Stewardship is a three-way reciprocal relationship. The steward lives off of the charge. If the steward and the charge get along well, the higher authority will make His presence felt. That presence will be the fulfillment of the values of the steward/charge relationship.
That three-way relationship is expressed in Leviticus 26. The question is why does the text not refer to mishpat in the positive statement of the choq laws, only in the negative statement Leviticus 26:3, 15)? Why did the biblical author leave out reference to mishpat in the statement of 'Im bechoqotai teileikhu ...'?
The mishpat reference comes up implicitly in the description of God's presence among the people. The verse (Leviticus 26:11,12) says 'vlo tigal nafshi etkhem vhithalakhti btokhkhem...' using the same term, 'tigal nefesh,' the text uses later (26:15) in association with the violations of mishpat. The fulfillment of the mishpat of sheviit is therefore manifest in God's presence among His people in the land. It seems it needn't necessarily be stated explicitly.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment