Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Exodus 24:1
And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the LORD, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off.
1. And unto Moses he said ] so the Heb. The emphasis on ‘Moses’ implies that Jehovah had before, in a part of the narrative now lost, been speaking to someone else. The last preceding passage from J was Exo 19:20-25, ending abruptly, in the middle of a sentence. It may be inferred that the intermediate lost parts of J contained the words ‘said’ (Exo 19:25) by Moses to the people, and after those some commands given by Jehovah to the people, perhaps (cf. Di., C.-H. ii. 134, McNeile, 32, B. XII, and the lucid statement in the Interpreter, Oct. 1908, p. 9 f.), Exo 34:1-5; Exo 34:10-28, in its original form (see p. 364 f.), with which the instructions now given by Him to Moses are contrasted.
unto Jehovah ] Jehovah speaking of Himself in the third person, as Exo 9:2, Exo 19:11; Exo 19:21-22; Exo 19:24.
Nadab and Abihu ] Aaron’s sons: Exo 6:23, Exo 28:1, Lev 10:1 ff.
seventy of the elders ] representing the people generally.
worship ye afar off ] in preparation, as it were, for the vision which they were to have afterwards, vv. 9 11.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
1 2 (J). Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, are summoned up into the mountain, to Jehovah. The sequel follows in vv. 9 11.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Are placed by some with great probability between Exo 24:8-9.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Exo 24:1-8
Behold the blood of the covenant.
The sprinkling of blood
I. He sprinkled the book in his hand. It was the Bible of his day, and yet it needed sprinkling. And we hold our Bibles–do they need sprinkling? The Bible is the transmitted mind of God–it is perfect truth, it is essential holiness–must it be sprinkled? Human words are all unclean. The mind of God must pass to men through the organs of the human voice–and that humanity mingling even with the revelation of God, wants washing. The materials of which the book is made are human. And again and again with our defiled hands we have soiled it–and we never open the book but it is a sinners hand that touches it. Our Bibles need the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus.
II. And he sprinkled the altar–for he had reared it. The altar was a holy thing–dedicate, consecrated, yet for the manhood which was associated with it, it needed the sprinkling of the blood. And we have our altars. You rise in the morning, and you set up your altar on your bedside-and when you rise from your knees, how many wandering thoughts, what coldness and dulness of soul, what mixture of motive, calls out for mercy. The altar of the bedroom–it must be sprinkled. You come down, and you gather round the family altar. But is there no one there, in that little assembly, whose heart is wrong with God? Does the worship of the family all go up in purity? Is it not a dull thing–that family prayer each morning–a mere routine? And does not it want the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus?
III. Moses sprinkled the people. There is no part of man that does not need that sprinkling.
IV. The sprinkling of the blood was the token that whatever it touched became covenant. We have our covenanted Bibles and our covenanted altars; we ourselves are in covenant with Christ. Do you know that the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ is on you? And all that you must recognize if you would obey God. You must not rely upon All the words that the Lord hath spoken we will do. But you must go as a sprinkled and covenanted people, or you will not go at all. (J. Vaughan, M. A.)
The blood of the covenant
I. The sacredness of blood. This is taught both in Old and New Testament.
II. The Christian covenant is a covenant of blood. The blood of the eternal Son of God, shed on Calvary, sprinkled on the high altar of heaven and on all who approach with penitence and faith.
III. The covenant which Christ has instituted with His people is the most sacred covenant which God ever made with man.
IV. The Lords supper is a memorial and a solemn public ratification of this Divine blood covenant. It sprinkles us afresh with the blood of the great atonement. (J. M. Sherwood, D. D.)
The covenant
I. Divinely revealed.
1. Revealed faithfully.
(1) Words. for direction and encouragement.
(2) Judgment, for warning.
2. Revealed intelligently.
(1) Not an appeal to superstition and credulity.
(2) In language which all could understand.
(3) Under circumstances attesting Divine origin.
(4) An appeal to reason, piety, interest.
II. Accepted by man.
1. Unanimously.
2. Heartily.
3. Specifically.
4. Speedily.
III. Permanently embodied. A written revelation is–
1. Necessary.
2. Advantageous.
3. Important.
IV. Arrangements carefully and impressively prepared.
1. Altar and pillars–representing God and people.
2. Young men–symbolizing strength and earnestness that should be exerted in keeping covenant engagement.
3. Sacrifices.
(1) Burnt-offerings, to signify dedication of people to Jehovah.
(2) Peace-offerings, as typifying Jehovahs reconciliation with people.
V. Ratified with blood. In conclusion–
1. Christ is the Mediator of a better covenant.
2. That His blood is sprinkled on the altar of God (Heb 9:12), and in the heart of His people (Heb 9:13-15).
3. That He has instituted a perpetual memorial of His precious death until His coming again (1Co 9:25). (J. W. Burn.)
Gods covenant with Israel
I. The preparation and separation. God and Israel were to bind themselves in sacred oath. God was ready. Was man ready? Reverence and humility were required, a deep sense of the full meaning of all that was to be said and done. Special preparation is always demanded for special exhibitions of the Divine glory and power, and for special seasons of covenanting with God. Man is never ready for pledges of love and loyalty until he has sanctified himself through penitence and prayer.
II. The people informed. Let the leaders of Gods host plainly point out the path. The need of our age is not speculation but declaration of things revealed by those who have been on the mount with God, have beheld His glory, and have received a message for dying men. The people would know what God has said, not what men imagine or guess. How about our Father in heaven? What are His purposes of grace? What are the conditions of blessing? These are the burning questions of our age and of all ages. If any one has been on the mount and heard the voice, let him come down and tell us what he knows. The world is waiting.
III. Ratification of the covenant. Deliberation is always demanded before pledges of acceptance and obedience are made. No act of human life is more solemn than that of covenanting with God. Before men begin to build, they should count the cost. Many who run well for awhile afterwards halt and turn back because they started under the impulse of a sudden and ill-considered emotion. Christianity is righteous principle put in practice.
IV. Sealing the covenant. Remember the hour, the spot, all the circumstances attending your public avowal of faith in Jesus Christ, and your covenanting with God and with His people. How have these vows been kept? How have the conditions of blessing been fulfilled? God has never failed you. Have you failed Him? Oh, these covenants! How many have been broken! These vows! How many have been slighted! We should frequently go back to the altar under the hill, and recall the sealing blood.
V. New visions of God. This doubtless was a far more distinct vision than the former, when the law was given amid clouds and darkness and tempest. That was a display of majesty; this is of love. The language of the former was: Obey and thou shalt live. The language of the latter is: Love and confide. A little while before the vision was of a Law-giver. Now it is of a Saviour, inspiring confidence and peace. The mercy-seat appears. Gods glory is seen in the face of Jesus Christ, typified by the sapphire stone and, as I suppose, by the dimly outlined form of the worlds Redeemer. (J. E. Twitchell.)
The strictness of Gods law
The Bible is so strict and old-fashioned, said a young man to a grey-haired friend who was advising him to study Gods Word if he would learn how to live. There are plenty of books written now-a-days that are moral enough in their teaching, and do not bind one down as the Bible. The old merchant turned to his desk, and took out two rulers, one of which was slightly bent. With each of these he ruled a line, and silently handed the ruled paper to his companion. Well, said the lad, what do you mean? One line is not straight and true, is it? When you mark out your path in life, do not take a crooked ruler! (S. S. Chronicle.)
Belief and disobedience
Suppose, says the late Archbishop Whately, two men each received a letter from his father, giving directions for his childrens conduct; and that one of these sons hastily, and without any good grounds, pronounced the letter a forgery, and refused to take any notice of it; while the other acknowledged it to be genuine, and laid it up with great reverence, and then acted without the least regard to the advice and commands contained in the letter: you would say that both of these men, indeed, were very wrong; but the latter was much the more undutiful son of the two. Now this is the case of a disobedient Christian, as compared with infidels. He does not like them pronounce his Fathers letter a forgery; that is, deny the truth of the Christian revelation; but he acts in defiance in his life to that which he acknowledges to be the Divine command.
The sealing of the covenant
I. What occurred? The Law had been given, amplified (chaps. 21-23), and endorsed by the people (Exo 24:3). Necessary now to uncover that atonement which is ever the ground of Gods dealings with man. Hence the altar. No soul was to touch it, for the atonement is the creation of God. Still man had a part in these covenantal transactions, hence twelve pillars = twelve tribes. But sacrifice on the altar–the burnt offering = life surrendered–and the peace offering = communion with God and one another. The sacrifices were slain by young men = the flower of Israel. The Levitical priesthood not yet. Every age has its own special service for God. The blood was preserved. Now the blood stands for life. Half disappeared in fire on the altar. Gone! = forfeited life of the sinner. Half thrown back upon the people = life restored to man. How Israel ascended to a higher plane of life (Exo 24:9). In the only possible way–representatively. Then came the vision of God (Exo 24:10). Then the banquet (see Son 2:3-4).
II. What did it mean?
1. Salvation has its ground in God and God alone. Calvary potentially before the Christian era, actually since, the Divine ground of salvation.
2. Forfeited life is given back to man on the ground of Christs atonement. Life, capacity, faculty, are all given back now to be mans very own.
3. Now again to be given back to God in consecration. Being now my very own (in the sense just hinted), I give my own to God. This self-surrender is vital. The surrender is to be complete in intent and purpose. And the obligation presses now. Delay is disloyalty.
4. There will then be peace. With God; with ourselves; with men.
5. Life will move on a higher level (Exo 24:9; Exo 24:12-13). (Emphasize the meaning in the words And BE there: And Moses went up into the Mount of God.) Valley men have no idea of the bracing atmosphere, the brilliant light, the wider view, the grander visions, to be found on the mountain-plateau. It is so in Switzerland; so with the mountains celestial.
6. There shall be visions of God (Exo 24:10). Bushnell says: So gloriously has my experience of God opened His greatness to me, I seem to have got beyond all physical images and measures, even those of astronomy, and simply to think God is to find and bring into my feeling more than even the imagination can reach. I bless God that it is so. I am cheered by it, encouraged, sent onward, and, in what He gives me, begin to have some very faint impression of the glory yet to be revealed.
7. And banquetings and satisfactions of soul (Exo 24:11). As the body has its nutriment, so the soul. No more husks. High thought befitting immortal man. Manna: Hidden manna. Here on earth. At the marriage supper of the Lamb. Thereafter to all eternity. (H. T. Robjohns, B.A.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER XXIV
Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders, are
commanded to go to the mount to meet the Lord, 1.
Moses alone to come near to the Divine presence, 2.
He informs the people, and they promise obedience, 3.
He writes the words of the Lord, erects an altar at the foot of
the hill, and sets up twelve pillars for the twelve tribes, 4.
The young priests offer burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, 5.
Moses reads the book of the covenant, sprinkles the people with
the blood, and they promise obedience, 6-8.
Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel, go up
to the mount, and get a striking display of the majesty of God, 9-11.
Moses alone is called up into the mount, in order to receive the
tables of stone, written by the hand of God, 12.
Moses and his servant Joshua go up, and Aaron and Hur are left
regents of the people during his absence, 13, 14.
The glory of the Lord rests on the mount, and the cloud covers it
for six days, and on the seventh God speaks to Moses out of the
cloud, 15, 16.
The terrible appearance of God’s glory on the mount, 17.
Moses continues with God on the mount forty days, 18.
NOTES ON CHAP. XXIV
Verse 1. Come up unto the Lord] Moses and Aaron were already on the mount, or at least some way up, (Ex 19:24), where they had heard the voice of the Lord distinctly speaking to them: and the people also saw and heard, but in a less distinct manner, probably like the hoarse grumbling sound of distant thunder; see Ex 20:18. Calmet, who complains of the apparent want of order in the facts laid down here, thinks the whole should be understood thus: – “After God had laid before Moses and Aaron all the laws mentioned from the beginning of the 20th chapter to the end of the 23d, before they went down from the mount to lay them before the people, he told them that, when they had proposed the conditions of the covenant to the Israelites, and they had ratified them, they were to come up again unto the mountain accompanied with Nadab and Abihu the sons of Aaron, and seventy of the principal elders of Israel. Moses accordingly went down, spoke to the people, ratified the covenant, and then, according to the command of God mentioned here, he and the others reascended the mountain. Tout cela est racont ici avec assez peu d’ordre.”
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
After thou hast gone down and acquainted the people with my will, and received their answer, then come up again. This sense is gathered from the repetition of this command after that was done, Exo 24:12. Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu; Aaron and his two eldest sons, whom by this special honour and favour he prepared for that office to which they were to be called, Exo 28. Seventy of the elders of Israel; not the seventy governors which were chosen after this time, as appears from Num 11:16, compared with Exo 24:14; but seventy persons selected by Moses out of those rulers chosen and mentioned Exo 18:25; and possibly these were the chief heads of those several families which went with Jacob into Egypt, which were about seventy. See Gen 46:26,27. Worship ye afar off. Though they may come up into the mount further than the people, yet do thou, and let them especially, keep their distance; and what worship either thou or they shall offer to me, shall be performed afar off from the top of the mountain, whither thou only shalt be admitted, and that not to pray to me, but only to receive laws and oracles from me. See Exo 24:2.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And he said unto Moses,…. Who said? no doubt a divine Person, and yet what this Person said is,
come up unto the Lord; meaning either to himself, or one divine Person called to Moses to come up to another: according to the Targum of Jonathan, it was Michael, the prince of wisdom; not a created angel, but the eternal Word, Wisdom, and Son of God; who said this on the seventh day of the month, which was the day after the giving of the law, or ten commands; though Jarchi says this paragraph was before the ten commands, and was said on the fourth of Sivan; but the Targumist seems most correct:
come up unto the Lord, thou and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; Nadab and Abihu were the two eldest sons of Aaron, Ex 6:23 and the seventy elders were not all the elders of Israel, but were so many of them selected out of them, the chief and principal; who were heads of tribes and families, and were no doubt many, if not all of them, of those who by the advice of Jethro were chosen to be rulers of thousands, hundreds, and fifties; these were called to come up to the Lord on the mountain, but not to the top of it, only Moses went thither:
and worship ye afar off: from the people, and even at a distance from Moses; for he only was admitted near to God, as the following verse shows.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
These two verses form part of the address of God in Ex 20:22-23:33; for (“ but to Moses He said ”) cannot be the commencement of a fresh address, which would necessarily require (cf. Exo 24:12; Exo 19:21; Exo 20:22). The turn given to the expression presupposes that God had already spoken to others, or that what had been said before related not to Moses himself, but to other persons. But this cannot be affirmed of the decalogue, which applied to Moses quite as much as to the entire nation (a sufficient refutation of Knobel’s assertion, that these verses are a continuation of Exo 19:20-25, and are linked on to the decalogue), but only of the address concerning the mishpatim, or “rights,” which commences with Exo 20:22, and, according to Exo 20:22 and Exo 21:1, was intended for the nation, and addressed to it, even though it was through the medium of Moses. What God said to the people as establishing its rights, is here followed by what He said to Moses himself, namely, that he was to go up to Jehovah, along with Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and seventy elders. At the same time, it is of course implied that Moses, who had ascended the mountain with Aaron alone (Exo 20:21), was first of all to go down again and repeat to the people the “ rights ” which God had communicated to him, and only when this had been done, to ascend again with the persons named. According to Exo 24:3 and Exo 24:12 (? 9), this is what Moses really did. But Moses alone was to go near to Jehovah: the others were to worship afar off, and the people were not to come up at all.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Israel’s Acceptance of the Laws. | B. C. 1491. |
1 And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the LORD, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off. 2 And Moses alone shall come near the LORD: but they shall not come nigh; neither shall the people go up with him. 3 And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do. 4 And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. 5 And he sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the LORD. 6 And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. 7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. 8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.
The first two verses record the appointment of a second session upon mount Sinai, for the making of laws, when an end was put to the first. When a communion is begun between God and us, it shall never fail on his side, if it do not first fail on ours. Moses is directed to bring Aaron and his sons, and the seventy elders of Israel, that they might be witnesses of the glory of God, and that communion with him to which Moses was admitted; and that their testimony might confirm the people’s faith. In this approach, 1. They must all be very reverent: Worship you afar off, v. 1. Before they came near, they must worship. Thus we must enter into God’s gates with humble and solemn adorations, draw near as those that know our distance, and admire the condescensions of God’s grace in admitting us to draw near. Are great princes approached with the profound reverences of the body? And shall not the soul that draws near to God be bowed before him? 2. They must none of them come so near as Moses, v. 2. They must come up to the Lord (and those that would approach to God must ascend), but Moses alone must come near, being therein a type of Christ, who, as the high priest, entered alone into the most holy place.
In the following verses, we have the solemn covenant made between God and Israel, and the exchanging of the ratifications; and a very solemn transaction it was, typifying the covenant of grace between God and believers through Christ.
I. Moses told the people the words of the Lord, v. 3. He did not lead them blindfold into the covenant, nor teach them a devotion that was the daughter of ignorance; but laid before them all the precepts, general and particular, in the foregoing chapters; and fairly put it to them whether they were willing to submit to these laws or no.
II. The people unanimously consented to the terms proposed, without reservation or exception: All the words which the Lord hath said will we do. They had before consented in general to be under God’s government (ch. xix. 8); here they consent in particular to these laws now given. O that there had been such a heart in them! How well were it if people would but be always in the same good mind that sometimes they seem to be in! Many consent to the law, and yet do not live up to it; they have nothing to except against it, and yet will not persuade themselves to be ruled by it.
This is the tenour of the covenant, That, if they would observe the foregoing precepts, God would perform the foregoing promises. “Obey, and be happy.” Here is the bargain made. Observe,
1. How it was engrossed in the book of the covenant: Moses wrote the words of the Lord (v. 4), that there might be no mistake; probably he had written them as God dictated them on the mount. As soon as ever God had separated to himself a peculiar people in the world, he governed them by a written word, as he has done ever since, and will do while the world stands and the church in it. Moses, having engrossed the articles of agreement concluded upon between God and Israel, read them in the audience of the people (v. 7), that they might be perfectly apprised of the thing, and might try whether their second thoughts were the same with their first, upon the whole matter. And we may suppose they were so; for their words (v. 7) are the same with what they were (v. 3), but something stronger: All that the Lord hath said (be it good, or be it evil, to flesh and blood, Jer. xlii. 6) we will do; so they had said before, but now they add, “And will be obedient; not only we will do what has been commanded, but in every thing which shall further be ordained we will be obedient.” Bravely resolved! if they had but stuck to their resolution. See here that God’s covenants and commands are so incontestably equitable in themselves, and so highly advantageous to us, that the more we think of them, and the more plainly and fully they are set before us, the more reason we shall see to comply with them.
2. How it was sealed by the blood of the covenant, that Israel might receive strong consolations from the ratifying of God’s promises to them, and might lie under strong obligations from the ratifying of their promises to God. Thus has Infinite Wisdom devised means that we may be confirmed both in our faith and in our obedience, may be both encouraged in our duty and engaged to it. The covenant must be made by sacrifice (Ps. l. 5), because, since man has sinned, and forfeited his Creator’s favour, there can be no fellowship by covenant till there be first friendship and atonement by sacrifice.
(1.) In preparation therefore for the parties interchangeably putting their seals to this covenant, [1.] Moses builds an altar, to the honour of God, which was principally intended in all the altars that were built, and which was the first thing to be looked at in the covenant they were now to seal. No addition to the perfections of the divine nature can be made by any of God’s dealings with the children of men, but in them his perfections are manifested and magnified, and his honour is shown forth; therefore he will not be represented by an altar, to signify that all he expected from them was that they should do him honour, and that, being his people, they should be to him for a name and a praise. [2.] He erects twelve pillars, according to the number of the tribes. These were to represent the people, the other party to the covenant; and we may suppose that they were set up against the altar, and that Moses, as mediator, passed to and fro between them. Probably each tribe set up and knew its own pillar, and their elders stood by it. [3.] He appointed sacrifices to be offered upon the altar (v. 5), burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, which yet were designed to be expiatory. We are not concerned to enquire who these young men were that were employed in offering these sacrifices; for Moses was himself the priest, and what they did was purely as his servants, by his order and appointment. No doubt they were men who by their bodily strength were qualified for the service, and by their station among the people were fittest for the honour.
(2.) Preparation being thus made, the ratifications were very solemnly exchanged. [1.] The blood of the sacrifice which the people offered was (part of it) sprinkled upon the altar (v. 6), which signifies the people’s dedicating themselves, their lives, and beings, to God, and to his honour. In the blood (which is the life) of the dead sacrifices all the Israelites were presented unto God as living sacrifices, Rom. xii. 1. [2.] The blood of the sacrifice which God had owned and accepted was (the remainder of it) sprinkled either upon the people themselves (v. 8) or upon the pillars that represented them, which signified God’s graciously conferring his favour upon them and all the fruits of that favour, and his giving them all the gifts they could expect or desire from a God reconciled to them and in covenant with them by sacrifice. This part of the ceremony was thus explained: “Behold the blood of the covenant; see here how God has sealed to you to be a people; his promises to you, and yours to him, are both yea and amen.” Thus our Lord Jesus, the Mediator of the new covenant (of whom Moses was a type), having offered up himself a sacrifice upon the cross, that his blood might be indeed the blood of the covenant, sprinkled it upon the altar in his intercession (Heb. ix. 12), and sprinkles it upon his church by his word and ordinances and the influences and operations of the Spirit of promise, by whom we are sealed. He himself seemed to allude to this solemnity when, in the institution of the Lord’s supper, he said, This cup is the New Testament (or covenant) in my blood. Compare with this, Heb 9:19; Heb 9:20.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
EXODUS – CHAPTER TWENTY-FOUR
Verses 1, 2:
These verses are not out of place. They are God’s instructions to Moses while he was still on the mountain (Ex 19:20). He was to carry them out when he returned to the Mount after hallowing Israel and relaying to them the words of the Law.
Nadab and Abihu were Aaron’s two eldest sons, and were the natural successors to the priesthood. Their sin in offering “strange fire” (Le 10:1, 2) did not occur until much later.
Aaron, his sons, and seventy elders of Israel were to accompany Moses only part of the way up the Mount. Moses was to return alone to confer with Jehovah.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
1. Come up unto the Lord, thou, and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu. Before Moses erected the tabernacle and consecrated it by a solemn ceremony, it was necessary for him to fetch the Tables of the Covenant, which were a pledge of God’s favor; otherwise, if the ark had nothing in it, the sanctuary would have been in a manner empty. For this reason, he is commanded to go up into the mount, but not without a splendid train of companions, in order that an appropriate preparation might arouse their minds for a fit reception of this especial blessing. He is, therefore, commanded to take with him Aaron his brother, and Nadab and Abihu, together with seventy of the elders of the people. This was the number of witnesses selected to behold the glory of God. Before, however, they ascended the mount, a sacrifice was offered by the whole people, and the Book of the Law was read. Finally, Moses alone was received into the top of the mount, to bring from thence the Tables written by the hand of God.
Here, however, (See this subject further discussed on Num 11:16, infra.) arises a question respecting the seventy elders; for we shall see elsewhere that the seventy were not chosen till the people had departed from Mount Sinai; whereas mention is made of them here, before the promulgation of the Law, which seems to be by no means consistent. But this difficulty is removed, if we allow, what we gather from this passage, that, even before they came to Mount Sinai, each tribe had appointed its governors ( praefectos), who would make up this number, since there were six of every tribe; but that when Moses afterwards desired to be relieved of his burdens, part of the government was transferred (305) to these seventy persons, since this number was already sanctioned by custom and use. Certainly, since it is plainly stated that there were (306) seventy from the very first, it is probable that this number of coadjutors was given to Moses in order to make as little change as possible. For we know that, when a custom has obtained, men are very unwilling to depart from it. But it might have also been that the desire and intention of the Israelites was thus to celebrate the memory of their origin; for seventy persons had gone down into Egypt with Jacob, and, in less than two hundred and twenty years after they went there, their race had increased to six hundred thousand, besides women and children. It is not, therefore, contrary to probability that seventy persons were appointed to preside over the whole people, in order that so marvelous a blessing of God might continue to be testified in all ages, as if to trace the commencement of their race up to its very source.
(305) “A ceux, qui desia estoyent en degre d’honneur;” to those who were already honourably distinguished. — Fr.
(306) “Septante et deux;” seventy-two. — Fr.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES.
Exo. 24:1. And he said unto Moses.] These words should be read in connection with Exo. 20:18. The order of events seems to be thisAfter Moses had received the ten commandments, he drew near again where God was, and then he received the book of the covenant (Exo. 20:19 to Exo. 23:33); and before leaving the presence of God he was asked to appear again, accompanied by Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, together with seventy of the elders of Israel (Exo. 24:1, &c.)
Exo. 24:6. And half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar.] This preliminary to the act of communication of the book of the covenant to the people signifies that God pledged Himself to fulfil His part of the covenant independently of the acceptance of it by the people.
Exo. 24:7. And he took the book, &c], i.e., after God had declared Himself bound to the fulfilment of the covenant.
Exo. 24:8. And sprinkled it on the people,] i.e., after the book of the covenant had been read out in the audience, b-osney = into the ears. Thus they were not asked to declare their willingness to do and obey the words until they had heard them distinctly read. Amid all the awful grandeur of the scene God dealt with them as intelligent agents. The objection that Moses could not have made himself heard by so vast a multitude, 600,000, besides children, is met by the fact that the covenant was made not with individuals but with the whole Jewish nation, so that there could be no ground found for dissent on the part of individuals from the engagements of those who heard the words of the covenant and promised obedience to them. The same argument is applicable to the sprinkling of the blood on the people, which, in all probability, was only sprinkled on some few individuals who were considered as representatives of the whole nation.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Exo. 24:1-8
THE RATIFICATION OF THE DIVINE COVENANT
There are divine regulations in nature, but these are not sufficient for mans guidance. Nature teaches only in symbol, and these symbols cannot always be clearly read and interpreted. Natures teachings are not adequate as a rule of life for man as a moral agent. The scientific man and the philosopher would not be satisfied without a book revelation. And the moralist, who should be the true philosopher, will ask for a direct revelation on morals. And this requirement is met. The true guide for man in the realm of morals is the revelation of God as found in the Bible; taken in its completeness, read and interpreted under the guidance of a discriminating wisdom. The old covenant will tend to illustrate the new; and the new will declare what part of the old is perpetually binding.
I. God makes a covenant with His people. Though the terms of the old covenant were strict and severe, yet they were evidently designed for the good of the people to whom they were delivered. We cannot possibly imagine any advantage that might accrue to the Divine Being from this ancient covenant. But from time to time we have seen that great advantage would result to the people, in so far as they followed the divine rules for life and conduct. Here, again, the divine mercy may be marked in that God makes a covenant with His people. He does not at once destroy, but labours for their social and national prosperity.
II. God reveals the terms of His covenant by specially endowed messengers. Moses was specially endowed as a messenger of God. He displayed the possession of those qualities fitting him in an eminent degree to be a legislator. He ruled with a wise spirit. He stands forth as one of the master spirits of humanity. He was further fitted for his office by special divine communications, and by special disclosures of the divine glory. He alone stands in the divine presence. The people must stand afar off. The elders must worship at a distance. And even the gifted Aaronthe progenitor of a noble priesthoodmust not come nigh. In solitude, Moses must approach the mysterious realm. This Moses was the one to tell the people all the words of the Lord, and all the judgments. Those lips, touched with the divine hand and made reflective of the divine glory, must read the book of the covenant in the audience of the people. The old covenant was given by Moses who reflected the divine glory, but the new is given by Him who was the incarnation and visible manifestation of the divine glory.
III. God gives definiteness and permanence to the covenant. And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord. Yea, God Himself is represented as writing, and we find reference made to the commandments which God had written. Oral instruction is not sufficient. The voice of tradition is vague. As time advances that voice becomes feeble and wavering. The moral code must be clear and definite. This writing of the covenant may be taken as symbolical of its permanence. To this day the broad spiritthe true essentialof the covenant is working in all legal codes and religious systems.
IV. God gives solemn emphasis to the covenant by sacred ceremonials. We may suppose that Moses acted under divine direction. The hands of Moses built the altar, but the mind of God directed the human movements. The altar raised as indicative of the divine presence, and the twelve pillars representative of the dwelling place of the twelve tribes. Moses sends the young men, the life and vigour of the people, to offer burnt offerings and sacrifice peace offerings, the divine and human sides of the great solemnity. Part of the blood was sprinkled on the altar, an act of solemn dedication of their humanity in its completeness to God, and then the other part was sprinkled upon the people, which may be regarded as the divine response and acceptance. The first Testament was dedicated with blood. Thus the covenant was rendered emphatic by solemn observances. The blood sprinkled on the altar and on the people would be calculated to inspire deep reverence.
V. God requires a voluntary assent to the terms of His covenant. There was something of the nature of an appeal to the people. In fact, the whole circumstances, in connection with the promulgation of the covenant, constituted an eloquent appeal. The reading of the book of the covenant by such a reader, and on an occasion so deeply impressive and affecting, was plainly calculated to draw forth the universal utterance: All the words which the Lord hath said will we do. The whole people joined in the declaration. There was a pleasing unanimity in the promise, but there was unpleasant difference as to the performance. The man who at first refuses and then performs is nobler than the man who too readily acquiesces, and then fails to fulfil his vows.
VI. Mans highest wisdom is to promise and perform obedience to all the terms of Gods covenant. Well would it have been for these people if they had kept to their brave resolveAll that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient. There are poetical states in peoples, and then they are apt to be free with their promises. But the prosaic condition soon arrives, and then the promises are broken. Gods covenant ever commends itself to mans higher nature, or to mans nature in its loftier and holier moods. The temptations of life, and the weakness of the flesh, render us unwilling to practice, and then unbelieving as to the virtue of the divine covenant. Obedience is the pathway of light, the pathway of true divine knowledge, and the pathway to the realisation of divine benedictions. Let us obey, and then shall we know the blessedness of all divine covenants.
There is a slight disarrangement in this chapter, as Ewald and speakers commonly shew. Exo. 24:3 logically follows Exo. 23:33 of previous chapter, and Exo. 24:1-2 should be inserted between Exo. 24:8-9.
W. Burrows, B.A.
THE COVENANT.Exo. 24:3-8
This was one of the most impressive acts of a most impressive dispensation. It was also one of the most important, inasmuch as
(1) God used this opportunity to avouch Himself to be the God of Israel, and Israel avouched themselves to be His people. And
(2) it is the great fact upon which the New Testament lays stress as typifying the great covenant work of our Lord Jesus Christ (1Co. 11:25; Heb. 8:9 For some valuable remarks in this latter application, see Dales Jewish Temple and Christian Church, p. 163).
I. The covenant was divinely revealed. And Moses came and told the people.
1. It was revealed faithfully. All the words of the Lord and all the judgments.
(1.) It consisted of words for their direction and encouragement.
(2.) It consisted of judgment for their warning: so the covenant of Jesus Christ consisted of beatitudes and woes.
2. It was revealed intelligently. Moses had no interest in suppressing anything. He was a good man, and would not suppress anything.
(1.) It was not an appeal to their superstition and credulity. It consisted of laws upon the wisdom and beneficence of which 2000 years of legislation have not improved.
(2.) It was revealed in language which they could all understand.
(3.) It was revealed under circumstances which attested its divine origin.
(4.) It was an appeal to their reason, piety, and interest.
II. The covenant was accepted by man.
1. Unanimously. All the people with one voice.
2. Heartily. We will do.
3. Specifically. All the words which the Lord hath said. There had been a general acceptance before (Exo. 19:8).
4. Speedily. Moses rose up early in the morning.
III. The covenant was permanently embodied. And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord.
1. A written revelation is necessary. Memory is not to be trusted. Traditions from a long past are apt to be vague or to diminish or be added to. Books fix facts.
2. A written revelation is advantageous.
(1.) A perpetual direction for obedience and warning against disobedience.
(2.) A standing witness of the divine wisdom and goodness.
3. A written revelation is important. An everlasting record for mans benefit of what has proceeded from the mind of God.
IV. The arrangements for the covenant were carefully and impressively prepared.
1. (1) An altar was built to represent God, and
(2) pillars to represent His people.
2. Young men were selected for special service as symbolising the strength and earnestness that should be exerted in keeping our covenant engagement.
3. Sacrifices were offered.
(1.) Burnt-offerings, to signify the dedication of the people to Jehovah.
(2.) Peace-offerings, as typifying Jehovahs reconciliation with His people.
V. The covenant was ratified with blood.
1. Half the blood of the sacrifices was sprinkled on the altar to signify Israels dedication to God.
2. One more opportunity was given to the people to withdraw from their engagement. The law was read and the people renewed their vows.
3. Then the other half of the blood was sprinkled on the people, signifying the purification of the people and the certainty of the divine favours, and the whole ceremony closed with the memorable words, Exo. 24:8.
In conclusion
1. Christ is the mediator of a better covenant.
2. That His blood is sprinkled on the altar of God (Heb. 9:12), and in the heart of His people (Heb. 9:13-15).
3. That He has instituted a perpetual memorial of His previous death until His coming again (1Co. 9:25).
J. W. Burn.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Exo. 24:1-8. Again, I see the seventy left at some little distance; I see Moses alone go up into the mount; and I see the affairs of the people committed to Aaron and Hur. It appears to me this is a beautiful presentment of what is going on in the present dispensation, when the affairs of the Lords kingdom are administered through subordinate instrumentality. The 4th of Ephesians tells us that, when the Lord Jesus Christ ascended to the right hand of God, He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ. But, meantime, higher transactions are going on in the mounttransactions of which you and I know nothing except through the precious lattices of the promises. By and by the time will come when we shall see our glorious Head; see Him in His glory, see Him as he is.Krause.
We may search from end to end of the legal ritual, and not find those two precious words, draw nigh. Ah! no; such words could never be heard from the top of Sinai, nor from amid the shadows of the law. They could only be uttered at heavens side of the empty tomb of Jesus, where the blood of the cross has opened a perfectly cloudless prospect to the vision of faith. The words, afar off, are as characteristic of the law, as draw nigh are of the Gospel. Under the law, the work was never done which could entitle a sinner to draw nigh. Man had not fulfilled his promised obedience; and the blood of calves and goats could not atone for the failure, or give his guilty conscience peace. Hence, therefore, he had to stand afar off. Mans vows were broken and his sin unpurged; how, then, could he draw nigh? The blood of ten thousand bullocks could not wipe away one stain from the conscience, or give the peaceful sense of nearness to a reconciled God.C. H. M.
ILLUSTRATIONS
BY
REV. W. ADAMSON
Elders! Exo. 24:1. Pierotti says that, among the Jews, the elders exercised great authority, and were held in high respect. At a later period the word became a regular title, irrespective of age or experience, being conferred generally on those who, by their wealth or wisdom, could head a tribe or lead in public affairs:
1. From Deu. 21:2 it would appear that in certain expiatory rites they represented the city or the whole nation. In Deu. 22:15 they formed a court for trying crimes; while in Num. 11:16 they were selected by Moses to aid in supporting his authority. Joshua, in Jos. 7:6, relates how, after Israels defeat, he and the elders fell down before the ark.
2. In the New Testament we have the seventy disciples; and in the apocalyptic scenery of heaven are twenty-four lesser thrones around about the throne of Godoccupied by four and twenty elders. These, sitting in the symbols of priesthood and royalty, of endurance and victory, clothed in white raiment, and having on their heads crowns of gold, are supposed to be the representatives of the twelve tribes under the Mosaic and Christian dispensations:
For the Lord their God hath clothed them with
A new and glorious dress.
With the garments of salvation, with the robes
Of righteousness.
Covenant! Exo. 24:3. Awa, on the lofty mountain-summit is a spring which breaks into two parts, one flowing down one side, the other adown the other. A man, climbing up the wild and rocky side, traces the river up to its source. There he sees the other flowing. He follows down the grassy soft slope, until he traces its descent into the ocean. Even so with Christs salvation on the Mount of Love. This is not a new covenant, but the renewal and fuller development of the everlasting covenant with Abraham, Abel, Adam, &c. Its living stream flowed on one side to David and Israel, Abraham and Abel; on the other side to the apostles and martyrs, &c., and so on to the eternal ocean.
Jehovahs covenant shall endure,
All ordered, everlasting, sure!
O child of God, rejoice to trace
Thy portion in its glorious grace.
Laws Province! Exo. 24:3. In Gal. 3:17, the apostle says that law, in its Mosaic development, was added because of transgression. He does not say that there was no law before Adam sinned, much less does he assert that there was none before Moses received it here. There is law in heaven, i.e., the moral law of love, and that law Adam had. In the free state of Liberia certain judicial enactments were absent. After the African Republic had existed a few years, some of its subjects committed offences. To prevent their repetition Government passed certain laws. The moral law was there before, and the Liberian freed-men were as morally bound to obey it before as after its judicial enforcement. God renewed the covenant more stringently, because of previous breaches of its provisions. The purpose of the law was to
(1) Point out clearly the rule of human duty to tread the path of righteousness; to
(2) Press home mans natural inability to keep the law in his own strength; and to
(3) Prepare the way, like John the Baptist, for Christ to enter the sinners heart, as the end of the law for righteousness.
By His life, for that fulfilling Gods command exceeding broad,
By His glorious resurrection, seal and signet of thy God.
Morning-Prayer! Exo. 24:4. Milton speaks of the breath of morning being sweet, Her rising sweet with charm of earliest birds. Vaughan quaintly says that mornings are mysteries. Mysteries of good are they when well used, but mysteries of evil when, as too oft, much abused. Mornings are well used when prayer ushers them in. Beecher says, Let the day have a blessed baptism by giving your first waking thoughts into the bosom of God. The first hours of the morning is the rudder of the day. Carlyle says we have a proverb among us that the morning is a friend to the muses, i.e., a good time for study. Is it not more true that it is a great friend to the gracesthat it is a good praying time! Therefore
Serve God before the world; let Him not go
Until thou hast a blessing; then resign
The whole unto Him, and remember who
Prevailed by wrestling ere the sun did shine.
Vaughan.
Gospel and Blood! Exo. 24:6. Foss says that he once heard a very earnest and evangelical minister say that he had been accosted by a man who had heard him preach with this remark: I do not like your creed; it is too bloody,it savours of the shambles. It is all blood, blood, BLOOD. To this the faithful ambassador replied, Well, it is so, for it recognises as its foundation a very sanguinary scenethe death of Christ, with bleeding hands, and feet, and side. And without shedding of blood is no remission of sins.
Jesus, our Great High Priest,
Has shed His blood and died;
Our guilty conscience needs
No sacrifice beside.
His precious blood
Did once atone,
And now it pleads
Before the throne.
Watts.
Covenant-Obedience! Exo. 24:7. Obedience is our universal duty and destiny, says Carlyle, and whoso will not bend must break. Upon which Watson adds that to obey God unwillingly, as Balaam did, is to resemble the devils who came out or the man possessed, at Christs command, but with reluctancy and against their will. If a willing mind be wanting, there wants that flower which should perfume our obedience and make it a sweet-smelling savour to God. The hireling prophets obedience was deficient in this respect, that it lacked the frequent odours of voluntary or free-will offering. Israels apparently full self-surrender to covenant-obediencehowever earnest for the nonceafterwards turned out signally deficient in this voluntary grace. Their vehement covenant-protestations of obedience here are a vivid example of the Divine testimony, The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked, who can know it? None but God, who searcheth the heart and trieth the reins.
Not the labour of my hands
Can fulfil Thy laws demands;
Could my zeal no respite know,
Could my tears for ever flow,
All for sin could not atone
Thou must save, and Thou alone.
Toplady.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
THE TEXT OF EXODUS
TRANSLATION
24 And he said unto Mo-ses, Come up unto Je-ho-vah, thou, and Aar-on, Na-dab, and A-bi-hu, and seventy of the elders of Is-ra-el; and worship ye afar off: (2) and Moses alone shall come near unto Je-ho-vah; but they shall not come near; neither shall the people go with him. (3) And Moses came and told the people all the words of Jehovah, and all the ordinances: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which Je-ho-vah hath spoken will we do. (4) And Moses wrote all the words of Je-ho-vah, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the mount, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Is-ra-el. (5) And he sent young men of the children of Is-ra-el, who offered burnt-offerings, and sacrificed peace-offerings of oxen unto Je-ho-vah. (6) And Mo-ses took half of the blood, and put it in basins; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. (7) And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that Je-ho-vah hath spoken will we do, and be obedient. (8) And Mo-ses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which Je-ho-vah hath made with you concerning all these words.
(9) Then went up Mo-ses, and Aar-on, Nadab, and A-bi-hu, and seventy of the elders of Is-ra-el: (10) and they saw the God of Is-ra-el; and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stone, and as it were the very heaven for clearness. (11) And upon the nobles of the children of Is-ra-el he laid not his hand: and they beheld God, and did eat and drink.
(12) And Je-ho-vah said unto Mo-ses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee the tables of stone, and the law and the commandment, which I have written, that thou mayest teach them. (13) And Mo-ses rose up, and Joshua his minister: and Mo-ses went up into the mount of God. (14) And he said unto the elders, Tarry ye here for us, until we come again unto you: and, behold, Aar-on and Hur are with you; whosoever hath a cause, let him come near unto them. (15) And Mo-ses went up into the mount, and the cloud covered the mount. (16) And the glory of Je-ho-vah abode upon mount Si-nai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day he called unto Mo-ses out of the midst of the cloud. (17) And the appearance of the glory of Je-ho-vah was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Is-ra-el. (18) And Mo-ses entered into the midst of the cloud, and went up into the mount: and Mo-ses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.
EXPLORING EXODUS: CHAPTER TWENTY-FOUR
QUESTIONS ANSWERABLE FROM THE BIBLE
1.
Who was to come up with Moses into the mount? (Exo. 24:1; Exo. 24:9)
2.
Who alone was to come near the Lord? (Exo. 24:2)
3.
What words did Moses tell the people? (Exo. 24:3)
4.
What did the people promise to do? (Exo. 24:3)
5.
What did Moses write down? (Exo. 24:4)
6.
What did Moses build? (Exo. 24:4)
7.
Who offered sacrifices unto the Lord? Of what types? (Exo. 24:5)
8.
How did Moses divide the blood? (Exo. 24:6)
9.
What did Moses sprinkle the blood upon? (Exo. 24:6; Exo. 24:8; Heb. 9:19)
10.
What did Moses read publicly? (Exo. 24:7)
11.
By what title did Moses refer to the blood? (Exo. 24:8; Compare Luk. 22:20)
12.
What did Moses and the others see in the mount? (Exo. 24:10-11)
13.
What was under Gods feet? (Exo. 24:10; Eze. 1:22; Eze. 1:26; Rev. 4:6)
14.
What is meant by upon the nobles . . . he laid not his hand? (Exo. 24:11)
15.
What did the nobles eat and drink? (Exo. 24:11; Exo. 24:5). Where did they eat and drink?
16.
What did God promise to give to Moses (Exo. 24:12)
17.
Who went with Moses up into the mount? (Exo. 24:13)
18.
What was Moses to do with the tables of stone? (Exo. 24:12)
19.
What was Joshuas position, or office? (Exo. 24:13)
20.
Where did the elders wait? (Exo. 24:14)
21.
Who were appointed to settle legal disputes? (Exo. 24:14)
22.
What was the appearance of the mount as Moses entered it? (Exo. 24:15)
23.
How long did Moses wait before God called him? (Exo. 24:16)
24.
From where did God call Moses? (Exo. 24:16)
25.
What did the glory of the Lord look like? (Exo. 24:17)
26.
How long was Moses upon the mount? (Exo. 24:18)
27.
What did Moses eat during this stay on the mount? (Deu. 9:9)
EXODUS TWENTY-FOUR: RATIFICATION OF THE COVENANT
1.
The call to ascend the mount; Exo. 24:1-2.
2.
The blood ratification; Exo. 24:3-8.
3.
The fellowship with God; Exo. 24:9-11.
4.
The ascent of Moses into the mount; Exo. 24:12-18.
WORSHIP AFAR OFF! (Exo. 24:1)
1.
Afar off because of past unbelief.
2.
Afar off because of past disobedience.
3,
Afar off because sacrifices had not yet been offered.
(This separation was removed when sacrifices were made! Exo. 24:5-6; Exo. 24:8-10.)
EXODUS TWENTY-FOUR:
THE OLD TESTAMENT MOUNT OF TRANSFIGURATION!
1.
An ascent into the mount; Exo. 24:1; Exo. 24:9; Mat. 17:1.
2.
An emphasis on sacrifice; Exo. 24:5; Luk. 9:31.
3.
A vision of God and glory; Exo. 24:10; Luk. 9:29.
4.
A covering cloud; Exo. 24:15-16; Luk. 9:34.
5.
Moses only Jesus only; Exo. 24:18; Luk. 9:34.
THE COVENANT! (Exo. 24:3-8)
1.
The covenant was divinely revealed; Exo. 24:3.
2.
The covenant was willingly accepted; Exo. 24:3.
3.
The covenant was permanently written; Exo. 24:4.
4.
The covenant was impressively presented; Exo. 24:4-5.
5.
The covenant was ratified with blood; Exo. 24:5-6; Exo. 24:8.
How MEN MAKE COVENANT WITH GOD (Exo. 24:3-8)
1.
By hearing Gods words; Exo. 24:3.
2.
By commitment to obey; Exo. 24:3.
3.
By writing Gods words; Exo. 24:4.
4.
By sacrifices unto God; Exo. 24:4-5.
5.
By sprinkling the blood God-ward; Exo. 24:6.
6.
By promises to obey; Exo. 24:7.
7.
By sprinkling the blood man-ward; Exo. 24:8.
FELLOWSHIP WITH GOD! (Exo. 24:3-11)
I.
How fellowship with God was obtained (Exo. 24:3-8)
1.
By accepting Gods words; Exo. 24:3; Exo. 24:7.
2.
By offering sacrifices; Exo. 24:5.
3.
By sprinkling the blood; Exo. 24:5-6; Exo. 24:8.
a.
Toward God; Exo. 24:5-6.
b.
Toward the people; Exo. 24:8.
II.
Blessings of fellowship with God (Exo. 24:9-11)
1.
Access to God; Exo. 24:9.
2.
A view of God; Exo. 24:10.
3.
Security with God; Exo. 24:11.
4.
Nourishment in Gods presence; Exo. 24:11
MOSES AND CHRIST: COVENANT-MAKERS! (Exo. 24:3-11)
1.
Both declared Gods words.
Moses (Exo. 24:3); Christ (Joh. 7:16; Joh. 8:26)
2.
Both offered sacrifices.
Moses (Exo. 24:4-5); Christ (Eph. 5:2; Heb. 9:13)
3.
Both sprinkled the blood.
Moses (Exo. 24:6; Exo. 24:8); Christ (Heb. 12:24; 1Pe. 1:2)
4.
Both brought men unto God.
Moses (Exo. 24:9) Christ (Eph. 2:18; 2Co. 3:18)
GODS MEDIATOR (Exo. 24:12-18)
1.
Called up alone unto God; Exo. 24:12-14.
2.
Entered divine surroundings; Exo. 24:15-17.
3.
Heard Gods call; Exo. 24:16.
4.
Continued long with God; Exo. 24:18.
(Both Moses and Jesus shared these experiences.)
EXPLORING EXODUS: NOTES ON CHAPTER TWENTY-FOUR
1.
What is in Exodus twenty-four?
Exodus twenty-four is one of the most sublime and glorious chapters in the Old Testament. We agree with Arthur Pink that there is no subsequent passage in the Old Testament approaching a parallel to the glories revealed in this chapter. Not until we come to the New Testament account of God tabernacling among men through the presence of His son do we have anything equal to Exodus twenty-four (Joh. 1:14). This chapter has been designated the Old Testament Mount of Transfiguration! It is the climactic point of the history in Exodus.
In Exodus twenty-four we have the call to Israels representatives to come up to Jehovah (Exo. 24:1-2). This indicates the achievement of direct fellowship with God.
The chapter continues by telling of Moses reading the book of the covenant to the people, and the peoples acceptance of it, and the ratifying of it by the sprinkling of blood (Exo. 24:3-8). Thus Exodus twenty-four tells the fulfillment of the promise God made in Exo. 19:5-6 to take Israel as His special people, a holy nation.
The chapter records the actual meeting with God by Israels leaders. They saw God and ate and drank with Him in security. (Exo. 24:9-11)
The chapter concludes with the call to Moses to come up into the mount again to receive the written law and the commandments. Moses ascended and was there forty days. (Exo. 24:12-18)
This chapter has been a particular target of unbelieving critics, who have tried to dissect it and attribute various parts of it to different authors living centuries apart. It seems that those chapters in which believers perceive the deepest spiritual significance and meaning are often the very ones the critics concentrate their attacks upon. (Such chapters include 2 Samuel 7, Isaiah 53, Zechariah 6, Genesis 1-2.) We should not be surprised at this, because the Bible says that the god of this world (the devil) has blinded the minds of the unbelieving. (2Co. 4:3-4)
2.
Who was called to come up into the mount? (Exo. 24:1-2)
Moses, Aar-on, Aar-ons two sons (Nadab and Abihu), and seventy men from the elders of Israel were summoned to come up and worship afar off. Only Moses was to come near to Jehovah. The people were not to go up with him.
It appears that Moses had come down from the mountain after hearing the words in chapters twenty-one to twenty-three. Note Exo. 20:21. Either Moses was already down at the start of chapter twenty-four, or he was in the process of descent when God spoke the words of Exo. 24:1.
Twice in this chapter Nadab and Abihu, sons of Aar-on, are named (Exo. 24:1; Exo. 24:9). They shared the rare honor of seeing God (Exo. 24:9-10). They are referred to elsewhere in Num. 3:4; Lev. 10:1-2; Exo. 6:23. They are remembered chiefly because they died by fire from the Lord, sent upon them when they offered strange fire. The repeated mention of them in Exodus twenty-four speaks of lost opportunities, of high privileges thrown away. Neither the dignity and righteousness of parents, nor our own special privileges from God will save us, if we do not respond to God with a lowly, believing, obedient spirit.
The seventy elders seem to have been the accepted representatives of the entire nation. (Exo. 24:14; Compare Num. 11:16; Exo. 18:12; Exo. 3:16; Exo. 12:21; Exo. 17:5.) Though some disregard the number seventy as a loose traditional number, we accept it as precisely correct.
The fact that Israels representatives had to worship afar off shows that men cannot approach God on the basis of their own works and personal righteousness.[343] Even at our best we need a mediator.
[343] J. H. Hertz, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, p. 322, quotes the Jewish authority Nachmanides: They [the seventy elders] remained uninjured, because they were worthy to see the vision. This opinion surely conflicts with the scriptural view that There is none that doeth good, no not one (Pslam Exo. 14:3). Men are accepted by God solely because of Gods graciousness and not because of their worthiness.
The fact that Moses alone could come near to Jehovah indicates again his unique position as mediator and as a type of Christ, our mediator, who draws near unto the presence of God for us (Heb. 9:24).
The shifting of wording from second person (thou) in Exo. 24:1 to third person (him) in Exo. 24:2 surprises us a bit. We feel that Cassuto[344] is correct in suggesting that verse two was worded in third person because those who accompanied Moses were also enjoined to let Moses go up by himself. An abrupt change from second to third person occurs sometimes in Hebrew literature. See Exo. 23:25; Exo. 20:5-7 for other examples.
[344] Op. cit., p. 310.
Many critics of the Bible attribute Exo. 24:1-2; Exo. 24:9-11 to one author (Driver says J; Noth says E), and Exo. 24:3-8; Exo. 24:12-14 to some other source. Martin Noth says, In Exo. 24:1-11 two different literary strata may easily be distinguished.[345] These critics do not agree among themselves as to the exact break-off point after verse fourteen. (Driver sets it after 14; Oesterly and Robinson after 15; Noth after 15a.) Noth feels that even Exo. 24:1-2 shows it has been worked over. The lack of agreement among those holding such views reveals the lack of real evidence to confirm them. The fact that these theories conflict so sharply with the scriptures own statements of authorship reveals the presupposition of the critics that the Bible is not trustworthy.
[345] Op. cit., p. 194.
3.
What did Moses tell to the people? (Exo. 24:3)[346]
[346] Martin Noth, op. cit., p. 198, considers Exo. 24:3-8 an independent fragment attached to the originally independent book of the covenant (chapters 2123), to connect that book with the covenant made at Sinai. He feels that chapter 34 is the J version of the making of the Sinai covenant, and that the story of the covenant making in chapter 24 was not originally by the same author as the one who wrote chapter 34. We feel that the story as given in Exodus is too harmonious with itself to permit us to accept such extreme ideas about its production.
He told them all the words of Jehovah and all the ordinances. The people responded to Moses words by unanimously declaring that they would do all the words which Jehovah had spoken.
We suppose that the words and ordinances which Moses told the people were all the words that he had heard from God after he left the people. See Exo. 20:21. This would include everything in Exo. 20:22 to Exo. 23:23. It seems unlikely to us that Moses repeated the words of the ten commandments, since all the Israelites had heard these for themselves from Gods own voice. See Deu. 4:33; Deu. 4:36.
After hearing Moses, ALL the people answered with ONE voice, saying, ALL which Jehovah has spoken we will do. (Compare Israels earlier promises to obey in Exo. 19:8; Exo. 20:19; Deu. 5:27.) Their prompt and unanimous response makes us forget for a moment how short was the time they remained faithful. In less than forty days they made the golden calf (Exodus 32).
4.
What last-minute preparations did Moses make for the ratification of the covenant? (Exo. 24:4-5)
(1)
He wrote the words of Jehovah.
(2)
He built one altar and set up twelve stone pillars.
(3)
He sent young men to offer burnt-offerings and peace-offerings.
The words which Moses had told the people orally (Exo. 24:3), he then wrote upon papyrus or parchment. Surely both Moses act of oral recitation and his written record of Gods words required inspiration from God. Probably no one could have recalled all those details unless God aided him in recalling all that God had said. Compare Joh. 14:26.
Numerous passages affirm that Moses wrote a great amount of material. See Deu. 31:9; Deu. 31:19; Deu. 31:24; Num. 33:2; Exo. 17:14. Certainly we believe these statements.
Regarding under the mount (or, at the foot of the mountain), see Exo. 19:17.
Moses altar was made of earth or of uncut stones. See Exo. 20:25. The altar appears to have symbolized the Lords presence among the Israelites. See Exo. 20:24.
The twelve pillars (presumably made of stone) symbolized the tribes of Israel. The act of setting up stones as memorials or symbols when a covenant was made is mentioned in other places in scripture. See Gen. 31:45; Jos. 24:25-26.
We appreciate the thought of R. Alan Cole,[347] that while the pillars represented Israel, the fact that this was only symbolism and not superstition is shown by the fact that in the blood ceremony, the blood was dashed over the people themselves (Exo. 24:8), and not over the pillars that represented them.
[347] Op. cit., p. 184.
We think that the young men who were sent to offer sacrifices were the firstborn sons. Exo. 13:2 : Sanctify unto me all the firstborn. This is the view expressed in the Jewish Talmud and the Targum of Onkelos. Keil and Delitzsch[348] deny that these young men were the firstborn sons, or some pre-Levitical priests. Positive proof of their identity is indeed not given, but we still think they were the firstborn.
[348] Op. cit., II, p, 157.
Burnt-offerings and peace-offerings were Israels most ancient types of offerings. See Exo. 20:24. God later revealed His will on more involved types of offerings, like sin-, trespass-, and meal-offerings (Leviticus 1-7). Burnt-offerings indicated mans guilt and Gods condemnation of this guilt. Peace-offerings indicated the state of harmony brought about by the offering of burnt-offerings. Only the peace-offerings were partly eaten by the offerer (Lev. 7:15-16). It seems probable that the food eaten in Exo. 24:11 was from the peace-offerings.
There is a special emphasis on the fact that the sacrifices of Exo. 24:5 were unto the LORD. See Exo. 22:20.
5.
What did Moses do with the blood of the offerings? (Exo. 24:6; Exo. 24:8)
He put half the blood in basins, and he sprinkled this part of the blood on the altar he had built (Exo. 24:4). The sprinkling of the blood on the altar indicated the blood was sprinkled God-ward (toward God) to satisfy the requirements of divine justice. Similarly, Christs blood was presented in heaven on our behalf (Heb. 9:11-12; Heb. 9:24-25).
After sprinkling blood on the altar (an act of reaching out for Gods acceptance), Moses read to the people the entire book of the covenant which he had written. After reading, Moses sprinkled the blood upon the people (or in the) direction of the people). He also sprinkled[349] the book itself. Seemingly, Moses used the remaining half of the blood for these acts. The blood was sprinkled man-ward, as well as God-ward. The blood was to change the lives of the people.
[349] The verb zaraq, translated sprinkle in Exo. 24:8, means to scatter to sprinkle, to swing, to shake, to pour out a vessel.
Heb. 9:18-20 : Wherefore, even the first covenant hath not been dedicated without blood. For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses unto all the people according to the law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the BOOK itself and all the PEOPLE, saying, This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded to you-ward.
Christ used similar words at the last supper: This cup is the new covenant in my blood, even that which is poured out for you. (Luk. 22:20)
Gods covenants are solemn, sealed with blood! Blood speaks of sin, and of death, and of life.
6.
Why was blood used in ratifying the covenant? (Exo. 24:8)
No theological explanation is given in Exodus, but several reasons are suggested in other passages.
(1) The blood was a means of enactment. Heb. 9:15-17 tells us that for a will (or testament, or covenant) to be in force, a death must have occurred. The offering of blood is possible only when a death has occurred. Thus, the blood functioned as a means of ENACTMENT of the covenant. Wherefore, not even the first covenant (that given by Moses) was dedicated without blood. (Heb. 9:18)
(2) Furthermore, blood has always been connected with the forgiveness of sins. See Lev. 17:11; Heb. 9:15; Heb. 9:22. The passage in Hebrews quite definitely links remission (release) of sins with the offering of blood, and specifically mentions Moses sprinkling the blood at the making of the covenant as one of the applications of blood offered for remission of sins. Without the shedding of blood, Israel could not have been accepted as a people.
(3) Also blood served as a visual warning to the people that they must keep the terms of the covenant or face death. Blood-covenants showed the deadly seriousness of the commitments being made. See Gen. 15:9-10; Gen. 15:17; Jer. 34:18-20.
(4) The blood functioned also as a means of bringing unity between God and Israel. There was blood sprinkled upon both the altar (symbolizing God) and the people. Thus the two contracting parties were by this means united by a solemn bond. The blood was for the people a transposition into the kingdom of God, a fulfillment of Exo. 19:5-6.
7.
What promise did the people make when they heard the law read? (Exo. 24:7)
They promised to obey all that Jehovah had spoken. Gods covenants must be accepted voluntarily by His people. Regrettably, Israel did not keep to its promise.
Note that Moses twice declared the law to Israel, once extemporaneously and once by reading from the written word. Public reading of a book of covenant was a frequent practice in Bible times. It was done by Joshua and King Josiah, among others. (Jos. 24:1 ff; 2Ki. 23:2; 2Ki. 23:21.)
If it be objected that Moses could not possibly have spoken so as have been heard by 600,000 men plus women and children, we can only reply that perhaps this was done by speaking to certain individuals who were representatives of all the people or tribes. Probably the same thing occurred in the sprinkling of the blood upon the people. Furthermore, we can not dismiss the possibility that God miraculously amplified Moses voice so that all could hear it.
Israels promise to obey in Exo. 24:7 was their third open promise to obey. See Exo. 19:8; Exo. 24:3. Compare Exo. 23:22.
We must remind ourselves at this point that the law of Moses was never given as a means for justifying men from sin. See Gal. 3:21. It only pointed out sins, with the goal of curbing the practice of sin. (Gal. 3:19; 1Ti. 1:9-10; Rom. 3:20.) The law was (and is) an essential guide to those who would live Godly. But the attainment of righteousness in Gods sight has always been possible only because God graciously accepts those who believe and seek Him through the sacrificial system He has provided, namely through the death of Jesus Christ. (Gal. 3:8-9; Gal. 3:22.)
8.
What marvelous demonstration of fellowship followed the making of the covenant? (Exo. 24:9-11)
Moses, Aar-on, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy elders went up upon the mount and actually saw the God of Israel![350] They met in harmony, and beheld God, and ate and drank! However, even at this time it appears that Moses came much closer to God than the others. See Exo. 24:2.
[350] The Greek LXX reads They saw the place where the God of Israel stood. This appears to be a deliberate alteration of the text to avoid the possibility of describing God as having human or tangible form.
Only a few days before it would have been DEATH for any Israelite to have broken through the fence-barrier and gazed at God (Exo. 19:21; Exo. 19:24). Now after the blood has been sprinkled and the covenant accepted, they eat and drink with God in peace. Though the people had been rebels against Gods holy nature and laws, He as the God of all grace meets with their representatives in gracious fellowship.
Moses had previously been commanded to ascend into the mount with the peoples representatives (Exo. 24:1). But they did not ascend till the blood was sprinkled and the covenant was ratified. This point cannot be stressed too strongly! Ponder the power of the blood to bring men into Gods presence (Rev. 7:14-15). When we consider the rebelliousness and disobedience of Israel up to this point, and consider that God foresaw their soon-forthcoming disobedience, we are awed at the graciousness of God. We should also be awed that through the blood of Christ we have an access to the Father (Eph. 2:18).
Meditate on the marvel of seeing God![351] How unusual this is! Exo. 33:20 : Thou canst not see my face; for man shall not see me and live. Joh. 1:18 : No man hath seen God at any time. Compare 1Jn. 4:12. God dwells in light unapproachable, whom no man hath seen, nor can see (1Ti. 6:16). When Isaiah saw the Lord, he felt that he was undone (or destroyed), for mine eyes have seen the king. . . . (Isa. 6:3) It was generally recognized among the Israelites that man could not see God and live. See Jdg. 6:22; Jdg. 13:22. Exo. 24:11 itself hints that there was something very out of the ordinary in the fact that God did not lay His hand upon (or harm) the nobles.
[351] Moses and the others with him on the mount saw elohim, or God. The name Yahweh is not used here. Neither is it used in other accounts that tell of men seeing God. Compare Isa. 6:1; Jdg. 13:22.
Never again for 1500 years did a body of men see God again, not until they saw the Lord Jesus with glory as of the only-begotten of the father. We think that the one whom Moses and the elders saw was God the Word, he who later came in the flesh as Jesus; and that they did not actually behold God the Father. If this be true, then both the statements that they saw God and that no man has beheld God at any time can be true. Compare Isa. 6:1 and Joh. 12:41. But we claim no knowledge of the divine vision presented unto Moses other than the words of the scripture text itself.
Critical scholars who seek to connect Exo. 24:1-2 directly to Exo. 24:9-11, and attribute Exo. 24:3-8 to another author, saying it has been inserted into the story, miss a principal point of Exodus 24 : the point that the ratification of the covenant in Exo. 24:3-8 was followed by a glorious experience of fellowship with God upon the mount.
The then at the start of Exo. 24:9 could be (literally) translated simply as and, although the and there does indicate the consecutive sequence of events which we express by then.
9.
What was the appearance of God like? (Exo. 24:10)
The description of Gods appearance is so brief that no image could possibly be made from the information given here. See Deu. 4:15. What is described is only that which lay under his feet, which was like a work (or production of labor) made of brilliant, clear sapphire. The translation pavement seems to be a bit too specific, but probably represents the general idea correctly.
The area under Gods feet is said to have been like the very essence (KJV, body) of heaven for (or in) purity. The term translated body in KJV does indeed mean bone, body, or frame; but it also has the meanings of essence, self, self-same, very. This seems to be its meaning in Exo. 24:10. This indicates that what Moses and the elders saw had in every way the appearance of heaven itself. They did not see some watered-down representation.
The word saw in Exo. 24:10 (Heb., raah) is a common word for seeing with physical eyes. The word saw (or beheld) in Exo. 24:11 (chazah) is the customary word for seeing a vision. The use of both of these words leads us to think that God had not actually transported His heavenly throne apparatus to Mt. Sinai but that the nobles saw it by a vision, but with a vision of such clarity that it was like the very essence of heaven, like being there on the spot.
Cassuto[352] says that the word translated purity is commonly used (in Ugaritic poetry) to signify the brightness of the sapphire.
[352] Op. cit., p. 314.
The paved work under Gods feet appears to be the same as that which is referred to in the description of Gods throne in Eze. 1:26 : Above the firmament . . . was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone; and upon the likeness of the throne was a likeness as the appearance of a man upon it. Ezekiel alone refers to the appearance of God as the appearance of a man. The sapphire is a sky-blue semi-precious stone. See Exo. 28:18. Rev. 4:6 says that before the throne of God was, as it were, a sea of glass, like unto crystal. We suppose that this crystal refers to the same pavement as that described as sapphire in Exodus.
The liberal critic Noth tries to link the sapphire paved work of Exo. 24:10 with painted or glazed pavements of sapphire color, such as are known to have existed in ancient Mesopotamia.[353] This, of course, renders the Exodus account a fictitious description, written by some author who devised a description of heaven resembling a Mesopotamian temple, and then alleged that the summit of Mt. Sinai was in heaven and that the God of Israel was present there. We are frequently astounded to see how far unbelievers will go to avoid accepting scripture statements as simple truth.
[353] Op. cit., p. 195.
10.
What was the significance of eating and drinking before God? (Exo. 24:11)
The exact significance of this act is not stated. We suppose that it was mainly an act of fellowship with God, celebrating the ratification of the covenant. It is noteworthy that Jesus also instituted the new covenant with a meal, the last supper. See Luk. 22:19.
We suppose also that what they ate were portions of the peace-offerings brought with them upon the mount.[354] See Exo. 24:5. The burnt-offerings would have been completely burned, but not the peace-offerings (Lev. 1:9; Lev. 7:11; Lev. 7:14). The peace-offerings were the only sacrifice of which the worshippers ate part. See notes on Exo. 20:24. The peaceful eating and drinking in Gods presence indicates the harmony existing at that moment between God and Israel. It may be even a type of the blessedness of our presence with God in eternity, and of the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:7-9; Rev. 21:3).
[354] Keil and Delitzsch, op. cit., p. 315, feels that they ate and drank after they descended and returned to camp. We certainly do not get that impression from the Biblical text.
Was the eating in Gods presence part of the process of ratifying Gods covenant with Israel? We feel that it was. Jacob and Laban sealed the covenant between them by a meal together (Gen. 31:46; Gen. 31:54). BUT and this is important it was NOT the complete process of ratifying the covenant. Nor was it even the major part. That had taken place a day (or more) before when Moses sprinkled the people and the altar and the book with blood (Exo. 24:6-8). The eating seems to us to have been more a celebration of the previous ratification of the covenant than a substantial part in the act of ratifying it.
We stress this, because the liberal critical view is that Exodus twenty-four contains two accounts of ratifying the covenant woven together. Supposedly the account in Exo. 24:1-2; Exo. 24:9-11 tells of ratifying the covenant by eating the meal with God up on Mt. Sinai. Then Exo. 24:3-8 gives another authors version of the covenant ratification by sprinkling blood at the foot of the mountain.[355] It is much better to understand the sprinkling of the blood and the eating as being two acts in the one story.
[355] Noth, op. cit., p. 194.
11.
For what purpose was Moses called up into the mount? (Exo. 24:12)
He was called up to receive tablets of stone, and the law (torah) and commandment, which God had written.
We assume that the call of verse twelve came AFTER Moses had returned to the foot of the mountain with Aar-on and his other companions. This surely seems to be implied by verse fourteen.
The giving of the tablets written by God would be a further and final confirmation of the covenant with God.
When Moses was told to come up into the mount and Be there, he probably never imagined that he would be there forty days. See Exo. 24:18.
The section Exo. 24:12-18 looks ahead to Exo. 32:1, where Moses was sent down off the mount after the people built the golden calf.
The text surely declares that God himself wrote on the tablets of stone which He gave to Moses. See Exo. 31:18. We accept this as true.
It seems to us that the tablets of stone and the law spoken of are one and the same thing, namely the ten commandments on stone. The text could be translated (and probably should be), I will give thee the tables of stone, even the law. . . . (The and merely introduces another word by way of explanation, and stands between words in apposition.)
Jewish interpreters believe that the law spoken of in verse twelve was an oral law (or tradition) given to Moses in addition to the written law. This oral law is supposedly now preserved in written form in the Jewish Talmud. The Talmud has volumes of material telling how the laws of Moses are to be interpreted and how they are to be carried out in all of lifes activities. To many Jews every interpretation of the law given by a universally recognized authority (or rabbi) is regarded as having been given on Mt. Sinai.
Jesus rejected these traditions which were added to the law as being without authority from God. See Mar. 7:5; Mar. 7:8-9. Moses himself declared that men were NOT to add to nor take away anything from the word which had been commanded to them (Deu. 4:2), referring to their written statutes and ordinances (Deu. 4:1).
12.
Who went with Moses up into the mount? (Exo. 24:13-14).
Joshua, Moses servant, went up with him. Regarding Joshua, see Exo. 17:9 and Exo. 32:17. Not even Aar-on went up.
Aar-on and Hur are mentioned together in Exo. 24:14, as they were in Exo. 17:10; Exo. 17:12. See notes on those verses.
Moses had served as the judge in disputes too difficult for the other judges of Israel,(Exo. 18:26). In Moses absence, the people were to bring such cases to Aar-on and Hur.
The last clause of verse thirteen seems out of order with what follows it in verses fourteen and fifteen. That does not prove that the text is a jumble of contradictory statements copied clumsily from several sources. It merely reflects the Hebrew style of writing, which is not as concerned with strict chronological order as modern writers generally are. We saw another example of this back in Exo. 10:28 to Exo. 11:4.
13.
What covered the mount when Moses ascended into it? (Exo. 24:15-17)
The cloud covered it. The text suggests that the cloud returned, a cloud similar to which appeared previously, when the ten commandments were proclaimed (Exo. 19:16).
The glory of Jehovah was seen there with the cloud. This glory is described as like a devouring fire on the top of the mount, and it was visible even down below to the eyes of the children of Israel (Exo. 24:17). Compare Exo. 16:10.
The glory of Jehovah abode upon Mt. Sinai. The word abode is a translation of the verb shakan, from which later developed a non-Biblical term shekinah (meaning dwelling, or presence, of God), that referred to the glory cloud within the tabernacle and above it.
Moses was in the cloud on the mount six days, and on the seventh day God called him from the midst of the cloud. We suppose that these six days were days of spiritual preparation. In the Bible we have several instances where the events of six days reached a culmination on the seventh day. Examples could include creation, the weekly sabbath, the manna, etc. Perhaps the six-days delay caused Moses to associate this experience with other great doings of God.
Gods men need patience! Moses waited six days before Gods voice came to him.
Many critics separate the story in Exodus into sources at Exo. 24:15 or near there. (See notes on Exo. 24:1-2). They allege that beginning at Exo. 24:15 we have a resumption of the Priestly narrative (P), which was interrupted after Exo. 19:20. This Priestly section is said to include Exo. 24:15 to Exo. 31:18, and to have been written centuries later, probably during Babylonian captivity (about 550 B.C.), and set into the older story by editors of the literary material. There is certainly no ancient manuscript evidence that the story has such sources. We have observed repeatedly how the text tells a continuous, harmonious story. We should not be intimidated by the critics confident but unverified declarations. Their views deny the unity, truthfulness, and spiritual significance of the Exodus story.
14.
How long was Moses in the mount? (Exo. 24:18)
He was there forty days and forty nights. Moses did not come down until the making of the golden calf (Exo. 32:15). In those forty days he received all the information in chapters 2531 about the tabernacle, the priesthood, etc. Moses was gone so long that the people thought he had perished or otherwise left the scene (Exo. 32:1).
We do not know whether Joshua was with Moses at any time in these forty days or not. Perhaps they tented together some of the time, or stayed together in some cave.
During these forty days Moses neither ate nor drank. See Deu. 9:9. Moses also fasted during his second stay on the Mount (Deu. 9:18; Exo. 34:28). Elijah fasted forty days at this same place (1Ki. 19:8). And Christ fasted forty days in the desert (Mat. 4:2). Assuredly Moses could not have survived forty days without water if he had not been miraculously sustained.
The spectacle of Moses amidst the cloud and the fire of Gods glory is awesome. But it is typical of the events connected with the giving of the law. Thou heardest his words out of the midst of the fire (Deu. 4:36). The Israelites came to a mount that burned with fire, and unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest (Heb. 12:18).
As Christians, we have come to a very different spiritual starting place. We have come, not to Sinai, but to Mt. Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. We have come to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant (Heb. 12:18; Heb. 12:24).
Israels representatives briefly came into the presence of God after the covenant was ratified. As Christians we have a constant and eternal access to the father through the new covenant ratified by Christ through His death upon the cross.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
XXIV.
THE RATIFICATION OF THE COVENANT.
(1) And he said.We should have expected And God said, or And Jehovah said. The omission of the nominative is probably to be accounted for by the insertion into Exodus at this point of the Book of the Covenant, which was originally a distinct document. Exo. 24:1 of Exodus 24 probably followed originally on Exo. 20:21 of Exodus 20. The sequence of the words was then as follows: And Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was. And he said unto Moses, &c.
Come up.The ascent of Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and the seventy elders seems to have been commanded in order to give greater solemnity to the ratification of the covenant between God and Israel, which is the main subject of this section. Moses received instructions on the subject before descending, and no doubt was divinely guided in the steps which he took previously to ascending with them.
Nadab, and Abihu.Aarons two elder sons. (See Exo. 6:23.)
Seventy of the elders.These are not the judges of Exo. 18:21-26, who were not yet appointed (see Note on Exo. 18:24-25), but rather the heads of tribes and families who had exercised authority over the Israelites in Egypt, and through whom Moses had always communicated with the people. (See Exo. 3:16; Exo. 4:29; Exo. 12:21; Exo. 17:5-6.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
RATIFICATION OF THE COVENANT, Exo 24:1-11.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1. He said unto Moses That is, after having given unto him the judgments recorded in the book of the covenant, and before he went down to communicate them to the people . Moses had gone into the thick darkness to receive these laws, (Exo 20:21,) and now, before he returned to the people, (Exo 24:3,) he is instructed to bring with him, when he comes up into the mountain again, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel. These persons, namely, Moses’s brother and the two oldest sons of the latter, and seventy of the most distinguished representatives of the people, (comp. Exo 18:25,) would thus stand between Moses and the people .
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
The People Respond to the Covenant and Confirm Their Acceptance of Its Terms ( Exo 24:1-11 ).
This passage can be analysed as follows:
a Moses, Aaron and his eldest sons, and the seventy are called up to worship ‘afar off’ (Exo 24:1).
b Only Moses may approach Yahweh (as the mediator) (Exo 24:2).
c Moses declares the words of Yahweh and all His judgments and the people respond, ‘All the words which Yahweh has said we will do’ (Exo 24:3).
d Moses writes all the words of Yahweh (preparing the covenant document for the people) (Exo 24:4 a).
e Moses builds an altar and erects twelve pillars in accordance with the tribes of Israel (Exo 24:4 b).
e Moses sends young men who offer whole burnt offerings and sacrifice peace offerings to Yahweh (Exo 24:5).
d Moses takes of the blood and sprinkles it on the altar (committing the covenant to Yahweh) (Exo 24:6).
c The covenant having been accepted by the Overlord Moses takes the book of the covenant and reads it to the people and they respond, ‘All that Yahweh has said we will do and be obedient’ (Exo 24:7).
b Moses sprinkles the people with the blood of the covenant sealing the covenant with them (as the mediator) (Exo 24:8).
a Moses, Aaron and his eldest sons, and the seventy go up to behold Yahweh and to eat and drink before Him (Exo 24:9-11).
We note that the first five references refer to preparation for the covenant and the second five refer to the application of the covenant. In ‘a’ the representatives of Israel are called together to worship (preparation), and in parallel eat and drink the covenant meal before Yahweh (application). In ‘b’ Moses approaches Yahweh as the mediator (preparation), and in parallel sprinkles the people as the mediator (application). In ‘c’ the covenant is declared and accepted (preparation) and in the parallel it is read out (having meanwhile been written down) and accepted (application), with in both cases a willing response from the people. In ‘d’ the covenant words of Yahweh are written down for presentation to the people (preparation) and in parallel the blood of the written covenant is presented to Yahweh (application). And central to all in ‘e’ is the preparation for and offering of the offerings and sacrifices.
We can now look at it in more detail.
Exo 24:1-2
‘And he said to Moses, “Come up to Yahweh, you and Aaron, and Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and you will worship afar off. And Moses alone will come near to Yahweh, but they shall not come near, neither shall the people go up with him.” ’
This is the commencement of the covenant procedure, the call of the Overlord for the people’s representatives to approach. It is then followed by the selection of the mediator who alone can approach the Overlord.
“And He said to Moses.” The use of ‘He’ instead of ‘Yahweh’ (contrast Exo 20:22 with which it therefore connects, see also Exo 24:12), demonstrates the close connection between this and the previous words, stressing that this is a continuation of the theme. He had been speaking to all Israel through Moses (Exo 21:1), now He speaks to Moses in his own right. Exodus 24 is integrally connected with what has gone before,
The change of person in the sentence from ‘you’ to ‘him’ appears to be a pattern (compare Exo 23:23), and here indicates a firm and emphasised movement from the general welcome of all to the particular access provided to the chosen mediator. The purpose here would seem to be to stress the names of Yahweh and of Moses, and the latter’s unique privilege of access.
A group of ‘seventy of the elders of Israel’, as the people’s representatives, together with Moses, Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, were to ascend the lower mount so as to ‘worship afar off’. But they were not to go up higher. That was to be left for Moses alone. And the people were excluded altogether. This feasting before Yahweh would seal the covenant.
Nadab and Abihu were two sons of Aaron (Exo 28:1; see also Exo 6:23). Here they were given a huge privilege and were being prepared for great responsibility. But they would shortly sadly die before they had fulfilled themselves because they dealt lightly with sacred things (Lev 10:1-2). Great privilege brings great responsibility of many kinds.
“Seventy of the elders of Israel.” These would seem to represent specifically the combined leadership (compare Num 11:16; Num 11:24-25). The number seventy signifies divine completeness (compare Exo 1:5), and the leading elders were possibly limited to that number. Compare Num 11:24-25 with 26. The two were ‘of those who were written’ and therefore part of ‘the seventy’. But it may be that this means that at that stage there were seventy two, although ‘gathered the seventy’ might simply be describing the group as a whole without saying that they were all present. The group was probably known as ‘the seventy’ regardless of exact numbers. On this number was patterned the later Sanhedrin, the governing body of the Jews in the time of Christ. Compare also Luk 10:1; Luk 10:17.
The purpose of this event was as a ceremony at which Yahweh would receive the response of the people to His covenant and would seal it by handing over the official covenant documents, just as a great overlord would when sealing his suzerainty treaty. But before this could be done there were things that Moses had to do.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Exo 24:1 “Nadab, and Abihu” – Comments – Nadab and Abihu were Aaron’s two sons.
Exo 24:1 “and seventy of the elders of Israel” Comments – The number “seventy” occurs a number of times in Scriptures within the context of God laying beginning a new work and laying a foundation. For example, God called seventy nations at the tower of Babel to serve as the foundation for the nations of the earth (Gen 10:1-32). God called seventy souls to found the nation of Israel (Exo 1:1-7). We know that Moses called seventy elders to establish the laws of the nation of Israel (Exo 24:1, Num 11:24-25). Jesus trained seventy disciples to carry the Gospel to the world (Luk 10:1; Luk 10:17).
Exo 24:7 “the Book of the Covenant” – Comments – The phrase “book of the covenant probably refers to Moses initial writings (Exo 20:1 to Exo 23:33). However, it was probably expanded into the “book of the law” (Deu 31:26).
Exo 24:8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.
Exo 24:8
The words Moses used in instituting the old covenant are reminiscent of the words Jesus used when He instituted the new covenant (Mat 26:28).
Mat 26:28, “For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.”
Scripture References – Note:
Heb 9:19-20, “For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Moses Summoned by God
v. 1. And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the Lord, thou and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off. v. 2. And Moses alone shall come near the Lord; but they shall not come nigh; neither shall the people go up with him. v. 3. And Moses, v. 4. And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord, v. 5. And he sent young men of the children of Israel, v. 6. And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basins, v. 7. And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people, v. 8. And Moses took the blood,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
COMPLETION OF THE COVENANT, AND ASCENT OF MOSES INTO THE CLOUD ON SINAI.
EXPOSITION
THE RATIFICATION OF THE COVENANT. The giving of the Book of the Covenant being now completed, Moses, having received directions with respect to another ascent into the mount (Exo 24:1, Exo 24:2), descended to the people, and in the first instance declared to them the main heads of the Covenant, which they received with favour, and expressed their willingness to obey (Exo 24:3). Not, however, regarding this as a sufficiently formal ratification, the Prophet proceeded to write out in a “Book” the whole of the commands which he had received, He then built an altar, erected twelve pillars, offered sacrifice, and having collected half the blood of the victims in basins, summoned the people to an assembly. At this, he read over solemnly all the words of the Book to them, and received their solemn adherence to it (Exo 24:7); whereupon, to complete the ceremony, and mark their entrance into covenant, he sprinkled the blood from the basins on the twelve tribes, represented by their leaders, and declared the acceptance complete (Exo 24:8). The ceremony was probably modelled on some customary proceedings, whereby important contracts between man and man were ratified among the Hebrews and Syrians.
Exo 24:1, Exo 24:2
It has been supposed that these verses are out of place, and suggested to remove them to the end of Exo 24:8. But no change is necessary. It is quite natural that God should have given the directions before Moses descended from the mount, and that he should have deferred executing them until the people had accepted the covenant. Nadab and Abihu were the two eldest of Aaron’s sons, and so his natural successors in the priesthood, had they not sinned by offering “strange fire” (Le Exo 10:1, Exo 10:2). They had been mentioned previously, in Exo 6:23. Seventy of the elders. On the elders of Israel, see Exo 3:16, and Exo 18:21. The “seventy” eiders may, together with Nadab and Abihu, have represented the twelve tribes, six from each. Worship ye afar off. Though all were to ascend the mount to a certain height, only Moses was to go to the top. The others, being less holy than Moses, had to worship at a distance.
Exo 24:3
And Moses came. Moses descended from the mount, and reported to the people all the words of the Lordall the legislation contained in the last three chapters and a half (Exo 20:19, to Exo 23:33), not perhaps in extenso, but as to its main provisions. And all the people answered with one voice, promising obedience. In times of excitement, a common impulse constantly animates an entire multitude, and an exaltation of feeling leads them to make pledges, which they are very unwilling to stand by afterwards. Hence Moses requires something more than a verbal assent.
Exo 24:4
Moses wrote all the words of the Lord. We may presume that they were miraculously brought to his remembrance by that Spirit of Truth which guided all the Prophets (2Pe 1:21; Joh 14:26). Having written the words, he waited till the next day, and then rose up early and builded an altar, in preparation for the sacrifice without which no covenant was regarded as binding. And twelve pillars. Symbolical of the twelve tribes. Compare Jos 4:3, Jos 4:9, Jos 4:20.
Exo 24:5
And he sent young men. The Levitical priesthood not being as vet instituted, either all the people were regarded as holy, and so any one might offer sacrifice, or the “young men” selected may have been of the number of the first-born, who were priests in their respective families until the appointment of Aaron and his sons to be priests of the nation (Exo 28:1). No doubt young men were selected as most competent to deal with struggling animals.
Exo 24:6
Moses took half of the blood. The blood, which symbolised the life of the victim, was the essential part of every sacrifice, and was usually poured over the altar, or at any rate sprinkled upon it, as the very crowning act of offering. (See Le Exo 1:5; Exo 3:8; etc.) On this occasion Moses retained half of the blood, and put it in basins, for the purpose of so uniting all the people in the sacrifice, and thereby the more solemnly pledging them to the covenant, which the sacrifice at once consecrated and consummated. (See Heb 9:18-20.) The other half of the blood was, according to the usual practice, sprinkled upon the altar.
Exo 24:7
And he took the Book of the Covenant. In this book we have the germ of the Holy Scripturesthe first “book” actually mentioned as written in the narrative of the Bible. Genesis may contain other older documents, inserted by Moses, under the sanction of the Holy Spirit, in his compilation. But his own composition, if we except the burst of poesy called forth by the passage of the Red Sea (Exo 15:1-18), would seem to have commenced with “the Book of the Covenant.” Upon this nucleus the rest of the law was based; and it was to explain and enforce the law that Moses composed the Pentateuch. In the audience of the people, Literally, “in the ears of the people,” which is equally intelligible, and more graphic. And they said, etc The people made the same answer as before (verse 3), adding a general promise of obedience to all that God might command in future.
Exo 24:8
Moses then proceeded to the final actHe took the blood from the basins, and sprinkled itnot certainly upon all the people, who numbered above two millionsbut upon their leaders and representatives, the “elders” and other chief men, drawn up at the head of each tribe, and thus brought within his reach. It has been supposed by some that he merely sprinkled the blood on the twelve pillars, as representing the twelve tribes; but, had this been the case, the expression in the text would probably have been different. We read, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, that he “sprinkled both the book, and all the people” (Heb 9:19). As he sprinkled, he said, Behold the blood of the covenant, etc. It was a common practice among the nations of antiquity to seal covenants with blood. Sometimes the blood was that of a victim, and the two parties to the covenant prayed, that, if they broke it, his fate might be theirs (Hom. 1l. 3.298; 19.252; Le 1:24; 21:45; etc.). Sometimes it was the blood of the two parties themselves, who each drank of the other’s blood, and thereby contracted a blood-relationship, which would have made their breaking the covenant more unpardonable (Herod. 1.74; 4.70; Tacit. Ann. 12.47). Moses seems to have followed neither practice at all closely, but, adopting simply the principle that a covenant required to be sealed with blood, to have arranged the details as he thought best. By the sprinkling of both the altar and the people the two parties to the covenant were made partakers of one and the same blood, and so brought into a sort of sacramental union.
HOMILETICS
Exo 24:3-8
Man’s readiness to enter into covenant with God, and promise unlimited obedience.
In any covenant which God proposes to man, the advantages offered to him are so great, and the requirements made of him so manifestly “holy, just, and good,” that it is almost impossible that he should calmly consider the terms and reject them. It is his natural instinct to exclaim”All that the Lord hath said I will do, and be obedient.” There are many reasons for this feeling, of which the following are some:
I. THE CREATURE IS MORALLY BOUND TO OBEY ITS CREATOR. That which an intelligent agent has made belongs to him absolutely, and cannot resist his will without rebellion. Now, “it is God that has made us, and not we ourselves.” We are his, whether we choose to obey him or nohis to punish or rewardto kill or make aliveto exalt to happiness or condemn to misery. We cannot resist his will without being self-condemned. The reasons which make disobedience to a father morally wrong tell with increased force if applied to God, who is far more truly than our father,
1. The author of our existence;
2. The preserver of our life; and
3. The bestower upon us of favours and benefits which we cannot possibly repay.
II. MAN‘S BEST INTERESTS ARE PROMOTED BY A PERFECT OBEDIENCE. Every law ever imposed by God on man has been imposed for man’s sake, and tends to his advantage. If a man were truly wise, he would lay down for himself as rules of conduct exactly those laws which are laid down for his guidance in Holy Scripture. The man whose obedience approaches nearest to perfection is the happiest. For every act of disobedience there is a natural penalty.
III. THE HIGHEST ASPIRATION OF MAN‘S NATURE IS TO DO GOD‘S WILL. Angels have no other desire but this. Man has a thousand desires, but, together with them, has an inward conviction that it is better for him to resist than to gratify the greater number. His passions draw him one way, his reason another, his affections, perhaps, a third. He has no unmixed satisfaction but in following the lead of the highest principle within him; and this principle is the love of God, which prompts him to make it the sole object of his life to please God by so acting as God would have him. Man, therefore, readily promises obedienceas of old at Sinai, so now at baptism and confirmation, or, again, after a sudden conversion; and, under the excitation of stirred feelings and an awakened conscience, imagines that he will keep to his brave resolve; but when the excitement is past, and the feelings have calmed down, and the tame, dull course of ordinary life is entered upon, then it is found not so easy to observe the promises made, and “do all that the Lord has said, and be obedient.” The flagrant contrast between the conduct of the Israelites and their words is known to all. The contrast is, perhaps, less, but it is still great, between the pledges given by Christians and their acts. Performance ever lags far behind promise. “The spirit, indeed, is willing, but the flesh is weak.” Temptations assailSatan spreads his wilesthe lower nature turns traitor, and men fall away. Happy, if, while there is still time, they “return and repent, and do the first works,” anti casting themselves upon Christ obtain pardon for their disobedience from the ever-merciful God.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
Exo 24:1-2, Exo 24:9-11
The vision of God for the selected few.
I. THOSE SELECTED FOR THIS VISION. That Moses himself went up was a matter of course. It was good for him to be there for the strengthening of his own faith. He himself would rejoice in the assurance thus given that the promise of the people was accepted. As to those who went up with him, it is clear that in the revelation something was being done to prepare them for official positions afterwards. They got this glorious sight not because they deserved it more than others, but because they needed it more. Moses required helps in order that he might be a mediator between God and the whole nation, and so these men, the seventy elders in particular, needed help in acting as mediators between Moses and the people. Doubtless it was intended that they should go down again among the people and be witnesses as to what they had seen. Would it not give an elder greater influence in after days if the people took knowledge of him that he had been with Moses in the mount? Notice, that in spite of this great revelation, Aaron soon fell away into the great transgression of the golden calf, and a little later Nadab and Abihu perished before the Lord for their disobedience. And may we not say that their sin was all the greater, just because they had been favoured with a privilege which they had failed to profit by?
II. THE VISION ITSELF. “They saw the God of Israel.” There is a mysterious yet most instructive reticence as to exactly what it was that they saw. As to what shape and form were seen nothing is said; and even concerning the circumstances nothing more is ventured than an indication o! the sapphire work on which he stood. And since we find this reticence of description it behoves us to put corresponding restraint on our conjectures: we may infer that the purpose of this vision was to give a plain and encouraging contrast between what was now seen and what had been seen before. When God’s people are at peace with himand there was a symbolic peace at this timethen there is a cessation of such terrorising manifestations as we read of in Exo 19:1-25. When we see all that strange mingling of terrible darkness, light, and sound, which make up the thunderstorm, we know that Nature is striving to recover her balance. That balance recovered, the body of heaven resumes its clearness; nay it often appears in even more than its accustomed beauty. All the dark and frowning appearances of God, all things that shake and confuse the soul, are meant to lead on to a calming and attracting revelation of God such as this revelation to Aaron and his companions but feebly typifies. First, the presence of God is made known amid thunder, lightning and smoke, and everything trembles to its centre at but the touch of his feet: then there is the change to where he is lifted clean above the polluting earth. Instead of disturbance there is unruffled peace, the beauty and profundity of the cloudless heaven. Thus by this outward symbol should we think of the quiet, untroubled heart where dwells the reconciled God. The more complete that reconciliation, the more settled the peace which we have with God, the more may the state of our hearts be indicated by the language which is here employed.
III. THE EXPERIENCES OF THIS CHOSEN COMPANY DURING THE VISION.
1. They were made to feel unmistakably God‘s benignity towards them. He did not lay his hand upon them. That they were not swiftly stretched in death upon the mountain side is spoken of as if in itself a subject of congratulation. The negative must come before the positive. The thought of complete salvation from danger must precede the thought of positive growth and enrichment. It was scarcely credible that men should see God and live. How dependent we are for our conclusions on narrow experiences, sometimes on most superstitious fears! The day is coming when, if we only accept all purifying ministrations, we shall not only see God and live, but also wonder that so long we should have been able to live without seeing him.
2. This benignity is particularly experienced in their being allowed to eat and drink before God. It is in the companionship of the table that social intercourse is commonly supposed to reach its perfection. This eating and drinking before God indicated that a certain composure of mind had been attained, and that the company had some real enjoyment of the position in which it was placed. There is a setting forth of the Divine blessing which ever rests on true fellowship of the saints. As many as are right with God personally are drawn together for united enjoyment as well as for united service. There is no place where the hearts of men are really one but when they are gathered before him who has the sapphire work under his feet. There, and there only, do we find the secret of that penetrating harmony which dissolves and utterly destroys all discords.Y.
Exo 24:3-8
The terms of the covenant accepted.
I. OBSERVE HOW CLEARLY THESE TERMS HAD BEEN STATED. Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord and all the judgments. All the way to Sinai the people had the opportunity of seeing the power of Jehovah; at Sinai something of his glory had been manifested; and now in these words and judgments the character and will of Jehovah were made known. It is observable that at their first approach to Sinai the people had expressed their willingness to be obedient to God (Exo 19:8). But he does not seek to bind them. down by a formal contract until he has made clear the laws under which he would have them to live. it is well for us to bear in mind that God distinctly and emphatically states all things of practical and present importance. We indeed may have a very imperfect understanding of his statements; but the statements in themselves are perfectly plain, only requiring that our minds should be brought into a right state of humility, and concentrated upon the study of God’s holy commandments with the requisite degree of attention.
II. OBSERVE ALSO THE WAY IN WHICH THESE TERMS HAD BEEN ACCEPTED. The people answered with one voice. There was a remarkable unanimity. Are we to take it that there was a complete, universal, cordial shout of acceptance? There is no reason to suppose otherwise, no reason to suppose but that a profound impression had been made on every mind. Not the slightest word appears to indicate discord. But of course, although there was no discord in the expression, there was great diversity in the state of mind which underlay the shout of acceptance. The emotion finding vent in this unanimous acceptance could be traced back in a few instances to a thoroughly awakened conscience, desiring to live a thoroughly righteous life, and be in true and complete conformity to the will of God; for there were men of David’s spirit long before David’s time. But in how many was there nothing more than the inconsiderate shout of those who, after all God had said, had yet not the slightest knowledge of his will! And yet with all these profound differences the superficial enthusiastic agreement evidently served a purpose. For not only was there a word, but also a highly significant and impressive deed. Notice that all the preparations in the way of altar, pillars, offerings, etc; made so carefully by Moses, are not said to have been made by God’s commandment. The most we can say is, that they were not out of harmony with his will. They were a visible representation, a kind of writing out of the great contract into which the people thus entered. There stood the altar signifying the presence of God, and there the pillars signifying the twelve tribes, and there was the blood with its principle of life joining together, in a glorious unity, Jehovah and his people. The great and lamentable differences underneath are neither forgotten nor underrated; but for the time they are not regarded. The unity of feeling thus seemed was made to serve a great symbolic purpose. These people, by word and deed, by the erection of these pillars, and by the acceptance of the sprinkled blood, took part in a great historic act, and declared that they were the people of God in a way the consequences of which they could not afterwards escape.
III. Observe this very remarkable thingTHAT GOD SHOULD HAVE ACCEPTED THEIR ACCEPTANCE. He knew how much and how little it meant, and yet he did not point out the rashness of the utterance, he did not interfere with the symbolic actions by which Moses more deliberately set forth the adhesion of the people. We are bound, therefore, to conclude that in whatever ignorance and sudden enthusiasm the people might subscribe to this covenant, yet that subscription was right. The laws that God gave from Sinai are the laws for men to live by. The constitution of God’s kingdom was by this great symbolic act solemnly introduced into Israel, and made the constitution of Israel also. Every nation, if it is to be anything more than a mere crowd, must have a constitution. Some constitutions grow, and like all things that grow, they occasionally branch out in unexpected directions. Other constitutions, men meet together to determine and formulate, like that of the American republic. But here is a constitution which comes down out of heaven from God; and in a great historic act, the nation into which it comes accepts it. Hence those born under that constitution were bound to accept it also. There was no nation on the face of the earth that had such securities, privileges, and prospects as Israel had under these laws from Sinai. The government was neither a despotism nor a democracy. The people were neither under an arbitrary will which might capriciously change, nor did they depend upon their own fluctuating opinions. God, if we might use such an expression, was bound by these laws, even as the people were themselves.Y.
HOMILIES BY G. A. GOODHART
Exo 24:4
If any man will do the will he shall know of the doctrine.
What a man receives must depend upon what he is able to receive. [illustration. The sponge absorbs more water than the wood, because its pores are more open.] To receive the light of revelation the spiritual pores must be well opened; and this depends upon inward conditionsthe will to obey, followed by obedience. Here a revelation is impending. Notice
I. READINESS OF THE WOULD–BE RECIPIENTS. Moses had declared the Divine will. The hearers might have been indifferent, or they might have been disheartened by the stringency of the injunctions. In either case, through their imperfect condition, more perfect light must have been delayed. For a little, however, they were rapt out of self; and though, it may be, the momentary enthusiasm did not pierce clouds which years only could disperse, yet they were ready for the moment to gain a glimpse, at any rate, of the Divine glory. “All the words which the Lord hath said will we do:” such was the utterance of the people’s disposition at the moment. Temporary inclination, however, is not everything; at best it only marks out the way along which effort may compel habit. For a nation to speak with “one voice” is something; but it needs discipline and training to secure the “one heart” as well. The first step towards securing this has next to be taken:
II. READINESS CONFIRMED AND ACCEPTED. A record needed to impress the memory; a sacramental symbol to impress the imagination.
1. The record. “Moses wrote all the words of the Lord,” and, when he had read what he had written, the people confirmed their previous promise (Exo 24:7). A written reminder of the covenant as accepted by them was all-important; a dying enthusiasm goes hand in hand with a waning memory; only a record which will revive the memory can avail to rekindle the enthusiasm. Our own experience illustrates this. The diary, the marked Biblewhat a suggestive eloquence they have, not only to remind of old times, but to re-awaken old feelings!
2. The sacramental symbol. Burnt-offerings, the outward sign of dedication and obedience; peace offerings, the outward sign of gratitude and thanksgiving. Half the blood sprinkled on the people and half on the altar, symbol of the union between man and God so long as his commands were thankfully obeyed. So long as man is in the flesh he needs such sensible and visible emblems. His senses are a function of himself; to lay hold of them is to lay hold of him through them. The Bible is our record of what God requires of us; but baptism and the Lord’s Supper give outward expression to the teaching of the Bible. Each confirms the influence of the other; we need both to support our resolutions.
III. THE PARTIAL REVELATION. The people had expressed their willingness to obey; and, further, they had openly confirmed that expression. Time, however, was needed to test and strengthen their resolution: they could not be admitted to the full blaze of light merely because, in partial darkness, they had for a little gazed towards its dawning. A few are selected to represent the multitude (Exo 24:1, Exo 24:9-11); and even of these few, not all are admitted to equal nearness. Enough is revealed to help faith, more would probably have only injured its growth. [illustration: Plants are kept from too much light until they are firmly rooted.] Faith, here, needed rooting: until that was accomplished an economy of reserve was necessary.
Concluding considerations.
1. The honest promise of obedience is accepted by God as of moral value. He encourages sincerity by glimpses of the reward in store.
2. Only obedience tested by difficulty can win the realisation of the beatific vision. The people must share the life-long training of Moses before they can enjoy with the like freedom his privilege of intimacy with God. Willingness to obey brings knowledge; but full knowledge comes with full obedience.G.
HOMILIES BY J. ORR
Exo 24:3-9
The ratification of the covenant.
These verses contain the account of the formal ratification of the covenant between Israel and Jehovahan event, the most momentous in the history of the nation, big, for weal or woe, with unimaginable issues, and a shadow of the better covenant which God now makes with Christians. Observe
I. THE RATIONALITY OF THE COVENANT. God desires from his people “reasonable service” (Rom 12:1). He would not have them enter it in haste. Vows made under the influence of sudden impressions are not to be trusted. Once committed to his service, God will deal with us with strictness (Exo 23:21). But he does not wish us to commit ourselves till we have carefully considered the nature of the step we are taking, and the magnitude of the issues involved (cf. Luk 14:26-34). See this illustrated in the history of the covenant with Israel. The covenant was entered into
1. With great deliberation. It was not forced on Israel. The negotiations connected with it were intentionally drawn out and prolonged, just that the people might have the opportunity of pondering well the character of the proposed engagement. Alike in the events of the exodus, and in the miracles of the desert, they had had abundant experience of the character of the Being with whom they were allying themselves. Arrived at Sinai, preliminary proposals were made to them, and an opportunity given them at the outset of saying Yea or Nay (Exo 19:3-9). Their acceptance of these proposals was followed by the giving of the law, which drew from them a new promise to do whatever God should speak to them (Exo 20:19; Deu 5:27). An interval ensued, during which Moses was in the mountain (Exo 20:21). On descending, he recites to them “All the words of the Lord, and all the judgments” (Exo 24:3); and once again they promise full obedience. Even then the matter is allowed to stand over till the morrow, when Moses appears with the written book in his hand, and they are asked, finally, if they adhere to what they have said (Exo 24:7). Greater precautions against rash committal could scarcely have been taken.
2. After careful instruction. Pains were taken fully to inform the people of the terms of the covenant, before asking them to enter into it. The law was uttered by God’s own voice. The “judgments” were recited to them by Moses. They were read a second time from the “book.” Their assent to the covenant was thus sought to be made an intelligent one. If we engage ourselves to God, he would have us do it with “understanding.”
3. Amidst impressive solemnities. Thesethe reading of the words from the book, the sprinkling of the blood, etc.were of a nature adapted to arouse the minds of the people to a just sense of the momentousness of the transaction. From the whole we learn that if dedication is the result of an act, it should be of a calm, sober, thoughtful act; it cannot be done too solemnly or too intelligently. Our religious life should have a rational basis.
II. THE BOND OF THE COVENANT. The nucleus of the transaction is the people’s promise”All the words which the Lord hath said will we do” (Exo 24:3)”All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient” (Exo 24:7). There is a tone of rashnessof self-confidencein this promise, as given by Israel, which forewarns of subsequent defection. The people evidently had but little knowledge of their own hearts. They had little perception of the spiritual requirements of this law. They had not learned to distrust themselves. Their surrender to the Divine will was not thorough or heartwhole. (See on Exo 19:8.) It remains true, however, that surrender of the will to God, in the spirit of obedience, is an indispensable condition of being received into covenant with him. “The idea of the servant of God is complete only when he who is bound to God also binds himself to God’s will, following God perfectly.” (Oehler.) This is as true of the Gospel as of the law. The obedient will is implicit in faith. The end contemplated in salvation is obedience. We are made free from sin that we may become servants of righteousness (Rom 6:18). The recognition of thisthe acceptance of the obligationis involved in conversion, in saving faith, in the new birth, in the coming to Christ, or however else we may express the change from death to life. If we no longer speak of the promise of obedience as the “bond” of the covenant, it is only because that which the Gospel primarily demands of us, viz. faith, goes deeper than such a promise, while implicitly containing it. The object of spiritual trust is, ultimately, God himself, and in the Gospel, Christ, as the sent of God to be the Saviour of the world; but such trust invariably involves the yielding up of the will to God, and is on its practical side, an energy of holiness. The true believer is, of necessity, a doer of the will of the Father. “Faith, without works, is dead” (Jas 2:17-26). (See further, on Exo 19:5.) It is, however, well that this implicit element in faith should also be allowed to become explicit in distinct acts of consecration or of self-dedication to God. This brings us very near to what we have in this covenant with Israel. See below.
III. THE CEREMONIAL OF RATIFICATION.
(1) Moses “builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel” (Exo 24:4).
(2) Young men of his appointment sacrificed burnt-offerings and peace-offerings unto the Lord. (Exo 24:5).
(3) The blood of the sacrificed animals was divided: half was put in basins, and half sprinkled on the altar (Exo 24:6).
(4) The words of the book of the Covenant were next solemnly read in the audience of the people; and the latter renewed their assent to them (Exo 24:7).
(5) The blood was then cast upon the people out of the basins, and the Covenant was declared to be concluded (Exo 24:8). Two points here claim our attention.
1. The ratifying of the Covenant with sacrifice; and
2. The action with the blood.
Both were significant.
1. The sacrifices. The burnt-offering was primarily a symbol of self-surrender (cf. Psa 51:16-19). The idea embodied here, therefore, was, that in the institution of the Covenant, what was required was the unconditional surrender of the offerer, with all that belonged to him, to God. The peace-offering symbolises reconciliation and fellowship. But the offering of the sacrifices had also a propitiatory reference. This is plain from the sprinkling of the blood on the altar. It is sprinkled there as atoning for the people’s sins. It was through the blood of propitiation that peace was made, that reconciliation was brought about. This teaches several things. It shows
(1) That Israel was viewed by God as sinful.
(2) That it was not on legal grounds, but as an act of grace, that they were being admitted into covenant.
(3) That the covenant embodied grace as well as law.
(4) That God. would deal graciously with Israel, if they sincerely endeavoured to keep his law, notwithstanding many defects and failures.
(5) That their attitude under the law, in seeking to fulfil its righteousness, ought to be an evangelical, not a legal one, i.e; they ought to draw their motives, their encouragement, and their hope, not from the thought of their self-sufficiency to keep the law, or from the idea that they were actually keeping it in such a way as legally to entitle them to the blessing, but from the conviction of God’s mercy to them, which, as it was the foundation of their national existence, so was it the real ground of their standing all along.
2. The sprinkling of the blood on the people. It is, as Keil remarks, the one blood which is sprinkled on the altar and on the people; and it is not sprinkled on the people, till it has been presented and accepted on the altar. Applied to the people, the blood had the effect of formally cleansing them from sin, and of consecrating them to God’s service. God thereafter claimed them as his special property. Redeemed life is his. Made free from sin, we become servants of God (Rom 6:22).J.O.
Exo 24:7, Exo 24:8
Consecration.
By the sprinkling of the blood of sacrifice, and by their voluntary acceptance of obligations to obedience, the children of Israel became, formally, the people of Jehovah. They had avouched themselves to be the Lord’s. They had taken on them the vows of his service. They were now consecrated to be doers of his will. The same idea of consecration is embodied in the New Testament word “saint.” The believer is one of a sanctified, a consecrated, a priestly people, set specially apart “to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ” (1Pe 2:5). Consider
I. THE NATURE OF CONSECRATION. Consecration, as a Christian duty, involves three ideasseparation from evil, devotement to God, and ceaseless pursuit of holiness in heart and life. It has its ground in the fact of redemption, and in the sense of God’s mercies. The consecrated heart then becomes a sanctuary in which God dwells by his Holy Spirit; while this sacred indwelling in turn becomes a new source of obligations to holiness. The holiness we are to aim at is a holiness like God’s ownnothing lower (1Pe 1:15, 1Pe 1:16). Consecration, if never so complete as the Christian could wish, may always be perfect, at least in aim, in spirit, in intention, in desire. We are expected, like Caleb, to follow the Lord fully. The Divine ideal is the absolute consecration of him who said”Lo, I come to do thy will, O God.” “My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work” (Heb 10:9; Joh 4:34). “I would rather,” says Spurgeon, “my child had a perfect copy to write by, though he might never equal it, than that he should have an imperfect copy set before him, because then he would never make a good writer at all.” The Scriptural idea of consecration comes out in the light of the usage of the cognate word”sanctify.” God himself is the fountain of sanctity or holiness. The whole Mosaic ritual was a grand apparatus for impressing this thought of God’s holiness upon the minds of his worshippers. Everything to be used in his service, as contaminated by sin, required to be purged with blood (Heb 9:21). To this, in special cases, succeeded an anointing with oil (Exo 30:25-32). Thus purged and anointed, the sanctuary, person, sacred vessel, or whatever it might be, was regarded as completely sanctified; in other words, as separated from common uses to the service of a holy God. The High Priests and Levites of the Old Covenant were all thus specially sanctified to God. But these things were only shadows; we have the realities corresponding to them under the New Covenant. If a man is really in Christ, he is already, by God’s act, through the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ, and the holy anointing of the Spirit, a consecrated person, and ought to regard himself as such. This is the Divine side of the matter. There is clearly, however, a vast difference between the consecration of a mere utensil, say the golden candlestick, or the pots and vessels of the sanctuary, and the consecration of a living, moral, intelligent being. A material thing is sanctified simply by the act of setting it apart to sacred uses; its nature admits of nothing more. But the consecration of a moral being implies an act on his own part, as well as on God’s, else the consecration has no reality; it is such only in name and form. The essence of it lies in a free, cheerful, self-dedication of the person (of. Rom 12:1). Here, then, are two sides of this subject, the Divine and humanthe ideal and the realwhich two sides are constantly reappearing in Scripture, sometimes apart, sometimes blending together, sometimes standing side by side, almost with the force of contradictions, e.g; “Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, even as ye are unleavened” (1Co 5:7). In short, God’s consecration gives us a standing and an ideal; but it is only as we consciously accept this standing and ideal as our own, and seek to give them reality by self-dedication, and the strenuous pursuit of holiness, that our consecration becomes truly effectual. God’s consecration of us becomes, so to speak, the ground of our own consecration of ourselves, and of constant striving after that perfection which is implied in the ideal he sets before us. Hence all those manifold Scripture images which imply sanctification as a process, and a work of God’s grace constantly going on within us.
II. ADVANTAGES OF CONSECRATION. We come back to the old point that consecration, regarded as a duty, is a personal act whereby, out of a sense of God’s mercies, and specially his grace in redemption, a believer solemnly dedicates himself and all that he has to the service and glory of God. Such consecration, with the surrender of the obedient will, is already, as seen in the previous homily, implicit in every exercise of saving faith. Great moral advantages, however, accrue from making one’s consecration to Christ a distinct solemn act, again and again to be repeated, each time, we shall hope, with more perfect self-surrender; and the remembrance of which is to go along with us in the discharge of every duty. This corresponds pretty nearly to the meaning of the Israelitish covenant.
Consecration is the basis of acceptable service.
(1) Consecration of self precedes all other consecrations; as of time, substance, talents, service, etc. It is only where self is consecrated, that the consecration of anything else is acceptable. What St. Paul says of charity, that without it all special gifts and acts, even feeding the poor, or giving his body to be burned, are valueless, we may say with equal truth of self-dedication. It is self God wantsthe love, reverence, devotion, service of self; not a mere share of self’s possessions. On the other hand
(2) the consecration of self includes all other consecrations. If we are God’s, then all is God’s that is ours. Our time is God’s; so is our money, our talents, our influence, everything we have. Let Christians ask, whether, in this view of the matter, consecration is in their case being carried out into all its legitimate results. Not that God desires “a gift;” but he desires “fruit that may abound to our account” (Php 4:17).
Consecration secures nobler service; it is likewise a source of immense strength in the active pursuit of holiness. In any course of conduct, we know the value of a definite purpose and aim. Most of all is it important to have as the clear, definite motto of our lives”To me to live is Christ.” We know then exactly what we are living for. Consecration invests a man’s whole being with a sanctity from which evil shrinks back repelled. The same sanctity spreads itself over all he has and does. He feels that he must be holy “in all manner of conversation.” Even on the bells of his horses he sees something written, “holiness to the Lord.” He has “holy garments;” and his great business is to watch and keep his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame (Rev 16:15). His body is the temple of the Holy Ghost; and he dare not desecrate with worldly pollutions the place where God dwells. He has definitely separated himself from evil; and he must not return to it.
Consecration resolves questions of casuistry. How often do we find good people, or people who wish to be good, puzzling and perplexing themselves with questions of this kindDare I read this book? Should I go to this party? May I engage in this amusement? Can I take this profit? Unless we greatly mistake, most of these difficulties would disappear with more perfect consecration. A truly consecrated man carries in his breast a principle which easily guides him through all such cases, and makes many things right and pure to him which others would stumble at, while it leads him to discountenance and condemn much that they would pass unnoticed.
Finally, consecration is absolutely essential to success in prayer. The heart that has not said”All for Christ,” is in no fit state to approach God’s throne to supplicate blessings for Christ’s sake. There must be iniquity hidden away in that heart somewhere; and “if I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me” (Psa 66:18). But the consecrated man, as a true priest of God, has free access to the holiest of all. He asks what he will, and it is given him. Prayer, indeed, is no prayer, unless it is the outcome of a heart which is the seat of deep consecration, and where the Lord is habitually sanctified. Only to such prayer are the promises yea and amen.
From all this, it is manifest that consecration pertains to the deepest essence of religion. Yet many feel as if sometimes they could almost close with Christ, were it not for this very matter of consecration. Their hearts are still clinging to something which God requires them to forego; and clinging to this, they rightly judge that they cannot be Christ’s disciples. Let them reflect that for this something they sacrifice eternal life.J.O.
HOMILIES BY H. T. ROBJOHNS
Exo 24:1, Exo 24:2, Exo 24:9-11
The Covenant made.
1. THE VISION OF GOD (1, 2, 9, 11).
1. It is for the called alone. God manifests himself only to the repentant and the believing.
2. These are commanded to approach. This is our warrant for confident boldness of access: he has called us.
3. The vision is bestowed upon those from whose midst the mediator has gone into God’s immediate presence and who wait his return (Exo 24:2).
4. It is given as they go upwards into the mount where the Lord’s will is declared (9). The heart which seeks after holiness admits the light in which God will by-and-by be manifested.
5. The vision is sure: “they saw the God of Israel.”
6. For the called the vision of God is not destruction, but safety and joy. We meet the unveiling, not only of infinite holiness, but also of infinite love. The vision of the Divine glory was a wonder and delight; and the place of vision became a place of feasting.
II. THE RATIFYING OF THE COVENANT.
1. It was made with a willing people: “all the words which the Lord hath said will we do.”
2. It was made with a people who were in possession of God’s testimonies: he “told them all the words of the law,” he “wrote all the words of the Lord.” God’s light must reveal sin and need before it may manifest his salvation.
3. God and his people are bound together by the blood of accepted sacrifice. The blood of sprinkling is peace and power to the saved.U.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Exo 24:1. And he said unto Moses Moses was now upon the Mount with the Lord: the meaning, therefore, here must be, that God enjoins Moses respecting his future coming up to the Mount with Aaron, &c. after he had delivered to the people the laws mentioned in the former chapters, and confirmed the covenant with them, as is mentioned in the subsequent part of this. These things being done, we find, Exo 24:9 that Moses, Aaron, &c. ascended the mount, according to the order delivered in these two verses. Houbigant renders and understands these verses differently: Exo 24:1. He said unto Moses, Come up, thou, &c. Exo 24:2. And Moses alone came near unto the Lord; but they came not nigh, neither did the people come up with them. He is of opinion, that Moses now went up to the Lord to receive those commands, which, in the third verse, he delivers to the people. Possibly, as Moses, during the delivering the laws in the foregoing chapters, was with God in the Mount, see ch. Exo 20:21 these verses, introductory to the subsequent covenant, may be considered as a repetition; and so the first clause may be rendered, Now, he [the Lord] had said unto Moses, Come up, &c.
Seventy of the elders Lowman supposes, that these seventy elders were twelve princes of the twelve tribes, and fifty-eight heads of the first families in the twelve tribes. See his Civil Government of the Hebrews, page 76.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
d.The feast of the covenant commanded
Exo 24:1-2
1And he said unto Moses, Come up unto Jehovah, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off. 2And Moses alone shall [let Moses alone] come near Jehovah: but they shall not [let them not] come nigh; neither shall [and let not] the people go up with him.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
The connection of this passage with the foregoing is correctly stated by Keil in opposition to Knobel. In Exo 20:22 God spoke through Moses to the people. What He now speaks at the end of the giving of the law is for Moses himself, although he must communicate with the people about it. After Jehovah has proclaimed the law of the covenant to the people, the feast of the covenant must be celebrated. It is presupposed, first, that God has spoken from Sinai the ten commandments to Moses and the people at the foot of the mountain (Exo 19:25). Then that He gave the ceremonial laws and the civil laws for the people, while the latter had removed from the mountain, but Moses was standing in the darkness of the mountain; by which, however, is not exactly meant that he was on the mountain (Exo 20:21). It is therefore not to be supposed (with Keil and Knobel) that Moses, according to Exo 20:21, had again betaken himself to the mountain; for in this case it would have to be assumed that the descent had been forgotten. But now an ascending to Jehovah takes place, with most significant distinctions. Moses, the prophet, alone is permitted to go to the top of the mountain, and approach Jehovah. At the declivity of the mountain the priests must stop, represented by Aaron and his sons, Nadab and Abihu; and with a like limitation, but also with a like right, the state, the popular assembly, represented by the seventy elders. They occupy a middle position between the prophet above and the people below. On Nadab and Abihu vid.Lev 10:1 sqq.
______________
e.Ratification of the covenant
Exo 24:3-8
3And Moses came and told the people all the words of Jehovah, and all the judgments 4[ordinances]: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which Jehovah hath said [spoken] will we do. And Moses wrote all the words of Jehovah, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill [mountain], and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. 5And he sent young [the young] men of the children of Israel, which [and they] offered burnt-offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen [bullocks] unto Jehovah. 6And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basins; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. 7And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience [hearing] of the people: and they said, All that Jehovah hath said [spoken] will we do, and be obedient. 8And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold, the blood of the covenant which Jehovah hath made with you concerning all these words.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Exo 24:3. And Moses came.That is, out of the darkness of the mountain, not exactly from the mountain itself. And told the people.Not the decalogue (as Delitzsch holds, Hebrerbrief, p. 414), for the people had heard this immediately from the mouth of God, but the words of Exo 20:22-26, and all the laws (Keil). But evidently the report must have included the whole threefold law (therefore not only the decalogue), because the covenant now to be concluded was to relate to the whole law. But it is also self-evident that Moses was a better hearer of the ten commandments than the people were, and had to be for them a mediator of the law which they themselves had heard. Once more the assent of the people is given to the law of the covenant unanimouslywith one voice; practically, the third expression of compliance (vid.Exo 20:19 and Exo 19:8). How then can there be any more thought of despotic subjection of the people? Thus far everything has been done orally; and for the first time Moses makes a provisional copy of the law.
Exo 24:4. The covenant is concluded, and now it is sealed by the feast of the covenant. Moses builds early on the following morning an altar (for Jehovah), and in addition twelve pillars for the twelve tribes of Israel. As the altar, says Keil, being the place where the Lord comes to bless His people (Exo 20:24), indicates the presence of Jehovah, so the twelve pillars, or signal stones, were not to serve as mere memorial signs of the ratification of the covenant, but, as the dwelling-place of the twelve tribes, to represent their presence. Vid.Gen 28:18; Gen 31:45 (Knobel on Gen 21:31), Joshua 4 (memorial stones), Jos 22:11 sqq. (the altar a symbol of unity).
Exo 24:5. And he sent the young men. The young men must officiate in offering the sacrifices of ratification. Why? Different views: (1) As first-born children, who constitute the natural basis for the priesthood (Onkelos), or even the sons of Aaron (Augustine). (2) Vigorous men, as Moses assistants in making the offering (Knobel: first-born youths). (3) As representatives of the youthful people (Kurtz III., p. 143). The young men of the nation stand midway between the children and the men; they share with the first their innocence, and with the latter their strength, and, as being the bloom of the national life, are the fittest representatives of an incipient national life. When the national life is to be restored by wars of liberation or defence, the young men enter the lists. Thus Israel concludes its covenant with Jehovah through the bloom of its national life, the young menaccording to a general law of the life of nations, which Kurtz has at least suggested (but criticised by Keil, note 1, p. 157).1 It is, however, an observation needed only by the high-churchly, when Kurtz lays stress on the fact that the bringing and slaying of the victims was not a sacerdotal function. For as yet the universal priesthood officiates, although Moses alone as yet exercises the function of high-priest. Archological notes on the young men offering, vid. in Knobel, p. 242.Burnt-offerings and peace-offerings. The burnt-offerings symbolize Jehovahs part of the festive solemnities; the peace-offerings that of the people.Bullocks. The great covenant cannot be ratified by the sacrifice of sheep or goats.Half of the blood. On the division of the blood, vid. Keil, p. 158.2 We have no hesitation, in spite of superstitious interpretations of the Lords Supper and of the ritual, to conceive of the one-half of this blood as a sacrifice, and the other as a sacrament typically foreshadowed. In accordance with this reference the sacrificial element is traceable in the burnt-offering, the sacrament in the , peace-offerings, or thank-offerings. Keil, referring to Bhr and Knobel, rightly opposes the adducing of the analogy of heathen usages, in so far as thereby an identification of the usage is intended (vid. Knobel, p. 243); but an affinity of the profane with the theocratic sacrificial usages cannot be denied. Keil is also incorrect, when, in reference to these offerings, he speaks of expiation in the proper sense of the word. This could least of all be applied to the peace-offerings, or festive-offerings. The offerings in general, it is true, rest on the consciousness of the sinfulness which leads man, with his good will, and in symbolic form, to bring to God, as confession, prayer, and vow, what in his real condition as sinful in his spiritual life he cannot bring Himin the burnt-offering the sinless consecration of his whole life, in the peace-offering the sinless consecration of all his prosperity and enjoyment. It is quite in accordance with the legal stand-point that Moses at first pours out the blood designed for God at the altar of God; thereby he symbolically effects a general and complete surrender of the people to God. But not till after he has read the book of the covenant, the laws of chs. 2023, and the people have given their fullest assent (vid. the translation), does he sprinkle the people with the other half of the blood of the offering, which till then was kept in the basin, while he calls it the blood of the covenant that has been completed. It can hardly be correct, with Keil, to understand the blood to have been halved only because the blood sprinkled on the altar could not be again taken from it and sprinkled on the people; but he is right in assuming that the halves belong together. Clearly there is formed out of the identity of the blood a contrast in actu. In this contrast, however, the thought comes out that surrender in general, in accordance with the conditions of grace, must precede obedience in particular, according to the law. This is the patriarchal and evangelical seal impressed on the law, such as also introduces the decaloguethe language about the redeeming God. The expression, blood of the covenant, is, it is true, a marked one, denoting an ideally symbolical exchange of blood, as a foundation for blood relationship. But no human blood is here used, and still less can there be any thought of real blood of God, although, as sacrificial blood, it comes from God (and so far forth is a typical mystery), and is sprinkled upon men, symbolically expiating them and devoting them to sanctification, vid.Exo 29:21, Lev 8:30.
f.Feast of the covenant
Exo 24:9-11
9Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: 10And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone [as it were work of bright sapphire], and as it were the body of heaven [the very heaven] in his clearness [for clearness]. 11And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also [and] they saw God, and did eat and drink.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
A wonderfully beautiful, sublime, but also mysterious feature of the history of the giving of the law. In it we see the significance of the sprinkling of the blood further carried out. It is the communion festival of the lawa communion of the Israelites, in the persons of their noblest representatives, with Jehovah,the other side of the picture presented by the communion of Moses, his brother Aaron, and the elders, with Jethro, Moses heathen father-in-law, after the latter offered burnt-offerings and sacrifices, and doubtless also, as here, peace-offerings, Exo 18:12.A prophetic form of the communion feast is given by Isaiah, Exo 25:6-8. The first realization of it, the celebration of the Lords supper, frequently made to point figuratively to the last supper of the kingdom of Christ (Mat 19:28), finds its last fulfilment in the marriage of the Lamb, Rev 19:7-9.
Exo 24:9. Therefore the representatives of Israel went up, according to the prophetic, ceremonial, and political elements of the community. Aarons sons mark the genealogical succession of the Levitical priesthood; the prophets have no genealogical succession; the elders must grow up to attain their dignity, and from the whole of them seventy are chosen as representatives, according to the sacred number seventy. Vid.Gen 46:27.
Exo 24:10. And they saw the God of Israel. It is not said that they saw Jehovah, though He is meant; for Jehovah is the God of Israel. Therefore not , as Knobel conceives, referring to Exo 16:10. He says, According to the chief narrator this favor was shown only to Moses, and that too later than this, and at his special request. Two discrepancies are said to be found here: (1) That Moses does not see the glory of Jehovah till afterwards, Exo 33:18; (2) That according to the chief narrator the people themselves at the proclamation of the ten commandments perceived only thunder, lightning, clouds, noise of trumpets, and the voice of Jehovah; but here also the [glory of Jehovah], according to Exo 24:17! The narrative evidently brings out two marked contrasts. The first is the seeing of Elohim, and the seeing of Jehovah; the second is the heavenly clearness above the mountain during the feast of the covenant, and the subsequent darkening of the mountain by cloud and fire which took place when the law was drawn up. The vision of Jehovah in its several stages of development is marked by Isa 6:1 and Eze 1:26, Dan 7:9-13 (comp. Num 12:8). During the feast of the covenant at the declivity of the mountain (according to Exo 24:1 prescribed before the covenant was formed) the representatives of Israel saw the God of Israel. It was a vision, for which no objective image is furnished. But the sign of the objective image is called the image of a work or footstool under Gods feet, of brilliant sapphire, of sky blue therefore, like the heaven in its full brightness, as is added by way of further explanation. This ethereally delicate picture of the vision of the covenant God of Israel in His grace and covenant faithfulness has been coarsened and obscured in two directions. According to Knobel, the figure under Gods feet is like a work of sapphire slabs; and he refers to Eze 1:26, and reads . vid. p. 244. According to Baumgarten there was no image of God, because the vision of the men was imperfect. According to Hofmann the fire was separated from the cloud and turned into a form. According to Keil they saw also a form of God, which, however, is not described, inasmuch as Moses, according to Num 12:8, saw the form of Jehovah. But here we are told of a vision of the supermundane God as the God of Israel, not of a vision of Jehovah becoming incarnate. This is the first contrast. The second is the fact that at the feast of the covenant the cloud and the darkness are entirely gone, that the heavens open themselves, as it were, to the transported gazers in the full splendor of the heavenly blue, as at the baptism of Jesus; whereas immediately afterwards, at the beginning of the drawing up of the law, the mountain was obscured again, even more than before, as was the case when the ten commandments were first proclaimed. This is now again a phenomenal image of the glory of Jehovah as a law-giver, the same one who also in Exodus 33 does not show Moses, the law-giver, the face of His glory, but only its reflected splendor. The exegetical assumption that an external image must correspond to a vision of God, or that the sight must always be an external seeing, has no Biblical basis, although even here the inward vision is connected with the sight of an outward corresponding sign.
Exo 24:11. He laid not his hand. It is dangerous for sinful man to approach God, because the holiness and justice of God repel him; hence the true priest is he who can summon courage to approach God (Jer 30:21). But the view of the countenance of Jehovah annihilates, as it were, the sinful man (slays the old man); hence the Jewish popular saying, that no one can see God without dying, vid.Jdg 13:22. At that very place the error in the popular notion is corrected by Manoahs wife; yet the full revelation of Jehovah is still dangerous and agitating even for one who sacerdotally approaches and sees Him (vid.Revelation 1). Hence to the legal mind of the narrator it is an astonishing and joyous wonder of grace that the God of Israel did not punish the nobles of Israel for their temerity. In the enjoyment of this theocratic peace of God the nobles of the children of Israel received a pledge that the people of Israel themselves were also called to this dignity. They received this peace for the benefit of Israel. And they saw God.Luthers translation makes the sentence describe two successive events: and when they had seen God, they ate and drank. But the two are simultaneous; the seeing of God and the eating and drinking are intimately connected, forming a prelude of sacramental enjoyments. Fear might report: they saw God and died; but instead of that faith reports: they saw God, and ate and drank. In Exo 24:14 is found an indication that the nobles of Israel were on a declivity of the mountain, which, as contrasted with the summit, might be regarded as in the valley, and from which they could keep up their connection with the people. According to Keil, Moses also had first left the mountain with them, and afterwards ascended it again. This assumption may be favored by the fact that Joshua now comes into company with Moses. Moses needed his servant, since there was now to be a longer stay on the mountain. Knobel also understands the command, Tarry here, of the stay at the foot of Sinai.
______________
g.The summons to commit the law to writing
Exo 24:12-18
12And Jehovah said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee [thee the] tables of stone, and a [the] law, and commandments [the commandment] which I have written, that thou mayest teach [written, to teach] them. 13And Moses rose up, and his minister Joshua: and Moses went up into the mount of God. 14And he said unto the elders, Tarry ye here for us, until we come again [back] unto you: and behold, Aaron and Hur are with you: if any man have any matters to do [whosoever hath a suit], let him come unto them. 15And Moses went up into the mount, and a [the] cloud covered the mount. 16And the glory of Jehovah abode upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the [on the] seventh day he called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud. 17And the sight [appearance] of the glory of Jehovah was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel. 18And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount: and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Exo 24:12. And Jehovah said. The particular legislative relation of Jehovah here becomes again prominent, whereas heretofore the seventy elders of Israel may have represented Israels vocation to become a shepherd of the nations in their relation to Elohim. Moses is now summoned to a longer stay on the summit of the mountain. The mere reception of the tables is related in Exo 31:18. No very long stay was needed for that. What Moses as mediator of the law did upon the mountain, Jehovah did indeed do through him.3 But besides this there was added a new, grand task: the construction of the tabernacle. The law (or, the instruction) and the commandment. Not as two parts, but as two fundamental forms of the legislation. The law is originally oral instruction (thorah), but is written down as commandment only by Jehovah as the proper author, and is again to be transferred into living instruction for the people by the mouth of the prophet.
Exo 24:13. And Joshua.Vid.Exo 17:9, Exo 32:17, Exo 33:11. Mount of God.Vid.Exo 3:1.
Exo 24:14. Tarry ye here for us. At the foot of the mountain? That they were not to go any further with the people must have been quite self-evident. Moses goes now through the flame and the darkness as it were to death; he therefore institutes for the interim a government, which, standing between the mountain and the people, represents the outward sanctuary which was still wanting, and at the same time governs the people. Aaron and Hur (vid.Exo 17:12) are nominated as chief magistrates to settle suits that might arise.
Exo 24:15 sqq. Moses ascends the mountain, and is concealed by the cloud for six days. It is the cloud which at once reveals and conceals the glory of Jehovah, identical in significance with the pillar of cloud, but different from it in form, since it covers the mountain. On the seventh day Jehovah calls Moses to Himself out of the cloud, and the cloud is now transformed, to the people at the foot of the mountain, in its outward appearance, into the radiance of a consuming fire. Into this fiery radiance Moses enters, through the fiery flame, as it were, of the unapproachable justice of God (Heb 12:18; Heb 12:29), as it were, through the lightnings of the flaming sword of the cherubim (Genesis 3), in order to receive the fiery law (Deu 33:2) which goes through the worlds history under the protection of the cloudy darkness and of the fire (Psa 18:8-13; Psa 104:4, Isa 6:2-4, Zep 1:15, Zec 14:7, Mal 4:1, Mat 24:29, 2Pe 3:10, Revelation 18), in order to sanctify the people of God by means of judgment and deliverance, and to prepare for the reconstruction of the old world. The lawgiver had to be familiar with this design of the sacred fire, whose typical significance reaches its climax and turning-point in the life of Elijah. So then he seemed to the people to have disappeared; and after his stay of forty days and nights on the mountain where he had a vision of the tabernacle, the image of the kingdom of God, the people might imagine that he had perished in the terrors of the mountain. Knobel confounds the first stay of forty days on the mountain with the second. The origin of the idea of the tabernacle on the mountain coincides in time with the origin of the golden calf, and so there arises a contrast, in which nevertheless the tabernacle outweighs the golden calf. On the significance of the forty days, vid. the Introduction, as also the Introduction to Revelation.
Footnotes:
[1]The English edition omits the note. Keil argues that there is nowhere any indication that a nation in general approaches Jehovah through an offering. These young men officiated, he thinks, merely as Moses assistants, as is indicated by the circumstance that he sent them (Exo 24:5).Tr.
[2][Keil, l. c. says: The halving of the blood has nothing in common with the heathen customs cited by Bhr (Symbolik, II., p. 421) and Knobel (on this passage) according to which the contracting parties mingled their own blood. For it is not two different kinds of blood that are mixed together, but one blood, and that, sacrificial blood, in which animal life is taken away instead of human life.. Inasmuch as the blood is divided only because what is sprinkled on the altar cannot be taken up again from the altar and sprinkled on the people, the two halves of the blood are to be regarded as belonging together and so forming one blood, which is first sprinkled on the altar and then on the people, as was really done at the consecration of the priests, Exo 29:21, Lev 8:30.Tr.]
[3][In representing the commandments as committed to Writing by Moses, and not by Jehovah, Lange certainly has to strain the language of the text. It is true that God may be said to do what He commands Moses to do. But that would not justify the narrator in declaring with such particularity that the two tables were written with the finger of God (Exo 31:18), and that the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God (Exo 32:16). A man may be said to write what an amanuensis writes at his dictation; but if he expressly states that certain things are written with his own hand, it is unreasonable to suppose that they are written by the hand of another.Tr.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
This Chapter relates the interview between Moses and the people, when in his descent from the mount he delivered to them the law which he had received. Moses is again called up to the mount, where he continues forty days and forty nights.
Exo 24:1
Gen 7:1 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Exo 24:2
All deep feelings of a chronic class agree in this, that they seek for solitude, and are fed by solitude. Deep grief, deep love, how naturally do these ally themselves with religious feeling! and all three, love, grief, religion, are haunters of solitary places.
De Quincey.
Exo 24:3
Under baleful Atheisms, Mammonisms, Joe-Manton Dilettantisms, with their appropriate Cants and Idolisms, and whatsoever scandalous rubbish obscures and all but extinguishes the soul of man religion now is; its Laws, written if not on stone tables, yet on the azure of Infinitude, in the inner heart of God’s Creation, certain as Life, certain as Death! I say the Laws are there, and thou shalt not disobey them. It were better for thee not. Better a hundred deaths than yes. Terrible ‘penalties’ withal, if thou still need ‘penalties,’ are there for disobeying.
Carlyle in Past and Present.
Reference. XXIV. 3. E. Talbot, Sermons Preached in the Leeds Parish Church, 1889-95, p. 126.
The Vision of God and the Feast Before Him
Exo 24:11
I. Consider the vision of God possible for us.
The Bible says two things about that. It asserts, and it denies with equal emphasis, the possibility of our seeing Him. That vision which is impossible is the literal vision by sense, or, in a secondary meaning, the full, adequate, direct knowledge of God. The vision which is affirmed is the knowledge of Him, clear, certain, vivid, and, as I believe, yielding nothing to sense in any of these respects.
What lessons does this vision bring for us? That we Christians may, even here and now, see God, the God of the covenant. Christ, the revealer of God, makes God visible to us.
The degree of this vision depends upon ourselves, and is a matter of cultivation. There are three things wanted for sight something to see; something to see by; something to see with. God has given us the two first, and He will help us to the last if we like. Christ stands before us, at once the Master-Light of all our seeing, and the Object. Faith, meditation, purity, these three are the purging of our vision, and the conditions in us of the sight of God.
II. Notice the feast in the Divine presence. ‘They did eat and drink.’ That suggests, in the singular juxtaposition of the two things, that the vision of God is consistent with, and consecrates, common enjoyment and everyday life. If we see God there is only one thing that we shall be ashamed to do in His presence, and that is to sin.
That strange meal on the mountain was no doubt made on the sacrifices that had preceded, of which a part were peace-offerings. The same meaning lies in this meal on the mountain that lay in the sacrificial feast of the peace-offering, the same meaning that lies in the great feast of the New Covenant, ‘This is My Body; this is My Blood’. The vision of God and the feast on the mountain are equally provided and made possible by Christ our Passover, who was sacrificed for us.
III. We may gather out of this incident a glimpse of a prophetic character, and see in it the perfecting of the vision and of the feast.
Whatever may be the change in manner of knowledge, and in measure of apprehension, and in proximity of presence, there is no change in heaven in the medium of revelation. Christ is forever the Manifester of God, and the glorified saints see God as we see Him in the face of Jesus Christ, though they see that face as we do not.
The feast means perfect satisfaction, perfect repose, perfect gladness, perfect companionship.
A. Maclaren, The Unchanging Christ, p. 125.
Vision and Drudgery
Exo 24:11
It has been said by a very competent scholar, that this is the most significant chapter in the whole of the Old Testament. It is the basis of that covenant between God and man, which is glorified in the New Covenant of Christ. There was first the shedding of the blood of oxen, and ‘This cup is the New Covenant in My Blood’. There was the pouring of half the blood upon the altar, in token of lives that were forfeited to God. And then there was the sprinkling of the people with the other half, as if God were saying, ‘My children, live again’. For the blood is the life, and God, in covenant-mercy, was redeeming them from the death which they deserved. It was then that Moses and the seventy elders went upwards to the rocky heights of Sinai. And above a heaven, blue as a sapphire stone, somehow the vision of the Eternal broke on them. And they saw God, not with the eye of sense, for no man hath seen God at any time and they saw God and did eat and drink. Is not that a strange conclusion to the matter? It is a magnificent and unequalled anticlimax. They saw God and began to sing His praise? Not so; they saw God and did eat and drink. What does it mean?
I. First, the vision of God is the glory of the commonplace.
It was an old and a widespread belief that the vision of God was the harbinger of death. You are all familiar with Old Testament passages where men have voiced this primitive conviction. We are far away from that conception now, thanks to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Our God is love; He has a Father’s heart; He has a Father’s yearning for the prodigal. But God was terrible and dreadful once; and to see Him was not a blessing but a woe, driving a man apart from all his fellows into a loneliness horrible as death. I have no doubt that these seventy men of Israel had some such heavy feeling in their hearts. Let them see God, and then farewell for ever to the common lights and shadows of humanity. And so they climbed the hill, and had their vision above the pavement of the sapphire stones, and they saw God, and did eat and drink. Do you see what they were learning in that hour? They were learning that the vision of God does not withdraw us. It is not vouchsafed to drive a man apart, and rob him for ever of familiar joys. It is vouchsafed to consecrate the commonplace; to shed a glory on the familiar table; to send a man back into his daily round with the light that never was on sea or land.
II. The vision of God is the secret of tranquillity. That day at Sinai, as you may well conceive, had been a day of most intense excitement. It was a day when the most deadened heart was wakened to awe and to expectancy. If that were so with the body of the people, it was doubly so with these seventy elders. Think what it must have signified to them as they clambered up the rocky steeps of Sinai. There God had dwelt: there He had spoken to Moses: there there was blackness and darkness and tempest, and so terrible was the sight that even Moses said, ‘I exceedingly fear and quake’. I do not think that these seventy elders were in any state to think of food or drink. Like a soldier in the excitement of the charge, they forgot that they were hungry or athirst. And then they had their vision of the infinite, and it brought them to their quiet selves again, and the tumult and confusion passed away, and they saw God, and did eat and drink. That means that in the vision of God there is a certain tranquillizing power. Just to realize that He is here, is one of the deep secrets of repose. The man who has learned that can eat and drink and join in the happiness of feast and fellowship, although his table be set upon Mount Sinai, and be ringed about with darkness and with fire.
G. H. Morrison, The Return of the Angels, p. 235.
The Vision of God
Exo 24:11
Bishop Chadwick remarks on this passage: ‘They saw the God of Israel,’ and under His feet the blue-ness of the sky like intense sapphire. And they were secure: they beheld God, and ate and drank.
I. But in privilege itself there are degrees: Moses was called up still higher, and left Aaron and Hur to govern the people while he communed with his God. For six days the nation saw the flanks of the mountain swathed in cloud, and its summit crowned with the glory of Jehovah like devouring fire. Then Moses entered the cloud, and during forty days they knew not what had become of him. Was it time lost? Say rather that all time is wasted except what is spent in communion, direct or indirect, with the Eternal.
The narrative is at once simple and sublime. We are sometimes told that other religions besides our own rely for sanction upon their supernatural origin. ‘Zarathustra, Skya-Mooni, and Mahomed pass among their followers for envoys of the Godhead; and in the estimation of the Brahmin the Vedas and the laws of Manou are holy, Divine books’ (Kuenen, Religion of Israel, i. p. 6). This is true. But there is a wide difference between nations which assert that God privately appeared to their teachers, and a nation which asserts that God appeared to the public. It is not upon the word of Moses that Israel is said to have believed; and even those who reject the narrative are not entitled to confound it with narratives utterly dissimilar. There is not to be found anywhere a parallel for this majestic story.
II. But what are we to think of the assertion that God was seen to stand upon a burning mountain?
He it is Whom no man hath seen or can see, and in His presence the seraphim veil their faces.
It will not suffice to answer that Moses ‘endured as seeing Him that is invisible,’ for the paraphrase is many centuries later, and hostile critics will rule it out of court as an after-thought. At least, however, it proves that the problem was faced long ago, and tells us what solution satisfied the early Church.
With this clue before us, we ask what notion did the narrative really convey to its ancient readers? If our defence is to be thoroughly satisfactory, it must show an escape from heretical and carnal notions of deity, not only for ourselves, but also for careful readers from the very first.
Now it is certain that no such reader could for one moment think of a manifestation thorough, exhaustive, such as the eye receives of colour and of form. Because the effect produced is not satisfaction, but desire. Each new vision deepens the sense of the unseen. Thus we read first that Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu and the seventy elders, saw God, from which revelation the people felt and knew themselves to be excluded. And yet the multitude also had a vision according to its power to see; and indeed it was more satisfying to them than was the most profound insight enjoyed by Moses. To see God is to sail to the horizon; when you arrive, the horizon is as far in front as ever; but you have gained a new consciousness of infinitude. ‘The appearance of the glory of the Lord was seen like devouring fire in the eyes of the children of Israel.’ But Moses was aware of a glory far greater and more spiritual than any material splendour. When theophanies had done their utmost, his longing was still unslaked, and he cried out, ‘Show me, I pray thee, Thy glory’. To his consciousness that glory was still veiled, which the multitude sufficiently beheld in the flaming mountain. And the answer which he received ought to put the question at rest for ever, since, along with the promise ‘All My goodness shall pass before thee,’ came the assertion ‘Thou shalt not see My face, for no man shall see Me and live’.
III. So, then, it is not our modern theology, but this noble book of Exodus itself, which tells us that Moses did not and could not adequately see God, however great and sacred the vision which he beheld. From this book we learn that, side by side with the most intimate communion and the clearest possible unveiling of God, grew up the profound consciousness that only some attributes and not the essence of deity had been displayed.
Reference. XXIV. 11. J. Kerr Campbell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xli. 1892, p. 119.
Exo 24:12
‘The monastical life,’ says Bacon in the second part of The Advancement of Learning, ‘is not simple, contemplative, but performeth the duty either of incessant prayers and supplications, which hath been truly esteemed as an office in the Church, or else of writing or taking instructions for writing concerning the law of God, as Moses did when he abode so long in the mount…. But for contemplation which should be finished in itself, without casting beams upon society, assuredly divinity knoweth it not.’
My life is not stolen from me. I give it. A pleasure which is for myself alone touches me slightly. It is for myself and for my friends that I read, that I reflect, that I write, that I meditate, that I hear, that I observe, that I feel. I have consecrated to them the use of all my senses.
Diderot.
Exo 24:15
‘There was an idea of sanctity,’ says Ruskin, in the third volume of Modern Painters, ‘attached to rocky wilderness, because it had always been among hills that the Deity had manifested Himself most intimately to men, and to the hills that His saints had nearly always retired for meditation, for especial communion with Him, and to prepare for death. Men acquainted with the history of Moses, alone at Horeb, or with Israel at Sinai… were not likely to look with irreverent or unloving eyes upon the blue hills that girded their golden horizon, or drew down upon them the mysterious clouds out of the height of the darker heaven.’
How insignificant Sinai appears when Moses stands on its summit! This mountain seems but a pedestal whereon rest the feet of the man, whilst his head reaches to the clouds, where he speaks with God.
Heine.
Exo 24:18
If we insist upon perfect intelligibility and complete declaration in every moral subject, we shall instantly fall into misery of unbelief. Our whole happiness and power of energetic action depend upon our being able to breathe and live in the cloud; content to see it opening here and (closing there; rejoicing to catch, through the thinnest films of it, glimpses of stable and substantial things; but yet perceiving a nobleness even in the concealment, and rejoicing that the kindly veil is spread where the untempered light might have scorched us, or the infinite clearness wearied.
Ruskin, Frondes Agrestes, p. 24.
The region of dimness is not wholly without relations towards our moral state.
F. W. Newman.
Forty Days
Exo 24:18
Moses was forty days and forty nights in the mount. He was away. The mount means high elevation, an altitude crowned with golden clouds, utmost distance, perspective, and all the music of mystery. Sometimes we can only say of the great man, legislator, poet, or prophet, He is not here. Where is he? Away. Where? No man can tell; in the hidden places, in the invisible sanctuaries; away among the shaping clouds that are sometimes almost living presences. It is only when we are at some distance from our own life that we can make anything really of it; you cannot deeply consider that problem in the throng, you cannot use your slate and pencil in the great city multitude; you must go away into a mountain or valley or hang over the sanctuary-sea; in order to see yourself you must stand some distance back from yourself.
I. Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights. What was he receiving? He was receiving the law. Our greatest men are not the men on the streets. We call these men on the streets very active persons, much too active; the law is not a street anecdote or an incident of the thoroughfare, the law is away in the sanctuary of the infinite, the invisible, and the ineffable.
II. Moses was away forty days and forty nights receiving, not inventing, the law. There is a wondrous deliberation about the movement of God. The few commandments which we once called the law could be written in less than a minute each; it was not the handwriting but the heart-writing that required the time.
III. In Mat 4:2 we read that Jesus was tempted in the wilderness, ‘And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He was afterward an hungered’. Moses and the Lamb; the similarities between their histories are worth tracing out; such collocation of coincidence and repetition constitutes itself into an argument. Forty days and forty nights Jesus was fasting: surely great preparation means great issues; surely this is an athlete in training for some fight; this cannot be a mere pedantic arrangement; we must wait and see what comes of this trial of the soul: it may be that fasting is the true feasting, it may be that this disciplining the body and all that gathering up of force which we call passion or desire may mean that the greatest contest ever fought on the theatre of time is about to take place.
IV. What is the meaning of all this withdrawal, of all this forty days and forty nights’ experience?
1. The meaning is rest. The prophets must go away for a time, they must become nothing, enter into a state of negativeness, forget for the time being their own office and function; to forget it may be best to remember it. But the withdrawal must not be too long; too much rest would mean weariness; there is a rest that leads to reluctance, disbelief, and despair. A measurable rest, and then a happy renewal of service, that is the Lord’s idea of the ministry of His own discipleship.
2. The meaning is self-culture. A man may be too busy keeping other vineyards to keep his own, a man may be so much from his own fireside that his own children shall be turned into atheists by a misconstruction of his false piety. We should not indulge in any culture that separates us from the people.
3. The meaning is reception. There must be a time of intaking, there must be periods when we are not giving out, but when we are receiving in. Understand therefore that withdrawment from the prophetic office and service, as in the case of Moses and Elijah, does not mean abandonment of that office, but further preparation for it, and that the best withdrawment is a withdrawment which takes us right into the very sanctuary of the soul of Jesus Christ.
Joseph Parker, City Temple Pulpit, vol. I. p. 132.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
Moses In the Mount
Exo 24
This account would seem to be supernatural and miraculous. What is supernatural? What is miraculous? We are fond of using these great words, but it is one thing to employ them and another rightly to measure and apply their meaning. What is miraculous to one man is commonplace to another. We should not be astounded by the miracles if we had correlative faith. The surprise of the disciples at the miracles did not throw any doubt upon the miracles themselves, but showed only too plainly the want of faith on the part of the observers. “How is it,” said the Master, “that ye have no faith?” If we had faith there would be no miracles in the present narrow conception of that term; all our course would be lifted to a new level. Our wonder is the measure of our ignorance; our scepticism expresses the lack in our hearts of that wondrous power of interpretation and assimilation which is known by the name of faith. What is supernatural? and to whom is it supernatural? What is the standard? By what scales do you weigh things? We do not all stand upon one mental level. We must, therefore, go into individuality of heart, mind, attribute, and general condition, before we can understand the particular uses of so marvellous a term. What is supernatural to one man would seem to be the natural climate of another man’s soul. When we read the large words of advanced philosophy, when these words are brought under the attention of a great variety of persons, to some they will appear to be almost supernatural. They are so odd, so wholly unknown; they bear upon their faces lineaments not strange only but almost repellent; their image awakens no recognition in the consciousness of the reader; they are words that might be dismissed without the consciousness of loss. But to another kind of reader the words are friends, the longest of them is short, the most out-of-the-way term is a well-known companion in many a long day and night’s study. So when we come upon incidents in the Scriptures which appear to be uncommon to a degree involving what is generally known as the supernatural and the miraculous, we ought to find out the quality of the reader before we determine the quality of that which is read. All men do not read the Bible with the same eyes. Some men can read the Bible through at one perusal: they eat and drink abundantly at God’s table, and the festival never sates the appetite, but rather whets it and makes it long for further revelation and satisfaction. Other men cannot read the Bible at all. The very first verse is a gate they cannot open: they are puzzled, bewildered, discouraged: in them is no answering spirit; when the Bible and they meet, a process of indignation seems to be instantly set up. Beware, therefore, of the indiscriminate and lavish use of such terms as supernatural, miraculous, transcendental, and fall back upon the mystery of your own constitution as explaining a good many of the difficulties which rise like mountains in your way. If ye had faith as a grain of mustard-seed, ye would say to these mountains “Begone!” and they would vanish, like mist in the dissolving sun. But we must, in the spirit of decency and justice, protest against a man bringing his no-faith as the standard and measure of Divine revelation. The more spiritual we are, the less we shall be affrighted by the supernatural; the more carnal we are loving the dust and living in it the more we shall be alarmed by what is termed the miraculous element in the Bible. Sometimes by our criticism we rebuke ourselves it may be unconsciously, but not the less severely. It is the reader who has fallen from the upper level; the Divine revelation has never lost its line. Suppose we regard this marvellous incident as setting forth the possibility and blessedness of rapturous communion with God, we lose nothing of the moral grandeur and scenic majesty of the occasion. Even as a historical record it may only transcend reason as poetry transcends arithmetic. If you take away the poetry of life, you take away the vowels from the alphabet. What is left when you have taken away the few from the many, the speakers from the dumb? You have a cluster of consonants, but no language. The consonants are dumb, the consonants cannot utter a tone, the consonants wait until the vowels breathe into them the breath of life. It is the same with the Bible and the spiritual element. It is no Bible when the supernatural element, so called, is removed. Take out the spiritual, and the Bible is but a framework of consonants; insert the spiritual, and the Bible becomes a revelation. Many of us are waiting for the vowels. We feel as if we had something to say, but could only set the lips in a certain attitude, but utter no articulate speech. We have much because the consonants are more in number than the vowels. We have thought that bulk was wealth; we have said that it is more important to have many than to have few. Therein we have made a foolish speech. We must have both consonants and vowels if we are to have language, song, true music. So the spiritual or miraculous element plays the part of the vowels in this wondrous Book of God.
But Moses was called to solitary vision and communion of a spiritual kind. So he was. We need not stumble at that. “Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders” were not called to the same summit as Moses. Quite true. This is happening every day. The peaks of the mountain are less populated than the base. We must not deny the mountain because we have never climbed it. More persons have admired the Matterhorn than have stood upon its pinnacles. It is always the one man who sees first, hears most clearly, and is gifted with special utterance. It is so in all departments and ranges of life. Each of us has some prince who leads our thought ay, and who gives speech to our heart’s dumb desire. The hireling waits for the clock; the poet longs for the dawn. Dawn! what language is that? Not a hireling’s. Say “bell,” say “clock,” “hour,” and you speak the hireling’s measurable terms. But what is the “dawn”? Who made that sweet, liquid, tender word, without one line of hardness in it, requiring a woman’s softness of heart and speech to utter it as it ought to be spoken? Many a man has risen in the morning who has never seen the dawn. Others have gone up into the dawn, and have seen much and pledged the soul in many a holy oath and covenant before coming down into the marketplace to do life’s rough day’s work. The prophet is always alone. You cannot pluralise him. When he is near you, he is not one of you. The prophet is always mad. When a man is solitary in scientific investigation, when he is far ahead of “Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders,” we call him a philosopher; when the daring traveller goes out alone over sea and land and finds a river, a hill, a village, a colony, that no man of his country or speech ever saw before, we call him a discoverer; when a man ascends the hills of religious contemplation and communion and is shut up with God forty days and forty nights, not knowing the pain of hunger or the silence of solitude, we call him an enthusiast, a fanatic, a dreamer. Thus we distribute our tinsel honours! There will be a better judgment some day, the first shall be last and the last shall be first. He will be most philosopher who has prayed most, most a discoverer who has brought to bear upon the inspired record the keenest insight and quickest sympathy; he shall be a prince who has had power with God. We must not judge the acquisitions of others by the meanness of our own spiritual results. Do not blame Moses for the rapture, let us blame ourselves for the want of it.
We need not stumble even at the tenth verse, which reads thus: “And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.” The soul has eyes. There are hours not related to the clock; there are birthdays for which the calendar provides no line of registry. How natural is this endeavour to make the conception plain by a visible picture, and how visible pictures are lifted up to new meanings and clothed with new solemnities by such sacred uses. There have been times, even in our cold experience, when nature has had to be called in to help the expression of the soul’s delight. We too have made comparisons; we too have been inventors of parables, sometimes roughly outlined, but still having jewels in their meaning, even “sapphire stones “and the “body of heaven.” We have compared our supreme love to a company of horses in Pharaoh’s chariot; we have chosen the apple-tree amongst the trees of the wood, and have said that best images our soul’s one Love, and he in his turn looking round has seen a lily among the thorns and said, “That sweet lily represents my chosen one.” Every heart has its own image, or parable, or symbol, by which it sets forth to itself the best aspect of its supreme delight. When we want to represent God, and our view of him, how naturally we turn to the heavens. No earthly object will suffice. There burns in us a sacred contempt for all things measurable. We want all the broad brilliance of noonday, all the tender glory of the midnight, all the pomp of the summer sky. There is verily a natural religion; it is a poor deity that can be set forth in clay, and iron, and carved stone. Find any race that has lifted up its religious conceptions so as to require for their imaging all heaven, and surely you have found a race that may at any moment alight upon the true God. What Ezekiel saw was as the appearance of the likeness of a throne. John said that the face he saw was like a jasper and a sardine stone, and the rainbow which gave tenderness to the throne was in sight like unto an emerald. When Jesus was transfigured, his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. Do not take these as equivalents, but as hints, some idea of the majesty which must have beamed upon the eyes of worship as they gazed with religious awe upon sights for which there is no language. It does us good to be wrought into passions which transcend all adequate speech, yes, it does the soul good to pray itself into silence. We may have clear vision of God to such an extent as to have every word taken away from our use and be left dumb in the eloquence of silence.
Nor need we stumble at the twelfth verse, where the law is promised and where the written commandments were given. When we are most religious we are most inclined to proclaim the law. It is a poor rapture that does not come down upon legislation with a new force, a firmer grip, and a deeper conception of its moral solemnity. Know whether you have been with God upon the mount by knowing how much law you have brought back with you; and when you would read the law, read it after you have been long days and nights with the Lawgiver. Then there will be no harshness in the tone, nothing terrific, repellent, unsympathetic, but the laws, the commandments, the stern words will be uttered with a suppressed power equal to tenderness, with an awe equivalent to an interpretation, with a quiet solemnity that will have in it none of the sophism or violence of threatening. The commandments have not been rightly read: they have been pronounced in a judicial tone. How much better to speak them in tender whispers. Thou shalt not have any God before the true Jehovah, I have seen him. Thou shalt honour thy father and thy mother, for God is both, and I have been a long time with the Father and have studied and felt his motherliness. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not kill. All these things grieve him, are opposed to him excite not the petty anger of vindictiveness but the ineffable grief of wounded holiness. Thou shalt not thou must not In the name of righteousness, holiness, tenderness, beauty, harmony, music, truth, do not on the one hand, and do on the other.
Moses was absorbed in holy vision. The visible is not always the most real may we say that the visible is sometimes not real at all? We must be in certain mental moods before we can understand that speech. People speak about believing their eyes. I know not of less credible witnesses than our eyes! Discredit them and distrust them at once. You will be duped by many a sophism if you trust to your eye for sight. The eyes are within faculties spiritual, themselves unseen but always seeing. We ourselves have been so transported with sacred rapture or have been so absorbed in deep thought as not to have known where we were, by what circumstances we were environed. Speak of environment! it has a thousand times been burst asunder or transcended by consciousness for which there is no adequate name. These give us hints of the sublime future of disembodiment We shall be clothed upon with our house from heaven. The leaden flesh that keeps us tethered to one place shall go back to the dust whence it came, and the spirit-winged fire shall go back to the God who gave it. We shall not always be slaves, or prisoners, bound to particular places and fastened down by particular chains.
These absorptions, raptures, supernatural communions, if you so please to term them, give us hints of jubilee, festival, immortality. Do not dissipate their meaning by a superficial criticism of the letter, but magnify and glorify their meaning by giving to them all the sympathy and adoration of the spirit From the level of every life there is a way up to the mount of God.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XII
THE COVENANT AT SINAI ITS GENERAL FEATURES
Exo 19:1-24:11
The covenant at Sinai is the central part of the Old Testament. There is no more important part than the giving of the law on Mount Sinai, coupled with all of the transactions that took place while the children of Israel remained there. We first discuss, in catechetical form, the covenant in its general features.
1. Describe the place of the covenant.
Ans. The name of the place is sometimes called Sinai and sometimes Horeb. Moses himself calls it each one. Horeb is the range of mountains of which Sinai is the chief peak. So you speak truly when you say that the law was given at Horeb and at Sinai. But that there is a distinction between the two, you have only to see that at Rephidim, where the rock was smitten, it was a part of the high range, and is called, in Exo 17:6 , the rock in Horeb; and yet the succeeding chapters show that they had not yet gotten to Sinai. In describing the place, then, the first thing is to give its name, which is the range of mountains called Horeb, whose chief peak is Sinai. The second idea of the place is that this range of mountains, including Sinai, is situated in Southern Arabia between two arms of the sea, and the triangular district between those two arms of the sea is called the Sianitic peninsula. The third part of the answer in describing the place is this: The immediate place has a valley two and one half miles long by one and one-half miles wide, perfectly level and right under Sinai. Sinai goes up like a precipice for a considerable distance, then slopes toward the peak, and Overlooks a valley and a plain, for it is a long way above the level of the sea. This valley is the only place in all tin country where the people could be brought together in one body for such purposes as were transacted here. Modern re- search has made it perfectly clear that this valley right under Sinai is the place for the camp, and you can put three millions of people there, and then up the gorges on the mountain sides there is abundant range for their flocks and herds.
2. What are the historical associations of this place, before and since?
Ans. It was called the Mount of God before Moses ever saw it, and there was a good road into these mountains prepared by the Egyptians in order to get to certain mines which they had in the mountains of Horeb. Since that time we associate Horeb with Elijah when he got scared and ran a the way from Samaria to Mount Sinai a big run; he was very badly scared; and what he was scared at was more terrible than a man; a woman was after him. He was not afraid of Ahab, but he was afraid of Jezebel. Now, Sinai is associated with Elijah; and I believe that Jesus went to Sinai, an I am sure Paul did. He says when he was called to preach, “I did not go to Jerusalem for the people there to tell me now to preach, but I went into Arabia.” He stayed there three years, and, as I think, he came down to this place when the Law was given, in order to catch the spirit of the occasion of the giving of the Law from looking at the mountain itself and there received the revelations of the new covenant which was to supersede the covenant given upon Mount Sinai. Long after Paul’s time the historical associations of Sinai are abundant. Many of the books that teach about the Crusades have remarkable incidents in connection with the Sinaitic Peninsula and particularly this mountain. If you were there today, you would see buildings perpetuating Mosaic incidents, and on this mountain is a convent belonging to the Eastern, the Greek church, rather than to the Roman church; and in that convent Tischendorf found the famous Sinaitic manuscript of the New Testament, which is the oldest, the best and the most complete. There are associations in connection with Sinai which extend to the fifteenth century and even after.
3. What was the time of the arrival of these people at this mountain?
Ans. The record says, “In the third month after the children of Israel were gone forth out of the land of Egypt, the game day came they into the wilderness of Sinai.” In chapter 16 it says: “And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt.” They left Egypt on the fifteenth and were in the wilderness of Sin on the fifteenth of the next month, one month’s time; but while it is only one month in time, it covered parts of two months. “Now in the third month”, but just where in it the record does not say they reached Sinai. Another question on that directly.
In discussing this subject, I shall have the following general heads: (1) The Preparation for the Covenant; (2) The Covenant Itself; (3) The Stipulations of the Covenant; (4) The Covenant Accepted; (5) The Covenant Ratified; (6) The Feast of the Covenant. That will be the order of this chapter.
4. What was the proposition and reply?
Ans. In chapter 19 the proposition for the covenant comes from God in these words: “And Moses went up unto God, and Jehovah called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel [here’s the proposition]: Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles’ wings, and brought you unto myself. Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be mine own possession from among all peoples: For all the earth is mine: and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.” On those terms God proposes a covenant. Now, let us see if the people agree to enter into covenant with God: “And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and set before them all these words which Jehovah commanded him. And all the people answered together and said, All that Jehovah hath spoken we will do.” Moses then reported back to God what the people said here was a mutual agreement on the part of the people enter into a covenant (Exo 19:7-8 ).
5. What was the method of Jehovah’s approach in order enter the covenant?
Ans. The theophanv. “Theonhany” means an appearance of God. God says to Moses, in describing how he will come, that he will come in a cloud; that they won’t see him; but they will see the cloud and hear his voice; an appearance of God, some of it visible, a cloud that envelops God, and voice Heard.
6. What was the preparation for this covenant they se to enter into?
Ans. The first part of it was to sanctify the mountain “Sanctify” means to set apart, or to make holy; to sanctify a mountain is to set it apart. That mountain which was to be the scene and place of this great covenant between God and the people was set apart, things set upon it, fenced about’, with the prohibitions of God: “Don’t you come too close I it; don’t touch it.” Just as God fenced the burning bush when he said to Moses “Don’t, draw nigh; stop, you are enough; take the shoes off your feet; this is holy ground.” The next part of the preparation was to sanctify the people. This was done ceremonially. They were ceremonially purified, as is expressed in these words: “Go down, charge the people, lest they break through unto Jehovah to gaze, and many of them perish. And let the priests also that come near to Jehovah, sanctify themselves, lest Jehovah break forth upon them.”
7. What was to be the signal which would bring the people close to that mountain and put them into the presence of God?
Ans. It was a trumpet sound, described on this occasion in such a way as to thrill the people hearing the sound. This sound was prolonged, and thus it waxed louder and louder and louder a fearful, unearthly sound. No human lips blew that trumpet earth never heard it before; the earth will hear it again only one more time, and that when Christ comes to judge the world; he will then come with the sound of a trumpet.
8. What was to be the time when God and the people, after this preparation, should come together?
Ans. On the third day.
9. Describe Jehovah’s coming on the third day and compare Deu 4:10-12 .
Ans. The record says, “And it came to pass on the third day, when it was morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; and all the people that were in the camp trembled. And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet God; and they stood at the nether part of the mount. And Mount Sinai) the whole of it, smoked, because Jehovah descended upon it in fire; and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice of the trumpet waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice” (Exo 19:16-19 ). In Deu 4:10-12 , Moses describes it again, referring to that great occasion, the theophany, and he uses this language: “The day that thou stoodest before Jehovah thy God in Horeb, when Jehovah said unto me, Assemble me the people, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they live upon the earth, and that they may teach their children. And ye came near and stood under the mountain; and the mountain burned with fire unto the heart of heaven, with darkness, cloud, and thick darkness. And Jehovah spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of words but ye saw no form; only ye heard a voice.” “Form” or similitude is a likeness; “you heard a voice, but saw no likeness or similitude of God.”
10. Who was the mediator of this covenant between God: and the people?
Ans. You will notice that the people and God do not come together directly. In the book of Job he says, “There is no daysman who shall stand between me and God, touching God, touching me.” If God had revealed himself visibly to the people and directly, the sight would have killed them, for they were a sinful people. In order to get to them, then, there was a necessity for a middleman, a mediator; one who should approach God for the people and approach the people for God. Now who was this mediator? Moses.
11. What part did the angels take, and how signified?
Ans. In the later books of the Bible we learn that this law was given by the disposition of angels and was signified by that trumpet, the trumpet served to summon the whole army of God’s angels.
12. When again will it sound, and why?
Ans. When the judgment day comes: “He shall come with the sound of the trumpet”; and when that trumpet sounds, its object is not to wake the dead, according to the Negro theology, but to marshal the angels, to bring them back with him.
13. What are the great lessons of this preparation?
Ans. Let us get these clearly in our minds:
(1) That this is to be a theocratic covenant. I want you to get the idea of this, viz.: The difference between a democratic covenant (made with all the people), an aristocratic covenant (made with the nobles, the best of the people) and a theocratic covenant, one in which God alone makes the stipulation. The people don’t prescribe anything. God tells everything that is to be done, either on his part or on their part. All the people have to do in a theocratic covenant is to say “yes” or “no”; to accept or reject.
(2) That it was a mediatorial covenant) not a covenant directly between God and the people, but a covenant in which a daysman goes between, a mediator to transmit from God to the people, and from the people to God.
(3) The third great lesson is that the people, in order to enter into a covenant with God, even through a mediator, must have the following requirements:
(a) They must make a great voluntary decision (Exo 24:8 ). You remember when Elijah summoned all the people to meet him on the mountain with the prophets of Baal, and had the test as to who was God, and the prophets of Baal were to try to bring proof that they represented God, and he was to prove that he represented God; that he proposed to them that day to make a great decision: “How long halt ye?” “Halt” does not mean to “linger,” but to “limp”; a halting man in the Bible is a “limping” man. “How long hobble ye as a limping man between two opinions? If the Lord be God, follow him; if Baal be God, follow him” (1Ki 18:21-40 ). This is the lesson: That what the people must do was to make this great decision. Moses could not make it for them. They were brought up there; they had plenty of ground on which to stand; that valley was two and a half miles long and one and a half miles wide; and God could speak loud enough for them to hear him, and anything they said he could hear. “Now, you people, will you make this decision?” And they said, “We will.”
(b) The people must have fear toward Jehovah. “You are not entering into a covenant with a dumb idol, but with the living God.”
(c) “And you must have reverence. Don’t get too close to the divine presence; don’t try to break through that fence; don’t touch the mountain; do not presume to be intimate with Jehovah. You must have reverence.”
(d) The next requirement was holiness; and that holiness is a sanctifying by the ceremonial purification. The last requirement
(e) is obedience. “Will you obey? Will you do it.?” Suppose now, to give you, the idea perfectly, I ask again: What are the great lesson from this preparation? Theocratic covenant; lessons of the mediatorial covenant; What the people must do: decide, fear God, have reverence, be purified, obey God. That discusses the first part of the preparation for the covenant. We will now discuss, in general terms, the covenant itself.
14. Give proofs that what we call the giving of the law of Mount Sinai is a covenant as well as a law.
Ans. The evidence of its being a covenant is presented by the meaning of the word “covenant,” viz.: agreement between two, under stipulations binding either party. That is a covenant; and the ratification takes place by the sacrifice of a victim. All the covenants of the Old Testament are of that kind. As a proof that this is a covenant, God, the party of the first part, makes the proposition to enter into the covenant; then the people agree to it; and next, God prescribes, what he will do, and what they must do. These are the stipulations of the covenant. Then the people must accept formally after they have heard all the stipulations, and then comes the ratification. In Exo 24:1-8 , we have an account of the ratification. In this chapter I shall speak of it more as a covenant than as a law.
15. What are its three constituent parts, binding the people?
Ans. Whatever mistakes you make, do not make a mistake in answering this question. It is just as clear as a sunbeam that this covenant entered into on Mount Sinai has three distinctive, constituent parts:
(1) The moral law (Exo 20:17 ), the Ten Commandments, the first part of the covenant.
(2) The altar, or law of approach to God (Exo 20:24-26 ; Exo 23:14-19 ). In case you cannot keep the moral law, the law of the altar comes in.
(3) The civil or national law, (Exodus 1-23:13). Now, what are the constituent parts of the covenant? Moral law, law of the altar, or way of approach to God, also the civil, or national law. The civil law of judgments covers several chapters: they are all a part of this covenant. Now, let us separate those ideas:
(1) Relates to the character of the person;
(2) to the way you can approach God, if you fail in character;
(3) to the civil, or national affairs. Israel was a nation. This is not Abraham making a covenant; it is not Moses making one; it is a nation entering into a covenant with God, to be his treasure, his peculiar people. And I venture to say that everything else in the Pentateuch, whether in the rest of the book of Exodus, in Leviticus, in Numbers, or in Deuteronomy, everything is developed from one or other of these three things. All Leviticus is developed from the law of the altar; it is just simply an elaboration of that part of this covenant they entered into with God, and was enacted when they were at Sinai. All that part of Numbers up to the time they left Sinai (first ten chapters) is a development of one or another of these three parts. Every new enactment which comes in Numbers, every restatement occurring in Deuteronomy must be collocated there with the moral law and with the altar law, or with the national law. I had the pleasure at Brownwood, Texas, at the request of the school, the churches, and the people there, to deliver a lecture on Leviticus, so as in one lecture to give those people an idea of the book. And the first thing I wrote on the blackboard was: “Everything in the book of Leviticus is developed from that part of the covenant given on Mount Sinai which relates to the law of the altar, or the way of approach to God.”
16. In what prophecy is it shown that this covenant given on Mount Sinai shall be superseded by a new covenant with different terms?
Ans. Jeremiah is the prophet. The passage commences: “In the last days, saith the Lord, I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, not like the covenant I made with them when I led them out of Egypt.” Jeremiah then shows how different the terms of the new covenant shall be from those of the covenant given at Sinai (Jer 31:31-34 ).
17. Where in the New Testament are the terms of the two covenants contrasted in this form: “Do and thou shalt live,” and “Live and (thou shalt) do”?
Ans. You are bound to see that there is a sharp contrast between the new and the old covenants. If this old covenant says, “Do in order to live,” and the new one says, “Live in order to do,” you must be alive before you can do; and they then start in different directions, keep going away from each other, one going up, the other going down. Where in the New Testament is that thought brought out? (Rom 10:5 ff.)
18. Where in the New Testament is the contrast between the two covenants expressed in allegory?
Ans. Gal 4:24 ff.
19. What three books of the New Testament best expound the covenants as contrasted?
Ans. Galatians, Romans, and Hebrews (in that order), particularly, Hebrews. And now comes a question of chronology.
20. What is the support for the Jewish tradition that this covenant was enacted the fiftieth day after the Passover sacrifice in Exo 12 ?
Ans. You know the Jews always have maintained that the law given on Mount Sinai was on the fiftieth day after the Passover was celebrated; just as in the New Testament the Holy Spirit was given on the fiftieth day after the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Alexander Campbell makes a great point of that: The giving of the new covenant law must be on the fiftieth day after Christ’s crucifixion. You could make it a proof this way: Exo 12 says that this month Abib, later called Nisan, i.e., after the captivity it was so called, shall be the beginning of the year to you, and on the fifteenth day of that month they left Egypt, not on the first day of the month, but on the fifteenth, which was the beginning of the new year. The Passover was slain on the night of the fourteenth, and hurriedly eaten. On the fifteenth they marched out. Chapter 16 tells us that on the fifteenth day of the next month, which would be about a month after they left Egypt, they were then in the wilderness of Sin, not very far from Mount Sinai, but only one month gone. Now, there are several stations at which they stopped before reaching Sinai, and they could be at Sinai and waiting three days, devoting the time to preparation, and making the giving of the law on the fiftieth day. The argument can be made out so that the time covered from the leaving of Rameses in Egypt to the arrival at Sinai would be less than two months, as fifty days does not equal two lunar months; there must be fifty-six days to get two lunar months, even.
21. The next question bears on the stipulations of the covenant. Where do we find the stipulations of what God would do for his part?
Ans. What God proposes to do is expressed in Exo 19:5 : “Ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people, and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation.” Then in Exo 23:20 he enumerates what he will do. “I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. . . . Mine angel shall go before thee . . . and I will cut off the opposing nations . . . and ye shall serve Jehovah your God, and he will bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee . . . I will drive these nations out from before thee. . . . And I will set thy border from the Red Sea even unto the sea of the Philistines, and from the wilderness unto the river [i.e., Euphrates].” In other words, he will do what he promised to Abraham he would do, as to their boundary. That is what he proposes to do.
22. What must the people do?
Aug. Keep those three parts of that covenant, having fear and reverence toward God, and toward his angels and toward Moses, the mediator. That is their part of the covenant.
23. Cite the passage to prove that the people agreed to enter into the covenant when proposed, and cite the passage showing their acceptance of it when stated. Pause Key (Key: Enter!)
Ans. – The covenant having been stated in all of its parts, God propounds to the people the plain question: “Will you accept it?” thus: “Moses told the people all the words of the law,” i.e., the Decalogue, with the judgments, or the civil law, and the law of the altar, or the way of approach to God. And Moses wrote these words and said to the people, “Will you do them?” They said, “We will.” It is very plain that after they had heard they accepted. And the next thing is the ratification.
24. Describe the ratification.
Ans. – I quote it: “Moses rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the mount, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent young men of the children of Israel, who offered burnt offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto Jehovah. And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basins; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. And he took the book of the covenant [wrote those in a book; what both parties had obligated themselves to observe] and read in the audience of the people; and they said, All that Jehovah hath spoken will we do, and be obedient. And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which Jehovah hath made with you concerning all these words” (Exo 24:4-8 ). That was the ratification.
25. What are the developments in the rest of the Pentateuch from each of the three parts of the covenant?
Ans. – The last chapter of Exodus, all of Leviticus, a large part of Numbers are devoted to the development of the Law of the Altar, Deuteronomy, to the Ten Commandments; a large part of Exodus and some of Deuteronomy, to the Civil Code.
26. In what part was the gospel germ?
Ans. – In the Altar, or Law of Approach to God.
27. What three books are specially commended?
Ans. – Boardman’s Lectures on the Ten Commandments; Butler’s Bible on the Giving of the Law at Sinai; and the) Presbyterian Catechism on the Ten Commandments.
28. What is the sign, or token of the covenant? Cite scripture.
Ans. — Circumcision. Gal 5:2 .
29. How long after the call of Abraham and the promise to him, was this?
Ans. – Paul says, “Four hundred and thirty years.” See Gal 3:17 .
XIII
THE COVENANT AT SINAI (Continued)
Scripture: Same as in preceding chapter
1. The first question is based on Exo 24:7 : “And he took the book of the covenant.” What is this book of the covenant?
Ans. All that part of Exodus 19-24-11. Moses wrote it then.
2. How may this book be regarded and what is its relation to all subsequent legislation in the Pentateuch?
Ans. You may regard the book of the covenant as a constitution and all subsequent legislation as statutes evolved from that constitution. The United States adopted a constitution of principles and the revised statutes of the United States are all evolved from the principles contained in that constitution. So that this book of the covenant may be regarded as a national constitution.
3. Why, then, is the whole of the Pentateuch called the law?
Ans. Because every part of the Pentateuch is essential to the understanding of the law. The historical part is just as necessary to the understanding of the law as any particular provision in the constitution, or any particular statute evolved from the constitution. The history must commence back at creation and go down to the passage over into the Promised Land. Very appropriately, then, do the Jews call the Pentateuch the torah, the law.
4. What other Pentateuchs?
Ans. The five books of the Psalter. When you come to study the psalms, I will show you just where each book of the psalms commences and where it ends. They are just as distinct as the five books of Moses. Another Pentateuch is the fivefold Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul; and as Moses’ Pentateuch is followed by Joshua the man of deeds, the Gospel Pentateuch is followed by Acts, which means deeds.
5. Where and when was a restatement and renewal of this covenant at Sinai?
Ans. In the book of Deuteronomy. There not only had been a breach of the covenant in the case of the golden calf, which was forgiven, but there came a more permanent breach at Kadesh-barnea when the people refused, after God brought them to the border, to go over into the Promised Land, and they wandered until all that generation died. Their children are brought where their fathers would have been brought, and it became necessary to renew that covenant. You find the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy just as you find them here.
6. State again exactly the three parts of the covenant.
Ans. (1) The Ten Commandments, or moral law (Exo 20:1-17 ); (2) the law of the altar, or the way of approach to God, in case the Ten Commandments were violated; (3) The judgments, or the civil law. Now from those three parts, the constituent elements of the covenant, are evolved everything, you might say, in all the rest of the books of the Bible. Leviticus is all evolved from the law of the altar; very much of Numbers and Deuteronomy is evolved from the civil law. Now before I consider Part I, that is, the Decalogue, I want to make a brief restatement of some things in the preceding chapter. The first is the covenant. A covenant is an agreement or compact between two or more parties with expressed stipulations showing what the two parties are to do. The parties to this Sinai covenant are: God upon the first part, and the people on the second part, with Moses as the daysman or mediator. In the preceding chapter we had the following outline:
A proposition upon God’s part for a covenant and the people’s acceptance of that proposition; A preparation for entering into that covenant; The covenant itself as expressed in three parts; The stipulations of the covenant as shown in the last chapter; The covenant ratified; The Feast of the Covenant.
Now we take up Part (1) the moral law; and we are to consider that moral law first, generally, then specifically. I can, in this chapter, get into only a part of the specifics of it.
7. What do we call Part I of this Covenant?
Ans. We call it the moral law; or, using a Greek word, the Decalogue.
8. What are the three scriptural names?
Ans. The Bible gives (1) “the ten words”; that is what “decalogue” means, “the ten words spoken.” God spake all these words. (2) “The tables” or “tablets,” whereon these words were written, and (3) “the tables of the testimony.” When this written form was deposited in the ark of the covenant, from that time on they are called “the tables of the testimony.”
9. Give the history of these tablets.
Ans. They were written on tables of stone by the finger of God; that was the original copy. Moses broke them when the people made a breach of the covenant in the matter of the golden calf. God called him up into the mountain again and rewrote these Ten Commandments; that was the second copy. Both of these God wrote. These two tables that God wrote on were deposited in the ark when it was constructed, and that, too, before they left this Mount Sinai. The last time they were seen, you learn from 1Ki 8 , was when Solomon moved that ark out of the tabernacle into the Temple which he had built. He had it opened and in there were the two tables of atone on which God had written. The probable fate of them is this, that when Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, he may have taken the ark of the covenant with the things in it as memorials of his victory, just as when Titus destroyed the Temple he took away the sacred things of the Temple; the seven-branched golden candlestick was carried in triumph into the city of Rome.
10. Divide these ten words first into grand divisions, and then into subdivisions.
Ans. The grand divisions were two tables, one of them were the commandments relating to God, i.e., man’s duty to God, and the other were the commandments expressing man’s relation to his fellowman. The subdivisions are these: all that part of Exodus from Exo 20:2-17 is divided into ten parts. Those are the subdivisions of the two tables. We will note them precisely a little further on in the comments for Exo 20:1-6 .
11. What is the Romanist method of subdivision and what are the objections thereto?
Ans. The Romanists make one out of the first two commandments, and two out of the last. We say that the First Commandment is, “Thou shall have no other gods before me,” and they say the first command is: “I am the Lord thy God which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, etc.,” to the end of the Second Commandment.
12. What other ten words and how do you compare them?
Ans. The ten words of creation and the ten Beatitudes spoken by our Lord. We compare them by a responsive reading.
13. How and where does Moses compress the ten into two?
Ans. I will give the compression. In one place Moses says, “Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength.” In another place Moses says, “Thou shalt love their neighbour as thyself,” compressing the first table into one and the second table into one (Deu 6:4 f; Lev 19:18 ).
14. What was the occasion of Christ’s quotation of Moses compression?
Ans. An inquirer came to him propounding this question: “Which is the great commandment in the law?” Jesus, quoting Moses, says, “This is the great and first commandment, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul and with all thy mind. And a second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets.”
15. What New Testament scripture shows the solidarity of the law?
Ans. The solidarity of a thing means the inability to touch any part without touching it all; and if you violate one commandment you violate all the Decalogue, and if you are guilty of one you are guilty of all. The place in the New Testament where it is said, “He that is guilty of one point in the law is guilty of all,” is Jas 2:10 . That passage expresses the solidarity of the law.
16. How does the New Testament compress the ten into one?
Ans. This passage is: “All the law is fulfilled in this one word, love,” (Gal 5:14 ).
17. Is this giving of the law, orally or in writing, the origin of the law? That is, was there no law before? Was it the origin of the law; and if not, what is it, and why is it?
Ans. This is not the origin of the law, but it is an addition. The Scriptures say, “The law was added because of trans-gression.”
18. Then, what is law?
Ans. Law is that intent or purpose in the mind of the Creator, concerning any being or thing that he causes to be. Now, the intent that he had in his mind, the purpose, when he made man, is the law of man. The intent or purpose that he had in mind when he created the tree is the law of the tree. That law may not be expressed. It inheres: it is there in the nature of the thing. It may be expressed in the spoken commandment or in the written one. But you do not have to wait until the word is spoken or till the spoken word is written in order to have law. For example, Paul says, “Death reigned from Adam to Moses.” But death is the penalty of the law, and “where there is no law there is no transgression.” Now, if law didn’t exist before given on Mount Sinai, why did those people die?
19. If the spoken or written law at Sinai was added because of transgression, show more particularly and illustrate its purpose, both negatively and positively. Now, if a law exists in God’s mind and in the nature of the things that he creates, why did he afterward speak that law and have it written?
Ans. (1) Because of transgression. We now show the mean ing of that, and illustrate it. We have the answer in this form: The purpose of speaking this law and of having it written negatively, was not to save men by it. They were lost when it was developed. But first it was to discover sin. Sin is hidden and there was a law, but it was not written or spoken. Now, God put that law in writing so that it could be held up by the side of a man, and his life, and his deeds to discover sin in him. Paul says, “I had not known sin except by the law.” (2) This sin by the law is discovered to the man in order to convict him of this sin. Paul says, ” I was alive without the law once [that is, before I knew it I felt like I was all right], but when the commandment came sin revived and I died. I saw myself to be a dead man.” In the next place, (3) it was to make the sin, which looked like something else before the man had the law, appear to be sin, as Paul says in his letter to the Romans, and also, to make it appear to be “exceedingly sinful.” Now to illustrate: Suppose on a blackboard we were to trace a zigzag turning line. That is the path a man walks; he is in the woods and thinks he is going straight, and he feels all right. Now you put a rule there, which is exactly straight, and just watch how that zigzag walk of his is sometimes on one side and sometimes on the other. The rule discovers the variations; it makes it known. Now here is (4) another purpose of the, Law: To incite to sin in order that the heinousness of the exceeding sinfulness of sin may be made manifest. Now, maybe you don’t believe that. Paul says it is so, and I can give you an illustration that will enable you to see just how it is so. I never saw one of the Baylor University boys put his foot on top of the mail box at the street corner, but if the faculty should pass a law that no boy should put his foot on that mail box, some boy’s foot would go on top of it, certainly. Now, that boy may have imagined all along that he was law abiding. But put a standard there and he wants to test it right away. I illustrate again: A little boy once saw a baldheaded man going along up the side of a hill, and the boy said, “Go up, thou bald head! Now trot out your bears.” He had been told that if he was irreverent toward an old, baldheaded man, as the boys were toward Elisha, the bears would tear him to pieces.
20. Explain carefully the Christian’s relation to this law.
Ans. It is a part of the old covenant, you say, and we have a new covenant now. Then is a Christian under obligations to keep this law? Is the law binding on you not to kill, not to lie, not to steal, not to commit adultery? We certainly would be extreme antinomians if we were to say that as an obligation that does not rest on us. It does rest on us, but it does not rest on us as a way to eternal life. You see the distinction? The time never will come when it will be right for a man to kill, to steal, to commit adultery, to covet, and no matter who does any one of these things, whether saint or sinner, it is sin. But the keeping of the Decalogue is an obligation upon the Christian because it is in the nature of his being, as when it was spoken at Sinai, yet that is not the Christian’s way to obtain eternal life.
21. What is the form of the statement of the ten words?
Ans. Negative and positive. For some of them: “Thou shalt not”; for others, positive: “Honour thy father,” etc.; but whether the form be positive or negative if it is negative, it has a positive idea attached, and if it is positive it has a negative idea. If it is an affirmation, it is also a prohibition. No matter what the form, it does prescribe certain things and it does proscribe certain things.
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
XXIV
GOD AND THE STATE, THE STATE AND THE CITIZEN, THE PROMISES, AND THE RATIFICATION OF THE COVENANT Exo 21:1-24:8
1. What are the lesson and the themes?
Ans. Lesson: Exo 21:1-24:8 . Themes: (1) God and the state; and the state and the citizen, 21:1-23:19.
(2) The promises of the covenant, Exo 23:20-33 .
(3) The ratification of the covenant, Exo 24:1-8 . Having considered Part I of the covenant, the Decalogue, or God and the normal man, and Part II, the altar, or God and the sinner, we now consider Part III, the judgments, or God and the state, and the state and the citizen. This lesson is contained in Exodus 21-23.
2. What is the name of section Exo 21:1-23:19 ?
Ans. This section is called the judgments, or decrees.
3. What is the book of the covenant, and what may it be called?
Ans. The whole book of the covenant, i.e., from Exo 19:1-24:8 , in its three parts and in its ratification, may well be called the constitution of the nation of Israel; and all subsequent legislation in the Pentateuch is but statutes developed from this constitution. The United States has a written Constitution; all the legislation of Congress must be simply enlargements or developments of the fundamental principles contained in that Constitution.
4. How is God recognized in this section?
Ans. He is the author of the state, as he is the author of its antecedents, the family and the tribe.
5. What results from this origin of the state?
Ans. God’s providential government over the nations, counted as units, and their responsibility to him.
6. How does Paul put it?
Ans. In Rom 13:1-7 , he says: “The powers that be are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power, withstandeth the ordinance of God: and they that withstand shall receive to themselves judgment. For rulers are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. And wouldest thou have no fear of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise from the same: for he is a minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be in subjection not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. For for this cause ye pay tribute also; for they are ministers of God’s service, attending continually upon this very thing. Render to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.”
In I Timothy Paul puts it this way: “I exhort therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings, be made for all men; for kings and all that are in high places; that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and gravity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth.” The powers, then, must be respected and honoured, and must be prayed for by those having the good of society at heart (1Ti 2:1-4 ).
7. What is extent of God’s government over the nations and the proof from Paul and Daniel?
Ans. It is absolute in authority and universal in scope; so that the ruler or state must perish that despises God, as Paul says in Act 17:24-31 : “God hath determined . . . the bounds of their habitation and decreed that they should seek after him.” Daniel puts it more strongly in Dan 4:10-37 , especially Dan 4:17 ; Dan 4:25 ; Dan 4:34-35 ; Dan 4:37 , where it is affirmed that God holds a nation responsible just as he holds an individual responsible, and that the ruler who does not know God puts himself on a level with the beast, and that he must be disciplined until he does know that the Most High ruleth over the nations of the world, and that the inhabitants of the earth are but as grasshoppers in his sight.
8. From what additional source arises the state’s jurisdiction over the citizen?
Ans. We have just discussed the authority of God over the state. Now the authority of the state over the citizen, apart from God’s having ordained it, arises also from the social nature of man. He is not independent of other men but codependent with them. The ties which bind him to his fellow men are natural, inherent, indissoluble, and cannot be despised with impunity; so that he cannot be self-centered and apart.
9. What was the particular form of state government organized at Sinai and its subsequent changes?
Ans. This particular Jewish state was theocratic in form, God himself was the king of the nation, and in visible symbol dwelt among them. But keep the etymology of certain words in your mind, viz.: theocracy, aristocracy, democracy. That form of government established over the Jewish nation at Sinai was theocratic, i.e., God was the ruler. There were changes in the form of this national government in subsequent ages. The first change took place in the days of Samuel, when the people rejected God as governor and selected, after the manner of the nations, a man to be their ruler (1Sa 8:4-22 Joshua was priest, and the heads of the tribes were the rulers.). This was the establishment of a monarchial form of government, not theocratic; it was thus changed from a theocracy to a monarchy. Subsequently it perished (2Ki 25 ) and the form of government became in the days of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah, a mixture of democratic, aristocratic, and the priestly. That is to say, Zerubbabel was governor, Joshua was priest, and the heads of the tribes were the rulers. This mixture continued until under Herod the Great it again became a kingdom, a monarchy, and from that time, it passed into a provincial government under Roman procurators. Those were the changes in the government; then upon the destruction of Jerusalem they were a scattered people without a king, without an ephod, without a priest, without a temple, without sacrifices, and with no national government; and they continue so until this day.
10. Our present section (Exo 21:1-22:10 ) establishes the general principles on which the state shall deal with what matters?
Ans. – (1) With property in slaves, Exo 21:1-11 ; (2) The sanctity of human life, or criminal law, Exo 21:12-36 ; (3) With other kinds of property, Exo 22:1-15 ; (4) With the stranger, the widow, the orphan, and the poor, Exo 22:21-27 ; Exo 23:5 ; Exo 23:11 ; (5) With cases of seduction, Exo 22:16-17 ; (6) With sins against nature, Exo 22:19 , that mate man with the brute, disregarding the distinction between man and beast; (7) With the rights of neighbor or enemy in the matter of his domestic animals going astray, or found in suffering, Exo 23:4-5 ; (8) With false testimony and bribery, Exo 23:1-3 ; Exo 23:7-9 ; (9) With sins against the first commandments, i.e., making sacrifices to others than Jehovah, Exo 22:20 ; Exo 23:13 ; (10) Sins of necromancy, Exo 22:18 , i.e., wizards or witches ‘that seek to find out the future from the dead or from other sources, and not depending on God for revelation; (II) Sins against rulers, Exo 22:28 : “Thou shalt not curse the rulers of the people,” Exo 23:10-11 , and of the weekly sabbaths, Exo 23:12 ; (12) With God’s rights to his firstfruits of the family, the harvest, the herd, and the flock, Exo 22:29-31 ; (13) The three annual festivals, Exo 23:14-19 ; (14) With cases of eating blood, Exo 22:31 . Man was not allowed to eat meat with blood in it, for the blood is the life thereof. He could eat no meat from which the blood had not first been drained; if an animal died and the blood was still in him, he must not eat of that animal; if a wild beast had killed an animal and the blood remained in it he could not eat that which was slain of the beasts. This section shows that God gives the state power to deal with these fourteen questions; it is not God but the state dealing with them. If one violated the sabbath law, the state could put him to death; if he made a sacrifice to another god, the state could put him to death; if he stole a man and put him into slavery, the state could put him to death.
11. What is evident from the scope and variety of these’ cases?
Ans. From the scope and variety of these judgments it is evident that a theocratic state is a union of church and state, the state having jurisdiction over religious matters, as well &a civil, its magistrates and courts being charged with the responsibility of enforcing under penalties duties toward God as well as duties toward man and beast.
12. What are the conditions of success in a theocratic government?
Ans. These are evident as follows: (1) God alone must legislate; (2) God must be present as an oracle to settle vexing questions; as an interpreter of law; as omniscient to read the heart back of the overt act; as omnipotent to enforce the law; and as infinitely holy, just, and merciful to insure the right legislation and right administration of the legislation; (3) The people must have the heart and will to obey every requirement of his law. If you take away these conditions, a theocratic government is a failure.
13. What are the hazards under present conditions?
Ans. The priest may assume the functions of deity, the legislator to define religion, the oracle to interpret it and then call on the state to enforce it. Since he has not the holiness, justice, and mercy of God, nor his wisdom and omniscience, the state may thus become the slave of superstition, priestcraft and irreligion, and the people the victims of its tyranny. These conditions are when the people’s heart are not right toward God and when they are not disposed to obey him.
14. Cite instances where these hazards have been realized.
Ans. History records many instances of just such priestly usurpation of powers with ruinous results to the people. The whole Romanist hierarchy from its establishment down to the present time is an illustration. The Pope claims to be God’s vicar, in the place of the Holy Spirit; he claims the power to interpret the law; to change the law; he claims to have the two keys and two swords; to keep you out of the church on earth and out of heaven hereafter; to inflict upon you ecclesiastical and state punishment. Those are the instruments, the swords and the keys; the result is that they have determined what is religion, and what they have defined to be religion is not God’s religion. They claim to be the oracles of God; to have sole power to interpret that law, and if you vary a hair’s breadth from what they have said is religion, off goes your head; and in their search for evidence they have established the Inquisition that makes domiciliary visits, investigating family life, putting spies over the most thoughtless expressions, and they claim to arrest and try them, and when they have tried them to call upon the state to execute. The bloodiest pages of history are those of the Romanist usurpation in Spain, in France, in Italy, in Bohemia, in the low countries, in the days of Alva, in all the South American states and in Mexico. Not only is that true, but there ‘were other denominations expressing a union of church and state and with the same powers somewhat modified. When the Puritans came over in the May flower they established a theocracy; their preachers prescribed everything they should do; and according to a statements which has been current, a man was punishable by a fine and by imprisonment if he was found kissing his wife on Sunday. And they pushed their jurisdiction to such an extent that they destroyed the liberty of conscience, whipped Baptist preachers, banished Roger Williams, sold out under forced sale or hasty auction the choice acres of Baptist farms and property in order to get money to build meetinghouses for another denomination, and when that Baptist father, Isaac Backus, went to John Adams, President of the United States Continental Congress, and asked him to use his influence to force Massachusetts to allow liberty of conscience, he said, “You might as well expect rivers to run upstream, and the ocean to dry up and the sun to quit shining as to expect to repeal Massachusetts’ law on that subject.”
15. How does the New Testament hedge against these hazards?
Ans. In two ways: (1) By clearly distinguishing between what belongs to God and what belongs to Caesar, rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God those that are his; (2) Especially by its form of church government. There was to be no provincial church government, no district, county, state, national church government; no hierarchy, but each particular congregation was the church of Jesus Christ and having final jurisdiction over its own matters. While there might be district associations, conventions, state or national, for voluntary co-operation, they were not appellate courts over the churches, and hence it would be impossible for the union of church and state with the Baptist church involved. But this New Testament hedging was evaded: (1) By establishing a papal form of government, an autocracy; (2) A prelatical form; as, the Church of England; (3) A federal form of government, like the Presbyterian.
16. What offenses in this section called for capital punishments?
Ans. They say that you may determine the civilization of a people by its code as to blood. If they put people to death for every kind of offense it is a bloody code; if only for a few great offenses, it is not a bloody code. Note in this lesson that there are six causes for which capital punishment would be administered:
(1) For sacrificing to another God; as long as the theocratic government was in vogue a man must be put to death for sacrificing to other gods than Jehovah, because it was treason treason against the state because it belongs to somebody else;
(2) Necromancy; that is a sin against God, in that it seeks to get at the secrets of the future from another source than God’s revelation: “Thou shalt not suffer a wizard or a witch to live”;
(3) Bestial crimes; sins against nature, where the man would mate with a brute;
(4) Stealing a man for slavery; stealing a man’s very life away from him that he may make a slave of him. Now, there are ways discussed in this section by which you could be enslaved. I have not space to go into their details; but they could not steal a man and make a slave of him. The death penalty would always be administered in the case of what is called “slave-stealing,” so largely carried on by the New England States, where as many as 250 ships from a New England town were engaged in the slave trade, and the wealth of a great many of those people up there today was derived from stealing slaves from Africa and selling them to the West Indies and to the United States.
(5) Murder or homicide that resulted from criminal negligence;
(6) In Exo 21:17 , it says, “He that curseth his father or his mother, shall surely be put to death.” So here is another offense calling for capital punishment; and a very remarkable piece of legislation comes into development of that principle. I remember once telling it to Judge Harrison in Waco, my father-in-law. It provides that if a father or mother shall bring a child to the magistrate and say that he is incorrigible; that they cannot do anything with him; he has no respect for them; does not obey them; that he is going to be a terror; he will be awful to the state; they thus bringing him before the magistrate, making that affidavit, that child must be stoned to death by the state. I read that to General Harrison and he said, “Dr. Carroll, you know you would never take your boy there.” While I do not think I would, I certainly have seen some specimens in my time that would have been brought up with great advantage by the state.
(7) Later on we will come to another which is not in this section. A man went out on a sabbath day to get sticks to make a fire to cook some breakfast, and he was put to death. “Thou shalt do no labour on the sabbath day.” “You must make provision for that day beforehand.” There are no exceptions but those of mercy, or necessity, and of worship.
17. In what judgments do the elements of mercy and love to man and beast appear?
Ans. Consideration shown (1) to a stranger; (2) to a widow; (3) to an orphan; (4) to the poor; (5) to animals. They might charge interest for money lent to any Hebrew brother that was well-to-do, but if he was poor they could not charge interest lending him money. Then this reference to the poor in connection with the land, which was to lie every seventh year idle, and, of course, where land was devoted to the culture of cereals like wheat and barley there would be a voluntary crop that year. They were not allowed to harvest that crop at all, but the poor people had the right under this law to enter that field and use that seventh-year voluntary crop. It also applies to the poor in this, viz.: that if he had pawned his cloak, or outer garment, which constituted his bed by night, the pawnbroker was not allowed to keep that garments in pawn overnight, or that man would not have a bed to sleep on; it must be restored to him when night came.
18. What are the promises of the covenant?
Ans. In Exo 23:20-33 are three: (1) That the angel of God’s presence should be with them, and would be their guide to show them how to go and to be their guard to preserve them and to discomfit their enemies on the way to and in the land where they were going. That was one of the great promises of the covenant. The presence of the angel of the Lord was manifest in the pillar of cloud by day and the fire by night, and by his speaking as an oracle when any trouble was brought up to him, and a solution asked.
(2) That God would bless their bread and drink, that is he would give them food and he would give them life: “You shall not be exposed to hunger nor to sickness.” This angel would see to it that a table was set before them; that in the wilderness their shoes should not wear out; that their clothes should not wax old; that there should be no sick people in the camp. What a tremendous blessing that was!
(3) That he would give them all the territory set forth in the original promises to Abraham, extending from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates, and from Gilead on the left bank of the Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea. Those are the three elements of the great promises of the covenant. He had to drive their enemies the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jehusites, and the others that held the land all out, but not all at once, for they would not be able to occupy the land, but, mark you, just as they were able to develop the resources of the country.
19. Describe step by step the ratification of the covenant.
Ans. In Exo 24:1-8 , it is treated. Here are the statutes: (1) All the words of the book of the covenant, that is, the moral law, the altar law, and the state law, were repeated very carefully to the people. (2) Then a copy of them was reduced to writing (3) An altar and pillars were erected according to the requirements given in the twentieth chapter. (4) Two kinds of offerings were offered on the altar, (a) burnt offerings, expiatory’, of blood and fire, and (b) the peace offerings, or the eucharist, thank offerings thus were made. (5) The disposition of the blood, one half of the blood flowing from these victims sacrificed was put into basing and set aside; the other half was to be sprinkled upon that altar, and thus the blood of the covenant was put upon the altar. (6) This covenant which has been spoken and written is now carefully read by Moses, item by item, all of them in the hearing of all the people, and they again solemnly agree to make every obligation prescribed for them in that covenant. (7) The sprinkling of the blood on the people. That half that had been set aside in basins, the priests and the Levites took charge of, and with bunches of hyssop moved among the people in every direction (all the Levites engaged in it, as they were afterward established) , and sprinkled that blood on all the people. That was the ratification of the covenant.
I have tried to make the reader see clearly this book of the covenant, beginning at Exo 29 , where was the introduction, the proposition made to have a covenant, and the people’s agreement to go into it, then the preparation for entering it by ratification; next the three parts of the covenant: (a) The Decalogue, or ten words, God’s relation to the normal man; (b) the law of the altar, or approach to God on the part of the sinner; (c) The state and God, and then the state and the citizen. I have tried to make you see these points very clearly. Then the promises bound up in that covenant, and Just exactly with what solemnity step by step that covenant was ratified; and that this was peculiarly a covenant made with the nation regarded as a unit.
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
Exo 24:1 And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the LORD, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off.
Ver. 1. Worship ye afar off. ] Thus under the law; but now by grace we draw nigh with boldness, and “have access with confidence by the faith of Christ.” Eph 3:12 See Trapp on “ Eph 3:12 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Exodus
‘THE LOVE OF THINE ESPOUSALS’
Exo 24:1 – – Exo 24:12
An effort is needed to feel what a tremendous and unique fact is narrated in these words. Next to the incarnation, it is the most wonderful and far-reaching moment in history. It is the birthday of a nation, which is God’s son. It is the foundation stone of all subsequent revelation. Its issues oppress that ancient people to-day, and its promises are not yet exhausted. It is history, not legend, nor the product of later national vanity. Whatever may come of analysing ‘sources’ and of discovering ‘redactors,’ Israel held a relation to God all its own; and that relation was constituted thus.
I. Note the preliminaries of the covenant. The chapter begins with the command to Moses to come up to the mount, with Aaron and other representatives of the people. But he was already there when the command was given, and a difficulty has been found or, shall we say, made out of this. The explanation seems reasonable and plain enough, that the long section extending from Exo 20:22 , and containing the fundamental laws as spoken by God, is closed by our Exo 24:1 – – Exo 24:2 , which imply, in the very order to Moses to come up with his companions, that he must first go down to bring them. God dismisses him as a king might end an audience with his minister, by bidding him return with attendants. The singular use of the third person in reference to Moses in the third verse is not explained by supposing another writer; for, whoever wrote it, it would be equally anomalous.
So he comes down from the stern cloud-encircled peak to that great plain where the encampment lay, and all eyes watch his descent. The people gather round him, eager and curious. He recounts ‘all the judgments,’ the series of laws, which had been lodged in his mind by God, and is answered by the many-voiced shout of too swiftly promised obedience. Glance over the preceding chapters, and you will see how much was covered by ‘all that the Lord hath spoken.’ Remember that every lip which united in that lightly made vow drew its last breath in the wilderness, because of disobedience, and the burst of homage becomes a sad witness to human weakness and changefulness. The glory of God flashed above them on the barren granite, the awful voice had scarcely died into desert silence, nerves still tingled with excitement, and wills were bowed before Jehovah, manifestly so near. For a moment, the people were ennobled, and obedience seemed easy. They little knew what they were saying in that brief spasm of devotion. It was high-water then, but the tide soon turned, and all the ooze and ugliness, covered now, lay bare and rotting. ‘Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.’ We may take the lesson to ourselves, and see to it that emotion consolidates into strenuous persistency, and does not die in the very excitement of the vow.
The pledge of obedience was needed before the Covenant could be made, and, as we shall find, was reiterated in the very centre of the ceremonial ratification. For the present, it warranted Moses in preparing for the morrow’s ritual. His first step was to prepare a written copy of the laws to which the people had sworn. Here we come across an old, silenced battery from which a heavy fire used to be directed against the historical accuracy of the Pentateuch. Alphabetic writing was of a later date. There could not have been a written code. The statement was a mere attempt of a later age to claim antiquity for comparatively modern legislation. It was no more historical than similar traditions in other countries, Sibylline books, etc. All that is out of court now. Perhaps some other guns will be spiked in due time, that make a great noise just at present. Then comes the erection of a rude altar, surrounded by twelve standing stones, just as on the east of Jordan we may yet see dolmens and menhirs. The altar represents the divine presence; and the encircling stones, Israel gathered around its God. The group is a memorial and a witness to the people,-and a witness against them, if disobedient. Thus two permanent records were prepared, the book and the monument. The one which seemed the more lasting has perished; the more fragile has endured, and will last to the world’s end.
II. Note the rite of ratification of the covenant. The ceremonial is complex and significant. We need not stay on the mere picture, impressive and, to our eyes, strange as it is, but rather seek to bring out the meaning of these smoking offerings, and that blood flung on the altar and on the crowd. First came two sorts of sacrifices, offered not by priests, but by selected young men, probably one for each tribe, whose employment in sacrificial functions shows the priestly character of the whole nation, according to the great words of Exo 19:6 . Burnt-offerings and peace-offerings differed mainly in the use made of the sacrifice, which was wholly consumed by fire in the former, while it was in part eaten by the offerer in the latter. The one symbolised entire consecration; the other, communion with God on the basis of sacrifice. The sin-offering does not appear here, as being of later origin, and the product of the law, which deepened the consciousness of transgression. But these sacrifices, at the threshold of the covenant, receive an expiatory character by the use made of the blood, and witness to the separation between God and man, which renders amity and covenant friendship impossible, without a sacrifice.
They must have yielded much blood. It is divided into two parts, corresponding to the two parties to the covenant, like the cloven animals in Abraham’s covenant. One half is ‘sprinkled’ on the altar, or, as the word means, ‘swung,’-which suggests a larger quantity and a more vehement action than ‘sprinkling’ does. That drenching of the altar with gore is either a piece of barbarism or a solemn symbol of the central fact of Christianity no less than of Judaism, and a token that the only footing on which man can be received into fellowship with God is through the offering of a pure life, instead of the sinner, which, accepted by God, covers or expiates sin. There can be no question that the idea of expiation is at the very foundation of the Old Testament ritual. It is fashionable to regard the expiatory element of Christianity as ‘Hebrew old clothes,’ but the fact is the other way about. It is not that Christianity has not been able to rid itself of a rude and false conception, but that ‘Judaism’ had its sacrifices appointed by God, in order to prepare the way for the true offering, which takes away sin.
The expiation by blood having been thus made, the hindrances to the nation’s entering into covenant are removed. Therefore follows in logical order the next step, their formal alas! how purely formal it proved to be taking on themselves its obligations. The freshly written ‘book’ is produced, and read there, to the silent people, before the bloody altar, beneath the peak of Sinai. Again the chorus of assent from a thousand throats echoes among the rocks. They accept the conditions. They had done so last night; but this is the actual contract on their part, and its place in the whole order of the ceremony is significant. It follows expiation, without which man cannot enter into friendship with God, without the acceptance of which man will not yield himself in obedience. The vows which God approves are those of men whose sins are covered.
The final step was the sprinkling of the people with the blood. The division of the blood into two portions signifies that it had an office in regard to each party to the covenant. If it had been possible to pour it all on the altar, and then all on the people, that would have been done. The separation into two portions was inevitable; but in reality it is the same blood which, sprinkled on the altar, expiates, and on the worshipper, consecrates, cleanses, unites to God, and brings into covenant with Him. Hence Moses accompanies the sprinkling of the people with the explanation, ‘This is the blood of the covenant, which the Lord hath made with you, upon all these conditions’ Rev. Ver. margin. It ratifies the compact on both sides. God ‘hath made’ it, in accepting the sprinkled blood; they have made it, in being sprinkled therewith. But while the rite sets forth the great gospel truth of expiation, the Covenant moves within the region of law. It is made ‘on the basis of all these words,’ and is voidable by disobedience. It is the Magna Charta of the nation, and its summing up is ‘this do, and thou shalt live.’ Its promises are mainly of outward guardianship and national blessings. And these are suspended by it, as they were in fact contingent, on the national observance of the national vow. The general idea of a covenant is that of a compact between two parties, each of whom comes under obligations contingent on the other’s discharge of his. Theologians have raised the question whether God’s covenant is of this kind. Surely it is. His promises to Israel had an ‘if,’ and the fulfilment of the conditions necessarily secured the accomplishment of the promises. The ritual of the first covenant transcends the strictly retributive compact which it ratified, and shadows a gospel beyond law, even the new covenant which brings better gifts, and does not turn on ‘do,’ but simply on the sprinkling with the blood of Jesus. The words of Moses were widened to carry a blessing beyond his thoughts, which was disclosed when, in an upper chamber, a dying man said to the twelve representatives of the true Israel, ‘This is the new covenant in My blood, drink ye all of it.’ The blood which Moses sprinkled gave ritual cleansing, but it remained outside the man. The blood of Jesus gives true purification, and passes into our veins to become our life. The covenant by Moses was ‘do and live’; that in Christ is ‘believe and live.’ Moses brought commandments, and on them his covenant was built; Christ brings gifts, and His covenant is all promises, which are ours on the simple condition of taking them.
III. Note the vision and feast on the basis of the covenant. The little company that climbed the mountain, venturing within the fence, represented the whole people. Aaron and his sons were the destined priests. The elders were probably seventy, because that number is the product of the two perfect numbers, and perhaps with allusion to the seventy souls who went down into Egypt with Jacob. It is emphatically said that they saw ‘the God of Israel,’ for that day’s covenant had made him so in a new closeness of relationship. In token of that new access to and possession in Him, which was henceforth to be the prerogative of the obedient people, some manifestation of His immediate presence was poured on their astonished eyes. It is needless to inquire its nature, or to ask how such a statement is consistent with the spirituality of the divine nature, or with what this same book of Exodus says, ‘There shall no man see Me, and live.’ The plain intention is to assert that there was a visible manifestation of the divine presence, but no attempt is made to describe it. Our eyes are stayed at the pavement beneath His feet, which was blue as sapphire, and bright as the cloudless sky gleaming above Sinai. It is enough to learn that ‘the secret of the Lord is with them’ to whom He shows ‘His covenant’; that, by the power of sacrifice, a true vision of God may be ours, which is ‘in a mirror, darkly,’ indeed, but yet is real and all sufficing. Before the covenant was made, Israel had been warned to keep afar lest He should break through on them, but now ‘He laid not His hand’ upon them; for only blessing can stream from His presence now, and His hand does not crush, but uphold.
Nor is this all which we learn of the intercourse with God which is possible on the ground of His covenant. They ‘did eat and drink.’ That may suggest that the common enjoyments of the natural life are in no way inconsistent with the vision of God; but more probably it is meant to teach a deeper lesson. We have remarked that the ritual of the peace-offering included a feast on the sacrifice ‘before the Lord,’ by which was signified communion with Him, as at His table, and this meal has the same meaning. They who stand in covenant relations with God, feed and feast on a sacrifice, and thereby hold fellowship with Him, since He too has accepted the sacrifice which nourishes them. So that strange banquet on Sinai taught a fact which is ever true, prophesied the deepest joys of Christian experience, which are realised in the soul that eats the flesh and drinks the blood of Christ, the Mediator of the new covenant, and dimly shadowed the yet future festival, when, cleansed and consecrated by His blood, they who have made a covenant with Him by His sacrifice, shall be gathered unto Him in the heavenly mount, where He makes a ‘feast of fat things and wines on the lees well refined,’ and there shall sit, for ever beholding His glory, and satisfied with the provisions of His house.
Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren
He (Elohim of Exo 20:1) said. See note on Exo 4:3.
the LORD. Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.
Nadab, and Abihu. Aaron’s eldest two sons.
seventy. See App-10.
afar off. See note on Exo 20:21,
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Chapter 24
And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the Lord, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off. And Moses alone shall come near to the Lord: but thou shalt not come near; neither shall the people go up with him. And Moses came up and told the people all the words of the Lord, and the judgments: and all of the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the Lord hath said we will do ( Exo 24:1-3 ).
Words are sure cheap. Here Moses lays upon them all these judgments. They said, “Oh, everything the Lord says, we will do. Oh God, everything I have belongs to You.” Words are sure cheap, aren’t they? Too bad, because it isn’t what I say that really counts, it’s what I do.
Moses wrote all the words of the Lord, he rose up early in the morning, he built an altar under the hill with twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent the young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the Lord. Moses took half of the blood, put it in basins; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. And he took the book of the covenant, and read it in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the Lord hath said we will do, and be obedient. And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words ( Exo 24:4-8 ).
So this experience of sprinkling the people with the blood from these sacrifices and so forth, the blood covenant is referred to in the book of Hebrews. As we were going through the book of Hebrews we dealt with all of the things under the law, sanctified with the blood, for without the shedding of blood was nothing sanctified. How the new covenant that we have in Christ, of course, was also sanctified through the blood of Christ. The better covenant. This was the old covenant that was disannulled. This is the old covenant that didn’t work. Why? Because the old covenant was predicated upon the people doing these things. It was predicated upon the people’s faithfulness, the people weren’t faithful.
So God has established in Christ a new covenant that is predicated now upon the faithfulness of God to do what He said He would do. Now because the new covenant is predicated upon God’s faithfulness, the new covenant will stand. It cannot fail because God will not fail. So I thank God for the new covenant relationship that I have with God through Jesus Christ, a covenant that cannot fail. I’m sure that God’s gonna do all that He has said He would do through Christ. Now it’s not predicated upon my doing, but my believing in God, and in that work of Jesus Christ. I don’t have to send twenty-five bucks.
Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in clearness ( Exo 24:9-10 ).
So they saw God, they saw the glassy sea before the throne of God. John describes it, “the sea of glass, crystal before the throne of God”( Rev 4:6 ).
Now you say, “Wait a minute. What do you mean they saw God?” Because in the gospel of John, John declares, “No man hath seen God at any time, but the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath manifested Him”( Joh 1:18 ). What does it mean then, “They saw God”? I don’t know, but I have to compare scripture with scripture, and the fact that we read “no man hath seen God at any time but the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.” The scripture also declares that you cannot see God and live.
I must assume that when it declares, “and they saw the God of Israel and this crystal sea”, that they saw Him perhaps in a vision form, as Isaiah and as Ezekiel, and as others saw God, in a vision form, but did not actually see God Himself, which is impossible for man to do. “No man has seen God at any time.”
They went up and they saw God,
And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: and they saw God, and did eat and drink. [That is, a fellowship with God.] And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me in the mount, and be there; and I will give to thee the tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that you may teach them. And so Moses rose up, and his minister [or his servant] Joshua: and Moses went up into the mount of God. And he said unto the elders, Tarry ye here for us, [or wait for us] until we come again to you: and behold, Aaron and Hur are with you: and if any man have any matters to do, let him come unto them. And Moses went up into the mount, and a cloud covered the mount. And the glory of the Lord abode upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it for six days: and the seventh day he called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud. And the sight of the glory of the Lord was like a devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel. And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and he got him up into the mount: and Moses was up in the mount for forty days and for forty nights ( Exo 24:11-18 ).
While he was there God gave to him the details for the building of the tabernacle where God would come to meet the people of Israel, the meeting place for God to meet the people. God gave him exact and specific dimensions and all for the tabernacle and for the things that were to be in the tabernacle. “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Exo 24:1-2. And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the LORD, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off. And Moses alone shall come near the LORD: but they shall not come nigh; neither shall the people go up with him.
Nearer to God than the people were allowed to come, but still at a distance from him. It was a covenant of distance, bounds were set about the mount lest the people should come too near. Yet they were near unto God as compared with the heathen, but far off as compared with those who now, by the teaching of the Spirit of God, have been brought near to God through the precious blood of Jesus. Moses alone could come near to Jehovah on mount Sinai, the people could not go up with him, nor even with the man who was their mediator with God, for such Moses was; but you and I, beloved, can go up with him who is far greater than Moses, with him who is the one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ at Jesus, for God hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.
Exo 24:3-8. And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do. And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the LORD. And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basons; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.
There is a double power about the blood; towards God an atonement, that is the blood sprinkled on the altar, and towards ourselves a sense of reconciliation, thus must the blood be sprinkled upon us that we may prove its cleansing power.
Exo 24:9-10. Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: and they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness.
This exposition consisted of readings from Hebrews 9, and Exo 24:1-10.
Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible
We now come to the story of the preparation for the true order of worship. The elders of Israel were called to approach in company with Moses. So far as it had been received, the law was repeated in their hearing. This was immediately followed by the offering of sacrifice and the shedding of blood. Thus at the very heart of these laws for the conditioning of national life the necessity for sacrifice was solemnly emphasized.
Perhaps there is nothing more august in all the inspired ceremony than the account of the approach of the elders. We are told that “they saw the God of Israel.” No description is given of what they saw. It may be that God manifested Himself to these men in the Angel Presence which He had promised. However, in all probability it is better to leave the sublime statement as it stands, remembering that it may be interpreted by the facts which followed. Almost immediately afterward Moses went into yet closer union with God and, as we shall find in a subsequent chapter, notwithstanding that closer union he craved something beyond it. In response, he received the declaration that none could see God and live. Spiritual intelligence will easily understand that there is no contradiction here. These men saw God and yet the infinite and final Essence could not be seen. The vision was characterized for the elders by immunity from judgment, for on them “He laid not His hand,” and, moreover, by a sacred act of communion in which they “did eat and drink.”
After this, Moses was called to go beyond the elders into the midst of the mount. There we may not follow him. We may see only what the children of Israel saw during those days, an appearance like “a devouring fire.” Into that fire Presence Moses passed to receive the law in fuller detail and to see the heavenly things and to learn the pattern of earthly worship.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
the Covenant Made and Sealed by Blood
Exo 24:1-11
Moses remained in communion with God while receiving the laws of the preceding chapters. When they were concluded he descended to ratify with all solemnity the Covenant between Jehovah and Israel. If the altar represented Gods side of the transaction, the twelve pillars stood for Israel. The young men filled the priestly office according to Exo 13:2, and until the Levites were appointed. It must have been a solemn spectacle as the sprinkled blood sealed the covenant. But let us turn from that first covenant, sealed with the blood of beasts, to the New Covenant, by which all the Church of the Redeemed are bound to God, and which was sealed by the shedding of the precious blood of Christ. This is my blood of the Covenant, said Jesus, when handing round the wine. See Heb 9:18-20, and Exo 13:20. The Lords Supper is a perpetual reminder of our obligations.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
Exo 24:8
I. Moses sprinkled the book in his hand. It was the Bible of his day, and yet it needed sprinkling. The mind of God must pass to men through the organs of the human voice, and that humanity, mingling even with the revelation of God, needs washing. Our Bibles need the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus.
II. He sprinkled the altar, for he had reared it. The altar was a holy thing, dedicate, consecrated, yet, for the manhood which was associated with it, it needed the sprinkling of the blood. We have our altars of prayer, at home and in the sanctuary, and these need to be sprinkled with the blood of Christ.
III. Moses sprinkled the people. There is no part of man that does not need that sprinkling.
IV. The sprinkling of the blood was the token that whatever it touched became covenant. We have our covenanted Bibles and our covenanted altars; we ourselves are in covenant with Christ.
J. Vaughan, Meditations in Exodus, p. 38.
References: Exo 24:11.-W. M. Taylor, Limitations of Life, p. 111. Exo 24:12.-H. Wonnacott, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xiv., p. 94. Exo 24:13.-E. Mason, A Pastor’s Legacy, p. 166.
Exo 24:18
The great fact that stands out in the text is that Moses spent forty days in solitary communion with God.
I. What is it to be alone with God? (1) In order to be alone with God, we must do as Moses did-we must first get up high enough. Like him, we must go to the mount. If we reach the right standing-point, the converse with God is sure and easy. (2) We must not expect to be always there. Moses went twice, Elijah went once, Peter and James and John only once. (3) Solitude with God is the very opposite of being solitary. To make it there must be two things: we must be alone with God, and God must be alone with us.
II. What are we to do when we are alone with God? (1) We must be still, hush the mind, and listen for voices. (2) We should cultivate a simple and silent prostration of heart before the majesty and beauty of Deity. (3) We may form plans on the mount, or lay out the plans we have formed already. (4) We may go near to God at such times and hold communion with Him, not familiarly, but lovingly and tenderly.
J. Vaughan, Sermons, 15th series, p. 61.
References: 24-Parker, vol. ii., p. 199. Exo 25:6.-Spurgeon, Morning by Morning, p. 241. Exo 25:7.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 302.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
CHAPTER 24 The Ratification of the Covenant and the Glory of Jehovah
1. Moses called into Jehovahs presence (Exo 24:1-2)
2. The covenant ratified and the sprinkling with blood (Exo 24:3-8)
3. in the presence of God and Jehovahs glory (Exo 24:9-18)
This chapter is a fitting conclusion of this second section of the second part. It begins with the giving of the law and ends with the glory of the Lord. Moses alone was to come near to Jehovah; Aaron, Nadab and Abihu with the seventy elders of Israel , had to worship afar. Moses is a type of Christ in his exclusive privilege and attitude. Twice the people make the promise to keep the covenant, not realizing what they were doing. Then the blood was sprinkled upon the altar, upon the book of the covenant (Heb 9:19), and on the people. In this way the covenant was ratified. This sprinkling of the blood here has not the meaning of atonement. It rather stands for the penalty of the broken covenant. The blood standing for life given, was a solemn warning that the penalty of disobedience would be death. At the same time the offerings and the blood point to Christ. He came and took the curse of the law upon Himself When He came to give His life a ransom for many, the people, so occupied with the ordinances, the law and the traditions of men, cried, This blood be upon us and upon our children. Ever since blood-guiltiness rests upon them and the curse of their own law is their portion till they shall look upon Him whom they have pierced.
The people were afar off, the leaders were not to come nigh, and had to worship afar off. The blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, however, makes nigh and we can draw nigh. The legal covenant ever puts man into a solemn and guilty distance from God; the covenant of Grace brings man nigh to God. The presence and glory of God appeared. Moses was on the mount forty days and forty nights.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
Come up: Exo 24:15, Exo 3:5, Exo 19:9, Exo 19:20, Exo 19:24, Exo 20:21, Exo 34:2
Nadab: Exo 6:23, Exo 28:1, Lev 10:1, Lev 10:2, 1Ch 6:3
seventy: Exo 24:9, Exo 1:5, Num 11:16, Num 11:24, Num 11:25, Eze 8:11, Luk 10:1, Luk 10:17
Reciprocal: Gen 46:27 – threescore and ten Exo 4:29 – General Exo 24:11 – nobles Exo 34:31 – called Lev 1:1 – called Lev 4:15 – the elders 1Sa 8:4 – the elders 1Ch 24:2 – Nadab Eze 16:8 – I sware Eze 16:59 – which Gal 3:19 – in
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Exo 24:1. Come up unto the Lord Moses being already on the mount, the meaning is, After thou hast gone down and acquainted the people with my will, and received their answer, then come up again. He was to bring with him Aaron and his two eldest sons, Nadab and Abihu, who, by this special favour, were to be prepared for that office to which they were to be called. Seventy of the principal elders of Israel also were to accompany him, probably that they might be witnesses of Mosess immediate intercourse with God, and that they themselves might be possessed with a greater reverence for the laws to be received from him. Worship ye afar off Before they came near they must worship. Thus we must enter into Gods gates with humble and solemn adorations.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Exo 24:5. Young men. These were of the firstborn, who were entitled to assist at the altar.
Exo 24:8. The blood of the covenant, without which no man can approach the Lord.
Exo 24:9-10. Seventy elders. All these witnessed the divine authority of the law, and of the ritual obligation, being nearly the same number that went down into Egypt. They saw [the glory of] the God of Israel; not his face, as Moses once asked. The pavement seemed to be studded with gems which refracted the beams of uncreated glory. Certainly this was one of the sublimest manifestations of the Divinity that the eyes of mortals ever beheld. It demonstrated to the heads of the nation the absolute characters of divine revelation, requiring perfect obedience.
Exo 24:11. Laid not his hand. They saw imperfectly the divine glory, and were not struck dead, but were permitted to feast on the declivity of the mount.
Exo 24:12. Tables of stone, that the precepts might be preserved in perfection to future ages. But these laws of holiness should be written on our hearts by the Holy Spirit, as the tables were written by the finger of God.
Exo 24:15. Moses went up into the mount. The LXX read, Moses and Joshua; yet it would seem from chap. 32. that Joshua remained where the elders had eaten of the sacrifices.
Exo 24:18. Moses fasted forty days. During these days, six of which were spent in preparation, he neither ate nor drank. Exodus 34. Deu 11:9. The vision and enjoyment of God was to him a happy substitute for food. Joshua is understood to have waited in the place where the elders had stood before.
REFLECTIONS.
Guilty and trembling man, conscious of sin, and apprised of the approach of death, has need of a sure covenant to which he may with confidence adhere. The Lord therefore was graciously pleased to give, and to ratify his covenant, in the following solemn manner. First, the words of the covenant are written in a book, containing the fifty seven precepts, in which God engages to give them the land, to deliver them from all their enemies, and in due time to send them the promised Seed, or hope of Israel. Secondly, the people promised by oath to keep this covenant, for they said three times, All that the Lord hath commanded that will we do. Thirdly, this covenant extended to their wives and their little ones, to the strangers who were among them, and to all future generations; hence the basis of it was, the new or Gospel Covenant, which shall never be done away. Pardon, holiness, and heaven, were all typically implied. Fourthly, the witnesses called to attest this covenant were no other than the heavens and the earth. Deu 32:1. And after the violation of this covenant, God appeals to these witnesses in a fine apostrophe. Hear oh heavens, and give ear oh earth; behold I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me. Isa 1:2. Lastly, the holy God, covenanting with a sinful people, required them to approach with sacrifices, and with the sprinkling of blood. The Testator, not being as yet incarnate, could not die; therefore beasts were slain to presignify the oblation of his body, and the sprinkling of his blood. Nor can he have any thing to do with man, nor with any of his services, till all his soul, and all his works are covered with the blood of atonement. And in this solemn manner must every christian covenant with his Maker. See Deuteronomy 29. Jeremiah 31. Hebrews 8. Nature, so corrupt as ours, needs to be bound by every tie, human and divine.
When God gave the law, it was with smoke and flame, with lightnings and thunders; but now covenanting with his people, the glory of his cloud is merely dark with excessive brightness. So it was when he discovered his glory on the mount to the three disciples. The pavement under his feet resembled sapphire, the foundation of his throne was bespangled with gems; angels and saints place themselves at his feet, and shine as the brightness of the firmament, and as the stars for ever and ever.
Moses waited six days in sanctifying awe, before he was called into the glory of the cloud, nor did he see more than the glory of it. It is not till the six days of labour and toil, and the tears of life are past, that we shall be called to the mount of glory. Let us wait that short period in holy awe and earnest expectation, for we know not the day when he shall say, come up hither. And whenever that shall be, we shall not have to return any more to a backsliding and rebellious people. Joshua was also favoured in this view, though less so than Moses. He was designed to succeed Moses and in the arduous task he needed the support which a partial sight of the divine glory is calculated to inspire. The kings friends must have special marks of the kings favour; and the Lord is ever wont to favour those who are remarkably called to do and suffer his will with reviving views of his glory by faith. He will afford them strength adequate to every duty, that they may boldly speak and nobly act, as in his immediate presence.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Exodus 24
This chapter opens with an expression remarkably characteristic of the entire Mosaic economy. “And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the Lord, thou and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off . . .. they shall not come nigh, neither shall the people go up with him.” We may search from end to end of the legal ritual, and not find those two precious words, “draw nigh.” Ah! no; such words could never be heard from the top of Sinai, nor from amid the shadows of the law. They could only be uttered at heaven’s side of the empty tomb of Jesus, where the blood of the cross has opened a perfectly cloudless prospect to the vision of faith. The words, “afar off,” are as characteristic of the law, as “draw nigh” are of the gospel. Under the law, the work was never done, which could entitle a sinner to draw nigh. Man had not fulfilled his promised obedience; and the “blood of calves and goats” could not atone for the failure, or give his guilty conscience peace. Hence, therefore, he had to stand “afar off.” Man’s vows were broken and his sin unpurged; how, then, could he draw nigh The blood of ten thousand bullocks could not wipe away one stain from the conscience, or give the peaceful sense of nearness to God.
However, the “first covenant” is here dedicated with blood. An altar is erected at the foot of the hill, with “twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel.” “And he sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt-offerings, and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the Lord. And Moses took half of the blood, and put it in basins; and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar …. And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words although, as the apostle teaches us, it was “impossible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sin,” yet did it “sanctify to the purifying of the flesh,” and, as “a shadow of good things to come,” it availed to maintain the people in relationship with Jehovah.
“Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in clearness. And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God and did eat and drink.” This was the manifestation of “the God of Israel,” in light and purity, majesty and holiness. It was not the unfolding of the affections of a Father’s bosom, or the sweet accents of a Father’s voice, breathing peace and inspiring confidence into the heart. No; the “paved work of a sapphire stone ” told out that unapproachable purity and light which could only tell a sinner to keep off Still, “they saw God and did eat and drink.” Touching proof of divine forbearance and mercy, as also of the power of the blood!
Looking at this entire scene as a mere illustration, there is much to interest the heart. There is the defiled camp below and the sapphire pavement above; but the altar, at the foot of the hill, tells us of that way by which the sinner can make his escape from the defilement of his own condition, and mount up to the presence of God, there to feast and worship in perfect peace. The blood which flowed around the altar furnished man’s only title to stand in the presence of that glory which “was like a devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes or the children of Israel.”
“And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount; and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.” This was truly a high and holy position for Moses. He was called away from earth and earthly things. abstracted from natural influences, he is shut in with God, to hear from his mouth the deep mysteries of the Person and work of Christ; for such, in point of fact, we have unfolded in the tabernacle and all its significant furniture!’ the patterns of things in the heavens.” The blessed One knew full well what was about to be the end of man’s covenant of works; but He unfolds to Moses, in types and shadows, His own precious thoughts of love and counsels of grace, manifested in, and secured by, Christ.
Blessed, for evermore, be the grace which has not left us under a covenant of works. Blessed be He who has “hushed the law’s loud thunders and quenched mount Sinai’s flame” by “the blood of the everlasting covenant,” and given us a peace which no power of earth or hell can shake. ” Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch
Exodus 24. Vision and Covenant. Exo 24:1 f. J, Exo 24:3-8 E, Exo 24:9-11 J, Exo 24:12-15 a E, Exo 24:15 b Exo 24:18 a P, Exo 24:18 b E.Taking the J elements first, it must be noted that they must have followed the giving of the code now transposed to Exo 34:17-26 (see Exo 34:3*). The inclusion of Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu along with the 70 elders recalls Exo 19:22; Exo 19:24*, but the stratum of tradition from which this piece is drawn seems highly primitive. The meaning appears to be that the people remained at the base of the mountain, the priest and elders went half way up, and only Moses reached the top. But, perhaps later, all these last (Exo 24:9-11) went up, and they saw the God of Israel, the description of the surroundings (Exo 24:10) bearing out the conjecture that the old tradition was that heaven itself was at the top of this mountain (cf. Eze 1:26; Eze 28:14). It was ordinarily death to see God (Exo 33:20*), but on this occasion He put not forth his hand for destruction upon the nobles (lit. corner-stones of men), and they beheld God with the seers eye, and shared in the heavenly banquet, the covenant feast (Exo 24:11). Undying symbols here lie at hand of the glorious vision of God which is given to the pure in heart in the face of Jesus Christ, while He gives to His members (living stones in the Temple of His Body) His very flesh to eat. Returning to Es story, the request of Exo 20:19, that Moses would be Gods spokesman, is here made good, and the people promise loyal obedience (Exo 24:3, and all the judgments, being a gloss ignored in Exo 24:3 b, cf. iii. p. 184). The mention of writing the Words in the Book of the Covenant is perhaps a mark of a stage of tradition later than the earliest, in which only the living voice could convey the knowledge of Gods will. Mohammed would not have the Koran written. The rest of the description is thoroughly primitive: altar (cf. Exo 20:24), standing-stones, or pillars for dignity and witness (cf. Jos 24:27), burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, and the distribution of the blood of the covenant (Mar 14:24) between God (represented by the altar), and the people (Exo 24:4-8). [The significance is to be explained in the light of the custom of blood-brotherhood. When two men wished to make a blood-covenant each would drink a little of the others blood, perhaps in water, or lick an incision made in the others skin, as is done by the blood-lickers. In that way each incorporated something of the others life. Later this was refined into the rite of dipping the hand into a bowl containing the blood of an animal. The sprinkling of blood from the same vessel on both parties similarly creates a covenant bond. The blood is sprinkled on the altar, because in it Yahwehs presence is supposed to be manifested.A. S. P.] There may also have been a covenant feast on the victims, displaced because of Exo 24:11, or the blood-ritual may have stood by itself. As in Jdg 17:5, the young men were as a matter of course entrusted with the laborious work of slaying, preparing, and offering the sacrifice (Exo 24:5). But it was Moses who threw the blood against the altar (Exo 24:6). The covenant idea had, and has, dangers, as if God would be tied to His people, and be bound to protect them, if the ritual was duly maintained. It found its crowning OT expression in the new covenant of Jer 31:31-34. In the next piece from E (Exo 24:12-15 a) there is some confusion. The words and the law (or teaching) and the commandment to teach them seem to refer to the Judgments. Perhaps the confusion is connected with the insertion of the Decalogue. The tables of stone are perhaps more likely to have been an idea suggested by inscribed tablets in Canaan than to have actually belonged to the journey thither. Like the book (Exo 24:7) they may reflect a later stage of tradition than the earliest. It is not clear how this passage is related to what goes before, and Exo 24:13 b seems to anticipate Exo 24:15 a. Perhaps elders in Exo 24:14 should be people, altered to fit the 70 in Exo 24:1. Mosess temporary commission to Aaron (here rather elder than priest) and Hur confirms the view that Exo 24:18, describing a permanent judiciary, is later than the Horeb scenes. The 40 days upon the sacred mount would, it has been pointed out, better fit a time of exalted communing and enlightenment than a mere visit to receive the tablets. In Exo 24:15 b Exo 24:18 a we have Ps parallel to the appearance of God in 19. The cloud is, as elsewhere, the sign in P of the Divine presence.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
THE COVENANT WRITTEN AND READ TO THE PEOPLE
(vs.1-8)
Having finished declaring the rules and regulations connected with the law, the Lord tells Moses to come up to Him in the mountain, and to take with him Aaron, Nadab and Abihu (Aaron’s sons) as well as seventy of the elders of Israel (v.1). A group therefore was selected to have a place above the people, which is consistent with the character of law, but having no place whatever in the church of God today, for all believers are seen as priests in God’s dealings now (1Pe 2:5).
Yet Moses alone was allowed to come near to God (v.2). In this he is typical of Christ, the Mediator of the new covenant (Heb 12:24).
Before going up, however, Moses told the people all that the Lord had spoken, His ordinances and judgments (v.3). The people unitedly answered that they would obey all that the Lord had commanded. Before they had heard these things they promised to obey (ch.19:8). Now in hearing, they speak the same.
Then Moses wrote all the words of the Lord. He built an altar along with twelve pillars which represented the twelve tribes of Israel. Then young men (not elders nor priests) of the children of Israel were sent to offer burnt offerings and peace offerings to the Lord (v.5). The very fact of these offerings intimates that Israel’s promise was not going to be kept: they would require the shedding of blood because of their disobedience. Yet this blood could not take away sins (Heb 10:4).
Moses sprinkled half of the blood on the altar, then read the book of the covenant to all the people. For the third time they made the self-confident promise that they would do all that the Lord commanded. How little they knew their own hearts! But Moses then sprinkled the remainder of the blood on the people, declaring to them that this was the blood of the covenant that the Lord had made with them. Typically this warned them that disobedience would require the shedding of blood — and not just the blood of an animal. Heb 9:18-22 comments on this occasion, insisting also that “without shedding of blood there is no remission.”
A SELECT GROUP IN THE PRESENCE OF GOD
(vs.9-18)
In obedience to verses 1-2 Moses, Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, together with 70 of the elders of Israel went up into the mountain (v.9). This large group of witnesses took away any suspicion of the people that Moses might be in any way deceiving them. These men must be impressed with the greatness of the glory of the Lord. We are told, “they saw the God of Israel” (v.10).
The meaning of this must be considered in the light of Joh 1:18 : “No one has seen God at any time,” and 1Ti 6:16; “Whom no man has seen or can see.” Therefore it was not God personally whom they saw, but evidently some partial manifestation of His nature or character, for the language is symbolical that tells us, “there was under His feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stone, and it was like the very heavens in its clarity” (v.10). This appears to be a vision that would inspire awe in all who were observers, realizing that it was indeed the great God of creation who was dealing with them. Compare the vision of Eze 1:1-28, which ends with the words, “This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord” (v.28).
MOSES AND JOSHUA GOING FURTHER
(vs.12-18)
Moses now is to be separated from Aaron, his sons and the 70 nobles, as the Lord calls him up into the mountain in order to give him the tables of stone on which the ten commandments would be written by God. Joshua had not been mentioned before, but had evidently also come with the group as the personal attendant of Moses. Now he goes with Moses (v.13), and was evidently with him during the whole time in the mount. Moses leaves instructions that Aaron and Hur can be consulted as to any problems that might arise (v.14).
As Moses went up a cloud covered the mountain, evidently the shekinah glory cloud (vs.15-16), and on the seventh day of this obscurity the Lord called to Moses out of the cloud. To the children of Israel below the sight of the glory of the Lord was like a consuming fire (v.17). Moses then remained in the mountain altogether forty days and forty nights. Forty is the number of testing: this was a test not only for Moses, but for all Israel, — a test which issued in Israel’s failure.
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
24:1 And he {a} said unto Moses, Come up unto the LORD, thou, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel; and worship ye afar off.
(a) When he called him up to the mountain to give him the laws, beginning at the 20th chapter till now.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
5. The ratification of the Covenant 24:1-11
"The great event in chapter 24 is the climax of the Book of Exodus." [Note: Ramm, p. 139.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
The remaining verses in this section contain God’s directions to Moses personally. He, Aaron, Aaron’s two eldest sons, and 70 of the elders of Israel were to ascend the mountain to worship God. God permitted only Moses to approach Him closely, however.
Moses first related the content of God’s covenant with Israel orally, and the people submitted to it (Exo 24:3). Then he wrote out God’s words to preserve them permanently for the Israelites (Exo 24:4). The altar he built memorialized this place as where God had revealed Himself to His people. The 12 pillars were probably not part of the altar but separate from it. They probably represented the permanent relationship of the 12 tribes with God that God established when He made this covenant.
"In the ceremony to be performed, the altar will represent the glory of the Lord, whilst the pillars will represent the tribes of Israel; the two contrasting parties will stand facing each other." [Note: Cassuto, p. 311.]
The 12 pillars may also have served as memorial standing stones to commemorate the occasion (cf. Gen 31:45). [Note: John W. Hilber, "Theology of Worship in Exodus 24," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:2 (June 1996):181.] The young men (Exo 24:5) were probably assistants to Moses chosen for this special occasion to serve as priests (cf. Exo 19:22; Exo 19:24).
"In the blood sprinkled on the altar [Exo 24:6], the natural life of the people was given up to God, as a life that had passed through death, to be pervaded by His grace; and then through the sprinkling upon the people [Exo 24:8] it was restored to them again, as a life renewed by the grace of God. In this way the blood not only became a bond of union between Jehovah and His people, but by the blood of the covenant, it became a vital power, holy and divine, uniting Israel and its God; and the sprinkling of the people with this blood was an actual renewal of life, a transposition of Israel into the kingdom of God, in which it was filled with the powers of God’s spirit of grace, and sanctified into a kingdom of priests, a holy nation of Jehovah (Exo 19:6)." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, 2:158.]
"The throwing of half of the blood of the offerings against the altar, which represented the Lord, and half on the people, or that which represented them, signifies a joining together of the two contracting parties (communio), and symbolized the execution of the deed of covenant between them.
"Between one blood-throwing and the other, the content of the covenant was finally and solemnly ratified by Moses’ reading from the Book of the Covenant and by the people’s expression of consent." [Note: Cassuto, p. 312.]
This ritual constituted the formal ratification of the Mosaic Covenant by which Yahweh adopted Israel as His "son" (cf. Genesis 15). The parallel with the inauguration of the New Covenant is striking (cf. Mat 26:28; 1Co 11:25).
"In all such ceremonies the oath of obedience [Exo 24:7] implied the participants’ willingness to suffer the fate of the sacrificed animals if the covenant stipulations were violated by those who took the oath." [Note: Youngblood, p. 110.]
"Virtually every sovereign-vassal treaty incorporated a list of deities before whom the solemn oaths of mutual fidelity were sworn. These ’witnesses’ could not, of course, be invoked in the case of the biblical covenants, for there were not gods but Yahweh and no higher powers to whom appeal could be made in the event of covenant violation. The counterpart of this is not lacking, however, for the ceremony of covenant-making described in Exodus 24 clearly includes ’witnesses’ to the transaction. These are in the form of the altar, which represented Yahweh, and the twelve pillars, which represented the twelve tribes. Although there is no explicit word to the effect that these objects were witnesses as well as representations, the use of inanimate objects in that capacity elsewhere certainly allows for that possibility here." [Note: Merrill, "A Theology . . .," pp. 34-35. Cf. Deuteronomy 4:26; 30:19; 31:28. See also Kline, The Treaty . . ., p. 15.]
"This is the covenant meal, the peace offering, that they are eating there on the mountain. To eat from the sacrifice meant that they were at peace with God, in covenant with him. Likewise, in the new covenant believers draw near to God on the basis of sacrifice, and eat of the sacrifice because they are at peace with him, and in Christ they see the Godhead revealed." [Note: The NET Bible note on 24:11.]
There is some disagreement among the commentators about the meaning of "the Book of the Covenant" (Exo 24:7). Most take it to mean the "Bill of Rights" that God had just given (Exo 20:22 to Exo 23:33). [Note: Wolf, p. 153.] Some feel it included "the whole corpus of Sinai laws." [Note: Childs, p. 506; Johnson, p. 74.] Others hold that ". . . it denotes a short general document, a kind of testimony and memorial to the making of the covenant." [Note: Cassuto, p. 312.] I prefer the view that it refers to the covenant stipulations God had made known to the Israelites at this time including the Decalogue and the "Bill of Rights." This seems most consistent with other references to this book in the text. [Note: See Kaiser, "Exodus," p. 449.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
CHAPTER XXIV.
THE COVENANT RATIFIED. THE VISION OF GOD.
Exo 24:1-18
The opening words of this chapter (“Come up unto the Lord”) imply, without explicitly asserting, that Moses was first sent down to convey to Israel the laws which had just been enacted.
This code they unanimously accepted, and he wrote it down. It is a memorable statement, recording the origin of the first portion of Holy Scripture that ever existed as such, whatever earlier writings may now or afterwards have been incorporated in the Pentateuch. He then built an altar for God, and twelve pillars for the tribes, and sacrificed burnt-offerings and peace-offerings unto the Lord. Sin-offerings, it will be observed, were not yet instituted; and neither was the priesthood, so that young men slew the offerings. Half of the blood was poured upon the altar, because God had perfected His share in the covenant. The remainder was not used until the law had been read aloud, and the people had answered with one voice, “All that the Lord hath commanded will we do, and will be obedient.” Thereupon they too were sprinkled with the blood, and the solemn words were spoken, “Behold the blood of the covenant which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words.” The people were now finally bound: no later covenant of the same kind will be found in the Old Testament.
And now the principle began to work which was afterwards embodied in the priesthood. That principle, stated broadly, was exclusion from the presence of God, relieved and made hopeful by the admission of representatives. The people were still forbidden to approach, under pain of death. But Moses and Aaron were no longer the only ones to cross the appointed boundaries. With them came the two sons of Aaron, (afterwards, despite their privilege, to meet a dreadful doom,) and also seventy representatives of all the newly covenanted people. Joshua, too, as the servant of Moses, was free to come, although unspecified in the summons (Exo 24:1, Exo 24:13).
“They saw the God of Israel,” and under His feet the blueness of the sky like intense sapphire. And they were secure: they beheld God, and ate and drank.
But in privilege itself there are degrees: Moses was called up still higher, and left Aaron and Hur to govern the people while he communed with his God. For six days the nation saw the flanks of the mountain swathed in cloud, and its summit crowned with the glory of Jehovah like devouring fire. Then Moses entered the cloud, and during forty days they knew not what had become of him. Was it time lost? Say rather that all time is wasted except what is spent in communion, direct or indirect, with the Eternal.
The narrative is at once simple and sublime. We are sometimes told that other religions besides our own rely for sanction upon their supernatural origin. “Zarathustra, Sakya-Mooni and Mahomed pass among their followers for envoys of the Godhead; and in the estimation of the Brahmin the Vedas and the laws of Manou are holy, divine books” (Kuenen, Religion of Israel, i. 6). This is true. But there is a wide difference between nations which assert that God privately appeared to their teachers, and a nation which asserts that God appeared to the public. It is not upon the word of Moses that Israel is said to have believed; and even those who reject the narrative are not entitled to confound it with narratives utterly dissimilar. There is not to be found anywhere a parallel for this majestic story.
But what are we to think of the assertion that God was seen to stand upon a burning mountain?
He it is Whom no man hath seen or can see, and in His presence the seraphim veil their faces.
It will not suffice to answer that Moses “endured as seeing Him that is invisible” (Heb 11:27), for the paraphrase is many centuries later, and hostile critics will rule it out of court as an after-thought. At least, however, it proves that the problem was faced long ago, and tells us what solution satisfied the early Church.
With this clue before us, we ask what notion did the narrative really convey to its ancient readers? If our defence is to be thoroughly satisfactory, it must show an escape from heretical and carnal notions of deity, not only for ourselves, but also for careful readers from the very first.
Now it is certain that no such reader could for one moment think of a manifestation thorough, exhaustive, such as the eye receives of colour and of form. Because the effect produced is not satisfaction, but desire. Each new vision deepens the sense of the unseen. Thus we read first that Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu and the seventy elders, saw God, from which revelation the people felt and knew themselves to be excluded. And yet the multitude also had a vision according to its power to see; and indeed it was more satisfying to them than was the most profound insight enjoyed by Moses. To see God is to sail to the horizon: when you arrive, the horizon is as far in front as ever; but you have gained a new consciousness of infinitude. “The appearance of the glory of the Lord was seen like devouring fire in the eyes of the children of Israel” (Exo 24:17). But Moses was aware of a glory far greater and more spiritual than any material splendour. When theophanies had done their utmost, his longing was still unslaked, and he cried out, “Show me, I pray Thee, Thy glory” (Exo 33:18). To his consciousness that glory was still veiled, which the multitude sufficiently beheld in the flaming mountain. And the answer which he received ought to put the question at rest for ever, since, along with the promise “All My goodness shall pass before thee,” came the assertion “Thou shalt not see My face, for no man shall see Me and live.”
So, then, it is not our modern theology, but this noble book of Exodus itself, which tells us that Moses did not and could not adequately see God, however great and sacred the vision which he beheld. From this book we learn that, side by side with the most intimate communion and the clearest possible unveiling of God, grew up the profound consciousness that only some attributes and not the essence of deity had been displayed.
It is very instructive also to observe the steps by which Moses is led upward. From the burning bush to the fiery cloud, and thence to the blazing mountain, there was an ever-deepening lesson of majesty and awe. But in answer to the prayer that he might really see the very glory of his Lord, his mind is led away upon entirely another pathway: it is “All My goodness” which is now to “pass before” him, and the proclamation is of “a God full of compassion and gracious,” yet retaining His moral firmness, so that He “will by no means clear the guilty.”
What can cloud and fire avail, toward the manifesting of a God Whose essence is His love? It is from the Old Testament narrative that the New Testament inferred that Moses endured as seeing indeed, yet as seeing Him Who is inevitably and for ever invisible to eyes of flesh: he learned most, not when he beheld some form of awe, standing on a paved work of sapphire stone and as it were the very heaven for clearness, but when hidden in a cleft of the rock and covered by the hand of God while He passed by.
On one hand the people saw the glory of God: on the other hand it was the best lesson taught by a far closer access, still to pray and yearn to see that glory. The seventy beheld the God of Israel: for their leader was reserved the more exalting knowledge, that beyond all vision is the mystic overshadowing of the Divine, and a voice which says “No man shall see Me and live.” The difference in heart is well typified in this difference in their conduct, that they saw God and ate and drank, but he, for forty days, ate not. Satisfaction and assurance are a poor ideal compared with rapt aspiration and desire.
Thus we see that no conflict exists between this declaration and our belief in the spirituality of God.
We have still to ask what is the real force of the assertion that God was in some lesser sense seen of Israel, and again, more especially, of its leaders.
What do we mean even by saying that we see each other?–that, observing keenly, we see upon one face cunning, upon another sorrow, upon a third the peace of God? Are not these emotions immaterial and invisible as the essence of God Himself? Nay, so invisible is the reality within each bosom, that some day all that eye hath seen shall fall away from us, and yet the true man shall remain intact.
Man has never seen more than a hint, an outcome, a partial self-revelation or self-betrayal of his fellow-man.
“Yes, in the sea of life in-isled,
With echoing straits between us thrown,
Dotting the shoreless watery wild,
We mortal millions live alone.
God bade betwixt ‘our’ shores to be
The unplumb’d, salt, estranging sea.”
And yet, incredible as the paradox would seem, if it were not too common to be strange, the play of muscles and rush of blood, visible through the skin, do reveal the most spiritual and immaterial changes. Even so the heavens declare that very glory of God which baffled the undimmed eyes of Moses. So it was, also, that when rended rocks and burning skies revealed a more immanent action of Him Who moves through all nature always, when convulsions hitherto undreamed of by those dwellers in Egyptian plains overwhelmed them with a new sense of their own smallness and a supreme Presence, God was manifested there.
Not unlike this is the explanation of St. Augustine, “We need not be surprised that God, invisible as He is, appeared visibly to the patriarchs. For, as the sound which communicates the thought conceived in the silence of the mind is not the thought itself, so the form by which God, invisible in His own nature, became visible, was not God Himself. Nevertheless it was He Himself Who was seen under that form, as the thought itself is heard in the sound of the voice; and the patriarchs recognised that, although the bodily form was not God, they saw the invisible God. For, though Moses was conversing with God, yet he said, ‘If I have found grace in Thy sight, show me Thyself'” (De Civ. Dei, x. 13). And again: “He knew that he saw corporeally, but he sought the true vision of God spiritually” (De Trin., ii. 27).
It has still to be added that His manifestation is exactly suited to the stage now reached in the education of Israel. Their fathers had already “seen God” in the likeness of man: Abraham had entertained Him; Jacob had wrestled with Him. And so Joshua before Ai, and Manoah by the rock at Zorah, and Ezekiel by the river Chebar, should see the likeness of a man. We who believe the doctrine of a real Incarnation can well perceive that in these passing and mysterious glimpses God was not only revealing Himself in the way which would best prepare humanity for His future coming in actual manhood, but also in the way by which, meanwhile, the truest and deepest light could be thrown upon His nature, a nature which could hereafter perfectly manifest itself in flesh. Why, then, do not the records of the Exodus hint at a human likeness? Why did they “behold no similitude”? Clearly because the masses of Israel were utterly unprepared to receive rightly such a vision. To them the likeness of man would have meant no more than the likeness of a flying eagle or a calf. Idolatry would have followed, but no sense of sympathy, no consciousness of the grandeur and responsibility of being made in the likeness of God. Anthropomorphism is a heresy, although the Incarnation is the crowning doctrine of the faith.
But it is hard to see why the human likeness of God should exist in Genesis and Joshua, but not in the history of the Exodus, if that story be a post-Exilian forgery.
This is not all. The revelations of God in the desert were connected with threats and prohibitions: the law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. And with the different tone of the message a different aspect of the speaker was to be expected. From the blazing crags of Sinai, fenced around, the voice of a trumpet waxing louder and louder, said “Thou shalt not!” On the green hill by the Galilean lake Jesus sat down, and His disciples came unto Him, and He opened His mouth and said “Blessed.”
Now, the conscience of every sinner knows that the God of the commandments is dreadful. It is of Him, not of hell, that Isaiah said “The sinners in Zion are afraid; trembling hath surprised the godless ones. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?” (Isa 33:14).
For him who rejects the light yoke of the Lord of Love, the fires of Sinai are still the truest revelation of deity; and we must not deny Sinai because we know Bethlehem. We must choose between the two.