[2] Cf. S. Wypych,
«Będę wam Bogiem, wy będziecie moim ludem» (Jr 7,23). Studium egzegetyczno-teologiczne formuły w ekonomii Starego Przymierza, [in:] W. Chrostowski (ed.),
Duch i Oblubienica mówią: przyjdź. Księga pamiątkowa dla O. Prof. A. Jankowskiego w 85. rocznicę urodzin (series:
Ad Multos Annos, 5), Warszawa 2001, p. 451; R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, B. K. Waltke,
The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Chicago – Illinois 1980, the electronic version in
BibleWorks 6.0, point 282a (בְּרִית).
[3] The biblical scholars realize how deeply the passage of the Israelites through the Sea of Reeds permeates the thinking of the inspired authors of the Bible, prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel), psalmists. Cf. E. Zawiszewski,
Pięcioksiąg i Księgi historyczne, Pelplin 1996, p. 19-20; B. Poniży,
Motyw Wyjścia w Biblii: od historii do teologii, Poznań 2001, p. 73-99 (Deutero-Isaiah); 101-129 (the author of the Book of Wisdom); B. Wodecki,
Morze w Piśmie świętym, “Ruch Biblijny i Liturgiczny” 58 (2005) No. 2, p. 102.
[4] More detailed analyses carried out in point 2.5 will show the need to distinguish between the structure of the covenant ritual and the literary structure of the description of the covenant, with the first structure represented in the middle part of the second one. One must add that translation of point 2.5 into English is available on Academia.edu not in this paper but as the next article, entitled:
The literary scheme of the Book of Exodus 1-18 as the scheme of the Hittite treaties.
[5] Cf. R. Meynet,
Wprowadzenie do hebrajskiej retoryki biblijnej, translated by K. Łukowicz, T. Kot, Kraków 2001, p. 69-70.
[6] T. Jelonek,
Biblia księgą Kościoła, part I, Kraków 1983, p. 93-98 (about the literary scheme of the Book of Exodus 19:1-24:11); ibid., part II, pp. 34-37 (about the literary scheme of Deut 5-28). In both cases, the author points out the identity of the literary scheme of the analyzed book with that of the ancient one, within the framework of which it was customary to describe the making of a covenant in the Ancient East.
[7] Cf. S. Wypych,
«Będę wam Bogiem, wy będziecie moim ludem» (Jr 7,23). Studium egzegetyczno-teologiczne formuły w ekonomii Starego Przymierza, op.cit., p. 451-469.
[8] Cf. Cz. Jakubiec,
Stare i Nowe Przymierze. Biblia i Ewangelia, Warszawa 1961, p. 71-72; T. Brzegowy,
Pięcioksiąg Mojżesza. Wprowadzenie i egzegeza Księgi Rodzaju 1-11, Tarnów 1997, p. 64-65; A. Jankowski,
Biblijna teologia przymierza, Katowice 1985, p. 27. Cf. also the footnote to Gen 15:17 in
Biblia Tysiąclecia4, i.e.,
Pismo Święte Starego i Nowego Testamentu w przekładzie z języków oryginalnych. Opracował zespół biblistów polskich z inicjatywy benedyktynów tynieckich, 4th edition, Poznań 1996.
[9] This noun appears throughout the Bible 17 times, but 15 times means
Gezer, and only twice
half. One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: . גזר@n*
[10] More precisely: to Him who
is halving the Sea
into halves; to Him who
is parting the Sea
into parts.
[11] Cf. W. Borowski,
Psalmy. Komentarz biblijno-ascetyczny, Kraków 1983, p. 423.
[12] It is a Hebrew interpretation technique known to biblical scholars – ‘verbal allusion’: cf. A. Jankowski,
Aniołowie wobec Chrystusa, Kraków 2002, p. 45.
[13] The classical historical-critical method rejects the holistic understanding of the Bible, presented here; according to it, there is a difference between a historical event and its interpretation among many different biblical authors. However, this holistic approach is legitimate, characteristic for the canonical method now recommended by the Church’s Magisterium: cf. Joseph Ratzinger – Pope Benedict XVI,
Jesus of Nazareth. Part 1:
From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration, p. 191: The Holy Father emphasizes that in order to reach the meaning of the words written in Scripture, which God intended to convey, it is necessary to adopt the principle of reading it “as an overall unity expressing an intrinsically coherent message, notwithstanding their multiple historical layers”; cf. also p. 9 and 13. Cf. also the words of the Pope: Benedict XVI, [in:] Synod of Bishops,
XII Ordinary General Assembly.
The Word of God in the Life and Mission of the Church. Lineamenta, No 15 d: “I would very much like to see theologians learn to interpret and love Scripture as the Council desired, in accordance with
Dei Verbum: may they experience
the inner unity of Scripture – something that today is helped by ‘canonical exegesis […]’”. Cf.
on the Internet ← link
[14] It is crucial for the comparison of the two events to see
the transition between the divided entities and not to focus attention on the sacrificial dimension of the act of splitting animals by Abram. The sacrificial dimension is not present in the description of the passage through the Sea of Reeds, so the comparison of the two events does not take place within its framework. Not the victim is the binding element, but the transition between the halves.
[15] It is also characteristic that Psalm 136 belongs to a specific group of psalms containing allusions to the liturgical temple activities performed as a part of the ritual of the covenant renewing. Cf. A. Struś,
Śpiewajcie nam pieśni Syjonu (Księga Psalmów), [in:] A. Struś, J. Warzecha, J. Frankowski (ed.),
Pieśni Izraela. Pieśń nad Pieśniami, Psalmy, Lamentacje (series:
Wprowadzenie w myśl i wezwanie ksiąg biblijnych, 7), Warszawa 1988, p. 89: The author shows the elements characteristic of this ritual: the calling of the liturgical congregation, the preamble of the covenant (the titles of Yahweh and the recollecting of His goodness to the Nation), a speech of a prophet or priest showing the history of the covenant and its laws, then the response of the congregation; the final enumeration of blessings for those who keep the covenant, and curses for those who break it. Psa 81; 111; 135; 145 contain all this rite. Psa 78; 105; 114 and 136 do not contain the whole of it; they are a lyrical transposition of one of its elements – of the speech showing the history of the covenant. In point 2.5 of the whole dissertation, the research intuition indicated here will be developed into an explanation of the relationship between the literary structure of Psa 136 and the covenant-making rite. Translation of point 2.5 into English is available at Academia.edu as an article entitled:
The literary scheme of the Book of Exodus 1-18 as the scheme of the Hittite treaties.
[16] The work of biblical scholars can also lead to such an idea: the priestly editor shows the way of Israel from Ramses (cf. Ex 12:37) through the desert as a religious procession, in which the main stages are marked by the dates of the feasts commanded by God. The biblical scholars also pay attention to the meaning of the signs of cloud and fire, indicating both God’s protection and the majesty of God walking at the head of the People: S. Hałas,
Pustynia miejscem próby i spotkania z Bogiem. Wybrane zagadnienia biblijnej teologii pustyni, Kraków 1999, p. 108, 254n. The author refers to M. Smith,
The Pilgrimage Pattern in Exodus, Sheffield 1997, p. 231n; L. Alonso SchöKel,
Salvezza e liberazione: Esodo, Bologna 1997, p. 165. Analyses of the further part of this work will reveal the value of this intuition in a new light.
[17] וַיּוֹלֶךְ is the verb הלך in
hifil imperfect with ו
consecutive. Hebrew
hifil is a causative form of the verb. הלך in its basic form
Qal means: to go, walk, come, depart, proceed, move, go away. The verb in
hifil form, used in the text to express the Lord’s act affecting the sea, means: The Lord made the sea go, walk, come, depart, proceed, move, go away. Cf. P. Briks,
Podręczny słownik hebrajsko-polski i aramejsko-polski Starego Testamentu, wydanie trzecie, Warszawa 2000, p. 94: הלך. The understanding of this act as lasting some time, not performed at one moment, is associated primarily with the adverbial of time being at the end of this part of the sentence: כָּל־הַלַּיְלָה (by all night). It also indirectly results from the characteristics of the imperfect conjugation: cf. A. Tschirschnitz, K. Wojciechowska,
Gramatyka języka hebrajskiego w zarysie, Warszawa 1996, p. 255 (about the imperfect conjugation), 258 (about the time nuances of the imperfect consecutive).
[18] וַיִּבָּקְעוּ in 14:21d is the verb בקע in Niphal imperfect with ו consecutive. A Niphal conjugation expresses a passive or reflexive action. Since the previous verse describes the Lord as the cause of the parting of the waters, here we must understand the verb וַיִּבָּקְעוּ as a passive action. בקע in the basic form Qal means: to cleave, rip, split, open, divide, break. So it means in Niphal: to be cleaved, ripped, split, opened, divided, broken. Cf. P. Briks,
Podręczny słownik hebrajsko-polski i aramejsko-polski Starego Testamentu, op.cit., p. 63: בקע.
[19] Cf. W. Gesenius,
Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament in Verbindung mit H. Zimmern, W. Max Müller, O. Weber, bearbeitet von F. Buhl, sechzehnte Auflage, Leipzig 1915, p. 111: בקע.
[20] The New American Standard Bible, the electronic version from the 1995 year in
BibleWorks 6.0.
[21] Cf. Pius XII, Encyclical
Divino Afflante Spiritu, No. 15-16: “For it is the duty of the exegete to lay hold, so to speak, with the greatest care and reverence
of the very least expressions which, under the inspiration of the Divine Spirit, have flowed from the pen of the sacred writer, so as to
arrive at a deeper and fuller knowledge of his meaning. Wherefore let him diligently apply himself so as to acquire daily a greater facility in biblical as well as in other oriental languages and to support his interpretation by the aids which all branches of philology supply.” Then the Pope pointed out that “the original text which, having been written by the inspired author himself, has more authority and higher weight than any even the very best translation, whether ancient or modern.” See
on the Internet ← link.
[22] Cf. B. Poniży,
Motyw Wyjścia w Biblii: od historii do teologii, op.cit., p. 73-100: the author analyses three fundamental issues: getting out of captivity, crossing the desert, the shape of a new life after the return to the Promised Land. Cf. also R. E. Watts,
Echoes from the Past: Israel’s Ancient Traditions and the Destiny of the Nations in Isaiah 40-55, “Journal for the Study of the Old Testament” 28 / 4 (2004), p. 487.
[23] Here and at the next participles, the word ‘was’ is by default (for example: ‘He was cutting’) to give back the past tense. The Hebrew participle does not specify the time, so the time results only from the context.
[24] The expression כִּימֵי קֶדֶם (as in ancient times), or in the basic form יְמֵי קֶדֶם (ancient times), is characteristic of texts referring to the oldest promises, threats or interventions of God toward the Fathers: cf. Psa 44:2; 77:6; 143:5; Mic 7:20 – we searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: '
קדם@* *1
יום@n??* Therefore, it is not justified to understand the intervention of the ‘arm of the Lord’ as an act against ‘the marine primeval elements’ at the time of the creation of the world by the Lord, and therefore to understand Rahab or Tannin as the personified elemental powers of the ancient marine world – a concept from Babylonian mythology. Such a suggestion is in
Biblia Poznańska³, i.e.,
Pismo Święte Starego i Nowego Testamentu w przekładzie z języków oryginalnych ze wstępami i komentarzami. Opracował zespół tłumaczy pod redakcją ks. M. Petera (Stary Testament), ks. M. Wolniewicza (Nowy Testament), 3rd edition, Poznań 1991, vol. 3, p. 132: footnote to Isa 51:9-11. However, the commentator states here (rightly so!): “It is also possible that Rahab is here also a symbol of Egypt (as in Isa 30:7)”, which harmonizes with the notion that Isa 51:9-11 is like an ode to the arm of the Lord, a symbol of God’s power, which intervened many times in history, especially while crossing the Red Sea. Cf. also S. Łach,
Księga Wyjścia. Wstęp – przekład z oryginału – komentarz, Poznań 1964, p. 123: a commentary to Ex 7:8-9. Cf. Isa 51:9-10; Psa 74:13; Ezek 29:3; 32:2.
[25] Cf. B. Poniży,
Motyw Wyjścia w Biblii: od historii do teologii, op.cit., p. 89-90.
[26] One should remember the word-reality relationship. In this relation, the reality is primordial, while words are supposed
to describe reality. Therefore, in exegesis, it is crucial to discover the meaning of words and compare the meaning of all sentences containing
words of identical meaning, although not the same set of words! Therefore, below we will analyze different words, but expressing the same thought: cut, break and so on. Saint Jerome has already pointed to this issue: cf. Pope Benedict XV, Encyclical
Spiritus Paraclitus, No. 50: “
The precise meaning, too, that attaches to particular words has to be worked out, for ‘
when discussing Holy Scripture it is not words we want so much as the meaning of words.’” Cf.
on the Internet ← link. We must add that the words can be: (a) equally sounding, although describing different realities (the homonymy phenomenon), or (b) unequally sounding and describing the same reality, or (c) unequally sounding and describing different realities. In order to examine the reality indicated by the word used by the hagiographer, it is necessary to examine all the places where the word appears in the Scriptures. Then – if there is a homonymy phenomenon of the word – we must select the appropriate meaning for it, based on the examined context, i.e., the reality, indicated by this word. Sometimes it is worthwhile to extend the study to ancient literature. Concordances, dictionaries, computer programs are helpful here.
[27] Cf. W. Gesenius,
Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament in Verbindung mit H. Zimmern, W. Max Müller, O. Weber, bearbeitet von F. Buhl, op.cit., p. 116: חלל.
[28] One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: .חלל@v*+*Hb*
[29] Cf. P. Briks,
Podręczny słownik hebrajsko-polski i aramejsko-polski Starego Testamentu, op.cit., p. 126: חרב.
[30] The word הַשָּׂמָה in Isa 51:10b is the sum of the Hebrew article and the verb שִׂים in the form Qal participle feminine singular. The understanding of this word as the participle is one of the listed versions of the Hebrew text in R. Kittel (ed.),
Biblia Hebraica, 14th edition, Stuttgart 1966. Septuagint also gives the article + participle (of aorist: ἡ θεῖσα), as well as in ‘drying’: ἡ ἐρημοῦσα.
BibleWorks 6.0 explains it as Qal perfect (
Biblia Tysiąclecia4 interprets it similarly: it did), probably because of the accent on שׂ, but the accent – given around the sixth century after Christ – may be incorrect. Aside from the accent, the two Qal forms of this verb are not different! – G. Deiana, A. Spreafico (oprac. wersji oryginalnej), S. Bazyliński (oprac. wersji polskiej),
Wprowadzenie do hebrajszczyzny biblijnej, Warszawa 2001, p. 103: verbs וʺע. About the meaning of Septuagint for decisive interpretations of the Hebrew text of the Bible see G. Kubski,
Teoria komentarza biblijnego (series: Biblioteka pomocy naukowych, 16), Poznań 2000, p. 76.
[31] Cf. also W. Chrostowski,
Czy Adam i Ewa mieli się nie starzeć i nie umierać? Egzegetyczny przyczynek do nauczania o nieśmiertelności pierwszych ludzi, [in:] R. Bogacz, W. Chrostowski (red.),
Verbum caro factum est. Księga pamiątkowa dla Księdza Profesora Tomasza Jelonka w 70. rocznicę urodzin (series: Ad Multos Annos, 11), Warszawa 2007, p. 157-158; A. Kuśmirek,
Interpretacja tradycji o „potworach morskich” (Rdz 1,21) w targumach, [in:] ibid., pp. 343-350.
[32] Cf. P. Briks,
Podręczny słownik hebrajsko-polski i aramejsko-polski Starego Testamentu, op.cit., p. 189: מחץ – to smite through, shatter, wound severely; מַחַץ – breakage, severe wound; p. 190: מֶּחֱצָה – half.
[33] The use of the wordplay חֶרֶב (sword) – חָרָבָה (dry, desolate land) is possible because of their origin from the root חרב.
[34] One should note that the first two verbs often appear as a so-called ‘pair of words,’ indicating the content parallelism of verses which include them: cf. M. Kantor,
Struktury dośrodkowe i odśrodkowe w poezji biblijnej (Ps 120-134), Kraków 1988, p. 45-46.
[35] Cf. P. Briks,
Podręczny słownik hebrajsko-polski i aramejsko-polski Starego Testamentu, op.cit., p. 138: יַבָּשָׁה.
[36] Cf. Psa 74:13-15 with a footnote [in:]
Pismo Święte Nowego Testamentu i Psalmy. Przekład ekumeniczny z języków oryginalnych. Towarzystwo Biblijne w Polsce, wydanie drugie, Warszawa 2001. Cf. also: Psa 66:6 with a footnote in
Biblia Tysiąclecia4; J. Synowiec,
Izrael opowiada swoje dzieje. Wprowadzenie do ksiąg: Powtórzonego Prawa, Jozuego, Sędziów, Samuela i Królewskich, Kraków 1996, pp. 78-79: The author presents numerous parallels between the figure of Moses and Joshua and between the events in which they played a significant role as leaders of the People, the executors of God’s orders; T. Brzegowy,
Księgi historyczne Starego Testamentu, Tarnów 1996, p. 50: The author also presents (cf. p. 47) an interesting parallel between God’s command indicating the need for Israelites to prepare for crossing the Jordan and a similar God’s command concerning Israel’s preparation for the making of the Covenant on Sinai: Josh 3:5-6 and Ex 19:10-14.
[37] Cf. M. Dahood,
The Anchor Bible. Psalms II (51-100), Garden City – New York 1968, p. 205.
[38] One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: 'ברית *4 כרת
[39] The parallel between the cloud of the Lord, leading the Israelites between the waters of the Sea of Reeds, and the Ark of the Lord’s Covenant, leading them between the waters of the cut Jordan, is a good confirmation of this thought, too. Cf. M. Kokot,
Obłok w Starym Testamencie jako znak zbawczej mocy Boga działającej w historii Izraela, “Seminare” (1981), p. 9. The author refers to the work: T. W. Mann,
The Pillar of Cloud in the Red Sea Narrative, “Journal of Biblical Literature” 90 /1 (1971), p. 29-30.
[40] Cf. T. Jelonek,
Jak czytać Pismo Święte?, Kraków 1994, p. 15, 17; L. Stachowiak,
Ogólna charakterystyka proroków, [in:] L. Stachowiak (ed.),
Wstęp do Starego Testamentu, Poznań 1990, p. 248: “a prophet under the particular influence of the Spirit of God sees things and relationships that others do not see.”
[41] Verse 3b and 8 express an identical thought: cursed is anyone who
does not listen to the words of the covenant.
[42] Literally: “On the day of My bringing them out of the land of Egypt.” A thorough analysis of the sequence used here we carry out a little further.
[43] It occurs 284 times.
[44] Cf. F.-L. Hassfeld, E. Renter,
Przymierze, translated by B. Wodecki, [in:] F. König, H. Waldenfels (ed.),
Leksykon religii, Warszawa 1997, p. 367; F. Rienecker, G. Maier, W. Chrostowski (scientific editor of Polish edition),
Leksykon biblijny, Warszawa 1994, p. 674; S. Wypych,
Przymierze i jego odnowa. Studium z teologii biblijnej Starego Testamentu, Kraków 2003, p. 157, 165-167.
[45] One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: 'קול יהוה אלהים *2 שׁמע * אם.
[46] One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0 for words: מַחֲלָה or מַחֲלֶה.
[47] More about
murmuring, see: B. Zbroja,
Biblijne «szemranie», “Ruch Biblijny i Liturgiczny” 58 (2005), p. 32: In the Book of Exodus, God’s answer to the Israelites’ murmuring is not to punish them but to give them what lack was the cause of such their reaction.
[48] Cf. R. E. Watts,
‘ŌLĀH: The Rhetoric of Burnt Offerings, “Vetus Testamentum” 56 (2006), p. 126.
[49] One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: .עלה@n* זבח@n*
[50] However, the sign announced by God of making this sacrifice by people liberated from Egypt (cf. Ex 3:12: תַּעַבְדוּן אֶת־הָאֱלֹהִים עַל הָהָר הַזֶּה) was filled thanks to the presence of the priest Jethro at the foot of the mountain Horeb in Rephidim – cf. Ex 18:12.
[51] Cf. F. Zorell,
Lexicon Hebraicum et Aramaicum Veteris Testamenti, Roma 1968, p. 685-686: צוה
[52] Cf. J. Bright,
The Anchor Bible. Jeremiah, Garden City – New York 1965, p. 287: “Although the passage may not preserve the prophet
’s
ipsissima verba, it represents what might well be considered the high point of his theology. It is certainly one of the profoundest and most moving passages in the entire Bible”.
[53] Cf. G. Deiana, A. Spreafico (oprac. wersji oryginalnej), S. Bazyliński (oprac. wersji polskiej),
Wprowadzenie do hebrajszczyzny biblijnej, op.cit., p. 74.
[54] In
BibleWorks 6.0, this verse of Septuagint appears as 38:32.
[55] One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for BGM: 'εν@* *3 *@vpamg*
[56] Cf. footnote to Jer 31:32 in
Biblia Tysiąclecia4.
[57] The same one should say about the translation of this phrase in Septuagint. It is because the participle of the aorist ἐπιλαβομένου μου is present here, of which one knows that it does not express temporal relations, but is similar to a noun or adjective: cf. E. De Witt Burton,
Moods and Tenses of New Testament Greek, without the place of publication, 1900, paragraph 132:
The Aorist Participle. Available as an electronic document in
BibleWorks 6.0. Similar issues we analyzed in this paper concerning the sentence in Ex 4:21.
[58] Cf. also footnote to Jer 31:31-34 in
Biblia Poznańska³. Here, the main reason for this translation is the understanding of the problematic phrase as a “technical expression” – to denote God’s care. For this reason, the subsequent analyses of this work will show that one must understand literally the expression “took by her/his hand” in many parts of the Bible.
[59] Cf. also A. Van Der Val,
Themes from Exodus in Jeremiah 30-31, [in:] M. Vervenne (ed.),
Studies in the Book of Exodus. Redaction – Reception – Interpretation, Leuven 1996, p. 559-566.
[60] For to this point (to 14:30-31 as a whole), there is nowhere a significant sequence indicating Israel as a subject of the act of seeing. In Ex 13:17 God states that He does not lead the people by the nearest way, so that they, seeing the battle, does not turn back to Egypt. In 14:13 Moses announced to the people that they would
see the Lord’s salvation and the dead Egyptians – those whom they now see still alive. Only in Ex 14:30 does the hagiographer state: “Thus the Lord saved Israel on that day from the power of the Egyptians and Israel
saw the Egyptians dead upon the seashore.” The next verse continues describing this Israeli ‘seeing’: The people
saw the mighty hand of the Lord, and in consequence, they feared the Lord and believed the Lord and His servant Moses.
[61] About the deep meaning of the whole Psalm as a decision to entrust oneself into the hands of God see L. Alonso SchöKel,
Nadzieja. Uwierzyć miłości, translated by M. Zaręba, Kraków 1998, p. 57-59.
[62] Regarding the rabbinical interpretation of Jer 31:31-34 see: R. S. Sarason,
The Interpretation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 in Judaism, [in:] J. J. Petuchowski (ed.),
When Jews and Christians Meet, Albany 1988, p. 99-123. However, one can find little about the new covenant (Jer 33:31-34) in
The Targum of Jeremiah, which seems surprising. The only mention is the statement that in the future world God will personally teach the Torah, the book of the covenant: cf. R. Tomes,
The Reception of Jeremiah in Rabbinic Literature and in the Targum, [in:] A. H. W. Curtis, T. RöMer (ed.),
The Book of Jeremiah and its Reception, Leuven 1997, p. 240.
[63] Cf. G. J. Broke,
The Book of Jeremiah and its Reception in the Qumran Scrolls, [in:] Ibid., p. 202-203. The author points out clearly: “In [11QT
a] 29:10 there is the phrase ‘like the covenant which I made with Jacob at Betel’ (…); with this can be compared Jer 31:32 ‘
not like the covenant which I made with their fathers’. (…) the exegesis of Jer 31:32 in 11QT
a could be the assertion that the ‘new’ or ‘renewed’ covenant
will not be a restatement of the Sinaitic covenant but a renewal of the covenant made with the patriarchs”.
[64] Cf. Ibid., p. 193. Vocabulary and phrases are so strikingly similar to some sections of the Book of Jeremiah that some scholars speak of this text as “Pseudo-Jeremiah”: see E. Larson,
4Q470 and the Angelic Rehabilitation of King Zedekiah, “Dead Sea Discoveries” 1 (1994), p. 215. Others point to the similarity of the text 4Q470 to other Apocrypha of Jeremiah: cf. K. H. Kuhn,
A Coptic Jeremiah Apocryphon, “Le Muséon” 83 (1970), p. 95-135. 291-350.
[65] Cf. F.-L. Hassfeld, E. Renter,
Przymierze, op.cit., p. 367; S. WYPYCH,
Przymierze i jego odnowa. Studium z teologii biblijnej Starego Testamentu, op.cit., p. 157, 165-167.
[66] The covenant on Sinai is also at the center of modern covenant theology and of the attempts to explain it based on literary principles of recording ancient Hittite covenant treaties: cf. W. J. Harrington,
Klucz do Biblii, translated by J. Marzęcki, Warszawa 1984, p. 209-210.
[67] Cf. M. Vervenne,
Introduction, [in:] M. Vervenne (red.),
Studies in the Book of Exodus. Redaction – Reception – Interpretation, op.cit., p. 9, 18; J. Lust,
Exodus 6:2-8 and Ezekiel, [in:] M. Vervenne (ed.),
Studies in the Book of Exodus. Redaction – Reception – Interpretation, op.cit., p. 209-224.
[68] Cf. J. Homerski,
Wstęp do Księgi Ezechiela, [in:]
Biblia Poznańska³, vol. 3, p. 391.
[69] One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: 'אני יהוה; percentage data, given for books with the highest percentages, were obtained from
Detailed Statistics of this program.
[70] One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: 'ידע כי אני יהוה
[71] The first sequence occurs here 14 times (for 17 in total in the Book of Exodus: Ex 6:2.6.7.8.29; 7:5.17; 8:18; 10:2; 12:12; 14:4.18; 15:26; 16:12; 29:46ab; 31:13), while the second sequence – 5 times (for 7 in total in the book of Exodus: Ex 6:7; 7:17; 8:18; 10:2; 16:12; 29: 46; 31:13).
[72] Cf. J. Homerski,
Wstęp do Księgi Ezechiela, op.cit., p. 392; W. Chrostowski,
Prorok wobec dziejów. Interpretacje dziejów Izraela w Księdze Ezechiela 16, 20 i 23 oraz ich reinterpretacja w Septuagincie, Warszawa 1991; J. L. Mckenzie,
Dictionary of the Bible, London–Dublin 1965, p. 258-262 (
Ezekiel). Cf. also M. Greenberg,
Ezekiel, 1-20. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Garden City – New York 1983, p. 301: the author accurately argues against the fact that some biblical scholars do not regard the text Ezek 16 as an allegorical history of
the whole nation, although the only addressee of the prophetic speech seems to be the city of Jerusalem (cf. 16:1-3). Evidence of it is the observation that according to 16:8 God entered into a covenant with this “Jerusalem”, while we know that Jerusalem was never in a covenant with God – He always made a covenant with the whole nation: “Jerusalem stands for Israel; God entered into a covenant only with the people, never with the city (vs. 8).”
[73] Cf. the attempt to understand Ezek 16:3 in light of the analysis of religions of Canaan and Israel: M. S. Smith,
The Early History of God: Yahweh and Other Deities in Ancient Israel, San Francisco 1990, p. 11; S. B. Parker,
Divine Intercession in Judah?, “Vetus Testamentum” 56 (2006), p. 76-91.
[74] The image of the union of the bridegroom and the bride was adopted in Israel and in many other religions to represent the relationship of love between man and God: cf. J. Warzecha,
Miłość potężna jak śmierć (Pieśń nad Pieśniami), [in:] A. Struś, J. Warzecha, J. Frankowski (ed.)
, Pieśni Izraela. Pieśń nad Pieśniami, Psalmy, Lamentacje, op.cit., p. 160, 173; E. Cortese,
Ezechiele (Nuovissima Versione della Bibbia, 27), Roma³ 1981, p. 116: a commentary to Ezek 16:1-43.
[75] Cf. G. Te Stroete,
Exodus (Buch), [in:]
Bibel-Lexikon, Einsiedeln 1968², col. 461: the author notes that this fragment is an example of a prophetic interpretation of the stay in the desert as the time of the first love of God and Israel: “der Aufenthalt in der Wüste als Zeit der ersten Liebe (vgl. z.B. Ez 16:4-7)”; M.-E. Boismard,
Wyjście z Egiptu, [in:] X. Lén-Dufour (ed.),
Słownik teologii biblijnej, wydanie 3, translated by K. Romaniuk, Poznań 1990, p. 1093: the author considers that Ezek 16:4-7 presents the exit from
Egypt as the real
birth of the People of God, where God himself gave birth to her in blood. The need for a slightly different justification for the thesis that Egypt was the birthplace we will show below.
[76] Cf. W. Zimmerli,
Ezekiel 1. A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, Chapters 1-24, translated by R. E. Clements, Philadelphia 1979, p. 339-340.
[77] Cf. H. Matthew,
Commentary on the Bible, Chester 1706-1721, the electronic version in
BibleWorks 6.0: a commentary to Deut 32:10; Ezek 16:4-5; W. Chrostowski,
Prorok wobec dziejów. Interpretacje dziejów Izraela w Księdze Ezechiela 16, 20 i 23 oraz ich reinterpretacja w Septuagincie, op.cit., p. 107f: The author convincingly proves that Ezek 16 is an allusion to the period of slavery in Egypt, where Israel lived in her blood as a result of the Egyptian violence against her. Among other things, he notes the significance of the noun ‘blood,’ which in Ezek 16:6 is in the plural, and thus means blood innocently shed (by implication: as a result of the violence of the Egyptians), as earlier Koch wrote about it: K. Koch,
Der Spruch «Sein Blut bleibe auf seinem Haupt», “Vetus Testamentum” 12 (1962), p. 396-416: In the Old Testament, the use of the noun ‘blood’ in plural usually means blood, shed suddenly, innocently. Cf. also M. Greenberg,
Ezekiel, 1-20. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, op.cit., p. 301.
[78] Ezek 16:5 has the word גֹּעַל – disgust; Ex 1:12 has the word קוּץ – to feel a disgust / to feel abhorrence.
[79] Moses sang it at the end of his way of life and of the way of Israel from Egypt to Canaan.
[80] The Egyptian Land is
wilderness compared to the Promised Land – Cf. Deut 11:10.
[81] Cf. also H. Matthew,
Commentary on the Bible, op.cit. The comment to Deut 32:10: The author notes one more reason why the hagiographer used the term ‘in the waste howling wilderness’ – Israel was in a state of idolatry in Egypt, and thus in a state of wilderness. God brought him out of it.
[82] The word רבה, the same as in Ezek 16:7, appears here: be(come) great, many, much, numerous.
[83] 16:7b: “However, you were naked and bare!” – in Ezekiel (cf. 16:7f. 22. 36f. 39; 22:10; 23:10.18.29), the second word mentioned here, עֶרְוָה / עֶרְיָה – is connected with the condemnation of debauchery, understood both naturally and concerning God, as idolatry.
[84] Cf.
Biblia Poznańska³, vol. 3, p. 108 – footnote to Rut 9:3.
[85] It is also significant that the word גֹאֵל as a term for God does not appear anywhere in Ex 19-40 – in the description of the Sinai covenant. However, the presence of this word in the pericopes II and V (division according to the analysis of the first part of the whole dissertation) means that it appears in the outer pericopes of the text composed of the pericopes II+III+IV+V. For the exceptional significance of this text see below.
[86] God had already pointed out to Moses in the revelations in Egypt (cf. Ex 2:24; 6:4n) that the faithfulness of People of Israel to the requirements of the covenant made with their fathers is a reason for His intervention in favor of them. Biblical scholars emphasize that God always makes a covenant because of His mercy (חֶסֶד), kindness and love. God loves and therefore still has a salvific initiative. He is not discouraged even by the disloyalty of the human partner: cf. W. Smereka,
Przymierze, [in:] S. Grzybek (ed.),
Vademecum biblijne, vol. 4, Kraków 1991, p. 45.
[87] The indicated sequence also appears as the term ‘wing stretching,’ performed by some being. The first – by the Cherubim being above the place of atonement (Ex 25:20; 37:9; 1Kings 6:27; 8:7; 2Kings 3:13; 5:8). The second – by the eagle, the symbol of God punishing the enemies of Israel (Jer 48:40; 49:22; only once this term serves to define the ordinary falcon). We can see how significant this sequence is when it serves to define God Himself and the Cherubim from the Ark of the Covenant, placed in the most sacred site; Cherubim are very important in the practicing the worship of God.
[88] Cf. Pope Leon XIII, Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, No. 125: about the books of the Holy Scriptures: “And the Church holds them as sacred and canonical, not because, having been composed by human industry, they were afterwards approved by her authority; nor only because they contain revelation without error; but because, having been written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author (Vatican Council I, Ses. III, cap. 2, De revel.)”; Vatican Council Ii, Dogmatic Constitution On Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum), No. 11; No. 9: “Sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit”; Synod of Bishops, XII Ordinary General Assembly. The Word of God in the Life and Mission of the Church. Lineamenta, No. 15 b: recommends to consider, among other things, issues: “unity of the Canon as the criterion of interpretation of Sacred Scripture” (Canonis unitatem considerabimus, utpote quæsit regula Sacram Scripturam interpretandi) and “the meaning and scope of the particular identity of the Bible as the Word of God in human language. So the interpretation of the Bible takes place as a whole, under the guidance of faith, with philosophical and theological criteria, in the light in particular of the Note of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church (No. I, C. D).” Cf. also Ibid., No. 16c (including references to Dei Verbum, No. 12; Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 109-114). Cf. Providentissimus Deus ← link. Cf. also Lineamenta ← link.
[89] Cf. M. Greenberg,
Ezekiel, 1-20. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, op.cit., p. 277: the author makes an excellent analysis by comparing Rut 3:9 and Ex 6:1-8 (especially 6:7) with Ezek 16:8; 20:5. The results of Greenberg’s analysis are almost identical with those presented in this paper; on page 206, the author, concerning Ezek 16:7, asks a question, the key one for his further examinations of the place where God married Israel: ‘in Egypt?’
[90] The Jewish interpretations of this verse discuss A. Kuśmirek,
«I niosłem was na skrzydłach orlich» (Ex 19,4) – metafora w tłumaczeniach targumicznych, “Ruch Biblijny i Liturgiczny” 57 (2004), p. 85-90. Cf. also J. L. Ska,
Exode 19:3b-6 et l’identité de l’Israël postexilique, [in:] M. Vervenne (ed.),
Studies in the Book of Exodus. Redaction – Reception – Interpretation, op.cit., p. 289-317: the author notes that the description of the exodus in Ex 19:4: “I bore you up on eagle wings and brought you here to myself” – contains a rarely used phrase. The closest texts to it are Deut 1:31, in light of which God bears Israel as a father bears his son, and Deut 32:10-12, which depicts the image of the eagle. The verb נשׂא, used similarly – God is the subject of the sentence – appears in poetic texts: Psa 28:9; Is 40:11; 46:3-4; 63:9.
[91] The expression ‘to enter into the covenant’ (בוֹא בִבְרִית) is equivalent to ‘to cut the covenant’ (כָּרַת בְּרִית), and the latter one in four cases (Josh 9:15; 2Kings 11:4; Psa 89:4; Ezek 16:8) is parallel to the expression ‘swear an oath unto someone’ (שָׁבַע ל). In Ex 6:7-8, God’s promise of marriage (“I will take you for my people, and I will be your God”), analogous to “you became mine” from Ezek 16:8, involves the oath to bring Israel into the land promised to the Fathers. The verb שָׁבַע appears in the Bible in 23 places to denote the act of God that guarantees the Fathers to give their offspring the land of Canaan. One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: שׁבע ארץ@v*. We found 46 verses, 23 of which (half!) are about God’s promise to give the land of Canaan: Gen 24:3.7; 26:3; 50:24; Ex 13:5.11; 32:13; 33:1; Num 14:16.23; Deut 1:8.35; 6:10.18.23; 8:1; 9:5; 10:11; 11:9.21; 19:8; 26:3.15; 31:7.21.23; 34:4; Josh 1:6; 5:6; 21:43; Judg 2:1; Jer 11:5; 32:22.
[92] It bases on the previous footnote.
[93] Cf. T. Stanek,
Kto jest bogiem w Egipcie – analiza retoryczna Wj 6,2-9,35, “Poznańskie Studia Teologiczne” 19 (2005), p. 14: this phrase comes from the terminology of the marriage contract. The author notes that also the word בְּרִית (covenant) is often associated with this phrase. Cf. also W. Chrostowski,
Prorok wobec dziejów. Interpretacje dziejów Izraela w Księdze Ezechiela 16, 20 i 23 oraz ich reinterpretacja w Septuagincie, op. cit., p. 149: Ezekiel does not limit marital symbolism to legal categories, but prefers the motif of love as the fundamental space of God’s relation to Israel.
[94] One searched with
BibleWorks 6.0, giving the command for WTM: 'יד *2 נשׂא@*
[95] The word גִּלּוּל (idols) appears 39 times in this book (48 times in the whole Bible); in Ezek 20 it appears 8 times, in Ezek 23 (another allegorical history: Israel as an unfaithful bride) 5 times.
[96] The previous promises God addressed to the individual Fathers of Israel; it is only in Egypt, for the first time, that the whole nation is the addressee of the promise.
[97] The word שַׁבָּת (Shabbat) appears in Ex 16:23.25.26.29.
[98] The word שַׁבָּת (Shabbat) appears in Ezek 20:12.13.16.20.21.24.
[99] That is, the Israeli nation, divided into two kingdoms in 931 by Jeroboam: cf. 1Kings 12:20 and a footnote in
Biblia Tysiąclecia4.
[100] The sequence אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם occurs 34 times in the Bible; the sequence אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיהֶם occurs 8 times. Of all those significant places, the first one is in Ex 6:7.
[101] Each of these two sequences appears four times in this book.
[102] Cf. W. Smereka,
Przymierze, op.cit., p. 52.
[103] Cf. S. Hałas,
Pustynia miejscem próby i spotkania z Bogiem. Wybrane zagadnienia biblijnej teologii pustyni, op.cit., p. 336; B. Poniży,
Motyw Wyjścia w Biblii: od historii do teologii, op.cit., p. 35; W. Smereka,
Przymierze, op.cit., p. 51.
[104] Cf. L. Roy,
Wyzwolenie – wolność, [in:] X. Léon-Dufour (ed.),
Słownik teologii biblijnej, op.cit., p. 1100: the author mentions that Ex 4:22 refers to the first covenant made during the first liberation of Israel from slavery – from Egypt.
[105] Cf. D. J. Mccarthy,
Covenant in the Old Testament: The Present State of Inquiry, “The Catholic Biblical Quarterly” 27 (1965), p. 217: “We do not know why the Septuagint chose the rather unusual
diathēkē, testament, to translate the Hebrew
berît, covenant…”. Cf. also the teachings of the Fathers of the Church about διαθήκη: G. W. H. Lampe,
A Patristic Greek Lexicon, Oxford 1961, p. 348: διαθήκη.
[106] Cf. J. Swetnam,
Diathēkē in the Septuagint Account of Sinai: A Suggestion, “Biblica” 47 (1966), p. 441.
[107] Cf. A. H. Gardiner,
Adoption Extraordinary, “Journal of Egyptian Archeology” 26 (1940), p. 23-29: the antiquity of the custom of doing adoption to free somebody from slavery in a general case (not in a religious context) one can read in the papyrus of 1110-1080 B.C. – the source of this information is: J. Swetnam,
Diathēkē in the Septuagint Account of Sinai: A Suggestion, art. cit., p. 442.
[108] Cf. Ibid., p. 442: “Israel, on basis of this supposition, becomes a fugitive seeking divine aid, and receives it on basis of assimilation into the sphere of divine in return for guarantees of divine service.”
[109] One cannot confuse the desert lying before the Sea of Reeds with the desert which Israel walked exceptionally long (40 years) after the day of covenant making at Sinai. That part of the split sea, which the Lord changed into the way of the passage, was also a desert, a dry land.
[110] Cf. F.-L. Hassfeld, E. Renter,
Przymierze, op.cit., p. 367; S. Wypych,
Przymierze i jego odnowa. Studium z teologii biblijnej Starego Testamentu, op.cit., p. 157, 165-167. Cf. also A. Phillips, L. Phillips,
The Origin of ‘I am’ in Exodus 3.14, “Journal for the Study of the Old Testament” 78 (1998), p. 81-84. 82: In the Book of Hosea (1:9) the symbolic name of the prophet’s son ‘not my people’ (לֹא עַמִּי) is parallel to the self-description of God as ‘I will not be yours’ (לֹא־אֶהְיֶה לָכֶם), which testifies to Israel’s violation of her covenant with God. The biblical scholars associate this text with an event that took place near the burning bush (Ex 3:14), where God revealed His name (אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה) and promised a future covenant (cf. Hos 6:7; 8:1). Scholars link this promise with the covenant made at Sinai. In light of the present work, one only should a little correct these valuable observations: that covenant concerns not that at Sinai, but the earlier one – the Passover/Exodus covenant, in which the covenant formula occurs in Ex 6:7.