BibleProject - Two Takes on the Test at Mount Sinai –– Feat. Carmen Imes

Episode Date: May 23, 2022

Did Israel pass or fail God’s test at Mount Sinai? And what did Yahweh mean when he made Israel a “nation of priests”? In this episode, Tim and Jon talk with long-time friend and Hebrew Bible scholar Dr. Carmen Imes. Tim and Carmen share differing interpretive perspectives of the Exodus story, reminding us that the Bible is meant to be meditated upon and studied within a community.View full show notes from this episode →Timestamps Part one (00:00-18:45)Part two (18:45-30:30)Part three (30:30-40:45)Part four (40:45-1:01:20)Referenced ResourcesBearing God's Name: Why Sinai Still Matters, Carmen Joy ImesBaker Commentary on the Old TestamentGodly Fear or Ungodly Failure?: Hebrews 12 and the Sinai Theophanies, Michael KibbeThe Pentateuch as Narrative: A Biblical-Theological Commentary, John H. SailhamerAbraham's Silence: The Binding of Isaac, the Suffering of Job, and How to Talk Back to God, J. Richard MiddletonCarmen Joy Imes, “The Lost World of the Exodus: Functional Ontology and the Creation of a Nation,” For Us, but Not to Us: Essays on Creation, Covenant, and Context in Honor of John H. Walton, edited by Miglio, Reeder, Walton, and WayInterested in more? Check out Tim’s library here.You can experience the literary themes and movements we’re tracing on the podcast in the BibleProject app, available for Android and iOS.Show Music “Defender (Instrumental)” by TENTS“Levitate,” “Nostalgia,” and “Nice and Easy” by Junior StateShow produced by Cooper Peltz. Edited by Dan Gummel and Zach McKinley. Show notes by Lindsey Ponder. Podcast annotations for the BibleProject app by Hannah Woo and Ashlyn Heise.Powered and distributed by Simplecast.

Hey, this is Cooper at Bible Project. I produce the podcast in Classroom. We've been exploring a theme called the City, and it's a pretty big theme. So we decided to do two separate Q and R episodes about it. We're currently taking questions for the second Q and R and we'd love to hear from you. Just record your question by July 21st

and send it to us at infoatbiboproject.com. Let us know your name and where you're from, try to keep your question to about 20 seconds and please transcribe your question when you email it in, try to keep your question to about 20 seconds, and please transcribe your question when you email it. That's a huge help to our team. We're excited to hear from you. Here's the episode.

I'm John Collins. This is Bible Project Podcast. And today, Tim Mackey and I get to talk with our friend and Hebrew Bible scholar, Dr. Carmen Ims. Carmen has been on the podcast before, talking about her book, Baring God's Name, Why Sinai, Still Matters. Because she's a good friend of ours, and because she has an emphasis on the scroll of Exodus in her studies, we thought how great would it be to sit down with her at the end of our journey through Exodus, and debrief a bit about the things we've been talking

about. It was wonderful to talk with Carmen, but it was also a little discombobulating actually, because Carmen presents a few alternative interpretations to stories that we've been reading. Namely, the story in Exodus 19, where Israel comes to the base of Mount Sinai. God asks them to become ritually pure and prepare themselves to make a covenant with him. As Tim and I talked through that story, Tim made a compelling case for how Israel was meant to go up the mountain when the trumpets blast. And when they don't go up the mountain, they've failed a test. They failed to trust God. But Karmann is going to give us an alternative perspective on this story,

in which Israel was never meant to go up the mountain, and they passed the test by fearing God and staying at the base of the mountain and sending Moses up instead as an intercessor. And so, as we listen along as two Hebrew Bible scholars discuss, a passage in the Bible and come to fundamentally two different perspectives on what it means. If you're like me, you might get a little flustered, but it's also good to remember that the Bible is meant to be read in community and were meant to challenge each other. And isn't it a beautiful thing that we can sharpen each other and trade ideas like isn't this what the rabbis did as they read scripture

together and well could be this and it could be this and somehow they were able to sit with more unresolved tensions than we are we want to know like which is it. So let's prepare ourselves to sit in some unresolved tension around Exodus 19 and whether Israel was meant to go up the mountain. Thanks for joining us. Here we go. All right, Carmen, I'm. Thank you for joining us today in this conversation on Exodus. It's great to be here.

Yeah. Let's see. So it's been a couple years ago that we actually interviewed you about the book of Exodus, even about the same section of the book of Exodus. Yes. And many people in our audience learned a lot from that, learned about your work, and really we're excited about you. So we were excited to have you back on because John and I have been talking our way through Exodus, and we've stacked up some questions that we've been talking through and are excited to hear your perspective. Let's see. So maybe real quick, just as a quick buy up for those of you who haven't heard that interview in the archive, feel free. We encourage you to go do that. But real quick, tell us about yourself, Carmen, and also about recent updates in your family's life story.

Sure. So the three of us go way back. We went to Multnomah Bible College together back in the day. So that was our connection and I'm a big fan of the Bible Project. I use the videos and all my classes. So I currently have students in Old Testament History and Literature class who are watching I think 40 Bible project videos and taking quizzes on them. So they watched them outside of class. You guys kept making so many videos. I used to show them in class, but then there were so many that like, there was no time left for me to talk. And so now I've created an outside of the class dimension where they watch them and take quizzes on our learning management platform. And it's the consistently their favorite thing about the class is that they,

they just love engaging visually with the text. So that's fun. I am associate professor of Old Testament at Biola University. So having just moved down here from Alberta where I was teaching at Prairie College for four years. So I'm, I'm in the thick of it with lots and lots of undergrads and Love what I get to do. Hmm. It's great. And let's see last time we had you on we Invited you to talk about both your dissertation and your book bearing God's name So we'll talk about some of those themes from that book today But you have you haven't left the orbit of the book of Exodus

You're still there and other projects you're working on. Maybe talk about some of those. Yes, I will be here for a while. I'm working on the Exodus commentary for the Baker commentary on the Old Testament series, so it'll be somewhere around 750 pages by the time it's done. It's a big project and I am just thrilled to get to do it because it's giving me this space to work through things on a detailed level to ask all the questions I want to ask and to chase down all the rabbit trails and I love it. Well, wonderful. When I learned that you were working on that project as John and I have been talking through Exodus, racking up our questions, we were like, let's call Carmen. Like Carmen.

Speak into some of these things. So, yeah, we are gonna hang out at Mount Sinai, as we did. Last time we had you on, but we're gonna focus in on some specific things. Maybe, real quick, for those of you who don't know about kind of your first series of projects on Exodus, you really zeroed in on both the moment of Israel making a covenant with God at Mount Sinai and that what God calls them, it's like as a title, but also what he calls them to be and do. So maybe kind of wrap that together. That's where we are. Let's for this conversation, we're parked at the foot of Mount Sinai. So talk about those first paragraphs and moments of the story,

how that connects to one of the 10 commandments, and just talk about that. Yes, great. Yeah, as you mentioned, I wrote my dissertation, and I wrote my master's thesis on first Peter 2, 9, and 10, which is an echo of Exodus 19. So I've really been in these chapters for 10 years now and just think they're fantastic. And I really believe that if we want to understand our identity and vocation as believers, we have to go back to Sinai because this is where

it really is fleshed out. So yeah, that people arrive at Sinai in Exodus chapter 19, they've crossed through the desert, and the first thing that happens is God speaks to them through Moses, and in Exodus 19 verse 3, he says, this is what you are to say to the descendants of Jacob, and what you are to tell the people of Israel. You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on Eagagles' wings and brought you to myself. Now, if you obey me fully and keep my covenant

then out of all nations, you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. And those, that moment is so important in Israel's development as a nation because it's defining who they are and what they are designed to do. What is the vocation that God has for them? And that phrase, my favorite phrase there

is treasured possession, which is just one word in Hebrew, the word segala. And segala is not just a warm fuzzy term that you might use if you really like somebody. It's a technical term used in treaty context to indicate a special treaty partner that has a representative role. And so God is appointing Israel to a special task of representing him among the nations. And that's before they get the law, it's, you know, the second half of Exodus

is known for having lots of laws. Before we even get to that, God makes clear, this is who you are. You as a nation are holy, you're set apart for my service, you represent amuling the nations. Excellent, okay. So let's talk about how that connects to this language of kingdom of priests

and then also about carrying the name, I think. Because then that teases us up for what we would like to do with you, which is actually to kind of walk through the steps of this narrative of how God shows up on the mountain and then how they come up to the mountain, and then are they supposed to go up it, but only Moses does. So there's things we'll talk about there.

But all the way back here, just this is setting out the ideal picture, as it were. Yeah, so he calls him his treasured possession kingdom of priests and that's before he's given them any laws, but then he does give them laws and those laws are the means by which they carry out the mission. He's just given them to be the treasured possession, the segala and the kingdom of priests. So why is kingdom of priests important? Well, it's very interesting that God would designate an entire nation as having some sort of priestly status. This would be totally unique in the ancient world, the idea that everyone in this nation is a priest or that together they function in priestly ways.

And so in just a few chapters we'll meet the actual, the people who are designated priests in Israel's tabernacle, Aaron and his sons, and we'll see that they are, they become like a visual model of what the entire nation is supposed to be and do. And so the high priest in particular is interesting to watch because he's the best dressed Israelite, he has this elaborate costume that he wears, made with gold and jewels and fancy dyed fabrics and embroidered fabrics. And we're told in chapter 28, Exodus, chapter 28 is where God gives Moses the instructions for how to make his garments. And we're told that he's supposed to bear the names of the sons of Israel over his heart. So he's got 12 gemstones on his chest. Each gemstone corresponds to one of the 12 tribes. As you know, there are actually 13 tribes. We don't count Levi in this because he himself is a

Levi. So I presume the 12 stones are the 12 other tribes. But anyway, he is bearing their names. He represents them before Yahweh. And then he also wears some kind of golden medallion on his forehead. And that medallion is engraved in Hebrew with two words, Kadoch Liyahuay, and it's wholly belonging to Yahweh is the meaning of it. So it's setting him apart as somebody who's designated by Yahweh for this special task. So with that in mind, like we can then circle back to, they're the kingdom of priests. If the high priest is representing them between,

he stands between Yahweh and the rest of the nation as a representative, then they as a nation are in a sense standing between Yahweh and the rest of the nations, the rest of the world, and having that kind of media, a burial role. And presumably, they have this, well, not presumably. God tells them they have this representative role. And so it's as if they

are wearing God's name too. And so when we get to the Ten Commandments and God says, you shall not bear the name of Yahweh or God in vain, which is what it actually says in Hebrew, bear the name, Nasa, using the same Hebrew word that's used to describe what the high priest is doing with names on his chest. He's nasaing the names, and they are supposed to bear the name of Yahweh. It seems clear to me that that command is not prohibiting them from saying God's name or from using it as a swear word or using it in oaths, although we have to think carefully about how we speak God's name. The command is much broader than that. It's telling them, you are my representatives.

I've put my name on you. So represent me well. John, I realized I didn't invite you to say hi at the very beginning. Hi. I'm sorry. We're just like, don't write him. I'm gonna let you guys nerd out. We're just going to get to the end. So, as John and I were talking about this, he had an interesting question that I wanted to hear your response to it, but John, it was about the way that the ideal of a kingdom of priests

and then there is a family of priests within the kingdom of priests, and are those two at odds with each other? You had a way of putting it. It was a really helpful way of asking that question. Do you remember asking that question? I don't know if I remember the exact question you're thinking of. Was that what conversation was it from?

Well, it's the ideal it begins with the nation of priests. Yeah. Oh, and then become a nation with priests. It's clear they later become a nation with priests. Yeah. Oh, and then become a nation with priests. It's clear they later become a nation with priests. Yeah. And the question is, is that a lessening of an ideal? Right. Or is it possible to have a select priesthood

and all the nations in priests? And that's just a happy situation. Or are we meant to see some kind of idealism that all the people are priests? So Carmen, I'd love to hear your perspective on the priesthood of Israel. When I talk with Tim, Tim, when we talk about the priesthood, especially in our series on the priest, the royal priest, you

make a pretty candid case that the priesthood is a concession. And that felt new to me, that it wasn't the ideal. And here at Sinai, Israel is called to be a kingdom of priests. So is the fact that not everyone in Israel is now a priest, is that a concession? Or is there actually something really beautiful and important about what the priesthood is doing within Israel? Or is it a little both? Yeah, how do you weave through that? Well, let me first admit that I have not listened

to all of your priesthood podcasts. So I don't know at what point. It's really good. Disagree. Of course it is. Of course it is. But you guys turn out content faster than I think you put. So at the risk of disagreeing with Tim, which I would hate to do, I think it's interesting

that God calls them a kingdom of priests. And then before the Golden Calf incident, he's already giving instructions for how to build a tabernacle and what the priests are supposed to wear. So I feel like in terms of literary design, it doesn't seem like it's a concession there. Like God's anticipating the need for it at least. And there's something really beautiful

about the high priest and his elaborate garments that he wears that I think then help the nation to see what it is they're supposed to be and do on a broader scale. Yeah, so you're saying there's a harmony between the nation itself envisioning itself as a priesthood and then looking to one tribe set apart as a priestly tribe, as it were, like a visual, visual cue. I think we could look ahead to the new testament and see a similar dynamic because we talk about the priesthood of all believers. And yet we do have people who are set apart for apostolic, pastoral, ministry, like in leadership roles, we have elders. I think the fact that we all have priestly access does not

get rid of the need for there to be specialists. Wow, that's a good point. Actually, and even more to the point, it would be, Jesus is our high priest, but not to the exclusion of His followers being the kingdom of priests, right? There's two working synch together. I've never really thought about that parallelism being parallel to Israel, And it's priests. I probably thought about it because of my master's thesis, because I was hanging out in first Peter where he calls them a kingdom of priests, and kind of looking at that symmetry. I think the conversation, John, that you're recalling, and actually it feeds into what we'll maybe get to, if we get to the Golden Cache today, that Aaron is introduced into the Exodus story, as you know, as a concession to Moses' unwillingness to be God's mediator before Pharaoh.

And so it's just interesting that Aaron is introduced into the story because of God's anger at Moses. And I've just always thought that seems really important that that's when Aaron gets brought up. Here, let me just throw out a thought with that because in chapter four, when Moses is saying, no, I really, really don't want this job. Like I didn't sign up for this. I wonder if part of why God's angry is because he has already accounted for Moses' weakness as a speaker and he's already provided a solution.

And Moses is failing to trust him for it because he says in chapter four verse 14, and the Lord's anger burned against Moses and he said, what about your brother Aaron the Levi? I know he can speak well. He is already on his way to meet you. And I think one way to read that is God already had this covered. And the reason God's angry is not that he needs to call Aaron, he had already called Aaron. But Moses is the one who's failing to trust that God's going to work this out and give him what he needs. Wow.

Okay. So what you're saying is because he says Aaron is on his way, implied because I prompted him or something like that to compensate for your fourth objection, but now with this fifth objection You're just kind of ticking me off. Yeah, I mean you you could take it as God's answering Moses plea before he even pray Yeah, yeah, which is how I initially read it But then as I was looking at it again and thinking about Really the area of disability like thinking about reading Moses' disability. The Lord said to him, who gave human beings their mouths? Who makes them deaf or mute? Who gives them sight or makes them blind? Is it not I the Lord? Like God knows Moses intimately

and knows what sort of support he's going to need. The problem is that Moses doubts his own ability and needs to trust. So maybe Aaron was the plan all along. Yeah, okay. Thank you for that. So let's talk that away when we come back to the developments later. But when we're at Mount Sinai, I appreciate your perspective that to be a kingdom of priests is not at odds with having a priestly tribe with high priests that those can all work in sync together. So let's move on to the next step in this story then. So God, and now you read God's opening words to the Israelites through Moses. After that, God invites them to become covenant partners. If you just listen to me, this is an invitation.

Keep my covenant and you'll be my representatives. So then God tells Moses, all right, we're going to make this official. I'm going to come down on the mountain in storm and fire cloud. And on the third day, you're going to hear the Ramshorn. And now I'm into Exodus, verse 19, 12, and 13. And verse 13 introduces a really interesting detail where God says, on the third day, when the Ram's horn is sounding, let the people come, and depending on what translation you read, you get a very different sense of what's happening. So the new revised standard version says,

let them come up onto the mountain, which is I think the most natural way of reading the Hebrew text there. But many of our other English translations say, let them come up to the mountain. Not on to it, just to it. So John, I talked about this at length in the previous episode already, but maybe kind of TES up, what do you see as the interpretive challenges in this story? Why these translation differences and how have you sorted your way through this challenging story? Yeah, well, it's challenging because the people say they don't want to go up the mountain and so then God says, okay, you can't. And there seems to be a tension in scripture

about whether it was a good idea or a bad idea for them to not wanna go up the mountain. I remember first reading these texts in Bible college and thinking, what, I missed opportunity. They could have gone up the mountain and they didn't. And now in Jesus' we can, and so let's lean into this. I think I've shifted on this. I think I have a different opinion now

than I did when I first read it. And I'm basing this opinion on the work of Michael Kibby, I think I have a different opinion now than I did when I first read it. And I'm basing this opinion on the work of Michael Kibby, who is a professor of New Testament and academic dean at Great Northern University. He wrote his doctoral dissertation on this conundrum. He did his doctorate in New Testament, so he was looking at the way Hebrews 12 recapitulates or recaps this event. So tracing it from Exodus to Deuteronomy and then into Hebrews. And he says that this moment, verse 13, is a test.

So you've done a test video. You've talked about how God sets up these tests. He believes that this is a test designed to demonstrate Israel's fear of God. And that the proper response to an invitation to come up on the mountain where God is, just to say, no, no, we can't approach a holy God. That that was the right response. And that this would then sort of galvanize their commitment to obey Moses as a mediator. So when they see that Moses can approach God and that they shouldn't,

that that shows both their fear of God and their trust in Moses as the mediator, and he traces that from Exodus into Deuteronomy and then on into Hebrews to kind of show exegetically how it works. Okay. All right. So that's good. This is a different. You're at a different place than where I was taking John to. Mm-hmm. Which is wonderful. And this is why reading the Bible in community is so important because we could learn from each other. So let me say back to you what I'm hearing you say as you summarize Michael Kibby. Because what God does say to Moses right before all of this is, listen, I'm going to come in a thick cloud. This is Exodus 19, verse nine. So that the people can hear when I speak to you and so they can trust in you permanently. So I'm guessing that's where Michael is really,

he sees that as a preview. That the goal of this is to set up Moses and the people's trust in Moses as a sole mediator. Is that right? Yes, I can read you a little section here. This is from page 32 of his dissertation. So the chapter on Sinai and Exodus, he says Israel has not consistently demonstrated proper fear of God in the events leading up to Sinai. So he's not confident of their ability to respond appropriately

to his presence. So the test here is to see whether they will respond appropriately. He says, the human recipients recognition of the divine presence and subsequent fear is a necessary precondition for moving forward in the story. So then he goes on, he surveys there's seven different options for how to reconcile these, you know, how could God say this twice? Or is there a, are we translating it wrong? Or, you know, what's going on? He talks about salehammers approach to it, which I'm guessing you're familiar with and shows why he doesn't think that works exegetically.

But he concludes the contradiction between saying, don't come up the mountain, come up the mountain is intentional and therefore necessary for the flow of the narrative. And it plays a crucial role in the fulfillment of God's broader purposes at the mountain, which, as I already said, were to show fear of God and to establish that mediation is necessary. And so when Moses, when Moses intercedes for them, the narrative is showing that he's ready to move forward as the mediator got appointed him to be and that's jumping ahead to chapter 32. When he intercedes for the people in chapter 32, that's the test of Moses and God's presenting him with a test. Hey, should I destroy these people and start over with you? So they both get a test. Israel gets a test here at the foot of the mountain and they say, no, we fear God. And then Moses gets a test and in 32 with, hey, should I destroy these people and start over with you?

And he says, no, I'm going to mediate. And so they both passed the test and now we can go forward with the intended mediator. Interesting. This, okay, this is great. So, so I'm curious if you work, Kibi. So here were the other two things that compelled me in the direction of Sail Hammer's interpretation and that has to do with the narrative patterning of this story

Is massively patterned after Abraham's test on Mount Moriah and then Adam and Eve's test on the Eden Mount when God showed up in the wind of the day And there Adam and Eve when God showed up in the wind of the day. And there Adam and Eve hid themselves from God's presence, and that's viewed as a sad fear of the Lord. It was a fear that came too late, and whereas Abraham's decision to go up the mountain and even surrender the life of his seed, even though he knew that God said

the nations will be blessed in my seed. So how does that work? So same kind of seemingly contradiction. It seems to contradict. Yeah, but there for Abraham, it's his fear of the Lord is demonstrated by going up the mountain, not besting away. So what do you think about how those narratives interact

with each other? Because it also becomes a question of, how do we interpret later stories when they're echoing earlier stories? Well, this is going to totally throw a wrench in the whole thing. I have in the margin of Kibbe's dissertation, how does Middletons reading change this? Because he has, Kibbe says on page 43 that Abraham passes the test.

So he sees the same parallel that you do. Abraham passes the test because he fears God enough to obey him when doing so makes no sense in light of previous revelation. Israel passes the test because they fear God so much that they cannot do what he's commanded. However, Richard Middleton just released a book last year called Abraham's Silence. Oh, yes. Yeah, I haven't read it yet, but I'm excited to. You must read it. It is absolutely mind blowing. So he argues that Abraham failed the test. That the test was, would you intercede on behalf of your son? Like he reads the Abraham story in light of the lament Psalms and the book of Job,

where our questioning of God, when he seems to be acting out of character, is held up as a positive thing that we should question God. And Abraham fails to do this, he just slavishly obeys in a case where there's a clear contradiction between promise and command. And so he he shows exegetically like he does careful work through the Abraham story in Genesis 22 to show why this is the case. And I'm not going to be able to do it all off the top of my head. But his basic point is Abraham is treating God like a cana knight deity that would require child sacrifice. He doesn't even question it.

And what God wanted him to do was to intercede the way he interceded for Sodom and Gomorrah. When he intercedes for Sodom and Gomorrah, he gets down to, what if there's 10 righteous? But he doesn't go lower than that. And so Middleton thinks that here in Genesis 22, that God is asking Abraham to press in and find out that God would make us sacrifice just for one. Keep negotiating down or keep pressing into no God better.

So yes, Abraham shows faith But his faith is misplaced. He he shows that he actually doesn't know Yahweh as over and against other gods So that throws a bit of a wrench in the parallel. Okay, so that's interesting. I would I'll need to work through his argument but when he in Genesis 22 when God responds to Abraham and says, now I know that you fear God, because you didn't withhold your own least of time. I know that you fear God. So that is not an answer.

You don't seem truly knowing me. Yeah. Yeah. You don't seem truly knowing. So like God, God steps into save Isaac because Abraham kind of failed to intercede for him. Like, okay, so you fear me. Okay, we're good, but I'm going to go ahead and save your son because otherwise the promises

and jimberdee. Now we're two stories deep. We were supposed to be talking about Exodus here. Well, but this raises an interesting question. When you have these narrative patterns, what does it mean to read one story in light of an earlier story? And how much do you import of the message of an earlier story, into a later story? Is it just replay or is it a contrast? Does it invert? Does it reverse? And these are interesting questions because the narratives obviously want us to make these kinds of connections.

And so the question is, how do we? So how does the narrator want us to see the people at the mountain in some kind of analogous relationship to Abraham in analogy, Adam and Eve? And if so, what's the comparison and what's the contrast? And there's this clear illusion right back to Genesis, because they're not even supposed to touch the mountain, which echoes the language of not even touching the tree

that Eve says. So, yeah, there's some clear verbal parallels. So you're persuaded by Kibbe that the people deciding not to go up the mountain and to say, Moses, you go up for us, is assigned a positive. It does have an interesting parallel to when God tells Moses in the same spot

at the burning bush, don't come any closer, and there that's a sign of his faithfulness is by honoring, you know, the divine fire. So then the idea would be that Moses goes up on their behalf as a mediator, and God gives him the blueprints for the tabernacle, which is going to help provide proper boundaries so that they can approach God appropriately. I see. I got it. John, I'm curious at this point where you're watching two people who have dedicated a lot of time to understanding these and all of a sudden there's more than one way to read these texts.

What does that feel like for you? This month, maybe it's energizing. For you. No, actually, it's a little frustrating. But yeah, I think, well, I mean, I spend so much time with you, so I just get inside of your brain. And so I could get really comfortable and just be like, oh, yeah, this is great.

There's a nice coherent way to view all of this. So it's a little jarring to kind of go, oh, that's how you read that story. Or there is a compelling case to be made to read that story in that way. But I think that's just my initial reaction. And then also I can hear Tim's response, be like, ooh, I want to engage. I want to kind of hear that argument through. I'm like, OK, I'm going to let Tim hear that argument through.

Because I don't know if I have the brain space. But I think what is cool is for me to be able to engage with these ideas on the level of narrative patterning. And just having that perspective and tool set is nice. I will say I'm very empathetic to the reading that we've been having, so it's kind of hard for me to detach from it and try to completely understand how the test for Abraham would be second-guess me.

I mean, that's interesting. It's like an invitation to wrestle with God. And Abraham doesn't take the, doesn't take the beat. Like he doesn't wrestle. It's what Moses does. Yeah, right? Yeah. Yeah.

On the Golden Calf story. Yeah, that's interesting. I'm thinking of the Jewish meditation literature video in the How to Read the Bible series. And just how you guys have laid it out as like this is complicated and there are all these resonances and it's going to take us a lifetime to sit with these and wrestle with them. You know, the complexity means we just can't wrap our minds around it and be done. Like, check it off the list.

I just also want to say that I'm still in the early stages of actually writing my commentary. So I haven't worked in depth on that question. Like I quickly turned to my Kaby's dissertation to help me answer it because I knew he had sat with that question for a long time. But I haven't worked my way all the way to that point of my commentary. So I may listen to you, your explanation of it and be persuaded by that. I have a thought. Can I jump in? It seems like these two interpretations cash out in pretty different ways. And they're both really cool ways. One is where we took our video on the test,

which is a test is an opportunity to trust God even though it doesn't make sense. And we have this image at the end of the video where there's this flaming door. I'm not going to walk through that flaming door, but then an arm comes out to lead you through it. And you picture Moses going up the top of Sinai, and it looks like he's going into his death. I mean, that's what is real sees. But through the flaming door into the space where God and Him can be together. And so it's this picture of, can I trust God even though I have the sense of self-preservation

that's telling me not to, or I'm second-guessing God's wisdom based off of my own assessment of what I need? That's a cool thing to think about. It is. The other way to think about this, that you're suggesting is the opportunity that we have as God's human partners to engage with Him. And we see that with Abraham as he negotiates about Sodom and Gomorrah. We see it with Moses negotiating on behalf of Israel.

And that's a cool thing to think about that we actually are invited to participate and actually actively negotiating with God. And those are two completely different, they almost feel opposed to each other in some way. Like just trust God, even though it doesn't make sense. There's something beautiful there. I think there's something biblical there.

Or here's an opportunity to engage with God and almost second-guess God in a way, because he wants to actually engage with you as a partner. I think the key that unites those two beautiful approaches is the character of God. We can trust God blindly because we trust his character. When something looks like it's not lined up with the character of the Yahweh, we know, that's where we would be invited to wrestle. This is what you see, say in Psalm 89,

where the Psalmist is saying, look at all these great promises you made to David to have a king on the throne. And then halfway through the psalm, it's this, where are you? You don't seem to be upholding David as king the way you said you were going to. So there's a disjunction between what God says

or what he promises and what we're observing in life. And I think we can trust God that he's gonna work out his purposes, but I think he invites us to engage in within like that. When we get to the part of the narrative where Moses is on top of the mountain for 40 days with God, there's this sense of, perhaps that should have been all of Israel

up there with God in the Eden space. Or are you pretty comfortable kind of going, no, that's great. That's the ideal. Like Israel up there would have been a mess, like in some way. And they needed a mediator. And the ideal was the mediator goes up there. I think they needed a mediator. I think it would have been a mess because they hadn't been made holy yet. And so they needed a mediator, I think it would have been a mess because they hadn't been made wholly yet. And so they needed a mediator because they didn't have a tabernacle yet and they didn't have a priesthood. And so therefore, there was not an operational sacrificial system that would repair

that relationship so that they could safely be in God's presence. So I actually think what resulted was even better than if they had gone up the mountain. God said, no, I'm going to come move down into your neighborhood. I'm coming down to where you are, but the tabernacles facilitated that move so that they could safely be in the presence of God. Yeah. Yeah, I think for me, this raises the whole set of questions about, well, I already named it, how, when earlier stories are patterned, excuse me, when later stories are patterned after earlier ones. So for example, the establishment of the fire and the angels at the boundary of Eden, and you can't go back in.

But the whole narrative is like, but I wish somebody could go back in, like, we need somebody to go back in. And wouldn't that be great if it was everybody? And so then you start having these narrative patterns of people, characters facing these life and death decisions or your life and death for the next generation where they stand at that door, as it were, and whether or not they're going to trust and step towards what looks

like death and then discover that it's actual real life. And that was the, what do you say? That's the force or the pressure that the Eden story was exerting on me all through Genesis, leading me up to being inclined to see that same dynamic here, namely that the ideal would be for all the people to be re-entered back to Eden. But what happens is the people stay distant. And I do think there's something to the macro design, how the moment where the people say we don't want to go, or they say that they stand far away and push Moses up, and Moses says this is a test. That's in chapter 20 verses 18 and following, that's at the literary center of all of nineteen through twenty four.

So there's something there that it's really highlighting that moment that they want to be distant and Moses is the one who goes up. The pressure of the earliest patterns is what led me to see that as another concession as it were. And so it's good, it's good that we have one, because if we have one, God can work with that one on behalf of all of the others. But it does point still to a lost ideal. But even that one ends up not being able to go into

the tabernacle at the end of Exodus, right? Like in the literary design, this is what your Exodus video brings out so well. There's like this unfinished element. And I think that setting us up for why we need Leviticus, we don't have a priesthood yet. We don't know the sacrifices yet. And that's going to be necessary if we're going to reenter God's presence. I think it's the mercy of God, isn't it, that he drives Adam and Eve out of the garden,

because he doesn't want them to eat from the tree of life and live forever in that state, in that state of brokenness. So the people aren't ready yet to approach the tree of life until that healing happens. Yeah, I appreciate that. That's good. I need to think about these things more. We need to make a cup of coffee and go for a walk. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah. The problem is, Oh, yeah, yeah. The problem is I don't want to wait till I'm 98 to say anything about the Bible. And so there's nothing for it though to just say this is my current understanding and I might actually land at the same place, but with greater conviction or I might adapt my views along the way and likely both will happen many times over. Isn't it a beautiful thing that we can sharpen each other and trade ideas? Isn't this what the rabbis did as they read scripture together?

Well, it could be this and it could be this and somehow they were able to sit with more unresolved tensions than we are. We want to know, which is it? Yeah. It seems like there's maybe more room for ambiguity there yeah Let's transition to a couple other questions that we had for you. First one, I think I know, but I've never heard you quite speak to it, so I was curious because you mentioned you brought up the tabernacle.

Setting up the tabernacle is a place where the relationship can be healed so the tabernacle is full of garden-like imagery in its description People have interpreted that symbolism in different ways, however over time so And that is going to lead to another question about the dress and the role of the high priest within that place to lead to another question about the dress and the role of the high priest within that place. So maybe first, what do you make of the tabernacle garden imagery within the larger storyline of the Torah? Yeah, I think it's unmistakable that there's all this garden imagery. I have an article about it where I sort of assembled all of the different- Oh, you do? It's published. Yeah. So it's in the festrift for John Walton for us, but not to us. And the articles titled the Lost World of the Exodus. So I kind of take Walton's style of Lost World books. And I apply it to seeing

Exodus as a creation story. And in so many ways, the book of Exodus is a creation story, the creation of the nation of Israel. And so I think that the tabernacle chapters echo the creation event because it's finally bringing them to the place where they can dwell in the presence of God as Adam and Eve dwelt in God's presence in the garden. So so many things, God consul creates the seventh day of creation, he consul creates the tabernacle. There's cherubim guarding the weight of the tree of life, there's cherubim in the inner sanctuary of the tabernacle. There's cherubim guarding the weight of the tree of life. There's cherubim in the inner sanctuary of the tabernacle. There's a tree of life in the garden. There's a tree-shaped candelabra in the sanctuary. There's gold and onyx in the garden of Eden.

There's gold and onyx on the high-priest garments and in the tabernacle, you know, the other furniture has gold. The creation days go from evening to morning, and evening and morning, first day and evening and morning the second day, and the lamps and the tabernacle are lit from evening to morning. So so many echoes between the two. There's all these sevens in both stories, right? We have seven days of Genesis 1, but we have God issues, the tabernacle instructions on Moses 7th day on the mountain. So he waits six days and then he hears them on the 7th day. We hear that in chapter 24. The priests ordination ceremony spans seven days and then they're clothed with new garments, just like Adam and Eve are clothed in the garden. The ordination has seven days of atonement on the altar

and the seven day ceremonies repeated for Aaron's Successors at the very end of the tabernacle instructions. The last thing we're told is that they should keep the Sabbath So it's the instructions are happening on the seventh day and we hear about the tabernacle and then we get Sabbath last and it's the Sabbath instructions are the seventh of speeches so we're on the seventh day and there's seven speeches about the tabernacle and the lessons about the Sabbath. I mean, it just seems like it's everywhere through this story like it's very Eden focused. All right, that's a very compact list. Okay, so all of that being the case, what do we make of just kind of these three sections that the Exodus story lays out then? So Moses sees all of this.

He's shown what you described up on the mountain, and he sees a high priestly figure in description and what it all looks like. That's what he sees. Then, the next narrative after the seven speeches conclude is the guy who's going to be supposed to be wearing those clothes, the camera shifts down to Aaron who is not only not being somebody who's ready for that kind of role, but he's making an image of a golden calf and then you get the image, but Moses is the one up on the mountain and he's actually being the mediator, and

he starts shining while he's up there mediating. And so you have this ideal priest, the guy is supposed to fill the role, who's not fit for the job, and then you have his younger brother, who's actually seems to be doing the thing of what his Aaron should be doing on a good day. So what do you make of that juxtaposition of roles and failed figures and put the wrong person doing the right thing? What do you think is going on there?

Yeah, Moses is clearly exalted. Like he clearly has an exalted role over Aaron and we see this again and again in the priestly ordination ceremony in Leviticus. Moses does all the things and Aaron is passive. Moses washes him, Moses dresses him, Moses does all the things. And Aaron is passive. Moses washes him, Moses dresses him, Moses does the sacrifices, Moses puts the stuff in Aaron's hands. So it really, we see Moses as a strong actor. He's the prophet. He's the one authorized to lead. Aaron,

Aaron is an interesting figure, and I need to spend more time thinking about it, but he's a model for every iser light, but he's almost like mute. Aaron doesn't say anything except the blessing, the priestly blessing that we see in number six. He doesn't even dress himself. I have an article about Aaron's garments, his high priestly garments, in which I talk about the clothes make the man. So Aaron actually has no special qualifications, you know, skill wise. He just, when he puts these clothes on and these things are done to him,

he is able to perform his role. And I wonder if part of what we're seeing in the Golden Calf story is that God is gonna take a very ordinary flawed human being and that the ordination ceremony and the clothing is going to transform him so that he can be put in God's service. The same way the whole nation is flawed as a kingdom of priests and God takes them as they are and transforms them authority outside his office. You know, in the book of numbers, when there's that brush up between Aaron and Miriam and Moses, and they're complaining about Moses, because

well, we're prophets too. Like, you know, what's so fascinating about that is Miriam gets leprosy or lepros, however we translate that. And Aaron is powerless to do anything about it And he has to come to Moses and say will you pray for her because priests actually don't cure skin diseases They just let you know if they are cured and so Moses authority is so much greater He's he's not just One of them with access to God like he has a different level of access Then Aaron does and it's consistent through his life. Okay. So how does that difference between the two brothers and the ideal role? How should that

affect how we think about the role of the priesthood, not in the history of Israel, but how the biblical authors want us to view the role of the priesthood. It's a good thing that there is this mediator, but at the same time, the first character to ever fill the role, it's like the volume is turned up on his failure. And the same will happen with the only other main priest highlighted, which is Eli and his sons, and there are just as much of failures as Aaron. So there's something I think very significant about that, about the portrayal of this priesthood, contrast it with Moses.

What do you think those overall implications are for how we think about the Hebrew Bible's message about the eronic priesthood? Yeah, it is a very, I feel like the stories are fascinating because they're showing us the priests at the same time issuing a strong warning against any kind of innovation or any kind of syncretism. So the priests are, they never become their own thing. They can't run the show. In fact, the very first story we have about priests after the priestly ordination in Leviticus 8 and 9 is the story of Nadabb and Abihu. Like, first day, after this thing is up and running, we hear about Nadeb and Abihu who bring unauthorized

fire into the tabernacle. They're innovating right away. They get too big for their bridges. They're thinking, oh, I work here. Here's what I want to do. Here's what I feel like doing today. And it's very clear that like, there is no tolerance for any kind of innovation. This is about strict adherence to protocol. So they don't have some kind of greater authority outside of the commands that God's given. And so it does turn our eyes to Moses as mediator. Maybe it turns our eyes to the role of the prophet in the Old Testament or the Tanakh as a whole, we shouldn't be relying on the priests who at every generation seem to be corrupt. We should

be looking to the prophets who then critique the priesthood and call people back to accountability. So, yeah, you would say it's fitting into a larger theme in the Hebrew Bible that's not like anti-priesthood, but it is saying we need something more. Chase, chase, chase, chase, chase into priesthood maybe. Chase, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's just fascinating to think about these scriptures are read and highly valued, say in the second temple period, where after the return from exile Babylon, there are no other institutional authorities, apart from the priests. Yeah. But this is their Bible. And this, yeah, these are no other institutional authorities apart from the priests. But this is their Bible.

And these are the stories they preserved in past on, which is fascinating. So fascinating. Yeah, it's sort of like, I mean, I'm trying to think of a, I never think of good parables on this spot. But, you know, a group that are the ones running the show, and the main story that we have to tell about our people is all about how the people who have had our jobs throughout history were total failures. Well, it kind of makes me wonder

whether there is this like scribal class that's separate from the priests who are actually preserving and passing on the stories. Like I'm thinking of Kumran who felt like the priesthood was corrupt and they were gonna be even more pure and they're the ones collecting and passing on stories. So I don't know enough about textual transmission to feel confident, but it seems to me like somebody wanted us to see the failures of the priests for

real. I guess you could say the same. There's a lot of failed prophets too, and Moses being both successful at certain moments, and then he has his failures. Are there a lot of field profits? Like we have the Moses moment in number 20. Yeah, I guess it depends on how you read the Elijah's story. Currently, I am persuaded that he is a failed intercessor by his story on Mount Sinai. And let's see what else. Yeah, then you have that weird profit who gets deceived and eaten by a lion. That's my which is a parable.

The whole thing. I mean, not a parable in the sense that it didn't happen. But yeah, I I'm pretty persuaded by Peter Lightheart's reading of that story. As like symbolizing the Northern and Southern kingdoms and their failure to follow the prophetic word. Yeah, getting eaten by lions. So and you know, Kings, of course, are both exalted, but as the Royal Seed of David, but also failure. So maybe we're just, maybe this is part and parcel

of how the Hebrew Bible works, is to say, we need these figures, but at the same time, we just keep producing ones that fail. I've sure we should be there. So maybe we need Yahweh to rescue us. Yeah. Yeah. Yahweh can come shepherd us himself because all of our shepherds are bad. I think it's just for me it's the priest stand out because even the first priest is not there are no good priests. There's just the description of the ideal. Yeah. But every human priest we meet

ends up being a pretty miserable failure from the start of their stories. I just, that is so fascinating to me. Yeah. I mean, Aaron's a total pushover in Exodus 32. Like everybody's pressuring him to make an idol and he's like, well, okay, I guess I have to do this. Yeah.

And you can see him kind of trying to quickly rescue the moment by saying, Hey, let's have a festival to Yahweh as if that, as if that's going to somehow solve the problem. It is a very negative story. Yeah. So maybe here, I'll make this a final question. And John, if you want to do any twists on it, feel free. And this kind of going up and summarizing a theme from what we've been talking about. What is the significance of a story about the Sinai covenant, Israel and the law, that both the priest and the people fail in the very moment of its inception?

And so thinking globally, because it's so, especially depending on what Christian tradition you've been brought up in, you think, oh, the Old Testament, that is teaching people about the law. And now that Jesus has come, it's about grace and so on. So I know that you don't buy into any of that. And I've learned a lot from you about how to correct those things. But it just seems so significant that in the story about the inception of the introduction of the law to Israel,

it's total failure from the start. What's the significance of that in the larger framework of the Hebrew Bible? Yeah, good. I mean, I think anyone who's tried to do a Bible read through and they got to Exodus, the end of Exodus, and waited through five or six chapters of Tabernacle instructions would be able to tell you it's kind of a letdown to, you know, get some stories again in chapter 32 and 33. And then we're back into more tabernacle instructions. Like we get all of the process of building the tabernacle takes as long to recount as the instructions.

And it feels like why is this in here twice? But I think in the literary design of Exodus, it's super important that the instructions came before the golden calf and that the implementation of those instructions came after it because it what it says to me is that Yahweh anticipated the need for forgiveness. He anticipated that these are sinful people and they're going to need a way to reconcile with me. And so before they even worshiped the golden calf, he was already designing a way to safely live

in their neighborhood. And he was already putting into place what would need to happen so that they could be cleansed, and the covenant would not be called off. This is one thing that persuades me with my Kibbe's thesis that when Moses is interceding in chapter 32, he's passing the test, that God was in fact giving him a test when he said, I will destroy you, that Moses passes the test by correctly discerning that he should mediate, not do away with these people. And so then when you have the building of the tabernacle,

we get such detailed instructions, I think on purpose to mirror the instructions that Moses was given to show, okay, we're actually following God's plan now, and this time it's gonna work. So, these two things are framing the golden calf, which is where we see a total apostasy. And I think maybe important to note that,

it's not like God just kind of snaps his fingers and says, okay, I'm not gonna punish you then for that terrible thing you did, right? Like, there's this moment of violence where the Levites run around killing the people who were involved in this terrible orgy worship, whatever they're doing. There's a sense in which those who have participated

in apostasy have to experience the consequences, but the rest of the community now has a path for cleansing. Like, the residual effects of that sin are not going to hamper the covenant going forward because they have a tabernacle where those things can be dealt with, but the sort of the sin of the community as a whole. So I think it illustrates both that God takes sin really seriously, but that he's very serious about forgiveness and about creating pathways for forgiveness for his people.

Hmm, those are great reflections. Yeah, I can't approve on those, even. I think as we come to the conclusion of this conversation, that's good. Severe and strong commitment to justice on human evil, but just as equal, if not a greater. As James would say, a mercy triumph over over judgment, commitment to creating pathways of forgiveness. Yeah. This is, that's maybe not what most people would get

after a first reading of Exodus. Mm-hmm. But those are really great reflections. Thanks for sharing those. Yeah, thanks for your great questions. Well, thank you, Carmen, for being on the podcast again, and engaging with us more in Exodus and sharpening Tim some pushback. It's wonderful. I did say it's overwhelming. I think it's also good for those following along

To realize that there's a lot going on and not to just let us simplify things but going on and not to just let us simplify things but invite us into deeper engagement with these texts which help us understand the character of God and our place in the story. I'm encouraged, though that Jesus is our high priest, and we can enter the throne room on the mountain, we could enter the fire on the mountain. So at least I know that to be true. And that is not less intimidating, I suppose. Yeah, but but encouraging. Maybe more intimidating, right? Like we're actually going to ascend the mountain. We're allowed to go.

Yeah, the trip is lasting. It's going time. And we realize that we need to take it seriously. That's true. Yeah, don't carry the name in vain Right awesome. Yes. Thank you, Carmen We wish you all the best and I'm sure we will be talking again about the Bible at some point so to be continued Yeah, thank you. Thanks for having me and thanks for all your work

Okay, how's everyone doing? We did it. I'm sure you have no questions. Actually speaking of questions, we are going to do a question and response for the Exodus scroll. It's going to be in a few weeks because we wanted to give enough time for questions to come in for these last few episodes. In the question and response, Tim and I are going to debrief this conversation. Tim is going to read the scholar that Carmen has cited and we'll discuss his thoughts. But also I want to talk with Tim about what to do when we find ourselves disagreeing fundamentally about the meaning

of a biblical passage. So I look forward to that conversation in an upcoming Exodus Q and R. forward to that conversation in an upcoming Exodus Q&R. Next week, we're going to begin the Scroll of Leviticus. The Leviticus scroll begins first with that good danger, kind of tension, but then chapters 1-7 of Leviticus are one long speech from God to Israel through Moses that are an invitation, a divine gift. Telling Israelites how they can approach the source of all life and beauty and power and goodness even though they are frail and mortal and morally corrupt, but God wants them to come near. And so he gives them the gift of the Korbadi.

Today's episode was produced by Cooper Peltz, edited by Zach McKinley and lead editor Dan Gummel. Lindsay Ponder did our show notes and the annotated podcast for our app is done by Ashlyn Heiss and Hannah Wu. Bible project is a non-profit. We exist to experience the Bible as a unified story that leads to Jesus.

Everything that we make is free because of the generous support of thousands of people just like you. So thank you for being a part of this with us. Hi, this is John Madelma Nyego and I'm from Manila Philippines. I first heard about Bible project on YouTube. Hi, this is Deanne Phillips and I'm from Shreveport, Louisiana. I first heard about the Bible project years ago when it first started from a church where Tim used to teach.

My favorite thing about Bible project is the classes online. It was very good. Illuminating and it is for free. My favorite thing about it, the Bible project is trustworthy. We believe the Bible is unified story that feeds to Jesus We're a crowdfunded project by people like me. Find free videos, study notes, podcasts, classes, and more at Bibleproject.com you