Original Meaning

The Exordium: A Call to Acknowledge the Perfections of Yahweh (32:1–4)

THE OPENING TO THE Song offers four critical elements involved in the rhetorical situation envisaged: (1) the audience (v. 1); (2) the means (v. 2); (3) the rhetor’s goal (v. 3); (4) the subject (v. 4). As elsewhere in the book, the “heavens” and the “earth” represent the entire cosmos. In light of earlier appeals (4:26; 30:19; 31:28), verse 1 looks like a call for witnesses in a legal case. However, the exordium suggests that this song does not envision a legal situation; this is a song of praise to Yahweh from the lips of a human that the world needs to hear.

Verse 2 describes the means by which the singer will praise Yahweh—“my teaching” and “my words”—but he focuses on the refreshing effect of his words. With artful parallelism he compares his words to “rain,” “dew,” “showers,” and “abundant rain.” Linked to verse 1, the words for moisture are arranged in an ABBA order, with the first and last expressions suggesting rains that fall from the heavens, and the middle two referring to moisture that appears spontaneously from the earth (Gen. 1:11–12; 2:5). This verse suggests that the words of praise for Yahweh (cf. v. 3) will precipitate new productivity and fertility in the cosmos.

The focus particle kî (omitted in NIV) at the beginning of verse 3 signals a shift in attention from the words of the Song to the singer’s intent: to glorify Yahweh. Exodus 34:5–6 illustrates the meaning of “I will proclaim the name.” In the second line the singer appeals to the audience to join him in ascribing greatness to Israel’s God. The Song does this by reciting his attributes (v. 4), his gracious deeds on behalf of his people (vv. 5–14), his righteous anger in response to their rebellion (vv. 15–25), his justice in dealing with Israel’s enemies (vv. 26–35), and ultimately his compassionate atonement for his own people (vv. 36–43). The reference to Yahweh by name and the epithet “our God” express the perspective of faithful Israelites in every generation.

Although verse 4 does not contain a new verb of speech, this seems to represent an embedded utterance, fulfilling the singer’s promise to proclaim the name of Yahweh (v. 3). Like the Shema (6:4–5), this is a confessional statement, announcing the theme of Israel’s national anthem. The mantra is carefully constructed, declaring the theme with a single word and then providing commentary in the form of a series of nominal clauses. The first line introduces a key motif in this song. The word “rock” appears twice in its natural sense (vv. 13a, 13b), five times as an epithet of Yahweh (vv. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31b), and twice in reference to foreign gods (vv. 31, 37). By contrasting Yahweh and the “rock” in which the nations put their trust (vv. 31, 37), the word connotes strength, stability, and permanence;16 Israel finds her security in Yahweh alone.17

Five nominal sentences citing six characteristics of the Rock follow this opening exclamation. (1) The activity of the Rock is “perfect,” which suggests that all Yahweh’s actions are flawless—in contrast to other gods (“rocks”) who are declared to be nothing (vv. 31, 37).18 (2) All the ways of the Rock are “just”; that is, everything he does serves the cause of justice. (3) The Rock is “the faithful God [El].” This cryptic phrase summarizes 7:9–10, offering a lyrical exposition of the earlier statement. It celebrates the two sides to Yahweh’s faithfulness, first in his calling and providing for Israel (vv. 8–14), and then in his judgment of those “who hate” him (vv. 15–43). (4) The Rock “does no wrong.”19 (5) The Rock is righteous (NIV “upright”; ṣaddîq) and upright (NIV “just”; yāšār). The former expression refers to living and acting according to principles established by covenant (cf. 16:20),20 while the latter derives from a root meaning “to be straight” (cf. 6:18; 12:25; 13:19[20]; 21:9).

Bridging Contexts

ECHOES OF THE SONG in the Old Testament. Having worked our way through the Song, we may now look back first and see how it fits into the overall program and message of Deuteronomy. Although many argue that the Song is textually erratic,111 its conceptual framework is clearly at home in the theology of the book.112 Of the nine characteristic Deuteronomic themes identified by Weinfeld,113 six are clearly represented in this song:114 (1) the struggle against idolatry (vv. 8–9, 15–18, 21, 37); (2) Israel’s election, exodus, and covenant (vv. 9–11, 15, 18); (3) the monotheistic creed (vv. 4, 12, 39); (4) observance of the Torah and loyalty to the covenant (vv. 13–15); (5) inheritance of the land (vv. 13–15); (6) retribution and material motivation (vv. 19–20, 22–27, 41–43).

Some attribute the differences in language and the addition of new tenets in the Torah of Deuteronomy to the temporal distance of several centuries between the Song and the rest of the book,115 but these may just as well be attributed to the genre and functions of the texts. Whereas the Torah is cast as a series of addresses to be read privately by the king (17:18–20) and publicly at least every seven years (31:9–13), this song is by definition a poem, composed to be sung or recited in liturgical contexts and/or sung as the national anthem wherever the people live. The embedding of the Song in Moses’ sermons is deliberate, reminding the reader in memorable lyric form of the gospel that he has been promulgating. Far from functioning as a loosely connected appendix, this song rings in our ears as a glorious summary of Moses’ preaching.

Whereas echoes of the Decalogue, the basic covenantal document, are rare in the Old Testament, echoes of the Song embedded in Deuteronomy 32 are ubiquitous. The psalmists speak of the futility of idols with particular poignancy and sarcasm. While the vocabulary is slightly different, Psalm 115:1–8 offers commentary on this text, beginning by ascribing glory to the name of Yahweh (115:1a),116 celebrating his attributes of covenant loyalty (ḥesed) (v. 1b),117 bringing in the nations who say, “Where is their God?” (v. 2), declaring his absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 3),118 and then describing the absurdity of idols:

But their idols are silver and gold,

made by the hands of men.

They have mouths, but cannot speak,

eyes, but they cannot see;

they have ears, but cannot hear,

noses, but they cannot smell;

they have hands, but cannot feel,

feet, but they cannot walk;

nor can they utter a sound with their throats.

Those who make them will be like them,

and so will all who trust in them. (vv. 4–8)

Borrowing is equally evident in Psalm 135, which begins by calling for praise to the name of Yahweh (v. 1–3; cf. Deut. 32:3–4), declaring Yahweh’s election of Jacob for himself and Israel’s status as his treasured possession (v. 4), stating his greatness and absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 5), employing elements from his treasuries (v. 7; cf. Deut. 32:34), quoting verbatim Deuteronomy 32:36, “For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants” (v. 14), and repeating the mockery of idols found in Psalm 115 (quoted above).

The celebration of Israel’s special status, the spoof of idolatry, and the declaration of Israel’s ultimate restoration in Isaiah 44 is laced with echoes of this song: (1) Jacob’s election and formation from the womb (44:1–2; cf. Deut. 32:8–9, 18); (2) the affectionate epithet, Jeshurun (44:2; cf. Deut. 32:15); (3) the declaration that there is no god besides Yahweh (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:39); (4) the lithic epithet, “the Rock” (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:4, 15, 31); (5) the mockery of idols, which turn out to be lies in people’s hands (44:9–20; cf. Deut. 32:15–17, 21, 37); (6) the announcement of Israel’s restoration (44:21–27), specifically confirming the word of his servant (44:26), which alludes to the promissory ending of the Song (Deut. 32:36, 43); and (7) the appeal to the cosmos, including the heavens, to join in the celebration of Israel’s restoration (44:23; cf. Deut. 32:43a).

The influence of the Song is evident in the prophets, particularly Isaiah,119 Jeremiah,120 and Ezekiel.121 This is most striking in Ezekiel 16, which adapts and transforms the Song’s portrayal of the rise, demise, and ultimate restoration of Israel into a powerful oracle of grace, judgment, and hope. Although Ezekiel’s primary concern in this chapter is Israel’s spiritual harlotry, by borrowing themes and vocabulary from Deuteronomy 32 and imitating the plot structure of the Song, he has confirmed its role as a “witness” for Yahweh and against Israel and transformed it into a powerful rhetorical device.122 If Israel goes into exile—and she does—it is because Yahweh has fulfilled his covenant threats (28:15–68) and made good on the warning embedded in Israel’s national anthem.

Post–Old Testament testimony. While prophets marshaled the Song’s words of judgment to warn the people of the consequences of their rebellion and to encourage reform123 in the nation’s darkest hours, to the faithful this song will have inspired great hope. Second Maccabees 7 preserves a striking illustration of the latter. In the face of torture for refusing to transgress the Torah of the ancestors, people encouraged each other with the words of Deuteronomy 32:36: “The Lord God is watching over us and in truth has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his song that bore witness against the people to their faces, when he said, ‘And he will have compassion on his servants’ ” (v. 6; cf. v. 36).124 As noted earlier, we may only speculate on how the Song might have been used liturgically in early Israelite worship. Josephus offers interesting insight into an early Jewish tradition:

He [Moses] recited to them a poem in hexameter verse, which he has moreover bequeathed in a book preserved in the temple, containing a prediction of future events, in accordance with which all has come and is coming to pass, the seer having in no whit strayed from the truth. All these books he consigned to the priests, together with the ark, in which he had deposited the Ten Words written on two tablets, and the tabernacle. (Ant. 4.8.44)

According to rabbinic tradition, Levites would read portions of the Song in the temple on the Sabbath over a six-week cycle, while worshipers presented their additional offerings; when they came to the end, they would repeat the cycle.125 Since a separate scroll apparently containing only Deuteronomy 32 has surfaced in Qumran (4QDeut^q),126 it seems this text was used separately either as part of a liturgy or for instructional purposes. That the Song’s influence carries over into the New Testament is evident from Paul’s quotation of Deuteronomy 32:43 (LXX) in Romans 15:10 and his development of the motif of “jealousy” in Romans 9–11.127

While Israel’s poets and prophets obviously did not forget the national anthem, if the people ever sang it or participated in liturgical performances involving the Song, this must have quickly become a mere ritual, because it did not keep the Israelites on course with Yahweh. Despite Yahweh’s and Moses’ efforts to keep the Song ringing in their ears and recited on their lips, it did not take long for them to trample underfoot his grace and to abandon their Rock in favor of the worthless “pebbles” of the nations.

Contemporary Significance

THE POWER OF MUSIC. What is the enduring theological significance of the Song? The question may be addressed at several levels. At the literary level, this chapter testifies to the power of music not only to express lofty theological ideas, but also to shape people’s lives. In a sense we are what we sing or what we play. If we would understand another culture, the first step is not to read essays about it by dispassionate observers, but to listen to the music, to feel the rhythm of its songs, to hear the story of its poetry.

This is no less true of the church than of the cultures of the people who make up the church. Luther said, “If any would not sing and talk of what Christ has wrought for us, he shows thereby that he does not really believe.” However, Luther misunderstood Old Testament worship completely when he added, “and that he belongs not into the New Testament, which is an era of joy, but into the Old, which produces not the spirit of joy, but of unhappiness and discontent.”128 In keeping with the spirit of worship in chapters 12, 14, and 26, this song was given to Israel to testify to them not only of the God with whom they were related by covenant, but also of themselves and their own proclivity to unbelief and to going their own way. Whereas to this point in their history Moses had kept them on course spiritually and theologically, when they would be dispersed to their tribal allotments, no central leader could perform this function anymore.

But if a leader cannot accompany all the people to all their scattered territories, a song can. God’s people should be characterized not only by enthusiastic song, but also by a song that goes beyond slogans and sound bites and empty repetitions, such as characterize the music of the world (Matt. 6:7). The song of God’s people must declare God’s just sovereignty over the universe, rehearse the history of God’s grace to his people, offer frank assessments of our own condition, warn us against the folly of forgetfulness and idolatry, and give us hope for the future. Deuteronomy 32 was that kind of gift to Israel.

Theology. At the theological level, the Song is unparalleled within the book of Deuteronomy, if not the entire Old Testament, for its concentrated but extraordinarily lofty theology. That theology is presented in several ways.

1. Through names and epithets of Yahweh: He is Yahweh (v. 3, etc.), our God (v. 3), the Rock (vv. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31), El (v. 4), Father (v. 6), Elyon (v. 8), and the One and Only (v. 39).

2. Through recitation of his attributes: He is great (v. 3), faithful (v. 4), lacking any fault (v. 4), righteous (v. 4), upright (v. 4), impassioned (vv. 16, 21), provoked (v. 20), angry (v. 22), and compassionate (v. 36).

3. Through rehearsal of his cosmic actions: He divides the population of the earth into peoples, places them in the charge of his heavenly agents, allocates the lands to the nations (v. 8), and uses the forces of nature in acts of judgment (vv. 31–42). When he acts against the nations, he does so in defense of his own honor and out of compassion for his people.

4. Through rehearsal of his actions on behalf of his people: He created them and established them (v. 6), he fathered them (18), out of all the nations he chose them for a special relationship with himself (v. 9), he rescued them in the desert (v. 10), he cared for them (vv. 10–11), he lavishly provided for them (vv. 12–14), he is their Savior (v. 15), he punishes them (vv. 20–25), he rescues them from the enemy (vv. 26–42), and he makes atonement for his land and his people (v. 43).

These are all worthy reasons to praise the Lord!

Assessment of the human condition. The Song presents a frank assessment of the human condition, especially our propensity to trample underfoot God’s grace by refusing to give thanks, and if we recognize our dependence on higher powers, to bow down to idols that are pathetic figments of the human imagination. John Calvin taught us centuries ago that human nature is “a perpetual factory of idols.”129

But what are idols? Are they limited to three-dimensional images erected in sanctuaries for worship? In our world, where television shows like American Idol annually present new objects of adulation to millions of viewers, the word has come to be associated primarily with musicians and other entertainers who have won the adulation and dervish devotion of their fans. While our text does not define the word “idolatry,” it declares that idolatry (1) is evidence of a corrupt, warped, and twisted culture (v. 5); (2) infects us when we forget our origins in the undeserved and gracious acts of God (vv. 6–15, 18); (3) is an irrational and foolish response to our environment (vv. 16–18, 21); (4) is incompatible with true faith and inevitably provokes the wrath of God (vv. 19–22); and (5) is treachery of the highest order, replacing confidence in and loyalty to the Rock, the only God who exists and who alone exercises sovereign control over the universe (vv. 39–41) for pathetic pebbles, which have no power at all, and whose spiritual significance is an illusion.

Modern Westerners do not tend to bow down to physical images, but idols are not limited to physical representations of deities. An idol is anything that robs God of our devotion and in which we trust, to which we look for significance, meaning, and security. The idols of our day include money, pleasure, beauty, science, human reason, and power.130 Job’s description of idolatry is not only brilliant, but also modern:

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)

In our day, when tolerance of alternative beliefs is touted as the highest virtue, the message of this song is as offensive as the Supreme Command, the first “word” of the Decalogue. The exclusiveness of Yahwism in the ancient Israelite context is matched only by the exclusivist message of the New Testament. In orthodox Yahwism Yahweh brooks no rivals; similarly, the gospel declares that salvation is found only in Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12).

Glorious hope. Finally, for individuals who flounder and for a church that has lost its way, this passage offers glorious hope. Yes, rebellion and ingratitude must be punished, but we may find hope in God’s covenant commitment and his great compassion, which in Christ triumphs over his wrath. For the church and for humanity, the judgment will not be the last word; we look forward to the day when the entire universe will be transformed into a symphony of praise to God. Through the work of Christ, God has rendered vengeance on all the forces of evil and made atonement for his people (cf. v. 43).

Original Meaning

The Recollection: A Call to Acknowledge the Imperfections of Yahweh’s People (32:5–18)

THIS SECTION OF THE poem consists of three stanzas: verses 5–6, 7–14, 15–18. With its remarkable description of God’s grace toward Israel, the middle stanza is obviously the center of gravity, being sandwiched between two pointed descriptions of Israel’s faithless response.

Stanza I: The thesis statement (vv. 5–6). The first stanza begins ambiguously. Although the initial clause lacks an antecedent specifying the subject as well as an explanation of how the corruption occurred, the context suggests it must be Israel, and the use of the verb elsewhere for future apostasy (4:16, 25; 31:29) indicates the corruption involves violation of the Supreme Command through idolatry.

A series of cryptic clauses describe this corrupt people. (1) They are Yahweh’s “non-children.” The expression suspends if not reverses Yahweh’s formal adoption of Israel as his children at Sinai (14:1).21 (2) They are a blemished (NIV “shame[ful]”) lot. Using a word normally applied to defective sacrificial animals, the singer contrasts the corruption of Israel with the perfection of Yahweh’s work (v. 4) and negates their status as “a people holy to the LORD.”22 (3) They are “a warped and crooked generation.” Elsewhere the former expression is contrasted with integrity (Prov. 19:1; 28:6), loyalty, and perfection (2 Sam. 22:26–27); the second word occurs only here. Proverbs 8:8 uses derivatives of these two words to represent the opposite of “righteousness.”

The rhetorical questions of verse 6 confirm that verse 5 has contrasted the perfections of Yahweh (v. 4) with Israel’s deep-seated imperfections, particularly its use of the verb gâmal (NIV “repay”). The rhetorical question in the first line calls for a negative answer, but the characterization of the Israelites in the second line as “foolish” and “unwise” suggests they have answered it positively. In Psalm 74:18 “foolish people” refers to those who stupidly revile the name of Yahweh.23 Together these words negate Israel’s status as recognized by the nations in 4:6.

The second half of verse 6 uses another rhetorical question to hint at the nature of their corruption: Yahweh is their Father (1:31; 8:5), but they have treated him shamefully. Here Yahweh’s fatherhood relates primarily to his being the source of Israel’s existence, which is expressed with a triad of verbs. “Your Creator” is used of acquisition,24 but the term may relate either to childbirth (Gen. 4:1) or to creation (Ps. 139:13; cf. Prov. 8:22). The second verb, “who made you,” involves the most common Hebrew word for “to make,” but in several contexts it relates to God’s creation of humanity in general (Prov. 14:31; Isa. 17:7; Jer. 27:5) and to Israel in particular (Pss. 95:6; 100:3; Hos. 8:14). The third (“formed”) means fundamentally to fix or establish, but the present creative nuance is reflected also in Psalm 119:73. Together, these rhetorical questions highlight the folly of Israel’s response to Yahweh’s work on her behalf.

Stanza II: A call to remember Yahweh’s grace (vv. 7–14). These verses recite the divine actions establishing Israel and elevating her high above the nations. This exposition opens with an appeal to remember Israel’s past. If the hearers themselves cannot remember, they may consult their fathers and elders, the guardians and repositories of history in preliterate societies. The invitation recalls 4:32, though here the terminus a quo is implied in the expressions “days of old” and “generations long past.” The rest of this stanza summarizes the response of the fathers/elders to the request, highlighting four significant stages of the nation’s history.

(1) Yahweh’s election of Israel and her special relationship with him (vv. 8–9). With elegant parallelism the elders recall the establishment of Israel’s special relationship to Yahweh. Identified in the opening line as “Most High,”25 verse 8 suggests Yahweh’s primary action involved establishing international boundaries (cf. Gen 10:5, 32). As noted on 1:38, the expression “to give as a grant” (NIV “give . . . their inheritance”) is a feudal expression referring to the apportionment of property by the lord to his subjects.

But what was apportioned, and who were the beneficiaries of the distribution? The NIV assumes the distribution involved territory granted to the nations,26 but on contextual and syntactical grounds, “nations” should be understood as the object of the verb. (a) Verse 9 presents Jacob/Israel as the personal “grant” of Yahweh.27 (b) The first two cola of verse 8 specify the context for the main event—when Elyon fixed28 the boundaries of the peoples. Although the beneficiaries of the apportionment are not explicitly identified, the last line of verse 8 provides a clue, especially if we prefer the reading of a Qumran fragment (4QDeut^j) and the Septuagint (“according to the sons of God”) over the Hebrew Masoretic text.29 These semidivine heavenly beings serve as Yahweh’s agents of providence on earth. Accordingly, Yahweh divided the “sons of man” into “nations,” and then apportioned them to the “sons of God,” to be their patrons and protectors on his behalf.

Verse 9 highlights Israel’s special status within this cosmic administrative structure. Whereas Yahweh apportioned the nations to the “sons of God,” he claimed Jacob as his own “portion” and his “allotted possession” (NIV “inheritance”). “Possession” (naḥ^alâ) usually refers to the land that Yahweh allots to Israel,30 but in 4:20 Moses spoke of Yahweh claiming his people themselves as his “possession.” Whereas the lore of other ancient peoples involving the origins of relationships between gods and their respective territories31 focused on the deities’ territorial holdings, like the rest of the Old Testament, this text emphasizes the relationship between Yahweh and his people.

(2) Yahweh’s rescue of Israel from a threatening situation and his care for her in the desert (vv. 10–11). In this strophe the allusion shifts from the exodus (v. 9) to Israel’s experience in the desert of Sinai. The bland expression in the first line (“in a desert land”) is colorized with “in a barren and howling waste” in the second. The word translated “howling” assumes a connection with a verb that denotes the howling of jackals and other desert creatures (cf. Mic. 1:8). This verse does not specify why the desert threatened Israel (cf. 8:15), but the vocabulary suggests a slow death of thirst or the sudden attack of hungry desert creatures.

However, apparently just in time Yahweh came by and “found” Israel (v. 10a; cf. Hos. 9:9–10; 13:4–6; Ezek. 16:1–8). The second half of verse 10 highlights Yahweh’s response to this vulnerable people. Like an army circling a village of defenseless women and children to keep the enemy at bay, he surrounded them and protected them. The simile in the last line of this verse intensifies the image of Yahweh’s protection; he guarded them as his precious treasure. This interpretation of the literal expression “the apple of his eye” has a long history.32 Whatever its derivation, this became a fixed expression for “to treat with love and care” (cf. 8:15–16).33

Verse 11 introduces another image of divine care, referring to four actions an eagle might take to secure the well-being of its young. It “hovers” over them, spreads its wings, takes hold of the eaglet, and carries it away with its pinions flapping.34 The image involves an adult bird picking up the eaglet with its beak and soaring away. The inspiration for the statement may come from Exodus 19:4. The strophe ends with a summary declaration that if the Israelites ever made it through the desert, it was entirely to Yahweh’s credit (v. 12). The first colon expresses the notion positively: Yahweh “alone led” Israel;35 the last clause expresses it negatively—“no foreign god” accompanied Israel (cf. 31:16).

(3) Yahweh’s endowment of Israel with all good things (vv. 13–14). The last strophe envisions Yahweh’s leading Israel through the Promised Land in triumphant procession. The first line portrays Israel’s arrival as an army of chariots riding over the “heights of the land.” The high places could either refer to the highlands of Canaan (1:7, 19–20, 41, 43, 44; 3:25) or serve as a cipher for religious installations in Canaan. The references to feasting on the resources of the land in the following lines point to the former interpretation.

The rest of verses 13–14, then, highlights the agricultural benefits that the land yields for Israel.36 (1) Yahweh provides food spontaneously from the rock. “Nourishing him with honey from the rock and oil from the flinty crag” is a metaphor for such prosperity that both desirable products (honey) and economic staples (olive oil) ooze from the land.37

(2) Yahweh provides food through livestock. This includes milk products38 and the flesh of animals: young rams fattened for slaughter,39 mature rams, male goats, and choice cattle (lit., “sons of Bashan,” an idiomatic expression for fattened bovines).40 Fat was considered especially nutritious and often represented the productivity of the land (Pss. 81:17; 147:14).

(3) Yahweh provides food through the soil. Just as fat around kidneys was the most desirable product of rams (Lev. 3:3–4; Isa. 34:6), so “fat of the kidneys of wheat” (pers. trans.) refers to the highest quality wheat or flour.41 The phrase “blood of grapes” refers either to common red or specialty wine. The stanza ends with a surprising verbal clause: “You drank foaming [wine].” Here wine in the fermentation stage highlights the Israelites’ joy in the produce provided by the land that Yahweh had given them.

Stanza III: Trampling underfoot the grace of Yahweh (vv. 15–18). The concern of this stanza is Israel’s violation of the Supreme Command. The subject is presented from two sides: Israel’s abandonment of Yahweh (vv. 15, 18) and their pursuit of other gods (vv. 16–17). The opening line highlights the material benefits of Yahweh’s grace. The reference to Israel as “Jeshurun” (cf. 33:5, 26; Isa. 44:2), Yahweh’s affectionate epithet for his people, heightens the tragedy.42 The description of Jeshurun that follows suggests the name is used ironically. The “straight one” on whom Yahweh had lavished his affection (vv. 7–14) has acted perversely through abominable acts of devotion to other gods (vv. 16–17).

The image of perversion pervades the entire stanza. The tone is set by the rare denominative verb “to be, become fat,” which appears in two different forms at the beginning of each of the first two cola of verse 15. In isolation the present metaphor could be interpreted positively (vv. 13–14), but as a heading for this stanza it represents the opposite, “fat of mind,” i.e., stupid (cf. Isa. 6:10; Jer. 5:28). Since all five verbs in the first two cola apply most naturally to farm animals, the Song paints a picture of a prize calf whose senses have been dulled by the glut of food and whose corpulence is highlighted in the second line: the calf grew fat and became stout and plump.

The rich food and prosperity (vv. 13–14) have obviously had an effect on the consumer’s disposition. In verse 15a Israel kicks like an animal, a colorful image of revolt against its provider. With elegant parallelism, in verse 15b the poet laments Israel’s abandonment of her divine Creator and Savior. The choice of nāṭaš rather than ʿāzab for “abandon” is striking. While usually used of Yahweh giving up on his people,43 here nāṭaš speaks of the people abandoning him (cf. Jer. 15:6). The second verb (nābal) (Piel) means to treat with contempt, as if the object is a fool (cf. v. 6). Instead of honoring Yahweh their father and generous divine benefactor, they despise him.

The target of their contempt is clear: “God,” and “the Rock” of salvation (v. 15). The reference to the Rock that saves is striking. Although rocks are normally associated with defense,44 by going on the offensive, this Rock created a people for himself by choosing them, providing for them in the desert, and granting them prosperity in his land (vv. 8–14), as well as by destroying the enemies who threatened and held them captive.45

Verses 16–17 shift the focus from Israel’s foolish response to Yahweh to their ridiculous response to other gods. We may treat these verses together by noting first the objects of Israel’s perverse devotion and then the effects this has on Israel’s true divine Benefactor. The Song employs seven expressions for false gods. (1) They are “strangers” (NIV “foreign”), illicit and prohibited objects of worship. (2) They are “abominations” (NIV “detestable”). (3) They are šēdîm. The rendering of this word as “demons” derives from LXX and the Vulgate’s daemonibus.46 While demons were viewed as agents of disorder and death in the world outside Israel, the Hebrew Bible provides little information on them.47 Though šēdîm is commonly treated as a loanword from an Akkadian word meaning protective spirits,48 in light of the references to the šdyn in the Deir ʿAlla texts from the ninth to eighth century BC,49 it seems best to interpret this as a designation for beings viewed to be actual divinities.50

(4) The Israelite objects of devotion are nongods. The phrase “not God” rejects any effort to equate the šēdîm with true divinity. (5) They are “unknown gods.” The expression recalls earlier statements51 and highlights the contrast with Yahweh, who had revealed himself by name to the Israelites. (6) They are novelties (“gods that appeared recently”), in contrast to Yahweh/Elyon, “the ancient God” (33:27), who has been operating in Israel’s interest since the day the nations were distributed among the sons of God (v. 8).52 (7) They are gods the ancestors “did not fear.”

Verse 18 returns to the notions with which the strophe had opened (v. 15): Israel has forgotten Yahweh. This notion is expressed by curiously conflating paternal and maternal elements. While masculine in form, the verbs describing Yahweh’s actions involve a female role. Whereas the first may be applied either to mothers53 or to fathers,54 the second (“who gave you birth”) obviously involves a maternal experience.55 By portraying Israel as the child of Yahweh, who exhibits both fatherly (v. 6) and motherly (v. 18) qualities, the Song highlights Israel’s dependence on Yahweh for her very existence.56 In forgetting Yahweh, they have truly trampled underfoot his grace.

Bridging Contexts

ECHOES OF THE SONG in the Old Testament. Having worked our way through the Song, we may now look back first and see how it fits into the overall program and message of Deuteronomy. Although many argue that the Song is textually erratic,111 its conceptual framework is clearly at home in the theology of the book.112 Of the nine characteristic Deuteronomic themes identified by Weinfeld,113 six are clearly represented in this song:114 (1) the struggle against idolatry (vv. 8–9, 15–18, 21, 37); (2) Israel’s election, exodus, and covenant (vv. 9–11, 15, 18); (3) the monotheistic creed (vv. 4, 12, 39); (4) observance of the Torah and loyalty to the covenant (vv. 13–15); (5) inheritance of the land (vv. 13–15); (6) retribution and material motivation (vv. 19–20, 22–27, 41–43).

Some attribute the differences in language and the addition of new tenets in the Torah of Deuteronomy to the temporal distance of several centuries between the Song and the rest of the book,115 but these may just as well be attributed to the genre and functions of the texts. Whereas the Torah is cast as a series of addresses to be read privately by the king (17:18–20) and publicly at least every seven years (31:9–13), this song is by definition a poem, composed to be sung or recited in liturgical contexts and/or sung as the national anthem wherever the people live. The embedding of the Song in Moses’ sermons is deliberate, reminding the reader in memorable lyric form of the gospel that he has been promulgating. Far from functioning as a loosely connected appendix, this song rings in our ears as a glorious summary of Moses’ preaching.

Whereas echoes of the Decalogue, the basic covenantal document, are rare in the Old Testament, echoes of the Song embedded in Deuteronomy 32 are ubiquitous. The psalmists speak of the futility of idols with particular poignancy and sarcasm. While the vocabulary is slightly different, Psalm 115:1–8 offers commentary on this text, beginning by ascribing glory to the name of Yahweh (115:1a),116 celebrating his attributes of covenant loyalty (ḥesed) (v. 1b),117 bringing in the nations who say, “Where is their God?” (v. 2), declaring his absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 3),118 and then describing the absurdity of idols:

But their idols are silver and gold,

made by the hands of men.

They have mouths, but cannot speak,

eyes, but they cannot see;

they have ears, but cannot hear,

noses, but they cannot smell;

they have hands, but cannot feel,

feet, but they cannot walk;

nor can they utter a sound with their throats.

Those who make them will be like them,

and so will all who trust in them. (vv. 4–8)

Borrowing is equally evident in Psalm 135, which begins by calling for praise to the name of Yahweh (v. 1–3; cf. Deut. 32:3–4), declaring Yahweh’s election of Jacob for himself and Israel’s status as his treasured possession (v. 4), stating his greatness and absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 5), employing elements from his treasuries (v. 7; cf. Deut. 32:34), quoting verbatim Deuteronomy 32:36, “For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants” (v. 14), and repeating the mockery of idols found in Psalm 115 (quoted above).

The celebration of Israel’s special status, the spoof of idolatry, and the declaration of Israel’s ultimate restoration in Isaiah 44 is laced with echoes of this song: (1) Jacob’s election and formation from the womb (44:1–2; cf. Deut. 32:8–9, 18); (2) the affectionate epithet, Jeshurun (44:2; cf. Deut. 32:15); (3) the declaration that there is no god besides Yahweh (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:39); (4) the lithic epithet, “the Rock” (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:4, 15, 31); (5) the mockery of idols, which turn out to be lies in people’s hands (44:9–20; cf. Deut. 32:15–17, 21, 37); (6) the announcement of Israel’s restoration (44:21–27), specifically confirming the word of his servant (44:26), which alludes to the promissory ending of the Song (Deut. 32:36, 43); and (7) the appeal to the cosmos, including the heavens, to join in the celebration of Israel’s restoration (44:23; cf. Deut. 32:43a).

The influence of the Song is evident in the prophets, particularly Isaiah,119 Jeremiah,120 and Ezekiel.121 This is most striking in Ezekiel 16, which adapts and transforms the Song’s portrayal of the rise, demise, and ultimate restoration of Israel into a powerful oracle of grace, judgment, and hope. Although Ezekiel’s primary concern in this chapter is Israel’s spiritual harlotry, by borrowing themes and vocabulary from Deuteronomy 32 and imitating the plot structure of the Song, he has confirmed its role as a “witness” for Yahweh and against Israel and transformed it into a powerful rhetorical device.122 If Israel goes into exile—and she does—it is because Yahweh has fulfilled his covenant threats (28:15–68) and made good on the warning embedded in Israel’s national anthem.

Post–Old Testament testimony. While prophets marshaled the Song’s words of judgment to warn the people of the consequences of their rebellion and to encourage reform123 in the nation’s darkest hours, to the faithful this song will have inspired great hope. Second Maccabees 7 preserves a striking illustration of the latter. In the face of torture for refusing to transgress the Torah of the ancestors, people encouraged each other with the words of Deuteronomy 32:36: “The Lord God is watching over us and in truth has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his song that bore witness against the people to their faces, when he said, ‘And he will have compassion on his servants’ ” (v. 6; cf. v. 36).124 As noted earlier, we may only speculate on how the Song might have been used liturgically in early Israelite worship. Josephus offers interesting insight into an early Jewish tradition:

He [Moses] recited to them a poem in hexameter verse, which he has moreover bequeathed in a book preserved in the temple, containing a prediction of future events, in accordance with which all has come and is coming to pass, the seer having in no whit strayed from the truth. All these books he consigned to the priests, together with the ark, in which he had deposited the Ten Words written on two tablets, and the tabernacle. (Ant. 4.8.44)

According to rabbinic tradition, Levites would read portions of the Song in the temple on the Sabbath over a six-week cycle, while worshipers presented their additional offerings; when they came to the end, they would repeat the cycle.125 Since a separate scroll apparently containing only Deuteronomy 32 has surfaced in Qumran (4QDeut^q),126 it seems this text was used separately either as part of a liturgy or for instructional purposes. That the Song’s influence carries over into the New Testament is evident from Paul’s quotation of Deuteronomy 32:43 (LXX) in Romans 15:10 and his development of the motif of “jealousy” in Romans 9–11.127

While Israel’s poets and prophets obviously did not forget the national anthem, if the people ever sang it or participated in liturgical performances involving the Song, this must have quickly become a mere ritual, because it did not keep the Israelites on course with Yahweh. Despite Yahweh’s and Moses’ efforts to keep the Song ringing in their ears and recited on their lips, it did not take long for them to trample underfoot his grace and to abandon their Rock in favor of the worthless “pebbles” of the nations.

Contemporary Significance

THE POWER OF MUSIC. What is the enduring theological significance of the Song? The question may be addressed at several levels. At the literary level, this chapter testifies to the power of music not only to express lofty theological ideas, but also to shape people’s lives. In a sense we are what we sing or what we play. If we would understand another culture, the first step is not to read essays about it by dispassionate observers, but to listen to the music, to feel the rhythm of its songs, to hear the story of its poetry.

This is no less true of the church than of the cultures of the people who make up the church. Luther said, “If any would not sing and talk of what Christ has wrought for us, he shows thereby that he does not really believe.” However, Luther misunderstood Old Testament worship completely when he added, “and that he belongs not into the New Testament, which is an era of joy, but into the Old, which produces not the spirit of joy, but of unhappiness and discontent.”128 In keeping with the spirit of worship in chapters 12, 14, and 26, this song was given to Israel to testify to them not only of the God with whom they were related by covenant, but also of themselves and their own proclivity to unbelief and to going their own way. Whereas to this point in their history Moses had kept them on course spiritually and theologically, when they would be dispersed to their tribal allotments, no central leader could perform this function anymore.

But if a leader cannot accompany all the people to all their scattered territories, a song can. God’s people should be characterized not only by enthusiastic song, but also by a song that goes beyond slogans and sound bites and empty repetitions, such as characterize the music of the world (Matt. 6:7). The song of God’s people must declare God’s just sovereignty over the universe, rehearse the history of God’s grace to his people, offer frank assessments of our own condition, warn us against the folly of forgetfulness and idolatry, and give us hope for the future. Deuteronomy 32 was that kind of gift to Israel.

Theology. At the theological level, the Song is unparalleled within the book of Deuteronomy, if not the entire Old Testament, for its concentrated but extraordinarily lofty theology. That theology is presented in several ways.

1. Through names and epithets of Yahweh: He is Yahweh (v. 3, etc.), our God (v. 3), the Rock (vv. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31), El (v. 4), Father (v. 6), Elyon (v. 8), and the One and Only (v. 39).

2. Through recitation of his attributes: He is great (v. 3), faithful (v. 4), lacking any fault (v. 4), righteous (v. 4), upright (v. 4), impassioned (vv. 16, 21), provoked (v. 20), angry (v. 22), and compassionate (v. 36).

3. Through rehearsal of his cosmic actions: He divides the population of the earth into peoples, places them in the charge of his heavenly agents, allocates the lands to the nations (v. 8), and uses the forces of nature in acts of judgment (vv. 31–42). When he acts against the nations, he does so in defense of his own honor and out of compassion for his people.

4. Through rehearsal of his actions on behalf of his people: He created them and established them (v. 6), he fathered them (18), out of all the nations he chose them for a special relationship with himself (v. 9), he rescued them in the desert (v. 10), he cared for them (vv. 10–11), he lavishly provided for them (vv. 12–14), he is their Savior (v. 15), he punishes them (vv. 20–25), he rescues them from the enemy (vv. 26–42), and he makes atonement for his land and his people (v. 43).

These are all worthy reasons to praise the Lord!

Assessment of the human condition. The Song presents a frank assessment of the human condition, especially our propensity to trample underfoot God’s grace by refusing to give thanks, and if we recognize our dependence on higher powers, to bow down to idols that are pathetic figments of the human imagination. John Calvin taught us centuries ago that human nature is “a perpetual factory of idols.”129

But what are idols? Are they limited to three-dimensional images erected in sanctuaries for worship? In our world, where television shows like American Idol annually present new objects of adulation to millions of viewers, the word has come to be associated primarily with musicians and other entertainers who have won the adulation and dervish devotion of their fans. While our text does not define the word “idolatry,” it declares that idolatry (1) is evidence of a corrupt, warped, and twisted culture (v. 5); (2) infects us when we forget our origins in the undeserved and gracious acts of God (vv. 6–15, 18); (3) is an irrational and foolish response to our environment (vv. 16–18, 21); (4) is incompatible with true faith and inevitably provokes the wrath of God (vv. 19–22); and (5) is treachery of the highest order, replacing confidence in and loyalty to the Rock, the only God who exists and who alone exercises sovereign control over the universe (vv. 39–41) for pathetic pebbles, which have no power at all, and whose spiritual significance is an illusion.

Modern Westerners do not tend to bow down to physical images, but idols are not limited to physical representations of deities. An idol is anything that robs God of our devotion and in which we trust, to which we look for significance, meaning, and security. The idols of our day include money, pleasure, beauty, science, human reason, and power.130 Job’s description of idolatry is not only brilliant, but also modern:

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)

In our day, when tolerance of alternative beliefs is touted as the highest virtue, the message of this song is as offensive as the Supreme Command, the first “word” of the Decalogue. The exclusiveness of Yahwism in the ancient Israelite context is matched only by the exclusivist message of the New Testament. In orthodox Yahwism Yahweh brooks no rivals; similarly, the gospel declares that salvation is found only in Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12).

Glorious hope. Finally, for individuals who flounder and for a church that has lost its way, this passage offers glorious hope. Yes, rebellion and ingratitude must be punished, but we may find hope in God’s covenant commitment and his great compassion, which in Christ triumphs over his wrath. For the church and for humanity, the judgment will not be the last word; we look forward to the day when the entire universe will be transformed into a symphony of praise to God. Through the work of Christ, God has rendered vengeance on all the forces of evil and made atonement for his people (cf. v. 43).

Original Meaning

The Confession: A Call to Recognize the Justice of Yahweh (32:19–35)

IN VERSE 19 THE Song turns to Yahweh’s reaction to Israel’s rebellion. The poet’s central thesis is that Yahweh’s punishment of his people is just, but so is his response to those who take advantage of them for their own sakes. This section opens with a narrative introduction (v. 19), but the remainder is cast entirely in the form of a divine speech in the first person.

Stanza I: Yahweh’s justice in dealing with his own people (vv. 19–25). In this first stanza, Yahweh declares his resolve to withdraw his presence from his people (vv. 20–21) and send in his agents of death (vv. 22–25). The singer begins by announcing the theme. The change in divine disposition is expressed with two verbs: “the LORD saw” and “rejected.” The first highlights the contrast between Yahweh and the non-gods to whom the Israelites had turned (4:28); the second is ambiguous because it lacks an object. However, the meaning of the verb is clarified in verses 20–25: Yahweh’s sons and daughters, who have provoked him.

Yahweh’s disposition toward his people (vv. 20–21). This poetic strophe opens with a declaration of Yahweh’s resolve: “Let me hide [my face]” and “Let me see” (pers. trans.). The first statement recalls Yahweh’s prediction in the narrative preamble to the Song (31:16b–18). The second line is not an expression of openness, as if Yahweh has no awareness or control over Israel’s destiny. The emphasis on his control in the following verses suggests this statement should be interpreted as ironic, if not even stronger, “Let me see to [i.e., determine] their end.”57

Verses 20c–21b summarize the basis for Yahweh’s rejection of his people, presenting first the external (v. 20c–d) and then the internal grounds (v. 21a–b). Externally, Israel’s punishment is justified because they are “perverse”58 and totally lacking in fidelity. Internally, Yahweh’s rejection of Israel is fueled by his fury. With their exchange of the only true God in favor of non-gods and “futilities” (NIV “worthless idols”), they have ignited his passion and stoked his anger (Deut. 5:9). The expressions for other gods are intentionally pejorative.59 Similar to Moses’ descriptions of these gods elsewhere in the book (4:28; 29:17[16]), Yahweh dismisses them as unresponsive to devotion. He denies their objective existence (cf. v. 17), describing them as h^abālîm (“vapor, soap bubbles”), evanescent and lacking substance.60

In verse 21c–d Yahweh declares his intention in rejecting Israel. Applying the principle of talion, he will treat them as they have treated him. They have ignited his passion by substituting him for a “non-god”; he will ignite theirs by substituting them with a “non-people.”61 They have provoked his ire with “futilities”; he will provoke their ire with a “nation that has no understanding.” Yahweh will exchange his “smart” people for an “idiotic” nation. In effect, barbarians have replaced a civilized people as the object of Yahweh’s affections.

Yahweh’s actions against his people (vv. 22–25). The focus particle kî at the beginning of verse 22 (“For”) signals a shift to the actions that Yahweh threatens against Israel. The expression of divine fury begins cosmically (v. 22) and then zeroes in on the Israelites themselves (vv. 23–25). Verse 22 opens with a simple announcement that a flame has been ignited in Yahweh’s nostrils.62 But the fire does not remain there; it spreads to the lowest recesses of Sheol (NIV “death”) and will devour the entire earth and its produce, and it will set ablaze the very “foundations of the mountains.” The scope of Yahweh’s anger has reached cosmic proportions.63

However, in verses 23–25 Yahweh’s fury against the cosmos gives way to a particular target, identified vaguely with the third person plural pronoun (“them”), and then specified in verse 25 as young men and young women, nursing children, and grey haired men. But who are they? Even though Yahweh’s people have not been referred to since verse 15, all who hear the Song will know the target is Israel, which renders the following description all the more frightening.

Verse 23 serves as a thesis statement, highlighting Yahweh’s role and identifying the genre of calamities that follow. Verse 23a classifies the gathering storm as “evils,” a general expression for “calamities” (NIV). The second colon casts the theme in metaphorical form,64 employing “arrows” as shorthand for all the ammunition at Yahweh’s disposal. Many of these weapons are associated with ancient conceptions of the demonic world. The boundaries of several blur, but each deserves brief comment.

Starvation. The word “wasting famine” occurs only here in the Old Testament. That this parade of deadly divine weapons should be headed by “famine” reflects the role of starvation in ancient warfare. If râʿab is intended as a proper name,65 then the previous word should probably be revocalized as m^ezî, yielding the sense, “My sucker, Raʿab,” to match the preceding “my arrows” and to go with the following “my warrior, Resheph.”66

Epidemic. Although NIV’s “consuming pestilence” assumes the first word is a passive form of a verb meaning “to eat,” it is preferable to derive the word from lāḥam (“to fight”)67 and to treat the second word as a proper name: Resheph. Resheph, whose symbol was the arrow,68 often appears in extrabiblical texts as the demon of epidemics and death.69

Pestilence. The NIV’s “deadly plague” is difficult. Qeteb is probably a proper noun. Though some connect it with the sirocco wind or the heat of midday,70 most understand this as the name of the demon of pestilence.71 In view of recent evidence, the word for “deadly” should be understood as “poisonous,”72 yielding “Qeteb, my poisonous one.”

While these agents appear in the covenant curses (28:20–22, 48) and the names originate in pagan demonology,73 in orthodox Yahwism the entities involved have all been thoroughly demythologized. Yahweh is in complete control of all forces of death, including those that other peoples identify with malevolent spirits from the netherworld. However, Yahweh also has other more natural weapons at his disposal.

Vicious animals. The verb “to send” is regularly used for Yahweh’s dispatching of messengers and prophets as well as agents of death and destruction (cf. 7:20). Here the agents are fearful animals, with “the fangs of the wild beasts.”74

Venom of vipers. Verse 24d moves from the teeth of the animals to the deadly venom (lit., “heat”; cf. v. 33) of snakes, identified as those creatures that “glide in the dust.”75

Sword. Whether we interpret as a common noun, “sword,” or as a proper noun, Ḥereb, the word functions as shorthand for the slaughter of warfare. The effect of the sword is expressed by the verb “to bereave of children,” which other texts attribute to wild animals.76

Terror. While NIV and most translations interpret this noun as a common noun, ʾEmah may also be a proper noun, a personification of the terror that causes those who have taken refuge inside their homes to collapse.77 The place of refuge refers to the inner rooms of a house, the ancient equivalent of a fallout shelter. The terror that Yahweh had threatened as a weapon against Israel’s enemies (Ex. 23:26–28; cf. 15:15–16) will be turned against his own people.

The final two cola of verse 25 summarize the scope of the disaster with two pairs of expressions. The first involves a conventional pair referring to males and females in their youthful prime.78 The second pair, “[nursing] infants”79 and “gray-haired men,” functions as a merism, emphasizing that none will survive the attack of Yahweh’s agents of wrath. While the language used to identify the divine agents differs significantly from the covenant curses in Deuteronomy 28, it is clear the Song envisions the same situation.

Stanza II: Yahweh’s justice in dealing with Israel’s enemies (vv. 26–35). The verb “I said” signals the start of an embedded speech in which the audience overhears Yahweh contemplating the implications of his actions against Israel.80 In the end we learn why he did not utterly reject his people, despite their horrendous ingratitude and rebellion. The strophe begins with a past conversation that Yahweh had with himself. He admits that he had intended to “scatter them” and to “blot out their memory.” This second line is shocking. While it involves different vocabulary, Yahweh would do to them what they were to do to the Canaanites (7:24).

Verse 27 explains why Yahweh backed off from this plan: He feared provocation (NIV “taunt”) from the adversaries of God’s people. Apparently Yahweh was troubled by the possibility that the enemies would draw false conclusions regarding their role in Israel’s demise. The Song declares the enemies’ response through direct speech by an interlocutor. The first clause reflects the gesture of a victor raising his hand in triumph.81 The second represents the opposite side of the coin. Despite all the first person verbs in verses 19–25, they will say that it was not Yahweh who destroyed Israel. Yahweh would not tolerate this besmirching of his reputation (9:28; cf. Ex. 32:12; Num. 14:13–16). The enemies’ declaration produces a change in the divine Sovereign’s disposition, as the object of his ire shifts to those he had sent as agents of his people’s punishment. Ultimately, Yahweh spares Israel to salvage his reputation.82

The focus particle kî functions as structural marker in verses 28, 31, 32, and 35c. In verse 28 (untrans. in NIV) it signals the beginning of a report from Yahweh’s point of view,83 as Yahweh renders his verdict on the arrogant enemies. They may have been chosen as instruments of divine judgment, but this decision was not based on their inherent qualifications or moral superiority (cf. 9:4–7). To the contrary, verses 28–29 highlight the enemy’s stupidity—of which their arrogant claim of verse 27 is primary proof. While some understand the subject of verses 28–30 to be Israel,84 the natural antecedents for the third person pronouns throughout verses 28–35 are the “enemy” and the “adversary” of verse 27. The portrayal of Israel’s enemies resembles the portrayal in wisdom literature of fools who refuse to acknowledge Yahweh.85 Verse 29 presents evidence of the enemy’s ignorance by posing a hypothetical and unreal condition. Were the nations wise, they would get it, that is, grasp their end (cf. v. 20). Since verses 36–42 promise a positive end for Israel,86 the present statement concerns the enemy’s destiny (cf. Ps. 73:16–19).

Without warning in verse 30 someone asks a rhetorical question. But who is the inquirer? Since the third person pronouns in the third and fourth lines rule out an Israelite, this must be an outsider who watches the tables turn.87 These lines answer the query of the first two. Whereas the nations think they have won the victory by their own military efforts (v. 27c–d), the speaker asserts that the Israelites’ survival is due entirely to the work of God.88 The God who had contemplated letting his people be destroyed (v. 26) has turned around and stood up for them.

The focus particle kî (“For”) and the shift to first person plural in verse 31 signal a new speaker, who recognizes the uniqueness of Yahweh among the gods of the nations (cf. vv. 15–18, 21). The statement assumes the catalog of Yahweh’s distinctive characteristics referred to in the Song, as well as the nature of the gods of the nations. But the meaning of the last line of verse 31 is unclear. NIV’s “concede” interprets the last word (p^elilîm) in the light of Exodus 1:22 and Job 31:11, where it seems to refer to arbiters in judicial cases. This interpretation suggests that in the end the enemies will acknowledge that Yahweh is incomparable. However, it seems preferable to associate p^elilîm with the Akkadian verb “to guard”89 and to see the phrase used here as “our enemies’ guardians,” the counterpart to “our Rock” in v. 31a.90

The opening kî in verse 32 (untrans. in NIV) signals another shift in perspective, returning to the voice of Yahweh, which will carry through to the end of verse 35. While the image of Sodom and Gomorrah as places renowned for agricultural productivity is ancient (Gen. 13:10), by linking Israel’s enemies with these cities Yahweh recognizes their great potential: Their vine derives from the same stock as that grown in Sodom, and their tendrils derive from the stock of Gomorrah. But how different is the promise from the fulfillment! Instead of finding Vitis vinifera yielding grapes for wine,91 those who picked the fruit discovered these were wild plants that produced lethal and bitter fruit (cf. 2 Kings 4:38–40).

The rest of verses 32 and 33 suggests the grapes are poisonous and their clusters deadly—as deadly as the venom of serpents and as cruel as the poison of cobras.92 With the references to Sodom and Gomorrah, Yahweh subtly hinted at the enemies’ destiny (v. 29) and provided a clue to the riddle that follows in verses 34–35. The strophe opens with a rhetorical question. “Have I not kept this in reserve with me and sealed it in my vaults [i.e., treasuries]?” But what has been stored up? It seems best to treat “their wine” in verse 33 as the antecedent of “it.” Yahweh has kept under lock and key the poisonous wine from Sodom and Gomorrah, reserved for the day when he will serve it to Israel’s enemies.93

According to verse 35, because Yahweh controls the nations’ fate, their judgment is certain. The opening phrase, “It is mine to avenge,” affirms the notion of the previous verse. Yahweh has stored the poisonous wine in his treasuries until the time is right to wreak vengeance on those who refuse to acknowledge his role in their defeat of Israel. Although the Masoretes pointed the following word as a Piel verb (“to make restitution, restore balance”) as a correlative of “vengeance,” it obviously functions as a noun, a second object in Yahweh’s possession, if not in his storehouse. Yahweh operates according to principle, giving the wicked what they deserve and balancing crime and punishment. Indeed, the poison is reserved for the time when their feet fail. Given the reference to wine in verse 33, the phrase “their feet will slip” evokes images of an intoxicated man struggling to walk. However, more to the point of the present text, faltering feet is a metaphor for experiencing calamity.94

The second half of verse 35 clarifies the “time” of the divine vengeance. The expressions for the calamity awaiting the nations are striking. The first, “disaster,” occurs elsewhere in the Old Testament,95 but its meaning is clarified by Ezekiel 35:5, which pairs “the time of doom” with “the time of their final punishment.” The second expression, “doom,” involves a hapax form.96 Here the plural form refers to “impending disasters”; poisonous wine now stored in Yahweh’s storehouse is about to be served.

Bridging Contexts

ECHOES OF THE SONG in the Old Testament. Having worked our way through the Song, we may now look back first and see how it fits into the overall program and message of Deuteronomy. Although many argue that the Song is textually erratic,111 its conceptual framework is clearly at home in the theology of the book.112 Of the nine characteristic Deuteronomic themes identified by Weinfeld,113 six are clearly represented in this song:114 (1) the struggle against idolatry (vv. 8–9, 15–18, 21, 37); (2) Israel’s election, exodus, and covenant (vv. 9–11, 15, 18); (3) the monotheistic creed (vv. 4, 12, 39); (4) observance of the Torah and loyalty to the covenant (vv. 13–15); (5) inheritance of the land (vv. 13–15); (6) retribution and material motivation (vv. 19–20, 22–27, 41–43).

Some attribute the differences in language and the addition of new tenets in the Torah of Deuteronomy to the temporal distance of several centuries between the Song and the rest of the book,115 but these may just as well be attributed to the genre and functions of the texts. Whereas the Torah is cast as a series of addresses to be read privately by the king (17:18–20) and publicly at least every seven years (31:9–13), this song is by definition a poem, composed to be sung or recited in liturgical contexts and/or sung as the national anthem wherever the people live. The embedding of the Song in Moses’ sermons is deliberate, reminding the reader in memorable lyric form of the gospel that he has been promulgating. Far from functioning as a loosely connected appendix, this song rings in our ears as a glorious summary of Moses’ preaching.

Whereas echoes of the Decalogue, the basic covenantal document, are rare in the Old Testament, echoes of the Song embedded in Deuteronomy 32 are ubiquitous. The psalmists speak of the futility of idols with particular poignancy and sarcasm. While the vocabulary is slightly different, Psalm 115:1–8 offers commentary on this text, beginning by ascribing glory to the name of Yahweh (115:1a),116 celebrating his attributes of covenant loyalty (ḥesed) (v. 1b),117 bringing in the nations who say, “Where is their God?” (v. 2), declaring his absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 3),118 and then describing the absurdity of idols:

But their idols are silver and gold,

made by the hands of men.

They have mouths, but cannot speak,

eyes, but they cannot see;

they have ears, but cannot hear,

noses, but they cannot smell;

they have hands, but cannot feel,

feet, but they cannot walk;

nor can they utter a sound with their throats.

Those who make them will be like them,

and so will all who trust in them. (vv. 4–8)

Borrowing is equally evident in Psalm 135, which begins by calling for praise to the name of Yahweh (v. 1–3; cf. Deut. 32:3–4), declaring Yahweh’s election of Jacob for himself and Israel’s status as his treasured possession (v. 4), stating his greatness and absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 5), employing elements from his treasuries (v. 7; cf. Deut. 32:34), quoting verbatim Deuteronomy 32:36, “For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants” (v. 14), and repeating the mockery of idols found in Psalm 115 (quoted above).

The celebration of Israel’s special status, the spoof of idolatry, and the declaration of Israel’s ultimate restoration in Isaiah 44 is laced with echoes of this song: (1) Jacob’s election and formation from the womb (44:1–2; cf. Deut. 32:8–9, 18); (2) the affectionate epithet, Jeshurun (44:2; cf. Deut. 32:15); (3) the declaration that there is no god besides Yahweh (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:39); (4) the lithic epithet, “the Rock” (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:4, 15, 31); (5) the mockery of idols, which turn out to be lies in people’s hands (44:9–20; cf. Deut. 32:15–17, 21, 37); (6) the announcement of Israel’s restoration (44:21–27), specifically confirming the word of his servant (44:26), which alludes to the promissory ending of the Song (Deut. 32:36, 43); and (7) the appeal to the cosmos, including the heavens, to join in the celebration of Israel’s restoration (44:23; cf. Deut. 32:43a).

The influence of the Song is evident in the prophets, particularly Isaiah,119 Jeremiah,120 and Ezekiel.121 This is most striking in Ezekiel 16, which adapts and transforms the Song’s portrayal of the rise, demise, and ultimate restoration of Israel into a powerful oracle of grace, judgment, and hope. Although Ezekiel’s primary concern in this chapter is Israel’s spiritual harlotry, by borrowing themes and vocabulary from Deuteronomy 32 and imitating the plot structure of the Song, he has confirmed its role as a “witness” for Yahweh and against Israel and transformed it into a powerful rhetorical device.122 If Israel goes into exile—and she does—it is because Yahweh has fulfilled his covenant threats (28:15–68) and made good on the warning embedded in Israel’s national anthem.

Post–Old Testament testimony. While prophets marshaled the Song’s words of judgment to warn the people of the consequences of their rebellion and to encourage reform123 in the nation’s darkest hours, to the faithful this song will have inspired great hope. Second Maccabees 7 preserves a striking illustration of the latter. In the face of torture for refusing to transgress the Torah of the ancestors, people encouraged each other with the words of Deuteronomy 32:36: “The Lord God is watching over us and in truth has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his song that bore witness against the people to their faces, when he said, ‘And he will have compassion on his servants’ ” (v. 6; cf. v. 36).124 As noted earlier, we may only speculate on how the Song might have been used liturgically in early Israelite worship. Josephus offers interesting insight into an early Jewish tradition:

He [Moses] recited to them a poem in hexameter verse, which he has moreover bequeathed in a book preserved in the temple, containing a prediction of future events, in accordance with which all has come and is coming to pass, the seer having in no whit strayed from the truth. All these books he consigned to the priests, together with the ark, in which he had deposited the Ten Words written on two tablets, and the tabernacle. (Ant. 4.8.44)

According to rabbinic tradition, Levites would read portions of the Song in the temple on the Sabbath over a six-week cycle, while worshipers presented their additional offerings; when they came to the end, they would repeat the cycle.125 Since a separate scroll apparently containing only Deuteronomy 32 has surfaced in Qumran (4QDeut^q),126 it seems this text was used separately either as part of a liturgy or for instructional purposes. That the Song’s influence carries over into the New Testament is evident from Paul’s quotation of Deuteronomy 32:43 (LXX) in Romans 15:10 and his development of the motif of “jealousy” in Romans 9–11.127

While Israel’s poets and prophets obviously did not forget the national anthem, if the people ever sang it or participated in liturgical performances involving the Song, this must have quickly become a mere ritual, because it did not keep the Israelites on course with Yahweh. Despite Yahweh’s and Moses’ efforts to keep the Song ringing in their ears and recited on their lips, it did not take long for them to trample underfoot his grace and to abandon their Rock in favor of the worthless “pebbles” of the nations.

Contemporary Significance

THE POWER OF MUSIC. What is the enduring theological significance of the Song? The question may be addressed at several levels. At the literary level, this chapter testifies to the power of music not only to express lofty theological ideas, but also to shape people’s lives. In a sense we are what we sing or what we play. If we would understand another culture, the first step is not to read essays about it by dispassionate observers, but to listen to the music, to feel the rhythm of its songs, to hear the story of its poetry.

This is no less true of the church than of the cultures of the people who make up the church. Luther said, “If any would not sing and talk of what Christ has wrought for us, he shows thereby that he does not really believe.” However, Luther misunderstood Old Testament worship completely when he added, “and that he belongs not into the New Testament, which is an era of joy, but into the Old, which produces not the spirit of joy, but of unhappiness and discontent.”128 In keeping with the spirit of worship in chapters 12, 14, and 26, this song was given to Israel to testify to them not only of the God with whom they were related by covenant, but also of themselves and their own proclivity to unbelief and to going their own way. Whereas to this point in their history Moses had kept them on course spiritually and theologically, when they would be dispersed to their tribal allotments, no central leader could perform this function anymore.

But if a leader cannot accompany all the people to all their scattered territories, a song can. God’s people should be characterized not only by enthusiastic song, but also by a song that goes beyond slogans and sound bites and empty repetitions, such as characterize the music of the world (Matt. 6:7). The song of God’s people must declare God’s just sovereignty over the universe, rehearse the history of God’s grace to his people, offer frank assessments of our own condition, warn us against the folly of forgetfulness and idolatry, and give us hope for the future. Deuteronomy 32 was that kind of gift to Israel.

Theology. At the theological level, the Song is unparalleled within the book of Deuteronomy, if not the entire Old Testament, for its concentrated but extraordinarily lofty theology. That theology is presented in several ways.

1. Through names and epithets of Yahweh: He is Yahweh (v. 3, etc.), our God (v. 3), the Rock (vv. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31), El (v. 4), Father (v. 6), Elyon (v. 8), and the One and Only (v. 39).

2. Through recitation of his attributes: He is great (v. 3), faithful (v. 4), lacking any fault (v. 4), righteous (v. 4), upright (v. 4), impassioned (vv. 16, 21), provoked (v. 20), angry (v. 22), and compassionate (v. 36).

3. Through rehearsal of his cosmic actions: He divides the population of the earth into peoples, places them in the charge of his heavenly agents, allocates the lands to the nations (v. 8), and uses the forces of nature in acts of judgment (vv. 31–42). When he acts against the nations, he does so in defense of his own honor and out of compassion for his people.

4. Through rehearsal of his actions on behalf of his people: He created them and established them (v. 6), he fathered them (18), out of all the nations he chose them for a special relationship with himself (v. 9), he rescued them in the desert (v. 10), he cared for them (vv. 10–11), he lavishly provided for them (vv. 12–14), he is their Savior (v. 15), he punishes them (vv. 20–25), he rescues them from the enemy (vv. 26–42), and he makes atonement for his land and his people (v. 43).

These are all worthy reasons to praise the Lord!

Assessment of the human condition. The Song presents a frank assessment of the human condition, especially our propensity to trample underfoot God’s grace by refusing to give thanks, and if we recognize our dependence on higher powers, to bow down to idols that are pathetic figments of the human imagination. John Calvin taught us centuries ago that human nature is “a perpetual factory of idols.”129

But what are idols? Are they limited to three-dimensional images erected in sanctuaries for worship? In our world, where television shows like American Idol annually present new objects of adulation to millions of viewers, the word has come to be associated primarily with musicians and other entertainers who have won the adulation and dervish devotion of their fans. While our text does not define the word “idolatry,” it declares that idolatry (1) is evidence of a corrupt, warped, and twisted culture (v. 5); (2) infects us when we forget our origins in the undeserved and gracious acts of God (vv. 6–15, 18); (3) is an irrational and foolish response to our environment (vv. 16–18, 21); (4) is incompatible with true faith and inevitably provokes the wrath of God (vv. 19–22); and (5) is treachery of the highest order, replacing confidence in and loyalty to the Rock, the only God who exists and who alone exercises sovereign control over the universe (vv. 39–41) for pathetic pebbles, which have no power at all, and whose spiritual significance is an illusion.

Modern Westerners do not tend to bow down to physical images, but idols are not limited to physical representations of deities. An idol is anything that robs God of our devotion and in which we trust, to which we look for significance, meaning, and security. The idols of our day include money, pleasure, beauty, science, human reason, and power.130 Job’s description of idolatry is not only brilliant, but also modern:

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)

In our day, when tolerance of alternative beliefs is touted as the highest virtue, the message of this song is as offensive as the Supreme Command, the first “word” of the Decalogue. The exclusiveness of Yahwism in the ancient Israelite context is matched only by the exclusivist message of the New Testament. In orthodox Yahwism Yahweh brooks no rivals; similarly, the gospel declares that salvation is found only in Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12).

Glorious hope. Finally, for individuals who flounder and for a church that has lost its way, this passage offers glorious hope. Yes, rebellion and ingratitude must be punished, but we may find hope in God’s covenant commitment and his great compassion, which in Christ triumphs over his wrath. For the church and for humanity, the judgment will not be the last word; we look forward to the day when the entire universe will be transformed into a symphony of praise to God. Through the work of Christ, God has rendered vengeance on all the forces of evil and made atonement for his people (cf. v. 43).

Original Meaning

The Gospel: A Call to Treasure the Compassion of Yahweh (32:36–42)

AGAIN THE FOCUS PARTICLE kî in verse 36 (untrans. in NIV) signals a new movement in this song. This stanza opens with the voice of the poet, but in verse 37 Yahweh quickly resumes his speech. Verse 36 announces the theme with two chiastically structured lines. The first verb (dîn) involves a legal expression meaning “to judge,” but in cases involving the oppressed or needy, it means “to champion the cause of.”97 The second involves a Hithpael of the root nḥm (NIV “have compassion”; cf. Ps. 135:14; Num. 23:19).98 While Yahweh and Moses deem Israel’s future infidelity and judgment to be inevitable (Deut. 31:16–18, 20–21), already in 4:31 Moses had declared the present assertion of divine empathy to be rooted in Yahweh’s character as a compassionate God. This stanza celebrates the extraordinary fact that Yahweh will intervene on Israel’s behalf against those who tried to destroy them.

The second half of verse 36 sets the context of his change in disposition. The expression “their strength is gone” (lit., “their hand evaporates”) contrasts Israel’s powerlessness with the boast of the enemies (v. 27c). But the Song adds a remarkable little detail: Yahweh sees! In contrast to the foreign gods (4:28) and reversing the hiding of his face earlier (v. 20), Yahweh notices that the Israelites are at the end of their resources. The last line expands on the enemies’ loss of power: Their leaders have disappeared. Reinforcing the first half of the verse, the scarcity of leaders motivates Yahweh to intervene.

In verses 37–38 Yahweh’s voice returns and carries on through verse 42. He begins by taunting the Israelites for having put their confidence in other gods. The rhetorical question (v. 37a) alludes to verses 15–18, ironically and sarcastically using the generic singular “rock.” The gods the people have chosen are mere pebbles, in contrast to Yahweh, the omnipotent and perfectly just Rock (v. 4). In verse 38 the mockery turns to idols themselves. Recognizing the importance of keeping gods satisfied, Yahweh challenges the gods they have chosen to come to their aid by asking where the gods are who accepted their devotees’ sacrifices and libations. The triad of action verbs reinforces the sarcasm: “Let them rise, assist you, and be your hiding place” (pers. trans.). These expressions all play on the reference to the gods as “rock” in verse 37.

Those who heard this song will have recognized in the introduction to verse 39 the climax. The unparalleled heaping up of attention-grabbing expressions, “See! Now! Note! I! I am he!” (pers. trans.), which focuses hearers’ attention on Yahweh, who declares self-assuredly, “There is no God beside me.” Whether we interpret ʿimmâd as “with me” or “besides me,” Yahweh alone controls the events of history. He is sui generis; no one shares status or rank with him.99 The remainder of verse 39 and indeed verses 40–42 elaborate on Yahweh’s exclusive control over the fates and fortunes of human beings, beginning with two merismic statements that highlight his supreme authority over life and death. If Israel has suffered, this has indeed been the work of Yahweh, but the switch to an imperfect verb turns this statement into a promise: Yahweh will certainly heal his people. The last line of verse 39 emphasizes that when he acts on Israel’s behalf, no outside power—neither divine nor human—can stop him.100

The final strophe (vv. 40–42) seals Israel’s future. With a dramatic nonverbal gesture and an emphatic verbal declaration, Yahweh assures Israel that he will deal with their enemies once and for all. While some interpret the idiom “to lift the hand” as a metaphor for Yahweh’s active involvement in defense of Israel,101 the added prepositional phrase “to heaven” and the following oath formula suggest a legal gesture of raising the hand in association with swearing an oath.102 By adding “forever,” Yahweh guarantees the defeat of the enemy with a certainty equal to that of his oath to Abraham in Genesis 22:16.

Verses 41 and 42 reinforce the substance of the divinely sworn affidavit, beginning with a reference to the context: when Yahweh, the divine warrior, prepares his weapons for battle. The first line speaks literally of sharpening “the lightning of my sword.”103 But Yahweh’s weapons of war are also weapons of judgment. If the first half of verse 41 sets the stage, the second half announces the action. Alluding back to verse 35, Yahweh declares that he will repay his enemies. The sword he had placed in the hands of Israel’s enemies (v. 25) he will now wield against them to restore ethical balance.

In verse 42 the picture turns grotesque. Yahweh portrays his sword and arrows as carnivorous beasts that cannot get enough of human blood and human flesh.104 The last two cola of this verse specify the fare with which these weapons gorge themselves. While the first line obviously refers to the blood of those slain by the sword and those who have been captured, the meaning of the second line is uncertain. The NIV follows an ancient interpretive tradition rendering parʿôt as “leaders,” while others suggest a reference to the hairy heads of the enemy, perhaps alluding to the unkempt and disheveled appearance of captives.105 The lexical issues are far from settled, but the general significance of this strophe is clear: Yahweh will rise on behalf of his people and punish their enemies for their arrogance and brutality to Israel.

Bridging Contexts

ECHOES OF THE SONG in the Old Testament. Having worked our way through the Song, we may now look back first and see how it fits into the overall program and message of Deuteronomy. Although many argue that the Song is textually erratic,111 its conceptual framework is clearly at home in the theology of the book.112 Of the nine characteristic Deuteronomic themes identified by Weinfeld,113 six are clearly represented in this song:114 (1) the struggle against idolatry (vv. 8–9, 15–18, 21, 37); (2) Israel’s election, exodus, and covenant (vv. 9–11, 15, 18); (3) the monotheistic creed (vv. 4, 12, 39); (4) observance of the Torah and loyalty to the covenant (vv. 13–15); (5) inheritance of the land (vv. 13–15); (6) retribution and material motivation (vv. 19–20, 22–27, 41–43).

Some attribute the differences in language and the addition of new tenets in the Torah of Deuteronomy to the temporal distance of several centuries between the Song and the rest of the book,115 but these may just as well be attributed to the genre and functions of the texts. Whereas the Torah is cast as a series of addresses to be read privately by the king (17:18–20) and publicly at least every seven years (31:9–13), this song is by definition a poem, composed to be sung or recited in liturgical contexts and/or sung as the national anthem wherever the people live. The embedding of the Song in Moses’ sermons is deliberate, reminding the reader in memorable lyric form of the gospel that he has been promulgating. Far from functioning as a loosely connected appendix, this song rings in our ears as a glorious summary of Moses’ preaching.

Whereas echoes of the Decalogue, the basic covenantal document, are rare in the Old Testament, echoes of the Song embedded in Deuteronomy 32 are ubiquitous. The psalmists speak of the futility of idols with particular poignancy and sarcasm. While the vocabulary is slightly different, Psalm 115:1–8 offers commentary on this text, beginning by ascribing glory to the name of Yahweh (115:1a),116 celebrating his attributes of covenant loyalty (ḥesed) (v. 1b),117 bringing in the nations who say, “Where is their God?” (v. 2), declaring his absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 3),118 and then describing the absurdity of idols:

But their idols are silver and gold,

made by the hands of men.

They have mouths, but cannot speak,

eyes, but they cannot see;

they have ears, but cannot hear,

noses, but they cannot smell;

they have hands, but cannot feel,

feet, but they cannot walk;

nor can they utter a sound with their throats.

Those who make them will be like them,

and so will all who trust in them. (vv. 4–8)

Borrowing is equally evident in Psalm 135, which begins by calling for praise to the name of Yahweh (v. 1–3; cf. Deut. 32:3–4), declaring Yahweh’s election of Jacob for himself and Israel’s status as his treasured possession (v. 4), stating his greatness and absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 5), employing elements from his treasuries (v. 7; cf. Deut. 32:34), quoting verbatim Deuteronomy 32:36, “For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants” (v. 14), and repeating the mockery of idols found in Psalm 115 (quoted above).

The celebration of Israel’s special status, the spoof of idolatry, and the declaration of Israel’s ultimate restoration in Isaiah 44 is laced with echoes of this song: (1) Jacob’s election and formation from the womb (44:1–2; cf. Deut. 32:8–9, 18); (2) the affectionate epithet, Jeshurun (44:2; cf. Deut. 32:15); (3) the declaration that there is no god besides Yahweh (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:39); (4) the lithic epithet, “the Rock” (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:4, 15, 31); (5) the mockery of idols, which turn out to be lies in people’s hands (44:9–20; cf. Deut. 32:15–17, 21, 37); (6) the announcement of Israel’s restoration (44:21–27), specifically confirming the word of his servant (44:26), which alludes to the promissory ending of the Song (Deut. 32:36, 43); and (7) the appeal to the cosmos, including the heavens, to join in the celebration of Israel’s restoration (44:23; cf. Deut. 32:43a).

The influence of the Song is evident in the prophets, particularly Isaiah,119 Jeremiah,120 and Ezekiel.121 This is most striking in Ezekiel 16, which adapts and transforms the Song’s portrayal of the rise, demise, and ultimate restoration of Israel into a powerful oracle of grace, judgment, and hope. Although Ezekiel’s primary concern in this chapter is Israel’s spiritual harlotry, by borrowing themes and vocabulary from Deuteronomy 32 and imitating the plot structure of the Song, he has confirmed its role as a “witness” for Yahweh and against Israel and transformed it into a powerful rhetorical device.122 If Israel goes into exile—and she does—it is because Yahweh has fulfilled his covenant threats (28:15–68) and made good on the warning embedded in Israel’s national anthem.

Post–Old Testament testimony. While prophets marshaled the Song’s words of judgment to warn the people of the consequences of their rebellion and to encourage reform123 in the nation’s darkest hours, to the faithful this song will have inspired great hope. Second Maccabees 7 preserves a striking illustration of the latter. In the face of torture for refusing to transgress the Torah of the ancestors, people encouraged each other with the words of Deuteronomy 32:36: “The Lord God is watching over us and in truth has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his song that bore witness against the people to their faces, when he said, ‘And he will have compassion on his servants’ ” (v. 6; cf. v. 36).124 As noted earlier, we may only speculate on how the Song might have been used liturgically in early Israelite worship. Josephus offers interesting insight into an early Jewish tradition:

He [Moses] recited to them a poem in hexameter verse, which he has moreover bequeathed in a book preserved in the temple, containing a prediction of future events, in accordance with which all has come and is coming to pass, the seer having in no whit strayed from the truth. All these books he consigned to the priests, together with the ark, in which he had deposited the Ten Words written on two tablets, and the tabernacle. (Ant. 4.8.44)

According to rabbinic tradition, Levites would read portions of the Song in the temple on the Sabbath over a six-week cycle, while worshipers presented their additional offerings; when they came to the end, they would repeat the cycle.125 Since a separate scroll apparently containing only Deuteronomy 32 has surfaced in Qumran (4QDeut^q),126 it seems this text was used separately either as part of a liturgy or for instructional purposes. That the Song’s influence carries over into the New Testament is evident from Paul’s quotation of Deuteronomy 32:43 (LXX) in Romans 15:10 and his development of the motif of “jealousy” in Romans 9–11.127

While Israel’s poets and prophets obviously did not forget the national anthem, if the people ever sang it or participated in liturgical performances involving the Song, this must have quickly become a mere ritual, because it did not keep the Israelites on course with Yahweh. Despite Yahweh’s and Moses’ efforts to keep the Song ringing in their ears and recited on their lips, it did not take long for them to trample underfoot his grace and to abandon their Rock in favor of the worthless “pebbles” of the nations.

Contemporary Significance

THE POWER OF MUSIC. What is the enduring theological significance of the Song? The question may be addressed at several levels. At the literary level, this chapter testifies to the power of music not only to express lofty theological ideas, but also to shape people’s lives. In a sense we are what we sing or what we play. If we would understand another culture, the first step is not to read essays about it by dispassionate observers, but to listen to the music, to feel the rhythm of its songs, to hear the story of its poetry.

This is no less true of the church than of the cultures of the people who make up the church. Luther said, “If any would not sing and talk of what Christ has wrought for us, he shows thereby that he does not really believe.” However, Luther misunderstood Old Testament worship completely when he added, “and that he belongs not into the New Testament, which is an era of joy, but into the Old, which produces not the spirit of joy, but of unhappiness and discontent.”128 In keeping with the spirit of worship in chapters 12, 14, and 26, this song was given to Israel to testify to them not only of the God with whom they were related by covenant, but also of themselves and their own proclivity to unbelief and to going their own way. Whereas to this point in their history Moses had kept them on course spiritually and theologically, when they would be dispersed to their tribal allotments, no central leader could perform this function anymore.

But if a leader cannot accompany all the people to all their scattered territories, a song can. God’s people should be characterized not only by enthusiastic song, but also by a song that goes beyond slogans and sound bites and empty repetitions, such as characterize the music of the world (Matt. 6:7). The song of God’s people must declare God’s just sovereignty over the universe, rehearse the history of God’s grace to his people, offer frank assessments of our own condition, warn us against the folly of forgetfulness and idolatry, and give us hope for the future. Deuteronomy 32 was that kind of gift to Israel.

Theology. At the theological level, the Song is unparalleled within the book of Deuteronomy, if not the entire Old Testament, for its concentrated but extraordinarily lofty theology. That theology is presented in several ways.

1. Through names and epithets of Yahweh: He is Yahweh (v. 3, etc.), our God (v. 3), the Rock (vv. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31), El (v. 4), Father (v. 6), Elyon (v. 8), and the One and Only (v. 39).

2. Through recitation of his attributes: He is great (v. 3), faithful (v. 4), lacking any fault (v. 4), righteous (v. 4), upright (v. 4), impassioned (vv. 16, 21), provoked (v. 20), angry (v. 22), and compassionate (v. 36).

3. Through rehearsal of his cosmic actions: He divides the population of the earth into peoples, places them in the charge of his heavenly agents, allocates the lands to the nations (v. 8), and uses the forces of nature in acts of judgment (vv. 31–42). When he acts against the nations, he does so in defense of his own honor and out of compassion for his people.

4. Through rehearsal of his actions on behalf of his people: He created them and established them (v. 6), he fathered them (18), out of all the nations he chose them for a special relationship with himself (v. 9), he rescued them in the desert (v. 10), he cared for them (vv. 10–11), he lavishly provided for them (vv. 12–14), he is their Savior (v. 15), he punishes them (vv. 20–25), he rescues them from the enemy (vv. 26–42), and he makes atonement for his land and his people (v. 43).

These are all worthy reasons to praise the Lord!

Assessment of the human condition. The Song presents a frank assessment of the human condition, especially our propensity to trample underfoot God’s grace by refusing to give thanks, and if we recognize our dependence on higher powers, to bow down to idols that are pathetic figments of the human imagination. John Calvin taught us centuries ago that human nature is “a perpetual factory of idols.”129

But what are idols? Are they limited to three-dimensional images erected in sanctuaries for worship? In our world, where television shows like American Idol annually present new objects of adulation to millions of viewers, the word has come to be associated primarily with musicians and other entertainers who have won the adulation and dervish devotion of their fans. While our text does not define the word “idolatry,” it declares that idolatry (1) is evidence of a corrupt, warped, and twisted culture (v. 5); (2) infects us when we forget our origins in the undeserved and gracious acts of God (vv. 6–15, 18); (3) is an irrational and foolish response to our environment (vv. 16–18, 21); (4) is incompatible with true faith and inevitably provokes the wrath of God (vv. 19–22); and (5) is treachery of the highest order, replacing confidence in and loyalty to the Rock, the only God who exists and who alone exercises sovereign control over the universe (vv. 39–41) for pathetic pebbles, which have no power at all, and whose spiritual significance is an illusion.

Modern Westerners do not tend to bow down to physical images, but idols are not limited to physical representations of deities. An idol is anything that robs God of our devotion and in which we trust, to which we look for significance, meaning, and security. The idols of our day include money, pleasure, beauty, science, human reason, and power.130 Job’s description of idolatry is not only brilliant, but also modern:

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)

In our day, when tolerance of alternative beliefs is touted as the highest virtue, the message of this song is as offensive as the Supreme Command, the first “word” of the Decalogue. The exclusiveness of Yahwism in the ancient Israelite context is matched only by the exclusivist message of the New Testament. In orthodox Yahwism Yahweh brooks no rivals; similarly, the gospel declares that salvation is found only in Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12).

Glorious hope. Finally, for individuals who flounder and for a church that has lost its way, this passage offers glorious hope. Yes, rebellion and ingratitude must be punished, but we may find hope in God’s covenant commitment and his great compassion, which in Christ triumphs over his wrath. For the church and for humanity, the judgment will not be the last word; we look forward to the day when the entire universe will be transformed into a symphony of praise to God. Through the work of Christ, God has rendered vengeance on all the forces of evil and made atonement for his people (cf. v. 43).

Original Meaning

The Coda: A Call to Celebrate Yahweh’s Deliverance (32:43)

ISRAEL’S NATIONAL ANTHEM ENDS on a festive note, appealing to the nations to join in the celebration of Yahweh’s gracious acts on behalf of Israel. Unfortunately, the interpretation of this final strophe is frustrated by the most serious textual problems in the chapter, if not in the book. Following MT the NIV presents a shorter ending consisting of four cola. The strophe makes sense, but it raises questions whether the verse is complete as it stands. The LXX, Targum Neofiti, and fragments from Qumran reinforce suspicions regarding the MT. While scholars disagree in their assessment of this evidence,106 we find the arguments for the eight-line reading of LXX to be persuasive and will base our commentary on this reading:107

Rejoice, O heavens with him,

and bow down to him, all sons of God.

Rejoice, O nations, with his people.

And let all the messengers of God strengthen themselves.

[See,] the blood of his sons he will avenge,

and he will avenge and take vengeance on his enemies.

He will pay back those who hate him,

and atone for the land of his people.

The switch from first person forms in verse 42 to third person in verse 43 signals a shift in speaker from Yahweh (vv. 37–42) to the poet. The object of praise is not named, but Yahweh is referred to at least twelve times, eight explicitly by means of pronominal suffixes on nouns, and four implicitly in third person singular verbs, to which we should add the phrases “sons of God” and “messengers of God.” These features keep the attention focused squarely on Yahweh. The way the coda refers to Israel reinforces this interpretation. Considering the complete collapse of the relationship between deity and nation in verses 15–25, the fact that the nation should be referred to as “his children”108 and “his people” alone is cause for celebration, for it declares that the promise of verse 36a–b has been fulfilled.

The opening lines identify the addressees as “heavens” and “all sons of God.” This correlation expressions suggests šāmayim (“heavens”) abbreviates “all the host of heaven” (4:19; 17:3) and refers to “celestial beings,”109 who are called on to shout in celebration and to prostrate themselves before Yahweh in submission and homage. Here the “sons of God” are residents of the heavens (cf. v. 8; 4:19). Their role as agents of divine providence among the peoples is reinforced in line 4, which identifies them as “messengers of God.” However, they may not compete with Yahweh for the affections of his people. The Song invites these heavenly beings to celebrate with Israel, acknowledging Yahweh’s role in punishing his (and Israel’s) enemies and in renewing his relationship with his people. Line 3 invites the nations to join Yahweh’s people in the celebration.

In the last four lines the hearers turn their sights from the heavenly scene to the earthly. The lines are arranged chiastically, with the outside cola focusing on Yahweh’s actions on Israel’s behalf and the inside lines dealing with their enemies. This arrangement highlights the echo of verse 41c–d and its function as a shorthand expression for Yahweh’s fuller declaration of his defeat of his adversaries in verses 39–42. The second bicolon presents the other side of the coin. If Yahweh defeats his enemies, he does so in the interests of his people by avenging the blood of his sons and making atonement for his land and his people.110 The need for atonement for land is created by human blood violently shed (Num. 35:30–34) and unburied corpses (Deut. 21:23) that defile the land—the effects of the slaughter of the Israelites (v. 43c; cf. 25).

Viewed as a whole, verse 43 presents the hosts of heaven and the nations with three reasons to celebrate and pay homage to Yahweh: (1) Yahweh has restored his relationship with Israel; (2) Yahweh has taken vengeance on Israel’s (and his own) enemies; (3) Yahweh has made atonement for the land. In so doing he has reversed the earlier dissolution of the tripartite relationship involving deity–nation–people precipitated by Israel’s idolatry. This is cause for celebration not only by the Israelite beneficiaries of the divine action—as in this song—but also by the hosts of heaven and the nations, indeed the entire universe.

Bridging Contexts

ECHOES OF THE SONG in the Old Testament. Having worked our way through the Song, we may now look back first and see how it fits into the overall program and message of Deuteronomy. Although many argue that the Song is textually erratic,111 its conceptual framework is clearly at home in the theology of the book.112 Of the nine characteristic Deuteronomic themes identified by Weinfeld,113 six are clearly represented in this song:114 (1) the struggle against idolatry (vv. 8–9, 15–18, 21, 37); (2) Israel’s election, exodus, and covenant (vv. 9–11, 15, 18); (3) the monotheistic creed (vv. 4, 12, 39); (4) observance of the Torah and loyalty to the covenant (vv. 13–15); (5) inheritance of the land (vv. 13–15); (6) retribution and material motivation (vv. 19–20, 22–27, 41–43).

Some attribute the differences in language and the addition of new tenets in the Torah of Deuteronomy to the temporal distance of several centuries between the Song and the rest of the book,115 but these may just as well be attributed to the genre and functions of the texts. Whereas the Torah is cast as a series of addresses to be read privately by the king (17:18–20) and publicly at least every seven years (31:9–13), this song is by definition a poem, composed to be sung or recited in liturgical contexts and/or sung as the national anthem wherever the people live. The embedding of the Song in Moses’ sermons is deliberate, reminding the reader in memorable lyric form of the gospel that he has been promulgating. Far from functioning as a loosely connected appendix, this song rings in our ears as a glorious summary of Moses’ preaching.

Whereas echoes of the Decalogue, the basic covenantal document, are rare in the Old Testament, echoes of the Song embedded in Deuteronomy 32 are ubiquitous. The psalmists speak of the futility of idols with particular poignancy and sarcasm. While the vocabulary is slightly different, Psalm 115:1–8 offers commentary on this text, beginning by ascribing glory to the name of Yahweh (115:1a),116 celebrating his attributes of covenant loyalty (ḥesed) (v. 1b),117 bringing in the nations who say, “Where is their God?” (v. 2), declaring his absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 3),118 and then describing the absurdity of idols:

But their idols are silver and gold,

made by the hands of men.

They have mouths, but cannot speak,

eyes, but they cannot see;

they have ears, but cannot hear,

noses, but they cannot smell;

they have hands, but cannot feel,

feet, but they cannot walk;

nor can they utter a sound with their throats.

Those who make them will be like them,

and so will all who trust in them. (vv. 4–8)

Borrowing is equally evident in Psalm 135, which begins by calling for praise to the name of Yahweh (v. 1–3; cf. Deut. 32:3–4), declaring Yahweh’s election of Jacob for himself and Israel’s status as his treasured possession (v. 4), stating his greatness and absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 5), employing elements from his treasuries (v. 7; cf. Deut. 32:34), quoting verbatim Deuteronomy 32:36, “For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants” (v. 14), and repeating the mockery of idols found in Psalm 115 (quoted above).

The celebration of Israel’s special status, the spoof of idolatry, and the declaration of Israel’s ultimate restoration in Isaiah 44 is laced with echoes of this song: (1) Jacob’s election and formation from the womb (44:1–2; cf. Deut. 32:8–9, 18); (2) the affectionate epithet, Jeshurun (44:2; cf. Deut. 32:15); (3) the declaration that there is no god besides Yahweh (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:39); (4) the lithic epithet, “the Rock” (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:4, 15, 31); (5) the mockery of idols, which turn out to be lies in people’s hands (44:9–20; cf. Deut. 32:15–17, 21, 37); (6) the announcement of Israel’s restoration (44:21–27), specifically confirming the word of his servant (44:26), which alludes to the promissory ending of the Song (Deut. 32:36, 43); and (7) the appeal to the cosmos, including the heavens, to join in the celebration of Israel’s restoration (44:23; cf. Deut. 32:43a).

The influence of the Song is evident in the prophets, particularly Isaiah,119 Jeremiah,120 and Ezekiel.121 This is most striking in Ezekiel 16, which adapts and transforms the Song’s portrayal of the rise, demise, and ultimate restoration of Israel into a powerful oracle of grace, judgment, and hope. Although Ezekiel’s primary concern in this chapter is Israel’s spiritual harlotry, by borrowing themes and vocabulary from Deuteronomy 32 and imitating the plot structure of the Song, he has confirmed its role as a “witness” for Yahweh and against Israel and transformed it into a powerful rhetorical device.122 If Israel goes into exile—and she does—it is because Yahweh has fulfilled his covenant threats (28:15–68) and made good on the warning embedded in Israel’s national anthem.

Post–Old Testament testimony. While prophets marshaled the Song’s words of judgment to warn the people of the consequences of their rebellion and to encourage reform123 in the nation’s darkest hours, to the faithful this song will have inspired great hope. Second Maccabees 7 preserves a striking illustration of the latter. In the face of torture for refusing to transgress the Torah of the ancestors, people encouraged each other with the words of Deuteronomy 32:36: “The Lord God is watching over us and in truth has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his song that bore witness against the people to their faces, when he said, ‘And he will have compassion on his servants’ ” (v. 6; cf. v. 36).124 As noted earlier, we may only speculate on how the Song might have been used liturgically in early Israelite worship. Josephus offers interesting insight into an early Jewish tradition:

He [Moses] recited to them a poem in hexameter verse, which he has moreover bequeathed in a book preserved in the temple, containing a prediction of future events, in accordance with which all has come and is coming to pass, the seer having in no whit strayed from the truth. All these books he consigned to the priests, together with the ark, in which he had deposited the Ten Words written on two tablets, and the tabernacle. (Ant. 4.8.44)

According to rabbinic tradition, Levites would read portions of the Song in the temple on the Sabbath over a six-week cycle, while worshipers presented their additional offerings; when they came to the end, they would repeat the cycle.125 Since a separate scroll apparently containing only Deuteronomy 32 has surfaced in Qumran (4QDeut^q),126 it seems this text was used separately either as part of a liturgy or for instructional purposes. That the Song’s influence carries over into the New Testament is evident from Paul’s quotation of Deuteronomy 32:43 (LXX) in Romans 15:10 and his development of the motif of “jealousy” in Romans 9–11.127

While Israel’s poets and prophets obviously did not forget the national anthem, if the people ever sang it or participated in liturgical performances involving the Song, this must have quickly become a mere ritual, because it did not keep the Israelites on course with Yahweh. Despite Yahweh’s and Moses’ efforts to keep the Song ringing in their ears and recited on their lips, it did not take long for them to trample underfoot his grace and to abandon their Rock in favor of the worthless “pebbles” of the nations.

Contemporary Significance

THE POWER OF MUSIC. What is the enduring theological significance of the Song? The question may be addressed at several levels. At the literary level, this chapter testifies to the power of music not only to express lofty theological ideas, but also to shape people’s lives. In a sense we are what we sing or what we play. If we would understand another culture, the first step is not to read essays about it by dispassionate observers, but to listen to the music, to feel the rhythm of its songs, to hear the story of its poetry.

This is no less true of the church than of the cultures of the people who make up the church. Luther said, “If any would not sing and talk of what Christ has wrought for us, he shows thereby that he does not really believe.” However, Luther misunderstood Old Testament worship completely when he added, “and that he belongs not into the New Testament, which is an era of joy, but into the Old, which produces not the spirit of joy, but of unhappiness and discontent.”128 In keeping with the spirit of worship in chapters 12, 14, and 26, this song was given to Israel to testify to them not only of the God with whom they were related by covenant, but also of themselves and their own proclivity to unbelief and to going their own way. Whereas to this point in their history Moses had kept them on course spiritually and theologically, when they would be dispersed to their tribal allotments, no central leader could perform this function anymore.

But if a leader cannot accompany all the people to all their scattered territories, a song can. God’s people should be characterized not only by enthusiastic song, but also by a song that goes beyond slogans and sound bites and empty repetitions, such as characterize the music of the world (Matt. 6:7). The song of God’s people must declare God’s just sovereignty over the universe, rehearse the history of God’s grace to his people, offer frank assessments of our own condition, warn us against the folly of forgetfulness and idolatry, and give us hope for the future. Deuteronomy 32 was that kind of gift to Israel.

Theology. At the theological level, the Song is unparalleled within the book of Deuteronomy, if not the entire Old Testament, for its concentrated but extraordinarily lofty theology. That theology is presented in several ways.

1. Through names and epithets of Yahweh: He is Yahweh (v. 3, etc.), our God (v. 3), the Rock (vv. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31), El (v. 4), Father (v. 6), Elyon (v. 8), and the One and Only (v. 39).

2. Through recitation of his attributes: He is great (v. 3), faithful (v. 4), lacking any fault (v. 4), righteous (v. 4), upright (v. 4), impassioned (vv. 16, 21), provoked (v. 20), angry (v. 22), and compassionate (v. 36).

3. Through rehearsal of his cosmic actions: He divides the population of the earth into peoples, places them in the charge of his heavenly agents, allocates the lands to the nations (v. 8), and uses the forces of nature in acts of judgment (vv. 31–42). When he acts against the nations, he does so in defense of his own honor and out of compassion for his people.

4. Through rehearsal of his actions on behalf of his people: He created them and established them (v. 6), he fathered them (18), out of all the nations he chose them for a special relationship with himself (v. 9), he rescued them in the desert (v. 10), he cared for them (vv. 10–11), he lavishly provided for them (vv. 12–14), he is their Savior (v. 15), he punishes them (vv. 20–25), he rescues them from the enemy (vv. 26–42), and he makes atonement for his land and his people (v. 43).

These are all worthy reasons to praise the Lord!

Assessment of the human condition. The Song presents a frank assessment of the human condition, especially our propensity to trample underfoot God’s grace by refusing to give thanks, and if we recognize our dependence on higher powers, to bow down to idols that are pathetic figments of the human imagination. John Calvin taught us centuries ago that human nature is “a perpetual factory of idols.”129

But what are idols? Are they limited to three-dimensional images erected in sanctuaries for worship? In our world, where television shows like American Idol annually present new objects of adulation to millions of viewers, the word has come to be associated primarily with musicians and other entertainers who have won the adulation and dervish devotion of their fans. While our text does not define the word “idolatry,” it declares that idolatry (1) is evidence of a corrupt, warped, and twisted culture (v. 5); (2) infects us when we forget our origins in the undeserved and gracious acts of God (vv. 6–15, 18); (3) is an irrational and foolish response to our environment (vv. 16–18, 21); (4) is incompatible with true faith and inevitably provokes the wrath of God (vv. 19–22); and (5) is treachery of the highest order, replacing confidence in and loyalty to the Rock, the only God who exists and who alone exercises sovereign control over the universe (vv. 39–41) for pathetic pebbles, which have no power at all, and whose spiritual significance is an illusion.

Modern Westerners do not tend to bow down to physical images, but idols are not limited to physical representations of deities. An idol is anything that robs God of our devotion and in which we trust, to which we look for significance, meaning, and security. The idols of our day include money, pleasure, beauty, science, human reason, and power.130 Job’s description of idolatry is not only brilliant, but also modern:

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)

In our day, when tolerance of alternative beliefs is touted as the highest virtue, the message of this song is as offensive as the Supreme Command, the first “word” of the Decalogue. The exclusiveness of Yahwism in the ancient Israelite context is matched only by the exclusivist message of the New Testament. In orthodox Yahwism Yahweh brooks no rivals; similarly, the gospel declares that salvation is found only in Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12).

Glorious hope. Finally, for individuals who flounder and for a church that has lost its way, this passage offers glorious hope. Yes, rebellion and ingratitude must be punished, but we may find hope in God’s covenant commitment and his great compassion, which in Christ triumphs over his wrath. For the church and for humanity, the judgment will not be the last word; we look forward to the day when the entire universe will be transformed into a symphony of praise to God. Through the work of Christ, God has rendered vengeance on all the forces of evil and made atonement for his people (cf. v. 43).

Original Meaning

The Epilogue to Israel’s National Anthem (32:44–47)

HAVING QUOTED ISRAEL’S ANTHEM, the narrator draws the reader back to the context in which the Song was delivered. The second half of verse 44 recapitulates 31:30, and verse 45 reiterates the last phrase of 31:30, “until it was finished.” But Moses is not content with merely reciting the poem. As Israel’s pastor he adds an exhortation in verse 46 for all the assembled people, charging them to take everything he has said with all seriousness. The NIV’s “solemnly declare” (or “testify”) reiterates 31:20–21 and indicates that the Song serves as “a witness” against the people. Echoing the sequel to the Shema in 6:6–9, Moses emphasizes how seriously they must take his instruction. From the inside out they are to commit themselves to all the words with which he has admonished them, and they are to pass on all his teachings to their children, charging them to keep all the words of this Torah by doing them.

In verse 47 Moses reiterates the importance for Israel’s future of heeding his instruction. Stated negatively, they are not to treat his teaching as frivolous or trivial; stated positively, Moses’ words are the keys to Israel’s life; their existence in the land they are about to enter depends on their commitment to these words (cf. 6:24–25; 30:20; 31:12–13). In identifying his words with the revelation of God, Moses provides his people with the key to their future.

Bridging Contexts

ECHOES OF THE SONG in the Old Testament. Having worked our way through the Song, we may now look back first and see how it fits into the overall program and message of Deuteronomy. Although many argue that the Song is textually erratic,111 its conceptual framework is clearly at home in the theology of the book.112 Of the nine characteristic Deuteronomic themes identified by Weinfeld,113 six are clearly represented in this song:114 (1) the struggle against idolatry (vv. 8–9, 15–18, 21, 37); (2) Israel’s election, exodus, and covenant (vv. 9–11, 15, 18); (3) the monotheistic creed (vv. 4, 12, 39); (4) observance of the Torah and loyalty to the covenant (vv. 13–15); (5) inheritance of the land (vv. 13–15); (6) retribution and material motivation (vv. 19–20, 22–27, 41–43).

Some attribute the differences in language and the addition of new tenets in the Torah of Deuteronomy to the temporal distance of several centuries between the Song and the rest of the book,115 but these may just as well be attributed to the genre and functions of the texts. Whereas the Torah is cast as a series of addresses to be read privately by the king (17:18–20) and publicly at least every seven years (31:9–13), this song is by definition a poem, composed to be sung or recited in liturgical contexts and/or sung as the national anthem wherever the people live. The embedding of the Song in Moses’ sermons is deliberate, reminding the reader in memorable lyric form of the gospel that he has been promulgating. Far from functioning as a loosely connected appendix, this song rings in our ears as a glorious summary of Moses’ preaching.

Whereas echoes of the Decalogue, the basic covenantal document, are rare in the Old Testament, echoes of the Song embedded in Deuteronomy 32 are ubiquitous. The psalmists speak of the futility of idols with particular poignancy and sarcasm. While the vocabulary is slightly different, Psalm 115:1–8 offers commentary on this text, beginning by ascribing glory to the name of Yahweh (115:1a),116 celebrating his attributes of covenant loyalty (ḥesed) (v. 1b),117 bringing in the nations who say, “Where is their God?” (v. 2), declaring his absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 3),118 and then describing the absurdity of idols:

But their idols are silver and gold,

made by the hands of men.

They have mouths, but cannot speak,

eyes, but they cannot see;

they have ears, but cannot hear,

noses, but they cannot smell;

they have hands, but cannot feel,

feet, but they cannot walk;

nor can they utter a sound with their throats.

Those who make them will be like them,

and so will all who trust in them. (vv. 4–8)

Borrowing is equally evident in Psalm 135, which begins by calling for praise to the name of Yahweh (v. 1–3; cf. Deut. 32:3–4), declaring Yahweh’s election of Jacob for himself and Israel’s status as his treasured possession (v. 4), stating his greatness and absolute freedom and sovereignty (v. 5), employing elements from his treasuries (v. 7; cf. Deut. 32:34), quoting verbatim Deuteronomy 32:36, “For the LORD will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants” (v. 14), and repeating the mockery of idols found in Psalm 115 (quoted above).

The celebration of Israel’s special status, the spoof of idolatry, and the declaration of Israel’s ultimate restoration in Isaiah 44 is laced with echoes of this song: (1) Jacob’s election and formation from the womb (44:1–2; cf. Deut. 32:8–9, 18); (2) the affectionate epithet, Jeshurun (44:2; cf. Deut. 32:15); (3) the declaration that there is no god besides Yahweh (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:39); (4) the lithic epithet, “the Rock” (44:8; cf. Deut. 32:4, 15, 31); (5) the mockery of idols, which turn out to be lies in people’s hands (44:9–20; cf. Deut. 32:15–17, 21, 37); (6) the announcement of Israel’s restoration (44:21–27), specifically confirming the word of his servant (44:26), which alludes to the promissory ending of the Song (Deut. 32:36, 43); and (7) the appeal to the cosmos, including the heavens, to join in the celebration of Israel’s restoration (44:23; cf. Deut. 32:43a).

The influence of the Song is evident in the prophets, particularly Isaiah,119 Jeremiah,120 and Ezekiel.121 This is most striking in Ezekiel 16, which adapts and transforms the Song’s portrayal of the rise, demise, and ultimate restoration of Israel into a powerful oracle of grace, judgment, and hope. Although Ezekiel’s primary concern in this chapter is Israel’s spiritual harlotry, by borrowing themes and vocabulary from Deuteronomy 32 and imitating the plot structure of the Song, he has confirmed its role as a “witness” for Yahweh and against Israel and transformed it into a powerful rhetorical device.122 If Israel goes into exile—and she does—it is because Yahweh has fulfilled his covenant threats (28:15–68) and made good on the warning embedded in Israel’s national anthem.

Post–Old Testament testimony. While prophets marshaled the Song’s words of judgment to warn the people of the consequences of their rebellion and to encourage reform123 in the nation’s darkest hours, to the faithful this song will have inspired great hope. Second Maccabees 7 preserves a striking illustration of the latter. In the face of torture for refusing to transgress the Torah of the ancestors, people encouraged each other with the words of Deuteronomy 32:36: “The Lord God is watching over us and in truth has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his song that bore witness against the people to their faces, when he said, ‘And he will have compassion on his servants’ ” (v. 6; cf. v. 36).124 As noted earlier, we may only speculate on how the Song might have been used liturgically in early Israelite worship. Josephus offers interesting insight into an early Jewish tradition:

He [Moses] recited to them a poem in hexameter verse, which he has moreover bequeathed in a book preserved in the temple, containing a prediction of future events, in accordance with which all has come and is coming to pass, the seer having in no whit strayed from the truth. All these books he consigned to the priests, together with the ark, in which he had deposited the Ten Words written on two tablets, and the tabernacle. (Ant. 4.8.44)

According to rabbinic tradition, Levites would read portions of the Song in the temple on the Sabbath over a six-week cycle, while worshipers presented their additional offerings; when they came to the end, they would repeat the cycle.125 Since a separate scroll apparently containing only Deuteronomy 32 has surfaced in Qumran (4QDeut^q),126 it seems this text was used separately either as part of a liturgy or for instructional purposes. That the Song’s influence carries over into the New Testament is evident from Paul’s quotation of Deuteronomy 32:43 (LXX) in Romans 15:10 and his development of the motif of “jealousy” in Romans 9–11.127

While Israel’s poets and prophets obviously did not forget the national anthem, if the people ever sang it or participated in liturgical performances involving the Song, this must have quickly become a mere ritual, because it did not keep the Israelites on course with Yahweh. Despite Yahweh’s and Moses’ efforts to keep the Song ringing in their ears and recited on their lips, it did not take long for them to trample underfoot his grace and to abandon their Rock in favor of the worthless “pebbles” of the nations.

Contemporary Significance

THE POWER OF MUSIC. What is the enduring theological significance of the Song? The question may be addressed at several levels. At the literary level, this chapter testifies to the power of music not only to express lofty theological ideas, but also to shape people’s lives. In a sense we are what we sing or what we play. If we would understand another culture, the first step is not to read essays about it by dispassionate observers, but to listen to the music, to feel the rhythm of its songs, to hear the story of its poetry.

This is no less true of the church than of the cultures of the people who make up the church. Luther said, “If any would not sing and talk of what Christ has wrought for us, he shows thereby that he does not really believe.” However, Luther misunderstood Old Testament worship completely when he added, “and that he belongs not into the New Testament, which is an era of joy, but into the Old, which produces not the spirit of joy, but of unhappiness and discontent.”128 In keeping with the spirit of worship in chapters 12, 14, and 26, this song was given to Israel to testify to them not only of the God with whom they were related by covenant, but also of themselves and their own proclivity to unbelief and to going their own way. Whereas to this point in their history Moses had kept them on course spiritually and theologically, when they would be dispersed to their tribal allotments, no central leader could perform this function anymore.

But if a leader cannot accompany all the people to all their scattered territories, a song can. God’s people should be characterized not only by enthusiastic song, but also by a song that goes beyond slogans and sound bites and empty repetitions, such as characterize the music of the world (Matt. 6:7). The song of God’s people must declare God’s just sovereignty over the universe, rehearse the history of God’s grace to his people, offer frank assessments of our own condition, warn us against the folly of forgetfulness and idolatry, and give us hope for the future. Deuteronomy 32 was that kind of gift to Israel.

Theology. At the theological level, the Song is unparalleled within the book of Deuteronomy, if not the entire Old Testament, for its concentrated but extraordinarily lofty theology. That theology is presented in several ways.

1. Through names and epithets of Yahweh: He is Yahweh (v. 3, etc.), our God (v. 3), the Rock (vv. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31), El (v. 4), Father (v. 6), Elyon (v. 8), and the One and Only (v. 39).

2. Through recitation of his attributes: He is great (v. 3), faithful (v. 4), lacking any fault (v. 4), righteous (v. 4), upright (v. 4), impassioned (vv. 16, 21), provoked (v. 20), angry (v. 22), and compassionate (v. 36).

3. Through rehearsal of his cosmic actions: He divides the population of the earth into peoples, places them in the charge of his heavenly agents, allocates the lands to the nations (v. 8), and uses the forces of nature in acts of judgment (vv. 31–42). When he acts against the nations, he does so in defense of his own honor and out of compassion for his people.

4. Through rehearsal of his actions on behalf of his people: He created them and established them (v. 6), he fathered them (18), out of all the nations he chose them for a special relationship with himself (v. 9), he rescued them in the desert (v. 10), he cared for them (vv. 10–11), he lavishly provided for them (vv. 12–14), he is their Savior (v. 15), he punishes them (vv. 20–25), he rescues them from the enemy (vv. 26–42), and he makes atonement for his land and his people (v. 43).

These are all worthy reasons to praise the Lord!

Assessment of the human condition. The Song presents a frank assessment of the human condition, especially our propensity to trample underfoot God’s grace by refusing to give thanks, and if we recognize our dependence on higher powers, to bow down to idols that are pathetic figments of the human imagination. John Calvin taught us centuries ago that human nature is “a perpetual factory of idols.”129

But what are idols? Are they limited to three-dimensional images erected in sanctuaries for worship? In our world, where television shows like American Idol annually present new objects of adulation to millions of viewers, the word has come to be associated primarily with musicians and other entertainers who have won the adulation and dervish devotion of their fans. While our text does not define the word “idolatry,” it declares that idolatry (1) is evidence of a corrupt, warped, and twisted culture (v. 5); (2) infects us when we forget our origins in the undeserved and gracious acts of God (vv. 6–15, 18); (3) is an irrational and foolish response to our environment (vv. 16–18, 21); (4) is incompatible with true faith and inevitably provokes the wrath of God (vv. 19–22); and (5) is treachery of the highest order, replacing confidence in and loyalty to the Rock, the only God who exists and who alone exercises sovereign control over the universe (vv. 39–41) for pathetic pebbles, which have no power at all, and whose spiritual significance is an illusion.

Modern Westerners do not tend to bow down to physical images, but idols are not limited to physical representations of deities. An idol is anything that robs God of our devotion and in which we trust, to which we look for significance, meaning, and security. The idols of our day include money, pleasure, beauty, science, human reason, and power.130 Job’s description of idolatry is not only brilliant, but also modern:

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)

In our day, when tolerance of alternative beliefs is touted as the highest virtue, the message of this song is as offensive as the Supreme Command, the first “word” of the Decalogue. The exclusiveness of Yahwism in the ancient Israelite context is matched only by the exclusivist message of the New Testament. In orthodox Yahwism Yahweh brooks no rivals; similarly, the gospel declares that salvation is found only in Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12).

Glorious hope. Finally, for individuals who flounder and for a church that has lost its way, this passage offers glorious hope. Yes, rebellion and ingratitude must be punished, but we may find hope in God’s covenant commitment and his great compassion, which in Christ triumphs over his wrath. For the church and for humanity, the judgment will not be the last word; we look forward to the day when the entire universe will be transformed into a symphony of praise to God. Through the work of Christ, God has rendered vengeance on all the forces of evil and made atonement for his people (cf. v. 43).