80 GEORGE C. HEIDER Moving to “location” in a still more figurative (yet related) sense, the similarities between the two books become even more apparent. Both Deuteronomy and John employ stark, bipolar construals of reality involving the community’s self-identity. In Deuteronomy the community is called to exclusive devotion to YHWH (most famously in the Great Shema, Deut 6,4), and the corollary of its choice is either life or death (Deut 30,15-20). From the outset, John’s Gospel contrasts life/light with darkness and therefore death (John 1,4-5); indeed, Jesus himself is light (John 8,12), so that to reject him is to be blind (John 9,40-41). Both books delineate clearly between those who are in the community and outsiders, whether they be denominated “the nations” (especially of the Canaanite variety) in Deuteronomy or v / “the Jews” (οi` Ιουδαι οι) in John. What, then, does our consideration of the issue of location (broadly construed) in Deuteronomy and John contribute to the discussion? First, as already noted, the overlap in how physical locations are mentioned and treated establishes a distinctive link between the two books that reasonably leads one to ask where else they might share similarities. More to the point, the uncompromising insistence upon fidelity to the words and voice of this mediator (Deut 5,5.22-33; John 8,31-32; 10,27) and the explicit boundaries set around this community lend to these books an inclination toward what might pejoratively be termed “triumphalism” vis-à-vis others and the works of others. Indeed, both books claim a finality that seems intent on excluding the need for further revelation or mediators. Deuteronomy asserts after Moses’ recitation of the “ten words” that “he [YHWH] added no more” (5,5), and it asserts at the conclusion of the book that “Never since has there arisen a prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face” (34,10) 28. Similarly, the final edition of the Fourth Gospel concludes: sees loss of “location” and oppression from outside of the community only as a consequence of unfaithfulness to YHWH (Deut 28,15-68), while John antici- pates them as the result of faithfulness to Jesus (John 15,18-25). We may fairly attribute this difference, I believe, to the internal factors that generated the two books. It is the resultant loss of place and (as discussed immediately below) the “we/they” dynamic that invite our present attention. 28 Even Moses’ famous promise in Deut 18,15 (“The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people”) does not undercut Moses’ primacy: such a future prophet will be authentic simply be- cause he is like Moses.