B. The establishment of the Mosaic Covenant 19:1-24:11

The Lord had liberated Israel from bondage in Egypt, but now He adopted the nation into a special relationship with Himself.

"Now begins the most sublime section in the whole Book. The theme of this section is supremely significant, playing a role of decisive importance in the history of Israel and of humanity as a whole."³⁰⁶

At Sinai, Israel received the law and the tabernacle. The law expressed the obedience of God's redeemed people, and the tabernacle expressed their worship. Thus the law and the tabernacle deal with the two major expressions of the faith of the people redeemed by the grace and power of God.

The Mosaic Covenant is an outgrowth of the Abrahamic Covenant in the sense that it was a significant intimate agreement between God and Abraham's descendants. By observing it they could achieve their purpose as a nation. This purpose was to experience God's blessing and to be a blessing to all nations of the earth (Gen. 12:2). In contrast to the Abrahamic Covenant Israel had responsibilities to fulfill to obtain God's promised blessings (v. 5). It was, therefore, a conditional covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant--as well as the Davidic and New Covenants that contain expansions of the promises in the Abrahamic Covenant--was unconditional.

A further contrast is this.

"Whereas the Sinaitic covenant was based on an already accomplished act of grace and issued in stringent stipulations, the patriarchal covenant rested only on the divine promise and demanded of the worshipper only his trust (e.g., ch. 15:6)."³⁰⁷

"The covenant with Israel at Sinai is to bring Israel into a position of mediatorial service."³⁰⁸

"The major difference between the Mosaic covenant and the Abrahamic covenant is that the former was conditional and also was ad interim, that is, it was a covenant for a limited period, beginning with Moses and ending with Christ. . . .

"In contrast to the other covenants, the Mosaic covenant, though it had provisions for grace and forgiveness, nevertheless builds on the idea that obedience to God is necessary for blessing. While this to some extent is true in every dispensation, the Mosaic covenant was basically a works covenant rather than a grace covenant. The works principle, however, was limited to the matter of blessing in this life and was not related at all to the question of salvation for eternity."³⁰⁹

The Mosaic Covenant is the heart of the Pentateuch.

"First, it should be pointed out that the most prominent event and the most far-reaching theme in the Pentateuch, viewed entirely on its own, is the covenant between Yahweh and Israel established at Mount Sinai. . . .

"1) The author of the Pentateuch wants to draw a connecting link between God's original plan of blessing for mankind and his establishment of the covenant with Israel at Sinai. Put simply, the author sees the covenant at Sinai as God's plan to restore his blessing to mankind through the descendants of Abraham (Gen 12:1-3; Exod 2:24).

"2) The author of the Pentateuch wants to show that the Covenant at Sinai failed to restore God's blessing to mankind because Israel failed to trust God and obey his will.

"3) The author of the Pentateuch wants to show that God's promise to restore the blessing would ultimately succeed because God himself would one day give to Israel a heart to trust and obey God (Deut 30:1-10)."³¹⁰

The writer interrupted the narrative with blocks of other explanatory, qualifying, and cultic material in the chapters that follow.³¹¹

Narrative

19:1-3a

Other

19:3b-9

Narrative

19:10-19a

Other

19:19b-25

Narrative

20:1-21

Other

20:22-23:33

Narrative

24:1-18

Other25-31

Narrative

32-34

 1. Preparation for the Covenant ch. 19

Moses revealed God's purpose for giving the Mosaic Covenant in this chapter.

19:1-6 The Israelites arrived at the base of the mountain where God gave them the law about three months after they had left Egypt, in May-June (v. 1). The mountain in the Sinai range that most scholars have regarded as the mountain peak referred to in this chapter stands in the southeastern part of the Sinai peninsula. Its name in Arabic is Jebel Musa, mountain of Moses.³¹²There is a natural slope to the land to the southeast of this peak that would have afforded Israel a good view of the mountain if the people camped there. However the location of biblical Mt. Sinai continues to be uncertain. The nation stayed at Mt. Sinai 11 months (Num. 10:11). The record of their experiences here continues through Numbers 10:10.

Many reliable scholars have considered verses 3-6 the very heart of the Pentateuch because they contain the classic expression of the nature and purpose of the theocratic covenant that God made with Israel.

Note that God gave the Mosaic Law specifically "to the house of Jacob . . . the sons of Israel"(v. 3).³¹³

"The image of the eagle [v. 4] is based on the fact that the eagle, when its offspring learns [sic] to fly, will catch them on its wings when they fall."³¹⁴

"Without doubt Exodus 19:4-6 is the most theologically significant text in the book of Exodus, for it is the linchpin between the patriarchal promises of the sonship of Israel and the Sinaitic Covenant whereby Israel became the servant nation of Yahweh."³¹⁵

God's promise to Israel here (vv. 5-6) went beyond what He had promised Abraham. IfIsrael would be obedient to God, He would do three things for the nation (cf. Josh. 24:15).

1. Israel would become God's special treasure (v. 5). This means that Israel would enjoy a unique relationship with God compared with all other nations. This was not due to any special goodness in Israel but strictly to the sovereign choice of God.

2. Israel would become a kingdom of priests (v. 6). A priest stands between God and humankind. Israel could become a nation of mediators standing between God and the other nations responsible for bringing them to God and God to them. Israel would not be a kingdom run by politicians depending on strength and wit but by priests depending on faith in Yahweh; a servant nation rather than a ruling nation.³¹⁶

3. Israel would become a holy nation (v. 6). Holy means set apart and therefore different. The Israelites would become different from other peoples because they would devote themselves to God and separate from sin and defilement as they obeyed the law of God.³¹⁷

In short, Israel could have become a testimony to the whole world of how glorious it can be to live under the government of God. However the people experienced these blessings only partially because their obedience was partial. Israel's disobedience to the Mosaic Covenant did not invalidate any of God's promises to Abraham, however. Those promises did not rest on Israel's obedience as these did (cf. Gen. 15:17-21 and Exod. 19:5-6).³¹⁸

19:7-15 The reaction of the Israelites to God's promises was understandably positive. They wanted what God offered them. However, they overestimated their own ability to keep the covenant, and they underestimated God's standards for them. This twin error is traceable to a failure to appreciate their own sinfulness and God's holiness. The Mosaic Law would teach them to appreciate both.

God designed the procedures He specified in verses 10-15 to help the people realize the difference between their holy God and their sinful selves. Notice that God separated Himself from the Israelites spatially and temporally.

The temporary prohibition against normal sexual relations (v. 15) seems intended to impress the importance of this occasion on the Israelites and to help them concentrate on it. We should not infer from this command that normal sexual relations are sinful (cf. Gen. 1:28; 9:1, 7). Abstention was for ritual cleanness, not moral cleanness.

19:16-25 God again used the symbol of fire to reveal Himself on this mountain (3:2-5). Fire is a symbol of His holiness that enlightens, purges, and refines. The smoke and quaking that accompanied the fire further impressed this awesome revelation on the people.

The priests referred to (vv. 22, 24) were evidently young men (first-born?) that offered sacrifices before God appointed the Aaronic priests to this service (cf. 24:5).

Comparative ancient Near Eastern studies have revealed that the covenant form and terminology that God used to communicate His agreement with Israel were common in Moses' day. There were two basic types of formal covenants in the ancient Near East: parity(between equals) and suzerainty(between a sovereign and his subjects). The Mosaic Covenant was a suzerainty treaty. Such agreements characteristically contained a preamble (v. 3), historical prologue (v. 4), statement of general principles (v. 5a), consequences of obedience (vv. 5b-6a), and consequences of disobedience (omitted here). In 1977, Kenneth Kitchen wrote the following.

"Some forty different [suzerainty] treaties . . . are known to us, covering seventeen centuries from the late third millennium BC well into the first millennium BC, excluding broken fragments, and now additional ones still to be published from Ebla."³¹⁹

Thus the form in which God communicated His covenant to Moses and Israel was undoubtedly familiar to them. It enabled them to perceive better the nature of the relationship into which they were entering.³²⁰

The Mosaic Law consisted of three classes of requirements: those governing morallife (the Ten Commandments), those governing religiouslife (the ceremonial ordinances), and those governing civillife (the civil statutes). God gave the whole Law specifically for the nation of Israel (v. 3). It is very important to recognize how comprehensive the Mosaic Law was and not limit it to the Ten Commandments. The rabbis after Maimonides counted 613 commands, 248 positive and 365 negative, in the law.³²¹

There were three categories of law in Israel.

1. Crimes were actions that the community prohibited under the will of God and punished in its name. Murder (Exod. 21:12), adultery (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22), and the kidnapping of persons for sale outside Israel (Exod. 21:16) are examples of crimes. These offenses resulted in the punishment of the guilty party by the community as a community (Exod. 21:2).

2. Torts were civil wrongs that resulted in an action by the injured party against the party who had wronged him. Assault (Exod. 21:18-27), the seduction of an unmarried or betrothed girl (Exod. 22:15-16), and theft of animals or other property (Exod. 22:1-4) are examples of torts. Conviction resulted in the guilty party paying damages to the injured party (Exod. 21:18-27).

3. Family law did not involve the courts, but the head of the household administered it in the home. Divorce (Deut. 24:1-5), the making of slavery permanent (Exod. 21:1-11), and adoption (cf. Gen. 15:2; 30:3; 48:5, 12; 2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7) are examples. In these cases the head of the household acted unilaterally. He did not, however, have the power of life or death.³²²

The Mosaic Law had several purposes:

1. To reveal the holiness of God (1 Peter 1:15)

2. To reveal the sinfulness of man (Gal. 3:19)

3. To reveal the standard of holiness required of those in fellowship with God (Ps. 24:3-5)

4. To supervise physical, mental, and spiritual development of redeemed Israelites until they should come to maturity in Christ (Gal. 3:24; Ps. 119:71-72)

5. To be the unifying principle that made the establishment of the nation possible (Exod. 19:5-8; Deut. 5:27-28)

6. To separate Israel from the nations to become a kingdom of priests (Exod. 31:13; 19:5-6)

7. To make provision for forgiveness of sins and restoration to fellowship (Lev. 1-7)

8. To make provision for a redeemed people to worship (Lev. 23)

9. To provide a test whether one was in the kingdom (theocracy) over which God ruled (Deut. 28)

10. To reveal Jesus Christ.

J. Dwight Pentecost concluded his article on the purpose of the Law, from which I took the preceding 10 points, by pointing out the following.

". . . there was in the Law that which was revelatoryof the holiness of God. . . ."There was also ". . . that in the Law which was regulatory."³²³

"It is extremely important to remember that the Law of Moses was given to a redeemed people, not to redeem a people."³²⁴

". . . it is also possible that the Pentateuch has intentionally included this selection of laws for another purpose, that is, to give the reader an understanding of the nature of the Mosaic Law and God's purpose in giving it to Israel. Thus it is possible to argue that the laws in the Pentateuch are not there to tell the readerhow to live but rather to tell the reader how Moses was to live under the law.

"This understanding of the purpose of the laws in the Pentateuch is supported by the observation that the collections of laws in the Pentateuch appear to be incomplete and selective. The Pentateuch as such is not designed as a source of legal action. That the laws in the Pentateuch are incomplete is suggested by the fact that many aspects of ordinary community life are not covered in these laws."³²⁵

A movement that is gaining followers in our day, especially among charismatic evangelicals, is the Christian Reconstruction movement, also known as the theonomy movement and the Chalcedon school. Its central thesis is that God intended the Mosaic Law to be normative for all people for all time. Its advocates look forward to a day when Christians will govern everyone using the Old Testament as the law book. Reconstructionism rests on three foundational points: presuppositional apologetics, theonomy (lit. the rule of God), and postmillennialism. This movement is too complex to discuss briefly here, but it is too significant to pass over without mention.³²⁶

 2. The Ten Commandments 20:1-17

"We now reach the climax of the entire Book, the central and most exalted theme, all that came before being, as it were, a preparation for it, and all that follows, a result of, and supplement to it."³²⁷

There are two types of law in the Old Testament, and these existed commonly in the ancient Near East. Apodictic lawsare commands with the force of categorical imperatives. They are positive or negative. The Ten Commandments are an example of this type of law that occurs almost exclusively in the Old Testament and rarely in other ancient Near Eastern law codes. "Thou shalt . . ."and "Thou shalt not . . ."identify this type of commend. Casuistic lawsare commands that depend on qualifying circumstances. They are also positive or negative, and there are many examples in the Mosaic Law (e.g., 21:2-11, et al.) as well as in other ancient Near Eastern law codes. This type of command is identifiable by the "If . . . then . . ."construction.

Compared with other ancient Near Eastern codes (e.g., the Code of Hammurabi) the Decalogue (Ten Commandments) is positive and concise. God allowed the Israelites much freedom. There were comparatively few restrictions on their personal behavior (cf. Gen. 1:29-30; 2:16-17).

"The Ten Commandments were unique in Old Testament times because they possessed prohibitions in the second person singular and because they stressed both man's exclusive worship of one God and man's honoring the other person's body, rights, and possessions. Breaking these commandments would result in spiritual confusion and in human exploitation."³²⁸

Notice that the Ten Commandments use verbs, not nouns. Nouns leave room for debate, but verbs do not. God gave His people ten commandments, not ten suggestions.

 3. The response of the Israelites 20:18-21

The rest of this section contains the record of the Israelites' reaction to the giving of the Law and God's reason for giving it as He did. He wanted the people to reverence Him and therefore not to sin (v. 20).³⁴³

"It can be argued that in the present shape of the Pentateuch, the Decalogue (Ex 20:1-17) is intended to be read as the content of what Moses spoke to the people upon his return from the mountain in 19:25. After the Decalogue, the narrative in 20:18-21 looks back once again to the people's fear in 19:16-24. In retelling this incident, the second narrative fills the important gaps' in our understanding of the first."³⁴⁴

"The Book of the Covenant begins technically with Exodus 20:22, having been separated from the Decalogue by a brief narrative (vv. 18-21) describing the people's response to the phenomena accompanying Moses' encounter with Yahweh on Sinai (cf. 19:16-25). The technical term ordinances' (mispatim), which describes the specific stipulations of the covenant, does not occur until 21:1, so 20:22-26 serves as an introduction to the stipulation section. This introduction underlines Yahweh's exclusivity, His self-revelation to His people, and His demand to be worshiped wherever He localizes His name and in association with appropriate altars."³⁴⁵

God evidently spoke the Ten Commandments in the hearing of all the Israelites (19:9; 20:19, 22) to cause them to fear Him (v. 20). The people were so awestruck by this revelation that they asked Moses to relay God's words to them from then on (v. 20), which he did (v. 21).

"This verse [v. 20] contrasts two types of fear': tormenting fear (which comes from conscious guilt or unwarranted alarm and leads to bondage) or salutary fear (which promotes and demonstrates the presence of an attitude of complete trust and belief in God; cf. the fear of the LORD God' beginning in Gen 22:12). This second type of fear will keep us from sinning and is at the heart of the OT's wisdom books (cf. Prov 1:7; Eccl 12:13 et al.)."³⁴⁶

"Whereas 19:16-24 looks at the people's fear from a divine perspective, 20:18-21 approaches it from the viewpoint of the people themselves. What we learn from both narratives, therefore, is that there was a growing need for a mediator and a priesthood in the Sinai covenant. Because of the people's fear of God's presence, they are now standing afar off' (20:21). Already, then, we can see the basis being laid within the narrative for the need of the tabernacle (Ex 25-31). The people who are afar off' must be brought near to God. This is the purpose of the instructions for the tabernacle which follow this narrative."³⁴⁷

 4. The stipulations of the Book of the Covenant 20:22-23:33

Israel's "Bill of Rights"begins here.

"It is worth noting that the stipulations are enfolded within matching frames that stress the exclusivity of Yahweh (Ex. 20:22-23; cf. 23:24-25, 32-33), His presence in specified places (20:24; cf. 23:14-17, 20, 28-31), and a proper protocol and ritual by which He may be approached by His servant people (20:24-26; cf. 23:18-19). It is within the context of a vertical covenant relationship, then, that the horizontal, societal, and interpersonal relationships of the Book of the Covenant take on their ultimate meaning."³⁴⁸

"The section before us has something to say about each of the ten commandments, even if only incidentally."³⁴⁹

 5. The ratification of the Covenant 24:1-11

"The great event in chapter 24 is the climax of the Book of Exodus."⁴¹³

24:1-8 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 (v. 3). Then he wrote out God's words to preserve them permanently for the Israelites (v. 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."⁴¹⁴

The 12 pillars may also have served as memorial standing stones to commemorate the occasion (cf. Gen. 31:45).⁴¹⁵The young men (v. 5) were probably assistants to Moses chosen for this special occasion to serve as priests (cf. 19:22, 24).

"In the blood sprinkled on the altar [v. 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 [v. 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 (19:6)."⁴¹⁶

"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."⁴¹⁷

This ritual constituted the formal ratification of the Mosaic Covenant by which Yahweh adopted Israel as His son (cf. Gen. 15).

"In all such ceremonies the oath of obedience [v. 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."⁴¹⁸

"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."⁴¹⁹

There is some disagreement among the commentators about the meaning of "the Book of the Covenant"(v. 7). Most take it to mean the "Bill of Rights"that God had just given (20:22-23:33). Some feel it included "the whole corpus of Sinai laws."⁴²⁰Others hold that, ". . . it denotes a short general document, a kind of testimony and memorial to the making of the covenant."⁴²¹I 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.⁴²²

24:9-11 The ratification ceremony concluded with a meal (vv. 9-11), not a picnic lunch but a sacrificial meal (v. 5).

"They ate and drank' describes a covenant meal celebrating the sealing of the covenant described in vv. 3-8."⁴²³

We must understand the statement that the leaders of Israel saw God (v. 10) in the light of other passages (33:20-23; Isa. 6:1; John 1:18). Perhaps they only saw His feet or more exactly a representation of part of God in human form (cf. Isa. 6:1; Rev. 4:2, 6). The pavement of clear sapphire contributed to the vision of God as the supra-terrestrial sovereign.

". . . what Moses and his companions experience is a theophany of the Presence of God, not a vision of his person, and what they see, bowed before even that awesome reality, is what could be seen from a position of obeisant prostration, the surface on which his Presence offered itself. . . . The reference in v 10 may therefore be a double one, calling up the deep dark blue of an endless sky and the building materials of legendary divine dwelling-places."⁴²⁴

God in mercy did not consume the sinners before Him. Rather He allowed them to eat in His presence thus symbolizing the fact that He was taking on responsibility for their safety and welfare (cf. Gen. 31:44-46).⁴²⁵

"We have argued that the awkward surface structure of the narrative [in chapters 19-24], which results in the non-linear temporal ordering of events, can be explained when one takes into account the sequence structure of the narrative, particularly the use of the literary device called resumptive repetition. As a result of this literary device we have demonstrated that the narrative contains two different perspectives of the theophany. First, there is the perspective of Yahweh which emphasizes the preparation and execution of the covenant as well as highlighting the holiness of God, which is a key to understanding the relationship that exists between Yahweh and His people. Second, there is the perspective of the people, which is elaborated upon in the two resumptive narratives in 20, 18-21 and 24, 1-8. The first resumptive narrative in 20, 18-21, which elaborates in detail the fear of the people, serves as a preface and introduction to the Decalogue and Covenant Code. In addition, it also acts as a causal link between the fear of the people and their sinful acts below the mountain in Exod 32. The second resumptive narrative in 24, 1-8 elaborates in detail the ratification of the covenant and also leads into the subsequent ascent of Moses to the mountain where he receives the rest of God's regulations."⁴²⁶