The Mosaic covenant, also known as the Sinaitic covenant, refers to a biblical covenant between God and the biblical Israelites, including their proselytes. The establishment and stipulations of the Mosaic covenant are recorded in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, traditionally attributed to Moses and collectively called the Torah or Pentateuch. This covenant is sometimes also referred to as the Law of Moses, Mosaic Law, or the 613 Mitzvot, or commandments.
Historical-critical scholarship
The concept of a covenant began long before the biblical era, specifically the beginnings of Israel. According to George E. Mendenhall, covenants were originally established as legal customs and then later were replicated in the field of religion. These covenants were created on the basis of an oath, a promise between two parties followed by performance. Engaging in an oath implied that the more powerful party would ensure that the other received proper punishment if it were to default. In the case of religion, the god would be carrying out punishment. Such covenants assured that either blessings or curses be enacted in response to the circumstances. The initial covenant between God and Abraham follows the form of the suzerain covenant; what is significant is that Israel has no duties to uphold; the covenant is not conditional. Future covenants between Israel and God would be conditional. This is clearly expressed in Deuteronomy 11:13-21, recited twice-daily as part of the foundational prayer, the Shema. This passage declares that as long as Israel is faithful to God it will be blessed with ample crops but should it follow other gods the land will not support it. The cost of not following this covenant is hard. In addition to the legal influence in regards to the creation of covenants, Mendenhall also addresses the theory behind blood ties and their significance to the concept of a covenant. As stated in the bible, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are the descendants of Israel and because of their shared blood, they consequently form a bond. This blood tie is compared to the tie that is established by a covenant, and implies that without their shared blood, covenants would be the only way to ensure such unification of a religious group. Furthermore, Mendenhall notes two additional theories noting how covenants may have begun with the work of Moses, or are even thought to have been established during a true historical event with a valid setting. Regardless of the theories, the creation of covenants may be a mystery to scholars for centuries to come, however, the use of covenants evidenced throughout the biblical sources is an undeniable fact. According to Mendenhall, the covenant was not just an idea, but actually a historical event. This event was the formation of the covenant community. Wandering the desert, the clans left Egypt following Moses. These people were all of different backgrounds, containing no status in any social community. With all these circumstances they formed their own community by a covenant whose texts turned into the Decalogue. The Israelites did not bind themselves to Moses as their leader though and Moses was not a part of the covenant. Moses was just seen as a historical figure of some type sent as a messenger. The Israelites followed the form of the suzerainty treaty, a particular type of covenant common in the Near East and were bound to obey stipulations that were set by Yahweh, not Moses. In addition to Mendenhall's input and perspective, Weinfeld argues that there are two forms of covenants to have occurred throughout the Hebrew Bible: 1.) the obligatory type & 2.) the promissory type. These translate to a “political treaty” as evidenced by the Hittite Empire, and a “royal grant” as shown through the covenants tied to Abraham and David. A treaty entails a promise to the master by the vassal and ultimately protects the rights of the master. This consequently works in a manner that promotes future loyalty of the vassal since the suzerain had previously done favors for them. A grant on the other hand pertains to an obligation from the master to his servant thus ensuring protection of the servant's rights. This method of covenant emphasizes focus on rewarding loyalty and good deeds that have already been done. Weinfeld supports his characterization of a treaty by identifying the parallels exposed through the covenant between Yahweh and Israel. Similarly, he utilizes the Abrahamic and Davidic covenant to reveal its correspondence with a royal grant. In spite of the numerous theories revolving covenants in the ancient Near East, Weinfeld ensures his readers that the covenants exposed in the Old Testament fall beneath one of the two plausible types he has identified, either an obligatory type or a promissory type. In an article comparing covenants and forms of treaties common at the time, Mendenhall focuses on Hittite suzerainty treaties. These treaties, established between an emperor and inferior king, were defined by several important elements. The treaties were based on past aid or good fortune that the suzerain had previously delivered unto the vassal and the obligations that the vassal, therefore, had to the suzerain. This foundation for a treaty relationship is similar to the foundation for the Mosaic covenant and the Decalogue, according to Mendenhall. God had delivered the Israelites from Egypt in the Exodus, and they therefore are obligated to follow the commandments in the Decalogue. As the vassal, God has no further obligations towards the Israelites—but it is implied that God will continue to protect them as a result of the covenant.
