 |
Question:
On the Tablets of Stone (now titled, "On the Mystery of the Tablets")
This morning I was going over your “Tablets of Stone” study. I had told you before that I could find nothing wrong with it. But now in reviewing I have come across a verse in Deuteronomy 5:22 that appears to dispute everything you say. It reads as follows:
5:22 “These words the LORD spoke to all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice and He added no more. And He wrote them onto two tablets of stone, and delivered them to me.”
How does this fit into your presentation on the Tablets of Stone without contradicting it?
Answer:
This is a very good question, and is the very verse that throws people off on this subject. However, the remedy, and answer, to this is not too complicated. But in addition to answering your question, I will also show you how this all ties into the Books of Galatians and Hebrews.
The first point I would bring out is that no where in this passage of D’varim (Deuteronomy) 5 is the phrase “10 commandments” used. This coincides of course with the fact that the “traditional version” of the 10 commandments cannot legitimately be divided into any set of 10.
This, of course, is because D’varim (Deuteronomy) 5 is not speaking about the 10 commandments, but about the initial words of the covenant spoken directly to the people at Mt. Sinai when the mountain had the pillar of fire and smoke upon it. The covenant of which was written in the Book of the Covenant, and sprinkled with the blood in Shemot (Exodus) 24, and which included numerous other commandments in it besides.
This brings us to the wording of D’varim 5:22
“These words Yahuweh spoke to all your assembly in the Mountain out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice, and He added no more. And He wrote them onto the Tablets of Stone, and delivered them to me.”
This word “added” really messes up a lot of people on this matter. But the Hebrew word here “yacaph (yaw-saf)” can also be translated as “continued”, so that this passage would read,
“…and He continued no more.”
Now, is all we have to do is go back to Shemot 20 and see, was there a point where He paused?
Yes. In Shemot 20:18 -21, it is made clear that the people were so terrified by what they were seeing and hearing, that they feared they would die if they continued to hear God speak to them directly.
So they requested that Moshe go up to God and pass back to them what God had to say to them. And from this point onward, the people no longer came near, but stood far off; Shemot 20:21.
Once this was done, however, it is clear that Yahuweh continued where He had left off as is made clear in D‘varim 5:23-31 and in Shemot 20:22 - 24:3; only this time, with Moshe acting as the mediator.
So it is not that He discontinued giving them His commandments, for it is clear that He gave them 82 to 89 commandments before the covenant was even sealed in Shemot 24.
No, is what was discontinued was God’s direct communication with the people. It is after these initial words of the covenant were given that the communication of the commandments of the covenant went from being told to them directly by God, to be given to them indirectly by God through Moshe.
I realize that my initial study, which will soon be revised, indicated that only the instructions for building the 10 components of the Tabernacle were on the tablets of stone, and that the “traditional” 10 were not.
I have, however, since concluded that both were written on the tablets; but still maintain that the “10 commandments” are in reference to the 10 components of the Tabernacle that they were commanded to build. And later in this study I will explain why the “traditional” 10 was also on them.
So yes, D’varim 5 does state that this initial set of 9 or 13 commandments (depending on how you divide them) was written on the stone tablets as well.
But not because they are the “10 commandments”, which is evident by the fact that there are not 10, and by the fact that the phrase “10 commandments” is never used anywhere near where this “traditional 10" are ever quoted in Scripture - among other reasons.
However, the phrase “the 10 commandments” is used in Shemot 34:28 after the instructions on how to build the 10 components of the Tabernacle were given on Mt. Sinai, and immediately prior to when they began actually building the Tabernacle. And it is only after the stone tablets were presented intact to Israel that they were able to build the Tabernacle.
Likewise, Shemot 31:6 and 35:10 make it clear that the instructions to build the 10 components of the Tabernacle were specifically referred to as “commandments”.
Which takes us to Shemot 24:12 where Yahuweh commands Moshe to come up onto the Mountain to receive tablets of stone and “a law and commandments” which He had written, and which Yahuweh would give to him, so that Moshe could teach them to the sons of Israel.
Remember, close to 90 commandments had already been given and taught prior to the sealing of the covenant in chapter 24, so that when Yahuweh says in Shemot 24:12,
“I will give you tablets of stone, and a law and commandments which I have written that you may teach them.“
It is shown clearly that what Yahuweh was going to present on the Tablets was different than that which had already been given and taught.
Remember also, that what had already been given was written down in the Book of the Covenant by Moshe‘s hand; but that the tablets of stone containing the as yet unreceived, and untaught law and commandments, would be written on the stone tablets by God‘s own finger adding a further distinction between the two.
Take note also at this point that this “other” law, that Yahuweh wrote on the tablets, would eventually be placed into the ark, which in turn would be placed in the Holy of Holies where the High priest would have access only one time per year.
This shows that whatever was written on the tablets for instruction was for a temporary, short term, work.
That is because this second “law”, was solely for the purpose of building the Tabernacle, and for the regulation of activities during this time.
Remember, in Galatians 3:17-25 states that there was a law that was “added” 430 years after the promises given to Avraham to deal with transgressions until the promised Seed of Messiah could come.
It was a temporary law, designed to fulfill the need for atonement of the people until Yeshua, our ultimate sacrifice, could arrive. This is further re-iterated in Hebrews 10:1-10 (Hebrews 8:1 is a good place to start to understand the context, and to clarify that it is indeed the law of the Tabernacle/Temple being spoken of here.)
You see, “the law” is not always referring to “the Torah”. And oftentimes it is only context that tells us which law is being discussed.
So going back to Shemot 25 we see that Yahuweh is preparing to give us another “law” and set of commandments, and then in chapters 25 through 31 He proceeds to give a law revolving exclusively around the construction and ordination of the Tabernacle. So we can identify this “law” as the “law of the Tabernacle/Temple”.
After presenting this law of the Tabernacle/Temple, it turns out that some of the children of Israel had committed idolatry, and so Moshe upon learning this, smashes the tablets, and the Tabernacle is unable to be built.
Is what resulted was the need for another covenant to be made - a different one.
Let me begin by first describing the foundational covenant. It was the Avrahamic covenant as can be clearly seen from the following verses. B’resheet (Genesis) 12:1-8, 15:13-16, 17:1-27, 26:1-5, 35:9-12; Shemot (Exodus) 2:23-25 and 6:1-5.
This Avrahamic covenant given initially 430 years prior to Mount Sinai was the one that Israel had agreed to at Mount Sinai, and the one that they broke when they made the golden calf.
Had they not broken the Avrahamic covenant at this point, then the law of the Tabernacle would have become part of this Avrahamic covenant; but as it is written,
“…it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.” Hebrews 10:4.
So Yahuweh allowed them to break the Avrahamic covenant, which is an eternal covenant, and then in Shemot 34:10, just prior to re-issuing the law of the Tabernacle on the second set of stone tablets, He declares,
“Behold, I make a covenant.”
Thereby incorporating the law of the Tabernacle into a separate covenant, apart from the Avrahamic covenant. As it is written,
“Behold, the days are coming, says Yahuweh, when I will make a new covenant with the House of Israel and with the House of Judah. Not like the covenant that I made with their fathers… which they broke…”
That is, not according to the Avrahamic covenant which they broke when making and worshipping the idol of the golden calf.
“But this is the covenant that I will make with the House of Israel after those days, says Yahuweh, I will put my law in their minds, and write it on their hearts… I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” Yerem’yahu (Jeremiah) 31:31-34.
Notice He says,
“I will…write it on their hearts”,
and that this is within the context of what He will do for the remission of sin.
Even as He wrote the instructions of the Tabernacle and its 10 components on the tablets of stone for the remission of sin.
As it is written,
“Then I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within them, and take the stony heart out of their flesh, and give them a heart of flesh.” Yechezk’el (Ezekiel) 11:19
And again in Yechezk’el (Ezekiel) 36:25,26,
“Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols.
I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.”
These words, combined with the phrase,
“I will sprinkle clean water on you and you shall be clean.”
create a clear symbolic reference to the change in priesthoods that would take place at that time; as is also clearly stated in Hebrews 8:7-13.
And so, Yerem’yahu (Jeremiah) 31:31-34 is not saying that the new covenant is a different covenant from the Avrahamic covenant, but different in how the Avrahamic covenant would be administrated and carried out, for the Avrahamic covenant is eternal, as it is written,
“…I will establish My covenant between you and your descendents after you in their generations, as an eternal covenant…” B’resheet (Genesis) 17:7
And again in Luke 1:67-77,
“Blessed is Yahuweh, God of Israel, for He has visited and redeemed His people, and has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the House of His servant David as He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets, who have been here since the world began.
Declaring that we should be delivered from our enemies, and from the hand of all who hate us.
To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember His holy covenant - the oath which He swore to our father Avraham; to grant us that we, being delivered from the hand of our enemies, might serve Him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before Him all the days of our life.
And you child shall be called the prophet of the Highest; for your will go before the face of the Master to prepare His ways, to give knowledge of salvation to His people through the remission of their sins.”
So we can see that the Avrahamic covenant was in no way discontinued, but only expressed through two different types of priesthoods. As it is written,
“Avraham had two sons…” Galatians 4:22
So it is unlike the covenant of Avraham given at Mt. Sinai in that at Mt. Sinai the covenant of Avraham had incorporated into it the temporal law of the Tabernacle,
But it is the same covenant of Avraham that contained within it the promise of Messiah who would once, for all time, offer up Himself as eternal sacrifice to redeem all those who had sinned under the first form of the covenant presented at Mt. Sinai; Hebrews 7:26,27; 9:15.
For again, as it is written,
“Avraham had two sons, the one by the slave woman, the other by the free woman.” Galatians 4:22.
The covenant of Avraham being presented in Shemot chapters 19-24 is the son of the freewoman given by promise, and who was promised before the son of the slave woman came into being. It is an extension of the same covenant given to Avraham 430 years prior.
But the covenant given in Shemot 34 is the son of Avraham through the slave woman who came after the promise was made.
But as we can see from how it all plays out in Shemot, the slave woman gave birth first, that is, the Levitical priesthood and corresponding law of the Tabernacle would come and prevail first; and the eternal priesthood after the order of Melchizadok, which Avraham himself partook in, would be given birth to later.
This picture can be seen all the way from the beginning as can be seen in B’resheet (Genesis) 4:1-8, where we see that Cain, the evil one, would be born just prior to his twin brother Abel, the righteous one; and that the evil one would prevail first over the righteous one, and would ultimately kill the Righteous One.
And so when it says,
“… not according to the covenant made with their fathers…”
it means, not according to the Avrahamic covenant administrated through the Levitical priesthood and law of the Tabernacle which was “born” first among the 12 tribes of Israel; but through the revival and permanent establishment of the Avrahamic covenant through the blood of Yeshua, which was “born“ second among the 12 tribes of Israel; and that the children of the first would seek to kill the children of the second.
You see, the covenant given to Avraham was to go through Yitz’chak (Isaac), not through Ishmael. But because Avraham, through his own human efforts, attempted to bring about the promises through a different way, Ishmael, the son of the slave woman, became a thorn in the side of Yitz’chak, who the promises and Melchizadok priesthood belonged to. And this scenario continues to this very day through the Arab/Israeli conflict.
So when Messiah Yeshua arrived, the temporal Tabernacle law and covenant added to the Avrahamic covenant (representing Ishmael, the first born) would be de-activated, and the Avrahamic covenant through the priesthood of Melchizadok (and representing Yitz’chak [Isaac] the second born of Avraham, but first born of Sarah) would be revived for the remission of sins through the blood of Yeshua as was given by promise; Galatians 3:16-18. As it is written,
“In that He says, ‘A new covenant’, He has made the first obsolete. Now what is growing old is ready to vanish away.” Hebrews 8:13.
This was necessary, for the Avrahamic covenant is an eternal covenant, and so needed to be supported by an eternal sacrifice and perpetual priesthood. But because sin abounded, this law of the Tabernacle, a temporary facilitation for atonement, had to be added until Messiah could come; Galatians 3:15-25.
This law of the Tabernacle was patterned after the heavenly sanctuary; Hebrews 8:5.
However, Avraham (prior to the creation of the 12 tribes), within the covenant given to him, served and paid tithes to Melchizadok, who was both a priest and a king at Salem (the original name of Jerusalem). An arrangement which was forbidden under the Tabernacle law of the Levitical priesthood, which forbade kings to serve as priests, or for priests to serve as kings.
The Avrahamic covenant first given at Mt. Sinai, and prior to the rebellion, also required all the first born males to serve in the priesthood; but after the rebellion, after the Tabernacle law was introduced, the firstborn were redeemed and the Levites raised up to serve in their place.
These are just a few of the examples of the differences that distinguish the covenant given in Shemot 19-24 from the one given in Shemot 34:10-28.
These subtle changes took place because the eternal covenant of Avraham, and based on the promised Seed, could not be served with the temporal law of the Tabernacle, based on the flesh of animals.
This is why God did not allow this Tabernacle law to be officially introduced until after they had broken the Avrahamic covenant. For it was only after they violated it that Yahuweh could properly bring in the temporal Tabernacle law under an addenda and temporal sub-covenant.
Likewise, because this covenant was a temporal addendum to the Avrahamic covenant, it was appropriate that the words spoken directly to the people in Shemoth 20 be added to the tablets of stone as a token witness of their agreement to submit to the Avrahamic covenant in Shemot 19:5-8.
Notice also, that in Shemot 19:5 Yahuweh states,
“…if you will keep my covenant.”
And in Shemot 19:8
“Then all the people answered together and said, ‘All that Yahuweh has spoken, we will do.’ “
Showing that this Avrahamic covenant was conditional, and as such required the agreement of both parties; but in Shemot 34:10 He says,
“Behold, I make a covenant.”
This statement contains no “if”, “then” statements, and did not require or even invite the consent of the people.
This is because this “other” covenant, was being presented here to act as a receptacle for the “other” law and set of commandments related to the Tabernacle; and which covenant was not conditional, but based on what Yahuweh said He would do, regardless of whether the people agreed to it or not.
This is because,
1- Again, God’s promise to us to redeem us from our sins is what He stated He would provide, and was something that only He could provide; for the remission of sin is something that cannot be accomplished by human effort. It is something that has to be done on our behalf by someone in authority, and who is guiltless of sin themselves; and
2- as a temporal covenant, it was not binding on the people; but as Galatians 3:19-25 state, this law of the Tabernacle was but a tutor to deal with sin and to lead us to Messiah; but that once the Messiah came, we no longer needed to be under the tutor.
This Tabernacle has always been temporal in nature, as even the Temples in Jerusalem which were patterned after it were; which is evident from the fact that the Tabernacle eventually went out of service, and both Shlomo’s (Solomon’s) Temple, and Herod’s Temple were destroyed.
But yet despite the discontinuation of the Tabernacle service, and destruction of both Temples, we were still able to receive remission of our sins. How could this be if remission of our sins were dependent on those things? It could not.
As it is written, “…it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.” Hebrews 10:4
But because their was a temporal change from the priesthood of Avraham which was after the order of Melchizadok, to a priesthood Avraham never partook of, after the order of Aaron under the Levitical priesthood; there was now a need to change the covenant agreement back to its original form.
As it is written,
“…if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law [of the Tabernacle and corresponding sacrifices] ), what further need would there be for another priest to be appointed after the order of Melchizadok, rather than after the order of Aaron?
But the priesthood having been changed, brought about a change in the law [of the Tabernacle and sacrifices].
For He [Yeshua], about whom these things are spoken, belongs to a different tribe from which no man has officiated at the altar.
For it is evident that our Master arose from Judah, of which tribe Moshe spoke nothing concerning priesthood.
And yet even more evident, if, in the likeness of Melchizadok, there arises another priest who has come, not according to the law of a commandment of animal flesh; but according to the power of an endless life.
For He (Yahuweh) testifies,
‘You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizadok.’
For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, for the law (of sacrifices) made nothing perfect… “
But,
“Yeshua has become the guarantor of a better covenant…”
And,
“He (Yeshua), because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood.” Hebrew 7:11-24.
This unchangeable covenant is the Avrahamic covenant expressed through the priesthood after the order of Melchizadok, the same one that Avraham partook of and paid tithes to; B’resheet (Genesis) 14:18-20.
And when the promised Seed of Messiah Yeshua had arrived, the priesthood of the Avrahamic covenant resorted back to its original form, and the Levitical priesthood after the order of Aaron which had been temporarily raised in its place till Messiah could come, was rendered obsolete.
And as it is written, We have been made,
“…ministers of the new [form of the] covenant, not by that which was written [on the tablets of stone], but of the Ruach (Spirit); for that which was written puts to death [animal sacrifices], but the Ruach (Spirit) gives life [resurrection from the dead].
And if the ministry of death [of animal sacrifices], written and engraved on the stone tablets was splendid, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moshe because of the brightness of his countenance, which brightness was passing away, how will the ministry through the Ruach (Spirit) not be more splendid?” II Corinthians 3:3-8
And when was the face of Moshe brightened with Yahuweh’s glory? When Moshe came down from Mt. Sinai with the second tablets of stone, and immediately prior to the building of the Tabernacle. Shemot 34:29 - 35:20.
So we see it is not the Torah, THE Law, that was done away, but “the” law of the Tabernacle and associated sacrifices that were put aside. So that every commandment given not specific to a priestly responsibility and function is still binding to us, even as they were binding to the non-priest, and non-Levites of Moshe’s time.
And the commandments, specific to the Levites and priests, though binding on the Levites and priests during Temple times, are not binding on them in the absence of a Temple anymore than the laws governing agriculture apply to a city dweller who owns no farmland; or than the laws pertaining to women, apply to men.
The book of Galatians is all about those who wanted to receive the circumcision required for conversion to Judaism so that they could partake of the sacrifices for salvation; and Shaul (Paul) states in 5:1-5, that if they partake in that type of circumcision, the circumcision of conversion, Messiah’s sacrifice will be of no benefit to them; for remission of sins (salvation) was not through the animal sacrifices, but through the Blood of Yeshua.
Only the circumcision given under the covenant made with Avraham is binding; B’resheet 17. But the circumcision for conversion in order to partake in the sacrifices is not. This is the freedom that Shaul (Paul) talks about in Galatians. Not that we are free from the Torah (THE Law) as is evident from Galatians 5:16-21 where it is written,
“I say then, Walk in the Ruach (Spirit), and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusts against the Ruach (Spirit) the Spirit (Ruach) against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you desire. But if you are led by the Ruach (Spirit) you are not under the law (of the Tabernacle and sacrifices).
Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, prostitution, uncleanness, unrestrained sin, idol worship, sorcery, hatred, argumentativeness, jealousy, outbursts of rage, selfish pursuits, divisions, heresies, envy, murder, drunken partying, orgies, and the like, of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in times past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God.”
All these things are what the Torah teaches and commands us to refrain from, so it becomes clear that when it says,
“you are not under the law”
It is not referring to the Torah, THE Law, but rather to the law of the Tabernacle/Temple and its accompanying sacrifices, for if THE Law were done away, Yeshua would be made out to be a liar; see Mattit’yahu (Matthew) 5:17-19; and the above sins stated would not prevent us from entering into the Kingdom.
Copyright 8/23/2004, by Hezekiyah Haas
|
|
|
