Tag: exodus

Isaiah 35: Questions for Reflection

~ Bob Hayton

stream in the desertOne of my favorite texts is Isaiah 35. It is pregnant with intertextual allusions – echoes of other Bible stories and passages. It is a classic “new exodus” passage, where Isaiah casts the future restoration of Israel in the terminology of the original Exodus from Egypt. There is a way through a wilderness, and a return to the land. What is especially important is how Christ’s ministry and many New Testament books indicate that this new Isaianic exodus finds a beginning fulfillment in Jesus Christ and the experience of the Church.

Recently, I had the opportunity to lead a men’s Bible study where we inductively worked our way through this passage. I prepared several questions aimed at encouraging the pursuit of textual links to this passage as a way to understand what Isaiah 35 is communicating poetically. May these questions spark your own fascination with this chapter and may your own wilderness experience find new life through the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

If you want to interact further or suggest additional parallels, by all means join the converstaion in the comments section here.

Text:

Isaiah 35 (ESV)

1    The wilderness and the dry land shall be glad;
the desert shall rejoice and blossom like the crocus;
2    it shall blossom abundantly
and rejoice with joy and singing.
The glory of Lebanon shall be given to it,
the majesty of Carmel and Sharon.
They shall see the glory of the Lord,
the majesty of our God.

3    Strengthen the weak hands,
and make firm the feeble knees.
4    Say to those who have an anxious heart,
“Be strong; fear not!
Behold, your God
will come with vengeance,
with the recompense of God.
He will come and save you.”

5    Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened,
and the ears of the deaf unstopped;
6    then shall the lame man leap like a deer,
and the tongue of the mute sing for joy.
For waters break forth in the wilderness,
and streams in the desert;
7    the burning sand shall become a pool,
and the thirsty ground springs of water;
in the haunt of jackals, where they lie down,
the grass shall become reeds and rushes.

8    And a highway shall be there,
and it shall be called the Way of Holiness;
the unclean shall not pass over it.
It shall belong to those who walk on the way;
even if they are fools, they shall not go astray.
9    No lion shall be there,
nor shall any ravenous beast come up on it;
they shall not be found there,
but the redeemed shall walk there.
10  And the ransomed of the Lord shall return
and come to Zion with singing;
everlasting joy shall be upon their heads;
they shall obtain gladness and joy,
and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.

Questions/Observations:

  1. Why does it refer to “wilderness” and “dry land” (vs. 1-2)?
    • Look at 32:11-16, 40:3.
  2. What might the “glory of the LORD” be (vs. 2)?
    • Look at 40:4-5; Luke 3:3-6; Matt. 3:3; see also Is. 35:4.
  3. Isaiah 35:3 is quoted in Hebrews 12:12, why?
    • Context of vs. 4 indicates this is an encouragement (see 40:1).
  4. What can be drawn from Isaiah 35:5-6?
    • This may address the time or manner of fulfillment.
  5. Water and streams in the desert – what might this imagery suggest (v. 6)?
    • See also: 41:17-20, 43:16-21, 44:3-4, John 7:38-39 (also 32:11-16 above).
    • A personal angle on this too: Ps. 42:1-2, Ps. 63:1.
  6. Look at the parallels to 35:7 and see if an image or recollection from earlier in Israel’s history is coming to mind.
    • Look at 48:20-21, 49:9-13.
  7. The King’s Highway (v. 8)– not just a road for God (40:3) but one he travels with us (Mark 8-10 – his journey to Jerusalem – 10:32, 52).
    • Jesus opened a “new and living way” for us Heb. 10:20, John 14:6.
  8. Jesus leads us on the way like a shepherd leads the sheep (vs. 8-9).
    • Our shepherd leads us on the way 40:10-11, John 10:9, 27.
    • Our shepherd fights for us, too 35:8, John 10:10-12 (also Mark 1:13).
  9. The way to Zion is only for the “ransomed.”
    • See also Is. 51:10-11, Rev. 21:23-27 (with Is. 60:3-12).
  10. Ultimately there is “everlasting joy” – through Christ.
    • See Is. 65:17-19 with Isaiah chapter 12.

Commentary Roundup: “A Commentary on Exodus (Kregel Exegetical Library)” by Duane Garrett

~ Bob Hayton

A Commentary on Exodus (Kregel Exegetical Library)

Book Details:
• Author: Duane A. Garrett
• Publisher: Kregel Academic (2014)
• Format: hardback
• Page Count: 816
• ISBN#: 9780825425516
• List Price: $39.99
• Rating: Highly Recommended

Publisher’s Description:
A thorough exegetical and homiletical analysis of each passage of Exodus.

The true fountainhead of Old Testament theology, Exodus illuminates the significance of the name Yahweh and introduces the title I AM. It tells of Israel’s formative historical event, the exodus, as well as the making of the covenant at Sinai. It includes the first code of the Law in the Decalogue and Book of the Covenant. It details Israel’s besetting sin in the idolatry of the golden calf episode, but it also describes Moses’s intercession and the great revelation of God’s mercy. In its display of the Tent of Meeting, it presents the theology of the priesthood, the sacrifices, and the central sanctuary. A Commentary on Exodus explores all of these events with a view toward their significance both for the meaning of the Old Testament and for the message of the Christian church. Exegetically deep enough to satisfy the scholar and logically organized to meet the needs of the pastor, Garrett’s commentary promises to become standard reference material in Exodus studies.

– Every verse is given a fresh translation with copious explanatory notes, and particular attention is given to the poetry of Exodus, which the author demonstrates to be more abundant than previously believed.

– The commentary also helps to dispel much confusion about Exodus by introducing the reader to Egyptian history and by carefully analyzing questions about the date of the exodus and the location of Mount Sinai.

Commentary Type:
This is a technical commentary that provides both a detailed exegetical analysis of the Hebrew text and theological take-home points for applying the message of the text for today’s hearers.

Structure and Features:
Duane Garrett’s Commentary on Exodus is organized in consistent manner which makes it easy to peruse and use as a reference. After the lengthy introduction (145 pages), each section of the text is treated individually, grouped into 7 parts. Garrett’s own translation of the Hebrew, separated with one line per Hebrew clause begins each section. Included are a host of pertinent linguistic and translational footnotes that often included detailed discussions of difficult terms. For sections of poetry, he provides the Hebrew underneath the English and includes a treatment of how and why that section should be understood to be poetic. The the commentary proper follows and is further divided from the text. Following the commentary section, is a section labeled: “Theological Summary of Key Points.” This is the take-home part of the commentary where Garrett draws out the points that a preacher will be able to hone in on, in a message on this text. The commentary doesn’t address homiletical strategies, but the big picture that can be drawn from the text at hand. Occasionally an excursus follows this section, and allows for an extended discussion of a particularly thorny aspect of the text, such as how Moses’ birth story compares with that of Sargon’s, or how Paul’s discussion of Moses’ veil in 2 Cor. 3 fits in with a proper understanding of Exodus. Throughout the commentary one will find footnotes and tables, but no maps or diagrams or drawings are to be found.

Excerpt:
This excerpt is taken almost at random, it highlights the theological take-home punch that Garrett distills from the text. The section concerns Exodus 26:1-27:21.

4. Whatever the external two tent layers looked like, entering the Tent of Meeting itself would have been visually stunning. The priest, going into the holy place, would enter a chamber illuminated by the soft light of the seven lamps of the menorah. As his eyes adjusted, the fine linen inner tent with its colorful tapestry of cherubim would have suggested entry into heaven, where the angels in splendor were in attendance upon God. The tent frames of gold, reflecting the lamps, would have seemed to twinkle like stars and would have suggested a glorious hallway towards God’s throne room. The screen before the holy of holies, with its cherubim, would have suggested an angelic honor guard standing between the priest and YHWH. The priest thus would have a sense of being in the earthly representation of the outer chamber of God’s heavenly abode.

5. There was probably a cosmic dimension to this. That is, the outer chamber represented the lower heavens (what we would call the physical heavens) and the inner chamber, the holy of holies, would represent the upper heaven, God’s abode. The Tent of Meeting was a microcosm of the created universe and of the heavenly throne room that was above the created universe. That is, God’s glory fills all of creation, but there is yet a heavenly throne room that is above and beyond the physical universe. The Tent of Meeting is a smaller version of this cosmic reality. it is also the place where God who dwells in the highest heavens can be present or immanent in the world.

The overall message of this aspect of the tent complex is that God is holy. The barriers between the people and the interior of the tent, as well as the altar of burnt offering, all indicate that because of sin, people are kept apart from God. For the Christian, the barriers that separated the Israelites from the holy of holies remind us that in Christ the barrier is removed and that we have access to God (Matt. 27:51). Even so, we should not fail to take away an important message in the tent structure: that God is holy, that we should fear God, and that in worship, we should approach in reverent respect and also with constant brokenness of heart and repentance, knowing that we have no right of ourselves to approach God. (pg. 579-580)

Evaluation:

I absolutely loved this commentary. The introduction should be required reading at any conservative evangelical study as it responds masterfully to the increasingly common tendency to treat the Exodus as pure myth. He also deals with the JEDP documentary hypothesis and lasting versions of that. This also covers many other questions and betrays a wealth of Egyptian background knowledge which adds color to any study of this important book. He gives detailed pros and cons for 4 major Biblical chronologies. While he may lean toward the late Exodus date, ultimately he concludes that there are supporting texts and archaeological evidence for each major chronology view, and there are also archaeological problems as well. He cautions against getting too hung up on defending any one chronological scheme since the text doesn’t refer to specific Pharaoh’s by name. “The minister or Bible teacher, therefore, should refrain from specifying that this or that exodus event took place in the reign of this or that pharaoh” (p. 101-102). In short, we haven’t been given enough information to make a definitive conclusion. But we do have confidence that there is ample evidence to bolster the belief that the Exodus story is historically factual.

Another discussion in the introduction centered on the route the Israelites took as they left Egypt and crossed the Yam Suph (traditionally translated “the Red Sea”). This also brings up the question of where on a map we can place the Biblical Mount Sinai. As one who has read several popular accounts which provide compelling reasons for disagreeing with the standard Exodus route that one finds in most study Bibles, I was delighted to find a detailed study into the Bible’s record and the archaeological testimony to this route. Garrett finds it probable that Sinai was located in Northwest Arabia, across the Gulf of Aqaba, but the exact location of the crossing is likely lost forever. His detailed study is careful to avoid sensationalism, but doesn’t discount the insights of other scholars who may not hail from the scholarly guild of biblical studies. He largely agrees with the conclusions of Colin Humphreys (a physicist) with some reservations.

The translation and discussion of Hebrew terms is second to none. Garrett has a mastery of the language and the relevant literature and his translation deserves to be consulted. He also provides a helpful correction to the translation of 2 Cor. 3, a text that bears on the understanding of Exodus. His excursus on that topic is important and helpful.

Garrett finds several Hebrew poems placed strategically throughout Exodus, and in some cases this sheds new light on a passage. His treatment of Exodus 6:2-8 is an example. Rather than the text stating that previous generations did not know the name Yahweh, the text is a poetic affirmation to Moses that God will be with him. Garrett’s discussion of the Hebrew terms used in this passage are extremely helpful and here as in a few other places, my understanding of the meaning of the text has been adjusted for the better.

Almost all the puzzling questions that Exodus raises are covered. Garrett addresses the problem of Hebrew numbers briefly, and he grapples with the genealogy of Moses. He illuminates obscure customs (such as Zipporah’s circumcision of her son), and explains some of the ancient techniques referenced in the Tabernacle instructions.

Garrett is thoroughly evangelical in his treatment of Exodus, but he doesn’t shy away from following clues in the text where warranted. His explanation of the plagues allows for several of them to have natural causes (such as algae causing the Nile to look “red”), but guided in a supernatural way. Whereas I would have thought such an approach to belie a lack of faith, Garrett shows from the text and archaeological history why this may very well be so. But he still holds to the miraculous character of the Exodus as a whole.

He covers many textual problems and doesn’t hesitate to show a Christian application or Christological takeaway from the text. As noted in his treatment of 2 Cor. 3 above, Garrett has a mind for how the later Scriptural authors interact with Exodus. This concern benefits pastors and teachers who necessarily approach the text from a canonical and wholistic framework. At times, however, I wish he would say more, or deal with additional questions, such as the NT book of Hebrews placing the incense altar in the holy of holies, or Acts mentioning Moses’ eloquence in seeming contrast to the Exodus account. But all in all, this text provides a thorough and up to date, treatment of the book of Exodus that is worthy of close study.

The book does suffer from a lack of charts, maps and diagrams, however. I guess a commentary cannot be expected to furnish these. But when studying Exodus, in particular, such amenities would prove useful. Still his discussion of the route of the Exodus and the design of the Tabernacle is able to be followed without the help of diagrams.

I highly recommend this commentary for pastors and teachers everywhere. It will prove to be a reliable guide and a catalyst for theologically rich, exegetically informed appreciation of the Biblical text.

About the Author:
Duane A. Garrett (PhD, Baylor University) is the John R. Sampey Professor of Old Testament Interpretation and Professor of Biblical Theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and has served as a pastor and missionary. He coauthored A Modern Grammar for Biblical Hebrew and coedited the NIV Archaeological Study Bible, as well as having written numerous Old Testament commentaries.

Where to Buy:
• Westminster Bookstore
• Christianbook.com
• Amazon.com
• Direct from Kregel

Disclaimer:
This book was provided by Kregel Academic. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

Another Look at Zipporah and Her “Bloody Husband” (Exodus 4:24-26)

~ Bob Hayton ~ 1 Comment

A Commentary on Exodus by Duane A. GarrettThe short account of Zipporah being forced to circumcise her son is one of the most enigmatic and puzzling texts for modern readers. I want to look at the text here briefly and allow Duane A. Garrett to help clear things up. Garrett is the author of the latest commentary in the Kregel Exegetical Library. His A Commentary on Exodus is absolutely superb, I am thoroughly enjoying it and hope to have a review up soon.

Here is our text, first in the ESV and then in Garrett’s translation provided in the commentary:

24 At a lodging place on the way the Lord met him and sought to put him to death. 25 Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son’s foreskin and touched Moses’ feet with it and said, “Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me!” 26 So he let him alone. It was then that she said, “A bridegroom of blood,” because of the circumcision. (ESV)

24 Now it happened along the way at a lodging place that YHWH encountered him and sought to put him to death. 25 And Zipporah took a flint, and she cut off her son’s foreskin, and she touched his feet, and she said, “You are my hatan damim (kindsman by the blood of circumcision)!” 26 And he let him alone. In that episode she said hatan damim with reference to the circumcision ritual. (Garrett, p. 222-223)

I cannot reproduce Garrett’s entire discussion, but will provide the introduction to his discussion of this text. I’ll also summarize some of his many arguments (against the “standard interpretation” and for his own) and then present his conclusion. I’ll also excerpt his theological take-home points as well.

This text is very difficult. What would probably pass for the standard interpretation among evangelical Protestants is as follows. Moses had two sons, but he had not yet circumcised one of them. On the way to Egypt he was suddenly incapacitated (by a severe illness) as a punishment from God for this neglect. Moses, calling from his sickbed, told Zipporah what the problem was and that she had to circumcise the boy, and she performed the circumsion. By doing this, she averted the wrath of God against Moses. But she found the whole process disgusting and blamed Moses for putting her through the ordeal, so she threw the boy’s foreskin at Moses’s feet and called him bloddy and disgusting). Her revulsion toward what had happened was so great that she went back to her father at that time; we do not see her again until Exod. 18:2.

Every aspect of the above interpretation, except that Zipporah circumcised her son, is almost cerainly wrong…. (p. 225-226)

Some of his key arguments are that the text calls the boy “her son” and focuses on Zipporah, not Moses. There is no indication in the text that Moses is present with her at this time. The pronoun “him” likely points forward to the boy as being sick. The text doesn’t say Moses told Zipporah to do anything. Zipporah a shepherdess was likely very familiar wtih anatomy and familiar with circumcision rites in her own tribe. The most natural reading of the text is that she touches the boy’s feet – not those of Moses. “Feet” can be a euphemism for genitals, but doesn’t need to be in this case. It could be a ritual touching of the feet, similar to the annointing in Leviticus that puts blood and annointing oil on the priest’s big toes. The same word for “touch” here is used in Exod. 12:22 which may point to this being a ritual ceremony.

Garrett’s longest discussion is on the “bloody bridegroom” terminology and the use of the various Hebrew terms. He takes it as a liturgical expression that was probably used in Midianite circumcisions and it survives here in Exodus as a “linguistic fossil,” and does not follow normal Hebrew meaning. The specific interpretation he gives for the entire account does seem quite probable and I tend to agree with his view here on this term, particularly since it doesn’t mention Moses but is said of the circumcision act. Verse 26 has to remind the Hebrew readers what this phrase was directed toward, since it is an unusual expression even for Hebrew readers.

Here then is Garrett’s interpretation:

We might, therefore, suggest the following reconstruction of the story behind this text. Moses and Zipporah set out for Egypt. Along the way, their son suddenly became deathly ill. Zipporah recognized that the boy needed to be circumcised, and she did the act with a flint knife (flint can be more finely sharpened than can bronze and is therefore better for performing surgery). After the removal of the foreskin, she ritually touched the boy’s feet (or genitals) with her hand or the flint while saying, “You are hatan damim to me” (a member of my community by virture of the blood of circumcision). These formulaic words concluded the circumcision ceremony. The act formalized the inclusion of the boy in the community. After that, the boy recovered. Ziporah had turned aside the wrath of God.

Which son was it? We do not know, but since there is no birth report for Eliezer during their time in Midian, it is possible that he was born right about the time Moses set out for Egypt. This would explain Moses’s desire to get a donkey for the woman and the children. Why was one son not circumcised? Again, we do not know, but if the above conjecture is correct, it may be that they thought it dangerous to circumcise the boy right as they set out on a journey across the wilderness. ON the other hand, it may be that the uncircumcised son was Gershom, the firstborn, as some Jewish interpreters have maintained. Why is the boy called “her son” and not “Moses’s son”? Probably because Moses play no role in the story; this is about what Zipporah did.

An important feature of the text, however, is how it is linked to its context. In v. 20, Moses provides for “his sons,” while v. 23 speaks of “my son” and “your son,” and v. 25 speaks of “her son.” Thus, the issue of how parents treat their sons dominates this passage. In addition, as Sarna points out, 4:22-23 is focused on the life and death of the “firstborn,” while 4:24-26 indicates that the son must be circumcised in order to live…. This parallel further suggests that it was the son, not Moses, whose life was in danger…. In the broader context of Exodus, the portrayal of Zipporah turning aside God’s wrath from her son is paralleled in Moses’s doing the same for all of Israel in Exod. 32:9-14. (p. 230-232)

From this interpretation of the text, here are a few of Garrett’s theological take-home points:

The circumcision of Zipporah’s son makes the point that one cannot be considered to be part of Israel, and so to be YHWH’s son, unless one is circumcised. For the Israelites, the warning was that they could only escape the great wrath of God directed against Egypt’s sons by being sure that their own sons were circumcised. By analogy, one is not one of God’s people by mere association….

Zipporah, in her actions, demonstrates spiritual insight applied to the protection of her children. Spiritual wisdom and intervention is necessary in order to save one’s children from destruction….

Christ is the supreme example of the obedient son. He is also the true firstborn of God, and he provided for us the circumcision that removes the defilement of the flesh and allows us to join the people of God (Eph. 2:11-13; Col. 2:11). (p. 232)

I found this treatment extremely helpful and illuminating. This is an example of the care with which Garrett handles the text and is representative of his exegetical treatment throughout the commentary. He is not usually offering an innovative interpretation (as he does above), but he brings clarity and his masterful knowledge of Hebrew to bear on the questions at hand.

Check out the book’s detail page at Kregel.com, where you can find an excerpt. Or pick up a copy at any of the following retailers:

• Westminster Bookstore
• Christianbook.com
• Amazon.com
• Direct from Kregel

Disclaimer: This book was provided by Kregel Academic for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a positive review.

Leaving the Village

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

village

It takes a great deal of courage to follow the Lord’s call and leave the only church you’ve ever known. When I shared my story of leaving extreme fundamentalism, I was trying to deal with the trauma in one sense, but I also wanted to find camaraderie and support from others via the internet. I had become aware that I wasn’t the only one experiencing the turmoil of finally seeing the world through different eyes.

Over the years, I’ve had numerous expressions of thanks as people have commented on my blog posts or contacted me via email or Facebook. I’ve also had my share of ill-will directed toward me, as people assume that our dramatic change was a cop-out and an excuse to live it up in the world. In truth, it was the hardest thing my wife and I ever did: we risked alienating ourselves from both sides of our family and ruining the only real friendships we had.

There are now a lot of ex-fundamentalist blogs out there. And there are a host of other “survivor” type blogs as well. Some exaggerate the problems of fundamentalism, others jettison any connection with Christianity at all. The internet is a mixed bag, for sure. But it has helped shed light on the beliefs and practices of any group. Mormons have found the internet and are starting to see the problems in their church’s historical dogmas. And countless others have been rescued from cults as they do their own secret internet research.

Like anything, the internet in the wrong hands can be bad. But the truth is not ashamed of honest inquiry: which is why Christianity has and will only continue to flourish in the internet age.

I say all this by way of introduction as I want to direct your attention to a new blog from a Facebook friend of mine. It is called Leaving the Village and describes his own exodus from a legalistic, controlling faith community. His story is very similar to mine, in some respects. And for those struggling to decide how to proceed in their own faith journey, reading his story may be a blessing. He doesn’t try to trash his former church but is sharing his heart and how it felt to go through the process that lead to his “leaving the village.”

In his message to me he shares his motivation for the blog:

Hey Bob, your blog and story were a huge help to me when I was walking away from ——. Just simply knowing I wasn’t alone was one of the biggest things I needed to see.

I just started a blog to try to tell my story and help young guys in the same way you helped me. I’m trying to get the word out about it, but I’m not linking directly through my own social media yet. I don’t want my former pastor to just dismiss the blog as a hit piece. I’m writing with a bit of anonymity, but not pulling any punches.

Anyways, I was wondering if you might consider reading the first post and possibly sharing it on your blog. No pressure, I just wanted to ask you to consider it.

Regardless of what you do, thanks again for the encouragement you gave me.

Go over and read his first post. Then bookmark his site, as it promises to be good reading.

Here is an excerpt to get you started:

It’s hard to imagine unless you’ve been there. One decision, one moment changing the whole course of your life and the life of your family. Regardless of your story, everyone faces life changing decisions at some point, but the feelings of angst and terror seem to be multiplied when those decisions involve leaving a religious cult.

I know, the word cult is a loaded term. It’s also pretty polarizing. Those within the cult never see it as a cult. If they did, they would leave. But those outside it look back in and, at least in my case, ask questions like, “How did I stay duped for so long?” or “Why do people stay?” Calling something a cult has far less to do with its message and far more to do with its methods. But again, that’s a subjective definition that someone inside a cult is bound to disagree with….

My goal is not… to correct misguided beliefs or point out the flaws of others. We all hold presuppositions, more than we care to admit, and attempts at correcting your presuppositions will only go as far as you allow them.

Instead, I want to share my story–a story of angst, a story of searching for truth, a story of a guy looking for a God who was there all along, guiding each step of the journey. I know my audience is small. Not too many people grew up in “a village.” But if you’re one that did and you’re reading this, then know this, you are not alone. Rather than try to convince you of one position against another, I simply want to meet you in the journey and share in the feelings and longings that can be down right terrifying.

My prayer is that you know the road you walk is not one walked alone. Leaving the village and embracing the mystery of a life of faith in Jesus was the best thing that ever happened to me.