Sermon Tone Analysis

God’s Law - God’s Council

I’ll admit, it’s a little hard to get excited about the Law of God.

How many of us would echo Paul’s sentiment, that he delighted in the Law of God in his heard?

Or how many of us think of the law the way David did?

We tend to think of the law as though every one of its 663 commands were an oppressive lynch pin in a relationship to God.

We tend to view the law negatively, as though it were given to produce feelings of guilt to frustrate Israelite with the impossibility of pleasing God.

This is misguided.

The laws of the Torah broadly deal with a person’s relationship with God (worship, access to sacred space), relationships with the community or outsiders (sex, business, property), and the nation’s covenantal bond with her God.

The law was not a means of meriting salvation.

An Israelite would have known that believing was at the heart of a right relationship with God, not mere mechanical observance of a list of do’s and don’t's.

For sure some Isrealites would have lapsed into this mistaken thinking, particularly after the shock of the exile, but that wasn’t what the law was about.

In other words, legalism is not intrinsic to a biblical theology of the law.

The heart of salvation in biblical theology — across both testaments - is believing loyalty to God.

That orientation extends from Eden and has deep roots in what happened at Sinai.

It is no coincidence that when Israel, Yahweh’s portion, met with him at Sinai, the result was a second covenant involving laws binding Israel and Yahweh in faithfulness, witnessed by the members of Yahweh’s divine council.

The Cosmic Mountain: Birthplace of the law

Last week we were introduced to the connections between Eden and Sinai.

Both are sacred places were God’s children saw him in human form (Gen 3:8 and Exod 24: 9-11) We ended our discussion with the notion that the divine council was at God’s mountain, specifically during the giving of the law.

The link between the law and the heavenly council is noted several times in the New Testament, which uses the word “angel” as an umbrella term for the divine hierarchy.

At the end of last week we noted two passages that described the law as “delivered by angels (Acts 7: 53) and “declared by angels” (Heb 2:2).

When I first came across these NT verses, I was a confused — and a lot of heretical positions grow off of them.

Where was this coming from in the OT?

There are passages that show angels at Sinai, but none of them specifically reference the law.

For example:

This is not a direct reference to the law, the NT idea in Acts and Hebrews, and in many ways it is disturbing if there is not reference in the OT, but there is a second Sinai passage and the Masoretic text differs from the Septuagint that the apostles used.

this is from blended text ..In Sept. it reads “he made haste from mount Paran with 10K of Kadesh, at his right, his angels with him” .... note “holy ones” can be angels, so ....

but many take holy ones here and imply that they are the 70 of Israel… But it seems more likely with Sept reading and confirmation of NT writing that these are angels at God’s right hand- the position of authority - -witnessing the giving of the law to Israel.

But then we hit Gal 3:19

so there is an intermediary?

Most commentaries say this is Moses.

But then why Gal 3:20

no need for this clarification if it is Moses....

There is another possibility, one that explains Paul’s clarification .. the intermediary is Yahweh in human form.

So if we see God appearing in human form, Deut 33 uses this language (appeared, at his right).

In this light read Deut 9: 9-10

Put this all together:

We have language of human physicality - the finger applied to God.

This is stock description of the second Yahweh (Power, Person), the Angel.

It should not be a shock that the NT speaks of an angelic mediation for the law - it was written by the Angel who is God in the presence of council members (the holy ones) and then dispensed to Israel through Moses.

The Sinai Law Covenant and Its Witnesses

The core idea of the law being delivered and declared by angels was seen earlier in Deut.

It is a little vague, but we need to read and connect some things to clarify and catch the clues.

It is agreed that the events of Sinai after the exodus established a covenant between God and his people Israel.

The exodus had fulfilled other covenant promises… large tribe, strangers in foreign land, rescued and not at Sinai God is setting terms of relationship.

The covenant between God and Israel enacted at Sinai follows the conventions of a type of covenant known from ancient Near East sources.

Scholars refer to it as a vassal treaty.

This type of covenant was, in essence, an oath of loyalty by an inferior (Israel here) to a superior (God) who was the initiator of the agreement.

The basic stipulations of the covenant relationship were what we know as the 10 commandments (Ex 20), though there are other laws in Ex 20-23.

As with the earlier Abrahamic covenant, a sacrificial ritual was performed to ratify the covenant (Ex 24: 3-8).

After the ritual there was a sacrificial meal between the parties involved.

This was the scene in Ex 24: 9-11.

A formal vassal treaty in the ANE regularly listed “third party” witnesses to its enactment.

In fact, the witnesses were most often gods relevant to both parties.

They were covenant enforcers in this worldview.

Israelites would not have recognized foreign gods in such a treaty.

So most commentaries regard the witnesses as absent.... but the elohim of the council were not foreign gods.

They were God’s host and witnesses to the giving of the law, at least according to the text in OT and NT, and if we remember 1 Kings 22.... they are also Yahweh’s means of punishing covenant apostates.

Now we go deep into the weeds ....The tablets of the law are referred to in Exodus by Hebrew term ‘edut.

It is usually translated as “testimony” in English Bibles.

It is also used in parallel with the Torah (law), so at the very least it speaks of the written text of the law.

Ex 25: 16

So the ‘edut testimony is to be put in the Ark.

In fact, the Ark was made for it.

BUT.. here are the weeds … ‘edut can also means witnesses.

In fact, in other dialects etc this word specifically means witnesses to such treaties as we are discussing (Akkadian).

We are not suggesting that the term does no refer to the laws on the tablets.

Rather, since the tablets themselves occupy sacred space reserved for Yahweh’s presence — in the ark in the holy of holies, the term appears to signify that the tablets of the law were sort of a proxy for the council members who witnessed the event.

In other words, they were more than just law, they were a tangible reminder of a a divine encounter with YHWH and his council, in much the same way that altars and standing stones built by the patriarchs would function.

Again, the presence of God in his home (Eden, Sinai, tabernacle and eventually the temple) implies by definition the throne room and his attending council.

The tablets not only contained the covenant terms but were a reminder of the event as it occured, with the throne and divine council present.

The Law and Salvation

In simplest terms, the Sinai covenant conveyed Yahweh’s will for what he intended Israel to be — in relation both to him and to the disinherited nations.

Israel was to be distinct both theologically and ethically.

These distinctions were obligations not suggestions.

Israel was to be holy and fulfill God’s original Edenic purpose of spreading his influence (and his kingdom rule) throughout all the nations.

Israel’s status as God’s own portion as not an end to itself, but the means by which Israel would draw all nations back to God.

This was the idea behind Israel being a kingdom of priests and a light to the nations.

It is no wonder that the book of Revelation uses the same language of believers in Rev 5: 10, a divine council scene, in connection with ruling over the earth.

The entire nation inherited the status an duties of Abraham, that through him and now them and us, all nations would be blessed.

But did this salvation come by obeying rules?

To ask the question is to miss the point.

Salvation in the OT meant love for Yahweh alone.

One had to believe that Yahweh was the God of all gods, trusting that the Most High God had chosen covenant relationship with Israel to the detriment of all other nations.

The law was how one demonstrated that love - that loyalty.

Salvation was not merited.

God only had initiated the relationship.

Yahweh’s choice and covenant promised had to be BELIEVED.

An Israelite believing loyalty was shown by faithfulness to the law.

The core of the law was fidelity to Yahweh alone, above all gods.

To worship other gods was to demonstrate the absence of belief, love and loyalty.

Doing the works of the law without having a heart aligned only to Yahweh was inadequate.

This is why the promise of the possession of the promised land is repeatedly and inextricably linked in the Torah to the first two commandments (stay clear of idolatry and apostasy).

The history of the kings of Israel is illustrative.

King David was guilty of the worst crimes against humanity in the incident with Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite.

He was clearly in violation of the law and deserving of death.

Nevertheless, his belief in who Yahweh was among all gods never wavered.

God was merciful to him, sparing him from death, though his sin had consequences the rest of his life.

But there was no doubt that David remained and was ever a believer in Yahweh and never worshipped another.

Yet other kings of Israel and Judah were tossed aside and both kingdoms sent into exile - because they worshipped other gods.

Personal failure, even of the worst kind, did not send the nation into exile.