4. ANÁLISIS Y DISCUSIÓN DE LOS RESULTADOS
4.3 Uso de las TIC en la planificación y diseño de la docencia
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
160
nuance, the role of ‗taboo‘ and prohibitions are called to play. Most of such taboos and prohibitions have ethical and moral values. For instance, industrial as well as domestic hazards are prevented by prohibitions against standing of sitting in the passageway.
There are also various food and hygiene taboos. For instance, a person should not sit in a mortar or millstone.
4.2.4 Significant development of the
tyrib.
concept in the canonical form ofUNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
161
that scholars are of the opinion that Israel had always believed in the emergence of their nation based on a
tyrIB.
rite. Hence, without getting distracted by the intricacies of the redaction debate, it can still be affirmed that the centrality oftyrIB.
in the emergence of Israel as a people is a general consensus. If Nihan‘s arguments were upheld, it implies that the ―Priestly redactors/Authors‖ of the hypothetical Hexateuch found it necessary to invent atyrIB.
instance through which the Northern tribes were incorporated into the Israelite commonwealth because they believed strongly that Israel emerged as a result of suchtyrIB.
.The formulation of the relationship between the YHWH and Israel by Deuteronomy, and perhaps, the Holiness Code,434 using the formal structure of the vassal state treaty prevalent in ANE, appear to have greatly influenced the theological perceptions of DH. Throughout DH, the relationship between the YHWH and Israel is constructed in the form of Suzerain-Vassal relationship. Hence, there is a shift of formal structure in the
tyrIB.
formulations between Deuteronomy and Deuteronomistic History. This can be seen in the different nuances of the formal structure of the Moab ratification which conforms more precisely to the form of―covenant law‖, in contradistinction from the formal structure of the present canonical form of the Shechem Covenant which conforms more to the structural pattern of the
‗‗covenant of vassalship‖435.
It is simply stated in Joshua 24:24-25 that (i) Joshua cut a
tyrIB.
with the people, (ii) set them a statute and an ordinance (iii) wrote these words in the book of the law of God. The questions raised by these affirmations are significant for our present study. Does thetyrIB.
cut by Joshua follow the full formal structure of Ancient Near Eastern Treaty or a different pattern? Could the statute and ordinance set by Joshua be equated with those found in any of the legal codes identified in the Pentateuch viz: the Covenant Code, the Ritual Decalogue, the Ethical Decalogue, the434 We cannot determine with absolute certainty the degree of influence of the Covenant Code on both the Deuteronomic Code and Deuteronomistic History. Within the scope of my familiarity with scholarly works on the connection between the Covenant Code and the Deuteronomic Code, the investigation of the possibility that UrDeuteronomion could have been identical with a version of the Covenant Code;
and the actual relationship between the Covenant Code, the Shechem Covenant and the Book found by Hilkiah the High Priest under the reign of Josiah is not yet conclusive.
435 M. Wenfield 1972.156. With his profound knowledge of ancient Near Eastern covenant typology, Weinfeld has argued that there is a distinction between the covenant of law, which is basically social and internal or national, and the covenant of vassalship, which is political and external or international.
He posited that an analysis of the ancient covenantal traditions of Sinai and Shechem leads to the conclusion that the Sinai covenant should be classified as ‗covenant law‘ while the Shechem covenant should be classified as covenant of vassalship.
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
162
Holiness Code or the Deuteronomic Code? Could the ―book of the law of God‖
mentioned in the verse be the same book allegedly discovered by Hilkiah the High Priest during the Temple renovations in the reign of King Josiah? Could this ―book of the law of God‖ be the Holiness Code, the Covenant Code or the Deuteronomic Code?
From the discussion so far, it could be tentatively put that the present canonical form of the Deuteronomistic History justifies the notion that there is continuity between the
tyrIB.
at Sinai/Horeb, the Moabite plain, and Shechem. ThetyrIB.
at Moab is a renewal and expansion of the one at Sinai/Horeb, while thetyrIB.
at Shechem is also to be perceived as another instance of renewal and further expansion of thetyrIB.
at Horeb/Sinai. This is why it seems that thetyrIB.
at Moab bypasses and replaces the Covenant Code, while it links with Horeb/Sinai. The history of thetyrIB.
between the YHWH and Israel can be traced hypothetically as follows:i. Based on the precedence and credentials of the
tyrIB.
with the Patriarch, Israel was inaugurated as a nation through atyrIB.
at Sinai/Horeb. By this, they derive their sense of relationship with the YHWH as an elect people, the הוהי־םַע. This became the archetype of all othertyrIB.
enactment between the YHWH and Israel. It became the prism with which Israel views her past history and the telescope with which she views the future. It is seen as atyrIB.
after the Grant Pattern, with less emphasis on the legal requirements and stipulations, but nonetheless, the Ethical Decalogue was given on the two tablets of stone as the deposit, which is kept in the Ark of the Covenant. The Ethical Decalogue conforms to the pattern of Law Codes in the Ancient Near East. ThetyrIB.
privilege is summed up as the abiding presence of the YHWH. There is emphasis on the theophany at the Mount of God as the basis of fear appeal to motivate compliance with the terms of the
tyrIB.
.ii. The
tyrIB.
in the plain of Moab is seen as a renewal and elaboration upon the Sinai/HorebtyrIB.
. It became necessary as a part of the ritual of change of leadership from Moses to Joshua. It involves an expansion of thetyrIB.
stipulations and the production of atyrIB.
document,UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN LIBRARY
163
which is also deposited ‗beside‘436 the Ark of the Covenant, apart from the stone tablets containing the Ethical Decalogue kept ‗inside‘ the Ark. This time, the
tyrIB.
evolved into a treaty instead of a covenant Grant. The sustenance of thetyrIB.
relationship became predicated on the keeping of the terms stipulated in thetyrIB.
document, which is drafted in form of ‗covenant law‘. The fear appeal mechanism draws upon the oath-imprecation written in thetyrIB.
document. The privilege of thetyrIB.
tends towards comprehensive socio-political and economic prosperity. The concept of the substantive immanence of Deity gradually shifted from substantive personal presence to the ‗kabod theology‟ and finally in Deuteronomy to the ‗shem theology‟.iii. The
tyrIB.
at Shechem was also given as part of the valedictory ceremony of Joshua. Joshua did further emendations to thetyrIB.
document, following the precedence of Moses‘ action at the plain of Moab.
Focus shifted from the pattern of ―Covenant Law‖ to ―Covenant of Vassalship‖. From the mention of the
tyrIB.
at Shechem onwards, the records oftyrIB.
enactment do not feature the contents of the stipulations. Less emphasis is placed on the detailed observance of the stipulations of thetyrIB.
, and great emphasis is laid on fidelity of the YHWH as the Suzerain LORD of thetyrIB.
. The sum of thetyrIB.
privilege is the patron rights of the YHWH. However, the fear appeal is still drawn from the oath-imprecation of the
tyrIB.
in line with the Treaty patterns of the Ancient Near East.iv. A look at the extant
tyrIB.
documents preserved in the canon of the Tanakh reveals a growth in three IsraelitetyrIB.
traditions depicting a systematic expansion of the sphere of human behaviour regulated by thetyrIB.
in Ancient Israel from the religious realm through the political,436 The Hebrew
dC;²mi
in this context should be rendered ―beside‖. Some however have argued that it should be rendered ―in the side‖ as in the KJV, such that the law was to the empaneled in the side-boards of the Ark. Given the instruction of regular occasional reading of the law, and the making of duplicates for the kings, the context would rather suggest ―beside‖ the Ark, where it may be retrieved for the constant reading and reproduction. But the constant reference to the ―testimony‖ in the P traditions supports the position that there was indeed a copy of the Law of the Moab Covenant empaneled in the sideboards of the ark apart from the Ten Commandments placed within the Ark, as―Testimony‖ of the covenant. So far the argument needs further investigation.