Article

The Expository Times

The Shema (Deut 6:4-5) in 123(3) 119­–121

© The Author(s) 2011

the Story of Samuel

Reprints and permission: sagepub.
co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0014524611421731
(1 Samuel 1-15) ext.sagepub.com

Yoon Jong Yoo

Pyeongtaek University, South Korea

Abstract
Although the significance of the shema (Deut 6:4-5) has been noticed by many scholars, its connection
with other texts of the Bible has not been explored thoroughly. The author pursues how the shema
is reflected in the story of Samuel (1 Samuel 1-15). In addition to 1 Sam 15:22, a famous verse on the
shema, three more points will be demonstrated. They are the usage of “with all your heart”; YHWH
is One; and the law of h.erem. The existence of such a connection points to the conclusion that the
story of Samuel reflects the shema theology of Deuteronomy 6:4-5.

Keywords
Shema, Samuel, with all hearts, YHWH is One, utter destruction

The importance of the shema (Deut 6:4-5) has
been emphasized not only in the Hebrew Bible,
but also in the New Testament.1 However, its
exegesis within the Hebrew Bible has yet to be
examined thoroughly. Connecting the shema
(Deut. 6:4-5) with other portions of the Bible
goes back to people as early as Ibn Ezra, a well
known commentator of the 12th century.2
However, only a few scholars have attempted to
demonstrate how the shema influences other
texts of the Bible.3 The new text which I
1
Birger Gerhardsson, The Shema in the New Testament:
Deut 6:4-5 in Significant Passages (Lund: Novapress, 1996).
2
S. Reif, “Ibn Ezra on Psalm i 1-2,” VT 34 (1984): 232-36.
3
See A. Robert, “Les attaches littéraires bibliques de Prov
I-IX,” RB 44 (1935): 344-65. Robert contends that Prov
6:20-22 is based upon Deut 6:4-9; Janzen, “An Echo of
demonstrate is the story of Samuel in 1 Samuel
1-15, because the true meaning of shema is
revealed clearly in 15:22 at the end of the story:
And Samuel said, “Has the LORD as much
delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as in
obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey
(shema) is better than sacrifice, and to heed than
the fat of rams” (NRSV).
the Shema in Is. 51:1-3,” JSOT 43 (1989): 69-82.; Paul
Overland, “Did the Sage Draw from the Shema? A Study of
Proverbs 3:1-12,” CBQ 62 (2000): 424-40.
Corresponding author:
Yoon Jong Yoo
Email: yoonjongyoo@gmail.com
120 The Expository Times 123(3)
If we go further in 15:23, the meaning of
“shema”, a rejection of Yahweh is extended to
behaviors of “divination, iniquity, and idolatry”
which is a reflection of the first and the second
commandments of the Decalogue. On the posi-
tive form of the first commandment expressed
in the command to “love” (Deut 6:5), Olson
interprets: “Israel’s ‘love’ of God in Deutero­
nomy involves both ‘obeying’ and ‘holding
fast’.”4 According to the definition of Olson, it
is suggested that 1 Sam 15:22 clarifies the
meaning of “obeying” whereas 1 Sam 15:23
clarifies “holding fast.”
In addition to 1 Sam 15:22, in this essay, I will
explore three more points dispersed throughout
the story of Samuel (1 Sam 1-15) as being con-
nected with the shema in Deuteronomy 6:4-5.
First, Samuel delivers his message using the
phrase, “with all your heart” found in Deutero­
nomy 6:5, in the following verses; “If you are
returning to the Lord ‘with all your heart’….”
(1 Sam 7:3); “….serve the Lord ‘with all your
heart’ ” (1 Sam 12:20); and “….serve him faith-
fully ‘with all your heart’ ” (1 Sam 12:24). The
phrase “with all the heart” is considered as a
typical Deuteronomistic cliché occurring else-
where in well-established Deuteronomic and
Deuteronomistic contexts: Deut 30:6, 10; Josh
22:5; 23:14; 1 Kings 8:23, 48; 14:8; II Kings
10:31; 23:15; Joel 2:12; Jer 29:13.5 In rabbinic
tradition, the commandment to love God “with
all heart” in Deut 6:5 is interpreted as undivided
love. The contexts occurring “with all hearts” in
the above verses reflect the theology of the
shema.
Second, regarding the meaning of “YHWH
is One” (Deut 6:4),6 Janzen states “that avoids
4
D. T. Olson, Deuteronomy and Death of Moses
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 51.
5
Moshe Weinfeld, Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic
School (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972), 334.
6
NRSV renders “the Lord alone.” The translation “YHWH
is One” is quoted from R. W. L. Moberly, “ ‘YHWH is
One’: The Translation of the Shema,” in J. A. Emerton, ed.,
Studies in the Pentateuch (Leiden: Brill, 1990), 209-15. For
alternative translations based on linguistic and contextual
evidence, see S. D. McBride, “Yoke of the Kingdom: An
importation of anachronistic philosophical and
theological concerns, and that identifies a con-
cern for “oneness” of Israel’s God squarely
within Israel’s religious history and at the heart
of the covenant traditions.”7 If we follow
Janzen’s interpretation, the confession of
Hannah, in her prayer, can also reflect shema
theology: “There is no holy one like the Lord,
no one besides you” (1 Sam 2:2).8 Though the
word “one” (‫ )אחד‬does not occur, the unique
combination of “holy one” (‫)קדוש‬9 with “there is
no” (‫ )אין‬creates reinforcement of the insepara-
ble and incomparable nature in “YHWH is
One.” In addition, it also should be interpreted
contrastively with “Baals” (‫ )בעלימ‬in 1 Sam 7:4;
12:10 where the polytheistic nature of Baal is
expressed.10 Accordingly, the confession of
Hannah reflects the first and second command-
ments of the Decalogue. On the meaning of
“YHWH is One,” Janzen goes further: “That
narrative implies Yahweh’s unity, in the form of
fidelity to the promises made to the ancestors.”11
It is said that “YHWH is One” contains the
character of Yahweh’s faithfulness and everlast-
ingness. The character of YHWH is expressed
in 1 Sam 15:29: “Moreover the Glory of Israel12
Exposition of Deuteronomy 6:4-5,” Interpretation 27
(1973): 291-97.
7
J. G. Janzen, “On the Most Important Word in the Shema
(Deuteronomy VI 4-5),” VT 37, 3 (1987): 280-81.
8
See H. W. Hertzberg, I & II Samuel (OTL; London: SCM,
1964), 29-30. It also expresses incomparability of the Lord.
The similar formula occurs in Exod 8:10; 9:14; 2 Sam 7:22;
Ps 86:8.
9
The basic meaning of “holy” (‫ )שדק‬would be “to set
apart.” For details, see HALOT, 1072.
10
It is sharply contrasted with the God of second Isaiah
being described as “I am the first and I am the last besides
me there is no god” (Isa 44:6). See Janzen, “An Echo of the
Shema in Isa 51:1-3,” 69-82.
11
Janzen, “On the Most Important Word in the Shema,” 282.
12
The divine epithet “the Glory of Israel” (‫ )ישראל נצח‬can be
translated alternatively as “the Everlasting One of Israel,”
“the Victor of Israel,” “the Unchangeable One of Israel,”
and “the Faithful One of Israel.” R. W. Klein, 1 Samuel
(WBC 10; Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1983), 154. BDB
(663-64) renders “eminence, enduring, everlastingness,
Yoo 121

will not recant or change his mind; for he is not
a mortal, that he should change his mind.”
Though this statement is used to discourage
Saul,13 its abstract character reveals Yahweh’s
nature as faithfulness and everlastingness.
Accordingly this verse shows another instance
in which the theology of “YHWH is One” is
reflected.
perpetuity.” In the present context, Yahweh’s character as
“the everlasting, the faithful, the unchangeable” seems to
be more suitable.
13
Its contextual meaning can be expressed as “Yahweh
has rejected you, and since Yahweh does not change his
mind, there is no reason for further discussion.” See P.
K. McCarter, Jr., I Samuel (AB 8; Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday, 1980), 268. Moberly states, “How people
respond God matters to God, and affects how God responds
to people.” Thus Samuel’s saying seems to represent God
not repenting. See Moberly, “ ‘God is Not a Human That He
Should Repent’ (Numbers 23:19 and 1 Samuel 15:29),” in
T. Linafelt and T. K. Beal (eds), God in the Fray: A Tribute
to Walter Brueggemann (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998), 115.
Third, one reason God rejected Saul was
because Saul violated “the law of utter destruc-
tion” (h.erem) since he did not utterly destroy the
spoil from the victory over the Amalekites
(1 Sam 15:15). The law of “h.erem” occurs in
Deuteronomy 7:1-7, which is interpreted
predominately as an extension of Deuteronomy
6:4-5.14 It is suggested that the explicit rationale
for “utter destruction” is Israel’s holiness and
election (7:6), which is an essential counterpart to
the confession that YHWH is ONE.15 Accordingly,
the attestation of the theme “utter destruction”, in
the story of Samuel, affirms that the story is
under the influence of shema theology and also
reflects the covenantal law of Deuteronomy.
14
Moberly includes the law of h.erem under “love of God”
thus connecting it with the theology of shema of Deut 6:4-
5. See Moberly, “Toward an Interpretation of the Shema,”
132-36.
15
Moberly, “Toward an Interpretation of the Shema,” 134.

DEATH AND THE EPICUREAN

W. Benjamin Henry (trans. and ed.), Philodemus, On Death (Writings from the Greco-Roman World
29; Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2009. pp. xxxiv + 160. $34.95. ISBN: 978-1-58983-446-0).
In 79 AD Vesuvius wreaked death and destruction among the inhabitants of Herculaneum and Pompeii, but
Philodemus’ philosophical argument that death is not to be feared was preserved largely intact in a library
covered by the ash from the eruption. Writing a century before that disaster, Philodemus could hardly have
imagined that his work would prove so poignantly apposite on the shelf where it was kept, but death was an
important topic for Epicurean philosophy and his own treatment of it is one of the most significant to sur-
vive. A number of great poets of the first century BC, including Lucretius, Vergil and Horace, appear to have
interacted with it in their attempts to construct a meaningful but mellifluous literature in Latin.
W. Benjamin Henry here presents an excellent scholarly edition of the manuscript of Philodemus’
On Death that was discovered at Herculaneum, together with its first ever full English translation.
Henry offers an introduction contextualising Philodemus’ treatise historically and intellectually, and
discussing both its contents and the textual tradition. The cultural and philosophical discussion in the
introduction is rather brief, but Henry does provide extensive references to secondary literature. His
critical Greek text has an annotated, idiomatic, facing English version. There is no separate commentary
at the end of the text, but the annotations to the English give helpful, concise comments on textual, liter-
ary and philosophical matters. A select bibliography and a full index of Greek words are then supplied.
The edition closes with a complete series of black and white photographs of the manuscript; these are
diverse in quality but their inclusion is a boon.
The WGRW series has developed a slightly flexible profile in detailed matters of the presentation of
texts, but it continues to make available good editions of a range of interesting ancient works that
deserve to be more widely known than they are. Henry’s work on one of the most important Epicureans
of the first century BC is a welcome addition to the series.
JANE HEATH
School of Divinity, University of Aberdeen