This is long, but bear with me. There’s a discussion payoff at the end.
The Three Annual (Required) Festivals for Israelites in the Book of Exodus are:
- Passover / Unleavened Bread (the month of Abib was renamed to Nisan during exilic times)
- Harvest (qatsir)
- Ingathering (asif)
14 ?”Three times in the year you shall keep a feast to me. 15 ?You shall keep the Feast of Unleavened Bread. As I commanded you, you shall eat unleavened bread for seven days at the appointed time in the month of ?Abib, for in it you came out of Egypt. ?None shall appear before me empty-handed. 16 You shall keep ?the Feast of Harvest (qatsir), of the firstfruits of your labor, of what you sow in the field. You shall keep the ?Feast of Ingathering (asif) at the end of the year, when you gather in from the field the fruit of your labor. 17 ?Three times in the year shall all your males appear before the Lord God.
If you thought you’d be reading about Passover, “Weeks”, and “Booths” you are already mentally prepared for what’s coming – those names for the festivals come from Deuteronomy, and are NAME CHANGES that resulted from a different time period for the three festivals. But let’s start with what we have in Exodus.
Passover Unleavened Bread in the Book of Exodus 12
Instructions or the Passover (12:1-13)
1 The Lord said to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, 2 ?”This month shall be for you the beginning of months. It shall be the first month of the year for you. 3 Tell all the congregation of Israel that on the tenth day of this month every man shall take a lamb ?according to their fathers’ houses, a lamb for a household. 4 And if the household is too small for a lamb, then he and his nearest neighbor shall take according to the number of persons; according to what each can eat you shall make your count for the lamb. 5 Your lamb shall be ?without blemish, a male a year old. You may take it from the sheep or from the goats, 6 and you shall keep it until the ?fourteenth day of this month, when the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill their lambs at twilight.
7 “Then they shall take some of the blood and put it on the ?two doorposts and the lintel of the houses in which they eat it. 8 They shall eat the flesh that night, roasted on the fire; with ?unleavened bread and bitter herbs they shall eat it. 9 Do not eat any of it raw or boiled in water, but ?roasted, its head with its legs and its inner parts. 10 And ?you shall let none of it remain until the morning; anything that remains until the morning you shall burn. 11 In this manner you shall eat it: with ?your belt fastened, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand. And you shall eat it in haste. ?It is the Lord’s Passover. 12 For ?I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and on ?all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: ?I am the Lord. 13 ?The blood shall be a sign for you, on the houses where you are. And when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague will befall you to destroy you, when I strike the land of Egypt.
Instructions about the Feast of Unleavened Bread (12:14-20)
14 “This day shall be ?for you a memorial day, and you shall keep it as a feast to the Lord; throughout your generations, as a ?statute forever, you shall keep it as a feast. 15 ?Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread. On the first day you shall remove leaven out of your houses, for if anyone eats what is leavened, from the first day until the seventh day, ?that person shall be cut off from Israel. 16 On the first day you shall hold a ?holy assembly, and on the seventh day a holy assembly. No work shall be done on those days. But what everyone needs to eat, that alone may be prepared by you. 17 And you shall observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread, for ?on this very day I brought your ?hosts out of the land of Egypt. Therefore you shall observe this day, throughout your generations, as a statute forever. 18 ?In the first month, from the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat unleavened bread until the twenty-first day of the month at evening. 19 ?For seven days no leaven is to be found in your houses. If anyone eats what is leavened, ?that person will be cut off from the congregation of Israel, ?whether he is a sojourner or a native of the land. 20 You shall eat nothing leavened; in all your dwelling places you shall eat unleavened bread.”
More Instructions (Summary) about the Passover Sacrifice/Meal (12:21-28)
21 Then Moses called all the elders of Israel and said to them, “Go and select lambs for yourselves ?according to your clans, and kill the Passover lamb. 22 Take a bunch of ?hyssop and ?dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and touch ?the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood that is in the basin. ?None of you shall go out of the door of his house until the morning. 23 ?For the Lord will pass through to strike the Egyptians, and when he sees the blood on ?the lintel and on the two doorposts, the Lord will pass over the door and ?will not allow the destroyer to enter your houses to strike you. 24 You shall observe this rite as a statute for you and for your sons forever. 25 And when you come to the land that the Lord will give you, ?as he has promised, you shall keep this service. 26 And ?when your children say to you, What do you mean by this service?’ 27 you shall say, ?It is the sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover, for he passed over the houses of the people of Israel in Egypt, when he struck the Egyptians but spared our houses.’ ” And the people ?bowed their heads and worshiped.
So What Do We Learn in Exodus 12?
- Exodus 12:1-20 ordains that the Passover sacrifice be roasted whole over an open fire, with no bones broken and no sectioning of the lamb (or sheep or goat).
- The Passover sacrifice was not to be eaten raw or boiled (Hebrew, bashal) in water
- No altar was used at all.
- According to Exodus 12:21-28, the Passover sacrifice that initiates the festival of Unleavened Bread is to be offered by Israelite families in their homes.
- The sacrifice was to be offered in the early evening
- No person is to leave his house after the Passover sacrifice until morning.
What else do we know?
- The Passover / Unleavened Bread festival began on the New Moon of the month just preceding the hardening of the barley (Nisan-April). It lasted seven days, and on the seventh day the pilgrimage took place. A sacrifice was to be offered outside one’s home on the eve of the first day of the festival. Matsot were to be eaten and leaven avoided for all seven days.
- The harvest reaping festival (qatsir) occurred when reaping started, sometime near the beginning of lyyar-May (according to the Gezer Calendar). The pilgrimage lasted one day.
- The festival of ingathering (asif) occurred on the full moon of the former two-month season of the month of ingathering (Tishrei-September; again according to the Gezer Calendar). The pilgrimage lasted one day.
Now let’s go to Deuteronomy 16 (note the underlining)
Passover
16 1 “Observe the ?month of Abib and keep the Passover to the Lord your God, for ?in the month of Abib the Lord your God brought you out of Egypt by night. 2 And you shall offer the Passover sacrifice to the Lord your God, from the flock or ?the herd, ?at the place that the Lord will choose, to make his name dwell there. 3 You shall eat no leavened bread with it. ?Seven days you shall eat it with unleavened bread, the bread of affliction-for you came out of the land of Egypt ?in haste-that all the days of your life you may remember the day when you came out of the land of Egypt. 4 ?No leaven shall be seen with you in all your territory for seven days, ?nor shall any of the flesh that you sacrifice on the evening of the first day remain all night until morning. 5 You may not offer the Passover sacrifice within any of your towns that the Lord your God is giving you, 6 but only at the place that the Lord your God will choose, to make his name dwell in it, there you shall offer the Passover sacrifice, in the evening at sunset, at the time you came out of Egypt. 7 And you shall cook (Hebrew, bashal) it and eat it at the place that the Lord your God will choose. And in the morning you shall turn and go to your tents. 8 For ?six days you shall eat unleavened bread, and on the seventh day there shall be ?a solemn assembly to the Lord your God. You shall do no work on it.
The Feast of Weeks
9 ?”You shall count seven weeks. Begin to count the seven weeks from the time the sickle is first put to the standing grain. 10 Then you shall keep ?the Feast of Weeks to the Lord your God with ?the tribute of a freewill offering from your hand, which you shall give ?as the Lord your God blesses you. 11 And ?you shall rejoice before the Lord your God, you and your son and your daughter, your male servant and your female servant, the Levite who is within your towns, the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow who are among you, at the place that the Lord your God will choose, to make his name dwell there. 12 ?You shall remember that you were a slave in Egypt; and you shall be careful to observe these statutes.
The Feast of Booths
13 ?”You shall keep the Feast of Booths seven days, when you have gathered in the produce from your threshing floor and your winepress. 14 ?You shall rejoice in your feast, you and your son and your daughter, your male servant and your female servant, the Levite, the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow who are within your towns. 15 For ?seven days you shall keep the feast to the Lord your God at the place that the Lord will choose, because the Lord your God will bless you in all your produce and in all the work of your hands, so that you will be altogether joyful.
16 ?”Three times a year all your males shall appear before the Lord your God at the place that he will choose: at the Feast of Unleavened Bread, at the Feast of Weeks, and at the Feast of Booths. ?They shall not appear before the Lord empty-handed. 17 Every man ?shall give as he is able, ?according to the blessing of the Lord your God that he has given you.
Before we get into the differences, it is important to note that the traditional view of the authorship of Exodus 12 and Deuteronomy 16 is that they were written:
- By Moses
- 40 years (roughly) apart
- Prior to the existence of a temple or any central sanctuary (and there was ONLY one of those, to whom all Israel was to come for festivals – THE temple)
So now for the differences:
- Deuteronomy 16 reveals that the spring barley harvest festival was deferred seven weeks and its name was changed from “the Pilgrimage Festival of Reaping (qatsir),” to “a Pilgrimage Festival of Weeks (shab’ot).” This occasion could no longer appropriately be called qatsir because it was not to be celebrated at the beginning of the grain harvest.
- The reason for the postponement was practical. When (in former days, prior to having a temple) pilgrimage had been only a short trip to a nearby worship center a farmer could manage the brief absence from his fields at the beginning of the grain harvest. Once a longer journey to a central Temple was involved (“the place where God would set his name”), leaving the fields became virtually impossible. The spring harvest festival was necessarily postponed. One counted seven weeks from “when the sickle is first put to the standing grain” (Deut. 16:9) and then celebrated the pilgrimage festival-at a time when absence from the fields was possible.
- Deuteronomy deals in much the same way with the old Festival of Ingathering (asif). In Deuteronomy 16:13-17 we read that the third required feast was now a seven-day pilgrimage festival. It is not called asif, “ingathering,” but rather, “the Pilgrimage Festival of Booths (sukkot).”
- The third feast was no longer celebrated when produce was first brought in from the field. It was delayed until after the produce had been processed on the threshing floor and the vat. Once the spring harvest festival had been postponed for practical reasons, it became necessary to postpone the autumn pilgrimage as well.
- We do not have the precise date during the year of the Deuteronomic Sukkot festival, but its new name is readily understandable. Once the festival was extended to seven days to be celebrated in the religious capital (Jerusalem, where the Temple was), it became necessary to provide temporary housing for pilgrims in and around the city. Huts (sukkot) were erected for this purpose. Nehemiah 8:13-18 provides a description of such a Sukkot celebration in postexilic times.
- The most transparent problem created by Deuteronomy’s restriction of sacrificial worship to one central Temple concerned the Passover offering and the matsot festival.
- The Passover sacrifice could no longer be offered in one’s home. Not only rescheduling, but restructuring the entire celebration was called for. Israelites would have to arrive at the religious capital before the eve of the matsot festival and then remain there, in most cases, until the seventh day of the festival, when the pilgrimage was celebrated. They therefore might not have time to get home and back in a period of six or seven days.
- It was therefore ordained in Deuteronomy 16:1-8 that the paschal sacrifice be offered later in the evening: “in the evening when the sun sets.”
- In this way, the Passover sacrifice could also serve as the sacrifice of the first day of the matsot festival. This explains why, according to Deuteronomy 16:8, matsot must be eaten for six days, not for seven, as in earlier laws in Exodus. The Passover sacrifice counted as part of the pilgrimage, which now occurred on the first, not the seventh, day of the festival, thus leaving only six remaining days. The morning after the paschal sacrifice an Israelite returned “to his tent” (the temporary booth set up because now the festival had to take place away from one’s home – in Jerusalem, where the temple was).
- In effect, Deuteronomy transformed the Passover sacrifice into the pilgrimage sacrifice, and in so doing, prescribed the same mode of sacrifice as obtained for a normal zeva?, “sacred feast.” This is why it could not be boiled (bashal) in pots (this was prohibited in Exodus 12) and might consist of large or small cattle.?? The paschal sacrifice did double duty in commemorating the Exodus, as before, but also in representing the offering required on the pilgrimage day.
So what is the point for this lengthy excursus with respect to our inspiration and inerrancy discussion? This example was prompted by a reader/commenter’s request that I show an example of how ne portion of Scripture was altered or changed by another. Done with that now (and this was the second example, and more could be offered). The REASON for the request was that it came out of an objection to my denial that God “gave” the words of the Scripture to the authors in some way – either aural dictation or some other means by which the author did not come up with the words himself. That is my view, and is why I call the human authors the immediate source of Scripture, while God is the ultimate, providential source (and approver of the results). What we have here with Passover and the feasts are obvious changes, and changes that ONLY make sense if Deuteronomy is much later (hundreds of years), when Israel is in a new situation – they are in the land, have Jerusalem as a capital, and have a temple. This means that Moses did not write Deuteronomy 16, but some later unnamed priest or scribe did. I have no problem with that, since God can use an unnamed individual (and also because the phrase “law of Moses” no more consistently means “came from Moses” than the phrase “psalm of David” means “came from David” – many psalms very obviously did not).
This prompts the question to the commenter: If God “gave” the words of Exodus 12, why would he “give” the words of Deuteronomy 16 that altered the words of the prior revelation? Couldn’t he make up his mind on the procedures or the times of year?
This is easily explainable when dealing with finite humans living at different times. When an omniscient God is giving the very words, it appears odd. Why not give one set in anticipation of later times? And in case one wants to argue that the wordings of Deuteronomy are “a prophecy” of later Passover times, that doesn’t work for a simple reason. Consider the Israelite living at the time of Moses who received BOTH sets of commands. Since for that Israelite could construe “the place that God set is name” was the Tabernacle, and since he lived in close proximity to the tabernacle, he COULD obey the Deuteronomy commands, but then he’d be disobeying the Exodus commands (and vice versa). Either way he is violating something in the Law. Also, how could that Israelite observe the right liturgical calendar. Either way he’s in violation. It’s far more coherent to see Deuteronomy 16 as later. And since the chronological displacement is coherent, we don’t have a contradiction problem – different rules for different times is understandable; different rules for the same (pre-temple) time is contradictory.
In fairness to the commenter, though, there is an answer that (sort of) lets him keep his inspiration argument – but which would perhaps require him to change it elsewhere: surrender Mosaic authorship for Deut. 16. That way, God can be “giving” the words to separate authors. But that in turn requires rethinking a lot of other things in Deuteronomy that appear much later than Moses.
And again, for the record, I do not subscribe to JEDP. It is a classic example of observing the obvious (non-Mosaic material in Deuteronomy, like this Passover example) and then using that to extrapolate to the unnecessary – JEDP documents). Redaction, overseen by a providential God who is the ultimate source of the text, is much more coherent than the patchwork quilt idea offered by the critics.
I hope you are all seeing this subject is SO much deeper than the simplistic statements given in systematic theologies by those who work only in the English Bible (and often without OT context).
Now I see, as you put it, why this subject is SO much deeper…truly God wouldn’t inspire the same author with information that was contradictory to his own time. I understand wanting to hold to a plenary verbal inspiration view but we need to appy our reason when things like this are revealed. I, for one, am glad for this point of view as it does resolve the problem while maintaining integrity of the text and glorifying the omni-potent/Sovereign/omni-scient God.
@Jonnathan Molina: thanks – glad someone gets it!
Mike,
Excellent responses!! I love the complexity that we have manifested in this issue. I was on a hiatus from the 22-31 and I am only now catching up, so please be patient with me.
Grace be with you,
Chris
@cwmyers007: you bet
Mike,
I am thoroughly disappointed with this post. I feel like you may have been inspired by liberal critical scholarship here. I find the conservative (meaning they hold to Mosaic authorship) Christian/Jewish scholars to handle the text with much more consistency on this issue. Let me elaborate on where I believe you misstepped.
Basically in 3 areas: one, you did not take into account the purpose and reality of Exodus 12 vs. Deuteronomy 16; second, you did not consider Leviticus in this discussion (which illuminates much of your problems with the text); third, you read differences into the shalosh regalim that are unnecessary. Let me explain each of these in turn:
1. While reading, I was critiquing you and wondering if you realized that Exodus 12 is commanding the ORIGINAL Passover, the unique IN EGYPT one. The original Passover was never intended to be the exact same as the ceremonial Passover feast that is explained in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Yes, Exodus 12 does tell the people that this ORIGINAL Passover is going to be ceremonially memorialized for the rest of their generations and guidelines were given starting in verses 14-20 for the MEMORIAL of the ORIGINAL Passover. This distinction is not only made in the chapter itself, but is also explicit in chapter 13 and verses 5 and 11 where it says that and it shall be when the Lord brings you into the Promised Land. There is this distinction to how things ORIGINALLY occurred and how that original things were to be memorialized. Notice how the brief (and obviously incomplete) regulations in Ex. 12: 14-20 is paralleled in 13: 5-10. If you realize this distinction than you have no warrant to say that there is any difference between sacrificing the lamb in the home versus the place where the Lord will set his name because the sacrifice at the home was unique to the original Passover and Scripture never intends nor commands for THAT to be the practice in the ceremony memorializing the original Passover.
2. Because you did not take into account Leviticus 23, you made some errors in your judgment that could have been resolved. First, Leviticus 23:15-16 explains that the seven week deferral of Shavuot is called the Counting of the Omer and this was given in Leviticus by God through Moses in order to commemorate the giving of the Law at Sinaithe great reason that Israel was taken from Egypt was to serve the Lord by receiving and obeying his Law GIVEN at Sinai (therefore Ex 12 could not mention this because the narrative of the giving of the Law does not come until chapter 20!), instead Moses instituted this in Leviticus and this is why Deuteronomy must mention it in chapter 16! The seven weeks of defferal was later used by Jews as a time of spiritual growth that their desire may grow for the Torah. Secondly, Leviticus 23:5 (read it in Hebrew) literally says between the two evenings for the timing of Pesach. The Jews have historically understood this to mean the afternoon in other words the sacrifice was done in the afternoon and the feast commenced in the evening as commanded by Deuteronomy. Accordingly and thirdly, Leviticus 23:6 is explicit that the feast of unleavened bread is to be eaten for seven days (as Exodus confirms). You try to make Deuteronomy 16:8 say that it is CHANGING the eating of unleavened bread (matsot) from seven days to six days! But this is ludicrous when it says 3 verses earlier to eat it for seven days (16:3, seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread), read in context, Deut. 16:8 is chronology and it is simply saying that six days you will eat unleavened bread and the seventh day will be a solemn assembly for you. It does NOT say, You shall only eat the unleavened bread for six days and stop on the seventh to observe the solemn assembly-what you seem to want it to say, but it clearly does not.
3. Your reasons for what you think are differences in Ex. 12 and Deut. 16 are not warranted if these two considerations above are implemented and if Scripture is allowed in your mind to interpret itself. Deuteronomy did not transform the Passover into the Pilgrimage sacrifice. The people would have celebrated this in the same way in the wilderness by pilgrimaging to the tabernacle groundsyea so this was definitely not that far as traveling from Dan to Jerusalem, but the principle is the sameGO to where the Lord has set his namehis gloryat the wandering tabernacle in the wilderness and at the permanent temple in Jerusalem. All of these practical concerns that you mention are not supported by the text and ARE NOT the reasons for Deuteronomys alleged changed of Exodus rather Leviticus commands informs us of why Deuteronomy is not going to look the same as Exodus 12; along with the consideration of the contextual concerns between the two books.
More could be said, but this should be sufficient for anyone who is ever going to understand this at allthat this does NO HARM whatsoever to my view of verbal plenary inspiration that God gave the words of Scripture through his inspiration of them.
You posed the question for me: If God gave the words of Exodus 12, why would he give the words of Deuteronomy 16 that altered the words of the prior revelation? Couldnt he make up his mind on the procedures or the times of year?
I answer that I have shown that there was no alteration whatsoever, rather you have perceived an alteration because you have NOT even considered that said in Leviticus and nor have you distinguished between the uniqueness of the commandments for the first Passover verses the much different ceremony for memorializing the first unique Passover. All of this and more of which we have already discussed makes this question not-applicable, but instead requires you to evaluate whether there really is any evidence that I have not dealt with that would require me to even consider alterations that are not consistent with verbal plenary inspiration.
Thanks for the engaging discussionthats why your blog is my favorite.
Grace be with you,
Chris
@cwmyers007: so, when it says in Deut that they are not to offer the passover except in the place that the Lord puts his name, that really isn’t a change – it’s imaginary? Huh? Come on. It’s plain as day.
@cwmyers007: I still can’t make any sense of your explanation. Maybe someone else can.
@cwmyers007: so, God never intended the Israelites to practice the Passover as it’s laid down in Exodus 12? Why does he say “14 This day shall be ?for you a memorial day, and you shall keep it as a feast to the Lord; throughout your generations, as a ?statute forever, you shall keep it as a feast.” They follow the Exodus rules in the book of Numbers (Deuteronomy is the last book of Moses, by any view). I’d like to know if you can find a single instance of the Passover being observed according to the Deuteronomic procedure that was PRIOR to the temple being in existence. That would help. It would also help for you to provide an explanation for how the Deuteronomic instruction to offer the passover sacrifice “at the place where the Lord will set his name” = every individual’s house. I don’t think we can argue that the presence of Yahweh was in every Israelite tent or house.
Mike,
I think my post was not clear to you. I was saying that Exodus 12 is a narrative of what God commanded Israel to do for the very first passover. When God said “this is a memorial for you”–he meant the original pasach will be memorialized into a ceremonial feast (which of course will be much different from the original event) and of course it will not preserve all of the original details (think about it…did they subsequently splatter their doorposts with blood for all generations….NO…that was for the very first passover only as narrated in Ex. 12).
And again the Lord set his name at the tabernacle when it had been completed. Furthermore, when the people celebrated Passover in Numbers 9 it only says that they did “according to all that the Lord commanded Moses, so the people of Israel did”–I see this as a explicit reference to Leviticus 23 and not Exodus 12–Leviticus 23 has the most deailed explanation of the passover rules that even the Orthodox Jews use at this day.
Why are you still not considering Leviticus in this discussion–it is integral to the discussion at hand.
Grace be with you,
Chris
@cwmyers007: still didn’t answer my questions. What passage says the Lord set his name in the Tabernacle when it was finished?
>@cwmyers007: still didn’t answer my questions. What passage says the Lord set his name in the Tabernacle when it was finished?
Do you really need an explicit passage for that? I mean, the tabernacle is theplace where God descends to meet his people. If that doesn’t imply his name is set there, than I don’t know what doesn’t. After all, what is the difference between the tabernacle and the Temple (in principle)?
@cwmyers007: give me the Leviticus point again.
RE: The Leviticus Point
Mike,
Leviticus 23 explains the deferral–your “practical” explanation for the deferral is not in the text, but being supplied by your guessing….I said:
2. Because you did not take into account Leviticus 23, you made some errors in your judgment that could have been resolved. First, Leviticus 23:15-16 explains that the seven week deferral of Shavuot is called the Counting of the Omer and this was given in Leviticus by God through Moses in order to commemorate the giving of the Law at Sinaithe great reason that Israel was taken from Egypt was to serve the Lord by receiving and obeying his Law GIVEN at Sinai (therefore Ex 12 could not mention this because the narrative of the giving of the Law does not come until chapter 20!), instead Moses instituted this in Leviticus and this is why Deuteronomy must mention it in chapter 16! The seven weeks of defferal was later used by Jews as a time of spiritual growth that their desire may grow for the Torah. Secondly, Leviticus 23:5 (read it in Hebrew) literally says between the two evenings for the timing of Pesach. The Jews have historically understood this to mean the afternoon in other words the sacrifice was done in the afternoon and the feast commenced in the evening as commanded by Deuteronomy. Accordingly and thirdly, Leviticus 23:6 is explicit that the feast of unleavened bread is to be eaten for seven days (as Exodus confirms). You try to make Deuteronomy 16:8 say that it is CHANGING the eating of unleavened bread (matsot) from seven days to six days! But this is ludicrous when it says 3 verses earlier to eat it for seven days (16:3, seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread), read in context, Deut. 16:8 is chronology and it is simply saying that six days you will eat unleavened bread and the seventh day will be a solemn assembly for you. It does NOT say, You shall only eat the unleavened bread for six days and stop on the seventh to observe the solemn assembly-what you seem to want it to say, but it clearly does not.
Mike,
Remember that the ‘name of the Lord’ and the ‘glory of the Lord’ are virtuously synonymous. See Jonathan Edward’s The End For Which God Created the World in John Piper’s God’s Passion For His Glory, pp. 239-241 for proof for this.
To solidify my point, I offer verses in addition to Ex. 34 that show that God set his name upon the tabernacle—remember we have already established that his glory is no different from his name–they just emphasize different aspects of his majesty.
The glory of the Lord fills the tabernacle: Ex. 29:43, Leviticus 16:2, Numbers 9:15
The glory of the Lord fills the temple: I Kings 8:10-11, 2 Chronicles 5:13-14; 7:2
The Glory of the Lord fills the future temple/tabernacle (i.e. the body of Christ–or Christ in Herod’s temple): Haggai 2:7-9
The Glory of the Lord fills the tabernacle in heaven : Revelation 15:8
@cwmyers007: You’re still missing the point of my questions and contention. And to follow the other post up, there are no “other sacrifices” that are to be offered with Passover. They are boiling the passover offerings as food, contra Exodus 12.
@cwmyers007: I think I included this thought in my last reply. You have an odd habit of “reminding” me of things I’ve previously said.
@cwmyers007: I don’t see anything in Leviticus 23 that forbids the holding of Passover in one’s home, as in Deut 16, nor that allows for boiling (Deut 16) what wsa previously forbidden to be boiled in Exod 12. And again, they are boiling and eating the passover sacrifices in the late Passover observance passages (Josiah) – there are no “other sacrifices” that were sacrificed with Passover, in either Exod 12 or Deut 16. You are simply making that part up to “explain” the boiling.
Generalmente no publicar en los sitios, pero me gustar?a decir que este post realmente me oblig? a hacerlo! realmente la entrada de Niza.
@Beacan: I don’t read Spanish – sorry.
Very interesting discussions. I would like to add something to this comment:
“Redaction, overseen by a providential God who is the ultimate source of the text, is much more coherent than the patchwork quilt idea offered by the critics.”
I think your theory vs. Friedman’s JEPD is a distinction without a difference. You both believe multiple hands have touched the Torah. He believes in four, you believe in many more. It’s just a different sort of patchwork quilt, but it remains a quilt nonetheless. And what is stopping Friedman from saying that JEPD was redacted, but God was the ultimate approver? Would it hold sway? Probably not. So why is your version of redaction better? How do you know God approved of the text? Is there anything in the text that speaks of some anonymous scribe belong allowed to alter a text and he was given some vision by God? The prophetic books have an author because he was given a vision. It’s not anonymous. Doesn’t Deut. strictly forbid “adding or removing” anything? Is that not a basic warning to scribes or priests from coming in an altering anything? So then who are these scribes that would actually change God’s law and then claim God “approved” it. I think this may be Chris’ frustration as well.
I believe this to be the major kink in all your arguments to defend scripture. You do a good job showing traditional explanations don’t work, but in my opinion you have never given good cause to believe how God can “approve” of a redacted text when the text says nothing of who the redactor is and by what authority they had to redact and alter divine law. If you are going to claim inspiration led them, that is just circular reasoning.
>Nehemiah 8:13-18 provides a description of such a Sukkot celebration in postexilic times.
But it is described as a law that Moses gave, and, because they sat in booths in the desert. If it was simply a practical civic undertaking to accommodate people, why concoct a whole divine explanation around it that it connects to something in the desert?
>The morning after the paschal sacrifice an Israelite returned “to his tent” (the temporary booth set up because now the festival had to take place away from one’s home – in Jerusalem, where the temple was).
A tent = ohel
Booth = sukah
I don’t see the problem (again). Yes, on one hand, Moses could have written about Sukkoth, an account that stems from divine conversation, if you will. That doesn’t require dictation. Conversely, since “law of Moses” can also reflect Moses as a third party (laws about Moses and his time), Sukkoth could have been transmitted orally and written down later than Moses’ actual lifetime. Either way, the laws/ideas are Mosaic. Either way they have divine influence and, therefore, divine meaning and importance.
You don’t need personal divine encounter at a given point for God to be in and behind something. If you do need that, then none of us ought to be talking about what God does in our lives.
I think you misunderstood me. This was not an issue of dictation. It’s an issue of context. I am asking regarding the Booths, not the holiday. The booths are not something “divine.” They are what today we would call a porta potty. It was just something civic minded people realized they needed to accommodate all the people. Purely functional with the populace not in any way connecting the booths to Moses. So my question is, WHY (either the redactor OR some priest teaching the people) connect something like that to the desert wandering? That is quite a jump from saying the booths were needed to accommodate the influx of people and then saying “OH, we are doing it because our forefathers sat in booths in the desert too”
As an analogy, let’s take the 4th of july. In order to go to 4th of July celebrations we need public roads. The celebrations are the ends, the roads are the means. We, the populace put no meaning in the “roads” that take us to the celebration. So imagine centuries down the line, some historian writes up a book of customs and states Americans should walk on roads in memory of the founding fathers using roads
I hope I clarified what I meant.
>If you do need that, then none of us ought to be talking about what God does in our lives.
Well, I would be careful there. We may talk about it, but everyone knows it is a subjective claim with nothing more but “emotions” backing it up. I am sure some Hindu priest can say the same thing about his many gods as well.
I don’t know if it is wise to compare that to divine law and scripture or else you basically implying it is all just subjective “feelings” of divinity and nothing more substantial than that.
Any thoughts on my “Booths” inquiry? 😀
not sure I saw it – in email?
What I wrote above. Dated 4/27/14.
Starts with
“I think you misunderstood me”
I don’t really understand the point. The booths were not porta-potties. They were to “dwell in” (Lev. 23:42). The same term occurs elsewhere in the context of dwelling (e.g., 2 Sam. 11:11). The point is living in tents (whether the people, to commemorate the wilderness wandering, or any army in the field (2 Sam. 11:11). They don’t have to be divine – ?
Well, I think you still misunderstood. You said, the booths, were added LATER. The original pilgrimage did not include that commandment. You explain there are booths BECAUSE there was a sort of “rental sort age.” People needed places to stay during the pilgrimage. Again, meaning, the booths are the PURPOSE of the pilgrimage. It was simply there to facilitate people finding lodging.
Given that:
1) The Leviticus commandment came LATER.
2) My analogy of a porta-potty was simply to show you an analogy. If today, we had 4th of july celebrations and sponsors of celebrations brought port-potties for the people, would we as Americans conclude that port-potties were PART of the 4th of July? No of course not. In 300 years from now, would the President declare 4th of July celebrations must include porta-potties because their ancestors used them? Of course not. It’s strictly utility. The same goes for the booth in lieu of your reasoning. WHY did they connect a booth – that was strictly secular utility – to the desert wandering?????? Not only that, but the booth has become part of the central core. So I am aware Leviticus contains it, but it as was added AFTERWARDS. So that is just begging the question. WHY did the writer connect a booth to the desert wandering when he knew it was strictly something later invented later for the Jerusalem visitors.
3) If there were booths in Jerusalem to accommodate the masses – again, a purely secular utility – one would assume they also existed during the Passover pilgrimage and the Shavuot Pilgrimage. Right? After all, if people needed lodging for the fall pilgrimage, they would need it for the Spring on too. Therefore, why did the writer not connect booths to THOSE holidays. Why only to the Fall pilgrimage? Why make it the center of THAT holiday and not the others?
Again, please keep in mind: All this is in lieu of your reason for the booth which was strictly a secular usage to accommodate the masses. If your reasoning is correct, it had no essential connection to the desert wandering. You are left with answering both number #2 and #3. I’m not necessarily saying you are wrong. Just that your theory leaves two large holes.
Also, I am not saying it HAS to be divine, but why it was CONNECTED.
To re-emphasize, the commandant is not just to dwell in booths, but to dwell in booths BECAUSE your ancestors did it in the desert. You have to explain why someone would connect a LATER invention, with the past, when everyone knew it was strictly a utilitarian structure to accommodate visitors and not part of the desert wandering
I don’t think the booths was a later invention; Israel lived in tents during the wandering.
Also, I am following the logic of your post (unless I totally misunderstood you.
1) When it was Chag Ha’Asif, the Israelites were not celebrating, by living in booths. The original holiday had nothing to do with booths but merely a pilgrimage. There was no intention of honoring the desert wandering. It was purely a sacrificial holiday
2) Later on, they changed the holiday to Sukkot .Why was it changed? Because – as you said theorize – they built booths to house all the visitors. At some point, scribes saw a bunch of booths everywhere and forgot what their initial purpose was – which was to ONLY house the visitors to Jerusalem. So, the scribes retroactively* gave a REASON for the holiday as a time to honor the wandering and lodging in the desert by building booths.
My two questions from the earlier post (October 3) emanate from logic of your theory. It’s not JUST to say Sukkah can mean Tents. Its the fact of the scribe retroactively giving a reason for the new Fall Festival that it has to do with sitting in Sukkot when it initially did not when it was called Chag Ha’asif. Remember, if they had Sukkot to house all the people, than the same thing goes fort he other two pilgrimages. WHy connect booths with THAT specific holiday? I hope that makes sense. The booths in question – according to you – were strictly for utility purposes. Nothing more. Only LATER did they decide to connect all the weird booths around them with that holiday. The question STILL remains: Why?
*That is the main point.
why are you presuming that Israel didn’t actually live in tents during the wanderings?
My presumption lies in that sukkah and tent are two different things.
Sukkah = booths
Ohel = tents.
You say that sukkah can mean tent? Is this true? Or is it a type of square tent?
I don’t say it – I gave you a couple references to that effect. The difference is apparently a tent dwelling (ohel) vs. a “pup tent” that a modern soldier might use (sukkah – much smaller). Sukkah can mean other things (according to its usage), while ohel seems far more semantically restricted. Here’s the entry in HALOT for sukkah (not sure how much of this will come through, or if you’ll be able to decipher the chapter and verse abbreviations):
סֻכָּה: fem. of סֹךְ; III סכך, Bauer-L. Heb. 455f; MHeb.: סֻכַּת, סֻכָּתוֹ, סֻכֹּ(וֹ)תוֹ (SamP. sakkot): —1. thicket, a lion’s lair, Jb 3840 (parallel with מְעוֹנָה); —2. hut (Reicke-R. Hw. 754; BRL2 202), made from twigs and matting (Alt Kl. Schr. 3:233ff, esp. 239ff): a) for crops Jb 2718 (Dalman Arbeit 2:61; 4:333f), in the vineyard Is 18 (Dalman Arbeit 2:55f), towards the sun Is 46 (parallel with חֻפָּה), Jon 45; for cattle Gn 3317, for the wanderer Lv 2343, in the camp 2S 1111 (for the Ark), 1K 2012.16 (:: Gray Kings3 423f: n.loc. סֻכּוֹת), for those who fear God Ps 3121 (parallel with סֵתֶר); for God Ps 275 (K סֹךְ), cloud 2S 2212 parallel with Ps 1812 (? rd. כְּסֻתוֹ); metaph. David’s kingdom Am 911 cf. H. N. Richardson JBL 92 (1973):375ff; תִּשֻׁאוֹת as סֻ׳ for God Jb 3629 (see BHS); b) on the חַג הַסֻּכּוֹת feast of tabernacles (MiSuk. 2:6; de Vaux Inst. 2:397ff = Lebensordnungen 2:354ff; Elliger Lev. 321ff; Reicke-R. Hw. 1052f; J. Maier Geschichte d. Jd. Religion (Berlin 1972):3252; Merendino BBB 31 (1969):138): Lv 2334.42f (as in the wilderness), Dt 163.16 3110 Zech 1416.18f Ezr 34 2C 813 a person lives for seven days in סֻכּוֹת made from leafy branches Neh 815-17 (Dalman Arbeit 6:6f, 61f) on roofs and in courtyards Neh 816; → סִכּוּת; —Ps 275 rd. Q סֻכּוֹ for סֻכֹּה. †
Ludwig Koehler et al., The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1999), 753.
Other sources have the basic meaning as “covered structure”.
Thanks for the reference.
Though you are right. I can’t understand it 🙂
But at least I have some clarification that Sukkah is a TYPE of ohel.
>The point is living in tents
Is a sukkah a tent?
apparently that is part of the word’s semantic range.
Let’s simplify this 🙂
You said:
We do not have the precise date during the year of the Deuteronomic Sukkot festival, but its new name is readily understandable. Once the festival was extended to seven days to be celebrated in the religious capital (Jerusalem, where the Temple was), it became necessary to provide temporary housing for pilgrims in and around the city. Huts (sukkot) were erected for this purpose.
Ok. Great. But all this is for a purely secular utility purpose.
Why would a later scribe – taking the fact that he sees a bunch of booths all around – retroactively say one MUST live in booths as a remembrance of the wandering? According to your theory, that WASN’T the purpose of the booths. It was NOT a remembrance of the wandering. Also, why didn’t he do the same for Pesach and Shavuot? I am assuming pilgrims needed accommodations then too, right?
Why, when (later) people are living in an urban setting, does making temporary booths to commemorate a past event, a problem? If the people believed (based on either oral tradition or written material predating the DtrH era) that their ancestors lived in little tents on the way to the promised land, why can’t the later writing record a commemoration of that past event?
Your criticism just doesn’t make sense to me. Seem quite normal behavior.
Well, with all due honesty, it seems a bit, well weird. Here you have a holiday that had nothing to do with booths (or tents). Generations are celebrating it, minus these booths. Years later, Jerusalem becomes the center. The infrastructure can’t handle so many people so they build booths to accommodate them. Now, logically, – and I think would agree with me – this infrastructure problem happened on the rest of the pilgrimages too. (Chag haPesach, Chag HaKatzir). Meaning, booths were used then too. So I am left perplexed at the mode of thinking of the ancient people.
a) Why didn’t booths get connected to Chag HaKatzir? Presumably they needed booths then too.
b) It’s one thing for the populace to enjoy sitting in booths. It’s another thing to claim it was a COMMANDMENT from God, declaring it is in essence, the VITAL part of the holiday when it never was. What’s the mode of thinking there exactly???? How does a scribe go from knowing these booths at his time, were strictly secular in purpose, go on and tell the population that in FACT, it was ALWAYS a commandment from God!
If we had a chance to talk to Ezra or Nehemia, what would they think? Did they know the booths initially functioned as strictly utilitarian only to be repurposed by a scribe or did they actually believe God gave that commandment to Moses in the desert?
As a side note, how does all this relate to where in says in Deut. not to add or delete from the law? Isn’t a scribe ADDING a commandment (to well in booths) that was not there before?
I wish you would have commented on the thought process going on here 🙂
Deuteronomy’s laws adapt to living in the land with a temple (hence, Passover becomes a national event, not something done in homes). That sort of thing.
Coincidentally, an article came out today discussing what we are discussing here. The author brings up the same question I have regarding tent vs. sukkah. He says (as I) that the Torah says the lived in ohalim, yet than says we ought to commemorate by building sukkot. Again, all this is quite puzzling for me here and now. Why would a scribe ignore the earlier mention of them living in ohalim in the desert, and use his present day sukkah as an example of a dwelling when he KNOWS the concept of sukkah was being used as an accommodation, not to mimic the desert wandering.
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/high-holy-days-2014/high-holy-day-news-and-features/.premium-1.619440
I think this is akin to the changes in Passover — the later rules reflect urban life in the land, as opposed to nomadic (e.g. the rules in Exodus have the passover eaten in homes; the rules in Deut forbid that – it is a community event associated with the temple; see Exod 12 vs. Deut 16). It seems obvious that booths were not “ordered” in the earlier festival — people were already living in them prior to dwelling in the land (“in towns and cities they didn’t labor for” – Deut 6:10). Once in the land, the addition of the rules to make booths commemorated the past situation.