Plans for the Tabernacle, Court, and Altar of Burnt Offering

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Exodus 26:1) “Moreover you shall make the tabernacle with ten curtains of fine woven linen, and blue, purple, and scarlet thread; with cherubim of cunning work you shall make them."

In the last chapter, God began giving Moses instructions about how exactly to build a tabernacle and its furnishings.  He started with the Ark of the Covenant and the candlestand and table and its utensils in chapter 25, and now He continued with other furnishings.  Ten curtains were to be made of fine woven linen, with blue, purple, and scarlet threads, used either to embroider cherubim on the curtains, or perhaps to be woven as a tapestry with cherubim depicted.

(2) “The length of each curtain shall be twenty-eight cubits, and the width of each curtain four cubits; and every one of the curtains shall have the same measurements."

A cubit being about 18 in., each of the ten curtains was to be fourteen yards long and two yards wide.

(3) “Five curtains shall be coupled to one another, and the other five curtains shall be coupled to one another."

Five of the curtains were to be sewn together to make one large curtain, and likewise the other five were to be sewn together to make another large curtain.

(4) “And you shall make loops of blue on the edge of the curtain on the selvedge of one set, and likewise you shall make in the outer edge of the other curtain of the second set. (5) Fifty loops you shall make in the one curtain, and fifty loops you shall make on the edge of the curtain that is on the end of the second set, that the loops may be clasped to one another."

The edge of each large curtain that had been sewn together from five curtains was to have fifty blue loops on the side edge so that the large curtains could be clasped together.

(6) “And you shall make fifty clasps of gold, and couple the curtains together with the clasps, so that it may be one tabernacle."

Fifty clasps of gold were to be made in which to join the two large curtains together, so that the original ten curtains would then be one tent.

(7) "And you shall also make curtains of goats’ hair to be a covering over the tabernacle; you shall make eleven curtains."

They were to make a tent or covering of goats' hair to go over the curtained tabernacle, I'm sure to protect the fine linen curtains from the weather.  They were to make eleven curtains for the outside covering, one more than for the inside curtains, probably to be able to overlap and cover it well.

(8) “The length of each curtain shall be thirty cubits, and the width of each curtain four cubits; and the eleven curtains shall all have the same measurements. (9) And you shall couple five curtains by themselves and six curtains by themselves, and you shall double the sixth curtain in the forefront of the tabernacle."

The goats' hair curtains were to be fifteen yards long, a yard longer than the linen curtains, and two yards wide, the same width as the inside curtains.  Thus the outer curtain would fit over the inner curtain with extra length to protect the inner curtain.  Five goats' hair curtains would be sewn together as one large curtain, and six would be sewn together as one large curtain.  The outer curtain would fit over the inner curtain with extra length to protect the inner curtain.  The extra eleventh curtain would overlap at the front entrance of the tabernacle, again as extra protection over the inner curtain.

(10) "And you shall make fifty loops on the edge of the curtain that is outermost in one set, and fifty loops on the edge of the curtain of the second set. (11) And you shall make fifty brass clasps, and put the clasps into the loops, and couple the tent together, that it may be one."

They were to make fifty loops on the edges of each curtain and fifty brass clasps to fasten the curtains to each other so that it was one tent covering over the inner linen tent.

(12) "And the remnant that remains of the curtains of the tent, the half curtain that remains, shall hang over the back of the tabernacle. (13) And a cubit on one side and a cubit on the other side, of what remains of the length of the curtains of the tent, shall hang over the sides of the tabernacle, on this side and on that side, to cover it."

This is where these scriptures start to lose me.  The outer goats' hair curtain was one curtain width wider, which was two yards wider, and it was a yard longer.  Perhaps where I make my mistake is trying to picture this as one large wide curtain wrapped around a square area, whereas it was in reality laid over the whole top and sides.  Although I still have difficulty picturing it, I will take Albert Barnes's word for it in his Notes on the Bible:  "The measure of the entire tabernacle-cloth was about 60 ft. by 42; that of the tent-cloth was about 67 ft. by 45. When the latter was placed over the former, it spread beyond it at the back and front about 3 ft. (the “half-curtain”) and at the sides 18 inches."

(14) "And you shall make a covering for the tent of ram skins dyed red, and a covering of badger skins above that."

There appears to have been two additional covers for the tabernacle, a covering of red rams' skins to go over the goats' hair tent, and a covering of badger skins to go over the red rams' skin covering.  These last two coverings were perhaps more like leather coverings, and some theologians have thought perhaps they were meant to be just over the top as roofs.  Then again, they may have gone over the entire tabernacle to keep out the fine desert dust.  All these layers would certainly make a temporary tent more solid.

(15) “And you shall make boards for the tabernacle of acacia wood, standing upright. (16) Ten cubits shall be the length of a board, and a cubit and a half shall be the width of each board."

Speaking of solidity, there were also to be acacia wood boards made for walls or supports.  Each board was to be 5 yards long and 27 inches wide.

(17) “Two tenons shall be in each board for binding one to another; thus you shall make for all the boards of the tabernacle."

I believe the meaning here is that each board was to be made with grooves or slots to fit the boards together.  The dictionary more accurately defines a tenon as "a projection formed on the end of a timber or the like for insertion into a mortise of the same dimensions".  

(18) “And you shall make the boards for the tabernacle, twenty boards for the south side."

There were to be twenty boards for the south side wall.  This would make the wall about 45 feet long, assuming the tenons didn't overlap in a manner that would deduct any from the width of the boards.

(19) "And you shall make forty sockets of silver under the twenty boards, two sockets under each of the boards for its two tenons."

These silver sockets were to be placed under the boards, a socket for each tenon.  They were described in the old commentaries I study as the mortises for the two tenons of each board to be placed in, and would act as the base or foundation of the entire structure.

(20) “And for the second side of the tabernacle, the north side, there shall be twenty boards. (21) And their forty sockets of silver, two sockets under one board and two sockets under the other board."

Likewise for the north wall, there were to be twenty boards made with forty silver sockets.

(22) "And for the sides of the tabernacle westward you shall make six boards. (23) And you shall make two boards for the corners of the tabernacle in the two sides."

Twenty boards were to be made for the north and south sides, and just six for the western or back side.  Two boards were to be made for the two back corners at the end of each of the north and south sides where they joined the back west side.  The boards being a cubit and a half in width made the tabernacle about nine cubits wide, or about 4 1/2 yards wide.  However, the boards in the back corners would have added to the width. 

(24) "And they shall be coupled together beneath, and they shall be coupled together above the top by one ring; thus shall it be for both of them; they shall be for the two corners."

At first, I thought this meant that the back corner boards were to be joined to the north and south sides by rings that fastened each back board to its side board.  However, the original word translated as "coupled together" in verse 24 means "be doubled" or "twins"; therefore, the probable meaning is that two boards were doubled together for extra strength at the corners, and the rings were holding the two boards together as one thick board.  The same would be made for each back corner.

(25) "And there shall be eight boards and their sockets of silver, sixteen sockets; two sockets under one board, and two sockets under  the other board."

With the doubled corner boards, there would be eight boards across the back western wall.  Each board was to have two silver sockets as described above for the twenty boards on the northern and southern sides, for a total of sixteen sockets for the eight boards.

(26) “And you shall make bars of acacia wood, five for the boards on one side of the tabernacle, (27) And five bars for the boards of the other side of the tabernacle, and five bars for the boards of the side of the tabernacle, for the two sides westward. (28) And the middle bar in the midst of the boards shall reach from end to end."

Five bars of acacia wood were to be made to go across the boards on each side, probably two at the top, two at the bottom, and one across the middle of the boards to act as stabilizers.  "The two sides westward" must mean the two corners at the west end, the southwest corner and the northwest corner.  The middle bar reached from one end to the other, which I would assume all five bars would do, so this is where I cease to understand what is meant.  Even the old commentators made it clear as mud!  Dr. John Gill's explanations seemed plausible and were the easiest for me to understand.  It may be that the middle board was the only one that in one piece reached from end to end, whereas the others may have been pieced together.  Additionally, it is said that the middle bar was in "the midst of the boards", which might have meant that while the other bars were in rings, the middle one was just in the midst of the boards, perhaps bored straight into the boards.  There were objections to that idea, too, so I suppose it is anyone's speculation as to what exactly is meant.

(29) "And you shall overlay the boards with gold, make their rings of gold for holders for the bars, and you shall overlay the bars with gold."

All the boards, rings, and bars were to be overlaid with gold.  Perhaps it was only gilded or gold leafed, as some have pointed out how very heavy the boards would have been to take down and carry from place to place.  Then again some have objected and said that merely gilding would have been to short-change, and figure that they must have been covered in very thin sheets of gold.

(30) "And you shall raise up the tabernacle according to the pattern which you were shown on the mountain."

When everything was made and completed, they were to raise up the tabernacle.  Dr. John Gill pointed out that this was the third time that Moses had been warned to make the tabernacle just as God had shown him.  It was even made mention of in Hebrews 8:5 when it was said that Moses had been admonished by God to see that he made everything according to the pattern that he had been shown on the mount.
 

(31) "And you shall make a veil of blue, purple, and scarlet, and fine woven linen of cunning work; it shall be made with cherubim.  (32) And you shall hang it upon four pillars of acacia wood overlaid with gold; their hooks shall be gold, upon the four sockets of silver. (33) And you shall hang up the veil under the clasps, that you may bring in there within the veil the Ark of the Testimony; and the veil shall be a divider for you between the holy place and the most holy."

A veil was to be made, it seems, in the same fashion of the ten curtains in verse 1, of fine woven linen, with blue, purple, and scarlet threads, used either to embroider cherubim on the curtains or woven as a tapestry with cherubim.  The veil was to be hung upon four pillars of acacia wood overlaid with gold upon golden hooks at the top of the pillars, and each pillar upon four silver sockets which probably acted as feet or pedestals for the pillars.  The veil was to be hung up under the clasps mentioned in verse 6 which coupled the two large curtains.  It's hard for me to picture this, but it seems that wherever the two curtains met and were clasped, under that was to be where the veil hung.  The Ark of the Testimony was to be brought within the veil, the veil acting as a divider between the most holy place where the ark was and the rest of the holy place.  The original word translated as "veil" was "poreketh" and literally meant "separatrix", something that divides or separates.  

(34) "And you shall put the mercy seat upon the ark of the Testimony in the most holy place."

They were to put the mercy seat with the cherubim covering it upon the ark acting as a lid for it, and put the entire ark and seat into the most holy place within the veil.

(35) "And you shall set the table outside the veil, and the candlestick across from the table on the side of the tabernacle toward the south; and you shall put the table on the north side."

The table was to be placed outside the veil, in the holy place, but not inside the most holy.  The table was to be put on the north side, and the candlestick across from it toward the south side.

(36) "And you shall make a hanging for the door of the tabernacle, of blue, purple, and scarlet thread, and fine woven linen, wrought with needlework."

They were to make a curtain to hang as a door for the tabernacle, of the same blue, purple, and scarlet threads, and fine woven linen, as the other curtains and the veil.  "Wrought with needlework" probably means embroidered by hand, rather than woven in a loom, which may have been the case for the curtains in verse 1.  Albert Barnes, in his Notes on the Bible, pointed forward to Exodus 35:35 to show that both an embroiderer and a weaver were used.  This curtain would be referred to as the first veil, and the second veil was the one that separated the holy place from the most holy and held the ark within it.

(37) "And you shall make for the hanging five pillars of acacia wood, and overlay them with gold; and their hooks shall be of gold, and you shall cast five sockets of brass for them."

They were to make five pillars of acacia wood, overlaid with gold, for the first veil.  Albert Barnes explained that these pillars belonged just to the entrance of the tabernacle and were not part of the tabernacle itself.  I am imagining it as a covered porch area, but it didn't have a floor, so it was just a covered entrance area.  Dr. John Gill helped provide an image for me of how it must have looked.  He said there would have been one pillar at each corner of the entrance into the tabernacle, and the other three set out front "at a proper distance from each other, so as to make four ways for the priests to enter in at..."  I am imagining a pentagon pattern for the pillars, making four places in between each of the pillars to come into the fifth or main opening of the tabernacle.  There were to be hooks of gold on which to hang the veil.  Sockets of brass were to be made for bases for these pillars, not silver as were the sockets for the second veil of the most holy place.

(Exodus 27:1) "And you shall make an altar of acacia wood, five cubits long and five cubits wide; the altar shall be foursquare, and its height shall be three cubits."

An altar was to be made from acacia wood, and it was to be square in shape, about 7 1/2 feet long on each of the four sides.  It was to be about 4 1/2 feet tall.

(2) "And you shall make the horns of it on its four corners; its horns shall be of one piece with it. And you shall overlay it with brass."

Horns, or some similar projections pointing upward that resembled horns, were to be made on the four corners of the altar, of the same piece of wood as the altar, not made separately and applied to the altar.  Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on the Bible, said that these horns probably had three purposes:  for ornament, to tie sacrificial animals in place, and to prevent them from falling off the altar.  The altar was to be overlaid with brass.

(3) "And you shall make its pans to receive its ashes, and its shovels and its basins and its forks and its firepans; you shall make all its utensils of brass."

All the vessels and utensils for the altar were to be made from brass.  There were to be pans for receiving the ashes of the burnt sacrifices, basins for the blood, shovels and forks for handling the pieces of flesh and animal parts, and fire pans that have been described by theologians much more learned than me, as vessels for the burning embers or coals of fire that were taken off the altar of burnt offering, and carried to the altar of incense.

(4) "And you shall make a grate for it, a network of brass; and on the network you shall make four brazen rings in its four corners."

There was to be a brass grate, probably over a hollowed area in the middle of the altar, where the fire would burn.  On the grate there were to be four brass rings in its four corners, I imagine to aid in removing the grate.

(5) "And you shall put it under the rim of the altar beneath, that the network may be even to the middle of the altar."

This refers to the placement of the grate.  "Under the rim of the altar beneath" is rather difficult language, but I believe what this verse is trying to convey is that the grated area was a lower area in the middle of the altar that was about midway up the height of the altar.  Considering the altar was 4 1/2 feet high, that would be a fairly deep grated area for a sacrificial animal.

(6) “And you shall make poles for the altar, poles of acacia wood, and overlay them with brass. (7) And the poles shall be put into the rings, and the poles shall be on the two sides of the altar to bear it."

They were to make poles of acacia wood, overlaid with brass, with which to carry the altar.  I am lost as to how this looked, and didn't get any help from the old commentaries I read.  The only rings I know of were the ones on the grate, and I had imagined them for the purpose of raising the grate, but perhaps the brass grate was one piece with the entire overlay of brass and therefore poles through those rings would carry the entire altar.  Dr. John Gill was the only one to suggest that these must have been separate rings from the ones on the grate, but that takes speculation, so I just don't know.  We do know from the passage above that the poles were used on two opposite sides of the altar to carry it.

(8) “You shall make it hollow with boards; as it was shown you on the mountain, so shall they make it."

The altar was to be made hollow, not solid, perhaps just a framework of planks covered with the brass grating at the top.  Albert Barnes pointed out in his Notes on the Bible that the original word for "boards" in verse 8, "luach", is not the same word used for "boards" in Exodus 26:15 when discussing the boards for the tabernacle.  That word was "qeresh", and indeed means "boards" or "planks".  The word used here can also indicate boards or planks, but is most often used to mean "tables (tablets), plates, or slabs".  It comes from a root word meaning "to glisten", so it seems to indicate something with a more polished finish.  Mr. Barnes pointed out that the word used here is the same word used for the stone tablets of the law.   Also important to note, this is the fourth time that God referred to what "was shown" to Moses on the mountain.  It seems as if Moses actually saw a model of how all these things were to be made and look, and is again instructed to make it just as he was shown.

(9) "And you shall make the court of the tabernacle; for the south side there shall be hangings for the court made of fine twined linen of a hundred cubits long for one side. (10) And its twenty pillars and their twenty sockets shall be of brass; the hooks of the pillars and their fillets shall be of silver."

There was to be a courtyard for the tabernacle, enclosed on the south side with hangings of fine woven linen, fifty yards long.  The hangings hung on silver hooks upon twenty pillars set in brass sockets.  The silver fillets were probably a sort of connecting rods between the pillars.  The rods probably went across the top of the pillars as a sort of curtain rod upon which the hooks holding the hangings were attached.  Since there were only twenty pillars in a length of fifty yards, the hangings couldn't have hung on the pillars alone, so surely hung on the fillets or rods.

(11) "And likewise along the length of the north side there shall be hangings a hundred cubits long, with its twenty pillars and their twenty sockets of brass, and the hooks of the pillars and their fillets of silver."

The north side was to be made as the south side, with linen hangings fifty yards long upon twenty pillars set in sockets of brass, with silver rods and hooks.

(12) “And for the width of the court on the west side shall be hangings of fifty cubits, with their ten pillars and their ten sockets. (13) And the width of the court on the east side shall be fifty cubits."

The width of the court was to be 25 yards with hangings upon ten pillars and ten sockets on each of the east and west sides.

(14) “The hangings on one side of the gate shall be fifteen cubits, with their three pillars and their three sockets. (15) And on the other side shall be hangings of fifteen cubits, with their three pillars and their three sockets."

At the gate or entrance to the court there were to be hangings 7 1/2 yards long hanging on three pillars in three sockets on both sides of the entrance.

(16) "And for the gate of the court there shall be a hanging of twenty cubits, of blue, purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen, wrought with needlework; its pillars shall be four, and its sockets four."

The gate itself of the courtyard was to be made with hangings ten yards long.  These were of fine woven linen and hand embroidered with blue, purple, and scarlet threads. The hangings on the entrance door or gate would hang on four pillars in four sockets.

(17) “All the pillars around the court shall be filleted with silver; their hooks shall be of silver, and their sockets of brass. (18) The length of the court shall be a hundred cubits, the width fifty throughout, and the height five cubits, made of fine woven linen, and its sockets of brass."

All the pillars around the court were to be made with rods of silver with silver hooks, and were to stand in sockets of brass.  The length of the court was to be fifty yards long, 25 yards wide, and 7 1/2 feet high, made with fine woven hangings.

(19) “All the vessels of the tabernacle in all its service, all its pins, and all the pins of the court, shall be of brass."

At first, I assumed the vessels referred to here were the ones to be used at the altar and inside the tabernacle.  The altar vessels were indeed to be made of brass.  However, the utensils used inside the tabernacle were to be made with gold, so I believe some of the old commentators may be right who suggested these particular vessels may actually refer to the instruments or tools used in making, and subsequently setting up, taking down, and repairing the tabernacle, and were to be of brass.  Likewise, the tent pins were to be of brass.

(20) “And you shall command the children of Israel that they bring you pure oil of beaten olives for the light, to cause the lamp to burn continually."

The children of Israel were to bring only oil of the best kind, from beaten olives, as opposed to cooked with heat, for the lamp of the candlestand to burn continually.  The original word translated as "burn" is "alah" and does not mean burning as in consuming, but rather means "going up" or "ascending", and expresses the action of fire going up to heaven, and this was to be continual.

(21) “In the tabernacle of the congregation outside the veil which is before the Testimony, Aaron and his sons shall tend it from evening until morning before the LORD; it shall be a statute forever to their generations on behalf of the children of Israel."

In the tabernacle of the congregation or the tent of meeting or assembly of the people to worship, outside the veil that held the Ark of the Testimony within, there Aaron and his sons were to tend the lamps all night long.  Therefore, "continually" may just mean continually all night long.  There is a scripture later on which refers to Aaron lighting the lamps at night (Ex. 30:8); they wouldn't have to be lit if they were burning continually 24 hours a day, unless he was just lighting ones that had gone out.  This was to be a statute forever that oil be provided for the lamps and that the lamps of the Testimony be lighted and tended this way.  This is illustrative of the word of God, which shines as a light in the dark, and is a lamp to the feet, and a light to the path, and enlightens men in all ages forever until the end of the world.

Moses Receives Instructions From God for the Building and Furnishing of His Tabernacle

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Exodus 24:1) And He said to Moses, “Come up to the LORD, you and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and worship from afar. (2) And Moses alone shall come near the LORD, but they shall not come near; nor shall the people go up with him.”

In the last few chapters, Moses was near to the Lord (Exodus 20:21), receiving the judgments of God that He gave to Moses to give to the people, after He had given the Ten Commandments in the hearing of all the people.  Now God directed Moses, Aaron, Aaron's sons Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, to come up the mount to the Lord.  However, all but Moses were to stand afar off from the Lord and worship, and Moses alone would be allowed to come near the Lord.

(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 has said we will do.”

As Moses alone had been near to the Lord to hear these words, he first went to tell the people all the judgments of the Lord that He had told him to tell the people.  The people unanimously agreed and answered that they would obey the judgments of God.

(4) And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and twelve pillars according to the twelve tribes of Israel.

After the people had agreed to this covenant, Moses wrote down all these laws and judgments as a permanent record.  Then he rose up early the next morning and built an altar to the Lord at the foot of Mount Sinai where the Lord was.  Moses also built twelve pillars representing the twelve tribes of Israel, that represented the people as the other party to the covenant, probably in front of the altar that would of course, represent God.

(5) And he sent young men of the children of Israel, who offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen to the LORD. (6) And Moses took half the blood and put it in basins, and half the blood he sprinkled on the altar.

Moses then sent young able men to bring and sacrifice burnt offerings and peace offerings of oxen to the Lord.  He took half the blood from the sacrifices and put it in basins (to later be sprinkled on the people), and the other half he ceremoniously sprinkled on the altar, which would represent the blood covenant between God and His people.

(7) And he took the book of the covenant and read in the audience of the people; and they said, “All that the LORD has said we will do, and be obedient.”

Moses then read from the book of the covenant that he had written in the hearing of the people, and they ceremoniously repeated that they agreed to do all the Lord had said, and that they would be obedient to His laws and judgments.

(8) And Moses took the blood, sprinkled it on the people, and said, “This is the blood of the covenant which the LORD has made with you concerning all these words.”

Moses took the blood he had reserved in basins and then sprinkled it on the people, or perhaps since there were hundreds of thousands of people, maybe he sprinkled it on the pillars representing the people.  The people had ceremoniously confirmed that they would keep their part of the covenant by obeying the word of their Lord, and it was sealed with the sacrificial blood of their covenant.  God's part of this covenant was to support, increase, defend, and save them, as He had said He would at the end of chapter 23.

(9) Then Moses went up, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, (10) 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 its clarity.

It was at this point that Moses, Aaron, Aaron's sons, and the seventy elders went up to the Lord, as instructed by the Lord in verse 1.  It is said that they saw the God of Israel, but as they were to remain afar off, and we are told elsewhere in the Bible that no man can or has seen God, we understand this to mean that they saw the glory and evidence of God before them, as they saw the bright splendid pavement of sapphires under His feet.  Indeed the scripture states they only saw under His feet, but there was no doubt in their minds that the feet of the Almighty were above this awesome bright clear sapphire-like pavement.

(11) And upon the nobles of the children of Israel He did not lay His hand; also they saw God, and did eat and drink.

God did not strike down those who saw Him, or were close enough to see this splendid evidence of Him below His feet.  This was explained by God before His giving of the Ten Commandments when He told Moses to keep the people from gazing upon Him or they would die (Exodus 19:21).  However, in Exodus 19:22, He went on to say that the priests who came near must sanctify themselves or the Lord would break forth upon them.  In this case, these nobles were just sanctified by the sprinkling of the blood, and were allowed to come near the Lord and eat and drink.

(12) And the LORD said to Moses, “Come up to Me on the mount and be there; and I will give you tablets of stone, and the law and commandments which I have written, that you may teach them.”

The Lord now called Moses to go all the way up the mountain to where He was, as Moses alone was permitted to do.  "Be there" may mean "stay there" or "remain there" as indeed, Moses would come to be there an extended time.  God said He wanted to give Moses stone tablets, with the law and commandments that He Himself had written, that Moses might teach them to the people.  Isn't it fantastic to think of the Almighty God of the universe Himself writing the commandments on stone?!  Most of the old commentaries agree that these tablets (although scripture says the law and the commandments, what is meant is the law of the ten commandments) contained just the Ten Commandments that God had already given the people in all their hearing.  That is reasonable; those are the ones that God had Himself given the people with great terrifying thunder and lightning and noise.  The rest were judgments that God gave to Moses that more fully explained how the Ten Commandments were to play out in day to day judgments.  Moses had written all these words himself when he came back from the Lord before he built the altar where the people ceremoniously agreed to these words of the Lord.  The basis for all the judgments of God were contained in the Ten Commandments He initially gave the people, and it is most probable these are the only ones contained on the tablets of stone.

(13) And Moses rose up, and his minister Joshua; and Moses went up into the mount of God.

After God asked him to come up the mount to Him, Moses indeed went up, bringing his minister Joshua with him.  As his minister, Joshua was probably with Moses as his assistant to minister to his needs, and of course, he was to become Moses's successor.  We must assume that Joshua was only allowed to go so far up the mountain, not as far up and close to God, as Moses was allowed to go.

(14) And he said to the elders, “Wait here for us until we come again to you; and, behold, Aaron and Hur are with you; if any man has any matters to do, let him come to them.”

Moses told the elders, surely the ones who had gone thus far with him toward God, to wait for them (he and Joshua) until they came down again, and he put Aaron and Hur in charge of any matters the people might have in Moses's absence.

(15) And Moses went up into the mount, and a cloud covered the mount. (16) And the glory of the LORD abode on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days; and the seventh day He called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud.

Moses, and we may assume Joshua, went up into the mountain of God, and a cloud covered the mountain.  The glory of the Lord abode on the mountain within the cloud that served as a visible sign of God's presence on Mount Sinai.  Moses remained there six days, until the seventh day when God called Moses.

(17) And the sight of the glory of the LORD was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel. (18) And Moses went into the midst of the cloud and went up into the mountain; and Moses was on the mountain forty days and forty nights.

To the children of Israel below the sight of the glory of the Lord was like a consuming fire on top of the mountain.  It wasn't actually consuming the mountain top, but it looked as though it would consume all that was in its way, just like the burning bush that Moses observed back in Exodus 3:2.  The burning bush wasn't consumed then, and Moses would not be consumed now when he went up inside of what looked like a fire that would devour anything that came close to it.  We can assume at this point Joshua stayed behind and only Moses went up in the midst of the cloud at the top of the mountain.  Moses was there for forty days and forty nights.  Obviously, forty days and forty nights is a familiar theme as with Jesus Christ fasting forty days and forty nights in the wilderness.  Albert Barnes, in his Notes on the Bible, reminded me of another forty days and forty nights, and wrote this:  "In like manner, Elijah fasted for forty days, when he visited the same spot.  The two who met our Saviour on the Mount of Transfiguration, the one representing the law (Moses, my parenthetical note), the other representing the Prophets (Elijah, again my parenthetical note), thus shadowed forth in their own experience the Fast of Forty days in the wilderness of Judaea."

Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on the Bible, wrote, "Moses, who was the mediator of the Old Covenant, is alone permitted to draw nigh to God; none of the people are suffered to come up to the Divine glory, not even Aaron, nor his sons, nor the nobles of Israel. Moses was a type of Christ, who is the mediator of the New Covenant; and he alone has access to God in behalf of the human race, as Moses had in behalf of Israel."

(Exodus 25:1) Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, (2) “Speak to the children of Israel, that they bring Me an offering; from everyone who gives it willingly with his heart you shall take My offering."

When Moses went back down to the people, he was to tell them to bring the Lord an offering, but it was not dictated by the Lord exactly what they must bring to Him.  This was to be a free-will offering of whatever was in their hearts to give.  To me this suggests that God did not want the offerings of those who would give grudgingly or out of only obligation.  God loves a cheerful giver (2 Corinthians 9:7)

(3) “And this is the offering which you shall take from them: gold, silver, and bronze; (4) And blue, purple, and scarlet thread, fine linen, and goats’ hair; (5) And rams' skins dyed red, badger skins, and acacia wood; (6) Oil for the light, and spices for the anointing oil and for the sweet incense; (7) Onyx stones, and stones to be set in the ephod and in the breastplate. (8) And let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them."

The Lord went on to give Moses a broad and varied list of the type of good-will offerings he was to accept from the people, and these items were to be used to build the Lord a sanctuary, a place where He might dwell among His people.  Some of the offerings to be accepted would be used to make furnishings and accessories for the sanctuary, as well, as for the ephod and breastplate that were mentioned.  An ephod was a garment, perhaps a type of girdle or apron that would be worn by the priests.

(9) “According to all that I show you, that is, the pattern of the tabernacle and the pattern of all its furnishings, just so you shall make it."

God would give Moses an exact plan of how He wanted His sanctuary and all its furnishings built, and he was cautioned to make it just that way.

(10) “And they shall make an ark of acacia wood; two and a half cubits shall be its length, a cubit and a half its width, and a cubit and a half its height."

The people were also to make an ark or chest out of acacia wood, and the Lord gave the exact dimensions He wanted it to be.  A cubit was about the length of a forearm, about 18 inches.  Thus the ark was to be 3 ft. 9 in. long, 2 ft. 3 in. wide, and 2 ft. 3 in. tall.

(11) “And you shall overlay it with pure gold, inside and out you shall overlay it, and shall make on it a crown of gold all around. (12) And you shall cast four rings of gold for it, and put them in its four corners; and two rings shall be on one side, and two rings on the other side."

The ark or chest was to be overlaid with pure gold, inside and out.  There was to be a crown molding of gold all around the top of the chest, and on each corner of that would be a gold ring, which would make two rings on one side of the chest and two on the other side.

(13) “And you shall make staves of acacia wood, and overlay them with gold. (14) And you shall put the staves into the rings on the sides of the ark, that the ark may be carried by them. (15) The staves shall be in the rings of the ark; they shall not be taken from it."

Poles or rods were to be made of acacia wood, the same wood as the ark, and they were also to be overlaid with gold.  These poles were to be put into the rings on the sides of the ark so that it could be carried.  The poles were to stay in the rings of the ark and not to be removed, surely so that the ark would not be touched by human hands, as we will find to be the case in future verses.  

(16) “And you shall put into the ark the Testimony which I shall give you."

The tables of stone that the Lord planned to give to Moses (Exodus 24:12) were to be placed in this ark or chest.

(17) “And you shall make a mercy seat of pure gold; two and a half cubits shall be its length and a cubit and a half its width."

They were to make what was called a mercy seat that would act as a lid or covering to the chest, and this was to be made of pure gold.  Its dimensions were to be 3 ft. 9 in. long and 2 ft. 3 in. wide, exactly the dimensions of the ark.  Matthew Henry, in his Commentary on the Whole Bible, explained the mercy seat well:  "This propitiatory covering, as it might well be translated, was a type of Christ, the great propitiation, whose satisfaction fully answers the demands of the law, covers our transgressions, and comes between us and the curse we deserve."  In this, it was certainly a seat or covering of mercy.

(18) “And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work you shall make them at the two ends of the mercy seat. (19) And make one cherub on one end, and the other cherub on the other end; even of the mercy seat you shall make the cherubim on its two ends."

At each end of the mercy seat there was to be a cherub made from hammered gold.  Exactly what a cherub was and looked like was debated among all the old theologians.  I'm pretty sure it was not the chubby cheeked little angel we picture these days, but I imagine it was some sort of angelic being.  Most all the old translations and commentaries suggest that what these awkward, rather difficult to understand verses are trying to explain is that the cherubim were to be made of one piece of gold with the seat.  They were not to be poured into molds and attached, but rather to be worked and hammered out at the ends of the seat.  They refer to the verse in Exodus 37:7 which speaks of the actual making of the seat per these instructions:  "And he made two cherubim of gold, beaten out of one piece he made them, on the two ends of the mercy seat."

(20) “And the cherubim shall stretch forth their wings on high, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and their faces shall look at one another; the faces of the cherubim shall be toward the mercy seat."

The cherubim were to be made with their wings stretched out upward toward heaven and probably forward so that they touched or almost touched each other.  In that way they covered the mercy seat with their wings.  They indeed were to face each other and each toward the mercy seat.

(21) "And you shall put the mercy seat on top of the ark, and in the ark you shall put the Testimony that I will give you."

This mercy seat with cherubim on either side covering the seat with their wings was to be placed on top of the ark or chest, and the Testimony that the Lord was going to give Moses was to be placed inside the ark.

(22) “And there I will meet with you, and I will commune with you from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which are on the ark of the Testimony, about everything which I will give you in commandment to the children of Israel."

There at the mercy seat God would meet with Moses and converse with him.  More specifically, God said He would converse with Moses above the seat in between the cherubim on either side of the seat.  There He would talk to him about everything He would give him with respect to the commandments to the children of Israel.

(23) “You shall also make a table of acacia wood; two cubits shall be its length, a cubit its width, and a cubit and a half its height."

God instructed Moses to have the people also make a table of acacia wood, 3 ft. long, 1 ft. 6 in. wide, and 2 ft. 3 in. high.

(24) “And you shall overlay it with pure gold, and make a crown of gold all around. (25) And you shall make for it a border of a handbreadth all around, and you shall make a golden crown to the border all around."

The table was to be overlaid with pure gold with a crown molding of gold all around it.  Most theologians agree that the border of a handbreadth is an additional border, probably from table leg to table leg all around.  A handbreadth was the width of a man's hand, just the four fingers, not including the thumb.  The fact that this border was also to have a crown all around makes it sound separate and not attached to the first molding, like it could have been a brace around the middle or bottom of the table legs.

(26) “And you shall make for it four rings of gold, and put the rings on the four corners that are on its four feet. (27) Over against the border shall the rings be for places for the staves to bear the table. (28) And you shall make the staves of acacia wood, and overlay them with gold, that the table may be carried with them."

There were to be four rings of gold placed on the four corners of the table at the table legs at the second border that was to be made all around from leg to leg.  The rings were to be where poles were inserted with which to lift and carry the table.  The poles were also to be made of acacia wood and overlaid with gold.

(29) "And you shall make its dishes, its cups, its covers, and its bowls for pouring; you shall make them of pure gold. (30) And you shall set the showbread on the table before Me always."

They were to make all the dishes and utensils that would be used on the table out of pure gold.  The literal meaning of the words transcribed as "showbread" was "bread of faces", which may have referred to it being placed before the face of God, but probably more completely should be rendered as the "bread of presence".  That bread was to be on that table always, representing that God was present with them always.  The tabernacle was God’s house, and in it He had his table set with His bread, showing His people that He had taken up His dwelling among them.

(31) "And you shall make a candlestick of pure gold, of hammered work shall the candlestick be made; its shaft, its branches, its bowls, its ornamental knobs, and its flowers shall be of the same piece. (32) And six branches shall come out of its sides, three branches of the candlestick out of one side, and three branches of the candlestick out of the other side."

The original word for candlestick in the scripture above is "menorah" and the seven-branched candelabrum that word brings to mind now is more likely what is meant in this scripture rather than a single candlestick.  It was to be pure gold, and once again, rather than poured into a mold, it was to be hammered and worked from one piece.  Three branches were to come out of one side of the main stick or shaft and three branches out of the other side, making seven places for oil lamps, including the shaft in the middle.  There were to be bowls to hold the lamps, and ornamental knobs and flowers, all made from one piece of gold.

(33) “Three bowls shall be made like almond blossoms on one branch, with an ornamental knob and a flower, and three bowls made like almond blossoms on the other branch, with an ornamental knob and a flower; and so for the six branches that come out of the candlestick. (34) And in the candlestick shall be four bowls made like almond blossoms, each with its ornamental knob and flower."

The bowls for the oil lamps on each of the branches that extended from each side of the main candlestick were to be made as almond blossoms, each with an ornamental knob and flower.  The main shaft of the candlestick was to have four bowls made like almond blossoms, each with an ornamental knob and flower.

(35) “And there shall be a knob under two branches of the same, a knob under two branches of the same, and a knob under two branches of the same, according to the six branches that proceed out of the candlestick. (36) Their knobs and their branches shall be of one piece; all of it shall be one hammered piece of pure gold."

This is where the instructions completely lose me.  It sounds as if there was to be another knob underneath connecting two branches, and two and two, making six branches with three knobs underneath, but since the branches were to be arranged three on one side and three on the other, it does not make sense.  None of the old commentaries I read bothered to explain this, but Dr. John Gill, in his Exposition of the Entire Bible, did mention an interpretation of Jarchi, who was a medieval French rabbi and Torah commentator.  The previous scripture had just spoken of the bowls that were each to have a knob and a flower, and then the next speaks of "a knob under two branches of the same".  If "the same" is still referencing each bowl with its knob and flower, then verse 35's "knob" is speaking of the same knob, and what Dr. Gill said Jarchi wrote about it makes sense.  According to him, the knob was like a pomegranate (or an apple), and "two branches were drawn from the two sides of it...this clause is repeated twice in this verse, signifying there should be a knop under each of the three branches on one side, and three on the other side."  Once again these knobs and branches were to be hammered from one mass of gold, and not poured into molds and soldered together.

(37) "And you shall make the seven lamps for it, and they shall light its lamps that they may give light in front of it."

They were to make seven lamps for the elaborate candlestand, six for the bowls at the end of each of the six branches, and one for the shaft in the middle.  They should light the lamps so that they gave light before it out into the tabernacle.

(38) “And its tongs and its snuff dishes shall be of pure gold."

The instruments used to adjust and trim the wicks and to snuff out the lights, as well as the snuff dishes (literally fire pans) into which the snuffed pieces were placed and perhaps the tongs themselves laid, were also to be made of pure gold.

(39) "It shall be made of a talent of pure gold, with all these utensils. (40) And see to it that you make them according to the pattern which was shown you on the mountain."

The entire candlestand and all its utensils were to be made from a full talent of gold.  The old theologians and commentators that I read varied greatly in their opinions about exactly how much gold this was, but generally a talent was understood to be about the weight of a person, and was considered to be roughly 120 pounds.  God cautioned Moses to make sure everything was made according to the instructions He gave him.  The way the scripture is worded, it may be that Moses was even shown a model.  Nothing was to be left to the people's whimsy, but every detail religiously observed as God had directed.  Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on the Bible, explained why it was necessary that every detail must be meticulously followed:  "As God designed that this building, and all that belonged to it, should be patterns or representations of good things to come, it was indispensably necessary that Moses should receive a model and specification of the whole, according to which he might direct the different artificers in their constructing the work."  He then went on to summarize the features of the tabernacle and its furnishings and what it represented:

1.  We may observe that the whole tabernacle and its furniture resembled a dwelling-house and its furniture.
2.  That this tabernacle was the house of God, not merely for the performance of his worship, but for his residence.
3.  That God had promised to dwell among this people, and this was the habitation which he appointed for his glory.
4.  That the tabernacle, as well as the temple, was a type of the incarnation of Jesus Christ.  See Joh 1:14, and Joh 2:19, Joh 2:21.
5.  That as the glory of God was manifested between the cherubim, above the mercy-seat, in this tabernacle, so God was in Christ, and in him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.
6.  As in the tabernacle were found bread, light, etc., probably all these were emblematical of the ample provision made in Christ for the direction, support, and salvation of the soul of man. Of these, and many other things in the law and the prophets, we shall know more when mortality is swallowed up of life.

More Life-Giving Laws of God

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Exodus 23:1) “You shall not raise a false report; do not put your hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness."

God continued to give what He called "judgments" to Moses to give to the people.  These followed and perhaps more completely explained the Ten Commandments He had already given in the hearing of all the people.  This one sounds like a repeat of the ninth commandment not to bear false witness against your neighbor, but it goes a little further in depth.  The original word translated as "raise" was "nasah" and does mean "raise or lift", and may mean being the first to raise or bring up an issue, but I saw more when I looked in depth at the meaning of the original word.  The scripture goes on to say not to put your hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous or false or unjust witness.  You are not to start a false report and you are not to be a party to it with the wicked.  In this case of lifting or raising a false report, the meaning might be more completely defined by some of the word's other definitions--"carry, support, advance".  The meaning then becomes "don't spread a false report."  Some of the old commentaries I read believe that putting your hand with the wicked literally meant something like putting your hand on the Bible to swear, although their gestures were probably more like putting the hand under the thigh or raising their hand to heaven.  Regardless of whether it was literal or figurative, or whether the actual meaning intended was to first raise or to support, when you combine it with the ninth commandment not to bear false witness, it's pretty clear that you don't start a false report and you don't join with the wicked to spread it.

(2) “You shall not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shall you speak in a cause to turn aside after many to pervert justice."

The main gist of this is that you don't follow the crowd to do evil, and you don't turn aside from the truth to follow the crowd to speak evil, perverting justice.  The first part of the scripture is pretty clear, don't follow the crowd to do evil; but the second part was a little more difficult to decipher.  Don't speak in a cause, don't testify in a case, to turn aside after many, or to follow the majority, to pervert justice.  Interestingly, the original word translated as "turn aside" above is "natah", and is the same word also translated as "pervert" above.  The complete range of meanings for the word is "turn aside, bend away, stretch out, incline, influence, thrust away, overthrow, pervert".  You don't bend the truth to follow the crowd, and in so doing, pervert justice.  I can't help but think about the recent events in the Ferguson, Missouri, shooting death of a young black man by a white police officer, where "hands up, don't shoot" became the rallying cry, and was not at all representative of what really happened.  The slogan served a cause many wanted to advance, and many turned aside from the truth to follow the crowd and give a completely false witness report of what actually happened to fit the mantra of the crowd.  In that case, it turned out that many were being threatened into giving false testimony, or just not coming forward to tell the truth.  You can certainly see in this event and the ensuing riots the wisdom of God's judgment not to follow the crowd to turn aside from the truth, perverting justice.

(3) "Neither shall you show partiality to a poor man in his cause."

Just as you weren't to follow the crowd with the popular opinion just because it was popular, you were not to show partiality to a poor man just because he was poor.  The same rules of justice were to apply to all, regardless of their position in life.

(4) “If you meet your enemy’s ox or his donkey going astray, you shall surely bring it back to him again."

This judgment was surely an example of how to love your enemies.  Not only were the people to love their neighbors as themselves as Jesus summed up half of the Ten Commandments (Mark 12:31), but they were expected to do good to their enemies, as Jesus would expound on later in the New Testament:  "But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you." (Matthew 5:44)

(5) “If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying under its burden, and you would refrain from helping him, you shall surely help with him."

In the same spirit of loving and helping your enemies, if a person saw the donkey of his enemy lying down under its burden, unable or unwilling to rise up again, and although he might be inclined in his heart to pass on by and not help his enemy, he was commanded by God to indeed help him with his animal.

(6) “You shall not pervert the judgment of your poor in his cause."

As you were not to give partiality to a poor man just because he was poor, you were not to look down on him and pervert justice in his cause because he was poor and perhaps not able to buy his way out as his rich opponent might be able to do.

(7) “Keep yourself far from a false matter; do not kill the innocent and righteous, for I will not justify the wicked."

In fact, you were to keep yourself far from a false matter.  Be careful not to kill the innocent and righteous.  How many times in history has it seemed there needed to be a scapegoat; there needed to be someone responsible, so that an incident could be wrapped up and put behind?  God warned not to kill the innocent, for He would not justify the killer.  It sounds to me like even the law and the courts had better be careful not to sentence an innocent man.  It is why we look for reasonable doubt before pronouncing death on an alleged criminal.  It would be better to let a guilty man go free than to let an innocent man die for something he did not do.  Besides God not justifying the wicked who killed an innocent man, I believe the scripture may also mean not to worry about possibly letting a guilty man go because there was not enough proof to convict him, because God would not allow him (the guilty man) to go unpunished.  Vengeance is God's (Romans 12:19).

(8) “And you shall take no gift, for the gift blinds the wise and perverts the words of the righteous."

The word gift is meant to mean a bribe.  It's funny; when I was transcribing this verse, I accidentally wrote "bind" instead of "blind".  Doesn't a bribe indeed bind one to the briber?  The recipient of the bribe then owes the briber something, and thus judgment becomes perverted.  When I go back and think of it as merely a gift, with no supposed strings attached, would that gift not possibly sway the recipient to give more weight to the giver of the gift than he might otherwise be entitled?  Accepting gifts will pervert the words of the righteous, and will therefore pervert judgment, anyway you look at it.

(9) “Also you shall not oppress a stranger, for you know the heart of a stranger, because you were strangers in the land of Egypt."

Once again God repeated His commandment not to oppress a stranger because His people, better than anyone, knew what it was like to be an oppressed stranger in a land not their own.  I can't help but think of our illegal immigration problem today.  Our government seems to lean over backward to give over and above to the illegal immigrant rights that should not be legally his.  That's not what this law of God was intended to do.  They were in no way to oppress the foreigner, but he was welcomed as someone who wanted to live in peace among and eventually assimilate into the land of God's people.  It is said that in those Biblical times, the stranger was not allowed to inherit land, "yet they must have justice done them, must peaceably enjoy their own, and be redressed if they were wronged, though they were strangers to the commonwealth of Israel." (Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible).

(10) "And six years you shall sow your land and gather in its produce, (11) But the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie still, that the poor of your people may eat; and what they leave, the beasts of the field may eat. In like manner you shall deal with your vineyard and with your oliveyard."

Here was the institution of what was called the sabbatical year.  As the seventh day was the sabbath rest, so the seventh year should be a sabbath rest for the land.  First, the land was to rest from plowing and sowing so that it would become more fruitful afterwards.  Then God said it was so that the poor of the land might eat, and what they left, the beasts of the field might eat; this applied to all their fields and vineyards.  My first thought was that the poor could only count on this food once every seven years, but then I remembered that in the seventh year, servants were freed.  Servants were most often poor people who had been sold (often by themselves) into slavery, so as they were released, so was the land from farming, and those poor people were allowed to harvest whatever grew in the seventh year for themselves.  By the fact that God made it a point to say that what was left after the poor gathered what they wanted, was to go to the animals, suggests that God would provide an abundance in this year of rest, to feed both the poor and the animals.  As far as feeding the people whose land could not be sown and harvested during this seventh year, Leviticus 25:21 said that God would command His blessing on the land in the sixth year and it would bring forth produce enough for three years.  This law taught the people to rely on God for their needs, but also made them realize that the land was not really their own, but God's, and He provided for the poor and the beasts of the fields with it.  Besides nourishment, God was also giving rest.  By following the law of the Sabbatical Year, the people were reminded to think about the poor, the slaves, the strangers, and even the animals.

(12) “Six days you shall do your work, and on the seventh day you shall rest, that your ox and your donkey may rest, and the son of your handmaid and the stranger may be refreshed."

In keeping the sabbatical year, the people were reminded not to neglect the weekly sabbath.  They were allowed to work six days, but the sabbath day was to be a day of rest for them, their animals, and all people, including the sons of their maids, and the strangers among them, so that all might be refreshed.

(13) “And in all that I have said to you, be circumspect and make no mention of the name of other gods, nor let it be heard from your mouth."

The original word translated as "circumspect" was "shamar" and it literally meant "to hedge about", meaning to guard, making a hedge of protection around.  In all that God had said to the people, they were to guard their hearts and make no mention of any other gods.

(14) “Three times you shall keep a feast to Me in the year: (15) You shall keep the Feast of Unleavened Bread (you shall eat unleavened bread seven days, as I commanded you, at the time appointed in the month of Abib, for in it you came out of Egypt; and none shall appear before Me empty)."

Here God instituted (or reinstituted, as the case may be) three yearly feasts in His honor.  The first was the Feast of Unleavened Bread, or Passover, when they were to eat unleavened bread for seven days, as God had previously commanded them to do in the month of Abib, their first month, in memory of the time God brought them out of Egypt.  At this and the two following feasts, the people were not to appear before the Lord empty-handed.  There is not a great deal of detail in exactly what these offerings must be, as there will be later in Leviticus.  We know that the Passover feast had already been instituted by God.  As far as the offering required at this first feast, I can only assume at this point it was some free-will offering as a token of their respect and gratitude to their Lord.  The offerings for the next two feasts will be greatly detailed later in Leviticus, so either this scripture does not yet detail it for the reader, or perhaps God is just introducing these feasts now and required just the little He asked in the following verse:

(16) "And the Feast of Harvest, the firstfruits of your labors which you have sown in the field; and the Feast of Ingathering at the end of the year, when you have gathered in your labors from the field."

The second feast to be held in God's honor was the Feast of Harvest, or Pentecost, as it would become known.  This occurred at the time the people were beginning their harvests, and to this feast they were to bring the first fruits of their labor which they had sown in their fields.  The Feast of Ingathering, or later known as the Feast of Tabernacles, was to be at the end of the year when the people had gathered in all their crops.  "At the end of the year" can be looked at two ways.  As it was in the fall, it could only be counted as the end of the year by the civil year, and not by the new sacred year that God had instituted in Exodus 12:2, with Abib, or Nisan, being the first month of the year.  Perhaps it could be viewed as the end of the harvest year, or the end of the year as pertaining to their required feasts, for they were required to keep the three feasts in the spring (Passover), summer (Harvest or Pentecost), and fall (Ingathering or Tabernacles), and no feast was required in the winter.

(17) “Three times in the year all your males shall appear before the Lord. (18) You shall not offer the blood of My sacrifice with leavened bread; nor shall the fat of My sacrifice remain until morning. (19) The first of the firstfruits of your land you shall bring into the house of the LORD your God. You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk."

At these three feasts, all males were to appear before the Lord.  As noted before, these men were not to appear before the Lord empty-handed.  Surely referring to the Passover, they were instructed not to offer leavened bread with the Passover lamb, nor allow any of the lamb to remain until morning.  The first part of verse 19 likely refers to the Pentecost, when they were to offer the first of their first fruits to the Lord.  The reference to boiling a kid in its mother's milk may refer to an ancient heathen custom of boiling a kid in its mother's milk at the end of their harvest and sprinkling that milk on their fields and gardens to make them more fruitful the next year.  God forbade this superstitious and idolatrous practice which may have also been considered cruel, as it took a baby before its time when it was supposed to be left with its mother (Exodus 22:30) and boiled it in its own mother's milk which was designed for its life and nourishment in its first seven days.  Regardless of the exact reason for this prohibition, it is certain that God's people were to be above superstition and such wanton lust.

(20) “Behold, I send an Angel before you to keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. (21) Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for He will not pardon your transgressions; for My name is in Him."

God told Moses to tell the people He had sent an angel to them to help keep them in the way of the Lord and to guide them to the place He had prepared for them.  This was obviously no ordinary created angel messenger of the Lord, for the people were warned to beware of Him and obey Him.  They were warned not to provoke Him because He would not pardon their transgressions.  No ordinary angel had the power to pardon transgressions.  God said His name was in this angel.  Many have speculated that this could only be Jesus Christ, who was with God from the beginning, and I have often thought this way, too, when it was a very special empowered Angel of the Lord mentioned in scripture.  While it may indeed be, could it not rather be the Holy Spirit of God, that third member of the trinity, that Spirit of God and of Jesus Christ, that is One with them?  I would think He would have authority to pardon transgressions.  God said His name was in Him.  Jesus said that He and the Father were one, and that all power was given to Him (Matthew 28:18).  He additionally said in Matthew 9:6 that He, Jesus, had power to forgive sins.  John 16:13 said that when the Holy Spirit came, He would not speak of His own, but only what He heard (obviously from the Father), as He would declare not only truth of things past but also of things to come.  All power was given to Jesus, and the Holy Spirit was One with the Father, speaking only through Him and able to speak whatever the Father told Him, so I think it is feasible this Angel of God could have been either Jesus or the Holy Spirit.  Whoever it was, God made it clear this Angel had His full authority.

(22) “But if you indeed obey His voice and do all that I speak, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. (23) For My Angel will go before you and bring you in to the Amorites and the Hittites and the Perizzites and the Canaanites and the Hivites and the Jebusites; and I will cut them off."

The people were promised that if they would obey this Angel of God and do all that God Himself spoke through this Angel, then He would be with them to fight their battles and save them from their enemies.  God's Angel would go before them to bring them into the nations of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Canaanites, Hivites, and the Jebusites, and cut them off from being a nation, giving the land to His people.

(24) “You shall not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do according to their works; but you shall utterly overthrow them and completely break down their images."

God's people were warned not to be tempted to do any of the idolatrous things that the people of these lands did.  God not only commanded them not to worship these idols, but commanded them to completely destroy them.

(25) "And you shall serve the LORD your God, and He will bless your bread and your water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of you. (26) There shall nothing suffer miscarriage or be barren in your land; I will fulfill the number of your days."

If the people served only their Lord God, He would bless all their provisions and keep them healthy.  "Nothing" would suffer miscarriage or be barren, suggesting both the people and all their livestock, making them greatly increase in all their numbers of both people and livestock.  God would fulfill their full number of days, meaning no one would die prematurely.

(27) “I will send My fear before you, and I will destroy all the people to whom you come, and I will make all your enemies turn their backs to you. (28) And I will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite from before you."

The people of the lands to which God's people would come would be afraid of their coming and would turn their backs as in fleeing.  God would destroy the people of the lands to which they would come.  I don't think it means totally destroy as in killing them all, otherwise there would be no one to drive out.  "Hornets" can be figural as the root means "strike down".  So whether they were struck down or driven out, the Hivites, Canaanites, Hittites, etc., would be destroyed as nations.

(29) “I will not drive them out from before you in one year, lest the land become desolate and the beasts of the field multiply against you. (30) Little by little I will drive them out from before you, until you have increased, and you inherit the land."

The Lord let the people know in advance, that in His mercy, He would not drive all the people of those other lands out all at once because the land would become desolate and the wild beasts would be allowed to grow in number against them.  He said little by little He would drive them out, to give His people time to increase.  Isn't that often the way of the Lord, to give just what we need when we need it?  This would also keep His people on their guard and dependent on God to do the next little bit as they needed it. 

(31) “And I will set your bounds from the Red Sea to the sea of the Philistines, and from the desert to the river; for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand, and you shall drive them out before you."

God named the boundaries of the land He was giving His people.  Most of the old commentaries pointed out that this full amount of land was not completely fulfilled until the days of David and Solomon.  On the west side the land went to the Red Sea; on the east side it went to the sea of the Philistines, which was the Mediterranean Sea; to the south was the desert of Shur or Arabia; and to the north was the river Euphrates.  This was the promised land that the Lord promised to His people as He delivered its inhabitants into their hand as they were driven out from before them in degrees, not all at once.

(32) “You shall make no covenant with them, nor with their gods. (33) They shall not dwell in your land, lest they make you sin against Me; for if you serve their gods, it will surely be a snare to you.”

God warned the people that as they conquered the people of these lands, they were not to make covenants with them or their false gods.  They were not to make allies of these people, but were to always consider them their enemies, and their gods, false idols to be rejected.  They were not to allow these people to remain in the land, unless of course, I would imagine, they renounced their idolatry and assimilated with God's people.  God understood and passed that bit of wisdom on to His people that if they did ally themselves with these pagan people and compromised their worship to include their false idols, that it would become a snare which would eventually cause their ruin and destruction.

I can't help but think again about America's current struggle with illegal immigration.  We have leaders that tell us our country has always been a nation of immigrants; therefore we should welcome these illegals with open arms.  Indeed, God always warned to be kind to the foreigner, but the foreigners, if they stayed, were expected to renounce their ways and become one with God's people.  Oh, I can hear the arguments now--that we are NOT a nation of Christians under God and that all people should be allowed to worship their gods as they wish and live according to their customs.  While that is true of our country's freedoms (I use that word loosely), weren't immigrants traditionally supposed to renounce their citizenship and become Americans?  That no longer seems the case.  Rather than a country of united Americans, we have all these smaller groups of Americans--black Americans, Native Americans, Mexican Americans, gay Americans etc., fighting against each other.  While it may be true that a secular country with true religious freedom cannot force God onto its citizens, it is surely death to the country that rejects the one true God.  We are watching the sure decline and destruction of our country because it has chosen the ways of death rather than the life in God's ways.

These laws and judgments of God in the past few chapters are common sense laws, just and humane, and mean life, security, and happiness, for those who follow them.  God's laws are not a set of rules from a prude who doesn't want anyone to have any fun!  They are all about life and life more abundantly!  As God said in Deuteronomy 30:19-20a:

“I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live; that you may love the LORD your God, that you may obey His voice, and that you may cling to Him, for He is your life and the length of your days....”

More Laws for the Holy Man of God

Continuing a chronological Bible study:

(Exodus 22:1) “If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills it or sells it, he shall restore five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep."

Chapter 22 continues with God giving more moral laws or judgments following His giving of the Ten Commandments.  Verse 1 concerns the theft of an ox or a sheep.  If a man killed or sold an animal that he stole, he was required to give five oxen for the one he stole, or four sheep for the sheep he stole.  Evidently, the oxen were considered more valuable than the sheep.

(2) “If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no blood shed for him. (3) If the sun has risen on him, there shall be blood shed for him, for he should make full restitution; if he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. (4) If the theft is certainly found alive in his hand, whether it is an ox or donkey or sheep, he shall restore double."

If the thief was caught while breaking in to steal, and he was struck so that he died, there was to be no guilt placed on the man who struck him.  This apparently only applied if the theft was at night, because if the thief was caught by the light of day, there would be blood required for blood.  This may be because by the light of day, the thief could be identified and more easily apprehended.  Someone breaking in by the light of day was not likely intending to murder, but more likely was hungry or in need, and the master of the house could call for assistance.  If the thief was caught by the light of day, he was expected to make full restitution.  If he was caught in the act, and no harm was yet done to the animal he may have been trying to steal, he was to restore double as punishment for trying to steal in the first place, but was not required to pay four or five times as was the case if the animal was killed or sold.  If he was stealing by light of day because he was hungry, then chances were pretty good that he would not be able to pay restitution.  If he had nothing, and had restitution to pay and could not, then he was sold into servitude for his theft.

(5) “If a man causes a field or vineyard to be eaten, and puts in his animal, and feeds in another man’s field, he shall make restitution from the best of his own field and the best of his own vineyard."

If a man allowed his animal or animals to feed in another man's field, then he was required to make restitution for the damage or loss by giving the best of his own field and vineyard, even though it may be better than what was damaged.  In this way, he would be more careful in the future about letting his animals roam free.  Worth noting is that it was not acceptable to keep another's animal because it had wondered into your field.

(6) “If fire breaks out and catches in thorns, so that the stacks of corn or standing corn or the field be consumed, he who kindled the fire shall surely make restitution."

Possibly the point is that while trying to burn thorns, a fire might spread beyond the thorns and do damage to another man's crops.  If that was the case, the man who started the fire was responsible for negligence and had to make restitution.

(7) “If a man delivers to his neighbor money or stuff to keep, and it is stolen out of the man’s house, if the thief is found, he shall pay double. (8) If the thief is not found, then the master of the house shall be brought to the judges to see whether he has put his hand into his neighbor’s goods."

If a man delivered to his neighbor money or articles to keep for him, whether as a pledge (a deposit of goods by a debtor to his creditor to be kept until the debt was paid), or perhaps as to a carrier to be conveyed or to a warehouse to be kept, or perhaps he delivered his cattle to graze in a neighbor's field by mutual agreement--for whatever reason his property was in the hands of his neighbor, that neighbor was responsible for it as if it was his own.  As in verse 4, if the thief was found with the stolen article, then the thief had to pay double.  However, we may assume that, as in verse 1, if the article was not found, but the thief was, he had to pay four or five times, and I would imagine these restitutions would have been made to the original owner.  If the thief was not found, the owner of the house in whose care the articles had been entrusted would have to go before the judges to determine if he had anything to do with the loss of the goods.  In the words of Matthew Henry, in his Commentary on the Whole Bible, "this teaches us that we ought to be very careful of every thing we are entrusted with, as careful of it, though it be another's, as if it were our own. It is unjust and base, and that which all the world cries shame on, to betray a trust."

(9) “For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for donkey, for sheep, for clothing, or for any manner of lost thing, which another claims to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whomever the judges condemn shall pay double to his neighbor."

In all manners of disputes concerning property of any kind, as it was a case of "he said, she said", both parties would have to go before the judges to have the ownership determined, and the guilty party would be required to pay double to the injured party.

(10) “If a man delivers to his neighbor a donkey, an ox, a sheep, or any animal to keep, and it dies, is hurt, or driven away, no one seeing it, (11) Then an oath of the LORD shall be between them both, that he has not put his hand into his neighbor’s goods; and the owner of it shall accept that, and he shall not make it good."

If a man had under his care a neighbor's animal, and that animal was lost and there was no witness to what may have happened to it, then an oath, swearing by the name of the Lord, would be made between them both.  The owner would have to swear that he brought the animal to his neighbor for safe-keeping, and the neighbor would have to swear that he had nothing to do with the loss.  In Biblical times, an oath to the Lord was a serious thing, and one was to accept it as truth.  In such a case, restitution was not required.  Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on the Bible, put it this way:  "So solemn and awful were all appeals to God considered in those ancient times, that it was taken for granted that the man was innocent who could by an oath appeal to the omniscient God that he had not put his hand to his neighbor’s goods. Since oaths have become multiplied, and since they have been administered on the most trifling occasions, their solemnity is gone, and their importance little regarded. Should the oath ever reacquire its weight and importance, it must be when administered only in cases of peculiar delicacy and difficulty, and as sparingly as in the days of Moses."

(12) "And if it be stolen from him, he shall make restitution to the owner of it. (13) If it is torn to pieces, then let him bring it for witness, and he shall not make good that which was torn."

However, if the animal was stolen from the caretaker, then he was required to make restitution to the owner.  If he was able to find the thief, then the thief would have paid him restitution that could in turn be passed on to the owner, but if the thief was not found, then I assume it was considered negligence that he allowed the animal to be stolen without having seen the thief.  Then again, if the animal was torn to pieces by a wild animal, he was not required to pay restitution if he could provide evidence that the animal was indeed torn to pieces by a wild beast.

(14) “And if a man borrows anything from his neighbor, and it becomes injured or dies, the owner of it not being with it, he shall surely make it good. (15) But if its owner was with it, he shall not make it good; if it was a hired thing, it came for its hire."

If a man borrowed from his neighbor, again he must give it the care he would his own, and if it was injured under his care, he was required to make it good.  However, if the owner was with the borrowed thing (presumably an animal), as when he might be doing work for his neighbor, it was assumed that he would take responsibility and care for his own animal.  If it was a hired thing, then the cost of hire covered the risk of accident.

(16) “And if a man entices a maiden who is not betrothed, and lies with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife."

If a man took advantage of a young woman, he must marry her and give her a dowry.  This law spoke of a young woman who was not betrothed, because being betrothed was like being married, and that fell under a different law.

(17) “If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins."

However, it had to be by the young woman's father's consent that the man who took advantage of her was allowed to marry her.  If the father refused, then the man had to pay the sum of money as would be a handsome dowry for the injured female, and would allow her to enter with proper dignity and respect the house of whatever man might later become her husband.

(18) “You shall not permit a witch to live."

Witchcraft was to be a capital crime.  Witches and wizards called on other spirits other than the Holy Spirit of God to perform spells, so was the very definition of idol worship, which had already been forbidden by one of the Ten Commandments.  The fact that God made a point to call out witches, I believe proves that witchcraft and sorcery is real and probably has some power.  There are other scriptures in the Bible that confirm that one could communicate with other spirits (Isaiah 8:19, 1 Samuel 28:12).  The fact that the witch in 1 Samuel 28:12 was so surprised that she actually conjured up the spirit of Samuel proves that many witches were probably just fakes and deceivers, but the fact that they sought these dead spirits was evident of their desire to interact with them and was forbidden by God. 

(19) “Whoever lies with an animal shall surely be put to death."

Obviously, this meant to lie with in the same way one would lie with a person of the opposite sex in a sexual sense.  The fact that this law had to be made proves that the practice of bestiality existed, but it was so abominable and detested by God, that it was to be a crime punishable by death.

(20)  “He who sacrifices to any god, except to the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed."

Sacrificing to any god other than the one true God was obviously false idol worship and was considered a capital crime punishable by death.

(21) “You shall neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt."

The original word for "vex" was "yanah" and it meant "to rage or be violent, to suppress, to mistreat".  The people were not to mistreat or oppress strangers in their land.  The Lord reminded them that they were once strangers, and they should treat others the way they would want to be treated in that situation.

(22) “You shall not afflict any widow or fatherless child. (23) If you afflict them in any way, and they cry at all to Me, I will surely hear their cry; (24) And My wrath will become hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless."

The word translated as "afflict" was "anah", very similar to "yanah" above, but more completely meant "to look down on, browbeat, humiliate, mishandle, deal hardly with, defile, hurt, ravish, weaken".  No one was to look down on or mistreat in any way a widow or fatherless children.  I find it interesting that God put it the way He did.  Obviously, he would know what anyone did to anyone else.  He would not need to hear the cries of the victims to know that they had been mistreated.  I believe the point is to show that as widows and fatherless children, they had no husbands or fathers to protect them from unfair dealings, but God would act as their Father and Protector, and if He heard of any mistreatment, His anger would be kindled and He would take swift action against the one who mistreated them.  I like the way Adam Clarke wrote about this, "It is remarkable that offenses against this law are not left to the discretion of the judges to be punished; God reserves the punishment to himself, and by this he strongly shows his abhorrence of the crime. It is no common crime, and shall not be punished in a common way; the wrath of God shall wax hot against him who in any wise afflicts or wrongs a widow or a fatherless child: and we may rest assured that he who helps either does a service highly acceptable in the sight of God."

(25) “If you lend money to any of My people who are poor among you, you shall not be like a usurer, neither shall you charge him interest."

If one lent money to a poor person, he was not to loan as a creditor charging interest, and dealing harshly with the borrower if he was not punctual in his repayment.  If a poor person had to borrow, it generally meant he had to just to survive, and it was forbidden to add extra hardship on him.

(26) “If you ever take your neighbor’s garment as a pledge, you shall return it to him before the sun goes down. (27) For that is his only covering, it is his garment for his skin; what will he sleep in? And it will come to pass, when he cries to Me, I will hear, for I am gracious."

It seems a little odd that the law wasn't stated that one must not take clothing as security for a loan, but perhaps the situation didn't fall under the law forbidding extortion in lending to a poor man.  Perhaps a neighbor asked to borrow something short-term, as for a few hours, and left his clothing or bed clothes as collateral.  The lender must not keep the borrower's clothing overnight even if the borrower failed to keep up his end of the bargain.  To do so would be cruel as his clothing was a necessity.  Once again, our gracious God as Provider of our needs, would protect the borrower against such cruelty.

(28) “You shall not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of your people."

I had to take this one almost one word at a time to fully understand it.  "Revile" or "qalal" meant "to make light, trifle, bring into contempt, despise".  The gods, plural...this is a harder one to understand.  The original word is "elohim", is plural, and is the same name given to the one true God of Genesis, understood to be the Godhead of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  The word was also used in scripture to mean generic gods.  However, when you consider that God had already forbidden the worship of any other gods than Him, it makes no sense that God would now be forbidding the reviling of those false gods.  The word occasionally was used to mean a judge (Exodus 21:6, 1 Samuel 2:25), or godly or divine (Malachi 2:15).  Since it can't possibly mean false gods, the word would have to refer to either God Himself, godly or divine things, or judges.  God went on to say that you should not curse the ruler of your people.  God often reiterated a point, so it is reasonable to believe He meant not to despise, make light of, or curse your judges or rulers, either one, but it is also quite possible He meant not to make light of or despise godly or divine things of God Himself.  This would hearken back to the filial laws of the Ten Commandments that commanded our respect for all authority--parents, government, and God.  In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul took this commandment to heart even though the ruler of his people was his unrighteous persecutor:

"And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth. Then Paul said to him, 'God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?' And those who stood by said, 'Do you revile God’s high priest?'  Then Paul said, 'I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, "You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people."'" - Acts 23:2-5

Wow!  This one really hits home when I think of my lack of respect for President Obama (I had to force myself to even use his title) and other seemingly godless liberals in authority.  But God said to respect them and not dishonor them.  Imagine if everyone prayed for seemingly godless rulers every time they thought to curse them!  I am speaking mainly to myself!  If we worked out of love wanting the best for the rulers of our people, might it be that we and they and all of us would better benefit?  Wow, real food for thought...and action! 

(29) “You shall not delay to offer the first of your ripe fruits and your liquors; the firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me. (30) Likewise you shall do with your oxen and your sheep; seven days it shall be with its mother, on the eighth day you shall give it to Me."

The people were not to delay in their offerings to God.  In postponing their duties, they were in danger of omitting them altogether.  Matthew Henry in his Commentary on the Whole Bible explained it beautifully this way, "There is danger, if we delay our duty, lest we wholly omit it; and by slipping the first opportunity, in expectation of another, we suffer Satan to cheat us of all our time. Let not young people delay to offer to God the first-fruits of their time and strength, lest their delays come, at last, to be denials, through the deceitfulness of sin, and the more convenient season they promise themselves never arrive."

The people were to offer the first of their ripened produce to God, and the first of their liquors, which was probably the wine of their grapes.  The giving of their firstborn sons was a repeat of the law initially given by God in Exodus 13:2:  " Sanctify to Me all the firstborn, whatever opens the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast; it is Mine.”  The firstborn of their oxen and sheep was to be offered to the Lord, but these were to stay with their mothers for seven days, and be offered on the eighth day.

(31) “And you shall be holy men to Me: you shall not eat flesh torn by beasts in the field; you shall cast it to the dogs."

The Israelites were to be God's holy people, set apart by Him.  One mark of that distinction was that they were not to eat the flesh of any animal torn by beasts in the field.  This may have been for the reason Matthew Henry explained, "not only because it was unwholesome, but because it was paltry, and base, and covetous, and a thing below those who were holy men unto God, to eat the leavings of the beasts of prey."  However, I believe Adam Clarke more fully grasped the point, "The reason of the prohibition against eating the flesh of animals that had been torn, or as we term it worried in the field, appears to have been simply this: That the people might not eat the blood, which in this case must be coagulated in the flesh; and the blood, being the life of the beast, and emblematical of the blood of the covenant, was ever to be held sacred, and was prohibited from the days of Noah."  Probably both points were true.  The holy man of God was not to be as a savage, but eating and drinking deliberately and conscientiously, giving glory to God.

Verse 31 at the conclusion of this chapter summarizes the reason for all the laws contained in the chapter.  God's laws were given to His people that they might be His holy people, set apart from the rest of the world.  His laws were given to His people as restraints on disorderly passions and as incentives to holiness.