Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 14:3 (Summer 1971)
Article: The Covenant With Moses And Its Historical Setting
Author: Cleon L. Rogers, Jr.

---

JETS 14:3 (Summer 1971) p. 141

The Covenant With Moses
And Its Historical Setting

Cleon L. Rogers, Jr., Th.D.*

In the light of ever increasing material from the Ancient Near East the demand to view Scripture in its historical setting1 must not go unheeded. This study is an attempt to consider God’s covenant with Israel, given through Moses as mediator, against the background of the ancient Near East around the second millenium before Christ. The covenant concept of that time plays an important role and will be examined in relation to God’s dealing with His people.

I. Covenant And Law

Before turning to the Scriptures involved, a basic question must first be handled.2 Is it really proper to consider the Law of Israel as a covenant or even as a part of a covenant? Generally the critical approach is to view the Law of Israel as being developed over a period of years through various processes, ultimately reaching its present form at a rather late date. Albrecht Alt’s influential essay of 1934, serves as a good example of a critical explanation of the origin of Israel’s Law.3 He divides the laws into two classifications, the casuistic and the apodictic law. By casuistic law he understands those laws which are more formally legalistic in form (“When…then…) or relate more to case laws. These he feels were adopted from the Cananites and had no original connection with the covenant. The apodictic laws, on the other hand, are short and all inclusive in form and primarily religious and cultic in nature. These are said to have developed in Israel under cultic influences, especially under the influence of a covenant renewal festival. The con-

*Acting Director of the German Bible Instute (Bibelschule Bergstrasse), Seeheim, Germany.

JETS 14:3 (Summer 1971) p. 142

tact between Law and Covenant had been established but after parallels between the Hittite Treaties and Mosaic Law were recognized, Eichrodt could write, “The situation of the Law in the Covenant has now been placed in a new light. It is immediately clear that it must constitute an inalienable part of it.4 This “clarity” however has not gone unchallenged5 and recently Gerstenberger has forcefully argued that the apodictic laws had no original connection with the covenant concept. 6 His basic objection is that the stipulations of the treaties are intended to protect an existing relationship by imposing specific prohibition, whereas the apodictic laws of Scripture...

visitor : : uid: ()