Conflict of Nations

“When the Most High divided mankind, he set the boundaries of their lands according to the number of those in his heavenly court.  (Deut. 32:8 NLT) 

Regarding the above reference, some may find it of interest to note that while the majority of biblical translations regarding Deut. 32:8 are consistent with the Hebrew translation, which reads: “When the supreme one gave the nation’s their inheritance, when He separated the children of man, He set the boundaries of the peoples according to the Children of Israel,” (Deut. 32:8 / Chumash, Stone Ed.), there are exceptions, such as that found in the NLT, or New Living Translation. This can be problematic, as it not only sows confusion in the minds of many as to the purported innerancy of the Christian Bible, but can serve to compromise our willingness to contend for the Faith “sola scriptura,” or by scripture alone.

Additionally, further attempts at clarification can become quite convoluted, which is the case with both of the preceding translations. Essentially, the context of Deut. 32:8 is in reference to the the survivors of the antediluvian saga, Noah and his sons, Ham, Shem, Japheth and their families, who in turn became the new progenitors of the human race. And, while the Hebrew translation describes the distribution of mankind according to their appointed territories, it renders the verse somewhat obfuscate by virtue of emphasis on: “the children of Israel,” making it appear as if they only beneficiaries, when actually they are only one of the beneficiaries, as decedents of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. (Gen. 11:10), through the lineage of Shem, a son of Noah. Again, while at first glance, Deut. 32:8 seems to be referring to humanity as a whole, when it comes to the division of the territory in question, it not only appears vague, but is somewhat misleading. And, while the general consensus maintains that the verse is in reference to “The Table of Nations (Origines Gentium), which are seventy in number, it appears that the author(s) of the Hebrew translation have reached a different conclusion.

Compounding the problem, there remain alternate explanations, such as that found in the Jewish Midrashic literature, which attributes this division of mankind and, the number of territories in question to the Tower of Babel epic, as recorded in Genesis 11:1-9. In response to the tower’s architect, Nimrod, and his apparent motive: “(it was)…to ascend to heaven in order to wage war on God. (Midrash / Sages) Accordingly, “Hashem came down to look at the city and tower which the son’s of men had built, saying: Behold, they are one people, and with one language for all. And now, should it not be withheld from them all that they proposed to do? Come, let us descend then and there confuse their language, that they should no longer understand one another.” (Gen. 11:5-8) It is said then that Hashem had asked for assistance from seventy angels, each to be appointed as overseer over the individual territory appointed to each of the original seventy nations. Yet, it didn’t quite turn out that way, as these so called “ministering spirits” ultimately succumbed to their own sense of self-importance, in turn contending among themselves for hegemony, through territorial expansion and power, but increased recognition of their exalted status and worship from their earthly admirers.

Interestingly, in defense of this somewhat novel explanation, we find confirmation in the book of Daniel. “For from the first day that you set your heart to understand and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard and I was dispatched from heaven in response. Yet, the prince of the kingdom of Persia resisted me for twenty-one days, until Michael, one of the chief princes (Elohim) came to my aid. Saying: now, having completed my mission here, I must return to contend with the prince of Persia (again), after which the prince of Greece will also come.” (Dan. 10:12-13, 20) This in turn leads us back to the initial subject at hand, the apparent contradiction between the NLT translation of (Deut. 32:8) and that of a number of other translations.. Apparently the NLT version, in attempting to render the passage more accurately, utilized the Midrashic literature, in reference to the Babel narrative, which is consistent with the passages noted in Daniel. And yet, while somewhat unorthodox, this interpretation makes perfect sense, as many scholars agree. The point being that scholarly consensus aids in bringing greater clarity to the subject at hand, even if it comes at the expense of tradition. Which in turn in brings up an interesting point. The Hebrew translation of (Deut. 32:8) in the Chumash, would appear to be rather anthropocentric in its translation of: “…according to the Children of Israel.” Rather, it appears to be a joint inheritance, distributed among the descendants of Noah and not to Shem exclusively. Which, in and of itself is quite understandable, as the Hebrew Bible, as the name implies, is a historical narrative of the descendants of Shem, Israel.

In either case, two things become readily apparent. One. Non-Jewish readers due to their lack of familiarity with the depth and breadth of Hebrew literature, are constrained by conclusions which lack foundational support. Two. In contrast, the vast majority of Jewish readers are better informed, even in regard to the early Christian church, as this passage from Acts 17:10-12 (NRSE) would sees to indicate: “…the believers in Thessalonica sent Paul and Silas off to Beroea, who upon arriving, went to the Jewish synagogue. They found the Jews there much more receptive than those in Thessalonica, as they welcomed the message eagerly, even as they searched the scriptures daily to see if these things were true.” (NRSE) To add emphasis, while the Jewish community of Beroea (Ber-ea) appear to have been more open to inquiry, they were also better informed, as the scriptures referred to were from their own Hebrew Bible and not that of New Testament, as most Christians believe.

Regardless, as Christians, having been grafted into the same spiritual branch as that of Israel, we have become not only “believers,” but brothers in arms so to speak, “ …wrestling not against flesh and blood, but principalities and powers in high places; against the rulers of the darkness of this age and spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenlies.” (Eph. 6:12) Even so, it would appear that mankind has become somewhat of a pawn in this epic struggle of celestial proportions, unwittingly conscripted into a supernatural proxy war, and for good reason. As believers, we have become far more than just expendable board-pieces in an inter-dimensional game of chess. As a consequence, the elect now find themselves not only entrenched behind enemy lines, but functioning as the rear-guard in a heavenly pincer-movement. And, considering the current geopolitical crisis, believers may soon find themselves with little option but to actively contend for the faith, or simply abandon the proposition altogether. In view of that, it might then be worth asking: Is our personal faith just a passing fancy or are we in it for the long run? Not surprisingly, God himself has something to say: “I am God and there is none other like me; declaring the end from the very beginning and from ancient times those things not yet done, saying, my counsel will stand and I will do all that I have proposed.” (Is. 46:10)