Sanctified by the Law of Moses

Dr. Couch, would we say that the Jews in the Old Testament were sanctified by the Law of Moses, if they kept it? ANSWER:  I don't think so. Looking up all the words for "sanctification" in the OT, we do not find that idea mentioned. The Lord says the seventh day of the week is to be sanctified, He is sanctified in Israel, the sons of Israel would be sanctified, but the work of the Law in sanctifying Israel is not mentioned.    In Hebrew, the word "sanctify" and its related words, is Ko'desh. It means "to be holy," "to set something aside," thus making it unique or special.    In the NT there is Positional Sanctification that takes place when one accepts Christ as Savior. And then there is Progressive Sanctification, in both the OT and the NT, that is, we are to become more and more sanctified as we grow or mature. This was to be true for both the Jews in the OT and for the Christians in the NT.    The OT Jews were told "Be sanctified" or "Be holy; for I am holy" (Lev. 11:44), and for Christians in the NT (and quoting Leviticus 11:44), we read "Be holy, for I am holy" (1 Pet. 1:15-16).    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch  (1/11)

Talmud and Midrash

Dr. Couch, what is the Talmud and the Midrash? ANSWER: The body of Hebrew laws, civil and canonical, is based on the Torah, the Law of Moses, or the Pentateuch, the first five books of our Bible—Genesis through Deuteronomy. The Talmud is like a commentary based on the learned opinions and decisions of Jewish teachers from around 300 BC until 500 AD. The word "Talmud" means "teaching" or "doctrine." The Talmud is divided into two parts: (1) the Mishnah meaning "the repetition or explanation." This is a collection or digest of "oral laws" traditions and explanations of OT Scripture. (2) the Gemara, meaning "the supplement", a further commentary on the preceding part, the Mishnah. The Midrash is also a formal doctrinal and "preaching" exposition of the Hebrew Scriptures written in Hebrew or Aramaic (which is a language related to Hebrew). The Midrash is a commentary not simply a translation. The Midrash is a further expansion of the Law of Moses. I believe commentaries on the Old and New Testaments are helpful in giving us an understanding of the Bible. But they do not become the Bible itself! Commentaries are simply "helps" that we do not take as authoritative. But the Jews begin to see these writings as having absolute authority as if they were the Word of God itself! The Midrash flourished from about 100 BC to 300 AD. This was at first an oral writing but was then turned into permanent written form. These were the earliest synagogue readings or "sermons" that were quoted and read to the common people in their assemblies. Unfortunately, the people moved farther and farther away from reading the OT Scriptures themselves to simply reading these commentaries and avoiding the OT manuscripts specifically. In other words, the commentaries became authoritative and the writings of the prophets who wrote under the guidance of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit began to be ignored. This specifically has happened also in Catholicism. What the Church Fathers say has more weight than the prophets or the apostles! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (11/10)

Moses Strikes the Rock

Dr. Couch, how do we reconcile the fact that there seems to be a conflict in narration between Moses simply striking the rock in the desert (Exod. 17:6) and in anger striking the rock twice in Numbers 20:8-13. Is there a conflict? ANSWER: No, because by careful observation, and context, we see that there are actually two different occasions, or two different stories. This is agreed upon by the best of commentators, such as Ellicott and by the orthodox Jewish Rabbis. You have to look carefully to spot the distinction.    In Exodus 17 we find the people with Moses at Rephidim (v. 1). There they "quarreled with Moses" (v. 2) and "grumbled" (v. 3). In the other story in Numbers 20:7-13, they are called "rebels" (v. 10); this was not mentioned in the Exodus 17 story. The place in Exodus where Moses struck the rock is called "Massah" ("to test") and also "Meribah" or the "place of quarreling" (v. 7).    In the Numbers 20 story the place is identified as the waters of "Meribah" ("quarreling") and Kadesh. Or there, it is identified as "Meribah-Kadesh." This is not what it is called in Exodus.    In Numbers 20:10 "rebels" is the Hebrew word "marim". It carries the idea of being "fools" or even in some places "teachers." The Rabbis note that to render the word as "teachers" carries the idea: "You have presumed to teach your teachers," or "You imagine yourselves to be wiser than your leaders."  The Rabbis point out:    "In that moment of irritation and gloom, Moses gives expression to doubt in front of the masses of the people as to the fulfillment of God's promise."    More differences:    In Exodus 17 we note that the people were moving about the wilderness "by stages" and they had camped at Rephidim (v. 1). Moses was to strike the rock as he had struck the Nile in Egypt (17:5; 7:20). Moses did what God commanded and struck the rock "in the sight of the elders of Israel" (v. 6).    In the Numbers 20 story the entire congregation was gathered to see Moses strike the rock, not just the elders were gathered to see this happen (Num. 20:8-10), as mentioned in Exodus 17:5.    In Exodus 17 God said He would be with Moses before the elders. In Numbers 20 Moses (with Aaron) said "we [shall] bring forth water for you out of this rock" not simply God (v. 10). In Exodus 17:6 God said Moses was to strike the rock just once, which he does. In Numbers 20:11 Moses strikes the rock twice. Thus, the passage said, Moses "did not believe" God nor treat Him "holy in the sight of the sons of Israel" (v. 12a), therefore, he would not bring the assembly "into the land which I have given them" (v. 12b).    In the first story, in Exodus, the people are camped at Rephidim (17:1), but in Numbers 20 they are near Kadesh (v. 14).    The differences in the two stories are striking. And remember too, the people are moving around in the land, almost circling, and traveling by stages. It is certainly credible that they would need water from time to time (when there was none to find), and come to different rocks, or locations, when they were thirsty.     By the way, Kadesh was about 200 miles or more north of Rephidim. This clearly shows we have two different stories going on here.    The rock of course is a type of Christ as Paul mentions (1 Cor. 10:4-6). The people were drinking from a "spiritual rock" which was Christ (v. 4). Nevertheless, "God was not well-pleased; for they were laid low in the wilderness" (v. 5), and those things happened "that we should not crave evil things, as they also craved" (v. 6).    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (6-10)

The Lord's Supper

Dr. Couch, is the Peace Offering of Leviticus 7:11 equated with the Lord's Supper? And, what about the Meal with God that the seventy elders had in Exodus 24? ANSWER:  No, the Peace Offering is separate from the Lord's Supper. The Lord's Supper as the Church does it is Passover abbreviated. However, Unger says that the Peace Offering looks forward to thee Lord's Supper (1 Cor. 10:16-11:32) and it recalls the blessings of salvation. He also adds that the Peace Offering was the only one of the sacrifices (outside of Passover) of which the offerer was permitted to partake, for it represented all the benefits of one's salvation.    The Rabbis say the Peace Offering has three divisions. (1) Thanksgiving for deliverance from sickness or danger (Psa. 107), (2) Those in fulfillment of a vow made in time of distress (Psa. 16), (3) Free-will Offerings, when the heart is moved at the remembrance of God's tender mercies (Psa. 103:1-5).    Exodus 24:9-18 speaks of the seventy elders of Israel going up on a mountain with Moses and Aaron. There they "Saw the God of Israel; and under His feet there appeared to be a pavement of sapphire ..." (v. 10). The text also says "they beheld God, and they ate and drank" (v. 11b). I'm not sure this implies they ate and drank with the Lord but that is not impossible. The Lord ate and drank in the story of His appearance to Abraham. They saw the Angel of Jehovah, or God in bodily form.    Abraham and many of the patriarchs also saw the Angel of Jehovah, for example in Genesis 18:1-22. The "Lord appeared to him ..." (v. 1). Abraham "saw" the Angel and two other angelic persons (v. 2). They "washed" (v. 4) and food was set before them (v. 8). One of the persons was clearly the Lord (v. 17), for it says He, the Lord "heard the outcry" of those suffering in Sodom and Gomorrah (vv. 20-21).    The Angel of Jehovah is Christ in bodily form, the Pre-incarnate Christ.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (5/10)

The Law of God

Dr. Couch, what is the "law of God" in which Joshua wrote his final words, as mentioned in Joshua 24:26? ANSWER:  There are different opinions on what this is. Some believe Joshua wrote (1) additional words to the Pentateuch, the Law of Moses. Others hold that (2) it was a different scroll of information that Joshua wrote that was simply added alongside of the Law, a separate document all together.    The word book in Hebrew is the word "Sa'pher meaning the scroll. This was a particular scroll called "the law of God." Unger takes the first view but I take the second view because this is how the Rabbis interpret the statement, and I believe they are correct.    Joshua is very serious about what he wrote. He apparently took it as inspired of the Lord, though it only served for a period of time and then was discarded. Joshua takes several verses to describe what he did in the writing of this scroll.    Joshua made a binding covenant with the people. What he wrote he turned into an agreement, a statute and an ordinance that day in Shechem (v. 25). By this he established his authority over the people as their new leader in place of Moses. Some believe that Joshua simply renewed the covenant which God had first made with Israel at Sinai, but I am not sure that what he wrote is simply a repeat of the Sinaitic agreement. What Joshua did here seems to be something that is additional, going forward with the people in a new step as they fortify the land they were entering.    On this "law of God" the Rabbis say:    "This cannot mean that Joshua added this as an appendix to the Pentateuch and included it therein; firstly because the Books of Moses were too sacred to be tampered with, and secondly, because the words are not to be found there. It may indicate that he wrote them on a scroll which he deposited in the same place together with 'the book of the Law of God.' This makes sense if we read it correctly as 'in a book of the law of God.' Thus, 'it became a book of the law of God.' These words of Joshua then were simply placed alongside of the Torah of Moses as something additional but not formally attached or tied to the Pentateuch."    Joshua then took "a great stone" and set it under the oak that was by the sanctuary of the Lord (v. 26b). It was a common practice to set up a stone to commemorate an event of importance (cf. Gen. 28:18; Exod. 24:4). Joshua commemorated the crossing of the Jordan in this manner (4:3). Joshua here is declaring that this place was "a sanctuary of (for) the Lord." This became a place where the Lord would commune with Joshua and the people. Remember, a geographical place had not been established yet for the people to formally worship. The stone was set up "under an oak (tree)" that too became a sacred location. Joshua spoke to the people in order to confirm their inheritance.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Apr., 10)

Two Set of Ten Commandments

Dr. Couch, when Moses went back up on the mountain, did he not receive a completely new set of stones with new ten commandments on them? Why the two? And are they not different? ANSWER:  The people in their gross sins "broke" the Ten Commandments previously given to them from the Lord, delivered by Moses. Moses then "shattered the first set of tablets at the foot of the mountain" (Exod. 32:19). He went back up and remained for "forty days" and "he wrote on the [new] tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments" (34:28). He then came "down from the mountain" with the new tablets in his hand (v. 29). There is no indication that the Commands on the new tablets were any different than before.    You asked, "Is there any comparison between the two sets?" And the answer is No! The breaking of the tablets is symbolic that the people by their sins destroyed the commandments. The people were "prone to evil" (32:22); they had "committed a great sin" (v. 30). They had "sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play" (v. 6).    The Lord told Moses "I have seen this people, and behold, they are an obstinate people. Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them, and that I may destroy them; ..." (vv. 9-10). But Moses interceded with them before God and they were spared.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Apr., 10)

Moses' Shining Face

Dr. Couch, the first time Moses went up on the mountain and received the Law from God, the Bible does not mention his face shining from seeing the Lord. But the second time he went up, it says in Exodus 34:29-35 that his face shone from speaking with Him. What is the difference? ANSWER:  Moses broke the first set of Law tablets because of the sin of the people in the valley when he came down from the mountain. He went back up and was given a second set of tablets. Then it says "the skin of his face shone because of his speaking with the Lord" (Exod. 34:29). Aaron and the people "were afraid to come near him" (v. 30). Because of their fear Moses had to put a covering over his face to calm their hearts.    One good explanation comes from Unger who writes that the first giving of the Law was totally legal, while the second giving was "mixed with divine grace and glory." This seems to be demonstrated in Exodus 33:5-11, for it says that when Moses appeared before the people, as shown with the pillar of cloud descending, they all stood "and worshipped, each at the entrance of his tent" (v. 10). At least for awhile, they had learned their lesson about the holiness of their God. These chapters were "learning" chapters about who their Lord was. In their encounter with Moses and God, Aaron reminded the Lord that the people "are prone to evil" (32:22).    God's people must recognize the Lord's judgment and His grace. There is not the one without the other. As sinners, we are due judgment, but Christ went to the cross to provide grace. "Don't mess with the Lord, as Israel did!" Where would we be without His grace and mercy?    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Mar., 10)

Did Moses See God in Human Form?

Dr. Couch, what is going on in Exodus 24:9-18? Did Moses see actually God in human form? 

 

    This at first glance seems to be a tough passage. But looking carefully at all that is said here, it is not. While the passage does say the elders and Moses “say the God of Israel,” what is really happening? 

    Verses 9-10 may be the summary section of the passage. The details are spelled out in the verses that follow. “Seeing God” may simply mean they witnessed some kind of effusion that reflected His glory. (Effusion means “a pouring forth”) The verses go on and tell us that Moses and Joshua then go up closer on the mountain, and into a thick cloud. The Lord spoke out of the cloud. From the cloud His glory was made manifest. 

    If Moses and the elders did see God in human form, it would have been the Angel of Jehovah, or God in revealed physical form, that is, the second person of the Trinity, God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. He is the only member of the Trinity who was revealed in flesh. In many ways, this Exodus 24 passage is not strange. The Angel of Jehovah (God) made many appearances throughout the Old Testament. (Jacob even wrestled with God [Christ]) And those who heard His voice and saw Him in physical form knew they were standing before God but the full revelation of the Son, and the fact that He would appear in flesh on a permanent basis, had not been completely explained. 

    The apostle John, and Christ, made it clear that God the Father is Spirit and that no one has ever seen Him (John 1:18; 4:24). 

    Thanks for asking.

    Dr. Mal Couch

Who are the Two Witnesses in Revelation 11:3-12?

Dr. Couch, who are the two witnesses in Revelation 11:3-12? I have heard Elijah, Moses, Enoch, or simply two contemporaries at that time. What do you think? 

 

    Some have said they are Elijah and Moses because of the power they have to perform miracles. It is said in verse 4 that they are like two olive tress and two lampstands with this symbolism going back to Zechariah 4:3. In that context, the two olive tress represented, in the setting of Zechariah, the anointed ones: Zerubbabel and Joshua. 

    No one knows who the two witnesses are. We have to be content with the passage as is. We will find out in time their identity! 

    Thanks for asking.

    Dr. Mal Couch