AJBI Vol. XLVIII, (2023), 5–27

The Political Theology of Pg and
Its Relation to the Contemporary Pro-Babylonian
Golah Redactionin the Book of Ezekiel1

Kishiya HIDAKA
University of Zürich

1. Introduction
In current scholarship there is a new trend of research which tries to investigate the correlation between the formation of the biblical corpus and the diversified historical socio-political structure with the social groups behind the biblicaltradition.2 In line with this new research trend, this article aims to analyze therelationship between the political theologies and the formations of Pg and thebook of Ezekiel. The relationship between P and the book of Ezekiel is one of1

This is a revised and extended version of a paper that I presented at the EABS Graduate Symposium, 2022, held at Charles University, Prague. I thank my colleagues Jordan Davis (Oldenburg) and Moritz Franz Adam (Zürich) for improving my English inthis article and for their critical comments. All translations of the biblical passages are
mine.

2

This research trend is represented by following books. ed. B. Hensel et al., Yahwistic
Diversity and the Hebrew Bible, FAT 2. Reihe 120 (Tübingen; Mohr Siebeck, 2020);
ed. J. Jeon, The Social Groups behind the Pentateuch, SBL Ancient Israel and Its
Literature 44 (Atlanta; SBL Press, 2021); idem, From the Reed Sea to Kadesh: A Redactional and Socio-Historical Study of the Pentateuchal Wilderness Narrative, FAT
159 (Tübingen; Mohr Siebeck, 2022); ed. B. Hensel et al., Social Groups behind the
Biblical tradition, FAT 167 (Tübingen; Mohr Siebeck, 2023).
5

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

the most contentiously debated topics in Hebrew Bible studies. However, there isinsufficient research dedicated to this significant problem from the perspective of
historical-critical analysis.3 This paper aims to contribute to this discussion of therelationship between P and Ezekiel through the analysis and comparison of theirrespective political theologies, especially considering the diachronic historicaldevelopments of both literary corpora.
First of all, it can be helpful to survey the literary profile of P according torecent research.
Generally, scholars divide the Priestly literature of the Pentateuch into three
categories; namely, Pg (the literary core [beginning with the creation narrativein Genesis 1], which lays the foundation of the Priestly narrative in the Pentateuch), Ps (a blanket term covering several later interpolations, notably including
the Priestly legal materials but not limited to legal texts), and H (the Holiness
Legislations in Lev 17–26). The first scholar who introduced these terminologies
to reflect the separation between the literary core and the secondary materials of
P as “Pg” and “Ps” was Hermann Holzinger in his Einleitung in den Hexateuchfrom 1893.4 This model was later developed by Karl Elliger and Martin Noth,who accentuated the influential separation and distinction between the narrative
source of Pg and the secondary (legalistic) materials of Ps.5 This fundamental
separation of Pg and Ps continues to be prevalent in recent research, with a few
exceptions.6
3

For the exceptions, see, for example, J. Jeon, “A Source of P? The Priestly Exodus
Account and the Book of Ezekiel,” Sem 58 (2016, 77–92); W. Bührer, “Ezechiel und
die Priesterschrift,” in Das Buch Ezechiel. Komposition, Redaktion und Rezeption, ed.
J. C. Gertz et al., BZAW 516, (Berlin / Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2020, 175–206).

4

H. Holzinger, Einleitung in den Hexateuch (Freiburg I. B. / Leipzig: J. C. B. Mohr,1893), 332–475.

5

See K. Elliger, “Sinn und Ursprung der priesterlichen Geschichtserzählung,” ZTK 49(1952, 121–­143); Martin Noth, Überlieferungsgeschichte des Pentateuch (2. Aufgabe;Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1960), 7–19.
6

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

However, modern scholarship has proposed several different endings for Pg.
Following the detailed analysis of Lothar Perlitt in 1988, many scholars started
to abandon the idea of seeing the ending of Pg (Priestergrundschrift) in Deuteronomy 34.7 To give a few examples, Erich Zenger suggests its ending to be in
Leviticus 9:24.8 For Eckart Otto, it is in Exodus 29:46.9 Christophe Nihan argues
for the ending in Leviticus 16,10 and Thomas Pola, followed by Reinhard Kratz,
suggests Exodus 40.11 Even though they give the divergent candidates for theending of Pg, one point is communal, nametly that it is in the Sinai-pericope in
Exodus-Leviticus.

6

For example, Erhard Blum gave up this separation of narrative materials and secondary interpolations, including the discussion of whether P is a redaction or a source, andproposed his theoretical model of KP, which no longer adheres to the inner differentiations of the P-materials within the Pentateuch. See E. Blum, Die Komposition der Vätergeschichte, WMANT 57 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukircherner Verlag, 1984); idem,
Studien zur Komposition des Pentateuch, BZAW 189 (Berlin / New York: Walter deGruyter, 1990), especially, 221–360. Blum followed and significantly developed thetheory of his teacher, Rolf Rendtorff, in these studies. Cf. R. Rendtorff, Das überlieferungsgeschichtliche Problem des Pentateuch, BZAW 147 (Berlin / New York: Walterde Gruyter, 1977).

7

L. Perlitt, “Priesterschrift im Deuteronomium ?”, ZAW 100 (1988, 65–88). Contrary,
there is a recent scholarly voice that see the ending of P in Deut 34. See C. Frevel, Mit
Blick auf das Land die Schöpfung erinnern. Zum Ende der Priestergrundschrift, HBS
23 (Freiburg / Basel / Wien / Barcelona / Rom / New York; Herder. 2000).

8

E. Zenger, “Die priesterlichen Schichten,” in Einleitung in das Alte Testament, idem etal. (Stuttgart / Berlin / Köln; Verlag W. Kohlhammer, 1995, 89–108), 95.

9E. Otto, “Forschungen zur Priesterschrift,” TRu 62 (1997, 20–36).

10 C. Nihan, From Priestly Torah to Pentateuch: A Study in the Composition of the Book
of Leviticus, FAT 2. Reihe 25 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007).
11 T. Pola, Die ursprüngliche Priesterschrift. Beobachtungen zur Literarkritik und Traditionsgeschichite von Pg, WMANT 70 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag,
1995); Reinhard G. Kratz, Die Komposition der erzählenden Bücher des Alten Testaments (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000), 226–248.
7

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

This assumption of the ending of Pg in the Sinai-pericope can find further
textual support by the literary inclusion between the Priestly creation account(Gen 1:1–2:3) and the temple construction note (Exod 39–40*).12
Gen 1–2

Exod 39–40

1:31 And God saw all that he made (‫ וירא‬39:32 And all the work of the tabernacle‫)אלהים את כל אשר עשה‬. And see (‫)והנה‬, [it of Ohel Moed was finished (‫)ותכל‬. And thewas] very good. And there was an evening children of Israel made (‫)ויעשו בני ישראל‬and there was a morning. The sixth day. according to all that YHWH commanded
Moses. So made they (‫)כן עשו‬.
2:1 And the heaven and the earth were finished 43 And Moses saw all of work (‫וירא משה‬(‫)ויכלו‬, and all of their multitude[?].
‫)את כל המלאכה‬. And see (‫)והנה‬, they madeit (‫ )עשו אתה‬as YHWH commanded. So
made they (‫)כן עשו‬. And Moses blessed
them (‫)ויברך אתם משה‬.
2 And God finished his work on the seventh 40:33 And he raised the courtyard aroundday (‫ ויכל אלהים ביום השביעי מלאכתו אשר‬the tabernacle and the altar. And he put the‫)עשה‬. And he rested on the seventh day screen to the gate of the courtyard. And
from all of his work that he made (‫ מכל‬Moses finished the work (‫ויכל משה את‬‫)מלאכתו אשר עשה‬.
‫)המלאכה‬.
3 And God blessed (‫ )ויברך אלהים‬theseventh day. And he consecrated it because
in it he rested from all of his work that God
created in the making (‫מכל מלאכתו אשר‬‫)ברא אלהים לעשות‬.

As seen from this small chart, the creation story in Genesis 1–2 and theaccount of the building of the sanctuary in Exodus 39–40 share the phrases andmotifs, presenting a corresponding literary relationship between the two passages. The author(s) created a notable inclusion by repeating similar phrases andwords at the beginning and the ending of Pg.
12See, for example, Nihan, From Priestly Torah, 54; K. Schmid, Literaturgeschichte
des Alten Testaments. Eine Einführung (3. Auflage; Darmstadt: wbg Academic, 2021),
191–192.
8

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

For this document Pg, scholars usually propose a date in the late Exilic toearly Persian period. However, more recently scholars opt for the early Persian
period, which is more plausible.13 The peaceful view of the international politicalsituation of Pg (see Gen 10) suggests that Pg was written under the influence of
the Achaemenid hegemony.
There is also redactional activity in the book of Ezekiel contemporary to thecomposition of Pg, namely the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction that was also undertaken in the early Persian period. An analysis and comparison of the literary
and theological-political profiles of Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redactionin the book of Ezekiel can be an essential key for a more profound understandingof the relationship between the Priestly literature in the Pentateuch and the bookof Ezekiel.
A comparison with the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction is also meaningfulfrom the perspective of discerning the profile of the political theology of Pg,
because Pg also seems to have a conceptual proximity to the Babylonian-Golah.
The itinerary of Abraham in P provides a different original location of Abraham compared to the non-P passages. The following passages of Genesis 11:27–
12:3 describe the departure of Abraham from his home country.14
P Texts

Non-P Texts

11:27 And these are the Toledoth of Terah. 11:28 And Haran died before Terah, his
Terah begot Abram, Nahor, and Haran. father, in the land of his birthplace, in Urof the Chaldeans.
And Haran begot Lot.

13 Especially, see Nihan, From Priestly Torah, 383–394.
14 For my allocation of P texts in Gen 11:27–12:3, I have followed the traditional but still
credible scholarly division of the P texts and non-P texts here. Especially, vv. 28–30
lack the specific Priestly language. This position is also followed by Jakob Wöhrle.
See J. Wöhrle, Fremdlinge im eigenen Land, FRLANT 246 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck& Ruprecht, 2012), 25–38.
9Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

29 And Abram and Nahor took wives forthem. The name of Abram’s wife wasSarai and the name of Nahor’s wife was
Milcah. [She was] a daughter of Haran,[who was] the father of Milcah and thefather of Iscah.
30 And Sarai was childless. She had nochild.
12:1 And YHWH said to Abram. “Goahead from your land from your birthplaceand from your father’s house to the landthat I will show you.
31 And Terah took Abram, his son, and 12:2 And I will make you a great nation
Lot, the son of Haran, his grandson, and and I will bless you and make your nameSarai, his daughter in law, the wife of his great. Be you a blessing!
son Abram. And they went out from Urof the Chaldeans to go into the land of
Canaan. And they entered unto Haran andthey dwelled there.
32 And the days of Terah were two 12:3 And I will bless those who bless you.
hundred and five years. And Terah died in And I will curse those who curse you. And
all the clans on the earth will be blessed in
Haran.
you.

Even though the classical distinction between P and non-P texts in Genesis
11:27–12:3 is still appropriate because of the explicit presence of P-language,
their chronological order needs to be reconsidered due to the following observation. Vv. 28–30 seems to presuppose v. 27 because without it vv. 28–30 would
lack a proper introduction. In addition, Genesis 11:28 seems to be a Fortschreibung, adding the information on Haran that is lacking in the P materials. V. 31(P) skips the account of Haran and moves its focus on Lot, a son of Haran. This
indifference of P to Haran indicates the supplemental nature of the note on Haranin v. 28. The complementary nature of v. 28 suggests that this passage is a later
addition. Therefore, vv. 28–30* is a post-P Fortschreibung and dependent on P.

10

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

The P text of Genesis 11:27–32* introduces the unique account that Abraham originally came from Ur of the Chaldeans and entered into the land of Palestine. Besides Genesis 11, Genesis 15:7 also mentions Ur as the original place of
Abraham, but this is a post-P text, as many scholars point out.15 There is a strong
literary relation between Genesis 15 and Genesis 17 (P), which share several
terms and concepts, indicating that Genesis 15 and Genesis 17 have a literary dependency.16 Abraham finds the promise of a descendant as a surprise in Genesis
17:17, and this motif of Abraham being surprised stands in contradiction to Genesis 15, which promises the descendants to Abraham already before Genesis 17
in its narrative context (if Genesis 15 is presupposed by Genesis 17). In addition,
the ritualistic act of Abraham in Genesis 15:9–10 reflects the Priestly regulationin Leviticus 1:17; 5:8.17 Therefore, Genesis 15 is post-P and was written under
the influence of the P text in Genesis 11. Contrastingly to this P concept of theorigin of Abraham in Ur, several other traditions attribute Haran as the place
related to the ancestor figures. Except for Genesis 11, the place name of Haran
appears in Genesis 12:4.5; 27:43; 28:10; 29:4. Among them, the attestation in
Genesis 12:4b–5 is from the Priestly text. Genesis 27:43; 28:10; 29:4 correlate

15 K. Schmid, Genesis and the Moses Story: Israel’s Dual Origins in the Hebrew Bible,
trans. J. D. Nogalski (Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2010), 158–171; E. Blum,“Die literarische Verbindung von Erzvätern und Exodus. Ein Gespräch mit neueren
Endredaktionshypothesen,” in Abschied vom Jahwisten. Die Komposition des Hexateuch in der jüngsten Diskussion, ed. J. C. Gertz et al., BZAW 315 (Berlin / New York;
Walter de Gruyter, 2002, 119–156), 142–145; J. Wöhrle, “The Un-Empty Land: The
Concept of Exile and Land in P,” in The Concept of Exile in Ancient Israel and its
Historical Contexts, ed. E. B. Zvi et al., BZAW 404 (Berlin / New York: Walter deGruyter, 2010, 189–206), 192.
16 See T. Römer, “Genesis 15 und Genesis 17,” DBAT 26 (1989/90, 32–47).
17 See Römer, “Genesis 15 und Genesis 17,” 43l. Nihan even argues that the regulationof the burnt offering of the bird in Lev 1:14–17 is later addition to P. See Nihan, From
Priestly Torah to Pentateuch, 204–205.
11

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

the location of Haran to the family of Rebekah (and therefore, the origin place ofLeah and Rachel). Also, Jacob himself spent several years at Haran. Haran is a
closely related location to the ancestors in Genesis, but P introduces the notion of
the original location of Abraham in Ur. According to the P-text in Genesis 11, thefamily of Abraham also temporarily dwelled in Haran, but here Haran represents
a stopping point rather than the original point of departure.
As Jakob Wöhrle rightly points out, by locating Abraham’s point of origin
to the city of Ur of the Chaldeans, the P-writers reveal their intention to associate this ancestral figure with the Babylonian-Golah (who was also in the landof Babylon).18 The word ‫ כׂשדים‬is never attested in the context of the Table of
Nations (Völkertafel) in Genesis 10, nor in the entire Pentateuch except for twotimes in Genesis 11:28–31. In the synchronic reading of the Enneateuch, thereader can encounter this word for the second time in 2Kings 24:2 in the exact
context of the Babylonian invasion. Therefore, along with Jakob Wöhrle, we canassume that the use of ‫ כׂשדים‬in Genesis 11:27–32* is intentionally anachronistic
and the writer of this text had a clear intent to fuse the image of the BabylonianGolah to the ancestor figure of Abraham.19 The choice of the town of Ur mightreflect the knowledge of the Priestly writers that this place was the central city of
Mesopotamia during the period in which Abraham was supposedly active (i.e.,the second millennium BCE).20 Abraham thus becomes the exemplar of the Babylonian-Golah who departs from the land of Babylon and immigrates to Canaan.
Therefore, the Babylonian-Golah orientation in Pg seems essential to understanding the political theology of Pg. The literary activity approximately contemporary with Pg is the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel;both can be dated to the early Persian period. Importantly, Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel share several similar concepts,
18 Wöhrle, “The Un-Empty Land,” 192–193.
19 Wöhrle, “The Un-Empty Land,” 193.
20 Wöhrle, “The Un-Empty Land,” 193.
12

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

expressions, and theological ideas, which can work as points for comparison.

2. The Temple Orientation in Pg and
the Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in Ezek
It was Karl-Friedrich Pohlmann who first focused on the existence of the redaction in the book of Ezekiel that pays special attention to the first BabylonianGolah of 597 BCE.21 His theory is well accepted and has found many followers
such as Christophe Nihan, Konrad Schmid, and others.22
The pro-Babylonian Golah redaction begins with the visionary account inEzekiel 1–3*. Ezekiel saw the vision of the “Glory of YHWH,” when he waswith the Babylonian-Golah who were deported to the land of Babylon along withking Jehoiachin. The pro-Babylonian Golah redaction developed around thismotif of the “Glory of YHWH.” The second text where this motif appears is Eze-

21 K. Pohlmann, Ezechielstudien. Zur Redaktionsgeschichte des Buches und zur Fragenach den ältesten Texten, BZAW 202 (Berlin / New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1992);
idem, Das Buch des Propheten Hesekiel (Ezechiel) Kapitel 1–19, ATD Teilband 22/1
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996); idem, Das Buch des Propheten Hesekiel(Ezechiel) Kapitel 20–48, ATD Teilband 22/2, (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,2001).
22 C. Nihan, “Ezechiel,” in Einleitung in das Alte Testament. Die Bücher der Hebräischen Bibel und die alttestamentlichen Schriften der katholischen, protestantischen
und orthodoxen Kirchen, ed. Thomas Römer et al. (Zürich: Theologischer Verlag
Zürich, 2013, 412–430); Schmid, Literaturgeschichte des Alten Testaments, 216–221;
idem, “Das Ezechielbuch,” in Grundinformation Altes Testaments (6., überarbeitete
und erweiterte Auflage), ed. J. C. Gertz (Vandenhoech & Ruprecht; Göttingen, 2019,361–372); W. Bührer, “Ezechiel und die Priesterschrift,” in Das Buch Ezechiel. Komposition, Redaktion und Rezeption, ed. J. C. Gertz et al., BZAW 516 (Berlin / Boston:
Walter de Gruyter, 2020, 175–206); C. Koch, Gottes himmlische Wohnstatt. Transformation im Verhältnis von Gott und Himmel in tempeltheologischen Entwürfen desAlten Testaments in der Exilszeit, FAT 119 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018), 133–189.
13

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

kiel 8–11*. There, the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction introduced the idea that
YHWH himself left his temple and the city of Jerusalem before its destruction.
Finally, we can see the motif of the “Glory of YHWH” again at the final literarycomplex of Ezekiel 40–48*, where the concept of the constitution for the newtemple appears. The “Glory of YHWH” enters the visionary new temple city. A
further mention of the Babylonian-Golah can be found in Ezekiel 37*, which islocated right before Ezekiel 40–48* in the textual witness of Greek Papyrus 967.
As detailed analysis by Schwagmeier and others illuminated, the Hebrew Vorlageof Papyrus 967 represents the preliminary phase of the literary development of
the book of Ezekiel before the proto-MT.23 In addition, as Tooman proposed, theGog-Magog pericope in Ezekiel 38–39* employs a distinct literary and linguistic
profile compared to the other texts in the book of Ezekiel and seemed to form
originally an independent textual unit that was inserted to the book of Ezekiel.24
Thilo Alexander Rudnig argues that Papyrus 967 attests to the original textual
connection between Ezekiel 37* and Ezekiel 40–48*, which reflects the text arrangement created by the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction.25 The revival of thegroup of Babylonian-Golah is thematized, and a hopeful future is suggested withthe promise of the land and their coexistence with YHWH in Ezekiel 37*, which

23 P. Schwagmeier, Untersuchungen zu Textgeschichte und Entstehung des Ezechielbuches in masoretischer und griechischer Überlieferung (Diss., Zürich, 2004); I. E.
Lilly, Two Books of Ezekiel: Papyrus 967 and the Masoretic Text as Variant Literary
Editions, VTSup 150 (Leiden / Boston; Brill, 2012); K. Pohlmann, “Ezekiel: New
Directions and Current Debates,” in Ezekiel: Current Debates and Future Directions,ed. W. A. Tooman et al., FAT 112 (Tübingen; Mohr Siebeck, 2017, 3–17); A. Klein,
Schriftauslegung im Ezechielbuch. Redaktionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu Ez
34–39, BZAW 391 (Berlin / New York; Walter de Gruyter, 2008), 60–65.
24 W. A. Tooman, Gog of Magog: Reuse of Scripture and Compositional Technique inEzekiel 38–39, FAT 2. Reihe 52 (Tübingen; Mohr Siebeck, 2011).
25 T. A. Rudnig, Heilig und Profan. Redaktionskritische Studien zu Ez 40–48, BZAW 287(Berlin / New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2000), 62–77.
14

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

see the fulfillment in the entrance of the “Glory of YHWH” and the building of
the temple as a sign of the coexistence of YHWH in Ezekiel 40–48*. The proBabylonian Golah redaction is present in the structure of the book of Ezekiel via
four visionary accounts in Ezekiel 1–3*; 8–11*; 37*; 40–48*.26
Considering the structure of Pg mentioned above, an unmissable similarity
to the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction comes into view. Pg is a document thatbegins with the creation narrative and concludes with the building of the sanctuary.
P

The Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction

Exod 25:8 And they will make a sanctuary Ezek 43:7 And he said to me. “Son of
to me, and I will dwell among them.
man, [this is] the place of my throne andthe place for the soles of my feet, where I
will dwell there, among the sons of Israel
forever. And the house of Israel will no
more defile my holy name, neither they
nor their kings, by their harlotry, and by
the corpses of their kings at their Bamoth.
Exod 29:45 And I will dwell among the Ezek 43:9 Now let them put away theirsons of Israel, and I will be a God to them. harlotry and the corpses of their kings far
from me, and I will dwell among them
forever.
Exod 29:46 And they will know that I am
YHWH, their God, who brought them outof the land of Egypt that I dwell among
them. I am YHWH, their God.

In all the cases in this chart, the phrase “dwelling among (e.g., Ezek 43:9;‫ ”)ושכנתי בתוכם‬has YHWH as the subject, and it clarifies that he will live among
his people. Ezekiel 43:1–9* is rightly attributed to the pro-Babylonian Golah

26 See Schmid, “Das Ezechielbuch,” 366–368; Koch, Gottes himmlische Wohnstatt, 133–
189.
15

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

redaction by Christoph Koch.27 He argues that the concept of the departure of
YHWH from Jerusalem in the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction of Ezekiel 8–11*
remains without its narrative continuation if it lacks Ezekiel 43:1–9*, which narrates the entering of YHWH into the new temple.28 This common phrase “dwelling among” appears in the pivotal passages of the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction that forms the narrative inclusio from the very beginning of Ezekiel 1–3*
to Ezekiel 8–11*. The phrase "dwelling among" is used in relation to the temple
both in Ezekiel 43 and in Pg. While the former is in the literary complex concerning the new temple, in the latter it shows up in the crucial passages of the instruction for the temple construction. This means that both Pg and the pro-Babylonian
Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel end with accounts of the construction of
the temple.
When one takes into account aspects of political theology, the significant
divergences between Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction emerge. The
designation of the temple’s location played a crucial role in the sphere of politicaltheology in the socio-historical environment in the early Persian period because
in this period there were diversified groups of the “Yahwistic” people. For example, we can assume differences between the returned Babylonian Golah, those
who remained in the land of Palestine during the Exilic period, the Egyptian
diaspora, especially the Elephantine community, the Babylonian-Golah community who remained in the land of Babylon, etc.
The pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel centers on theconcept that the new, ideal temple is to be built in one specific temple city (presumably Jerusalem?)29 and in no other city. Pg is different. The temple in Pg is a
movable tent sanctuary, which is built outside of Palestine, somewhere in the re27 Koch, Gottes himmlische Wohnstatt, 175–187.
28 Koch, Gottes himmlische Wohnstatt, 184–187.
29 Remarkably, there is no direct mention of the name of “Jerusalem/Zion” in Ezek 40–
48. This could be intentional on the part of the writers of the temple vision.
16

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

gion of mount Sinai. The location of the sanctuary in Pg is not specified. The tent
sanctuary of Pg moves around with the people of Israel through the wilderness.
The beginning of both Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction draws
further attention. The vision of YHWH’s throne in Ezekiel 1–3* presents its
concept of the heavenly firmament ‫רקיע‬, especially in vv. 22–26. This word isfrequently attested in the Priestly creation narrative in Genesis 1:6, 7, 8, 14, 15,
17, 20. ‫ רקיע‬appears seventeen times in the Hebrew Bible, of which nine are in P,
and five are in the book of Ezekiel.30 Presumably, both Genesis 1 and Ezekiel 1
were influenced by Babylonian cosmological models rather than having a directliterary dependency between one another, as Bührer argues, following Koch.31
This is supported by the fact that there is a notable conceptual difference between
Genesis 1 and Ezekiel 1. For example, Pg understands heaven as the object of
the act of creation by God, while God does not have his own dwelling place inheaven. Ezekiel 1:26 locates the throne of YHWH above the ‫ רקיע‬firmament,
whereas the dwelling place of God is never explicitly mentioned in the creation
narrative of Genesis 1.32
A second example is found in the use of the word ‫( קׁשת‬rainbow), whichfunctions as the symbol of the eternal covenant of God in Pg (Gen 9:13, 14,16) but represents the Glory of YHWH in Ezekiel 1:28. Once again, the sharedphrase in Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel
demonstrates divergences in the meaning and content, such that a direct literary
dependency is not sugested.33

30 The other references are found in Ps 19:2; 150:1; Dan 12:3.
31 Bührer, “Ezechiel und die Priesterschrift,” 184–187; Koch, Gottes himmlische Wohnstatt, 137–168. Koch especially focuses on the comparison between Ezek 1 and theBabylonian mythical and religious commentary text of KAR 307.
32 K. Schmid, Theologie des Alten Testament (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), 261.
33 There is a further unique phrase in Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in
Ezek 1–3* that finds no further attestation in the entire Hebrew Bible. The phrase17Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

Therefore, while it is possible to see a general similarity in structure (ending
with the temple construction) and certain specific terminology (e.g., the firmament) in Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction, the ideology and theologyof these two works are entirely different.

3. The Concept of Judgment in Pg and
the Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction
A clear parallel between the expressions of judgment and destruction can befound in Genesis 6 and Ezekiel 7.
Ezek 7:2.3.6

Gen 6:13

Amos 8:2

2 And You, son of man, 13 And Elohim said to 2 And he said. “What dothus says the lord YHWH to Noah. “An end of all flesh you see, Amos?” And I
the land of Israel. “An end. has come before me, for the said. “A basket of summer
The end has come upon the earth is filled with violence fruit”. And YHWH said
because of them. And see, to me. “The end has comefour corners of the land.
I am going to destroy them upon my people, Israel. I
will never again pass themwith the earth”.
by.”“‫ חברת אׁשה אל־אחתה‬associate/join one to the other” is attested in Exod 26:3 (26:5,
6, 17) and Ezek 1:9 (1:23; 3:13). Remarkably, the passages in Pg are in the context ofthe manufacturing the tent of the sanctuary, and the passages in the pro-Babylonian
Golah redaction in Ezek 1–3* are the texts that describe the visionary account of thethrone of YHWH. It is the wings of the visionary throne that “associate one to theother” in the context of Ezek 1–3*. Here, too, even though the unique common phrase
simultaneously appears in the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction and Pg, not only the
direct literary dependence cannot be supposed, but also the meaning and content arevery different and unrelated to each other. These points of the common phrases in Pg
and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction reveal the divergencies, unrelatedness, andthe lack of explicit literary dependency between them.
18

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

3 Now the end is upon you.
And I will send my anger
upon you, I will judge you
according to your ways,
and I will give upon you allof your abominations.
6 An end has come. The end
has come. It has awakened
against you, see, it comes.

The older phrase of the prophecy of judgment (e.g., Am 8:2) is taken up
by Ezekiel 7:2, 3, 6.34 Ezekiel develops this motif so that it applies to the “fourcorners of the land”.35 Noteworthy is the case of P, which expresses a universal
perspective whereby all flesh will face the end by further developing this motif
in Ezekiel 7. The catastrophe and judgment in P are universal in scale, the entire
earth faces destruction.
The prophecy of judgment in Ezekiel 7 is further taken up by Ezekiel 8.
Walter Bührer points out that the same motif of “violence” is thought to be thecause of the judgment in both Genesis 6:13 and Ezekiel 8:17.36
Gen 6:13

Ezek 8:17

13 And Elohim said to Noah. “An end of 17 And he said to me, “Have you seen
all flesh has come before me, for the earth [this], son of man? Is it a light thingis filled with violence because of them. for the house of Judah to commit the
And see, I am going to destroy them with abominations which they made here thatthey filled the earth with violence andthe earth.”provoke my anger still more? And see,they are putting the branch to their nose.

34 Bührer, “Ezechiel und die Priesterschrift,” 188.
35 Bührer, “Ezechiel und die Priesterschrift,” 188.
36 Bührer, “Ezechiel und die Priesterschrift,” 188–189.
19

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

In both texts, it is explicit that nothing other than the “violence ‫ ”חמס‬is thecause of the judgment that strikes the land. P and those passages in the book of
Ezekiel share the same expressions and the theological motifs of judgment anddestruction. However, in the case of P, the violence that filled the land and thedestruction by the divine wrath is chronologically transferred to the primeval
period. This point can support the possibly younger dating of Pg compared to the
motif of judgment in the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction.37

4. The Covenant Theology in Pg and
the Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction
The covenant theology of Pg has a very unique theological profile to emphasize the unbroken and everlasting covenant of YHWH.38 This concept of covenant of Pg stands in sharp contrast with the covenant theology of the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel, which, for example, conceptualizes
the new covenant between YHWH and the Babylonian-Golah in Ezekiel 37*.
Pg takes another option regarding this covenant concept. Even a quick lookat the covenant text in Pg reveals that the writer of Pg had an explicit and firm
intention to overcome this approach to the covenant theology.
Genesis 17:7
And I will establish my covenant between me and you, and your descendant
after you throughout their generations, for an eternal covenant, to be a God
37 See Pola, Die ursprüngliche Priesterschrift, 287, n. 245.
38 For the overview of the covenant theology in the Priestly literature as a whole, especially, see C. Nihan, “The Priestly Covenant, Its Reinterpretations, and the Composition of ‘P’,” in The Strata of the Priestly Writings: Contemporary Debate and Future
Directions, ATANT 95, ed. S. Shectman and J. S. Baden (Zürich; Theologischer Verlag
Zürich, 2009, 87–134).
20

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

to you and to your descendant after you.
The theological challenge of this passage becomes very prominent if wecompare this text with other texts on the covenant formula between YHWH andthe people of Israel. Those covenant formulas can be found, for example, in
Deuteronomy 26:17–18; Jer 7:23; 11:4; 30:22; 32:38; Ezek 11:20; 14:11; 36:28;
37:23, 27.
P

Ezek 11:20;
36:28; 37:27

Deut 26:17–18

Jer 7:23; 24:7;
32:38

G e n 1 7 : 7 A n d I Deut 26:17 Today Ezek 11:20 so that Jer 7:23 For thiswill establish my you have obtained t h e y w a l k i n m y thing I commanded
covenant between [ a g r e e m e n t o f ] statutes and keep t h e m . “ H e a r m y
m e a n d y o u , a n d YHWH to be your my Mishpat and do voice, and I will be
your descendant after God, and for you to them. And they will a God to you, andyou throughout their walk in his ways, to be a people to me, you will be a people
generations, for an keep his statutes, his and I will be a God t o m e . A n d w a l keternal covenant, to commandments, and to them.
only in the way thatbe a God to you and his Mishpat, and to 36:28 And you will I command you, so
to your des­c endant hear his voice.
l i v e i n t h e l a n d that it will be wellafter you.
18 And today YHWH that I gave to your with you.”has obtained [agree­ ancestors. And you 24:7 And I will givement] of you, to be will be a people to them a heart to know
his treasured people, me, and I will be a that I am YHWH.
as he spoke to you, God to you.
And they will be aand to keep his com­ 37:27 And my dwell­ people to me andmandments.
ing place will be I will be a God toupon them. And I them, for they shallw i l l b e a G o d t o return to me with allthem, and they will of their heart.
be a people to me. 32:38 And they will
be a people to me,
and I will be a God
to them.

As it is very clear from this comparison, the covenant formula of Pg lacks

21

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

the phrase “you will be a people to me,” which finds attestation in all the othercases of the covenant formulas in the above list. This distinction shows that thecovenant theology of Pg is conceptualized as an idea that diverges from other
theologies of the covenant in the Hebrew Bible. Konrad Schmid rightly points
out the anti-Deuteronomistic orientation of covenant theology of Pg.39 While
the tradition of Deuteronomism emphasizes the aspect of the breaking of thecovenant from the side of the people to explain the national catastrophe of theBabylonian invasion in the 6th century BCE (and the Assyrian invasion in the
8th century BCE for the Northern kingdom), the lack of the phrase “you will
be a people to me” in the covenant formula in Pg signifies that the breaking of
the covenant from the side of the people is not possible. The central point of thecovenant theology of Pg is in the promise of YHWH.40
For the theological world of Pg, the covenant between YHWH and the people is unbreakable; therefore, it is still in place for the members of the returned
Babylonian-Golah who live in the time after the national catastrophe and thedestruction of the Jerusalem temple.41 They have the right to live in the land ofPalestine as before like those who remained in the land during the Exilic period
who did not depart from it and kept on living there.42 They also belong to the

39 Schmid, Literaturgeschichte des Alten Testaments, 195.
40 See Schmid, Literaturgeschichte des Alten Testaments, 193–194.
41 See Nihan, “The Priestly Covenant,” 91–103; W. Zimmerli, “Sinaibund und Abrahambund. Ein Beitrag zum Verständnis der Priesterschrift,” TZ 16 (1960, 268–280),
277–280.
42 Jakob Wöhrle emphasizes the political accent of P that the term “Canaanites” is acipher for those who remained in the land during the exilic period. See Wöhrle, Fremdlinge im eigenen Land, 165–226, especially, 215–217. However, his identification of
the Canaanites is not applicable in P except for Gen 26:34–35; 27:46–28:1, 6, 8. Oneof the possibilities that Wöhrle should have considered is that those mentions of endogamy are a later Priestly redaction in the book of Genesis but not the text of theoriginal P. His theory to see the P text in the ancestor narrative already as redaction
22

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

same Abraham covenant. This covenant is even valid for the diaspora who live
outside of the land and, therefore, can return to the land in the future and havethe right to live in it together with the returned Babylonian-Golah and those who
remained in the land.

5. The Theme of Abraham and Land in Pg
and the Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction
The covenant theology of Pg might also point to the distance that Pg takes
from the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel. In Ezekiel 37*,
there is an account of the covenant between YHWH and the revived Babylonian-Golah in the land of Babylon, who are described as the dry bones.43 P does
not mention the covenant between YHWH and the Exodus group in the land of
Egypt, but contains the covenant with the descendants of Abraham that include
not only the Israelites but also Edomites and Arabs in Genesis 17.44 Even in thecovenant related text in Exodus 6, we find the connection of the land promise
to the ancestor figures (Abraham with his descendants) and the promise to the
Exodus group. The land promise to Abraham itself is a topos which quite likely
worked as a basis of the land claim of those who remained in the land during
the Exilic period and early post-Exilic period, as is hinted at in Ezekiel 33:24.
The covenant theme in Exodus 6 might have the function of creating a comprehensive and inclusive identity that includes the returned Babylonian-Golah andmight have prevented him from considering this possibility.
43 See Rudnig, Heilig und Profan, 62–77; Schmid, “Das Ezechielbuch,” 366–368.
44 The covenant theology of Pg includes even the entire people of Israel, regardless ofwhether they are Samarians, those who remained in the land of Palestine, BabylonianGolah, Egyptian diaspora, or those who remained in the land of Babylon, as discussed
below.
23

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

those who remained in the land.45
Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel present
contrasting images of Abraham. This is especially prominent in Ezekiel 33*.
Ezekiel 33:24–26
24 Son of man, the inhabitants of these wastes in the land of Israel are saying. “Abraham was one man. But he possessed the land. But we are many,
the land is given us to possess”.
25 Therefore say to them. “Thus, says lord YHWH. You eat [meat] with theblood, lift up your eyes to your idols, and shed blood. And you possess theland?
26 You stand upon your swords, you do abominations, and each of you defiles the wife of his neighbor. And you possess the land?”Abraham is thematically related to the claim of those who remained in theland to insist on their right to possess the land. The Abraham tradition seems
to have been used and circulated by those who remained in the land. Ezekiel
33:24–26 criticizes the supposed right of possession of those who remained in
the land. Ezekiel 33:24aβb in particular cites the word of those who remained in
the land in order to develop a counterargument from the perspective of the Babylonian-Golah over the rights of possession.46 Namely, everyone who remainedin the land of Palestine is subject to judgment by YHWH, and only the peopleof the Babylonian-Golah can enjoy the restitutive act of YHWH in the future.47
The thematic connection of Abraham and the land is perceived negatively
45 J. Jeon, “The Promise of the Land and the Extent of P,” ZAW 130 (2018, 513–528),
524–525; Nihan, From Priestly Torah, 386–387.
46 See Pohlmann, Das Buch des Propheten Hesekiel Kapitel 20–48, 454–455.
47 Pohlmann attributes Ezek 33:21–29 to his “golaorientierte Redaktion.” Pohlmann,
Das Buch des Propheten Hesekiel Kapitel 20–48, 453–456.
24

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

in the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction, which criticizes the claims of the possession of the land by those who remained in the land through the Abraham
motif. The discontinuity of the lives and right to live in the land is emphasizedin the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction. The land had to become “empty” after
the Babylonian invasion. Also, the new promise and the new covenant must be
raised for restitution and new life in the land, which are exclusively given to thepeople of the Babylonian-Golah.48 Precisely the opposite is the case in Pg. Pg
tried to create a national myth for the entire people of Israel and Judah, regardless of whether they were Babylonian-Golah, diaspora, or those who remainedin the land. The figure of Abraham plays an essential role in the entire narrative
structure of Pg, and he works as the key figure for the claim of the right to live inthe land in the theological world of Pg.
If the recent assumption of researchers (e.g., Schmid, Gertz, de Pury, andNihan) is correct, then one of the important literary achievements of Pg was theconnection of the ancestor tradition in Genesis (those who remained in the land)
and the Exodus tradition (the Babylonian-Golah).49 Also, the Exodus story is a
48 The “Empty-Land” motif appears in the texts of the pro-Babylonian Golah redactionin Ezek 33:21–29. The theme of the new promise and new covenant in combination
with the motif of life in the land of Palestine is attested in Ezek 37*. Pohlmann attributes most of the texts of Ezek 37* except vv. 15–24 to the pro-Babylonian Golah
redaction. See Pohlmann, Das Buch des Propheten Hesekiel Kapitel 20–48, 491–505.
Ezekiel 37:15–24 develops a very different theme in the middle of these texts of the
pro-Babylonian Golah redaction to introduce the concept of the reunification of Israel
and Judah under the symbolic king “David.”
49 See Schmid, Genesis and the Moses Story, especially, 106–110. 144–148; J. C. Gertz,
Tradition und Redaktion in der Exoduserzählung. Untersuchungen zur Endredaktion
des Pentateuch, FRLANT 186 (Göttingen; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. 2000); A. dePury, “Pg as the Absolute Beginning,” in Die Patriarchen und die Priesterschrift / Les
Patriarchest et le document sacerdotal, ed. J. D. Macchi et al., ATANT 99 (Zürich;
Theologischer Verlag Zürich, 2010, 13–42), 26–27; Nihan, From Priestly Torah, 386–
287.
25

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVIII 2023

tradition that can be read parallelly with the tradition of an Exodus from Babylon, e.g. in Second Isaiah. Juxtaposing the Genesis story and the Exodus narrative in a sequence,50 P allowed for the joining of the land-oriented identity of
those who remained in the land, which is connected to the Abraham tradition, tothe originally exclusive Exodus identity, which was related to the returned Babylonian-Golah, who departed from the foreign country and entered the promised
land. Through this theological achievement of Pg, Abraham became an “ecumenical father,” with whom both the Babylonian-Golah and those who remainedin the land can identify.51

6. Conclusion
Even though the close literary relationship between P and Ezekiel is a welldebated topic for scholars, there seems to be no direct literary dependency between Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel that isdemonstrable. They indeed share some similar language and terms; however,there are significant divergences and gaps between them in the realm of political

50 See Schmid, Genesis and the Moses Story, especially, 237–248.
51 The theological profile of the Abraham figure as immigrating from Babylon also points
into the direction of this explanation. Abraham, who used to be a central figure for theland-claim of those who remained in the land, now functions as the inclusive ecumenical figure who is also an exemplar of the returned Babylonian-Golah. To put it morebluntly, Pg is overriding the identity of those who remained in the land into the Exodus
oriented (therefore the returned Babylonian-Golah oriented) identity so that even those
who remained in the land can join the Exodus identity as the narrative sequence proceeds from Genesis story to the Exodus story. However, the theological profile of P on
this joining of the identity of those who remained in the land into the Exodus identity is
not the concept that those people can keep and maintain their identity as it is, but theiridentity is overridden by the Exodus identity. Namely, Abraham is an immigrant fromthe land of Babylon, rather than being indigenous in the land.
26

K. HIDAKA: The Political Theology of Pg and Its Relation to the Contemporary
Pro-Babylonian Golah Redaction in the Book of Ezekiel1

theology. The contemporary Pg and the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in theearly Persian period show almost contrasting and conflicting concepts of political theology between them. Still, one hint of the possible dating difference
between them exists. The well-developed worldview of the political theology
in Pg, especially regarding the literary connection between the ancestor narrative and Exodus narrative and its developed concept regarding the socio-politicalproblem of the identity of Israel, suggests that Pg is later than the pro-Babylonian
Golah redaction and tries to overcome its program of exclusive identity formation.
Pg presents its unique political theology, which centers on Abraham as the“ecumenical father” of all the people of Israel in contrast to the exclusive political program of the pro-Babylonian Golah redaction in the book of Ezekiel.

27