Phillip Lerner, «Redefining h)lth. An Assurance of Israel’s Return
to the Land in Jethro’s Covenant», Vol. 87 (2006) 402-411
Though it is recognized that Exod 18,1-12 contains treaty making elements, there
seems to be very little evidence of the nature of this treaty. The term h)lth is reexamined
and redefined as “the suffering that is encountered due to the helpless
nature of being forsaken”. The phrase wnt)cm r#) h)lth lk, found in Exod 18,8,
is demonstrated to be a technical phrase with certain common characteristics that
is used as surety that Israel will be fully restored to their land. In addition to
providing more details of Jethro’s covenant, this phrase, in combination with
several other terms in Exod 18,1-12, narrows the possibilities regarding the
covenant’s nature and function.
408 Phillip Lerner
they consider the altar (i.e. themselves) abandoned. The first clue is found in
1,2 where Israel questions the Lord’s love for them, “But you say, ‘How have
you loved us?’†(29). They are painted as being selfish, not receiving
everything they ask for or want. The imagery of honor due a father (1,6) as
well as the impudent defenses (1,6-7) fit well with this theme. The
abandonment they suppose has occurred must not be very severe since they
still attempt to bring offerings and have no fear in bringing invalid ones at
that (30). The true “abandonment†by the Lord in the second chapter, is meant
to highlight the difference between their selfish desires and true rejection.
3. wntaxm rça halth lk
There are several similar features of this term’s use in the three passages
we will examine. The first feature of this phrase is an appeal to those familiar
with Israel’s history (31). Twice this appeal is made to kinsmen, Jethro in Exod
18,8 and the king of Edom (“your brotherâ€) in Num 20,14, and then the Lord
is referred to once in Neh 9,32. The term is also utilized to demonstrate their
return to the state of renewed protection and fortune. It seems that these
two elements are both necessary components of the technical use of
wntaxm rça halth lk. A relative is appealed to because they were a witness to
the previous state of blessing of Israel. They are also aware of the loss in some
measure of that state as referred to by the phrase wntaxm rça halth lk.
However, the implication is that this is a guaranteed process and can stand as
surety for Israel’s requests or demands.
Num 20,14-21 addresses a relative, the king of Edom, even referring to
him as “your brother†(v. 14), asking for safe passage through his land.
wntaxm rça halth lk is usually understood here to be used as an appeal to
Edom’s mercy, as a way of depicting Israel as weak and in need of help.
(29) According to Peterson, “the question could be rephrased, ‘What demonstratable
evidence may be offered’†that could possibly show that God is “acting as if a covenant
relationship between the deity and Israel is still in force?â€, D.L. PETERSON, Zechariah 9–14
and Malachi. A Commentary (Louisville 1995) 168. P.A. VERHOEF, The Book Haggai and
Malachi (Grand Rapids 1987) 198, summarizes the immensity of this question, “It
presupposes the denunciation of both election and covenant, the annulment of their own
wonderful history and of the fact that his compassions never failâ€. Indeed, it is exactly upon
the tangible blessings that this question causes the covenant to hang, if there is no sign of
them then there is a chance that the covenant no longer exists, or more accurately, and
relevant to v. 13, that it has become unprofitable and unproductive to continue.
(30) Regarding 1,2, VERHOEF, The Book Haggai and Malachi, 198, explains that “Their
expectations of a glorious renewal of their national life after the return from exile had been
disappointed. The promised kingdom of the Messiah had still not dawned… They remained
under Persian rule (1:8) and were suffering from pests and plaguesâ€. This would explain
why in v. 13 “they deemed it irrelevant to do good or evil in the eyes of the Lord … and
futile to serve him†(ibid., 199).
(31) Num 10,14-15 opens with an appeal to Edom’s knowledge of Israel’s history, their
descent to Egypt, enslavement there and subsequent freedom. Though it is logical that the
Lord would already know of Israel’s history, Neh 9 extensively lists Israel’s history and the
Lord’s involvement in it. He not only knows of it, he is the major force behind it. Even
though there is no direct evidence in Exod 18 of Jethro’s knowledge of much of Israel’s
history, his hearing of their recent enslavement and liberation is spelled out in 18,1. There
is also a certain amount of history to be learned from Gershom and Eliezer’s names, as
provided in vv. 2-4. Additionally, it may also be assumed that as the father-in-law of Moses,
he should be well aware of Israel’s past.