South Woods Baptist Church

The Song of Moses as an
Ecclesiology for Israel

Introduction

            The book of Deuteronomy can be divided into three main sections comprised of three addresses to Israel by Moses just before his death and their entrance into Canaan.  After the last address, God commands Moses to teach Israel a Song, the text of which is recorded in Deuteronomy 32.  Traditionally referred to as the Song of Moses, this poetic section was to be taught to all the children of Israel so that they might remember their indebtedness to Yahweh, and so that it may be a witness to them of their wrongful intent once they enter the land, i.e., turning to idols and spurning God (31:20).

            The Song's primary function, then, is to be a witness against Israel.  It has a secondary function, though, in that by witnessing against them, it shows what Israel is to be - a holy nation devoted to God.  By displaying how Israel has broken the covenant as a result of turning to other gods (32:16-17), the Song tells them what they should be doing as an alternative, which is to, "Ascribe greatness to our God!" (32:3).  This Song is a reminder of Israel's undeservedness of God's lovingkindness (32:10-14, 18), and of God's commitment to the vindication of His covenant people (32:36).

            It is proper, then, to examine this Song for the manner in which the congregation of Israel should think about themselves in relation to God, and for practices that they should enact as a result of that assessment.  If the Song was to be used as a mnemonic device to testify against Israel of their sin, then there must be a standard that they are being tested against for it to be effective.  Therefore, it is appropriate to approach this text as an ecclesiology, searching for ways in which Israel should behave based on the facts that they ascertain from this Song. 

            This Song, along with the Blessing of Moses in Ch 33, establishes the climax to the book of Deuteronomy.  The genre of the Song of Moses is that of poetry, an archaic poetry, which makes much of the Song difficult to translate because of the words and idioms that are unusual among available Hebrew literature.[1]  There are at least fourteen hapax legomena, and many other verses that are problematical to translate.  The style is also different from that even of other early poetic forms in that it is written with longer, more polished lines of verse, rather than short, disconnected lines.[2] 

            The poetic genre, though, is not the lens through which the Song should be read.  The genre is important in understanding the meaning of what is seen through the lens, but the lens itself must be seen as the structure around which the author wrote.  So, then, it is imperative to ascertain the structure of the Song of Moses so that one might better understand the purpose and use of the text.

The Textual Structure of the Song

            The literary structure of the Song of Moses has been debated for many years.  On a cursory reading, it may seem that the text is simply addressing certain issues in a logical pattern set out by the author.  Patrick Skehan argued in the mid-twentieth century that the Song was split into three discernable parts, "each of which divides on an identical pattern into adequate logical units."[3]  He then observes that the Song is composed of 69 verses, which when divided by the three sections, is 23 - the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet if p were to be added at the end as a completion character.[4]  Skehan goes on to argue that the author's use of a total of 69 lines was his way of writing a 70-line poem, which was a common verse structure in Hebrew poetic literature.  After asserting the possibility of the 70-lines, he uses the number 70 to argue for a late date for the Song by drawing parallels between the number of lines and the number of Sanhedrin, saying that the use of this number was an assertion of power by them.[5]  If Skehan is correct in his reconstruction of the structure of the Song, then we can infer that the external attributes of style and form were a large influence on the author's poetry, and thus his content.[6] 

Other scholars have sought to show that the text is not the result of a forced shaping of words into a diminutive pattern, one of which cannot be proven due to the lack of any other example of such a pattern.  Instead, some have attempted to look at the thought units of the text and determine whether or not a pattern can be detected.  Various attempts have been made to decipher the thought units, with the results being similar, though not exact.

            The consensus of most scholars is that, in some form, the Song of Moses represents a lawsuit pattern that was used in times of a suzerain confronting an erring vassal.  Examples of this type of lawsuit, known as an RIB-lawsuit (byr - to quarrel, complain against), date back from the Mari documents in the late eighteenth century B.C., even to some documents in the second millennium.[7]  The main difference among scholars with regards to the structure of this pattern as the basis for the Song is the verse allotment of each section of the lawsuit, but the basic pattern is as follows: call of witnesses, accusation, account of suzerain's compassion, acknowledgment of violation of covenant, and announcement of punishment.[8]

            Another option of interpretation offered by scholars is that of a covenant renewal.  This form is argued as the basis on which a lawsuit would rest.  By the recitation of it, the vassal would continually proclaim his devotion to the suzerain, and in turn the suzerain would continue to provide for the vassal.  The main components of this covenant renewal are: the Suzerain's recitation of his compassionate acts toward the vassal, the repetition of the stipulations of the covenant, the vows that are taken to uphold the stipulations, and the benefits and consequences of obedience or disobedience.[9]

            Though all of the above options are possible understandings of the structure of the Song of Moses, none of them fully encompass the essence of the Song.  In every case, there are certain verses that do not fit, leading to the under-interpretation of the Song as a whole.  The best option, then, is a not to force a structure, but to recognize the one that is present, which seems to be a combined structure of the RIB-lawsuit and the covenant renewal form, joined together as a covenant lawsuit.  The basis of both the lawsuit and the renewal is the covenant, which in the context of the Song of Moses is the book of Deuteronomy.[10]

The Function of the Song within Deuteronomy

          The Song of Moses cannot be separated from the broader context when attempting to observe its meaning or function for Israel.  Having the combined form of covenant lawsuit indissolubly links the Song with the broader structure of the book, which is recognized itself as being a covenant.  Many scholars who interpret Deuteronomy as covenant structure choose to use the designation suzerain treaty, rather than covenant, because it is the primary form found in the near east at the time of composition.  G.J. Wenham, though, has distinguished the forms of covenants in the ANE (ancient near east) environment, and has shown that the suzerain treaty and Old Testament covenant are two separate forms.[11] 

The suzerain treaty consists of: preamble, historical prologue, stipulations (both basic and detailed), document clause, god list, curses and blessings.  Wenham points out that the Old Testament covenant is similar, but has important distinctions.  First, the OT covenant does not include a preamble, but begins with a historical prologue.  Another difference is that the OT covenant omits the god list, but adds a recapitulation of the covenant at the end of the original stating.  When the OT covenant is applied to the text of Deuteronomy, the results demonstrate the historical prologue as 1:6-3:29, the basic stipulations as 4:1-11:32, the detailed stipulations as 12:1-26:19, the document clause as 27:1-26, the blessings as 28:1-14, the curses as 28:15-68, and finally the recapitulation as 29:1-30:20.[12]

                 This OT Covenant, then, accounts for Deuteronomy up through the end of Ch 30, but what about the remainder of the book?  Should we assume it was a later addition since it does not fit the covenant form?  It is clear from reading the text of Ch 31ff. that the ending chapters are not a later addition, but are quite important to the proper understanding of the importance of the covenant given in the first 30 chapters.  These last chapters demonstrate for the readers of Deuteronomy the manner in which the covenant was performed by the original Israelite hearers.  Ch 31 provides the passing on of leadership and the certainty of Israel's rebellion against God.  Ch 33 is the Blessing of Moses with which he gave before his death, which is based on the covenant of the first chapters.  The final chapter depicts Moses' death, but it also shows the fulfillment of the covenant in that he is able to see the land promised and have assurance of Israel's possession of it.

Chapter 32, though, has a special purpose within these last chapters, as well as within the context of the whole book.  This chapter, which contains the Song of Moses, is to explain to Israel who they are by exhibiting their present and future relationship to their LORD.  As stated earlier, the Song is composed of a hybrid covenant lawsuit structure, in which the vassals (i.e., Israel) would have recognized the binding nature of the covenant and its importance for their identity.  They were no longer a nation among the nations; rather they were primarily to be seen by the nations, as well as see themselves, as the covenant people of God.  The Song of Moses was to be remembered by all Israelites so that they might know themselves for whom they truly are, and that they might know God, as well as His punishment, when they cease to be loyal to their King.

The Nation Defining Relationship between God
and Israel in the Song of Moses

            The Song is first announced in 31:19 as a mnemonic device to testify against Israel when they forsake the covenant by following other gods.  The LORD tells them that they will abandon Him, and that this song's purpose is to remind them of who, and whose, they are.  The first section of the Song, vss. 1-14, explain the relationship between God and Israel by showing God's dependableness (vss. 1-4), their status before Him (vss. 5-6), and the reason they are dependent (vss. 7-14).

God is Dependable - 32:1-4

            The Song begins with the narrator calling the heavens and earth as witness to the Song to follow.  Many critical scholars understand this appeal to be reminiscent of the calling of gods to witness against the treaty breakers in the ANE treaty form.  In this case, the calling of heaven and earth would actually be the remains of the polytheistic religious beliefs before the giving of the covenant.[13]  When looking at the scope of divine lawsuits in the Old Testament, though, it is quite common for the heavens and earth to be called into the role of witnesses (Ps 50:4; Is 1:2; Mic 6:2), especially in the context of Deuteronomy (Deut 4:26, 30:19, 31:28).  It is likely that the purpose of heaven and earth being called as witnesses is that they were witness to the giving of the covenant to Israel, as well as to its breaking.[14]  Creation would be the only constant witness in Israel's history to observe their warrant of the covenant curses.

            Wisdom language is used in vs. 2 in the use of four similes that are used in describing the content of the Song that is to follow, employing the pictures of rain, dew, droplets, and showers.  In the agricultural understanding of this verse, the purpose of the Song, if Israel would be saturated by it, is to show them how to live to the LORD and be nurtured as His covenant people.[15]  This dispersing of wisdom is directly linked to the proclamation of the name YHWH by a kiy (causal) clause, showing the cause of their need to listen and take to heart to be the greatness of God.  They are to see the contrast between their sinful inferiority and God's perfect justice.

            Finally, the primary way that the Song shows Israel's dependence on God is by the use of the term hatsur, "the Rock," in vs. 4.  This verse, as will be seen, should be taken as the thesis statement for the rest of the Song, and this term for God is the basis of this verse, so it is important to understand in what way the original readers would have understood it.  There is a question among scholars of the past centuries as to what sense God is a rock for Israel.  Some recognize this term as an actual name or title based on the statement in vs. 3, "For I proclaim the name of the LORD."[16]  This understanding of the term, though, is not likely because when the proclamation of the name is announced, it is followed by God's self-given name, YHWH.  Therefore, there is no reason to further state another name. 

In the context of the Song, tsur (rock) is used 6 times, and in the whole of the Old Testament is used 78 times.  It is used as a metaphor 44 times, 33 occurrences as references to God, and most are in poetic contexts.  Many of the occurrences, when related to God, have reference to Him as a static image, such as a refuge, stronghold, or fortress.[17]  But His divine identity cannot be separated from His divine activity.  This understanding of the term in the Song is proper, because instead of the usual salvific personal experience of the Rock as hiding place or refuge, the Song presents God's moral character, the Rock whose work is perfect, and who is just, faithful, righteous, and upright.[18]  This usage seems to indicate that the Song is to point to the covenantal nature of the Rock, stressing the unchanging nature of God.  This idea will be contrasted in the following verse with the fickleness of the people of the covenant.[19]

Israel's Status before God - 32:5-6

            As previously stated, Israel is shown in contrast to God's faithfulness to be unfaithful.  God is their Father by nature of His purchase of them, as well as His making and establishing them as a people (32:6).  Israel, though, went against God and became "not His sons" (32:5; cf. Hos 1:9).  Sonship of God is a status that is not deserved, but conferred.[20]  Israel, by nature of their acting corruptly towards God, shows themselves to have a defect, resulting in their perversion and crookedness (vs. 5).  Their sinful state is a mockery of what they were created to be, i.e., a holy people to the LORD.  Based on the moral character of God as shown in vs. 4, the outcome of Israel shown here in vss. 5-6 shows Israel to be an irrational people, giving up their status as children for their own selfish ways, being blindly bent on their own destruction.[21]

The Reason for Israel's Dependence on God - 32:7-14

            Israel's dependence on God is a direct result of their status before Him.  They are at odds with themselves, not to mention with their Creator, and without His sustaining work, they would destroy themselves by allowing the full brunt of the covenant curses to come upon them.  Vss. 7-14, though, explain the reason for God's upholding of the covenant - His election of Israel.[22]  Because of the covenant, the Song urges the hearers to, "Remember the days of old" (vs. 7).  If one could not remember, then they were to find out from another Israelite.  The idea of "remember" is not simply an intellectual assent in this context.  Rather it is a call to action based on the knowledge of the past.[23]  It was imperative, then, that they realize their true condition before "the Rock," and alter their course of destruction.

            The ground of their turning is based on God's gracious choosing of the Israel in the past.  God was not obligated by anything outside Himself to create the nation of Israel.  He made a covenant with the patriarchs out of His sheer will, promising Abraham's seed would be a great people.  This point is propagated as the result of the LXX (Septuagint) rendering of "Sons of God," over against the MT's (Masoretic Text's) "sons of Israel."  The LXX wording is preferable for a few reasons.  First, antiquity of the reading argues for its being the original text, being supported by a Qumran text, even though the MT has the majority of support.  This fact results in an "'oldest-verses-most' predicament."[24]  Thus, the textual decision cannot be made on external evidence alone, but must be based on internal textual evidence. 

            Second, the LXX text is the most easily accounted for by the normal means of textual criticism.  If the MT text, "sons of Israel," is accepted, then this understanding would refer most likely to a conflation of three accounts: the Table of Nations in Gen 10, the Tower of Babel in Gen 11, and the number of Jacob's house in Gen 46.[25]  In arguing this point, one must concede that the nations were separated by God into 70 groups based on a nation that was not yet inexistence.  Those scholars arguing for the MT text do so partly because of fear that if "Sons of God" is used, it will open up the field for understanding this phrase to argue for polytheistic practices.  It is likely, then, that the MT altered the original text, which is preserved in the LXX, to guard against this understanding.[26]   

            If the LXX text, "Sons of God," is the preferred text, then it does not inevitably mean that the text argues for a pantheon of gods.  The text likely refers to a divine council, made up of supernatural beings who are paired with a nation to identify with it.  Thus, the number of nations depended on the number of supernatural beings in the divine counsel.  Israel, as mentioned above, was not part of the Table of Nations, leaving them without a being with which to identify.  The reason was that they are to be identified with God.  There was no intermediary because God was to care for Israel Himself.[27]  This thought is exposed even more in vs. 9 where Scripture reads, "For the LORD's portion is His people; Jacob is the allotment of His inheritance."

            In the Song of Moses, it is quickly understandable why Israel is to remind themselves of the "Sons of God" in relation to their dependence on God.  God chose them to be His people, and all other nation's numbers and borders were set according to His will for Israel.  He found them in the desert in ruin, referring to Egypt's uninhabitable conditions prior to the exodus.  He cared for them like an eagle for its young (vss. 10-11).  He stirred the nest, a picture that involves God's encouraging Israel to metaphorically fly, while guarding against her fall.[28]  God drove Israel into the dessert from Israel, while always guarding her and keeping her safe.

            The text then adds that it was YHWH who guided Israel, and there were no other gods with them (vs. 12).  This verse contrasts once again Israel's present religious adultery against God's character of faithfulness.  He not only initiated their freedom and guided them, but He provided security for them.  The phrase, "He made him ride on the high places of the earth," has the idea of victory and security (vs. 13).  yarcivehu al bamothey (He made them rise on the high places) is understood by some scholars to refer to a remaining allusion to a Canaanite story of struggle between Mot (arş) and Yamm.[29]  There is no reason, however, to read this phrase as anything but metaphorical language used to describe God's giving of security to Israel while in the desert, and when they enter the land, such as is the usage in other Old Testament passages, including Am 4:13 and Hab 3:19a.

            God not only gave them security, but He also provided graciously for them.  Vss. 13b-14 present the provisions that God gave Israel upon entering the land. Produce of the field, curd of the cows, milk of the flock, fat of lambs, rams, and goats, and wheat are easily transferable meanings into English.  Sucking both honey and oil from the rock, though, are not as easily understood.  The meaning seems to be that even in the rocky places, there would be provision for Israel.[30]

            It is certainly discernable, on the basis of vss. 7-14, that Israel was dependent on God in every stage of their begetting, from their inception, to their taking of the Land.  Their dependence was based on God's character as being faithful and dependable, because their status before God was less than upright and could add nothing to their salvation.  The next section of the Song takes the reader from observing the blessedness of Israel to her downfall due to her adultery with other gods.

The Adulteration of the Relationship between God and
Israel in the Song of Moses

            There is a content shift between vss. 14 and 15 in the Song.  The subject matter shifts from dealing with the relationship between the two parties to focusing on the devastating adulteration of the relationship.  Israel's fall from blessedness and subsequent punishment takes place in three stages: Israel turned from God (vss. 15-18), they were punished for their sin because of God's jealous anger according to the covenant curses (vss. 19-27), but they must overcome an obstacle if they are to be saved (vss. 28-33).

Israel Turned From God - 32:15-18

            The second section begins with the result of God's abundant provision for Israel.  "Jeshurun" grew fat off of the blessings of food, echoing the "fat" of the animals, which was a sign of abundance in vs. 14, and then forsook God's grace and faithfulness.[31]  The name Jeshurun is used mostly in positive contexts (Deut 33:5, 26; Is 44:2) as a "pet name," but in this verse serves to contrast between their prominence before God and their ingratitude toward Him.[32]  The Song then abruptly shifts from the 3^rd person "he" to the 2^nd person for emphasis when saying, "you have grown fat, you are thick, you are gorged" (vs. 15).[33]  As a result of their affluence, Israel not only abandoned God, but they even showed contempt for Him.  How did they scorn Him?  Vs. 16 speaks to their infidelity with other gods.  The Song is honest in highlighting the fact that there were no other gods to which Israel was provoking God; rather they were worshiping demons who were fallen creations of the true God.  Instead of having gratitude toward the God who begat them, Israel neglected and forgot their Creator (vs. 18).

            The Song puts great emphasis on the covenant relationship between God and the patriarchs.  The force behind their disloyalty to God is found in the wording of Israel's sacrificing "to gods they have not known, new gods who came lately, whom your father did not dread" (vs. 17).  This allusion once again points to the fact that the Song's purpose is to be a covenant lawsuit, reminding Israel that God is the covenant initiator, thus deserving their solitary allegiance. 

Israel was Punished for Their Sin because of God's
Jealous Anger according to the Covenant Curses - 32:19-27

            The direct result of Israel's turning from God was their rejection by Him.  They made Him jealous because He is the only rightful receiver of worship since He is the only creator and sustainer for Israel.  God's anthropomorphic reaction to their adultery was to hide His face and to wait to see how they would react to His absence.  These acts in themselves were punishment without active retribution, thus God left them to themselves (cf. Rom 1:24-32).

            Vs. 21 introduces a play on words, pairing Israel's worship of what were "not gods" with God's punishment of them with a nation that was "not a people."  Even in God's passive punishment of Israel (hiding His face, waiting), He is in control of Israel's active punishment.  He will bring a nation against them to make Israel jealous, just as they made Him jealous with their idols.  He punishes them because Israel kindled a fire in God's anger, and thus He will bring about the covenant curses upon them.  This anger burns to the pits of Sheol and consumes the earth (vs. 22).  The extent of the fire of anger likely points to the universality of the covenant breaking.  Israel's sin did not affect them alone, but caused consequences for the cosmos.[34] 

            After declaring the certainty of Israel's punishment because of their provoking of God, the Song declares implementation of the covenant curses because of Israel's violation of the stipulations of the covenant.  There is a common triad among the curses of hunger, pestilence, and war (28:21-25).[35]  The Song brings these categories out by stating that Israel will be "wasted by famine and consumed by plague," and "the sword shall bereave." 

            If Israel is to be saved, it is because of God's gracious choice.  Vss. 26-27 turn from their punishment to their possible salvation.  A major reason for Israel's salvation by God from the covenant curses, particularly that of war, would be the "not a nation's" haughtiness in thinking that their success was on account of their own might (vs. 27).  God's reputation was at stake in their misunderstanding of their victory.  This misapprehension of the truth by the nation is similar to Israel's delusion as to their strength in 8:17.[36]  The Song, using highly anthropomorphic words, suggests that Israel's sin was great enough to cause God to eradicate them from the world, even from memory of men, had it not been for His own honor at the hands of the other nation.[37]  Israel, then, could have not reason for boasting in their salvation.  God's grace was given for the sake of His own glory, to keep his honor among the nations.

The Obstacle Israel must Overcome for Salvation - 32: 28-33

            The Song begins in vs. 28 to make clear how Israel got herself into the position of being under the covenant curses.  The reason is that they failed to recognize the indications that they were not in good standing with God.  They lacked counsel and did not succeed in discerning the future of their sinful behavior (vs. 28-29).  Vs. 30 introduces a new speaker who is the narrator of the Song (originally Moses).[38]  The narrator implies, by asking a rhetorical question, that Israel is indebted to God for any victory they may have had on the battlefield, and the same is true if they have lost a battle.  God works through the "not a nation" to bring about His decree, which is ultimately the salvation of Israel.  It is obvious even to the other nation that their "rock" was not powerful enough to defeat Israel's "Rock," so the only alternative is to see God as the cause of Israel's defeat.[39]  Israel must recognize this fact before they will be delivered from the covenant curses. 

The Redemption of the Relationship between God and
Israel in the Song of Moses

            There is a final shift in the Song between vss. 33 and 34 that accentuates the great redemption that is afforded Israel by God's grace and faithfulness to His covenant.  This final section focuses on the fact that Israel, if they are to be vindicated, must realize who they are, what they have done, and who is their only hope, namely YHWH.  This last section is split into two segments, consisting of: God's promise of salvation (vss. 34-38), and God's accomplishment of salvation (vss. 39-43).

The Promise of Salvation - 32:34-38

            After bringing into question the self-sufficiency of the other nation's army in the previous section, God begins this section by assuring that the enemy will fail to wipe out Israel.  God alone is sovereign over the destiny of all men.  God is the one who brings about the calamity of curses on Israel, but it is also He who holds back His vengeance against the nation "until the day" of recompense (vs. 35).  "Their destiny hastens on," thus pointing once again that God has planned all the events for His own purpose.  This verse is sometimes taken as referring to Israel and their fall, but the following verse is a purpose clause connected to their destruction, arguing that because they will fall, the LORD will vindicate His people.  This interpretation would not make sense for God to vindicate His people because they fall.  It is better to understand this verse as speaking of the nation, meaning that God will vindicate His people because the "not a people" will fall.

            The promise for Israel is clear in vs. 36, "He will have compassion on His servants."  God will only have compassion on them, though, when "He sees that their strength is gone" (vs. 36).  Once again, the purpose of Israel's punishment is clear - to give them understanding as to why they have been devastated, i.e., because they have forsaken their covenant God.  This truth is underscored by vss. 37-38 when the Song asks rhetorically where are the supposed gods they worshiped, and why have they not helped them out of their low position?  The LORD is the only Rock; there is no refuge other than Him (vs. 39).  There was no place for Israel to seek shelter, for they were shut up to their lack of wisdom (vs. 29).  Given the situation in which they were, it was only God who could once again be their Rock, who could deliver them from the "not a nation."

God's Accomplishment of Salvation - 32:39-43

            This final section of the Song is consumed with the place of God in Israel, as well as among the nations.  Israel was to understand this section with one eye to themselves, but another to the role of the LORD in the larger workings of the world.  YHWH is not a national deity like the gods of the nation who attacked them.  Instead, God is to be seen as the only true Rock; all other would-be-gods are false and futile.  The events of the first 38 verses of the Song are attributed to God in these last stanzas.  It is God who put to death and gives life.  It is God who wounds and heals.  No one can escape Him (vs. 39).  These statements are to be understood in light of the downfall of Israel in the first section of the Song.  All things happened to Israel so that His purposes may be executed.

            Vs. 40 begins an oath taken by God to show the surety of His recompense to those people who hate Him.  In context, this oath is against the "not a people" that God used to bring about Israel's ruin.  Though He used them for His good purposes, He will still punish them for their lack of serving Him as their creator.  God is pictured as a warrior going out for battle, sharpening and wielding His "flashing sword," and shooting His arrows.[40]  God's waging war against the nation is similar to His punishment of Israel.  They committed the same crime, that of ceasing to revere God as Lord, and by doing so, they cease to perceive the reality of who they are before God - liable servants.

Conclusion

            Remembrance of the past is a large part of actions in the future.  Everyday decisions are made because of what happened in days before, good or bad, to guard against making the same bad decisions and to proceed in making the good ones.  This role of remembrance is the function of the Song of Moses.  Moses commanded all of Israel after he had recited the Song to "Take to your heart all the words with which I am warning you today, which you shall command your sons to observe carefully, all the words of this law.  For it is not an idle word for you; indeed it is your life. And by this word you will prolong your days in the land, which you are about to cross the Jordan to possess" (vss. 45-6).  This Song was the mnemonic device that would keep Israel on the right path.  It would bear witness to the covenant, remind them of the Law, and testify against them if they breached the covenant.  If Israel was to know who they were to be, and further, who God was, this Song was the key of recollection to that knowledge.