Lecture 26: At Sinai History-telling in the Bible At the heart of the story of Israel’s journey through the wilderness is the people’s sojourn at Mount Sinai, which consumes Exodus 19 through Numbers 10. And yet, that is far from a smooth flowing narrative; it's filled with jolts and jerks. E.g. we can raise the question of why the people dally so long at the mountain, given that the first verse of Exodus 33 reports, “The LORD said to Moses, “Go, leave this place, you and the people whom you have brought up out of the land of Egypt, and go to the land of which I swore to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, saying, ‘To your descendants I will give it.’” – Why is it that, following that command, the people hang around the mountain through the rest of Exodus, all of Leviticus, and the first nine chapters of Numbers, as Moses receives more divine directives? The people’s departure is reported only in Numbers 10: “11In the second year, in the second month, on the twentieth day of the month, the cloud lifted from over the tabernacle of the covenant. 12Then the Israelites set out by stages from the wilderness of Sinai, and the cloud settled down in the wilderness of Paran.” Israel’s departure is dated to nearly a year after their arrival at the mountain. And yet, the command to leave the mountain in Exodus 33 is given just a handful of days after the people had arrived. Why the delay? Another problem has to do with the erection of “the tent of meeting.” Shortly after the LORD’s command to set off from the mountain in Exodus 33, stands the 7 following passage we read last time: “ Now Moses used to take the tent and pitch it outside the camp, far off from the camp; he called it “The Tent of Meeting.” And everyone who sought the LORD would go out to the tent of meeting, which was outside the camp. 8Whenever Moses went out to the tent, all the people would rise and stand, each of them, at the entrance of their tents and watch Moses until he had gone into the tent. 9When Moses entered the tent, the pillar of cloud would descend and stand at the entrance of the tent, and the LORD would speak with Moses. 10 When all the people saw the pillar of cloud standing at the entrance of the tent, all the people would rise and bow down, all of them, at the entrance of their tent. 11 Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend. Then he would return to the camp; but his young assistant, Joshua son of Nun, would not leave the tent.” This “tent of meeting” is clearly a private structure where Moses meets the LORD for instructions and receives answers to issues raised by the people. This tent is tended by Moses and his assistant, Joshua; Aaron isn’t involved. The LORD’s presence at this “tent of meeting” is marked by the descent of “the pillar of cloud” – the same phenomenon that moved between the Israelites and the Egyptians at the sea in Exodus 14.

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 2 Now, significantly prior to that (at the start of chapter 25) we read the following command: “1The LORD said to Moses: 2Tell the Israelites to take for me an offering; from all whose hearts prompt them to give you shall receive the offering for me.…8And have them make me a sanctuary, so that I may dwell among them. 9 In accordance with all that I show you concerning the pattern of the tabernacle and of all its furniture, so you shall make it.” – Instructions for building this tabernacle fill chapters 25-31. In the course of those instructions, the tabernacle is frequently called by another name, as in this verse: “In the tent of meeting, outside the curtain that is before the covenant, Aaron and his sons shall tend it from evening to morning before the LORD.” – Here again is the phrase the “tent of meeting,” but this one is a large worship structure tended by Aaron and his sons. Moreover, just as Moses’ “Tent of Meeting” was graced by a visible descent of the LORD’s presence – in the form of the pillar of fiery cloud – so also the LORD’s presence descends visibly on this other “Tent of Meeting”: “34Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle.… 36 Whenever the cloud was taken up from the tabernacle, the Israelites would set out on each stage of their journey; 37but if the cloud was not taken up, then they did not set out until the day that it was taken up.” This cloud functions much the same way as the pillar of cloud at Moses’ “tent of meeting.” Moreover, as Schwartz tells you, after this Tent of Meeting is erected and visibly inhabited by the LORD, Moses goes there to receive the LORD’s instructions. So, why do we have two distinct Tents of Meeting, tended by two different groups, and yet both function as a meeting point for Moses and the LORD who appears at each? Additional difficulties arise already in chapter 19, which introduces the scene at Mount Sinai. Here we find a set of peculiarities perhaps even more perplexing because they stand virtually side-by-side. E.g. as Schwartz points out, this chapter represents the people’s stance towards the mountain in more than one way. In v. 12 the LORD warns Moses to carefully prevent access to the mountain: “You shall set limits for the people all around, saying, ‘Be careful not to go up the mountain or to touch the edge of it. Any who touch the mountain shall be put to death.’” – That taboo is invoked again, in vv. 21ff., where the LORD expresses concern that the people might be attempting to penetrate the cloud that veils him: “21Then the LORD said to Moses, “Go down and warn the people not to break through to the LORD to look; otherwise many of them will perish.…23Moses said to the LORD, “The people are not permitted to come up to Mount Sinai; for you yourself warned us, saying, ‘Set limits around the mountain and keep it holy.’”

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 3 But what makes the LORD so paranoid? If Moses has made sure that the people stay a healthy distance from the mountain, why should the LORD suspect that some might try to “break through” and see him? Well, let’s notice vv. 16-17: “16On the morning of the third day there was thunder and lightning, as well as a thick cloud on the mountain, and a blast of a trumpet so loud that all the people who were in the camp trembled. 17Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet God. They took their stand at the foot of the mountain.” It sounds, in fact, like the people, trembling in fear, had more sense than Moses, who brought them out to the foot of the mountain, in spite of the strict warnings about encroaching on any of the mountain territory. Why does Moses do this? Moreover, let’s notice v. 13, which we skipped earlier and which describes the capital punishment v. 12 imposes on any trespasser: “No hand shall touch them, but they shall be stoned or shot with arrows; whether animal or human being, they shall not live.” – Then, immediately afterwards stand these perplexing words: “When the trumpet sounds a long blast, they may go up on the mountain.” – The LORD has just made clear that the people cannot touch the mountain with impunity. And yet in vv. 16-17 the people follow the directive of v. 13, encroaching on the divine mountain once the trumpet has sounded a loud blast. Thus, while the LORD’s concern with someone penetrating the cloud is understandable, confusion arises from the conflict between how the people are supposed to treat the divine mountain, according to vv. 12 & 13, and how they approach it at Moses’ insistence, in compliance with another divine command. Yet another peculiarity in chapter 19 has to do with Moses and his interaction with the LORD. The first event reported once the people have struck camp in front of the mountain is this: “Then Moses went up to God; the LORD called to him from the mountain, saying.…” – By the way, while the words “went up to God” makes it sound as though Moses ascends the mountain to meet God, there is no corresponding report of his descent before meeting with the elders of Israel in v. 7. Moreover, such mountain top meetings are typically phrased the way we find in v. 20: “20And the LORD descended upon Mount Sinai, to the top of the mountain, and the LORD summoned Moses to the top of the mountain, and Moses went up.” – Moses’ ascent is usually a response to a divine summons, whereas here the divine summons follows his ascent. Given these considerations, it’s likely that we should follow the Septuagint, the early translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, in reading “Then Moses went up to the mountain of God.” Apparently the Hebrew manuscript the Septuagint translated contained the small word rh (“mountain”) before “God,” and that reading seems preferable, given the observations I just made. Indeed, that was the name used for this mountain in Exodus 3, where Moses first encountered God: “Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law Jethro, the priest of Midian; he

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 4 led his flock beyond the wilderness, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God.” As you might recall, in the ensuing narrative, the LORD promises Moses that he would bring the people back to that very mountain, which is the scene before us. So here I will read "mountain of God," with the Septuagint. After Moses reports to the people the words of his first encounter with the LORD, Moses receives the following message: “Then the LORD said to Moses, “I am going to come to you in a dense cloud, in order that the people may hear when I speak with you and so trust you ever after.” – Consistent with this, vv. 16-19 report 16 the following: “ On the morning of the third day there was thunder and lightning, as well as a thick cloud on the mountain, and a blast of a trumpet so loud that all the people who were in the camp trembled. 17Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet God. They took their stand at the foot of the mountain.…19As the blast of the trumpet grew louder and louder, Moses would speak and God would answer him in thunder.” But then, immediately afterwards, stand these verses, which we noted earlier: 20 “ And the LORD descended upon Mount Sinai, to the top of the mountain, and the LORD summoned Moses to the top of the mountain, and Moses went up. 21Then the LORD said to Moses, “Go down and warn the people not to break through to the LORD to look; otherwise many of them will perish.” These words suggest that only now does the LORD light on the mountain. Moreover, they suggest that rather than the people hearing the LORD speak with Moses, as in v. 19, the LORD summons Moses for a private conversation. Given these competing assumptions and images, how do we read the story of the people at the mountain so as to find a sensible narrative? You already know Baruch Schwartz’s solution, which is to invoke the Documentary Hypothesis. He contends that by following the trail of the narrative when it diverges at various points, it’s possible to recover four narratives of the event at Sinai, although he finds himself forced to conclude that the account from J is not a complete narrative, but is present only in fragmentary form. But there are some things he doesn’t tell you, most important of which is that any attempt to divide this narrative among the four classical sources winds up with loose ends: to change the metaphor, many pieces of this puzzle don’t fit anywhere, forcing subscribers to the Documentary Hypothesis to conclude that these unidentifiable pieces come from otherwise unknown sources or that they were inserted as additions after the four sources had been combined. But this undercuts the triumphant conclusion that the Documentary Hypothesis successfully untangles the snarls in this passage. Of a piece with this is the way Schwartz is forced to conclude that J is only fragmentarily preserved in the Sinai narrative. While it’s certainly possible that this could have happened, Schwartz’ conclusion results from the a priori that there

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 5 must be four different accounts here, two of which are E and J. While he is able to isolate elements he attributes to E – such as referring simply to “the mountain” or “mountain of God”; the characterization of Moses as a prophet; and the focus on sound as the prominent element of the theophany – it’s not clear why these must be the sole provenance of E. We can justifiably speak of P as dominated by priestly concerns, but it’s not clear that E alone (without J) is attentive to prophetic concerns. Moreover, in identifying J, Schwartz speaks of its prominent use of the Tetragrammaton. And yet, after Exodus 6 there is no reason to think that any of the supposed sources was restricted in its use of the divine name; the use of the Tetragrammaton could just as well be a feature of E or P at this point. And in fact, the restriction of J to verses that use the Tetragrammaton is part of what leads Schwartz to conclude that J is but fragmentarily represented. I would argue that Schwartz winds up with a fragmentary J source because he has deprived it of material that rightfully belongs to J/E, as a single source. Schwartz’ Procrustean bed leaves J in fragments and, as I said earlier, leaves pieces that can’t be fitted into the puzzle. Moreover, one of the difficulties Schwartz notes but never returns to is the peculiarity of Moses twice relaying the people’s words to the LORD, first in v. 8 – “The people all answered as one: “Everything that the LORD has spoken we will do.” And Moses reported the words of the people to the LORD.” – But then, curiously, we find him doing so again in the next verse: “Then the LORD said to Moses, “I am going to come to you in a dense cloud, in order that the people may hear when I speak with you and so trust you ever after.” And Moses told the words of the people to the LORD.” By the way, if you use the NRSV, you’ll notice that it glosses over that difficulty by connecting this report of Moses transmitting the people’s words to v. 10 and translating, “When Moses had told the words of the people to the LORD, 10the LORD said to Moses: “Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow.” – But that, in my opinion, is really fudging the Hebrew, even if its understandable for a translation aimed at smooth reading. For our purposes, we’re better off retaining the problematic repetition by translating, “And Moses told the words of the people to the LORD. 10And the LORD said to Moses: “Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow.” In any case, while Schwartz implies that this perplexing repetition is evidence that sources have been combined, he never explains how that is so. And indeed, this problem cannot be solved by attributing the first report to one source and the second to another. It can only be treated as a case of erroneous copying the text by a scribe, which is exactly how Schwartz deals with it in a larger study of this unit in another publication. There he suggests that rather than reading, “Moses reported

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 6 the words of the people to the LORD,” we should emend or alter the Hebrew word slightly – simply the change of a vowel, from wayyasheb to wayyashob – and omit the phrase “the words of the people.” Translated, this would read, “And Moses returned to the LORD.” And so even though Schwartz rightly points to this double report of the people’s words as one of the problems in this passage, he doesn’t solve it by appealing to the Documentary Hypothesis. By the way, while I agree with Schwartz that this problem must be treated as a scribal error, I disagree with his solution, which creates awkwardness by having Moses essentially interrupt the LORD just after he has begun talking about the big event about to take place, and about which he gives Moses instructions to prepare the people. Moreover, we expect Moses to report the people’s response when he first engages the LORD, and before the LORD begins laying out plans for a visit. A better solution, in my opinion, is to see the report at the end of v. 9 as a slight variant in wording on 8b (involving only a different verb, as those of you that know Hebrew will recognize). Most likely some scribe recorded this variant wording in the margin of a manuscript, and a later scribe erroneously transferred it from the margin into the text, albeit placing it in an awkward spot (a phenomenon paralleled elsewhere). Accordingly, I would omit the end of v. 9, leaving the text to read, “And Moses reported the words of the people to the LORD. And the LORD said to Moses, “I am going to come to you in a dense cloud, in order that the people may hear when I speak with you and so trust you ever after.” And the LORD said to Moses: “Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow.” In any case, even though I don’t think Schwartz is trying to deceive you, the way he presents this problem could lead you to think that this is additional evidence of documents being combined when it is not. In fact, I would suggest that the biggest flaw in appealing to four different documents to resolve the problems Schwartz correctly isolates is the assumption that the original sources for this passage were completely coherent narratives. Indeed, you’ll recall that’s one of the fundamental objections to the Documentary Hypothesis: why should we assume that the authors of the putative sources were any more concerned with coherence (at least as defined by our standards) than those who produced the final product of the Torah? On the other hand, we cannot resolve all the peculiarities and problems of this narrative by appealing to four coherent documents, there are strong indications that more than one story line is at play, creating these complications. I think that recognition leads to a judicious solution for the peculiarities in these texts. First, I concur with Schwartz that there is a distinctive strand of narrative readily identifiable as P. Above all, for P the sojourn at Sinai is about divine directions for building the Tabernacle and the report of its construction. That narrative begins

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 7 with a scene characteristic of P towards the end of chapter 24: “16The glory of the LORD settled on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it for six days; on the seventh day he called to Moses out of the cloud.” – As befits P, divine speech begins on the seventh day, the Sabbath: “17Now the appearance of the glory of the LORD was like a devouring fire on the top of the mountain in the sight of the people of Israel. 18 Moses entered the cloud, and went up on the mountain.” The first words out of the LORD’s mouth introduce the detailed plans for building the tabernacle and its appurtenances: “1The LORD said to Moses: 2tell the Israelites to take for me an offering; from all whose hearts prompt them to give you shall receive the offering for me.…8And have them make me a sanctuary.…9In accordance with all that I show you concerning the pattern of the tabernacle and of all its furniture, so you shall make it.” Instructions for crafting the tabernacle, its furnishings, and garments for the priests serving in it, conclude in chapter 31, and are capped off by an exhortation to keep the Sabbath that concludes with, “15Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the LORD; whoever does any work on the sabbath day shall be put to death.” This narrative thread resumes (following the incident of the golden calf and subsequent events) at the start of chapter 35: “1Moses assembled all the congregation of the Israelites and said to them: These are the things that the LORD has commanded you to do: 2Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a holy sabbath of solemn rest to the LORD; whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.…4Moses said to all the congregation of the Israelites: This is the thing that the LORD has commanded: 5Take from among you an offering to the LORD.…10All who are skillful among you shall come and make all that the LORD has commanded: the tabernacle, 11its tent and its covering, its clasps and its frames.…” The report of the people’s construction of the tabernacle, according to the specifications delivered in chapters 25-31, continues through chapter 40, whose final verses report the descent of the cloud embodying the glory of the LORD to inhabit the tabernacle. Only then, at the outset of Leviticus, does the LORD begin giving other instructions to Moses, from the newly constructed tabernacle: “1The LORD summoned Moses and spoke to him from the tent of meeting, saying: 2 Speak to the people of Israel and say to them: When any of you bring an offering of livestock to the LORD, you shall bring your offering from the herd or from the flock.” As Schwartz points out, this giving of instruction from the Tabernacle corresponds to the LORD’s statement to Moses in the midst of his directions for its construction: “There I will meet with you, and from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim that are on the ark of the covenant, I will deliver to you

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 8 all my commands for the Israelites.” As you know, this pattern of the LORD giving instruction from the Tabernacle continues throughout Leviticus and into Numbers. In fact, as Schwartz points out, once the divine glory resides in the Tabernacle, the mountain is no longer needed. Well, is this, then, the sum total of P’s narrative of Sinai? Baruch Schwartz would have you think so, except for the two opening verses of chapter 19: “1On the third new moon after the Israelites had gone out of the land of Egypt, on that very day, they came into the wilderness of Sinai. 2They journeyed from Rephidim, entered the wilderness of Sinai, and camped in the wilderness; Israel camped there in front of the mountain.” There are problems with the relationship between these two statements, but for our purposes they can both be attributed to P. And yet, I think Schwartz is mistaken to see these statements plus the narrative about the LORD’s instructions for the tabernacle, the story of its construction, the descent of the LORD’s glory and the giving of instruction from the tabernacle, as a complete accounting for P in the Sinai narrative, for there are two other segments of text within chapter 19 that have P stamped all over them. I have in mind two of the problematic sections I noted earlier, the first in vv. 1213: “12You shall set limits for the people all around, saying, ‘Be careful not to go up the mountain or to touch the edge of it. Any who touch the mountain shall be put to death. 13No hand shall touch them, but they shall be stoned or shot with arrows; whether animal or human being, they shall not live.’” – The notion that the mountain is such sacred space that it condemns anyone touching it to death invokes the priestly notion of holiness as a sort of contamination. That’s why no one is to touch such a person, even in executing them; holiness is a dangerous contagion. That’s very much a priestly notion. While there is no reason a non-priest could not use this theme, the second set of problematic verses, 20-25, confirms the priestly perspective: “20When the LORD descended upon Mount Sinai, to the top of the mountain, the LORD summoned Moses to the top of the mountain, and Moses went up. 21Then the LORD said to Moses, “Go down and warn the people not to break through to the LORD to look; otherwise many of them will perish. 22Even the priests who approach the LORD must consecrate themselves or the LORD will break out against them.” 23Moses said to the LORD, “The people are not permitted to come up to Mount Sinai; for you yourself warned us, saying, ‘Set limits around the mountain and keep it holy.’” 24 The LORD said to him, “Go down, and come up bringing Aaron with you; but do not let either the priests or the people break through to come up to the LORD; otherwise he will break out against them.” 25So Moses went down to the people and told them.” Most noteworthy is the way these verses single out the priests as a special subset

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 9 of the people. The LORD’s warning initially concerns all the people keeping proper distance and showing appropriate reserve. But v. 22 focuses on the priests as a unique group: “Even the priests who approach the LORD must consecrate themselves or the LORD will break out against them.” Nowhere else in the narrative do we get this sort of singling out the priests as a separate class. And, in fact, the emphasis that they must consecrate themselves, as if that were a new suggestion, stands in tension with what the LORD commands Moses just before the command to set limits on access to the mountain: “10And the LORD said to Moses: “Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow. Have them wash their clothes 11 and prepare for the third day, because on the third day the LORD will come down upon Mount Sinai in the sight of all the people.” – According to these verses all the people were consecrated prior to the theophany, making v. 22’s singling of the priests for consecration superfluous and peculiar. Also noteworthy is that while these verses prohibit even the priests from ascending the mountain, thus emphasizing its holiness, Moses is instructed to take one other person with him: Aaron. Nowhere in what follows, however, is Aaron involved or even mentioned as being at Moses’ side. Moses appears before God alone until chapter 24, when the LORD invites Moses to bring along others: “1Then he (the LORD) said to Moses, “Come up to the LORD, you and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and worship at a distance. 2Moses alone shall come near the LORD; but the others shall not come near, and the people shall not come up with him.” Even here, obviously, Aaron does not accompany Moses in the way envisioned in 19.24; only Moses can approach the LORD, while Aaron must wait with two other priests and the seventy elders of Israel. The role of Aaron as Moses’ companion in 19.24 is singular, but fits with the notion throughout P that “Aaron and his sons” are the ones to officiate before the LORD in the Tabernacle. Thus, three observations lead to the conclusion that that these two sets of verses (12-13b and 20-25) have been supplied by P: 1) the conflict between Moses leading the people up to the mountain and the stipulation that the people must not encroach on the mountain, for it is (in effect) sacred space; 2) the singling out of the priests in v. 22, especially with a warning that they need to consecrate themselves, when earlier provisions concerned consecration of all the people; 3) the command for Moses to bring along with him Aaron, whereas Moses works alone throughout the rest of the narrative. By the way, notice I am assuming that the narrative, prior to these additions by P, had a level of coherence to it, but I’m not arguing for the coherence of an entire source. There has to be some modicum of coherence in a single episode for a narrative to be intelligible, and isolating these sets of verses still leaves plenty of tensions. But the inconsistencies I’ve highlighted in these verses register a conflict

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 10 in basic conceptions of what happened on the mountain that can be linked with a particular frame of thought: namely, the ideology common in the Priestly materials. Schwartz gives you his reconstruction of how materials in the Sinai scene were combined, so let me give you my assessment of what’s going on in chapter 19. First, let’s note that if P has supplied vv. 1-2 – which date the people’s arrival to the third new moon after their escape from Egypt and tell of their arrival at Sinai after leaving Rephidim – then we are left with the question of when Moses and the people arrive at this mountain prior to P inserting this explicit report of their arrival? For our purposes it’s not necessary to get into the thorny issue of all the itinerary notices in Exodus. Instead, it’s sufficient to notice that in the preceding chapter, chapter 18, stands the story of the visit by Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, who advises Moses to share with others the burden of hearing the people’s cases. Here is how that episode begins: “1Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses and for his people Israel, how the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt. 2After Moses had sent away his wife Zipporah, his father-in-law Jethro took her back, 3along with her two sons.…5Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came into the wilderness where Moses was encamped at the mountain of God, bringing Moses’ sons and wife to him.” Notice that at the beginning of chapter 18 the people are already encamped “at the mountain of God.” And that remains the setting for the entire story of chapter 18, which closes with the report that Moses let his father-in-law return to his own country. In that context, then, it is entirely natural that the next words would be, “3Then Moses went up to the mountain of God; the LORD called to him from the mountain, saying, “Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the Israelites: 4You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself. 5Now therefore, if you obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is mine, 6but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the Israelites.” By the way, this sequence, assuming the setting of chapter 18 as the setting for this narrative, also speaks in favor of the emendation of “Moses went up to God” to “Moses went up to the mountain of God,” since that is the title for this mountain in chapter 18. And the fact that God speaks to him directly from the mountain is entirely natural, since it was from a flaming bush on this mountain that God spoke to Moses in chapters 3 & 4. The reason God will come to him in a cloud, according to v. 9, is “in order that the people may hear when I speak with you and so trust you ever after.”

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 11 There is certainly a bit of artificiality in this statement, in that it’s not clear why a visual phenomenon will help the people hear God speak with Moses. Most likely what’s behind this is that the author of this narrative is familiar with the tradition that this event involved a cloud from which the LORD spoke. I.e. the author didn’t creating this story out of nothing, but was bound by already circulating stories of what happened at the wilderness mountain. You’ll notice, however, that he uses this theme to his own purposes, bringing in a theme we have witnessed before: convincing the people to trust Moses. Recall the conclusion to the story of the escape at the sea: “Israel saw the great work that the LORD did against the Egyptians. So the people feared the LORD and believed in the LORD and in his servant Moses.” The Hebrew word translated “believed” there is the same one translated “trust” in 19.9. The author of the base narrative is again bringing into play a motif important to his portrayal of the interactions between Moses and the people: it was a relationship that vacillated between complaints and trust. In any case, the base narrative continues with Moses reporting to the people the LORD’s call to obey his voice and be his treasured people, a priestly kingdom and a holy nation: “7So Moses came, summoned the elders of the people, and set before them all these words that the LORD had commanded him. 8The people all answered as one: “Everything that the LORD has spoken we will do.” Moses reported the words of the people to the LORD.” The LORD responds with instructions Moses is to relay to the people: “9Then the LORD said to Moses, “I am going to come to you in a dense cloud, in order that the people may hear when I speak with you and so trust you ever after.” [Here I omit the second report of Moses telling the people the LORD’s words.] 10And the LORD said to Moses: “Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow. Have them wash their clothes 11and prepare for the third day, because on the third day the LORD will come down upon Mount Sinai in the sight of all the people.” I’ll skip over v. 12 and the first 2/3 of v. 13, P’s addition about securing the perimeter of the mountain. The narrative resumes with the final clause of v. 13: “When the trumpet sounds a long blast, they may go up on the mountain.” The next verses report Moses’ transmission of these orders and what happened subsequently: “14So Moses went down from the mountain to the people. He consecrated the people, and they washed their clothes. 15And he said to the people, “Prepare for the third day; do not go near a woman.” 16On the morning of the third day there was thunder and lightning, as well as a thick cloud on the mountain, and a blast of a trumpet so loud that all the people who were in the camp trembled. 17 Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet God. They took their stand at the foot of the mountain. 18Now Mount Sinai was wrapped in smoke, because the LORD had descended upon it in fire; the smoke went up like the smoke of a kiln, while the whole mountain shook violently. 19As the blast of the trumpet grew

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 12 louder and louder, Moses would speak and God would answer him in thunder.” Vv. 20-25 are that six verse unit supplied by P in which the LORD expresses concern that the people might break through to see him. Then appear the Ten Commandments, whose role I’ll address momentarily, but which I don’t think are part of the base narrative. Indeed, the narrative picks up again only in 20.18, in a logical sequel to where it left off in 19.19: “18When all the people witnessed the thunder and lightning, the sound of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking, they were afraid and trembled and stood at a distance, 19and said to Moses, “You speak to us, and we will listen; but do not let God speak to us, or we will die.” 20Moses said to “Do not be afraid; for God has come only to test you and to put the fear of him upon you so that you do not sin.” 21Then the people stood at a distance, while Moses drew near to the thick darkness where God was.” The meteorological and pyrotechnic phenomena have been effective: Moses is entrusted by the people with the role of mediator between themselves and God, and the people have had the fear of God instilled in them. So the core of the narrative runs from Moses’ receiving a divine address that assigns preconditions to a meeting with the people, to Moses receiving the people’s consent, through the peoples preparatory acts for the meeting, and then the people being led by Moses to the mountain for the meeting, which is replete with visual and aural effects that cause the people to cower and beg Moses to receive the divine word and relay it to them. Now, what about the Ten Commandments in 20.1-17, or the Decalogue? As you might recall, the final report of the base narrative in 19.19 read, “As the blast of the trumpet grew louder and louder, Moses would speak and God would answer him in thunder.” That description suggests what the people heard was not articulate speech, but the sound of thunder. And that fits with their response, which we just looked at, in 20.18. This speaks only of the people’s response to thunder, lightning, trumpet and smoking mountain, the sort of phenomena described in 19.19. Moreover, it is difficult to see this as a fitting response to distinct speech of the sort introduced in 20.1: “1Then God spoke all these words: 2I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery; 3you shall have no other gods before me.” What’s more, the motivation given for keeping the Sabbath in this version of the Decalogue is revealing: “8Remember the sabbath day, and keep it holy. 9Six days you shall labor and do all your work. 10But the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God; you shall not do any work – you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns. 11For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but rested the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and consecrated

Lecture 26, At Sinai – p. 13 it.” – The motivation for observing Shabbat here is distinctly priestly, in as much as it recalls the divine day of rest at the climax of the first creation story. While I’m not prepared to say that “P,” as such, inserted this version of the Decalogue here, whoever did so took advantage of a scene in which the people had been prepared to hear God speak them, so that a report of divine words fit, at least on a superficial reading of the narrative. And that’s likely how this version of the Decalogue came to stand here, as a summary of the most important commands given to Israel. But that is hardly the end of the deliverance of the Lord's commandments in Exodus. Indeed, the real giving commands is just about to begin, and that story is at the heart of what the base narrative saw as the purpose of the assembly at Sinai. We'll pick up that element of the story next time, before looking briefly at the types of commandments that are embedded in these legal codes and how they likely arose.