1 This article bases upon a paper presented at the SBL International Meeting in Vienna (7/7/2014) and keeps the oral character.

2 For more details, cf. R. Ebach, Das Fremde und das Eigene. Die Fremdendarstellungen des Deuteronomiums im Kontext israelitischer Identitätskonstruktionen, BZAW 471, Berlin / Boston 2014, 166–170, and regarding Deut 28:43f. pp. 56f.

3 Deut 28:1–14 belongs to an exilic redaction, which can be classified as Horebredaction as Eckart Otto does (E. Otto, Das Deuteronomium im Pentateuch und Hexateuch. Studien zur Literaturgeschichte von Pentateuch und Hexateuch im Lichte des Deuteronomiumrahmens, FAT 30, Tübingen 2000, 119 n. 54, and idem, Deuteronomium 1–11, Vol. 1: 1, 1–4, 43, Herders theologischer Kommentar zum Alten Testament, Freiburg u.a. 2012, 241). C. Koch, Vertrag, Treueid und Bund. Studien zur Rezeption des altorientalischen Vertragsrechts im Deuteronomium und zur Ausbildung der Bundestheologie im Alten Testament, BZAW 383, Berlin / New York 2008, 182–184, who distinguishes two stages of growth, sees at least in V. 7–13*, the verses, which are of crucial importance for the presented argumentation, a younger addition to the older blessing in V. 1–6.

4 Cf. C. Koch, Vertrag (see above note 3) 183f.

5 Cf. M. Noth, „Die mit des Gesetzes Werken umgehen, die sind unter dem Fluch‟, in: idem, Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament, ThB 6, München 21960, (155–171), 159f.

6 For more detailed argumentation and the postexilic dating of Deut 32, a young literary construct that preserved older elements, see R. Ebach, Fremde (see above note 2) 253–255, and concerning the other nations' view especially pp. 258–262.

7 Cf. T. Krüger, Law and Wisdom according to Deut 4: 5–8, in: B. U. Schipper, / D. A. Teeter (ed.), Wisdom and Torah. The Reception of ‚Torah’ in the Wisdom Literature of the Second Temple Period, Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 163, Leiden / Boston 2013, (35–54), 44.

8 Regarding the post-exilic dating, see M. Rose, 5. Mose, Vol. 2: 5. Mose 1–11 und 26–34. Rahmenstücke zum Gesetzeskorpus, ZBK 5,2, Zürich 1994, 551–557, and Otto, Deuteronomium (see above note 3) 151f. Otto sees a multi-layered deuteronomistic redactional process in Deut 29:21–27 basing upon the Moab- and Horebredaction and therefore growing not before the late exilic time. G. Braulik, Deuteronomium II: 16,18–34,12, NEB 28, Würzburg 1992, 215, argues for an exilic dating, but in my view, the similarities to Deut 4 support the thesis of a postexilic origin.

9 G. Braulik, Die Völkervernichtung und die Rückkehr Israels ins Verheißungsland. Hermeneutische Bemerkungen zum Buch Deuteronomium, in: M. Vervenne / J. Lust, (eds.), Deuteronomy and Deuteronomic Literature, FS C. H. W. Brekelmans, BEThL 83, Leuven 1997, (3–38), 30f. underlines, that the passage's climax aims at the other nations and their view on Israel.

10 Cf. M. Zehnder, Umgang mit Fremden in Israel und Assyrien. Ein Beitrag zur Anthropologie des „Fremden‟ im Licht Antiker Quellen, BWANT 168, Stuttgart 2005, 373. In other direction, C. Bultmann, Der Fremde im antiken Juda. Eine Untersuchung zum sozialen Typenbegriff ‘ger’ und seinem Bedeutungswandel in der alttestamentlichen Gesetzgebung, FRLANT 153, Göttingen 1992, 141, understands the נכרי in parallelism to the mentioned sons as part of the coming generation. In his view, the נכרי could become a member of the religious community.

11 G. von Rad, Das fünfte Buch Mose. Deuteronomium, ATD 8, Göttingen 41983, 129, names this perspective a „Spiegel der von der Katastrophe aufgeschreckten umliegenden Völker‟.

12 Cf. G. Braulik, Völkervernichtung (see above note 9) 31.

13 D. Markl, Gottes Volk im Deuteronomium, BZAR 18, Wiesbaden 2012, 85–87, also points to the external perspective, which is a fundamental aspect of the other nations' judgment and serves as „Formierung moralischer Identität‟ (p. 85) for Israel.

14 For the dating of the literarily coherent unit Deut 4:1–40 see Ebach, Fremde (see above note 2) 263–268. Deut 4 takes up different pentateuchal (esp. Deut 5–11; 29f.; Gen 1f., Exod 19) and prophetical texts (esp. Deutero-Isaiah), also shows motifs of the wisdom-literature (esp. the words בינה and חכמה) and combines them to a new theological concept based upon the monotheistic shape of Israelite religion. G. Braulik (Die Mittel deuteronomischer Rhetorik. Erhoben aus Deuteronomium 4,1-40, AnBib 68, Rom 1978, esp. 146–150) and E. Otto (Tora für eine neue Generation in Dtn 4. Die hermeneutische Theologie des Numeruswechsels in Deuteronomium 4,1–40, in: G. Fischer, et al. (eds.), Deuteronomium — Tora für eine neue Generation, BZAR 17, Wiesbaden 2011, 105–122) could show, that the change of number does not imply the textual growth of the chapter, but as Otto illustrates a rhetorical medium to illustrate the changing of perspectives.

15 Deut 30:19 explicitly asks for chosing life, cf. E. Ehrenreich, Wähle das Leben! Deuteronomium 30 als hermeneutischer Schlüssel zur Tora, BZAR 14, Wiesbaden 2010, esp. 250–260.

16 Cf. bBM59b.

17 G. McConville, 1 Kings 8:46–53 and the Deuteronomic Hope, in: G. N. Knoppers, / idem (eds.), Reconsidering Israel and Judah. Recent Studies on the Deuteronomistic History, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 8, Winona Lake, IN 2000, (358–369), 369. M. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy 1–11. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AncB 5, New York 1991, 217, regards 1 Kgs 8:44–53 as youngest text. G. Braulik, Spuren einer Neubearbeitung des deuteronomistischen Geschichtswerkes in 1 Kön 8,52–53.54–60, in: idem, Studien zur Theologie des Deuteronomiums, SBAB 2, Stuttgart 1988, (39–52), 49 n. 40, underlines the similarities, but regards Deut 30 as youngest text, which depends on Deut 4 and 1 Kgs 8. E. Aurelius, Zukunft jenseits des Gerichts. Eine redaktionsgeschichtliche Studie zum Enneateuch, BZAW 319, Berlin / New York 2003, 130, explains the differences in 1 Kgs 8 and Deut 8 by their different functions in their contexts and regards both texts as late deuteronomistic parts. The younger text 1 Kgs 8:46ff. already reacts to the notice of Jehoiachin's reprieval (2 Kgs 25:27–30, DtrH) and does not set hope on the rehabilitation of kingship, but shows the tendency „nachexilischer Literatur, die Verheißungen an David und die Dynastie auf das Volk auszudehnen.‟

18 L. Rost, Die Vorstufen von Kirche und Synagoge im Alten Testament. Eine wortgeschichtliche Untersuchung, BWANT 76, Stuttgart 1938, 14f., underlines the link between Deuteronomy and 1 Kgs 8 by the terminus קהל ישׂראל.

19 A later reaction on the adaption of 1 Kgs 8:44–53 in Deut 4 was the usage of motifs and language of Deut 4 in 1 Kgs 8:54–61 (for a convincing identification of layers in 1 Kgs 8 see Thomas Römer, Cult Centralization in Deuteronomy 12: Between Deuteronomistic History and Pentateuch, in: E. Otto, / R. Achenbach (eds.), Das Deuteronomium zwischen Pentateuch und Deuteronomistischem Geschichtswerk, FRLANT 206, Göttingen 2004, [168–180], 175–178): Mose and the canon (Deut 4:2; 1 Kgs 8:56), the words מצוה and חק (Deut 4:5f.8 a.o.; 1 Kgs 8:61), כיום הזה (Deut 4:20, 38; 1 Kgs 8:61), קהל (Deut 4:10; 1 Kgs 8:55). 1 Kgs 8:60 enlarges the motif of the other nations: Not only Israel, but all nations shall see, that Yhwh is the only one.

20 Because of this similarity, N. Lohfink, Verkündigung des Hauptgebots in der jüngsten Schicht des Deuteronomiums (Dt 4,1–40), in: idem, Studien zum Deuteronomium und zur deuteronomistischen Literatur, Vol. 1, SBAB 8, Stuttgart 1990, (167–191), 191, assumes, that the same author wrote Deut 4 and 30, but taking the differences into account an intertextual reception is probable.

21 For the new perspective on the distinction of epochs in Deuteronomy given by Deut 4:1–40 and 30:1–10 cf. J. Taschner, Die Mosereden im Deuteronomium. Eine kanonorientierte Untersuchung, FAT 59, Tübingen 2008, 138–153.

22 In Deuteronomy, only these two passages mention Israel's return (שׁוב) to Yhwh. Cf. G. Braulik, Deuteronomium 1–16,17, NEB 15, Würzburg 1986, 45. For the motif of reversal, cf. Ehrenreich, Leben (see above note 15) 110–114.

23 As Krüger, Law (see above note 7) 43f., rightly points out, the fact, that the other nations praise Israel shows, that Israel is interested in this commendation and that this action cast positive light on the outsiders.

24 By comparing Deut 4 with different texts of the wisdom literature, Krüger, Law (see above note 7) 45–47, underlines the different statements regarding the other's wisdom. For example in Bar 3:9–4:4 and Ps 147:20 the mosaic law, which is not understandable for non-Israelites, evokes sagaciousness.

25 In Exod 18, the Israelites realize Yhwh's power after Jethro's praise. He serves as external observer, cf. R. Albertz, Exodus, Vol. 1: Ex 1–18, ZBK 2,1, Zürich 2012, 298. 305–308. But, in contrast to the nations in Deut 4, he participates in the religious actions and praises Israel's God.

26 Rose, 5. Mose (see above note 8) 493f., interprets the expression as a sign for an impressive numerousness, but the greatness can easier be understood as importance.

27 Rose, 5. Mose (see above note 8) 493.

28 In addition, some Israelites are described as wise: Bezalel in Exod 31:3, the chosen men in Deut 1:13 and especially the Proverbs focus on individuals. Cf. T. Veijola, Das fünfte Buch Mose (Deuteronomium), ATD 8,1, Göttingen 2004, 111f. In contrast, in Jer 4:23 and Deut 32:6, 29 Israel is described as unwise (חכם and נבון).

29 G. Simmel, Exkurs über den Fremden, in: idem, Soziologie. Untersuchungen über die Formen der Vergesellschaftung, Gesammelte Werke 2, Berlin 61983, (509–512), 510.