8:2–3, 16, Moses interprets the occasion as a “test” from Yahweh of Israel’s loyalty to him (13:3a). While some interpret this as divine disingenuity, as with the magicians in Egypt, we should interpret this either as Yahweh’s permission of the instigator to have access to the Israelites, or as his permission of the signs accompanying the invitation to be fulfilled.25 Whatever the origin or source of a temptation to abandon Yahweh, such occasions always constitute a test of love for him.

The anticipated form of the test is at home in the context of ancient Near Eastern treaties26 and within the book of Deuteronomy: Do the Israelites love Yahweh with their entire beings?27 With emphatic syntax, Moses summarizes the evidence of unreserved love, using six familiar verbs: “after Yahweh their God they shall walk”;28 “him they shall fear”; “his commandments they shall keep”; “to his voice they shall listen”; “him they shall serve”; and “to him they shall cling” (all pers. trans.).29

Moses instructs the people on how to treat a prophet or dreamer who incites sedition with one simple statement: He “must be put to death” (v. 5a). If in political contexts encouraging subjects of one king to change allegiance to another king is considered worthy of the death penalty, how much more would the appeal to the Israelites to abandon Yahweh in favor of other gods call for capital punishment.30

Moses then provides the rationale for such harsh treatment of the conspirators (vv. 5b–c): The prophet or dreamer has falsely claimed to have received a message from God and has tried to turn the Israelites away from the way prescribed by Yahweh. Because the first expression suggests that, through the sign, Yahweh has authorized the worship of other gods,31 the issue involves an Israelite who creates the impression that he speaks in the name of Yahweh and suggests that, like other gods in the ancient world, Yahweh tolerates the worship of other deities.32 With the second expression, Moses describes the potential effect of such seditious prophecy: it is seductive and entices the people from Yahweh’s prescribed course. This statement summarizes the six verbs used in the previous verse.

As their pastor, Moses heightens the significance of such treacherous counsel by reminding the Israelites that Yahweh, the one who brought them out of Egypt and redeemed them from the house of slavery (cf. 7:8), is their God. His call for the death penalty for one who encourages spiritual defection from Yahweh may seem harsh, but the final clause declares Moses’ fundamental concern: to “purge the evil from among you.”33 Whereas in verse 5a Moses had used the passive, “and be put to death,” without specifying the agent, here he places responsibility for the purging the evil on the people themselves. He recognizes that the sin of sedition is like a virus whose influence in Israel can only be stopped by exterminating those infected with it. Yahweh requires a community united in its devotion to him and rigorous in its preservation of its own character as a holy people (cf. 7:1–6).

Apostasy instigated by a member of the family (vv. 6–11). Whereas the first seditious scenario had involved treachery inspired by persons posing as professional spokespersons for Yahweh, the second involves treachery at home. To highlight the potential problem Moses lists five close acquaintances who might incite defection away from Yahweh: a full brother, a son, a daughter, a wife, or a friend. The expressions highlight the intimacy of relationships between potential ringleader and follower. Presupposing a social environment in which polygamy was common, by qualifying “your brother” with (lit.) “son of your mother,”34 Moses stresses full blood relationship as opposed to one’s half brother.35

By adding “daughter,” Moses personalizes the issue even more. In a patricentric world sons were expected to take responsibility, but to imagine one’s daughter leading the charge in defection from Yahweh is striking. While “wife of your bosom” (NIV “wife you love”) speaks of the most intimate and affectionate relationship (Mic. 7:5),36 the final expression, “your neighbor who is like yourself” (NIV “your closest friend”) refers to someone close outside the family, one’s “bosom buddy.” Viewed as a whole, this list imagines those who are closest and dearest as potential conspirators intent on leading the family and the community away from the worship of Yahweh.37 Like most seditious plots, this action is urged “secretly,” presumably within the walls of one’s home—as if Yahweh or his spies are unable to see what goes on inside. To “entice” people to follow a different god is treason of the highest order.38

The appeal that the local instigator of rebellion presents (v. 6b) is essentially the same as that of the prophetic dreamers in verse 2b, though the characterization of alien gods is more elaborate. They are strange not only to the present generation, but have also been unknown to their ancestors, presumably a reference to the ancestors of the generation envisioned here rather than the patriarchs. In contrast to Yahweh, these are new gods, who have played no role in Israel’s history. By inciting family members to abandon Yahweh, the leaders of sedition violate both the Supreme Command and Israel’s longstanding religious tradition. The specification of the alien gods as the gods of the Canaanites, whether local or elsewhere in the land,39 deliberately eliminates any and every god as potential rivals to Yahweh.

In verses 8–10a Moses prescribes the proper Israelite response to close relatives and friends who attempt to lead them astray. The instructions are detailed, beginning with five negative commands, followed by three positive orders. By heaping up the former (v. 8) Moses addresses the tendency to let sentimentality interfere with the proper administration of justice. Whereas earlier Moses had simply urged his people not to listen to prophets or dreamers (v. 3), in verse 8 he intensifies the command with a direct appeal to the will of the hearer: “Do not yield to him or listen to him,” and follows this up with a twofold charge not to let natural human emotions deflect from what needs to be done. The first, “Show him no pity,” discourages persons charged with carrying out punishment from being lenient toward the offender.40 The second, “Do not spare him,” prohibits feeling sorry for or showing compassion toward the person.41 The last command, “Do not . . . shield him,” demands that relatives and close friends expose the perpetrator of the crime—they are not to give him asylum.42

To modern readers the demand to execute the conspirator in verses 9–10a seems ruthless and heartless. But Moses’ tone is emphatic: “You must certainly put him to death.” The singular verb suggests that the family member who hears a relative or neighbor propose sedition must take immediate action. This impression is reinforced by the added comment: “Your hand must be the first in putting him to death” (cf. 17:5–6). Nevertheless, the following clause reins in the temptation to individual vigilantism; this is in fact a community concern. Reinforcing the charge in verse 8, verse 9 insists that allegiance to Yahweh must take precedence over family ties. Because Israel’s identity was bound up with her covenant relationship with him, defection was a capital offense, the prescribed form of punishment being execution by stoning (v. 10a). The Old Testament requires this form of punishment for actions considered “high treason” against Yahweh.43 By stoning the criminal the executioners avoided direct contact with objects contaminated by holiness/unholiness (e.g. Ex. 19:13).

As Israel’s pastor, in verse 10b Moses returns to his principle concern: guarding the relationship between Yahweh and his people. The close relative or neighbor is to be executed because he tried to lure a person away from Yahweh his God. By identifying Yahweh as the God “who had brought you [sing.] out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery,” Moses reminds the people that all Israelites owe their existence and freedom to Yahweh’s redemptive grace. To go after other gods is to repudiate this grace and to renounce one’s status as his people. All Israelites have a vested interest in taking drastic measures, even against close relatives or neighbors. Fear of a similar fate should deter anyone else who might be tempted to promote spiritual sedition.

Apostasy instigated by anyone else in Israel (vv. 12–18). The third scenario is the most serious of all—the defection of an entire town. This time Moses’ instructions are not addressed to potential defectors but to witnesses to defection. Verse 12 sets the context: one of the towns that Yahweh has given to the Israelites. The issue involves a rumor that has reached the ears of the addressee (singular): Certain worthless fellows from one of Israel’s own towns have gone out and lured their fellow citizens to desert Yahweh in favor of other gods that are unfamiliar to them (v. 14).44 The text characterizes those responsible for this mass defection as “men, sons of Belial” (NIV “wicked men”). The last phrase translates literally as “sons of worthlessness,” that is, men without honor.45 The moral sense of the idiom is reflected by the kinds of people so characterized: murderers, rapists, false witnesses, corrupt priests, drunks, boors, ungrateful and selfish folk, rebels, and those who do not know Yahweh.

Because this scenario envisages rumors of spiritual sedition rather than direct contact with those who lead in the defection from Yahweh, instead of immediately calling for the death penalty Moses demands careful investigation to determine whether the rumors of “this detestable thing”46 are true or false (v. 14a). The seriousness of the inquiry is reflected in the verbs describing the process: “to inquire, seek,” “to probe, search out,” and “to investigate [thoroughly].”

Once it is established that the rumors are true,47 the punishment of the town is to be decisive and comprehensive. (1) Moses calls for the indiscriminate slaughter with the sword of all living things in the town (v. 15).48 By adding “Destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock,” Moses declares that if Israelites go after the gods of the peoples they were to dispossess, they were themselves to be utterly devoted to destruction.49

(2) Moses prescribes how the Israelites are to treat the inanimate material found in the renegade town (v. 16). Referring to the “stuff” as “plunder” captured in war, it is to be collected and piled up in the square of the condemned town. Then the pile and the city itself are to be torched and totally burned up as a sacrifice to Yahweh.50 The ash heap that remains is to be preserved as a permanent memorial, reminding all who see it of the fate of those who defect from Yahweh and serve other gods. The city is never to be rebuilt. For good measure, Moses adds that none of the objects reserved for destruction is to be allowed to stick to the hands of those who carry out the punitive/sacrificial action (v. 17a; cf. Josh. 7:21–26).

Following the pattern of the previous cases, Moses concludes his prescription for the response to incited apostasy by explaining why the guilty persons are to be treated so mercilessly (v. 17b). The sternness of his tone reflects the seriousness with which Yahweh looks on spiritual defection. The only way to placate his burning wrath and to renew his compassion is to offer up an entire town to Yahweh as a whole burnt offering. His renewed favor will then be demonstrated concretely in the multiplication (“increase”) of the population in accordance with his oath to their ancestors (cf. Gen. 15:5; 22:17; etc.).

Moses ends this chapter with a general pastoral reminder of the conditionality of Yahweh’s renewed favor (v. 18). Employing familiar language, he sets out three conditions: Israel must obey the voice of Yahweh in whatever he says, keep all his commandments that Moses is giving them this day, and do what is right in his eyes. This is an efficient summary of the essence of Israel’s vassaldom. As the trophy of divine grace, her devotion must be directed to Yahweh alone, and her love for him demonstrated in unreserved and unqualified obedience.

Bridging Contexts

THE SERIOUSNESS OF IDOLATRY. The drastic response against idolaters demanded by this passage has been illustrated in two prior events: the Levites’ zeal for Yahweh in their confrontation with the worshipers of the golden calf (Ex. 32:25–29), and more recently, Phinehas’s stand against the worshipers of Baal Peor (Num. 25). Although later historiographic texts never appeal explicitly to this passage, the spirit, values, and procedures presented here undoubtedly underlay the ruthless actions taken in later times in defense of an uncompromising Yahwism: Elijah versus the prophets of Baal at Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18); Jehu versus the worshipers of Baal (2 Kings 10:18–28); the Judahites versus the priest of Baal (11:18); Josiah versus the Manassite installations in Jerusalem and Judah (23:4–14), and Josiah’s extension of the crusade to the northern kingdom (23:15–20).

The actions of Josiah, the only person in the entire Old Testament said to have turned to Yahweh “with all his heart/mind and with all his being and with all his resources, in accordance with all the Torah of Moses” (pers. trans. 2 Kings 23:25; cf. comments on Deut. 6:5), come closest to the fulfillment of Deuteronomy 13. Indeed Deuteronomy 13 offers the clearest statement of what critical scholars have come to describe as the Yahweh-alone policy, whose aim was to stamp out all ideological competition. Moses’ passion for the exclusive claims of Yahweh on Israel also underlies later prophetic preaching, denouncing all idolatrous forms and calling for exclusive devotion to him.51

The case of the Benjamite town of Gibeah in Judges 19–20 represents the nearest example of judgment inflicted on a town that had apostasized.52 Although the crime for which Gibeah was attacked is not overtly identified as idolatry, given the repeated refrain referring to Israel’s degeneration into idolatry that punctuates the book of Judges53 and the arrangement of the narratives in the book,54 the Gibeahites represent a community of Israelites that had been thoroughly Canaanized. The links with our text are both lexical and thematic: The perpetrators of the moral offense are identified as (lit.) “men, sons of Belial” (Judg 19:22; 20:13); the aim of the Israelite army with respect to Gibeah was to purge the evil from Israel; the town was first struck with the edge of the sword (Judg. 20:37), and then it was burned up as one huge pyre, presumably as a “burnt offering.”

The Old Testament provides several cases that seem to invert the intentions of Deuteronomy 13. Based on Deuteronomy 13, Gideon, the son of Joash, should probably have executed his own father for promoting the worship of Baal and Asherah in his backyard. When he tore down the altar of Baal and the image of Asherah, in defense of the idolatrous cult the townspeople perversely demanded the death of the one who had demolished the installation. Jeremiah 11:18–23 reports Jeremiah’s townspeople of Anathoth taking action against the prophet of Yahweh for denouncing the nation’s treacherous going after Baal. According to Jeremiah 37:11–16, his enemies arrested and imprisoned the true prophet for preaching sedition because he had encouraged them to submit to the Babylonians.

In Galatians 1:8–9 Paul picks up the tone and vocabulary of Deuteronomy 13: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!” The Greek expression anathema (NIV, “eternally condemned”) is borrowed from LXX, which uses this word to translate the Hebrew hāyîtâ herem (“to be devoted to destruction”) in Deuteronomy 7:26. Perhaps with Deuteronomy 13 in his mind, in responding to those who were preaching another gospel in Galatians 1:6–12, Paul sounds like a second Moses.

How so? (1) Paul demands compliance with the message he has proclaimed (cf. Deut. 12:32; 13:18). (2) He introduces a hypothetical preacher of good news who disturbs the people (Gal. 1:7).55 (3) He identifies the “seducer” as either himself or “an angel [messenger] from heaven.” While the latter alludes to the prophet or dreamer of Deuteronomy 13:1, by including himself Paul shockingly places himself in the role of the relative (13:6) or “son of Belial” (13:13). (4) He pronounces the curse on the seducer (cf. 13:17). (5) Later in Galatians 3:1 Paul refers to the impact of the seducer as “bewitching,” the sinister effect of hostile words, which seems to allude to the seductive (“to turn you away,” Deut. 13:5, 10, 13; cf. “to entice” in 13:6) influence of those who preach a false gospel. For Paul, preaching a gospel contrary to the “gospel of Christ” (Gal. 1:7), which secured our deliverance from the present evil age (1:4), is equivalent to leading the Israelites away from Yahweh, who brought them out of Egypt and redeemed them from the slave house (13:5) to follow other gods.

Contemporary Significance

PRESERVING THE FREEDOM YAHWEH has provided. While modern readers might dismiss this chapter as totalitarian and link its call for the members of one’s family and the community to act violently against their own relatives and neighbors when they observe them “secretly” worshiping other gods, with Stalinist-style “secret police,” Moses’ message here is not about repressing personal freedoms and imposing thought control. It is about preserving the freedom that Yahweh by grace has wrought on Israel’s behalf. If they abandon Yahweh, they will not only cut themselves off from his grace, but will also cease to be his people, Israel. Yahweh had called Israel to a position of praise and fame and honor above all the nations (Deut. 26:18–19), but if they follow the gods of the nations, they will lose their identity in the mass of humankind and attract the fury of their own God. However, this chapter reminds Christians today that commitment to Yahweh is not only a national affair; it must also be rigorously pursued at the personal, family, and community level.

This agenda carries over into the New Testament with Jesus’ own claim to be the only way of salvation and his assertion that no one comes to the Father but through him (John 14:6). In Acts 4:12 Peter also declares that “salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”

But such statements do not reach the tone and severity of Deuteronomy 13. For that we turn to two Pauline texts: Galatians 1:8–9 (discussed above) and 1 Corinthians 16:22, with which he closes this long letter: “If anyone does not love the Lord—a curse be on him. Come, O Lord!” Paul does not charge Christians to engage in pogroms against those who would incite them to abandon the Lord Jesus Christ, but his invocation of the curse on an apostate is no less sharp than the words of Moses here. This is also true of Peter’s warning in 2 Peter 2:1, “But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.” As Yahweh had graciously rescued Israel from bondage and called the nation to freedom from the slavery of Egypt, so Jesus Christ has graciously called us to freedom from the bondage of sin. In the wake of this incredible grace, total and uncompromising devotion to Jesus Christ is a most reasonable and spiritual service (Rom. 12:1–2).

At the same time, this passage is not that far removed from Jesus’ own statement in Luke 14:26: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.” For those who have been redeemed from sin through the gracious work of Christ, devotion to the Savior must still take precedence over the closest family ties. This text offers a stern warning to anyone who seeks to deflect another’s devotion away from Jesus Christ (who is Yahweh incarnate) to any other god. Of course, apostasy is not restricted to the worship of physical idols, made of wood or stone or precious metal. Job grasped this truth in his climactic declaration of personal integrity and fidelity to God:

If I have put my trust in gold

or said to pure gold, “You are my security,”

if I have rejoiced over my great wealth,

the fortune my hands had gained,

if I have regarded the sun in its radiance

or the moon moving in splendor,

so that my heart was secretly enticed,

and my hand offered them a kiss of homage,

then these also would be sins to be judged,

for I would have been unfaithful to God on high. (Job 31:24–28)

Since we do not worship images of wood and stone, idolatry in our context may actually be more subtle. An idol is anything that deflects our devotion to Jesus Christ. It could be our career, our family, our hobbies, or our home. Preachers of a health and wealth gospel in our day push personal happiness and material success as if they were the ends for which we live and on the basis of which we make all our decisions. But this too is idolatry, twisting the gospel of divine grace and its call to take the name of Christ as a badge of honor and his cross as a privileged burden into a modern version of the fertility religions of the ancient Near East.

Original Meaning

The General Warning against Spiritual Defection (12:29–32)

MOSES BEGINS BY DESCRIBING the circumstances in which the danger identified in verse 30 will lurk:7 when Yahweh cuts off the seven nations of the land (7:1) and the Israelites settle in the land, dispossess them, and occupy their territory. Once again the test of Israel’s faith will come when they are enjoying the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham and the deity–nation–land relationship is fully operative.

Moses casts the warning not to behave like the people they dispossess with an exhortation, “Guard yourself” (NIV “be careful”), followed by two lurking dangers.8 (1) They are to be careful not to get caught in the trap that has destroyed the nations that preceded them in the land, the trap being a metaphor for destruction at Yahweh’s hands. (2) This warning (v. 30b) is more specific, cautioning the people against fascination with the gods of the nations in Canaan. He concretizes their potential curiosity by introducing an interlocutor who asks, “How do these nations serve their gods?” and then declares his determination: “I will do the same.”9 Moses’ rejection of such impulses echoes his earlier statement in verse 4: “You shall not treat Yahweh this way” (v. 31a, pers. trans.). Whereas the earlier reference to “this way” had involved multiplying shrines all over the land, this prohibition on serving Yahweh as the Canaanites worship their gods is more general.

Moses grounds the prohibition in two considerations. He first declares that everything that Yahweh abhors and hates the Canaanites do for their gods.10 Then Moses identifies the most despicable offense; they even offer their children as burnt offerings to their gods (cf. 18:10). Although direct archaeological evidence for this practice among the Canaanites is missing, classical sources speak of it in Phoenicia and her colonies.11 Whereas to Canaanites such actions represented supreme acts of piety (cf. Mic. 6:6–7), to Yahweh this was the ultimate in depravity.

In verse 32 Moses challenges his hearers once more to keep every word that he is commanding them (cf. 5:1). He also warns them not to supplement his instructions with their own cultic improvisations or borrowing practices from their neighbors. Moses sets the stage for the three hypothetical scenarios in chapter 13, then, with the charge neither to add to nor to subtract from what he is commanding them (cf. 4:2).

Bridging Contexts

THE SERIOUSNESS OF IDOLATRY. The drastic response against idolaters demanded by this passage has been illustrated in two prior events: the Levites’ zeal for Yahweh in their confrontation with the worshipers of the golden calf (Ex. 32:25–29), and more recently, Phinehas’s stand against the worshipers of Baal Peor (Num. 25). Although later historiographic texts never appeal explicitly to this passage, the spirit, values, and procedures presented here undoubtedly underlay the ruthless actions taken in later times in defense of an uncompromising Yahwism: Elijah versus the prophets of Baal at Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18); Jehu versus the worshipers of Baal (2 Kings 10:18–28); the Judahites versus the priest of Baal (11:18); Josiah versus the Manassite installations in Jerusalem and Judah (23:4–14), and Josiah’s extension of the crusade to the northern kingdom (23:15–20).

The actions of Josiah, the only person in the entire Old Testament said to have turned to Yahweh “with all his heart/mind and with all his being and with all his resources, in accordance with all the Torah of Moses” (pers. trans. 2 Kings 23:25; cf. comments on Deut. 6:5), come closest to the fulfillment of Deuteronomy 13. Indeed Deuteronomy 13 offers the clearest statement of what critical scholars have come to describe as the Yahweh-alone policy, whose aim was to stamp out all ideological competition. Moses’ passion for the exclusive claims of Yahweh on Israel also underlies later prophetic preaching, denouncing all idolatrous forms and calling for exclusive devotion to him.51

The case of the Benjamite town of Gibeah in Judges 19–20 represents the nearest example of judgment inflicted on a town that had apostasized.52 Although the crime for which Gibeah was attacked is not overtly identified as idolatry, given the repeated refrain referring to Israel’s degeneration into idolatry that punctuates the book of Judges53 and the arrangement of the narratives in the book,54 the Gibeahites represent a community of Israelites that had been thoroughly Canaanized. The links with our text are both lexical and thematic: The perpetrators of the moral offense are identified as (lit.) “men, sons of Belial” (Judg 19:22; 20:13); the aim of the Israelite army with respect to Gibeah was to purge the evil from Israel; the town was first struck with the edge of the sword (Judg. 20:37), and then it was burned up as one huge pyre, presumably as a “burnt offering.”

The Old Testament provides several cases that seem to invert the intentions of Deuteronomy 13. Based on Deuteronomy 13, Gideon, the son of Joash, should probably have executed his own father for promoting the worship of Baal and Asherah in his backyard. When he tore down the altar of Baal and the image of Asherah, in defense of the idolatrous cult the townspeople perversely demanded the death of the one who had demolished the installation. Jeremiah 11:18–23 reports Jeremiah’s townspeople of Anathoth taking action against the prophet of Yahweh for denouncing the nation’s treacherous going after Baal. According to Jeremiah 37:11–16, his enemies arrested and imprisoned the true prophet for preaching sedition because he had encouraged them to submit to the Babylonians.

In Galatians 1:8–9 Paul picks up the tone and vocabulary of Deuteronomy 13: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!” The Greek expression anathema (NIV, “eternally condemned”) is borrowed from LXX, which uses this word to translate the Hebrew hāyîtâ herem (“to be devoted to destruction”) in Deuteronomy 7:26. Perhaps with Deuteronomy 13 in his mind, in responding to those who were preaching another gospel in Galatians 1:6–12, Paul sounds like a second Moses.

How so? (1) Paul demands compliance with the message he has proclaimed (cf. Deut. 12:32; 13:18). (2) He introduces a hypothetical preacher of good news who disturbs the people (Gal. 1:7).55 (3) He identifies the “seducer” as either himself or “an angel [messenger] from heaven.” While the latter alludes to the prophet or dreamer of Deuteronomy 13:1, by including himself Paul shockingly places himself in the role of the relative (13:6) or “son of Belial” (13:13). (4) He pronounces the curse on the seducer (cf. 13:17). (5) Later in Galatians 3:1 Paul refers to the impact of the seducer as “bewitching,” the sinister effect of hostile words, which seems to allude to the seductive (“to turn you away,” Deut. 13:5, 10, 13; cf. “to entice” in 13:6) influence of those who preach a false gospel. For Paul, preaching a gospel contrary to the “gospel of Christ” (Gal. 1:7), which secured our deliverance from the present evil age (1:4), is equivalent to leading the Israelites away from Yahweh, who brought them out of Egypt and redeemed them from the slave house (13:5) to follow other gods.

Contemporary Significance

PRESERVING THE FREEDOM YAHWEH has provided. While modern readers might dismiss this chapter as totalitarian and link its call for the members of one’s family and the community to act violently against their own relatives and neighbors when they observe them “secretly” worshiping other gods, with Stalinist-style “secret police,” Moses’ message here is not about repressing personal freedoms and imposing thought control. It is about preserving the freedom that Yahweh by grace has wrought on Israel’s behalf. If they abandon Yahweh, they will not only cut themselves off from his grace, but will also cease to be his people, Israel. Yahweh had called Israel to a position of praise and fame and honor above all the nations (Deut. 26:18–19), but if they follow the gods of the nations, they will lose their identity in the mass of humankind and attract the fury of their own God. However, this chapter reminds Christians today that commitment to Yahweh is not only a national affair; it must also be rigorously pursued at the personal, family, and community level.

This agenda carries over into the New Testament with Jesus’ own claim to be the only way of salvation and his assertion that no one comes to the Father but through him (John 14:6). In Acts 4:12 Peter also declares that “salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”

But such statements do not reach the tone and severity of Deuteronomy 13. For that we turn to two Pauline texts: Galatians 1:8–9 (discussed above) and 1 Corinthians 16:22, with which he closes this long letter: “If anyone does not love the Lord—a curse be on him. Come, O Lord!” Paul does not charge Christians to engage in pogroms against those who would incite them to abandon the Lord Jesus Christ, but his invocation of the curse on an apostate is no less sharp than the words of Moses here. This is also true of Peter’s warning in 2 Peter 2:1, “But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.” As Yahweh had graciously rescued Israel from bondage and called the nation to freedom from the slavery of Egypt, so Jesus Christ has graciously called us to freedom from the bondage of sin. In the wake of this incredible grace, total and uncompromising devotion to Jesus Christ is a most reasonable and spiritual service (Rom. 12:1–2).

At the same time, this passage is not that far removed from Jesus’ own statement in Luke 14:26: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.” For those who have been redeemed from sin through the gracious work of Christ, devotion to the Savior must still take precedence over the closest family ties. This text offers a stern warning to anyone who seeks to deflect another’s devotion away from Jesus Christ (who is Yahweh incarnate) to any other god. Of course, apostasy is not restricted to the worship of physical idols, made of wood or stone or precious metal. Job grasped this truth in his climactic declaration of personal integrity and fidelity to God:

If I have put my trust in gold

or said to pure gold, “You are my security,”

if I have rejoiced over my great wealth,

the fortune my hands had gained,

if I have regarded the sun in its radiance

or the moon moving in splendor,

so that my heart was secretly enticed,

and my hand offered them a kiss of homage,

then these also would be sins to be judged,

for I would have been unfaithful to God on high. (Job 31:24–28)

Since we do not worship images of wood and stone, idolatry in our context may actually be more subtle. An idol is anything that deflects our devotion to Jesus Christ. It could be our career, our family, our hobbies, or our home. Preachers of a health and wealth gospel in our day push personal happiness and material success as if they were the ends for which we live and on the basis of which we make all our decisions. But this too is idolatry, twisting the gospel of divine grace and its call to take the name of Christ as a badge of honor and his cross as a privileged burden into a modern version of the fertility religions of the ancient Near East.