Exodus 19:16-25

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

The priests referred to (Exodus 19:22; Exodus 19:24) were evidently young men (first-born?) that offered sacrifices before God appointed the Aaronic priests to this service (cf. Exodus 24:5).

Comparative ancient Near Eastern studies have revealed that the covenant form and terminology that God used to communicate His agreement with Israel were common in Moses’ day. There were two basic types of formal covenants in the ancient Near East: parity (between equals) and suzerainty (between a sovereign and his subjects). The Mosaic Covenant was a suzerainty treaty. Such agreements characteristically contained a preamble (Exodus 19:3), historical prologue (Exodus 19:4), statement of general principles (Exodus 19:5 a), consequences of obedience (Exodus 19:5-6 a), and consequences of disobedience (omitted here). In 1977, Kenneth Kitchen wrote the following.

"Some forty different [suzerainty] treaties . . . are known to us, covering seventeen centuries from the late third millennium BC well into the first millennium BC, excluding broken fragments, and now additional ones still to be published from Ebla." [Note: Kenneth Kitchen, The Bible In Its World, p. 79.]

Thus the form in which God communicated His covenant to Moses and Israel was undoubtedly familiar to them. It enabled them to perceive better the nature of the relationship into which they were entering. [Note: See George E. Mendenhall, Law and Covenant in Israel and the Near East; Meredith Kline, The Treaty of the Great King; and F. C. Fensham, "Extra-biblical Material and the Hermeneutics of the Old Testament with Special Reference to the Legal Material of the Covenant Code," OTWSA 20 & 21 (1977 & 78):53-65.]

The Mosaic Law consisted of three classes of requirements: those governing moral life (the Ten Commandments), those governing religious life (the ceremonial ordinances), and those governing civil life (the civil statutes). The commandments expressed the righteous will of God (Exodus 20), the judgments governed Israel’s social life (Exodus 21:1 to Exodus 24:11), and the ordinances determined Israel’s religious life (Exodus 24:12 to Exodus 31:18). God gave the whole Law specifically for the nation of Israel (Exodus 19:3). It is very important to recognize how comprehensive the Mosaic Law was and not limit it to the Ten Commandments. The rabbis, after Maimonides, counted 613 commands, 248 positive and 365 negative, in the law. Maimonides was a Jewish philosopher and exegete who lived in the twelfth century A.D. and wrote Sepher Mitzvoth ("Book of the Commandments"), the definitive Jewish list of laws in the Penteateuch. [Note: For a summary of Maimonides’ list, see the Appendix in Sailhamer, The Pentateuch . . ., pp. 481-516.]

There were three categories of law in Israel.

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

2. Torts were civil wrongs that resulted in an action by the injured party against the party who had wronged him. Assault (Exodus 21:18-27), the seduction of an unmarried or betrothed girl (Exodus 22:16-17), and theft of animals or other property (Exodus 22:1-4) are examples of torts. Conviction resulted in the guilty party paying damages to the injured party (Exodus 21:18-27).

3. Family law did not involve the courts, but the head of the household administered it in the home. Divorce (Deuteronomy 24:1-4), the making of slavery permanent (Exodus 21:1-6), and adoption (cf. Genesis 15:2; Genesis 30:3; Genesis 48:5; Genesis 48:12; 2 Samuel 7:14; Psalms 2:7) are examples. In these cases the head of the household acted unilaterally. He did not, however, have the power of life or death. [Note: See Anthony Phillips, Ancient Israel’s Criminal Law; and idem, "Some Aspects of Family Law in Pre-Exilic Israel," Vetus Testamentum 23 (1973):349-361, for further discussion of these categories.]

God gave the Mosaic Law to the Israelites for several purposes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8. To make provision for a redeemed people to worship by observing and participating in the yearly festivals (Leviticus 23)

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

10. To reveal Jesus Christ.

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

". . . there was in the Law that which was revelatory of the holiness of God. . . ." There was also ". . . that in the Law which was regulatory." [Note: J. Dwight Pentecost, "The Purpose of the Law," Bibliotheca Sacra 128:511 (July-September 1971):233. See also idem, Thy Kingdom . . ., pp. 88-93.]

"It is extremely important to remember that the Law of Moses was given to a redeemed people, not to redeem a people." [Note: Ibid., p. 87. Cf. Johnson, p. 68.]

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

"This understanding of the purpose of the laws in the Pentateuch is supported by the observation that the collections of laws in the Pentateuch appear to be incomplete and selective. The Pentateuch as such is not designed as a source of legal action. That the laws in the Pentateuch are incomplete is suggested by the fact that many aspects of ordinary community life are not covered in these laws." [Note: Sailhamer, "The Mosaic . . .," pp. 244, 245.]

A movement that has gained some followers, especially in the United States, is the Christian Reconstruction movement, also known as the theonomy movement, and the Chalcedon school. Its central thesis is that God intended the Mosaic Law to be normative for all people for all time. Its advocates look forward to a day when Christians will govern everyone using the Old Testament as the law book. Reconstructionism rests on three foundational points: presuppositional apologetics, theonomy (lit. the rule of God), and postmillennialism. The main flaw in this system, from my perspective, is failure to distinguish God’s purposes for Israel from His purposes for the church. [Note: For a popular introduction to this movement, see Rodney Clapp, "Democracy as Heresy," Christianity Today (February 20, 1987), pp. 17-23. See also Robert Lightner, "Theological Perspectives on Theonomy," Bibliotheca Sacra 143:569 (January-March 1986):26-36; 143:570 (April-June 1986):134-45; and 143:571 (July-September 1986):228-45, for a scholarly dispensational critique; and Meredith Kline, "Comments on an Old-New Error," Westminster Theological Journal 41:1 (Fall 1978):172-89, for a scholarly reformed evaluation of the movement. The essay by Douglas Chismar and David Raush, "Regarding Theonomy: An Essay of Concern," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27:3 (September 1984):315-23, is also helpful.]

"Theonomy used to be an attractive lens through which to read Scripture for many Christians, particularly in Reformed and Pentecostal circles in the 1970s and into the 1990s, among those who looked with horror at the secularization of society and longed for a more powerful Christian influence. Fortunately, as we begin the twenty-first century this movement has lost significant influence." [Note: Longman and Dillard, p. 76.]