Page 1 of 2

2. Describe Israel's distinctiveness among the surrounding nations in the following areas:
a. The way they wrote and kept its historical records
Scholarly opinion about ancient historiography says that for the most part appears in two forms. First, in the
historical prologue sections of second millennium international treaties. Second, in the historical records
found in the regnal annals. Considering this concept, I will point out to some of the particularities about
Israelite historiography that radically differs from its ancient neighbors.
(1) Continuing narratives
Texts that record past, apart from the Hebrew Bible, are limited and fragmentary. Only the Biblical text
offers a continuous narrative that opens the possibility to contextualize the extant extrabiblical records.
They have infinite value for the reconstruction of the past, alas, several scholars disagree arguing that
since the Biblical text is theologically loaded then it cannot give a truthful testimony of the past. This
suspicion of tradition disregards the intrinsic value of testimony. We can only know the past through the
testimony of others, and all ancient testimony is selective and ideologically loaded.
(2) Theological insight
Biblical writers recorded history with an expressed, coherent and continuing purpose. They present an
interpretative history of God's dealings with his people. The theological insight of the author is what gives
the correct interpretation of the events. In the Biblical narratives, the historical, the literary and the
theological are joined in the mind of the author. Whereas, any other type of ancient historiography although heavily religious- does not claim to present a theological interpretation of events. Indeed, kings
and pharaohs present themselves as gods, divinely appointed, or even as shepherds for his people;
however, the different type of genres show a variety of purposes and motivations radically different from
the Israelite prophets-historian. For instance, in Babylonia a chronological framework was created, in the
first place, as a response to the need of dating administrative documents. Kinglists, or collection of
dynasties of various cities, were created to legitimize the supremacy of a certain city by giving it a divine
origin. In Assyria, the classical tradition of Kinglists was created to rival the Babylonian traditions of
kingship. In general terms, they are very nationalistic in nature. Whereas, the Bible as someone has said,
is the Annals of the Great King which only purpose is to establish a covenant-relationship with his
people.
(3) Predictive Prophecy
The Hebrew text is unique in this aspect among the extant ancient literary corpus. Only the Hebrew text
claims to have had knowledge of the distant future and had recorded the fulfilling of such prophecy. For
the most part, the Biblical text is prophetic in nature because it envisions the fulfilling of the promises of
the covenant, while the history of Israel unfolds.
b.

The way their society was shaped after the Law

Given the fact that there is a large number of Ancient law codes, and the parallel in some cases is
surprisingly close, similar ritual procedures, infrastructure (tabernacle-like structures), terminology and
concepts, as well as literary style in the formulation, reasoning and content of laws. We are led to
conclude that, in the first place, these similarities bear witness of how God uses the limit of space and
time to reveal His perfect will to a fallen world. The means through which He communicates with His
creation are broken by sin, but still He sanctifies and uses them. We see that in the Israelite society. The
rest, not sanctified by the Creator, is what we see in other societies, the same means but degenerated and
corrupted by sin. I have chosen only some topics for which the Mosaic Law marks a dark contrast with
other law-based societies.

(1) The heart of the Law

Scholars agree that the primary purpose of the compilation of written law-codes in the ancient Near
Eastern was propagandistic. They aimed to legitimize and enforce the rule of a king, to promote the legal
wisdom of the king and to influence local judges.

Page 2 of 2

(2) Kingship
The adoption of royal ideology in Israel was heavily indebted to ideas current in its environment. It shared
a common structure of thought, it was divinely instituted, and the language of divine Sonship was also
common. Their functions, in general terms, were similar to foreign kings.
In contrast to the Israelite king, In Egypt, pharaoh acted as god-king-priest, and as such he had plenty of
responsibilities as to communicate the order of the cosmos and society. The Assyrian and Babylonian
kings ate with the gods (I am sure there were a lot of leftovers and the kings were very fat). Near Eastern
monarchs had far more power than the Israelite kings. They were entitled to promulgate law codes,
whereas in Israel, as far as we know, did not issued laws. On the contrary, their power was confined by
the Mosaic covenant, particularly expressed for them in Deuteronomy 17.
(3) Jubilee
Mesopotamian kings proclaimed releases similar to the Biblical jubilee. The purpose of such legislation
was to restore some economic and social equilibrium. Whereas, the Israelite law, first and foremost,
rooted in God's just and compassionate character and, in second place, it was regular in order to provide a
social justice habit of sorts.
c. The way their religious practices stand out in the ANE environment
(1) Circumcision
This is well-known practice as early as the 4th millennium BC. It was practiced by the Egyptians, and
West Semitic peoples (Israelites, Ammonites, Edomites, and Moabites), but not by Eastern Semitic
peoples. In general, the rite is related to: virility, maturity, fertility and genealogy. For instance, the
Egyptians practiced it as rite of passage, from childhood to puberty. What is important then is not the
practice itself but the identity that gives to the Israelites. Circumcision is the "rite" of passage of a male
Israelite into the community of the Covenant. This idea of community is of supreme relevance, because
one may argue that women are not included. However, we need to remember that identity in Israel is not
based on the self but more in the clan.
(2) System of Offerings and Sacrifices
Ancient near eastern folks see offering and sacrifices as part of a system of provision and retribution
ordained by their gods. The human mind is only able to conceived gods after their image, all powerful yet
dependent on human service. The system of divine justice was not conceived as rooted in the Divine as
his intrinsic characteristic, but as part of seeking a balanced social system. Some scholars called it, the
"Great Symbiosis". Whereas, Israelites offered sacrifices to YHWH as their expression of covenantfidelity.
(3) Temple-centered society
Temples were at the heart of ancient societies, which have been classified as temple -and state- dominated
system. Kings and sanctuaries not only owned much of the land and regulated its use, but also the
economic trade depended on them. Economically, the temple was a center of massive consumption. For
instance, Mesopotamian temples acted as a bank. People could borrow money there to finance their
businesses. This is a stark contrast with the sanctity of the temple in Jerusalem. We see that clearly in the
book of Nehemiah. We see that the Judeans were pretty much adopting the view of the common practice
of their neighbors, and then we see the Lord Jesus overturning the tables of traders.