The ἐκκλησία of all Israel
We now turn to examining those occurrences of ἐκκλησία, which are said to have particular significance, the gathering of the whole congregation of Israel, a comprehensive assembly. There are several occasions when a comprehensive assembly gathers. The first such assembly is at Horeb and is discussed in Deuteronomy.312 Knox highlights Deuteronomy 4:10 as a key text in identifying this assembly,313 and here Moses refers back to Horeb, speaking to a people who did not stand there as if they did,314 and calls them to remember what they saw and heard. This highlights both the foundational nature of the assembly at Horeb, but also its inclusiveness, which seems to extend beyond those who were there. Deuteronomy 5:22 is similar, and further establishes the essential characteristic of this assembly: the people are (vicariously) addressed by God.315 Also in Deuteronomy, there are a number of occasions when those who are excluded from the assembly are noted.316 As Du Toit notes, the existence of entry conditions suggests a closed group, and therefore an ongoing entity, not restricted to the time of meeting, an idea which is seen more clearly still in Nehemiah 13:1–3, where those of foreign descent are not just excluded from assembling, but are excommunicated from the people.317 Finally, Deuteronomy 31:30 recognizes that there is an assembly on the edge of the promised land who hear about Horeb, and who are to put the commands from Horeb into practice.
Deuteronomy then establishes a pattern for the assembly of all Israel as the place where God’s word is heard, and as a gathering. However, the crossgenerational nature of the assembly in Deuteronomy 4, and the exclusions in Deuteronomy 23, suggest that, whilst Deuteronomy deals with an actual assembly, that assembly represents an ongoing reality. The assembly has some kind of existence when not assembled.
Later assemblies follow a similar pattern to those in Deuteronomy.318 The comprehensiveness of the assembly at Mizpah is emphasized by the penalties enacted on those who fail to turn up.319 In Ezra 10,320 the call to the assembly includes the explicit injunction that those who fail to attend will be expelled. This injunction only makes sense if those involved are considered to be part of the assembly even in their absence, suggesting a persistent reality. Nehemiah 8 emphasizes that all the exiles have assembled,321 and how this assembly includes women and children.322
The Psalms present a challenge for interpretation here, as the generalized nature of many of the references to ἐκκλησία make precise identification of the assembly in view difficult, but it is possible that some of the references in the Psalms to the great assembly,323 or blessed assembly,324 or to an assembly of the people,325 are comprehensive, 326 as also in Joel’s call for all to come to a sacred assembly at Zion.327
The comprehensive assembly, patterned after the example of Sinai, is a recurring theme in the usage of ἐκκλησία in the OT. However, some of these references are not wholly comprehensive, for ἐκκλησία is also used for a representative assembly. Significant here are the references to the assembly that gathers for the dedication of the temple in 1 Kings 8. In 1 Kings 8:1–2, the composition of the assembly is described: it is made up of the elders, heads, and chiefs (v. 1), and all the men of Israel (v. 2).328 However, this group is then referred to as the whole assembly of Israel in 1 Kings 8:14, 22, and 55, and the size of this assembly of all Israel is emphasized in 1 Kings 8:65.329 Other examples of this usage are the assembly David calls to establish Solomon’s succession,330 the assembly at Gibeon,331 and the assembly described in 1 Chronicles 13:2 and 4, where an assembly which does not include all Israel is described as the whole assembly of Israel,332 suggesting that here again there is a representative role: some can be considered in lieu of the whole.333
A similar pattern can be seen in other assemblies in 2 Chronicles. Their comprehensive nature is emphasized, but that comprehensive nature does not mean all Israel was present. So, in 2 Chronicles 20:5,334 Jehoshaphat’s assembly is of Judah and Jerusalem, although the chronicler notes that people came from every town of Judah,335 suggesting that not everybody came. A similar dynamic is at work in 2 Chronicles 23:3, where the whole assembly makes a covenant, but it is clear that those present are representatives of the people.336 Even the assembly which Hezekiah calls in 2 Chronicles 30337 is not completely comprehensive, because some refuse to come.338 These are comprehensive assemblies in that they represent the will of the people, even when not everybody is present. They are assembled, but they also represent people who are not there.
One feature of a number of these assemblies is a reference back to the gathering at Horeb.339 This is explicit in 1 Kings 8, where the temple as the successor to the tabernacle and new home for the ark of the covenant is noted. It is also a feature of 2 Chronicles 29–30, where the invitation to the whole of Israel is noted,340 as is the fact that nothing like this had happened since the days of Solomon,341 and what is being celebrated is the Passover.342 The assemblies in later Israelite history may have become representative, as the tribes no longer traveled together; however, the aspiration remained for a united people gathered together. This desire can perhaps also be seen in the use of ἐκκλησία to describe the traveling company of returning exiles—one of the things being celebrated here is the exiles returning together as a company.343
Philo quotes the exclusion from the assembly of Deuteronomy 23 regularly,344 underlining the foundational character of this assembly for Jewish self-identity, even after the return from exile.
I agree with O’Brien and others that the Sinai assembly is significant for understanding ἐκκλησία in the Septuagint. However, part of that significance lies in two features of the comprehensive assembly which