Episode 103: Pete Enns - Pete Ruins Exodus (Part 5)
In this episode of The Bible for Normal People Podcast, Pete walks us through the Ten Commandments and how Christians have misinterpreted Old Testament law codes as he explores the following questions:
- What is the importance of the Code of Hammurabi?
- What does "torah" really mean?
- What is the Book of the Covenant?
- How has our interpretation of the New Testament affected the way we read Old Testament laws?
- What’s the difference between casuistic and apodictic laws?
- Why are the laws of Moses hardly referenced in subsequent Old Testament books?
- How do different traditions order the Ten Commandments?
- What does “decalogue” mean?
- Are the laws of the Ten Commandments new or unique to Israel?
- What are some theories about the two tablets the commandments are given to Moses on?
- Is there evidence for multiple traditions within the Ten Commandments?
- What are some moral issues raised by the Book of the Covenant?
- How do the law codes in Exodus compare to other ancient Near Eastern law codes?
- What modern theological issues do the law codes bring up?
- How do the subheadings in our English Bibles change the way we read the text?
Tweetables
Pithy, shareable, less-than-280-character statements from Pete you can share.
- “Law is a response to deliverance.” @peteenns
- “These books are more than just lists of laws... they are laws woven into a narrative framework.” @peteenns
- “Israelites weren’t the only ones to receive commands from their God and they weren’t the first either.” @peteenns
- “Law and legalism are not the same thing.” @peteenns
- “The laws we see in Exodus weren’t just like timeless abstractions but, like everything else in the Bible, they have a context.” @peteenns
- “It’s very hard to bring ancient case laws into today’s world, no matter how much we might want to be obedient to God.” @peteenns
- “The commands are for those already in, they are not meant to be imposed on those who do not wish to be in.” @peteenns
Mentioned in This Episode
- Book: Genesis for Normal People
- Support: The Bible for Normal People
[bg_collapse view="link-inline" expand_text="Read the transcript" collapse_text="Hide the transcript" ]
00:00
Pete: You’relistening to the Bible for Normal People, the only God-ordained podcast on theinternet. Serious talk about the sacredbook. I’m Pete Enns.
Jared: And I’m JaredByas.
[Jaunty Intro Music]
Pete: Hey folks. Welcome to our continuing series on the bookof Exodus. We’re at Episode 5 now. Exodus Series Episode 5. Hey, fun fact for today: I’m home alone, which is, for a lot ofreasons, not a good idea. But I’m alsowith my dogs and my cat. This could getinteresting. We’ll see where thisgoes. Hope you’re not allergic.
Hey listen. Before webegin, just a quick word, that the Revised Edition of Genesis for Normal People is out there just waiting for you. This is a guide to the book of Genesis thatbreaks down big themes of the book and what Biblical scholarship hascontributed to our understanding of Genesis. It’s great for both personal reading and group study. It even comes with a study guide. You can check out some information about thebook if you go to my website, peteenns.com. Of course, it’s available on Amazon onboth Kindle and paperback.
Listen. Today, we’recovering the law codes in Exodus and this takes us from Exodus Chapter 20through 24. This section includes the famousTen Commandments in Chapter 20 and also, something called the Book of theCovenant in Chapters 22-24, which is what is referred to in Exodus 24:7. It’s called the Book of the Covenant. We’re not just making it up.
That’s the basic breakdown. Technically speaking, Chapter 20, in addition to the Ten Commandments,also contains a word about the proper altar to sacrifice on. The Book of the Covenant that I justmentioned, it seems to end in the middle of Chapter 23, specifically verse29. The rest of Chapter 23 and Chapter24 seem to tidy up some things before we begin the Tabernacle section, which isin Chapter 25 and continues to the end of the book.
This is a good break right before the beginning of theTabernacle section. We’re going to takea quick look at all these things.
02:16
First, let’s talk about some general things about the ideaof law before we get into the laws themselves.
First, if you don’t like reading laws, you are in bigtrouble, because from here on out, through the Pentateuch, that’s what we’vegot. Exodus. Leviticus. Numbers and Deuteronomy. Havingsaid that, these books are more than just lists of laws, but they are lawswoven into a narrative framework. Infact, the narrative is primary. It’sgives shape to these five books.
We’re moving from the creation story in Genesis all the wayto the Israelites encamped on the brink of the Promised Land. Stories are being told. But integral to that story is law.
We have a number of other law codes from the ancient worldand they do not appear woven into a long narrative, but they appear inlists. In its earliest stages, Israelitelaws might also have been bare-bones lists. We don’t know that for sure. Butif that’s true, the writers of the Pentateuch make that law part of a story, a storyof God’s deliverance of God’s people.
Narrative and law are connected, specifically they areconnected in this way. Law is a responseto deliverance. This is very importantfor understanding the Old Testament as a whole. We’re going to come back to this idea in a few minutes when we look atthe Ten Commandments specifically.
Second, I just mentioned other law codes of the ancientworld surrounding Israel, typically referred to the ancient Near Eastern World,which is confusingly called today, the Middle East. I don’t make up maps.
Law codes from these other cultures have been known to ustoday for over two centuries. Thank you,archeology. They date from as early asthe Sumerian Period, the late 3rd millennium BCE all the way to theBabylonian period which is as late as the 7th century BCE. Most famous, and maybe you’ve seen thissomewhere, either in your own studies or the History Channel, the most famousof these ancient law codes outside of the Bible is the Code of Hammurabi. Hammurabi was a Babylonian king. He lived in the 18th century BCEand this law code contains about 300 laws, some of which are strikingly similarto laws we find in Exodus.
The bottom line: Israelites weren’t the only ones to receivecommands from their god. They weren’tthe first either. The similaritiesbetween these law codes and the biblical codes suggest that the laws we see inExodus are not just timeless abstractions, but like everything else in theBible, they have a context. They have ahistorical time and place where they fit.
Third, let’s get straight on the meaning of the word Torah,which is a Hebrew word, meaning not just “laws” or something like that, butmore generally, “instruction” or “direction.” Why am I bringing this up? Because not all of the Pentateuch, which is the first five books of theOld Testament (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy). Not all of the Pentateuch is legal material,but all of it is Torah.
In other words, the narratives, the stories are also thereto provide some instruction, some direction. Not by turning them into laws, like lessons to live by or something likethat, but by gleaning wisdom from them and maybe even a glimpse of God fromthese stories.
Christians have tended to have a hang up with this part ofthe Bible, in part, because it smacks of legalism, which is a view of the OldTestament shaped by centuries of misunderstanding some things that we read inthe New Testament, especially with Paul, where Paul seems to be anti-law, whichhe isn’t.
We’re not going to get into all that here. I just want to note that the history of Judaism has taken a verynon-legalistic approach to the laws and the Torah. Again, we’re going to touch on this below aswell.
A fourth point. Generally,these laws in Exodus cover both social and religious matters. We see that in the famous Ten Commandments,where the first four are religious in nature. Don’t have other gods. Noidols. Don’t misuse God’s name. Sabbath rest. Those are the four.
The next six are social. Honor your parents. Don’tmurder. Don’t commit adultery. Don’t steal. Don’t bear false witness. Don’tcovet.
The Book of the Covenant, the second part of this sectionwe’re talking about—in the Book of the Covenant these two types of laws, socialand religious, they’re woven together. All of which is to suggest that these religious and social laws were notmeant to be separated, as if one is sacred and the other secular.
The worship of God in ancient Israel and the treatment ofothers are inseparable. After all, Godis just and so God’s people, especially kings, but reflect that justice to eachother. That’s part of what it means tobe created in God’s image.
A fifth point. Another way of categorizing the laws in addition to social and religiousare two words that we don’t use every day, but they come in handy when you’relooking at biblical law. Those two words are: apodictic and casuistic.
Casuistic means case laws. If such and such is the case, if such and such happens, then this is thepunishment, then this is the consequence. It’s if-then laws.
Apodictic means straight commands. Thou shalt not.
I raise this because it’s helpful to know, and also to pointout it’s very hard to bring ancient case laws into today’s world, no matter howmuch we might to be obedient to God. Last time I checked, for example, I don’t have cattle that wander ontomy neighbor’s property and graze their vineyard.
Even the straight commands, the apodictic laws, they aren’tthe clearest things to work out. Do notcovet. Where does admiring end andcoveting begin?
This is why, and I suppose we’re moving to the sixth pointnow—that’s why these laws have been interpreted differently at different timesand under different circumstances. Astimes change, as Judaism moved beyond the borders of Israel, some of the lawsbecame either irrelevant or obscure, so the law needed to be engagedcreatively.
09:42
This is why Judaism developed what is called hallachictradition. Halacha is the noun. Hallach the verb in Hebrew means “towalk.” Think about that. Engaging the law is like walking a path,rather than simply reading a law and doing what it obviously says. It’s engaging it. It’s taking the time to meditate on it. It’s learning from it. It’s not obvious. There’s nothing obvious about it. This hallachic tradition in Judaism is one ofdiscussion and debate about what laws mean and how they are to be enacted in aworld these laws never really envisioned when they were first given.
I’m dragging this out a little bit, but the lesson forChristians is not to proof-text laws in our own current moment in time in thewestern world, including the Ten Commandments. Some of these ancient laws are really disturbing when read today. They all have at least some ambiguity thatmakes their meaning less than certain.
For example, keeping the Sabbath and honoring your parents. These are the fourth and fifthcommandments. They seem clear enoughuntil you start getting into the details. Keeping the Sabbath means not working. What exactly constitutes work? Well, that’s not spelled out.
How does one honor one’s parents, especially if a parent isborderline abusive? The law doesn’tprovide for these contingencies. Butthat does not mean we shouldn’t. Infact, we have to. This is largely thehistory of Judaism I’m just describing here in terms of the law.
I guess the point I’m really trying to get across here isthat law and legalism are not the same thing, even if many of us were raised tothink so.
Two more quick points before we get into the lawsthemselves.
It’s interesting—number seven—it’s interesting howinfrequently the Law of Moses plays a role in the Old Testament as awhole. You can certainly find some ofthe Ten Commandments implicitly or explicitly in some places in the OldTestament, but references to the Law of Moses outside of the Pentateuch,they’re infrequent.
This raises the question, at least it has raised thequestion in the minds of many scholars, why is it if Sinai is so central toIsrael’s identity, the place where Moses got the law from God, on Mount Sinai,why is so little made of it in subsequent books?
Why don’t we see, for example, with a lot of regularity, “asthe Lord revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai” or some comment like that every timesomebody sins or screws up? The commonanswer given in modern scholarship is that there is no Torah during the time ofthe kings. There is no Torah before theBabylonian exile.
Yes. Israel has lawsand legal traditions. But thesetraditions, which are often in conflict with each other, they don’t exist as a collectionunder the name Moses until after the time of Israel’s kings, probably not untilafter the return from the Babylonian exile, which is usually called the Persianperiod.
What I’ve just described is more or less taken for grantedamong biblical scholars. Don’t try thisat home. Part of what we do here at theBible for Normal People is simply to pass that on. We want distill and bring biblical scholarshipinto the lives of people who don’t normally look at these sorts of things, butare still interested.
It also helps make a little more sense of some of what weread not only in these laws, but in the Pentateuch as a whole, some of which we’vetouched on in earlier episodes. In otherwords, understanding the existence of these traditions and the compilations andthe bringing together of these traditions at a much later time. It helps make sense of some of what we readin the Pentateuch itself.
Eighth and final point. We need to avoid—I’m speaking to Christians here—the law versus gracething between the Old and New Testaments. The law in the Old Testament is not a burden that’s dumped on Israel byan angry god meant to test them to see if they’re worthy. Remember that Israel was delivered from Egyptbefore they’re given the law.
To put that in Christian terms, grace always precedes law inthe Old Testament. You are saved firstand then given instructions about how to live in a matter consistent with thatgrace. You’re not given law in order tobe saved. You are saved. Then come the instructions for obedience.
In my experience, this gets quickly and regularly muddled byChristians. This is only one of severalreasons why I think Christians insisting that the Ten Commandments be placed inpublic places is just off-base.
The commands are for those already “in.” They are not meant to be imposed on those whodo not wish to be “in.” It reallybaffles me why anyone who sees America as a Christian country—I don’t, by theway—would want to front the Ten Commandments rather than the fruit of thespirit in Galatians or the Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount.
16:00
Let’s move to the Ten Commandments. This is in Chapter 20, verses 1 to 21. Or as they are also known, the Decalogue,which means “ten words,” which, by the way, is what the Hebrew says. Exodus 20, verse 1, where it’s introduced, itsays, “Then God spoke all these words.” It does not say “commands.” Theyare commands, but they’re called the “ten words” in Hebrew.
We’re not going to look at each one. That’s a ten-part podcast series in and ofitself. We’ll do the best we can togiving some highlights again of this section that might help orient us a littlebit differently to these laws.
First, here’s something annoying about the decalogue. Not every religious tradition numbers themthe same way. I don’t know why. For Protestants, the first two commands arecombined into one command in Judaism, which leaves nine. But they consider the prologue to be thefirst command, which isn’t exactly a command, but a statement. The prologue is “I am the Lord your God whobrought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.”
For Protestants, this is what introduces the laws. It’s not a law itself. It’s a statement. It’s not casuistic or apodictic. It’s just a statement.
But Roman Catholics and Lutherans have still another way ofdoing it, which we’re not going to get into. I’ll be going with the Protestant numbering, because you can’t teach anold dog new tricks, and that’s probably the one that gets the most attention.
Also, as I hinted earlier, these commands are not all new,nor are they all unique to Israel. It’snot like the Israelites would have said, “Wow. Shocker. You mean it’s wrong to murdersomebody? Who knew? Or do we think that the other nations thoughtkilling whoever, whenever was just fine?”
What makes these commands what they are for the ancientIsraelites isn’t that they are new, but that these are the commands that werefor establishing Israelite society as it was moving forward. They are not necessarily new or unique toIsrael.
Also, another point about the Ten Commandments: the law is written on two tablets. Often, it’s thought that half are on onetablet and half on the other. Five andfive. That’s a very neat, German thingto do. But that’s arbitrary. That’s guess work. We actually don’t know at the end of the daywhy there are two tablets.
Some say, you put religious commands on one. That’s the first four. And then the other six are the socialcommands, you put them on the other. Butagain, that’s this dichotomy between sacred and secular that really doesn’twork in ancient societies in general and certainly not in the Old Testament.
19:14 [Patreon Endorsement]
20:18
Some of argued, and this is what I think makes some sense—atleast it’s worth keeping in mind—some have argued that the two tablets areactually two identical copies of the ten commands. Each party gets a copy. Sort of like a contract today. One for God and one for the people. God’s copy would presumably go in the Ark ofthe Covenant. The people’s copy would go—Idon’t think the Bible actually says anything about that, so maybe be a littlecautious about this idea. But still, theargument is made on the basis of ancient near-Eastern treaties thatarcheologists have dug up, specifically from the ancient Hittites. This is the second millennium BCE and theAssyrians in the first millennium BCE. Here the king and his vassals, his underlings, the people he rules overor conquered—the king and his vassals, they form a pact, and this agreement isput into writing and each party gets a copy. It’s just food for thought.
That’s not a goofy theory, especially when we notice thatthe decalogue reflects these ancient treaties in another way and that is thisway: the prologue to the TenCommandments—remember, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the landof Egypt, out of the house of slavery—that prologue is followed by the commandsthemselves. That’s what we saw alreadyin the Ten Commandments.
Similarly, ancient kings before alerting the people of theirobligations to him, the laws, would remind the people of what he had done forthem, like deliver them from an enemy. Now that that’s settled, the people hear their end of the bargain ifthey want to remain protected and safe. You won’t join with other kings. You won’t wage war against me. You’ll be loyal to me. All thatkind of stuff.
This treaty between God and Israel works in a similarway. “Here’s what I did. I delivered you from Egypt. Now, here are your obligations to me. Don’t have any other gods, etc. etc.”
Also, this prologue tells us something—it fleshes out alittle bit more something I mentioned earlier, that is very huge, importantabout the Old Testament. Salvation,deliverance comes before the commands. Deliverance first. Commandssecond.
“Since I have delivered you, you shall”—firstcommandment—“have no other gods before me.”
Incidentally, as we saw in earlier episodes, this “you shallhave no other gods before me” is a classic statement of monolatry, notmonotheism. Monotheism is the beliefthat only one god actually exists. Monolatry is the acknowledgement that many gods exist, but only one isto be worshipped. The Israelites weremonolatrists, not monotheistic.
“You shall have no other gods before me”—that presumes thatother gods exist. The Israelites are tomake sure not to put any of these gods ahead of Yahweh, because Yahweh is theone who delivered them from Egypt. Likewise, the second commandment, “you shall not worship me the same wayother nations worship their gods by means of idols, representations of the godsin wood or stone or clay. I deliveredyou and now you will worship Me as I want to be worshipped, which is notthrough idols.”
That’s a pretty radical statement in the ancient world. In case they need more motivation, we read inthe second commandment that they will be “blessed for thousands of generations”for obeying that command but “punished for three or four generations” if theydon’t. Pretty serious stuff.
Another thing worth noting about the decalogue in Exodus 21is that it differs from the decalogue we see in Deuteronomy 5:5-21. Based on earlier episodes, maybe you alreadyknow where this is going, but scholars see this difference in the two forms ofthe Ten Commandments as evidence of multiple traditions. The commands are essentially the same, butthe explanations for a few of the commands are different.
The biggest difference we see is in the fourth commandment,keeping the Sabbath. In Exodus, thereason given for the whole community, including animals, to rest on the seventhday is that God rested on the seventh day when God created the cosmos inGenesis 1.
In Deuteronomy, the reason for rest is the memory of themselveshaving been slaves in Egypt. You don’tmake your male and female slaves work. The focus is more humanitarian in Deuteronomy than it is in Exodus. At least, that’s how many scholars understandthese things. It makes a lot of sense tome.
There’s obviously so much more we could talk about with the Decalogueand maybe we need to, given how it is sometimes held up by Christians as thetimeless essence as to what it means to obey God. But these laws, like all biblical laws, lookthe way they do because they have a contextual dimension that cannot beavoided.
The Christian context is more defined by the gospel than bythe Decalogue, which doesn’t mean the Decalogue can be tossed out, but it iscertainly secondary. I hope I’m notgoing to be misunderstood when I put it that way.
Speaking of the contextual dimension of laws, let’s now moveon and look at some high points of the Book of the Covenant, which is Exodus21:1 to 23:9, so-called because that’s what it’s called in Exodus 24:7.
Sometimes these laws are said to be—they come right afterthe Decalogue so they’re said to be specific applications of the Decalogue,like fleshed out examples of what the Decalogue says rather quickly. That doesn’t really work, namely because notall of the Decalogue is reflected here and some of the laws in the Book of theCovenant don’t seem to echo anything specific in the Decalogue.
I think that seeing the Book of the Covenant as an extensionof the Decalogue might stem from the notion that the Decalogue is the essenceof obedience, the essence of what it means to know the heart of God. But the Book of the Covenant is more its ownthing as far as I’m concerned.
What does the Book of the Covenant cover? In this sense, as I mentioned earlier, it isgenerally similar to the Decalogue in that it covers both religious matters(worship) and social responsibility. Infact, these two aspects alternate in the Book of the Covenant. Beginning already in Chapter 20, verses 22 to26, which is a bridge between the Decalogue and the Book of the Covenant.
Here God gives Moses commands about worship. They are to make no idols of silver orgold. The altar for sacrifice is to bemade of earth and not hewn stone, and with no steps less the nakedness of thepriest might be exposed. Apparently, youcould catch a peek under his robe as he climbs the steps. That’s a little weird, but this and the altarconstruction could reflect some issue with Canaanite worship practices. This is all about making sure the Israelitesare distinct in their worship from their Canaanite neighbors.
Moving on, in Chapter 21:1 to 22:17, we come to laws aboutsocial responsibility. Here we see somefamous laws like “eye for an eye,” which is not about retaliation, but makingsure the punishment fits the crime. Thissection also raises some long-known moral issues for readers of the law todayand actually, throughout history.
For example, slaves are the property of the owner andtherefore, they don’t benefit from the “eye for an eye” law. If a slave is injured, the owner isn’tinjured, but the owner receives some compensation. An owner can beat the slave with a rod and ifthe slave dies immediately, the owner is punished. We’re not told how. He doesn’t die. If the slave dies a couple of days later, notimmediately, but a couple of days later, there is no punishment. That will make you think.
By the way, this law is a good example of the overlap we seebetween Israelite law and law codes of other nations. I mentioned earlier the Code of Hammurabi,the Babylonian king, where the treatment of slaves parallels nicely what we seein Exodus 21:20-27. The Babylonian lawis certainly older. I don’t think thisis plagiarism, but both these slave laws reflect what was in the air at thetime, so to speak, what was generally understood about the status ofslaves. It’s really hard to discount thecontextual nature of Israel’s laws once you begin to see it.
For some people, theologically, it’s a bit easier to think ofthese rather difficult laws as examples of ancient near-Eastern thinking,rather than as something that God commands as if God thinks that some peopleare of lesser value than others. That’sa lot to wrap our heads around theologically.
There are challenges to looking at the context and there arealso some benefits to looking at the context.
Another example of an off-putting law for us is in22:16-17. This is where the virgindaughter is treated as a father’s property. If she’s seduced by a man, here’s what happens: he must marry her and he must pay the fatherthe bride price. But, if for somereason, the father refuses to give her to him, the guy still has to pay the brideprice.
On one level, this bride price helps support the virgindaughter, who is now basically damaged goods. She won’t be able to marry probably. Now she has some means of being provided for. However, note that the father gets paidregardless. That’s stillinteresting. If you compare this law tothe one right before it where the owner receives restitution of one of hisanimals that’s borrowed and is injured or dies, we can move effortlessly to thelaw about cattle to a similar law about virgin daughters.
Many English Bibles, no doubt trying to avoid thatawkwardness, they insert a subheading between these two laws as if the previouslaws are about property, but now we’re moving to a new category. But again, when read back-to-back, they arecasuistic laws, case laws, about damaged property.
When you’re able to and you have a minute, take a look atyour Bibles and see how your Bible handles this transition from Exodus 22:15 to16. Do they insert there a subheadingthat says something like “social laws” at the beginning of verse 16? They may very well do that. In a way, they sort of are, but that reallymisses the offense of this law, at least for modern ears, that the virgindaughter is essentially the property of the father.
These laws have presented challenges to readers for quitesome time.
In the final section of the Book of the Covenant, 22:18 to23:19, worship and social responsibility laws are woven together. Here we see a law prohibiting sacrifice toother gods, religious worship law, next to a law prohibiting oppressingresident aliens, who are basically non-Israelites who live peacefully amongthem.
We also see laws about fairness and justice for everyone, followed by laws(unless you’re a slave—remember that) for governing the Sabbath and theSabbatical year, like every seventh year, the land is to rest. Press reset.
33:41
You also have the annual feasts that are mentioned here andother places in the Old Testament as well. The Feast of Unleavened Bread, which later becomes the Passover. The Feast of First Fruits, or also called theFeast of Weeks. This is the grainharvest. This is the period of Pentecostin Greek. The Feast of Ingathering, alsoknown as the Feast of Booths. Sukkot isthe Hebrew name and also sometimes referred to as Tabernacles.
Now without opening up a huge can of worms, these feasts arepossibly adapted from older Canaanite practices, and then later, becomeidentified with Exodus Passover, sort of like connecting Christmas to apre-existing pagan holiday, like the Winter Solstice or the German Yule. We’re not innocent of this sort of thing.
As we saw with the two versions of the Decalogue before,some laws in the Book of the Covenant are not consistent with other law codesin the Pentateuch. For example, inExodus 21, a male Hebrew slave can go free after seven years if he wishes, butnot a female slave. She doesn’t havethat choice.
In Deuteronomy 15, both Hebrew male and female slaves aregiven that option. Then in Leviticus 25,Hebrew slaves are not permitted at all, since the Exodus was about liberatingHebrews from slavery.
The law we saw about building altars only of earth with nosteps—that presumes that this altar can be put anywhere. In fact, it need not even be limited toone. But in Deuteronomy 12 and Leviticus17, the altar is only located in the temple in Jerusalem and it’s not made ofearth. In fact, already in Exodus 27,which we’ll get to next time, the altar for the tabernacle, which is theprototype for the temple, the altar of the tabernacle is made of bronze.
Again, we’re looking at different traditions here that cometogether in this book by the hands of an editor, probably living during thePersian period, after the return from Babylonian exile.
Speaking of traditions, and moving now to my last and briefpoint, careful readers have noted that it’s very hard in this section to keeptrack of when Moses is actually going up and down the mountain to speak withGod.
In 24:1, God tells Moses to come up the mountain, but thistime bringing Aaron, Aaron’s sons and the 70 elders up with him, but to keepthem at a distance.
Throwing this in for free, if you’ve been hanging with thisseries since the beginning, in Episode 4, we talked about the three-partdivision of the mountain, reflecting the divisions of the tabernacle and thetemple itself. We’re seeing thathere. These other people are comingalong with Moses, but they have to keep a distance, but they’re going up themountain at least part of the way.
This happens in 24:9. The only question here is when did Moses ever come down? If you begin reading in Chapter 19, God isspeaking with Moses, but it’s not entirely clear where that speaking ishappening. In fact, the Decalogue seemsto have been spoken to Moses, rather incredibly, while he was down off themountain.
Read the end of Chapter 19 and the beginning of Chapter 20in succession. It seems like Moses wentdown and then God spoke to him the ten words.
A few verses later, in 20:21, Moses is said to “draw near tothe darkness where God was.” Now if thatmeans to go up the mountain, that means he had been down all that time. In other words, the Decalogue was given onflat earth. Unless, we insert into thestory a decent in between. This isgetting confusing. And then Moses goesup in 24:9.
But according to the flow of the story, Moses is still upthere.
Scholars have typically chalked this up to differenttraditions, sources, as they’re often called, that were woven together by alater editor. As is so typical ofancient editors, not really being all that concerned about avoiding problemslike this which keep some of us up at night.
This is another example. This example of going up and down the mountain—that’s a rather drawn-outexample. Maybe I shouldn’t even haveraised it. I just want you to know thatit’s there. Maybe if you read Exodusstarting in 19 and going through 24, try to get a sense of where Moses is andrealizing that he comes down from the mountain in Chapter 32 and 33, 34. That’s where he smashes the tablets of thecommandments.
He’s clearly up there at that point, but at what point is heup and what point is he down? You couldalmost make a chart of that. You can seewhere the problems are. It seems likethese different traditions were woven together here, again, without any concernabout, “Oh no. Is this going towork?” They didn’t care.
Don’t do it. I takeit all about. Don’t care. Don’t worry about it. Unless you’re really curious. Then do it.
We’re going to stop there. As I said before, even if these podcasts are a little bit longer than weusually have them, I’m just trying to give an overview, we’re really justscratching the surface and the complexities of this wonderful book ofExodus.
Having looked at Israel’s laws of worship and socialresponsibility, in the next episode to the section on the Tabernacle, Israel’sworship center, complete with a café and bowling alleys—wait, no that’s—that’snot that. Different kind of worshipcenter.
It is a long section. It might not be the most exciting, but it raises interesting historicaland theological issues. That’s whatwe’ll get into next time.
40:33
[Outro Music Begins]
All right, folks, listen. Thanks again for listening and if this podcast is for you, and I hopethat it is, spread the words to friends, enemies, anybody.
Take a moment a rate us on iTunes and maybe check out ourwebsite at peteenns.com for my blog and, of course, for other episodes of thepodcast. For books. We have some online courses there that you’rewelcome to. Even some awesome,can-do-without, totally FOMO merch. I’mtold merch is what professionals say when they mean merchandise.
All right, folks, that’s it for this week. See you again. Thanks again.
[/bg_collapse]