Vers. 10-12. Here follow directions respecting the year of rest and day of rest, the first of which lays the foundation for the keeping of the sabbatical and jubilee years, which are afterwards institutedin Lev. xxv., whilst the latter gives prominence to the element of rest and refreshment involved in the Sabbath, which had been already instituted (chap. xx. 9—11), and presses it in favour of beasts of burden, slaves, and foreigners. Neither of these instructions is to be regarded as laying down laws for the feasts; so that they are not to be included among the rights of Israel, which commence at ver. 14. On the contrary, as they are separated from these by ver. 13, they are to be reckoned as forming part of the laws relating to their mutual obligations one towards another. This is evident from the fact, that in both of them the care of the poor stands in the foreground. From this characteristic and design, which are common to both, we may explain the fact, that there is no allusion to the keeping of a Sabbath unto the Lord, as in chap. xx. 10 and Lev. xxv. 2, in connection with either the seventh year or seventh day: all that is mentioned being their sowing and reaping for six years, and working for six days, and then letting the land lie fallow in the seventh year, and their ceasing or resting from labour on the seventh day. " The seventh year thou shalt let (thy land) loose (^^^ to leave unemployed), and let it lie; and the poor of thy people shall eat (the produce which grows of itself), and their remainder (what they leave) shall the beast of the field eat" ^l??"?: lit, to breathe one's self, to draw breath, i.e, to refresh one's self (cf. chap. xxxi. 17; 2 Sam. xvi. 14). — With ver. 13a the laws relating to the rights of the people, in their relations to one another, are conclilded with the formula enforcing their observance, " And in all that I say to you, take heed," viz. that ye carefully maintain all the rights which I have given you. There is then attached to this, in ver. 136, a warning, which forms the transition to the relation of Israel to Jehovah: " Make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouthr This forms a very fitting boundary line between the two series of mishpatim, inasmuch as the observance and maintenance of both of them depended upon the attitude in which Israel stood towards Jehovah.
Chap, xxiii. 14-19. The Fundamental Eights of Israel IN its religious and theocratical relation to Jehovah. — As the observance of the Sabbath and sabbatical year is not instituted in vers. 10-12, so vers. 14-19 do not contain either the original or earliest appointment of the feasts, or a complete law concerning the yearly feasts. They simply command the observance of three feasts during the year, and the appearance of the people three times in the year before the Lord; that is to say, the holding of three national assemblies to keep a feast before the Lord, or three annual pilgrimages to the sanctuary of Jehovah. The leading points are clearly set forth in vers. 14 and 17, to which the other verses are subordinate. These leading points are D^lpQtJ'D or rights, conferred upon the people of Israel in their relation to Jehovah; for keeping a feast to the Lord, and appearing before Him, were both of them privileges bestowed by Jehovah upon His covenant people. Even in itself the festal rejoicing was a blessing in the midst of this life of labour, toil, and trouble; but when accompanied with the right of appearing before the Lord their God and Redeemer, to whom they were indebted for everything they had and were, it was one that no other nation enjoyed. For though they had their joyous festivals, these festivals bore the same relation to those of Israel, as the dead and worthless gods of the heathen to the living and almighty God of Israel.
Of the three feasts at which Israel was to appear before Jehovah, the feast of Mazzoth, or unleavened bread, is referred to as already instituted, by the words " as I have commanded thee,^^ and ''at the appointed time of the eanng month,^^ which point back to chaps, xii. and xiii.; and all that is added here is, ''ye shall not appear before My face empty T " Not empty: " i.e.' not with empty hands, but with sacrificial gifts, answering to the blessing given by the Lord (Deut. xvi. 16, 17). These gifts were devoted partly to the general sacrifices of the feast, and partly to the burnt and peace-offerings which were brought by different individuals to the feasts, and applied to the sacrificial meals (Num. xxviii. and xxix.). This command, which related to all the feasts, and therefore is mentioned at the very outset in connection with the feast of unleaven'fed bread, did indeed impose a duty upon Israel, but such a duty as became a source of blessing to all who performed it. The gifts demanded by God were the tribute, it is true, which the Israelites paid to their God-King, just as all Eastern nations are required to bring presents when appearing in the presence of their kings; but they were only gifts from God's own blessing, a portion of that which He had bestowed in rich abundance, and they were offered to
God in such a way that the offerer was thereby more and more confirmed in the rights of covenant fellowship. The other two festivals are mentioned here for the first time, and the details are more particularly determined afterwards in Lev. xxiii. 15 sqq., and Num. xxviii. 26 sqq. One was called the feast of Harvest^ " of the first-fruits of thy labours which thou hast sown in the field," i.e. of thy fi'eld-labour. According to the subsequent arrangements, the first of the field-produce was to be offered to God, not the first grains of the ripe corn, but the first loaves of bread of white or wheaten fiour made from the new corn (Lev. xxiii. 17 sqq.). In chap, xxxiv. 22 it is called the " feast of Weeks," because, according to Lev. xxiii. 15, 16, Deut. xvi. 9, it was to be kept seven weeks after the feast of Mazzoth; and the " feast of the first-fruits of wheat harvest," because the loaves of first-fruits to be offered w^ere to be made of wheaten flour. The other of these feasts, i.e. the third in the year, is called '^ the feast of Ingathering^ at the end of the year, in the gathering in of thy labours out of the field." This general and indefinite allusion to time was quite sufficient for the preliminary institution of the feast. In the more minute directions respecting the feasts given in Lev. xxiii. 34, Num. xxix. 12, it is fixed for the fifteenth day of the seventh month, and placed on an equality with the feast of Mazzoth as a seven days' festival, n^l^n rixvn does not mean after the close of the year, finito anno, any more than the corresponding expression in chap, xxxiv. 22, n^^'n riDlpn^ signifies at the turning of the year. The year referred to here was the so-called civil year, which began with the preparation of the ground for the harvest-sowing, and ended when all the fruits of the field and garden had been gathered in. No particular day was fixed for its commencement, nor was there any new year's festival; and even after the beginning of the earing month had been fixed upon for the commencement of the year (chap. xii. 2), this still remained in force, so far as all civil matters connected with the sowing and harvest were concerned; though there is no evidence that a double reckoning was carried on at the same time, or that a civil reckoning existed side by side with the religious. '^Sp^{Zl does not mean, " when thou hast gathered," postquam collegisti; for ^ does not stand for "int?, nor has the infinitive the force of the preterite. On the contrary, the expression " at thy gathering in," i.e. when thou gatherest in, is kept indefinite both here and in Lev. xxiii. 39, where the month and days in which this feast was to be kept are distinctly pointed out; and also in Deut. xvi. 13, in order that the time for the feast might not be made absolutely dependent upon the complete termination of the gathering in, although as a rule it would be almost over. The gathering in of '^ tliT/ labours out of the JieW^ is not to be restricted to the vintage and gathering of fruits: this is evident not only from the expression " out of the field," which points to field-produce, but also from the clause in Deut. xvi. 13, "gathering of the floor and wine-press," which shows clearly that the words refer to the gathering in of the whole of the year's produce of corn, fruit, oil, and wine. — Ver. 17. " Three times in the year'*'* (i.e., according to ver. 14 and Deut. xvi. 16, at the three feasts just mentioned) "aZZ thy males shall appear before the face of the Lord JehovahP The command to appear, i.e, to make a pilgrimage to the sanctuary, was restricted to the male members of the nation, probably to those above 20 years of age, who had been included in the census (Num. i. 3). But this did not prohibit the inclusion of women and boys (cf. 1 Sam. i. 3 sqq., and Luke ii. 41 sqq.).
Vers. 18, 19. The blessing attending their appearing before the Lord was dependent upon the feasts being kept in the proper way, by the observance of the three rules laid down in vers. 18 and 19. " Thou shalt not offer the blood of My sacrifice upon leavened breadJ' ^V upon, as in chap. xii. 8, denoting the basis upon which the sacrifice was offered. The meaning has been correctly given by the early commentators, viz. " as long as there is any leavened bread in your houses," or " until the leaven has been entirely removed from your houses." The reference made here to the removal of leaven, and the expression " blood of My sacrifice," both point to the paschal lamb, which was regarded as the sacrifice of Jehovah Kar e^oyfjv, on account of its great importance. Onkelos gives this explanation: " My Passover" for "My sacrifice." — '^ Neither shall the fat of My feast remain Qy^ to pass the night) until the morning^ " The fat of My feast" does not mean the fat of My festal sacrifice, for in, a feast, is not used for the sacrifice offered at the feast; it signifies rather the best of My fea^, i.e, the paschal sacrifice, as we may see from chap, xxxiv. 25, where " the sacrifice of the feast of the Passover " is given as the explanation of " the fat of My feast." As the paschal sacrifice was the sacrifice of Jehovah par excellence, so the feast of the Passover was the feast of Jehovah par excellence. The expression " fat of My feast " is not to be understood as referring at all to the fat of the lamb, which was burned upon the altar in the case of the expiatory and whole offerings; for there could have been no necessity for the injunction not to keep this till the morning, inasmuch as those parts of every sacrifice which were set apart for the altar were burned immediately after the sprinkling of the blood. The allusion is to the flesh of the paschal lamb, which was eaten in the night before daybreak, after which anything that remained was to be burned. '^P3'^!|? (without the article) till morning j has the same meaning as"J53p "for the (following) morning" in chap. xxxiv. 25. — The next command in ver. 19a nas reference to the feast of Harvest, or feast of Weeks. In " the first-fruits of thy land " there is an unmistakeable allusion to " the first-fruits of thy labours" in ver. 16. It is true the words, "the first of the first-fruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of the Lord thy God," are so general in their character, that we can hardly restrict them to the wave-loaves to be offered as firstfruits at the feast of Weeks, but must interpret them as referring to all the first-fruits, which they had already been commanded not to delay to offer (chap. xxii. 29), and the presentation of which is minutely prescribed in Num. xviii. 12, 13, and Deut. xxvi. 2-11, — including therefore the sheaf of barley to be offered in the second day of the feast of unleavened bread (Lev. xxiii. 9 sqq.). At the same time the reference to the feast of Weeks is certainly to be retained, inasmuch as this feast was an express admonition to Israel, to offer the first hi the fruits of the Lord. In the expression ^1^33 n^tJ'&?lj the latter might be understood as explanatory of the former and in apposition to it, since they are both of them applied to the first-fruits of the soil {yid. Deut. xxvi. 2, 10, and Num. xviii. 13). But as ^''K^Kl could hardly need any explanation in this connection, the partitive sense is to be preferred; though it is difficult to decide whether " the first of the first-fruits " signifies the first selection from the fruits that had grown, ripened, and been gathered first, — that is to say, not nierely of the entire harvest, but of every separate production of the field and soil, according to the rendering of the LXX.a7ra/5;)^a?
T(t)v TTpcoToyevvij/jbdrov Trj<i 77)9, — or whether the word fT'^'^^ll is used figuratively, and signifies the best of the first-fruits. There is no force in the objection offered to the former view, that " in no other case in which the offering of first-fruits generally is spoken of, is one particular portion represented as holy to Jehovah, but the first-fruits themselves are that portion of the entire harvest which was holy to Jehovah." For, apart from Num. xviii. 12, where a different rendering is sometimes given to n''ti^&<1, the expression ri"'tJ^&5']p in Deut. xxvi. 2 shows unmistakeably that only a portion of the first of all the fruit of the ground had to be offered to the Lord. On the other hand, this view is considerably strengthened by the fact, that whilst "^13?^ D''1^33 signify those fruits which ripened first, i.e. earliest, ^^55^^11 is used to denote the airap-^rj^ the first portion or first selection from the whole, not only in Deut. xxvi. 2, 10, but also in Lev. xxiii. 10, and most probably in Num. xviii. 12 as well. — Now if these directions do not refer either exclusively or specially to the loaves of first-fruits of the feast of Weeks, the opinion which has prevailed from the time of Aharhanel to that of Knohel, that the following command, " Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother s milk," refers to the feast of Ingathering, is deprived of its principal support. And any such allusion is rendered very questionable by the fact, that' in Deut. xiv. 21, where this command is repeated, it is appended to the prohibition against eating the flesh of an animal that had been torn to pieces. Very different explanations have been given to the command. In the Targum, Mishnahy etc., it is regarded as a general prohibition against eating flesh prepared with milk. Luther and others suppose it to refer to the cooking of the kid, before it has been weaned from its mother's milk. But the actual reference is to the cooking of a kid in the milk of its own mother, as indicating a contempt of the relation which God has established and sanctified between parent and young, and thus subverting the divine ordinances. As kids were a very favourite food (Gen. xxvii. 9, 14; Judg. vi. 19, xiii. 15; 1 Sam. xvi. 20), it is very likely that by way of improving the flavour they were sometimes cooked in milk. According to Aben Ezra and Aharhanelj this was a custom adopted by the Ishmaelites; and at the present day the Arabs are in the habit of cooking lamb in sour milk. A restriction is placed upon this custom in the prohibition before us, but there is no intention to prevent the introduction of a superstitious usage customary at the sacrificial meals of other nations, which Spencer and Knohel have sought to establish as at all events probable, though without any definite historical proofs, and for the most part on the strength of farfetched analogies.
— The declaration of the rights conferred by Jehovah upon His people is closed by promises, through which, on the one hand, God insured to the nation the gifts and benefits involved in their rights, and, on the other hand, sought to promote that willingness and love which were indispensable to the fulfilment of the duties incumbent upon every individual in consequence of the rights conferred upon them. These promises secured to the people not only the protection and help of God during their journey through the desert, and in the conquest of Canaan, but also preservation and prosperity when they had taken possession of the land. — Yer. 20. Jehovah would send an angel before them, who should guard them on the way from injury and destruction, and bring them to the place prepared for them, i.e. to Canaan. The name of Jehovah was in this angel (ver. 21), that is to say, Jehovah revealed Himself in him; and hence he is called in chap, xxxiii. 15, 16, the face oT Jehovah, because the essential nature of Jehovah was manifested in him. This angel was not a created spirit, therefore, but the manifestation of Jehovah Himself, who went before them in the pillar of cloud and fire, to guide and to defend them (chap. xiii. 21). But because it was Jehovah who was guiding His people in the person of the angel, He demanded unconditional obedience (ver. 21), and if they provoked Him ("i^l]) for "ip^, see chap. xiii. 18) by disobedience. He would not pardon their transgression; but if they followed Him and hearkened to His voice. He would be an enemy to their enemies, and an adversary to their adversaries (ver. 22). And when the angel of the Lord had brought them to the Canaan ites and exterminated the latter, Israel was still to yield the same obedience, by not serving the gods of the Canaanites, or doing after their works, i.e. by not making any idolatrous images, but destroying them (these works), and smiting to pieces the pillars of their idolatrous worship (nbSfD does not mean statues erected as idols^ but memorial stones or columns dedicated to idols: see my comm. on 1 Kings xiv. 23), and serving Jehovah alone. Then would He bless them in the land with bountiful provision, health, fruitfulness, and length of life (vers. 23-26). " Bread and water" are named, as being the provisions which are indispensable to the maintenance of life, as in Isa. iii. 1, xxx. 20, xxxiii. 16. The taking away of " sickness" (cf. XV. 26) implied the removal of everything that could endanger life. The absence of anything that miscarried, or was barren, insured the continuance and increase of the nation; and the promise that their days should be fulfilled, i.e. that they should not be liable to a premature death (cf. Isa. Ixv. 20), was a pledge of their well-being. — Yers. 27 sqq. But the most important thing of all for Israel was the previous conquest of the promised land. And in this God gave it a special promise of His almighty aid. " I will send My fear before theer This fear was to be the result of the terrible acts of God performed on behalf of Israel, the rumour of which would spread before them and fill their enemies with fear and trembling (cf. chap. xv. 14 sqq.; Deut. ii. 25; and Josh. ii. 11, where the beginning of the fulfilment is described), throwing into confusion and putting to flight every people against whom (DHB — "i^^.) Israel came. ^'^.V n''i<"ns pi to give the enemy to the neck, Le, to cause him to turn his back, or flee (cf. Ps. xviii. 41, xxi. 13; Josh. vii. 8, 12). 1 v^:. in the direction towards thee. — Yer. 28. In addition to the fear of God, hornets ("^Vl^fn construed as a generic word with the collective article), a very large species of wasp, that was greatly dreaded both by man and beast on account of the acuteness of its sting, should come and drive out the Canaanites, of whom three tribes are mentioned instar omnium, from before the Israelites. Although it is true that Julian (hist. anim. 11, 28) relates that the Phaselians, who dwelt near the Solymites, and therefore probably belonged to the Canaanites, were driven out of their country by wasps, and Bochart (Hieroz. iii. pp. 409 sqq.) has collected together accounts of different tribes that have been frightened away from their possessions by frogs, mice, and other vermin, " the sending of hornets before the Israelites" is hardly to be taken literally, not only because there is not a word in the book of Joshua about the Canaanites being overcome and exterminated in any such w^ay, but chiefly on account of Josh, xxiv, 12, w^here Joshua says that
God sent the hornet before them, and drove out the two kings of the Amorites, referring thereby to their defeat and destruction by the Israelites through the miraculous interposition of God, and thus placing the figurative use of the term hornet beyond the possibility of doubt. These hornets, however, which are very aptly described in Wisdom xii. 8, on the basis of this passage, as 7r/3oSpoyLtou9, the pioneers of the army of Jehovah, do not denote merely varii generis mala, as Rosenmidler supposes, but acerrimos timoris aculeos^ quihus quodammodo volantibus rumoribus pungehantur, ut fugerent (Augustine, qucest 27 in Jos.). If the fear of God which fell upon the Canaanites threw them into such confusion and helpless despair, that they could not stand before Israel, but turned their backs towards them, the stings of alarm which foUow^ed this fear would completely drive them away. Nevertheless God would not drive them away at once, " in one year," lest the land should become a desert for want of men to cultivate it, and the wild beasts should multipl}^ against Israel; in other words, lest the beasts of prey should gain the upper hand and endanger the lives of man and beast (Lev. xxvi. 22; Ezek. xiv. 15, 21), which actually was the case after the carrying away of the ten tribes (2 Kings xvii. 25, 26). He would drive them out by degrees (pVO Dyp^ only used here and in Deut. vii. 22), until Israel was sufficiently increased to take possession of the land, i.e, to occupy the whole of the country. This promise was so far fulfilled, according to the books of Joshua and Judges, that after the subjugation of the Canaanites in the south and north of the land, when all the kings who fought against Israel had been smitten and slain and their cities captured, the entire land was divided among the tribes of Israel, in order that they might exterminate the remaining Canaanites, and take possession of those portions of the land that had not yet been conquered (Josh. xiii. 1-7). But the different tribes soon became weary of the task of exterminating the Canaanites, and began to enter into alliance with them, and were led astray by them to the worship of idols; whereT;ipon God punished them by withdrawing His assistance, and they were oppressed and humiliated by the Canaanites because of their apostasy from the Lord (Judg. i. and ii.).
Vers. 31 sqq. The divine promise closes with a general indication of the boundaries of the land, whose inhabitants Jehovah would give up to the Israelites to drive them out, and with a warning against forming alliances with them and their gods, lest they should lead Israel astray to sin, and thus become a snare to it. On the basis of the promise in Gen. xv. 18, certain grand and prominent points are mentioned, as constituting the boundaries towards both the east and west. On the west the boundary extended from the Red Sea (see chap. xiii. 18) to the sea of the Philistines, or Mediterranean Sea, the south-eastern shore of which was inhabited by the Philistines; and on the east from the desert, i.e., according to Deut. xi. 24, the desert of Arabia, to the river (Euphrates). The poetic suffix ^O affixed to ^^P, answers to the elevated oratorical style. Making a covenant with them and their gods would imply the recognition and toleration of them, and, with the sinful tendencies of Israel, w^ould be inevitably followed by the worship of idols. The first ""^ in ver. 33 signifies if; the second, imoy verily, and serves as an energetic introduction to the apodosls. ^P}^, a snare (vid, chap. x. 7); here a cause of destruction. Inasmuch as apostasy from God is Invariably followed by punishment (Judg. il. 3).
Chap. xxiv. 1, 2. These two verses form part of the address of God In chap. xx. 22-xxiii. 33; for "i^N nro b^] (" hut to Moses He saidC^) cannot be the commencement of a fresh address, which would necessarily require '^ ^^ ^i^^*] (cf. ver. 12, chap. xlx. 21, XX. 22). The turn given to the expression 'O?«1 presupposes that God had already spoken to others, or that what had been said before related not to Moses himself, but to other persons. But this cannot be affirmed of the decalogue, which applied to Moses quite as much as to the entire nation (a sufficient refutation of KnoheVs assertion, that these verses are a continuation of chap. xlx. 20-25, and are linked on to the decalogue), but only of the address concerning the mishpatim, or " rights," which commences with chap. xx. 22, and, according to chap. XX. 22 and xxi. 1, was Intended for the nation, and addressed to it, even though it was through the medium of Moses. What God said to the people as establishing Its rights, is here followed by what He said to Moses himself, namely, that he was to go up to Jehovah, along with Aaron, Nadab, Ablhu, and seventy elders. At the same time, it is of course implied that Moses, who had ascended the mountain with Aaron alone (chap.
XX. 21), was first of all to go down again and repeat to the people the " rights^* which God had communicated to him, and only when this had been done, to ascend again with the persons named. According to vers. 3 and 12 (? 9), this is what Moses really did. But Moses alone was to go near to Jehovah: the others were to worship afar off, and the people were not to come up at all.
The ceremony described in vers. 3-11 is called " the covenant which Jehovah made with Israel" (ver. 8). It was opened by Moses, who recited to the people " all the words of JeJiovah^^ (i.e. not the decalogue, for the people had heard this directly from the mouth of God Himself, but the words in chap. xx. 22-26), and " all the rights^^ (chap, xxi.-xxiii.); whereupon the people answered unanimously pni< i'^P), " All the words which Jehovah hath spoken will we doT This constituted the preparation for the conclusion of the covenant. It was necessarv that the people should not only know what the Lord imposed upon them in the covenant about to be made with them, and what He promised them, but that they should also declare their willingness to perform what was imposed upon them. The covenant itself was commenced by Moses writing all the words of Jehovah in " the hook of the covenant*^ (vers. 4 and 7), for the purpose of preserving them in an official record. The next day, early in the morning, he built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and erected twelve boundary-stones or pillars for the twelve tribes, most likely round about the altar and at some distance from it, so as to prepare the soil upon which Jehovah was about to enter into union with the twelve tribes. As the altar indicated the presence of Jehovah, being the place where the Lord would come to His people to bless them (chap. xx. 24), so the twelve pillars, or boundary-stones, did not serve as mere memorials of the conclusion of the covenant, but were to indicate the place of the twelve tribes, and represent their presence also. — Yer. 5. After the foundation and soil had been thus prepared in the place of sacrifice, for the fellowship which Jehovah was about to establish with His people; Moses sent young men of the children of Israel to prepare the sacrifices, and directed them to offer burnt-offering and sacrifice slain-offerings, viz. ^''P^^, " peaceofferings (see at Lev. iii. 1) for JeJiovaJiy^ for wliicli purpose C3"'")Q, bullocks, or young oxen, were used. The young men were not first-born sons, who had officiated as priests previous to the institution of the Levitical priesthood, according to the natural right of primogeniture, as OnJcelos supposes; nor were they the sons of Aaron, as Augustine maintains: they simply acted as servants of Moses; and the priestly duty of sprinkling the blood Avas performed by him as the mediator of the covenant. It is merely as young men, therefore, i.e, as strong and active, that they are introduced in this place, and not as representatives of the nation, " by whom the sacrifice was presented, and whose attitude resembled that of a youth just ready to enter upon his course" ' (Kurtz, O. C. iii. 143). For, as Oehler says, " this was not a sacrifice presented by the nation on its own account. The primary object was to establish that fellowship, by virtue of which it could draw near to Jehovah in sacrifice. Moreover, according to vers. 1 and 9, the nation possessed its proper representatives in the seventy elders" (Herzog's Cyclopaedia). But even though these sacrifices were not offered by the representatives of the nation, and for this very reason Moses selected young men from among the people to act as servants at this ceremony, they had so far a substitutionary position, that in their persons the nation was received into fellowship with God by means of the sprinkling of the blood, which was performed in a peculiar manner, to suit the unique design of this sacrificial ceremony. — Vers. 6-8. The blood was divided into two parts. One half was swung by!Moses upon the altar (P")J to swing, shake, or pour out of the vessel, in distinction from njn to sprinkle); the other half he put into basins, and after he had read the book of the covenant to the people, and they had promised to do and follow all the words of Jehovah, he sprinkled it upon the people with these words: " Beliold the Hood of the covenant, which Jehovah has made with you over all these wordsT As several animals were slaughtered, and all of them young oxen, there must have been a considerable quantity of blood obtained, so that the one half would fill several basins, and many persons might be sprinkled with it as it was being swung about. The division of the blood had reference to the two parties to the covenant, who were to be brought by the covenant into a living unity; but it had no connection whatever with the heathen customs adduced by Bdlir and JCnohel, in which the parties to a treaty mixed their own blood together. For this was not a mixture of different kinds of blood, but it was a division of one blood, and that sacrificial blood, in w^hich animal life was offered instead of human life, making expiation as a pure life for sinful man, and by virtue of this expiation restoring the fellowship between God and man which had been destroyed by sin. But the sacrificial blood itself only acquired this signification through the sprinkling or swinging upon the altar, by virtue of which the human soul was received, in the soul of the animal sacrificed for man, into the fellowship of the divine grace manifested upon the altar, in order that, through the power of this sin-forgiving and sin-destroying grace, it might be sanctified to a new and holy life. In this way the sacrificial blood acquired the signification of a vital principle endued with the power of divine grace; and this was communicated to the people by means of the sprinkling of the blood. As the only reason for dividing the sacrificial blood into two parts was, that the blood sprinkled upon the altar could not be taken off again and sprinkled upon the people; the two halves of the blood are to be regarded as one blood, which was first of all sprinkled upon the altar, and then upon the people. In the blood sprinkled upon the altar, the natural life of the people was given up to God, as a life that had passed through death, to be pervaded by His grace; and then through the sprinkling upon the people it was restored to them again, as a life renewed by the grace of God. In this way the blood not only became a bond of union between Jehovah and His people, but as the blood of the covenant, it became a vital power, holy and divine, uniting Israel and its God; and the sprinkling of the people with this blood was an actual renewal of life, a transposition of Israel into the kingdom of God, in which it was filled with the powers of God's spirit of grace, and sanctified into a kingdom of priests, a holy nation of Jehovah (chap. xix. 6). And this covenant was made " upon all the words" which Jehovah had spoken, and the people had promised to observe. Consequently it had for its foundation the divine law and right, as the rule of life for Israel.
Vers. 9-11. Through their consecration with the blood of the covenant, the Israelites were qualified to ascend the mountain, and there behold the God of Israel and celebrate the covenant meal; of course, not the whole of the people, for that would have been impracticable on physical grounds, but the nation in the persons of its representatives, viz. the seventy elders, with Aaron and his two eldest sons. The fact that the latter were summoned aloncr with the elders had reference to their future election to tlie priesthood, the bearers of which were to occupy the position of mediators between Jehovah and the nation, an office for which this was a preparation. The reason for choosing seventy out of the whole body of elders (ver. 3) is to be found in the historical and symbolical significance of this number (see vol. i. p. 374). '" They saw the God of IsraeW This title is very appropriately given to Jehovah here, because He, the God of the fathers, had become in truth the God of Israel through the covenant just made. We must not go beyond the limits drawn in chap, xxxiii. 20-23 in our conceptions of what constituted the sight (njrij ver. 11) of God; at the same time we must regard it as a vision of God in some form of manifestation which rendered the divine nature discernible to the human eye. Nothing is said as to the form in which God manifested Himself. This silence, however, is not intended " to indicate the imperfection of their sight of God," as Baumgarten affirms, nor is it to be explained, as Hofmann supposes, on the ground that " what they saw differed from what the people had constantly before their eyes simply in this respect, that after they had entered the darkness, which enveloped the mountain that burned as it were with fire at its summit, the fiery sign separated from the cloud, and assumed a shape, beneath which it was bright and clear, as an image of untroubled bliss." The words are evidently intended to affirm something more than, that they saw the fiery form in which God manifested Himself to the people, and that whilst the fire was ordinarily enveloped in a cloud, they saw it upon the mountain without the cloud. For, since Moses saw the form (nj^iori) of Jehovah (Num. xii. 8), we may fairly conclude, notwithstanding the fact that, according to ver. 2, the representatives of the nation were not to draw near to Jehovah, and without any danger of contradicting Deut. iv. 12 and 15, that they also saw a form of God. Only this form is not described, in order that no encouragement might be given to the inclination of the people to make likenesses of Jehovah. Thus we find that Isaiah gives no description of the form in which he saw the Lord sitting upon a high and lofty throne (Isa. vi. 1). Ezekiel is the first to describe the form of Jehovah which he saw in the vision, " as the appearance of a man" (Ezek. i. 26; compare Dan. vii. 9 and 13). " And there was under His feet as it were work of clear sapphire (n337j from njnp whiteness, clearness, not from njnp a brick^), and as the material (Dvy body, substance) of heaven irt brillianci/y^ — to indicate that the God of Israel was enthroned above the lieaven in super-terrestrial glory and undisturbed blessedness. And God was willing that His people should share in this blessedness, for " He laid not His hand upon the nobles of Israel,^^ Le, did not attack them. " They saw God, and did eat and drinky" Le, they celebrated thus near to Him the sacrificial meal of the peaceofferings, which had been sacrificed at the conclusion of the covenant, and received in this covenant meal a foretaste of the precious and glorious gifts with which God would endow and refresh His redeemed people in His kingdom. As the promise in chap. xix. 5, 6, with which God opened the way for the covenant at Sinai, set clearly before the nation that had been rescued from Egypt the ultimate goal of its divine calling; so this termination of the ceremony was intended to give to the nation, in the persons of its representatives, a tangible pledge of the glory of the goal that was set before it. The sight of the God of Israel was a foretaste of the blessedness of the sight of God in eternity, and the covenant meal upon the mountain before the face of God was a type of the marriage supper of the Lamb, to w^hich the Lord will call, and at which He will present His perfected Church in the day of the full revelation of His glory (E-ev. xix. 7-9).
Yers. 12-18 prepare the way for the subsequent revelation recorded in chap, xxv.-xxxi., which Moses received concerning the erection of the sanctuary. At the conclusion of the covenant meal, the representatives of the nation left the mountain along with Moses. This is not expressly stated, indeed; since it followed as a matter of course that they returned to the camp, when the festival for which God had called them up was concluded. A command was then issued again to Moses to ascend the mountain, and remain there (Q^'T.P!!)? for He was about to give him the tables of stone, with (1 as in Gen. iii. 24) the law and commandments, which He had written for their instruction
(cf. xxxi. 18). — Vers. 13, 14. When Moses was preparing to ascend the mountain with his servant Joshua (yid, xvii. 9), he ordered the elders to remain in the camp (^13^ i.e. where they were) till their return, and appointed Aaron and Hur (vid, xvii. 10) as administrators of justice in case of any disputes occurring among the people. C)"'')n"i /V?"''P; whoever has matters, matters of dispute (on this meaning of /V3 see Gen. xxxvii. 19). — Vers. 15—17. When he ascended the mountain, upon which the glory of Jehovah dwelt, it was covered for six days with the cloud, and the glory itself appeared to the Israelites in the camp below like devouring fire (cf. xix. 16); and on the seventh day He called Moses into the cloud. Whether Joshua followed him we are not told; but it is evident from chap, xxxii. 17 that he was with- him on the mountain, though, judging from ver. 2 and chap, xxxiii. 11, he would not go into the immediate presence of God. — Ver. 18. " And Moses was on the mountain forty days and forty nights,^^ including the six days of waiting, — the whole time without eating and drinking (Deut. ix. 9). The number forty was certainly significant, since it was not only repeated on the occasion of his second protracted stay upon Mount Sinai (xxxiv. 28; Deut. ix. 18), but occurred again in the forty days of Elijah's journey to Horeb the mount of God in the strength of the food received from the angel (1 Kings xix. 8), and in the fasting of Jesus at the time of His temptation (Matt. iv. 2; Luke iv. 2), and even appears to have been significant in the forty years of Israel's wandering in the desert (Deut. viii. 2). In all these cases the number refers to a period of temptation, of the trial of faith, as well as to a period of the strengthening of faith through the miraculous support bestowed by God.
To give a definite external form to the covenant concluded with His people, and construct a visible bond of fellowship in which He might manifest Himself to the people and they might draw near to Him as their God, Jehovah told Moses that the Israelites were to erect Him a sanctuary, that He might dwell in the midst of them (chap. xxv. 8). The construction and arrangement of this sanctuary were determined in all respects by
God Himself, who showed to Moses, when upon the mountain, a pattern of the dwelling and its furniture, and prescribed with great minuteness both the form and materials of all the different parts of the sanctuary and all the things required for the sacred service. If the sanctuary was to answer its purpose, the erection of it could not be left to the inventive faculty of any man whatever, but must proceed from Him, who was there to manifest Himself to the nation, as the Holy One, in righteousness and grace. The people could only carry out what God appointed, and could only fulfil their covenant duty, by the readiness with which they supplied the materials required for the erection of the sanctuary and completed the work with their own hands. The divine directions extended to all the details, because they were all of importance in relation to the design of God. The account therefore is so elaborate, that it contains a description not only of the directions of God with reference to the whole and every separate part (chap, xxv.-xxxi.), but also of the execution of the work in all its details (chap, xxxv.-xl.).
The following is the plan upon which this section is arranged. After the command of God to the people to offer gifts for the sanctuary about to be erected, which forms the introduction to the whole (chap. xxv. 1-9), the further directions commence with a description of the ark of the covenant, which Jehovah had appointed as His throne in the sanctuary, that is to say, as it were, with the sanctuary in the sanctuary (chap. xxv. 10-22). Then follow — (1) the table of shew-bread and the golden candlestick (vers. 23-40), as the two things by means of which the continual communion of Israel with Jehovah was to be maintained; (2) the construction of the dwelling, with an account of the position to be occupied by the three things already named (chap, xxvi.); (3) the altar of burnt-offering, together with the court which was to surround the holy dwelling (chap, xxvii. 1-19). This is immediately followed by the command respecting the management of the candlestick (vers. 20, 21), which prepares the way for an account of the institution of the priesthood, and the investiture and consecration of the priests (chap, xxviii. and xxix.), and by the directions as to the altar of incense, and the service to be performed at it (chap. xxx. 1—10); after which, there only remain a few subordinate instructions to complete the whole (chap. xxx. 11-xxxi. 17). "The description of the entire sanctuary commences, tlierefore/' as Ranke has aptly observed, " with the ark of the law, tlie })lace of the manifestation of Jehovah, and terminates with the altar of incense, which stood immediately in front of it." The dwelling was erected round Jehovah's seat, and round this the court. The priests first of all presented the sacrifices upon the altar of burntoffering, and then proceeded into the holy place and drew near to Jehovah. The highest act in the daily service of the priests was evidently this standing before Jehovah at the altar of incense, which w^as only separated by the curtain from the most holy place. Chap. XXV. 1-9 (cf. chap. xxxv. 1-9). The Israelites were to bring to the Lord a heave-offering (nDnin^ from D^l, a gift lifted, or heaved by a man from his own property to present to the Lord; see at Lev. ii. 9), " on the part of every one ivJiom his heart drove^^ i.e. whose heart was willing (cf. i^P ^''13 chap. xxxv. 5, 22): viz. gold, silver, brass, etc. — Yer. 4. ^?5^, vclklvOo^, purple of a dark blue shade, approaching black rather than bright blue. \'or\^, iropcf^vpa (Chald. \)tr\^, 2 Chron. ii. 6; Dan. V, 7, 16; — Sanskrit, rdgaman or rdgavanj colore ruhro prceditus), true purple of a dark red colour. ""^^ ^Pr*^^, literally the crimson prepared from the dead bodies and nests of the glowworm,^ then the scarlet-red purple, or crimson. W, /Svacro^j from ^^^ to be white, a fine white cotton fabric, not linen, muslin, or net. D^^^ goats, here goats' hair {jpi')(e<i alfyelai, LXX.).— Yer. 5. D-'D^ND wh'^ nn'y rams' skins reddened, i.e.
dyed red. tJ'nri is either the seal, phoca, or else, as this is not known to exist in the Arabian Gulf, the (f)a)Ko^ = (pco/caiva of the ancients, as Knohel supposes, or /c^ro? OdXdacnov 6/jlolov Se\(j)lvcj the sea-cow (Manati, Halicora), which is found in the Red Sea, and has a skin that is admirably adapted for sandals. Hesychius supposes it to have been the latter, w^hich is probably the same as the large fish Tun or Atum, that is caught in the Red Sea, and belongs to the same species as the Halicora (^Robinson, Pal. i. p. 170); as its skin is also used by the Bedouin Arabs for making sandals (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 861). In the Manati the upper skin differs from the under; the former being larger, thicker, and coarser than the latter, which is only two lines in thickness and very tough, so that the skin would be well adapted either for the thick covering of tents or for the finer kinds of ornamental sandals (Ezek. xvi. 10). D''tpK?* ''Vy acaciawood. ^^^^ for '^p?^, the true acacia (^acacia vera\ which grows in Egypt and on the Arabian peninsula into a tree of the size of a nut-tree, or even larger;^ the only tree in Arabia deserta from which planks could be cut, and the wood of which is very light and yet very durable. — Yer. 6. Oil for the candlestick (see at chap, xxvii. 20). Q''?pb^3 perfumes, spices for the anointing oil (see at chap. xxx. 22 sqq.), and for the incense (D'^rsDHj lit, the scents, because the materials of which it was composed were not all of them fragrant; see at chap. xxx. 34 sqq.). — Yer. 7. Lastly, precious stones, Dnb^ ''.3^t? probably beryls (see at Gen. ii. 12), for the ephod (chap, xxviii. 9), and ^^''Kpp ''jnN, lit, stones of filling, i,e. jewels that are set (see chap, xxviii. 16 sqq.). On ephod C^^NI), see at chap, xxviii. 6; and on ]^^, at chap, xxviii. 15. The precious stones were presented by the princes of the congregation (chap. xxxv. 27).
Yers. 8, 9. With these freewill-offerings they were to make the Lord a sanctuary, that He might dwell in the midst of them (see at ver. 22). " According to all that I let thee see (show thee), the pattern of the dwelling and the pattern of all its furniture, so shall ye make it^ The participle n5<"iD does not refer to the past; and there is nothing to indicate that it does, either in ver. 40,
* See Ahdallatifs MerkwUrdigkeiten Aegyptens, and Rosenmuller, Althk. iv. i. pp. 278-9. This genuine acacia, Sont^ must not be confounded, according to Robinson (Pal. 2, 350), with the Acacia gumnifera {Talk). Seetzen also makes a distinction between the Thollhh, the Szont of the Egyptians, and the Szeidl^ and between an acacia which produces gum and one which does not.; but he also observes that the same tree is called both TJiollhh and Szeidl in different places. He then goes on to say that he did not find a single tree large enough to furnish planks of ten cubits in length and one and a half in breadth for the construction of the ark (he means, of the tabernacle), and he therefore conjectures that the Israelites may have gone to Egypt for the materials with which to build the tabernacle. But he has overlooked the fact, that it is not stated in the text of the Bible that the boards of the tabernacle, which were a eubit and a half in breadth, were cut from one plank of the breadth named; and also that the trees in the valleys of the peninsula of Sinai are being more and more sacrificed to the charcoal trade of the Bedouin Arabs (see p. 71), and therefore that no conclusion can be drawn from the present condition of the trees as to what they were in the far distant antiquity.
where " in the mount " occurs, or in the use of the preterite in chap. xxvi. 30, xxvii. 8. It does not follow from the expression, " which is showed thee in the mount" that Moses had already left the mountain and returned to the camp; and the use of tha preterite in the passage? last named may be simply explained, either on the supposition that the sight of the pattern or model of the whole building and its component parts preceded the description of the different things required for the completion of the building, or that the instructions to make the different parts in such and such a way, pointed to a time when the sight of the model really belonged to the past. On the other hand, the model for the building could not well be shown to Moses, before he had been told that the gifts to be made by the people were to be devoted to the building of a sanctuary. ^''^^^, from n:3 to build, lit. a building, then a figure of anything, a copy or representation of different things, Deut. iv. 17 sqq.; a drawing or sketch, 2 Kings xvi. 10: it never means the original, not even in Ps. cxliv. 12, as Delitzsch supposes (see his Com. on Heb. viii. 5)* In such passages as 1 Chron. xxviii. 11, 12, 19, where it may be rendered plan, it does not signify an original, but simply means a model or drawing, founded upon an idea, or taken from some existing object, according to which a building was to be constructed. Still less can the object connected with n"'jnn in the genitive be understood as referring to the original, from which the n^^nn was taken; so that we cannot follow the Rabbins in their interpretation of this passage, as affirming that the heavenly originals of the tabernacle and its f]Lirniture had been shown to Moses in a vision upon the mountain. What was shown to him was simply a picture or model of the earthly tabernacle and its furniture, which were to be made by him. Both Acts vii. 44 and Heb. viii. 5 are perfectly reconcilable with this interpretation of our verse, which is the only one that can be grammatically sustained. The words of Stephen, that Moses was to make the tabernacle Kara rov tvttov ov €copdK€c, " according to the fashion that he had seen," are so indefinite, that the text of Exodus must be adduced to explain them. And when the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews cites the words, " See that thou make all things Kara rov tvttov tov hei'^OivTa aoi iv TU) opeL^^ (according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount), from ver. 40 of this chapter, as a proof the
Levitical priests only served the type and shadow of heavenly things {rSiv eTrovpavicov); it is true, his words may be understood as showing that he regarded the earthly tabernacle with all its arrangements as only the counterpart and copy of a heavenly original. But this interpretation is neither necessary nor well founded. For although the author, by following the Sept., in which Dn^^nnn is rendered Kara rov tvttov^ the suffix being dropped, leaves it just a possible thing to understand the tutto? shown to Moses as denoting a heavenly tabernacle (or temple); yet he has shown very clearly that this was not his own view, when he explains the " patterns of things in the heavens " (i/ttoheir^fxara roiv iv ovpavoL<;) and " the true " things (ra aXTjOtvd) of both the tabernacle and its furniture as denoting the ^' heaven^* (ovpavos:) into which Christ had entered, and not any temple in heaven. If the iirovpavia are heaven itself, the rviro^ showed to Moses cannot have been a temple in heaven, but either heaven itself, or, more probably still, as there could be no necessity for this to be shown to Moses in a pictorial representation, a picture of heavenly things or divine realities, which was shown to Moses that he might copy and embody it in the earthly tabernacle.^ If we understand the verse before us in this sense, it merely expresses what is already implied in the fact itself. If God showed Moses a picture or model of the tabernacle^ and in-
^ The conclusion drawn by Delitzsch (Hebrderbrief, p. 337), that because the author does not refer to anything between the eTrovpoiuicc and their durhviroc (chap. ix. 24), the TV'Trog can only have consisted of the iTrovpxvtec themselves, is a mistake. All that the premises preclude, is the intervention of any objective reality, or third material object, but not the introduction of a pictorial representation, through which Moses was shown how to copy the heavenly realities and embody them in an earthly form. The earthly tent would no more be a copy of the copy of a heavenly original in this case, than a palace built according to a model is a copy of that model. Moreover, Delitzsch himself thinks it is "not conceivable that, when Moses was favoured with a view of the heavenly world, it was left to him to embody what he saw in a material form, to bring it within the limits of space." He therefore assumes, both for the reason assigned, and because " no n^ortal has ever looked directly at heavenly things," that "inasmuch as what was seen could not be directly reflected in the mirror of his mind, not to mention the retina of his eye, it was set before him in a visible form, and according to the operation of God who showed it, in a manner adapted to serve as a model of the earthly sanctuary to be erected." Thus he admits that it is true that Moses did not see the heavenly world itself, but only a copy of it that was shown to him by God.
structed him to make everything exactly according to this pattern, we must assume that in the tabernacle and its furniture heavenly realities were to be expressed in earthly forms; or, to put it more clearly, that the thoughts of God concerning salvation and His kingdom, which the earthly building was to embody and display, were visibly set forth in the pattern shown. The symbolical and typical significance of the whole building necessarily follows from this, though without our being obliged to imitate the Rabbins, and seek in the tabernacle the counterpart or copy of a heavenly temple. What these divine thoughts were that were embodied in the tabernacle, can only be gathered from the arrangement and purpose of the whole building and its separate parts; and upon this point the description furnishes so much information, that when read in the light of the whole of the covenant revelation, it gives to all the leading points precisely the clearness that we require.
Yers. 10-22. The Ark of the Covenant (cf. chap, xxxvii. 1—9). — They were to make an ark (i^"^^) of acacia-wood, two cubits and a half long, one and a half broad, and one and a half high, and to plate it with pure gold both within and without. Round about it they were to construct a golden "IT, i.e. probably a golden rim, encircling it like an ornamental wreath. They were also to cast four golden rings and fasten them to the four feet (nbVQ walking feet, feet bent as if for walking) of the ark, two on either side; and to cut four poles of acacia-wood and plate them with gold, and put them through the rings for carrying the ark. The poles were to remain in the rings, without moving from them, i.e. without being drawn out, that the bearers might not touch the ark itself (Num. iv. 15). — Ver. 16. Into this ark Moses was to put " the testimony" (JT!V.\} I cL chap, xl. 20). This is the name given to the two tables of stone, upon which the ten words spoken by God to the whole nation were written, and which Moses was to receive from God (chap, xxiv. 12). Because these ten words were the declaration of God upon the basis of which the covenant was concluded (chap, xxxiv. 27, 28; Deut. iv. 13, x. 1, 2), these tables were called the tables of testimony (chap. xxxi. 18, xxxiv. 29), or tables of the covenant (Deut. ix. 9, xi. 15). — Vers. 17 sqq. In addition to this, Moses was to make a capporeth (JXaar-qpLov iiriOeiJLa,
LXX.; propitiatorium^ Vulg.), an atoning covering. The meaning operculum^ lid (Ges.), cannot be sustained, notwithstanding the fact that the capporeth was placed upon the ark (ver. 21) and covered the tables laid within it; for the verb "IQD has not the literal signification of covering or covering up either in Kal or Piel. In Kal it only occurs in Gen. vi. 14, where it means to pitch or tar; in Piel it is only used in the figurative sense of covering up sin or guilt, i.e. of making atonement. 1 Chron. xxviii. 11 is decisive on this point, where the holy of holies, in which the capporeth was, is called nVMH n''3j which cannot possibly mean the covering-house, but must signify the house of atonement. The force of this passage is not weakened by the remark made by Delitzsch and others, to the effect that it was only in the later usage of the language that the idea of covering gave place to that of the covering up or expiation of sin; for neither in the earlier nor earliest usage of the language can the supposed primary meaning of the word be anywhere discovered. KnoheVs remark has still less force, viz. that the ark must have had a lid, and it must have been called a lid. For if from the very commencement this lid had a more important purpose than that of a simple covering, it might also have received its name from this special purpose, even though this was not fully explained to the Israelites till a later period in the giving of the law (Lev. xvi. 15, 16). It must, however, have been obvious to every one, that it was to be something more than the mere lid of the ark, from the simple fact that it was not to be made, like the ark, of wood plated with gold, but to be made of pure gold, and to have two golden cherubs upon the top. The cherubim (see vol. i. p. 107) were to be made of gold ^'f?'!^ (from HK^P to turn), i.e.^ literally, turned work (cf. Isa. iii. 24), here, according to Onkelos, 'T'Jp opus ductile, work beaten with the hammer and rounded, so that the figures were not solid but hollow (see Bahr, i. p. 380). — Ver. 19. " Out of the capporeth shall ye make the cherubs at its two ends," i.e. so as to form one whole with the capporeth itself, and be inseparable from it. — Ver. 20. " And let the cherubs be stretching out wings on high, screening (D^Dpbj avaKcd^ovT6<;) with their wings above the capporeth, and their faces (turned) one to the other; towards the capporeth let the faces of the cherubs beP That is to say, the cherubs were to spread out their wings in such a manner as to form a screen over the capporethj with their faces turned towards one another, but inclining or stooping towards the capporeih. The reason for this is given in ver. 22. There — viz. above the capporeth that was placed upon the ark containing the testimony — Jehovah would present Himself to Moses pVi^, from *^T to appoint, to present one's self to a person at an appointed place, to meet with him), and talk with him ''from above the capporeth^ out from between the two cherubs upon the ark of testimony^ all that I shall command thee for the sons of IsraeV^ (cf. chap. xxix. 42). Through this divine promise and the fulfilment of it (chap. xl. 35; Lev. i. 1; Num. i. 1, xvii. 19), the ark of the covenant together with the capporeth became the throne of Jehovah in the midst of His chosen people, the footstool of the God of Israel (1 Chron. xxviii. 2, cf. Ps. cxxxii. 7, xcix. 5; Lam. ii. 1). The ark, with the tables of the covenant as the self-attestation of God, formed the foundation of this throne, to show that the kingdom of grace which was established in Israel through the medium of the covenant, was founded in justice and righteousness (Ps. Ixxxix. 15, xcvii. 2). The gold plate upon the ark formed the footstool of the throne for Him, who caused His name, i.e. the real presence of His being, to dwell in a cloud between the two cherubim above their outspread wings; and there He not only made known His will to His people in laws and commandments, but revealed Himself as the jealous God who visited sin and showed mercy (chap. xx. 5, 6, xxxiv. 6, 7), — the latter more especially on the great day of atonement, when, through the medium of the blood of the sin-offering sprinkled upon and in front of the capporeth. He granted reconciliation to His people for all their transgressions in all their sins (Lev. xvi. 14 sqq.). Thus the footstool of God became a throne of grace (Heb. iv. 16, cf. ix. 5), which received its name capporeth or LKaarrjpLov from the fact that the highest and most perfect act of atonement under the Old Testament was performed upon it. Jehovah, who betrothed His people to Himself in grace and mercy for an everlasting covenant (Hos. ii. 2), was enthroned upon it, above the wings of the two cherubim, which stood on either side of His throne; and hence He is represented as '^ dwelling (between) the cherubim" D-'nisn nt^> (l Sam. iv. 4; 2 Sam. vi. 2; Ps. Ixxx. 2, etc.). The cherubs were not combinations of animal forms, taken from man, the lion, the ox, and the e.iglc, as many have inferred from Ezek.
i. and x., for even the composite beings which Ezekiel saw with four faces had a human figure (Ezek. i. 5); hut they are to be regarded as figures made in a human form, and not in a kneeling posture, but, according to the analogy of 2 Chron. iii. 13, standing upright. Consequently, as the union of four faces in one cherub is peculiar to Ezekiel, and the cherubs of the ark of the covenant, like those of Solomon's temple, had but one face each, not only did the human type form the general basis of these figures, but in every respect, with the exception of the wings, they were made in the likeness of men. And this is the only form which would answer the purpose for which they were intended, viz. to represent the cherubim, or heavenly spirits, who were stationed to prevent the return of the first man to the garden of Eden after his expulsion thence, and keep the way to the tree of life (see vol. i. p. 107). Standing upon the capporeth of the ark of the covenant, the typical foundation of the throne of Jehovah, which Ezekiel saw in the vision as VP'^ HIDT " the likeness of a firmament" (Ezek. i. 22, 25), with their wings outspread and faces lowered, they represented the spirits of heaven, who surround Jehovah, the heavenly King, when seated upon His throne, as His most exalted servants and the witnesses of His sovereign and saving glory; so that Jehovah enthroned above the wings of the cherubim was set forth as the God of Hosts who is exalted above all the angels, surrounded by the assembly or council of the holy ones (Ps. Ixxxix. 6-9), who bow their faces towards the capporeth, studying, the secrets of the divine counsels of love (1 Pet. i. 12), and worshipping Him that liveth for ever and ever (Rev. iv. 10).
Vers. 23-30. The Table of Shew-bread (cf. chap, xxxvii. 10-16). — The table for the shew-bread (ver. 30) was to be made of acacia-wood, two cubits long, one broad, and one and a half high, and to be plated with pure gold, having a golden wreath round, and a ''finish (ri'nSDD) of a hand-hreadth round about,^^ i.e. a border of a hand-breadth in depth surrounding and enclosing the four sides, upon which the top of the table was laid, and into the four corners of which the feet of the table were inserted. A golden wreath was to be placed round this rim. As there is no article attached to ^^l'^\ in ver. 25 (cf. xxxvii. 12), so as to connect it with the "^T in ver. 24, we must conclude that there were two such ornamental wreaths, one round the slab of the table, the other round the rim which was under the slab. At the four corners of the four feet, near the point at which they joined the rim, four rings were to be fastened for D*"^^, i.e. to hold the poles with wliich the table was carried, as in the case of the ark. — Yer. 29. Vessels of pure gold were also to be made, to stand upon the table (cf. xxxvii. IG). ^^^i?, ra Tevj^Xia (LXX.), large deep plates, in which the shew-bread was not only brought to the table, but placed upon it. Tliese plates cannot have been small, for the silver "^^J/p, presented by Nahshon the tribe prince, weighed 130 shekels (Num. vii. 13). nb2j from ^3 a hollow hand, small scoops, according to Num. vii. 14, only ten shekels in weight, used to put out the incense belonging to the shew-bread upon the table (cf. Lev. xxiv. 7 and Num. vii. 14): LXX. OvtaKT], i.e., according to the Etymol. Magn.j aKa^r) r) ra Ovjiara heyjofjievr). There were also two vessels " to pour out," sc. the drink-offering, or libation of wine: viz. n'ibpj a'TTovhela (LXX.), sacrificial spoons to make the libation of wine with, and ^'ip^P, KvaOoc (LXX.), goblets into which the wine was poured, and in which it was placed upon the table. (See chap, xxxvii. 16 and Num. iv. 7, where the goblets are mentioned before the sacrificial spoons.) — Yer. 30. Bread of the face (^''^3 ^^?)j the mode of preparing and placing which is described in Lev. xxiv. 5 sqq., was to lie continually before {''^^^) Jehovah. These loaves were called " bread of the face " (shewbread), because they were to lie before the face of Jehovah as a meat-offering presented by the children of Israel (Lev. xxiv. 8), not as food for Jehovah, but as a symbol of the spiritual food which Israel was to prepare (John vi. 27, cf. iv. 32, 34), a figurative representation of the calling it had received from God; so that bread and wine, which stood upon the table by the side of the loaves, as the fruit of the labour bestowed by Israel upon the soil of its inheritance, were a symbol of its spiritual labour in the kingdom of God, the spiritual vineyard of its Lord.
Yers. 31-40 (cf. xxxvii. 17-24). The Candlestick was to be made of pure gold, "beaten work." T\^pD: see ver 18. For the form nb'y^n instead of ^'^V^ (which is probably the work of a copyist, who thought the reading should be >^^V^ in the Niphal, as the '• is wanting in many MSS.), see Gesenius, Lehrgeh. p. 52, and Ewald, § 83 5. "Of it shall he (i,e. there shall issue from it so as to form one complete whole) its T?^^ " (lit, the loins, the upper part of the thigh, which is attached to the body, and from which the feet proceed, — in this case the base or pedestal, upon which the candelabrum stood); its npp^ or reed, i.e. the hollow stem of the candelabrum rising up from the pedestal; — " its U'^V^'^^j* cups, resembling the calix of a flower; — D"''iriD3j knobs, in a spherical shape (cf. Amos ix. 1, Zeph. ii. 14); — " and D'^rnQj" flowers, ornaments in the form of buds just bursting.— Yer. 32. From the sides of the candlestick, i.e. of the upright stem in the middle, there were to be six branches, three on either side. — Vers. 33-34. On each of these branches (the repetition of the same words expresses the distributive sense) there were to be " three cups in the form of an almond-flower^ (with) knob and flower^'' and on the shaft of the candlestick, or central stem, "four cups in the form of almond-flow ers^ its knobs and its fldwers:' As both n-iDl nnM (ver. 33) and n^nnsi J'^.i^?? (ver. 34) are connected with the previous words without a copula, Knobel and Thenius regard these words as standing in explanatory apposition to the preceding ones, and suppose the meaning to be that the flower-cups were to consist of knobs with flowers issuing from them. But apart from the singular idea of calling a knob or bulb with a flower bursting from it a flower-cup, ver. 31 decidedly precludes any such explanation; for cups, knobs, and flowers are mentioned there in connection with the base and stem, as three separate things which were quite as distinct the one from the other as the base and the stem. The words in question are appended in both verses to ^""^PJ^P ^Tt^? in the sense of subordination; ] is generally used in such cases, but it is omitted here before "iriDD^ probably to avoid ambiguity, as the two words to be subordinated are brought into closer association as one idea by the use of this copula. And if "iriDD and ni2 are to be distinguished from T^^, the objection made by Thenius to our rendering 'ij^^p " almond-blossom-shaped," namely, that neither the almond nor the almond-blossom has at all the shape of a basin, falls entirely to the ground; and there is all the less reason to question this rendering, on account of the unanimity with which it has been adopted in the ancient versions, whereas the rendering proposed by Thenius^ " wakened up, i.e. a burst or opened calix," has neither foundation nor probability. — Yer. 35. " And every pipe under the two branches shall he out from them (be connected '^^th them) for the six (side) pipes going out from the candlestick;^* i.e. at the point where the three pairs of the six side pipes or arms branched off fr6m the main pipe or stem of the candlestick, a knob should be so placed that the arms should proceed from the knob, or from the main stem immediately above the knob. — Yer. 36. " Their knobs and their pipes (i.e. the knobs and pipes of the three pairs of arms) shall be of it (the candlestick, i.e. combined with it so as to form one whole), all one (one kind of) beaten work, pure goldJ^ From all this we get the following idea of the candlestick: Upon the base there rose an upright central pipe, from which three side pipes branched out one above another on either side, and curved upwards in the form of a quadrant to the level of the central stem. On this stem a calix and a knob and blossom were introduced four separate times, and in such a manner that there was a knob wherever the side pipes branched off from the main stem, evidently immediately below the branches; and the fourth knob, we may suppose, was higher up between the top branches and the end of the stem. As there were thus four calices with a knob and blossom in the main stem, so again there were three in each of the branches, which were no doubt placed at equal distances from one another. With regard to the relative position of the calix, the knob, and the blossom, we may suppose that the spherical knob was underneath the calix, and that the blossom sprang from the upper edge of the latter, as if bursting out of it. The candlestick had. thus seven arms, and seven lights or lamps were to be made and placed upon them ("^^i!!^). '^ And they (all the lamps) are to give light upon the opposite side of its front^^ (ver. 37): i.e. the lamp was to throw its light upon the side that was opposite to the front of the candlestick. The D"'^Q of the candlestick (ver. 37 and Num. viii. 2) was the front shown by the seven arms, as they formed a straight line with their seven points; and '^^V does not mean the side, but the opposite side, as is evident from Num. viii. 2, where we find p^^ ^^ instead. As the place assigned to the candlestick was on the south side of the dwelling-place, we are to understand by this opposite side the north, and imagine the lamp to be so placed that the line of lamps formed by the seven arms ran from front to back, by which arrangement the holy place would be better lighted, than if the candlestick had stood with the line of lamps from south to north, and so had turned all its seven lamps towards the person entering the holy place. The lamps were the receptacles for the wick and oil, which were placed on the top of the arms, and could be taken down to be cleaned. The hole from which the wick projected was not made in the middle, but at the edge, so that the light was thrown upon one side. — Ver. 38. The other things belonging to the candlestick were D^nijpD tongs (Isa. vi. 6), i.e, snuffers, and ninn» snuff-dishes, Le. dishes to receive the snuff when taken from the wicks; elsewhere the word signifies an ash-pan, or vessel used for taking away the coal from the fire (chap, xxvii. 3; Lev. xvi. 12; Num. xvii. 3 sqq.). — Ver. 39. " Of a talent of pure gold (i.e. 822,000 Parisian grains) shall he make it (the candlestick) and all these vesselsy' i.e., according to chap, xxxvii. 24, all the vessels belonging to the candlestick. From this quantity of gold it was possible to make a candlestick of very considerable size. The size is not given anywhere in the Old Testament, but, according to Bdhr^s conjecture, it corresponded to the height of the table of shew-bread, namely, a cubit and a half in height and the same in breadth, or a cubit and a half between the two outside lamps. "The signification of the seven-armed candlestick is apparent from its purpose, viz. to carry seven lamps, which were trimmed and filled with oil every morning, and lighted every evening, and were to burn throughout the night (chap, xxvii. 20, 21, XXX. 7, 8; Lev. xxiv. 3, 4). As the Israelites were to prepare spiritual food in the shew-bread in the presence of Jehovah, and to offer continually the fruit of their labour in the field of the kingdom of God, as a spiritual offering to the Lord; so also were they to present themselves continually to Jehovah in the burning lamps, as the vehicles and media of light, as a nation letting its light shine in the darkness of this world (cf. Matt. V. 14, 16; Luke xii. 35; Phil. ii. 15). The oil, through which the lamps burned and shone, was, according to its peculiar virtue in imparting strength to the body and restoring vital power, a representation of the Godlike spirit, the source of all the vital power of man; whilst the oil, as offered by the congregation of Israel, and devoted to sacred purposes according to the command of God, is throughout the Scriptures a symbol of the
Spirit of God, by which the congregation of God was tilled with higher light and life. By the power of this Spirit, Israel, in covenant with the Lord, was to let its light shine, the light of its knowledge of God and spiritual illumination, before all the nations of the earth. In its seven arms the stamp of the covenant relationship was impressed upon the candlestick; and the almond-blossom with which it was ornamented represented the seasonable offering of the flowers and fruits of the Spirit, the almond-tree deriving its name "ip^ from the fact that it is the earliest of all the trees in both its blossom and its fruit (cf. Jer. i. 11, 12). The symbolical character of the candlestick is clearly indicated in the Scriptures. The prophet Zechariah (chap, iv.) sees a golden candlestick with seven lamps and two olive-trees, one on either side, from which the oil- vessel is supplied; and tlie angel who is talking with him infonns him that the olive-trees are the two sons of oil, that is to say, the representatives of the kingdom and priesthood, the divinely appointed organs through which the Spirit of God was communicated to the covenant nation. And in Eev. i. 20, the seven churches, which represent the new people of God, i.e. the Christian Church, are shown to the holy seer in the form of seven candlesticksstandingbefore the throne of God. — On ver. 40, see at ver. 9.
Chap. xxvi. (cf. xxxvi. 8-38). The Dwelling-Place. — This was to be formed of a framework of wood, and of tapestry and curtains. The description commences with the tapestry or tent-cloth (vers. 1-14), which made the framework (vers. 15-30) into a dwelling. The inner lining is mentioned first (vers. 1-6), because this made the dwelling into a tent (tabernacle). This inner tent-cloth was to consist of ten curtains (n'V")^, avKaLat)^ or, as Luther has more aptly rendered it, Teppiche^ pieces of tapestry, i.e. of cloth composed of byssus yam, hyacinth, purple, and scarlet. *^TK^O twisted, signifies yam composed of various colours twisted together, from which the finer kinds of byssus, for which the E^ryptians were so celebrated, were made {vid. Hengstenberg, Egypt, pp. 139 sqq.). The byssus yarn was of a clear white, and this was woven into mixed cloth by combination with dark blue, and dark and fiery red. It was not to be in simple stripes or checks, however; but the variegated yarn was to be woven (embroidered) into the white byssus, so as to form artistic figures of cherubim (" cherubim, work of the artistic weaver, shalt thou make it '*). '^^V^ ^K^n Qit. work or labour of the thinker) is applied to artistic weaving, in which either figures or gold threads (chap, xxviii. 6, 8, 15) are worked into the cloth, and which is to be distinguished from CpT nb^y?? variegated weaving (ver. 36). — Vers. 2, 3. The length of each piece was to be 28 cubits, and the breadth 4 cubits, one measure for all; and ^ve of these pieces were to be "joined together one to another," i.e. joined or sewed together into a piece of 28 cubits in length and 20 in breadth, and the same with the other five. — Yers. 4, 5. They were also to make 50 hyacinth loops " on the border of the one piece of tapestry, from the end in the join,^ i.e. on the extreme edge of the five pieces that were sewed together; and the same " on the border of the last piece in the second joined tapestry!^ Thus there were to be fifty loops in each of the two large pieces, and these loops were to be riP''3ipD " taking up the loops one the other; " that is to say, they were to be so made that the loops in the two pieces should exactly meet. — Yer. 6. Fifty golden clasps were also to be made, to fasten the pieces of drapery (the two halves of the tent-cloth) together, " that it might be a dwelling -placer This necessarily leads to Bdhrs conclusion, that the tent-cloth, which consisted of two halves fastened together with the loops and clasps, answering to the two compartments of the dwellingplace (ver. 33), enclosed the whole of the interior, not only covering the open framework above, but the side walls also, and therefore that it hung down inside the walls, and that it was not spread out upon the wooden framework so as to form the ceiling, but hung down on the walls on the outside of the wooden beams, so that the gilded beams were left uncovered in the inside. For if this splendid tent-cloth had been intended for the ceiling only, and therefore only 30 cubits had been visible out of the 40 cubits of its breadth, and only 10 out of the 28 of its length, — that is to say, if not much more than a third of the whole had been seen and used for the inner lining of the dwelling, — it would not have been called " the dwelling " so constantly as it is (cf. chap. xxxvi. 8, xl. 18), nor would the goats'-hair covering which was placed above it have been just as constantly called the " tent above the dwelling" (ver. 7, chap, xxxvi. 14, xl. 19). This inner tent-cloth was so spread out, that whilst it was fastened to the upper ends of the beams in a way that is not explained m the text, it formed the ceiling of the whole, and the joining came just above the curtain which divided the dwelling into two compartments. One half therefore, viz. the front half, formed the ceiling of the holy place with its entire breadth of 20 cubits and 10 cubits of its length, and the remaining 18 cubits of its length hung down over the two side walls, 9 cubits down each wall, — the planks that formed the walls being left uncovered, therefore, to the height of 1 cubit from the ground. In a similar manner the other half covered the holy of holies, 10 cubits of both length and breadth forming the ceiling, and the 10 cubits that remained of the entire length covering the end wall; whilst the folds in the corners that arose from the 9 cubits that hung down on either side, were no doubt so adjusted that the walls appeared to be perfectly smooth. (For further remarks, see chap, xxxix. 33.)
Vers. 7-13. The outer tent-cloth, "for the tent over the dwelling," was to consist of eleven lengths of goats' hair, i.e. of cloth made of goats' hair; ^ each piece being thirty cubits long and four broad. — Yer. 9. Five of these were to be connected (sew^ed together) by themselves p9r)j ^^^ the other six in the same manner; and the sixth piece was to be made double, i.e, folded together, tow^ards the front of the tent, so as to form a kind of gable, as Josephus has also explained the passage (Ant. iii. 6, 4). — Vers. 10, 11. Fifty loops and clasps w^ere to be made to join the two halves together, as in the case of the inner tapestry, only the clasps were to be of brass or copper. — Vers. 12, 13. This tent-cloth was two cubits longer than the inner one, as each piece was 30 cubits long instead of 28; it was also two cubits broader, as it was composed of 11 pieces, the eleventh only reckoning as two cubits, as it was to be laid double. Consequently there was an excess {^^'V[} that which is over) of two cubits each way; and according to vers. 12 and 13 this was to be disposed of in the following manner: '^ As for the spreading out of the excess in the tent-cloths^ the half of the cloth in excess shall spread out over the back of the dwelling; and the cubit from here and from there in the excess in the length of the tent-cloths (i.e. the
* The coverings of the tents of the Bedouin Arabs are still made of cloth woven from black goats' hair, which the women spin and weave (see Lynch'' s Expedition of the United States to the Jordan and Dead Sea).
cubit over in the length in each of the cloths) shall he spread, out on the sides of the dwelling from here and from there to cover it^ Now since, according to this, one half of the two cubits of the sixth piece which was laid double was to hang down the back of the tabernacle, there only remained one cubit for the gable of the front. It follows, therefore, that the joining of the two halves with loops and clasps would come a cubit farther back, than the place where the curtain of the holy of holies divided the dwelling. But in consequence of the cloth being a cubit longer in every direction, it nearly reached the ground on all three sides, the thickness of the wooden framework alone preventing it from reaching it altogether.
Yer. 14. Two other coverings were placed on the top of this tent: one made of rams' skins dyed red, " as a covering for the tent," and another upon the top of this, made of the skins of the sea-cow (D''^*nnj see at chap. xxv. 5).
Yers. 15-30. The wooden framework. — Yers. 15, 16. The boards for the dwelling were to be made " of acacia-wood standing," i.e* so that they could stand upright; each ten cubits long and one and a half broad. The thickness is not given; and if, on the one hand, we are not to imagine them too thin, as Josephus does, for example, who says they were only four fingers thick (Ant. iii. 6, 3), we have still less reason for following Rashij Lund, Bdhr and others, who suppose them to have been a cubit in thickness, thus making simple boards into colossal blocks, such as could neither have been cut from acacia-trees, nor carried upon desert roads.^ To obtain boards of the required breadth, two or three planks were no doubt joined together according to the size of the trees. — Yer. 17. Every board was to have two nn^ {lit. hands or holders) to hold them upright, pegs
^ Kamphausen (Stud, und Krit. 1859, p. 117) appeals to Bahr'^s Symbolik 1, p. 261-2, and Knohel, Exod. p. 261, in support of the opinion, that at any rate formerly there were genuine acacias of such size and strength, that beams could have been cut from them a cubit and a half broad and a cubit thick; but we look in vain to either of these writings for such authority as will establish this fact. Expressions like those of Jerome and Hasselquist^ viz. grandes arhores and arbor ingens ramosissima, are far too indefinite. It is true that, according to Ahdullatif^ the Sont is " a very large tree," but he gives a quotation from Dinuri, in which it is merely spoken of as "a tree of the size of a nut-tree." See the passages cited in Rosenmuller''s bibl. Althk. iv. 1, p. 278, Not. 7, where we find the following remark of Westing therefore; and they were to be ''hound to one another^ 0^^? from db^ in Chald. to connect, hence £3''2p^ in 1 Kings vii. 28, the corner plates that hold together the four sides of a chest), not " pegged into one another,'' but joined together by a fastening dovetailed into the pegs, by which the latter were fastened still more firmly to the boards, and therefore had greater holding power than if each one had been simply sunk into the edge of the board. — Vers. 18-21. Twenty of these boards were to be prepared for the side of the dwelling that was turned towards the south, and forty sockets (^''^'^^ foundations. Job xxxviii. 6) or bases for the pegs, i.e. to put the pegs of the boards into, that the boards might stand upright; and the same number of boards and sockets for the north side. n^QT], "southward," is added to n^ip nXBp in ver. 18, to give a clearer definition of negeh, which primarily means the dry, and then the country to the south; an evident proof that at that time negep was not established as a geographical term for the south, and therefore that it was not written here by a Palestinian, as Knohel supposes, but by Moses in the desert. The form of the " sockets " is not explained, and even in chap, xxxviii. 27, in the summing up of the gifts presented for the work, it is merely stated that a talent of silver (about 93 lb.) was applied to every socket. — Vers. 22^24. Six boards were to be made for the back of the dwelling westwards (n^J), and two boards " for the corners or angles of the dwelling at the two outermost (hinder) sides." ^V^pp? (for cornered), from V^pD, equivalent to mp'O an angle (ver. 24; Ezek. xlvi. 21, 22), from y^ij to cut off, lit, a section, something cut off, hence an angle, or corner-piece. These corner boards (ver. 24) were to be " doubled (p'^^j^) from below, and whole (Q**^^, integri, forming a whole) at its head (or towards its head, cf. p^ chap, xxxvi.
on Prosper. Alpin. de plantis ^g.: Caudicem non raro ampliorem deprehendi, quam ut brachio meo circumdari possit. Even the statement of Theophrast {hist, plant. 4, 3), to the effect that rafters are cut from these trees 12 cubits long (^uhKU'Tryixvc; tpi-^if^og vT^n)^ is no proof that they were beams a cubit and a half broad and a cubit thick. And even if there had been trees of this size in the peninsula of Sinai in Moses' time, a beam of such dimensions, according to KampJiauseri's calculation, which is by no means too high, would have weighed more than twelve cwt. And certainly the IsraeUtes could never have carried beams of this weight with them through the desert; for the waggons needed would have been such as could never be used where there are no beaten roads.
29) with regard to the one ring, so shall it be to both of them (so shall they both be made); to the two corners shall they be " (^.e. designed for the two hinder corners). The meaning of these words, which are very obscure in some points, can only be the following; the two corner beams at the back were to consist of two pieces joined together at a right angle, so as to form as double boards one single whole from the bottom to the top. The expressions "from below" and "up to its head" are divided between the two predicates "doubled" (D''pxn) and " whole" (D''PI?), but they belong to both of them. Each of the comer beams was to be double from the bottom to the top, and still to form one whole. There is more difficulty in the words nnsn nyntsn-ptj in ver. 24. It is impossible to attach any intelligible meaning to the rendering " to the first ring," so that even Knobelj who proposed it, has left it unexplained. There is hardly any other way of explaining it, than to take the word ^^ in the sense of "having regard to a thing," and to understand the words as meaning, that the corner beams were to form one whole, from the fact that each received only one ring, probably at the corner, and not two, viz. one on each side. This one ring was placed half-way up the upright beam in the corner or angle, in such a manner that the central bolt, which stretched along the entire length of the walls (ver. 28), might fasten into it from both the side and back. — Yer. 25. Sixteen sockets were to be made for these eight boards, two for each. — Yers. 26-29. To fasten the boards, that they might not separate from one another, bars of acacia-wood were to be made and covered with gold, five for each of the three sides of the dwelling; and though it is not expressly stated, yet the reference to rings in ver. 29 as holders of the bars (D"'n''")n5 ^''^?) is a sufficient indication that they were passed through golden rings fastened into the boards. — Yer. 28. '^And the middle bar in the midst of the boards (i.e. at an equal distance from both top and bottom) shall be fastening (jy^yyo) from one end to the other ^ As it thus expressly stated with reference to the middle bar, that it was to fasten, i.e. to reach along the walls from one end to the other, we necessarily conclude, with Rashi and others, that the other four bars on every side were not to reach the whole length of the walls, and may therefore suppose that they were only half as long as the middle one, so that there were only three rows of bars on each wall, the upper and lower being composed of two bars each. — Ver. 30. '^ And set up the dwelling according to its Tight, as was shown thee upon the mountain" (cf. chap. XXV. 9). Even the setting up and position of the dwelling were not left to human judgment, but were to be carried out itOSC'DS, i,e. according to the direction corresponding to its meaning and purpose. From the description which is given of the separate portions, it is evident that the dwelling was to be set up in the direction of the four quarters of the heavens, the back being towards the west, and the entrance to the east; whilst the whole of the dwelling formed an oblong of thirty cubits long, ten broad, and ten high. The length we obtain from the twenty boards of a cubit and a half in breadth; and the breadth, by adding to the nine cubits covered by the six boards at the back, half a cubit as the inner thickness of each of the corner beams. The thickness of the corner beams is not given, but we may conjecture that on the outside which formed part of the back they were three-quarters of a cubit thick, and that half a cubit is to be taken as the thickness towards the side. In this case, on the supposition that the side beams were a quarter of a cubit thick, the inner space would be exactly ten cubits broad and thirty and a quarter long; but the surplus quarter would be taken up by the thickness of the pillars upon which the inner curtain was hung, so that the room at the back would form a perfect cube, and the one at the front an oblong of exactly twenty cubits in length, ten in breadth, and ten in height.
Vers. 31—37. To divide the dwelling into two rooms, a curtain was to be made, of the same material, and woven in the same artistic manner as the inner covering of the walls (ver. 1). This was called ^?*^Sj Ut. division, separation, from Tl']Si to divide, or "^DD n^ns (chap. xxxv. 12, xxxix. 34, xl. 21) division of the covering, i.e, the covering separation, or veil. They were to put (ir^)? i'^* to hang this " upon four pillars of gilded acacia-wood and their golden hooks, (standing) upon four silver sockets^^ under the loops (D''p'ip) which held the two halves of the inner covering together (ver. 6). Thus the curtain divided the dwelling into two compartments, the one occupying ten cubits and the other twenty of its entire length. — Ver. 33. " Thither (where the curtain hangs under the loops) within the curtain shalt thou bring the ark of testimony (chap. xxv. 16-22), and the curtain shall divide unto you between the holy place and the most holy"
(p^Knjjn ^p the holy of holies). The inner compartment was made into the most holy place through the ark of the covenant with the throne of grace upon it. — Yer. 35. The two other things (already described) were to be placed outside the curtain, viz. in the holy place; the candlestick opposite to the table, the former on the south side of the dwelling, the latter towards the north. — Vers. 36, 37. For the entrance to the tent they were also to make a curtain (^pp, lit, a covering, from "H^D to cover) of the same material as the inner curtain, but of work in mixed colours, Le, not woven with figures upon it, but simply in stripes or checks. Di^T ^^VJP- does not mean coloured needlework, with figures or flowers embroidered with the needle upon the woven fabric (as I asserted in my Archdologie, in common with the Rabbins, GeseniuSy Bdhr, and others); for in the only other passage in which Qpi occurs, viz. Ps. cxxxix. 15, it does not mean to embroider, but to weave, and in the Arabic it signifies to make points, stripes, or lines, to work in mixed colours (see Hartma7in die Hehrderinn am Putztisch iii. 138 sqq.). This curtain was to hang on five gilded pillars of acacia^wood with golden hooks, and for these they were to cast sockets of brass. In the account of the execution of this work in chap, xxxvi. 38, it is still further stated, that the architect covered the heads (capitals) of the pillars and their girders (D'^ipK'n, see chap, xxvii. 10) with gold. From this it follows, that the pillars were not entirely gilded, but only the capitals, and that they were fastened together with gilded girders. These girders were either placed upon the hooks that were fastened to the tops of the pillars, or, what I think more probable, formed a kind of architrave above the pillars, in which case the covering as well as the inner curtain merely hung upon the hooks of the columns. But if the pillars were not gilded all over, we must necessarily imagine the curtain as hung upon that side of the pillars which was turned towards the holy place, so that none of the white wood was to be seen inside the holy place; and the gilding of the capitals and architrave merely served to impress upon the forefront of the tabernacle the glory of a house of God.
If we endeavour to understand the reason for building the dwelling in this manner, there can be no doubt that the design of the wooden walls was simply to give stability to the tabernacle. Acacia-wood was chosen, because the acacia was the only tree to be found in the desert of Arabia from wbich planks and beams could be cut, whilst the lightness and durability of this wood rendered it peculiarly suitable for a portable temple. The wooden framework was covered both within and without with hangings of drapery and other coverings, to give it the character of a tent, which is the term really applied to it in chap, xxvii. 21, and in most instances afterwards. The sanctuary of Jehovah in the midst of His people was to be a tent, because, so long as the people were wandering about and dwelt in tents, the dwelling of their God in the midst of them must be a tent also. The division of the dwelling into two parts corresponded to the design of the tabernacle, where Jehovah desired not to dwell alone by Himself, but to come and meet with His people (chap. XXV. 22). The most holy place was the true dwelling of Jehovah, where He was enthroned in a cloud, the visible symbol of His presence, above the cherubim, upon the capporeth of the ark of the covenant (see p. 169). The holy place, on the other hand, was the place where His people were to appear before Him, and draw near to Him with their gifts, the fruits of their earthly vocation, and their prayers, and to rejoice before His face in the blessings of His covenant grace. By the establishment of the covenant of Jehovah with the people of Israel, the separation of man from God, of which the fall of the progenitors of our race had been the cause, was to be brought to an end; an institution was to be set up, pointing to the reunion of man and God, to true and full vital communion with Him; and by this the kingdom of God was to be founded on earth in a local and temporal form. This kingdom of God, which was founded in Israel, was to be embodied in the tabernacle, and shadowed forth in its earthly and visible form as confined within the limits of time and space. This meaning was indicated not only in the instructions to set up the dwelling according to the four quarters of the globe and heavens, with the entrance towards sunrise and the holy of holies towards the west, but also in the quadrangular form of the building, the dwelling as a whole assuming the form of an oblong of thirty cubits in length, and ten in breadth and height, whilst the most holy place was a cube of ten cubits in every direction. In the symbolism of antiquity, the square was a symbol of the universe or cosmos; and thus, too, in the symbolism of the Scriptures it is a type of the world as the scene of divine revelation, the sphere of the kingdom of God, for which the world from the very first had been intended by God, and to which, notwithstanding the fall of man, who was creat(id lord of the earth, it was to be once more renewed and glorified. Hence the seal of the kingdom of God was impressed upon the sanctuary of God in Israel through the quadrangular form that was given to its separate rooms. And whilst the direction in which it was set up, towards the four quarters of the heavens, showed that the kingdom of God that was planted in Israel was intended to embrace the entire w^orld, the oblong shape given to the whole building set forth the idea of the present incompleteness of the kingdom, and the cubic form of the most holy place its ideal and ultimate perfection.-^ Yet even in its temporal form, it was perfect of its kind, and therefore the component parts of the quadrangular building were regulated by the number ten, the stamp of completeness.
The splendour of the building, as the earthly reflection of the glory of the kingdom of God, was also in harmony with this explanation of its meaning. In the dwelling itself everything was either overlaid with gold or made of pure gold, with the exception of the foundations or sockets of the boards and inner pillars, for which silver was used. In the gold, with its glorious, yea, godlike splendour (Job xxxvii. 22), the glory of the dwelling-
^ The significant character of these different quadrangular forms is placed beyond all doubt, when we compare the tabernacle and Solomon's temple, which was built according to the same proportions, with the prophetic description of the temple and holy city in Ezek. xl.-xlviii., and that of the heavenly Jerusalem in Eev. xxi. and xxii. Just as in both the tabernacle and Solomon's temple the most holy place was in the form of a perfect cube (of 10 and 20 cubits respectively), so John saw the city of God, which came down from God out of heaven, in the form of a perfect cube. " The length, and the breadth, and the height of it were equal," viz. 12,000 furlongs on every side (Rev. xxi. 16), a symbolical representation of the idea, that the holy of holies in the temple will be seen in its perfected form in the heavenly Jerusalem, and God will dwell in it for ever, along with the just made perfect. This city of God is " the tabernacle of God with men;" it has no longer a temple, but the Lord God of Hosts and the Lamb are the temple of it (ver. 22), and those who dwell therein see the face of God and the Lamb (chap. xxii. 4). The square comes next to the cube, and the regular oblong next to this. The tabernacle was in the form of an oblong: the dwelling was 30 cubits long and 10 broad, and the court 100 cubits long and 50 broad. Solomon's temple, when regarded as a whole, was in the same form; it was 60 cubits long and 20 cubits broad, apart from the place of God was reflected; whilst the silver, as the symbol of moral purity, shadowed forth the holiness of the foundation of the house or kingdom of God. The four colours, and the figures upon the drapery and curtains of tlie temple, were equally significant. Whilst the four colours, like the same number of coverings, showed their general purpose as connected with the building of the kingdom of God, the brilliant white of the byssus stands prominently out among the rest of the colours as the ground of the woven fabrics, and the colour which is invariably mentioned first. The splendid white byssus represented the holiness of the building; the hyacinth, a dark blue approaching black rather than bright blue, but the true colour of the sky in southern countries, its heavenly origin and character; the purple, a dark rich red, its royal glory; whilst the crimson, a light brilliant red, the colour of blood and vigorous life, set forth the strength of imperishable life in the abode and kingdom of the holy and glorious God-King. Lastly, through the figures of cherubim woven into these fabrics the dwelling became a symbolical representation of the kingdom of glory, in which the heavenly spirits surround the throne of God, the heavenly Jerusalem with its myriads of angels, the city of the living God, to which the people of God will come when their heavenly calling is fulfilled (Heb. xii. 22, 23).