-
Israel’s Prohibition against Coveting and the Need for Contentment
As noted in other articles dealing with the Ten Commandments, the first four commandments relate to God’s relationship with man, a vertical component. The next six commandments pertain to man’s relationship with man, a horizontal component. The tenth (and last) of the Ten Commandments is a little different than the others, specifically targeting an attitude, not an action. The Tenth Commandment prohibits a wrongful desire, “You shall not covet.” Coveting in the Old Testament Compared to the Ancient World It is interesting that other ancient Near Eastern civilizations did not have laws prohibiting an attitude like coveting. There were many laws prohibiting wrongful action, but none that prohibited a desire for something that was prohibited. Coveting can be thought of as internal desire for something forbidden. It is not the action that is in view in the tenth commandment, but the implicit desire for what does not belong to you.…
-
To Boil or Not to Boil: Exod 12:8-9 and Deut 16:7 in Contradiction?
Many people constantly accuse the Bible of having contradictions within it. One such alleged contradiction is in regard to the command not to boil the Passover lamb. In Exodus 12:8-9, Israel is forbidden to eat any of the lamb raw or to boil it in water. Similarly, in Deuteronomy 16:5-7, Moses’ instructions on eating the Passover include the command to cook it and eat it. Although the apparent contradiction is not present in many English translations, the issue is that the Hebrew of Exodus 12:8-9 says not to “boil [מְבֻשָּׁל] in water,” while Deuteronomy 16:7 uses the same verb while saying, “boil [וּבִשַּׁלְתָּ] and eat.” So the same verb (“to boil,” בשׁל) is used in both verses, but seemingly in contradiction. In Exodus 12:9 Israel is told not to בשׁל (boil) the meat. But in Deuteronomy 16:7 they are told to בשׁל (boil) it. Are these two passages a contradiction?…
-
Egypt, the Hyksos, and the People of Israel
Many people have not heard of the Hyksos before. The Hyksos are not mentioned in Scripture, but there are many times in Scripture where knowing the historical background helps one understand what is going on in the text. Such is certainly the case in Exodus 1, where we are told rather abruptly that a Pharaoh arose over Egypt that “did not know Joseph” (Exod 1:8). Although it is possible that this could actually be a reference to a Pharaoh not having any historical knowledge of how the Israelites came to be in Egypt, that seems highly unlikely. Rather, the concept of “knowing” in the Hebrew Bible often will carry with it a relationship component (cf. Gen 4:1; 18:19). If such is the case here, then the point is that a Pharaoh arose over Egypt who did not wish to be friendly to the Israelites as the Egyptians had in the…
-
Where was the Altar of Incense Located?
In Hebrews 9:3-4 we are told that the Holy of Holies (aka Most Holy Place) contained the golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant. This Holy of Holies was entered only once a year on the Day of Atonement by the High Priest (Heb 9:7; cf. Lev 16). However, we see from other Scriptures that the altar of incense was used much more frequently than once a year (cf. Lev 4:7; Exod 30:7-8). In fact, in God’s instructions for the altar of incense, Israel was instructed to put the altar of incense outside of the Holy of Holies, separated from the Holy of Holies by a curtain (cf. Exod 30:6; 40:5). How are we to understand these apparent contradictions about the placement of the altar of incense? Although there are a variety of ways people have dealt with this issue, I believe the best solution is to…
-
The Purpose of the Old Testament Law
In a prior post, I mentioned that the Law needs to be read in its narrative context. In addition to being sensitive to the narrative context, we also need to evaluate the purpose of the Old Testament Law as it is portrayed in the Old Testament itself. This is an important first step in helping understand the differences that we see between the Old and New Testaments. The Law was never a means of salvation First, we need to adimently reaffirm that the Law is not portrayed as a standard for salvation. It is common for people to accuse dispensationalists of believing the Law was the means of salvation for Israel. I have spoken against this on multiple occasions, but if you are looking for an in depth treatment on the subject, John Feinberg wrote an excellent article on salvation in the Old Testament. Additionally, as I argued previously, the…
-
The OT Law in Its Narrative Context
All too often we read sections of Exodus, Leviticus, or Deuteronomy without being sensitive to the surrounding narrative context. We need to remember that God’s giving of the Law on Mount Sinai was within a specific narrative, and we should understand the Law in light of that narrative. When we do so, we come away with the following observations. The narrative context shows the Law was not a legalistic standard to earn God’s favor. There is no reason to think Old Testament believers were saved by keeping the Law. In fact, when we look at the placement of the Law in the narrative, we see that God had already delivered Israel out of Egypt. The giving of the Law (e.g., Exod 19–24) took place after God had already demonstrated His saving relationship with Israel by delivering them (e.g., Exod 12–14). The Law was a precious gift to Israel to help…