Timing
of Tabernacle Plans; A Changed Relationship
Aaron, Golden Calf, Mt. Sinai, Law of Moses, Sin Offering,
ark of the covenant, arc of the covenant, census of Israel, Levitical Priesthood,
linear logic, block logic, Hebrew quirks
|
Major Threads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Based on the order of appearance, Exodus 24-31 seems to place the plan for a Tabernacle serviced by the Levitical priesthood immediately after the confirmation of the Sinai covenant. Moses met with God on Mt. Sinai after the Sinai covenant was confirmed and apparently received instruction to build a tabernacle. However, even the text describing that occasion casts doubts about where and when this discussion took place.
Exodus 25:40, 26:30 and 27:8, which are included in this text indicate that the narrative came at a later time, not on the mountain. “And see to it that you make them according to the pattern which was shown you on the mountain.” (Ex 25:40, NKJV) Something like this would logically be said later when Moses was not on the mountain.
Unexplained Change
If we consider the tabernacle in light of the covenant at Sinai some interesting dichotomies come to light. The Sinai covenant directed that altars were to be made of earth or uncut stones.
Ex 20:21 ‘Make for Me an altar of earth and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your sacrifices of well being, your sheep and your oxen; in every place where I cause My name to be mentioned I will come to you and bless you. 22 And if you make for Me an altar of stones, do not build it of hewn stones; for by wielding your tool upon them you have profaned them.’ (TNK, in KJV vs. 24-25)
There is a completely different altar specified for use with the tabernacle apparently given just days later. It was not earth or stone and it would have required tools to assemble it. If we accept the order and timing implied by Exodus 24-25, it was in the works from about a week after the confirmation of the Sinai covenant (Ex 24:9-25:1). So the ink on the Sinai parchment was hardly dry and a different altar is required which is contrary to the Sinai agreement.
The altar required for the tabernacle was made of wood covered with copper (Ex 27:1-2). This altar would have been inherently profane according to the Sinai covenant instruction. To a large extent that is indeed how it was treated. That altar required a seven day period of purification (Ex 29:37). This seems a step down to a less desirable altar. This altar was also the exclusive domain of the tribe of Levi, specifically Aaron and his sons. The nation of priests Israel was intended to be (Ex 19:5-6) were excluded except for the tribe of Levi.
In contrast to this, when the Sinai covenant was confirmed Moses made use of an altar of stones. This was in accord with the Sinai instruction. It was set up that very day (Ex 24:4-7). No purification was indicated. No particular tribe was required to oversee the sacrifice.
An altar of earth or uncut stones could be constructed virtually anywhere in the world. The quote above supports that it could be made in multiple places at once. Yahweh would come to the worshiper and bless. No particular tribe is required to officiate. At the time the firstborn were the official priests although the Sinai covenant may have been intending to expand that. The whole nation was to be a nation of priests for Yah (Ex 19:5-6).
An altar that could be set up anywhere would be very handy for someone representing Yahweh and calling on Him on behalf of some foreign people outside of the Promised Land. It certainly anticipates a close relationship with everyone in Israel.
The altar associated with the tabernacle/temple does not allow for any of this. There was only one in the world. Instead of Yahweh coming to the worshiper, the worshiper had to travel to Yahweh’s dwelling (Deu 12:5-14). Only the tribe of Levi, specifically the sons of Aaron, were authorized to prepare sacrifices and offer them (Lev 17: 2-9, Deu 12:5-13). The relationship between the worshipper and Yahweh was only through the Levitical priesthood which in comparison to the covenant of Sinai was a layer of geographical as well as individual separation! So instead of an expansion of priests beyond just the firstborn with all serving at His altar, there is a limiting to just the family of Aaron and as assistants to him, the rest of the tribe of Levi.
If we are to accept that the tabernacle was directed as part of the Sinai covenant we have two incompatible altars in the same covenant. Of course neither the tabernacle nor its altar is mentioned in the terms of the Sinai covenant (Ex 20-23). The Exodus 24-25 account leads one to believe that the plans for the tabernacle began to be given just a few days after the Sinai covenant. The tabernacle altar would have been part of those plans. Instead of an altar where Yahweh comes to the worshiper the tabernacle altar requires the worshipper to travel to wherever the tabernacle is. In that case, we have a radical and unfortunate change in relationship in a very short period of time for no apparent reason and with no explanation. It certainly indicates a step down in Israel’s relationship with Yahweh.
Actually, Jewish scholars recognized a timing controversy regarding the instruction to build the Tabernacle. “Rashi (who follows the Midrash Tanchuma [earlier Torah commentary]), notes the many Scriptural and Talmudic indications that the Sanctuary was in response to, and an atonement for, the sin of the Golden Calf. Accordingly, Rashi is of the opinion that the divine instructions contained in the sections of Terumah and Tetzaveh [Ex 25-30] were communicated to Moses … following Israel's repentance … and Moses' receiving of the Second Tablets.” (http://www.chabad.org/global/popup/default_cdo/aid/1329/jewish/Sin-and-Sanctity.htm). (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhaki, aka. Rashi 1040-1105, Troyes, France)
Rashi is not the sole proponent of this perspective: The commentary of Sforno (Rabbi Ovadia Sforno, Italy, 1470-1550) on Shemot 31:18 states: “...the original intention of God at the deliverance of the Torah was not fulfilled as he has said 'and you will be to me a nation of priests and a holy people' (19:6) and as he said: 'an altar of earth you shall make for me... anywhere I will come to you.' Now it is necessary to build a Mishkan [and the Torah] is informing us that this is a direct cause of the erred choice of the Children of Israel, for although at the end of the first forty days He gave the Tablets in order to sanctify the entire nation as priests... now they have rebelled... and have fallen from their (spiritual) level, as the Torah testifies: and the Children of Israel lost the crowns which they had from the Mountain of Horeb (Sinai)." ( from: https://etzion.org.il/en/mishkan) ( Ovadia ben Jacob Sforno[Seforno] was an Italian rabbi, Biblical commentator, philosopher and physician. He was born at Cesena about 1470 and died at Bologna in 1550.)
If the tabernacle was a reaction to Israel’s conduct with the golden calf, the account in Exodus 25-32 is not in sequential time order as we typically assume. It would also provide an explanation for a significant change in relationship between Israel and Yahweh since He was seriously threatening to destroy them. Is there other evidence which indicates the tabernacle plans were given after the golden calf?
Change in Priesthood
The firstborn were the priests as of the Sinai covenant. There is no indication in the Sinai covenant, recorded for us in Exodus 20-23 that would fall to Levi. However, the tabernacle account gives no indication that the firstborn priests had any standing with the tabernacle. All four of Aarons sons were expected to serve with him from the planning stage (Ex 28:1). This was not a priesthood of firstborn. The firstborn were exchanged for the tribe of Levi about nine months later (Ex 13:2, Num 1:1, 3:12, 41, 45). Of course, this was seven or eight months after the golden calf.
Num 3:45 "Take the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the children of Israel, and the livestock of the Levites instead of their livestock. The Levites shall be Mine: I am the LORD.”
The tabernacle was exclusively a Levitical institution. Aaron and his sons were consecrated when the Tabernacle was consecrated (Lev 8:10-12, Ex 40). The tabernacle needed Aaron and his sons to maintain the lamps and incense and Aaron and his sons needed the altar in front of the tabernacle to ascend offerings to Yahweh. They were mutually dependent.
Ex 40:2 "On the first day of the first month you shall set up the tabernacle of the tent of meeting… 12 "Then you shall bring Aaron and his sons to the door of the tabernacle of meeting and wash them with water.…15 "You shall anoint them, as you anointed their father, that they may minister to Me as priests; for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations." (see also Lev 1:1, 8:1-9:24)
The tribe of Levi was a buffer around the tabernacle to separate it from the other tribes (Num 1:53). No other tribe could serve at the altar (Num 1:51). Neither did Aaron have permission to offer sacrifices anywhere else. The Levites were also dependent on the tabernacle, as Yahweh’s dwelling for their authority in Israel. When the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed the station of the priesthood in the nation melted away.
The Levites were not mentioned in the Sinai covenant. Even when Moses moved, apparently to punish those responsible for the golden calf, he didn’t press the Levites into service as a duty. They evidently understood better than most the abhorrent nature of Israel’s sin, but even though Aaron and his sons were designated in Exodus 27:21 as the keepers of Yahweh’s house, Moses didn’t tell them to do their job as Yahweh’s priests. He asked for volunteers (Ex 32:26). Once the job was done Moses suggested that they would be blessed, but there is no indication he knew what form that blessing would take. Either the ramifications of Exodus 27:21 had not registered with Moses yet or more likely that instruction had not yet been given.
Ex 32:29 “Then Moses said, "Consecrate yourselves today to the LORD, that He may bestow on you a blessing this day, for every man has opposed his son and his brother.”
Deuteronomy 10:5-8 indicates the Levites were chosen to serve Yah’s house toward the end of Moses second 40 day stay on Mt. Sinai. There is obviously an inset section composed of verses 6-7 in this text that talks of Israel's camps after they left the area of Sinai. Aaron and the rest of the Levites were consecrated while they were still in Sinai (Lev 8-9, 1:1, Num 8, 1:1). The Levites carried the Ark and Tabernacle as they broke camp leaving Mt. Sinai (Num 10:11-22). They had obviously been chosen as the caretakers and priestly tribe by that time.
Through use of punctuation some translations connect this choosing of Levi with the travels to the other camps. Of course, this punctuation doesn’t exist in the Hebrew text. Levi was certainly chosen while Israel was still at Sinai. The reference to the other camps in Deuteronomy 10:6-7 is off topic. Removing that inset directly connects verse 8 with verse 5, which connects the choosing of Levi with Moses second 40-day stay on Mt. Sinai. Both verse 5 and 8 deal with the Ark of the Covenant and the responsibility for it and the replacement tablets. The flow of thought from verse 5 to 8 is perfectly logical and continues through verse 10.
Deu 10:5 "Then I turned and came down from the mountain, and put the tablets in the ark which I had made; and there they are, just as the LORD commanded me." ...
8 At that time the LORD separated the tribe of Levi to bear the ark of the covenant of the LORD, to stand before the LORD to minister to Him and to bless in His name, to this day.” (NKJV)
The tribe of Levi did ultimately receive a blessing. It was likely not an arbitrary choice, but as a result of their action after the golden calf. The account in Deuteronomy 10 supports this as does a later exchange with the firstborn (Num 3:41).
Other timing indicators
Ex 29:36 "And you shall offer a bull every day as a sin offering for atonement. You shall cleanse the altar when you make atonement for it, and you shall anoint it to sanctify it.”
Based on the location of this instruction in Exodus it also seems to have come from Moses first trip up Mt. Sinai after the confirming of the Sinai covenant. Again the sequential order of text appears to indicate that sin offerings were planned before the golden calf and before the explanation of sin offerings in Leviticus 4-7. The morning and evening sacrifices are also mentioned in Exodus 29:38-39. Leviticus 7:37-38 and Numbers 28:6 both connect the instruction requiring sin offerings and the daily offerings with the instruction Moses received “on/in Mt. Sinai”(בְּהַר סִינָי).
Lev 7:37 “This is the law of the burnt offering, the grain offering, the sin offering, the trespass offering, the consecrations, and the sacrifice of the peace offering, 38 which the LORD commanded Moses on Mount Sinai, on the day when He commanded the children of Israel to offer their offerings to the LORD in the Wilderness of Sinai.”
We could assume that connects with the Sinai covenant, but Moses was ‘in Mt. Sinai’ on a number of different occasions. The most direct connection is actually with Moses second 40-day stay on Mt. Sinai and the “on Mt. Sinai” instruction Moses passed to the elders of Israel upon his return as recorded in Exodus 34:32.
“Afterward all the children of Israel came near, and he gave them as commandments all that the LORD had spoken with him on Mount Sinai (בְּהַר סִינָי)”.
The Hebrew text designating Mt. Sinai is identical in these cases. This describes events that happened as Moses was returning to the camp with the replacement tablets after his second 40-day stay on Mt. Sinai. There is no similar phrase applied to the instruction of the Sinai covenant.
A similar phrase is used in Exodus 31:18. It is not associated with any particular new instruction. It is also not connected with any failure on the part of Israel even though the making of the golden calf was probably underway at the base of the mountain. Jeremiah 7 links a requirement of sacrifices to egregious failure of Israel to obey His instruction.
Jeremiah 7:22-23 makes clear that animal sacrifices were not commanded when Israel first came out of Egypt. They were a reaction to Israel’s failure.
Jer 7:22 "For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices. 23 "But this is what I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be My people. And walk in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well with you.’ 24 "Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but followed the counsels and the dictates of their evil hearts, and went backward and not forward.”
“Obey my voice” and “walk in all the ways that I have commanded you” fits well the exhortation Israel received just before confirming the Sinai covenant in Exodus 19:5.
Ex 19:5 ‘Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. 6 ‘And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation…’ (see also Ex 23:22)
Yahweh’s relationship with Israel seems to be quite good as of Exodus 24 after the covenant of Sinai was confirmed. No recent failure had raised His ire. Moses and the Elders ate a meal with Yahweh shortly after the covenant was confirmed (Ex 24:10-11). A meal between the parties of a covenant was a standard tradition. The superior party was welcoming the new vassals into His family to be under the protection of His roof. (see. Treaty and Covenant, by Dennis J. McCarthy Pg. 254, Biblical institute Press, Rome, 1978).
The sin offerings mentioned in Exodus 29 are to be offered in the process of consecrating Aaron and his sons. Considering that Levi, including Aaron the high priest, was chosen as of Moses second 40 day stay on Mt. Sinai, it is unlikely the plans for his anointing would have come very much before that time. On the other hand, if we assume the sequential order and timing of appearance in the text, Exodus 29 is 7 to 8 months before Aaron was actually consecrated.
The morning and evening sacrifices required at the tabernacle are specifically mentioned in Numbers 28:6 as being commanded ‘on Mt. Sinai’. Again this connects with the occasion of Moses second 40-day stay on the mountain after the golden calf. As indicated by Jeremiah 7:22-24, there was no reason to implement these things with a properly respected Sinai covenant. Jeremiah 7:22-24 with Leviticus 7:37-38 are clear; the sacrifices were implemented because of Israel's failure commanded on the second 40-day stay of Moses on Mt. Sinai. There was no deal breaking failure before the golden calf. So again, other scriptures place the timing on Mt. Sinai after the golden calf, not before. Of course, at the golden calf Yahweh was ready to destroy virtually the whole nation and start over (Ex 32:7-10). That was a deal breaking failure of Israel.
Another record we have from ‘on Mt. Sinai’ named Aaron’s sons. It is recorded in Numbers 3:1-2. It names all four of Aaron’s sons. Its existence is certainly understandable and appropriate for the national records when connected with the choosing of Aaron and the Levites on Moses second 40-day stay on Mt. Sinai.
The choice of Aaron as High Priest raises a question. Deuteronomy 9:20 records that Yahweh was very angry with Aaron as a result of the golden calf. He was in line for destruction with the rest of Israel. If Exodus 27:21 is in time order Yahweh may have been designating Aaron to serve as His high priest at His tabernacle about the same time that Aaron was overseeing the construction of the golden calf. This would have been seven or eight months before the tabernacle was complete. There was no need to choose anyone to be priest at that time. Yahweh is punctual, but seldom early.
The designation of Aaron and all his sons as priests in the tabernacle account of Exodus 25-30 is not inappropriate. It is certainly related to the tabernacle. The tabernacle is exclusively a Levitical building, but the entire tabernacle account is out of order sequentially relative to the account of the golden calf. If the instruction to build the tabernacle is in proper order it should have been connected to the firstborn priests rather than Aaron and all four of his sons. The firstborn were the priests during and immediately after the Sinai covenant was confirmed. There seems to be no connection between the firstborn and the tabernacle.
In the Sinai instruction there is a reference to God’s house in Exodus 23:19a "The first of the firstfruits of your land you shall bring into the house of the LORD your God.” However, when Jacob set up a pillar in honor of God he deemed that it was the very house of God:
Gen 28:22 "And this stone which I have set as a pillar shall be God’s house, and of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You." It seems Jacob was prepared to give his tenth just like Exodus 23:19 exhorts Israel to bring their first fruits to God’s house. A stone could have served as a marker of His house. An altar of earth or stone at that location would have been sufficient.
So, Israel didn’t need the tabernacle in order to give their first fruits to Yahweh. If the Sinai covenant needed the tabernacle, it should have been up and functioning from the day the covenant was confirmed, otherwise Israel would have been breaking that covenant made at Sinai.
Hebrews and Timing
This confusion surrounding the origin of the tabernacle came about because it is easy to assume that the order of appearance in Scripture is the order of occurrence. The Hebrew mind that compiled the record of Exodus 25-30 was bringing together items related to the tabernacle. The words of Yahweh from Mt. Sinai were huge in the history of Israel. The tabernacle and later temple was also of immense importance. Their record was not overly concerned with the timing of that instruction, but rather the relationship and relative significance. The exact timing was indicated elsewhere. Lack of concern for the sequential ordering of a matter is not unusual in Hebrew accounts.
It is well understood that ancient Hebrews did not have our perspective on timing. (see: The Hebrew Concept of Time, by Ronnie Littlejohn, pp. 53-56. Biblical Illustrator, Winter 1999-2000) The accounts are contradictory if we assume chronological order. If we don't assume the order of appearance in Exodus is chronological they fit together well. In any case the bulk of evidence does not support Exodus 25-30 being integral to the Sinai covenant.
The Hebrew authors and ancient Hebrew speakers in general, are not concerned with chronological order or timing the way we in the Western world are. For example: Deuteronomy 1:6-19 indicates that Moses set up his captains of tens, fifties, hundreds etc. about the time they left the area of Sinai. The setting of the tens, fifties, etc. is also what Jethro recommended and apparently was done in Exodus 18:17-24. It makes little sense that this was done before the Sinai covenant of Exodus 20-24 and then again less than a year later when Israel was leaving Sinai. It is the same event recorded from two slightly different perspectives. Exodus 18 is just not overly concerned about informing us of the exact timing. It does acknowledge that the narrative covers a time while Israel was camped by Mt. Sinai, the mountain of God (Ex 18:5). This is important to note since Exodus 19:1 has Israel arriving at Mt. Sinai later in the narrative.
A similar quirk shows up in the beginnings of the Ark of the Covenant. Different accounts appear to disagree about when the tablets were placed in it. Deuteronomy 10:5 indicates the tablets were put in the ark when Moses came down from Sinai after receiving them. Exodus 40:20 indicates the tablets/testimony were placed in the ark when Moses set up the tabernacle. The point is, the ancient Hebrews were not concerned about timing the way we are. The tablets were put into the ark. Exactly when that happened was not overly important, especially in Exodus 40. So we can be confused about timing if we assume our own timing norms or strict chronological order of everything in Exodus as well as other Hebrew writings.
Time consciousness is a trait of linear logic, not block logic typical of the Hebrew mind. The appearance of circumstances in Exodus 25-30 that really didn’t have existence until after Exodus 32 should not confuse us. Exodus 25-30 is focused on the tabernacle and its service. Based on its location relative to Exodus 24 and 31 it appears to belong to Moses first trip up Mt. Sinai, shortly after the Sinai Covenant was confirmed. However, after considering the details of its contents, it is apparent both the tabernacle and the Levitical priesthood came about because of the events of Exodus 32 and the golden calf.
Negotiations After the Golden Calf
The record of Exodus 33 gives interesting insight into Moses negotiation with Yahweh regarding Israel after the golden calf. Yah has evidently relented from destroying Israel and determined to honor His promise to the Patriarch’s. He will drive out the inhabitants of Canaan, but He won’t ‘go up in your midst’ (Ex 33:3b).
At some point in this negotiation Moses set up a tent far outside Israel’s camp where he could talk to Yah. This was obviously a new necessity. It was not necessary before the golden calf. Israel’s action at the golden calf drove Yahweh from the camp.
Ex 33:7 “Moses took his tent and pitched it outside the camp, far from the camp, and called it the tabernacle of meeting. And it came to pass that everyone who sought the LORD went out to the tabernacle of meeting which was outside the camp.”
Before this Moses communicated with Yahweh on many occasions without any indication that he had to go anywhere. Moses going up Mt. Sinai was not typical of how he communicated with Yahweh. It was unique since Mt. Sinai was, evidently for good reason, considered ‘the mountain of God’ (Ex 3:1, 24:13) and Moses happened to be right there.
Later in the ongoing negotiation Yahweh told Moses His presence would go with Moses (33:14). This was not satisfactory to Moses and he continued to plead for His presence to go with the whole nation (vs. 15). Yahweh finally allows that he will do as Moses wishes.
Ex 33:17 “So the LORD said to Moses, "I will also do this thing that you have spoken; for you have found grace in My sight, and I know you by name."
This is likely the first hint of the existence of the tabernacle as a place for Yahweh. Moses went up Mt. Sinai again to get the replacement tablets. This trip became his second 40-day stay on Mt. Sinai. Moses continued to plead for Yahweh to ‘go among’ Israel once he met Him on the mountain. Moses may have understood the former relationship was not going to be completely restored by what Yahweh promised in verse 17 above. Moses wanted the full relationship restored.
Ex 34:9 ‘Then he said, "If now I have found grace in Your sight, O Lord, let my Lord, I pray, go among us, even though we are a stiff-necked people; and pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us as Your inheritance."’
Earlier Yah had given direction to Moses to lead Israel to the Promised Land (Ex 32:34, 33:1). However, they didn’t leave any time soon. It would be six or seven months before they would break camp. They had a tabernacle to build which was evidently not in the plan as of the earlier instruction to start toward the Promised Land in Exodus 32:34-33:1. They couldn’t travel and build at the same time.
Exodus 25:8 is the first place, according to the standard text order, that mentions the Creator wanting to dwell with Israel. "And let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them.”
Moses did not request that Yahweh go among Israel before the confirming of the Sinai covenant in Exodus 24. By that time Moses had many conversations with Yahweh. Except when they were at the very base of God’s mountain, there is no indication he had to go outside the camp or somewhere else to communicate with Yahweh. Yahweh had been going among them in the camp until then, or at least Moses saw no reason to think He wasn't with them. That changed after the Golden Calf forcing Moses to set up the original Tabernacle of Meeting, his tent, outside the camp.
Yahweh’s plan to dwell among Israel in the tabernacle (Ex 25:8) is more likely a response to Moses’ plea of Exodus 34:9 and/or Exodus 33:15-16. Moses’s sudden need to go far outside the camp to communicate with Yahweh made it blatantly apparent His relationship with Israel and to a degree with Moses had changed. Earlier Yahweh was easily accessible, now He had separated Himself. This is clearly evident in the altar of the tabernacle when compared with the altar of earth or stone instructed in the Sinai covenant.
Remember that Moses asked Yahweh to ‘go among us’. He was asking Yahweh to move among Israel as had been the case before he had to provide a tent far outside the camp (Ex 33:7) in order to communicate with Him. Moses wanted the earlier relationship restored. However, that earlier condition was not restored. The Tabernacle would not enable the Creator to ‘go among’ Israel, but it would enable Him to ‘dwell among them’(Ex 25:8). He could dwell among them if the Levites were a buffer to keep the other tribes a sufficient distance away.
The Levites were placed around the tabernacle when it was completed. Moses then went there to meet with Yahweh. This did not restore Yahweh’s communication with Moses to what it had been before the golden calf. Moses had to leave his tent even though it was among the Levites to meet with Yahweh.
So the Tabernacle didn't restore things to the conditions that existed as of the Sinai covenant, before the golden calf. It seemed to create a closer relationship, but it was closer only compared to Moses’ tent far outside the camp. It didn’t create a closer relationship compared to the time of the confirmation of the Sinai covenant and before, but a more distant one.
Some of Exodus 25-30 was likely given to Moses during his second 40-day stay on Mt. Sinai. Much was likely given from his Tent of Meeting after his return to camp. It is unlikely Moses delayed his request for materials donations once he knew what would be needed. That would put the proper sequential place for most of the tabernacle instruction around or slightly before Exodus 35:4 where Moses requests materials of the people for tabernacle construction.
Moses’ instruction to the people to give for the tabernacle was recorded after the second 40-day stay on Mt. Sinai (Ex 35:4-20). Yet Yahweh’s instruction to Moses about this was in Exodus 25:2-9 supposedly months earlier, a few days after the Sinai covenant was confirmed. We saw that Moses was anxious that Yahweh would go among Israel (Ex 34:9). Wouldn’t he then make construction of the tabernacle a high priority? If Moses wanted Yahweh to be among Israel, wouldn’t he begin the construction of this house as soon as possible? If chapter 25 is in time sequence Moses had the plans and he had the means to begin construction immediately after the golden calf. It would seem that he would want to do that and give Yahweh every reason possible to see a desire in Israel to do His will. Yet he did nothing to start construction. However, if Exodus 25:2-9 is an account of instruction received on Moses second 40-day stay on Mt. Sinai, Moses is being diligent and responsive to Yahweh’s instruction.
Census
Numbers records a command to take a census of Israel minus the tribe of Levi. The tribe of Levi was considered separate from the rest of Israel probably about the time the tabernacle was completed. Much of the first few chapters of Numbers are related to that census. That census was taken the first day of the second month of Israel’s second year in the wilderness (Num 1:1-2, 18). That was about 8 months after the golden calf.
Num 1:18 “and they assembled all the congregation together on the first day of the second month; and they recited their ancestry by families, by their fathers’ houses, according to the number of names, from twenty years old and above, each one individually.”
Num 1:49 "Only the tribe of Levi you shall not number, nor take a census of them among the children of Israel”.
The count of the tribe of Levi was done separately (Num 3:15, 3:39). It seems apparent this census was done was to support the trade of the non-firstborn Levites for the firstborn of the other tribes (Num 3:45-48). This was not a function of the Sinai covenant, but an afterthought and reaction to failure of the firstborn priests.
This same census is referred to in Exodus 38:26 where a half shekel tax is imposed on those included in the census. One could easily assume this census was taken before the tabernacle was erected since it appears before Exodus 40 where the tabernacle is erected. However, Numbers 1:18 is quite specific that this census was taken on the first day of the second month, which would have been about a month after the tabernacle was erected. The census total is identical to that in Exodus 38:26 (Num 1:46, 2:32). Yet Exodus 38 appears to be of a time before the tabernacle was complete. That didn’t prevent related information from being included, like the census. Numbers 2 is certainly after the tabernacle was built.
As it turns out, this same tax is mentioned in Exodus 30:12-14 and this account anticipates a census will be done. The tax is so “that there may be no plague among them when you number them” (Ex 30:12d). That doesn’t sound like it’s coming from a Patron who is basking in the glow of a fresh new relationship of cooperation with His children. That sounds more like a Creator that is displeased with taking a census and is willing to strike anyone who steps out of line. The tax is called ‘atonement money’ (Ex 30:16). Did the Creator require Israel to take a census and then charge them for the offense of taking the census?
This strange approach on the part of the Creator is easily understood if one considers that He was opposed to any census, but required it because the firstborn failed in their responsibility. In that case, this area of Exodus 30 is not intended to be considered sequential in time relative to Exodus 24 or 32. It is not in time order, but subject order. It is simply describing things related to the tabernacle. The mention of Aaron and his sons in chapter 27/28 and the sin offerings of chapter 29 cannot be taken as indications of earlier timing because of their closeer proximity to Exodus 24 compared to Exodus 32. The timing of the Levites choosing (Deu 10:5, 8), the commanding of the required sacrifices (Lev 7:37-38, Num 28:6, Ex34:32) and the timing of the census (Num 1:18, 2) are specified in other areas of Moses record. The timing follows the episode of the golden calf. Like the tabernacle itself, these things were implemented in reaction to the golden calf and Moses plea to spare Israel.
It follows that the Tabernacle plans came at about the same time as the Levites were chosen to service it. A single physical building/tabernacle/temple is not necessary or desirable when everyone is functioning as a priest in their own geographical area or outside it. That was the intention of the Sinai covenant (Ex 19:5-6). Consider that this is the case again now that the Levitical system has been dissolved (John 4:20-24, I Cor 3:16, I Pet 2:5, 9). Believers are expected to represent Yahweh wherever they happen to be.
II Cor 6:16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will dwell in them And walk among them. I will be their God, And they shall be My people." This verse is a reference to Lev 26:11-12. If Israel had obeyed, the Creator would have come out from behind the Levites to reestablish a direct relationship with them. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen. It is clear that ultimately our Creator wants to again ‘walk among’ us. Dwelling nearby with a Levitical priesthood between us is not the relationship He seeks. That was not His intention with the Sinai covenant either.
The existence of the tabernacle was a step down from the way things functioned before the golden calf. After that failure the people were not to offer their own sacrifices. Moses had to go to the tabernacle to speak to Yahweh. Once in the Promised Land some people would need to travel multiple days to connect with Yahweh. The tabernacle was made so Yahweh could be within the camp of Israel again. However, He wouldn’t ‘go among them’ as before. The tabernacle would have a buffer of Levites to keep the rest of Israel at arm’s length. Animal sacrifices would need to be offered on a daily basis. This permanent change in relationship is well illustrated in the different altar specified for the tabernacle. However, the altar is not the only change illustrating a more distant relationship. The new Levitical priesthood at the expense of all the firstborn was another. Moses need to go to the tabernacle to communicate with Yahweh also illustrates a similar separation.
As Seforno suggested, this was not likely the original intention. Yahweh wanted a close personal relationship with His people, but He expects His people to walk in His ways. It was apparent that Israel as a whole could not overcome their past to walk in harmony with His ways. Even though Israel was not up to the purpose for which Yahweh brought them out of Egypt, He did preserve them, but the relationship was not what it could have been.