Grace and the Mosaic covenant

I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

You shall have no other gods before me...

Many people point to the preface to the Ten Commandments to demonstrate that obedience to the Ten Commandments was (solely) a response to a salvation already received.

I have two problems with this (other than the Pauline letters!):

1. Israel were not yet in the Promised Land. God may have unconditionally promised to bring the nation into Canaan, but he did not promise to bring every individual. A whole generation would perish in the wilderness because of their disobedience. Gordon Wenham himself comments "Israel is posed to take possession of the rest of their inheritance, but this depends on total obedience to the law and its demands".
2. Israel were tenants who could be dispossessed if they disobeyed. This is particularly clear in Deuteronomy, but even in the command to honour your parents there is an implicit warning that disobedience will lead to ejection from the land.

Transcending these problems is the absence of holiness in the people. Kiuchi comments "though it seems the Decalogue was given within a context of 'grace', would not the difficulty of observing it in addition to the severe punishments associated with such violations... mitigate against such a conclusion...the Israelites standing befoer hte Lord in Exod. 19 are as yet unredeemed (unsaved) from their sinfulness... the spiritual reality of the people showed that they were far from being saved from their own sinfulness" (pp.27-28, Leviticus (AOTC))

"the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." (John 1:17)

Moses and his veil

Listening to: Sufjan Stevens: The Age of Adz

Moses did not wear his veil when he was speaking to YHWH or when he was speaking to Israel the words of YHWH (Exodus 34). When he was acting as mediator he was unveiled, when he wasn't he was veiled.

The veil is like the curtain of the temple separating God from humanity, hiding his glory because of our sinfulness. Like the Tabernacle this hiding of God was both a judgement and a grace. It was judgement because it was a barrier between the God of life and us, but it was a grace because the glory of God is lethal to people on whom guilt still rests. That is why the people were afraid when they saw the glory (v.30), just as they were afraid when the law was given at Sinai (20:18).

Following Christ's death God has torn the curtain and the veil is no longer put in place by God because the glory of God is unveiled in the face of Christ. However, Satan veils this glory (2 Cor 4), and for people whose minds are hardened the veil lies not over the face of Christ but over their hearts (2 Cor 3:14).

Why should we not be afraid now that God is unveiled to us? Why can we be confident (v. 4) and bold (v.12) in approaching God? The reason is that (just as for Paul and his ministry), our sufficiency comes from God (v.5). We are made sufficient, by the Spirit (vv. 6, 17, 18) who Christ pours out on us following his death, resurrection and ascension.

It was not that we didn't see God in the law. There was glory there (v.9), but the glory in the face of Christ is superior because it permanently brings the Spirit, life and righteousness (vv.6, 9), rather than temporarily bringing the letter, death and condemnation.

Because Christ is now the mediator, not human beings like Moses or Paul, we don't proclaim ourselves but Jesus Christ as Lord (4:5).

With thanks to Bill Dumbrell and John Piper, who may not agree with all this. I still don't understand 2 Cor 3:13 though. Help gratefully received.

Moses doubts

Listening to: Bob Dylan: Blonde on Blonde

Moses said to the LORD, “Oh, my Lord, I am not eloquent, either in the past or since you have spoken to your servant, but I am slow of speech and of tongue.”

Then the LORD said to him, “Who has made man's mouth? Who makes him mute, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the LORD? Now therefore go, and I will be with your mouth and teach you what you shall speak.”

But he said, “Oh, my Lord, please send someone else.”

Then the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses

(Exodus 4:10-13)

Moses turned to the Lord and said, “O Lord, why have you done evil to this people? Why did you ever send me? For since I came to Pharaoh to speak in your name, he has done evil to this people, and you have not delivered your people at all.”

But the LORD said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh; for with a strong hand he will send them out, and with a strong hand he will drive them out of his land.”

God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am the LORD. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty [El Shaddai], but by my name the LORD I did not make myself known to them. I also established my covenant with them to give them the land of Canaan, the land in which they lived as sojourners. Moreover, I have heard the groaning of the people of Israel whom the Egyptians hold as slaves, and I have remembered my covenant. Say therefore to the people of Israel, ‘I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from slavery to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great acts of judgment. I will take you to be my people, and I will be your God, and you shall know that I am the LORD your God, who has brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. I will bring you into the land that I swore to give to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. I will give it to you for a possession. I am the LORD.’”

(Exodus 5:22-6:8)

In the both passages Moses doubts.

In the first passage Moses doubts God's power and God is angry.

In the second passage Moses doubts God's good purposes and God promises he will save and then Moses will stop doubting.

Leithart says of Barth:

What does Barth make of the “Name” theology of the OT? It shows that Israel must know God a “second time,” not only as hidden God but as revealed God. To know the name is to know God as partner in covenant (317-18).

The hidden God is the God of power only. His purposes are uncertain.

The revealed God is the God of both power and good purposes.

With thanks to Jim H

Exodus thoughts

I'm reading Exodus again, and it struck me that you won't find a better summary of the book than 3:8:

I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land to a good and broad land

Often we think of Exodus as release from physical slavery. We then compare this to Jesus who releases us from spiritual slavery. However, as someone pointed out to me recently, the Israelite's exodus is more spiritual than we think and our exodus more physical than we think.

The Hebrews were not able to worship YHWH while in Egypt because if they tried they would be stoned (8:26). Pharoah was their God, and while they lived in Egypt they had to worship him. YHWH is very clear, and Pharoah understands that the reason they want to be freed is to "serve" God by "sacrifice" on his holy mountain (just try these searches on for size: "that they may serve me", "sacrifice"). They were freed from worship to other's false God's to worship their true God.

But our bondage is physical too. We are in "bondage to corruption" (Rom 8:21), because spiritual slavery ends in physical death. We need physical freedom as well as 'spiritual' freedom. But for Moses and for Paul there is no tension, because the two always come together and are always achieved by our great liberator, Jesus Christ.

Our exodus is greater, because our saviour did not just achieve it but went through his own exodus which was also both physical and spiritual (Luke 9:31).

Finally, Tim Keller's sermon on Exodus 14 at TGC is worth a watch, or listen on MP3.

Getting Out - Tim Keller - TGC 2011 from The Gospel Coalition on Vimeo.

Meetings at the well

Genesis 24: Abraham's servant and Rebekah

The young woman was very attractive in appearance, a maiden whom no man had known. She went down to the spring and filled her jar and came up. Then the servant ran to meet her and said, "Please give me a little water to drink from your jar." She said, "Drink, my lord." And she quickly let down her jar upon her hand and gave him a drink.

Genesis 29: Jacob and Rachel

While he was still speaking with them, Rachel came with her father's sheep, for she was a shepherdess. Now as soon as Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother's brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother's brother, Jacob came near and rolled the stone from the well's mouth and watered the flock of Laban his mother's brother.

Exodus 2: Moses and Zipporah

Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters, and they came and drew water and filled the troughs to water their father's flock. The shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses stood up and saved them, and watered their flock.

John 4: Jesus and the Samaritan Woman

A woman from Samaria came to draw water. Jesus said to her, "Give me a drink." ... The Samaritan woman said to him, "How is it that you, a Jew, ask for a drink from me, a woman of Samaria?" (For Jews have no dealings with Samaritans.) Jesus answered her, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water."

I've some detailed thoughts on the connections between John 4 and Genesis 24 here.

Today I'd just like to note that Jesus begins by testing the Samaritan Woman, as Rebekah was tested by Abraham's servant. Through that test Rebekah was shown to be worthy of being Isaac's wife and the Samaritan unworthy of being a member of Jesus' bride. As well as this moral worth, Rebekah is physically beautiful. The Samaritan woman has had 5 husbands, and it is probably fair to speculate that she was past her prime by this stage.

However, Jesus doesn't reject this woman. Like Jacob and Moses before him he acts as a saviour. They provided water from the well, but Jesus provided living water.

Commandments 6-10

6. Do not deprive another person of their life
7. Do not deprive another person of their spouse
8. Do not deprive another person of their possessions
9. Do not deprive another person of their reputation
10. Do not even desire in your heart to deprive another person of anything

And a bit like Luther in his catechism these are then turned into positive commandments like this:

6. As far as you are able, supply your neighbour with all their needs for bodily and spiritual life
7. Strengthen your neighbour's marriage and your own
8. Give your neighbour your possessions
9. Build up your neighbour with your words and speak well of them to others
10. Love your neighbour in your heart and desire their good in everything

Why the Levites?

A little while back I wondered whether God approved of the Levite killing spree in Exodus 32. Jim Jordan has convinced me that God not only approved, but chose the tribe of Levi to be priests on the basis of that action. As Moses declares once they have completed their killing "Today you have been ordained for the service of the Lord" (32:29, 'service' being priestly language).

In Exodus 18 Jethro offers a sacrifice to God. In Exodus 24 the "young men of the people of Israel" are commanded to make sacrifice. Sharing in the food that belongs to God in the holy place was a priestly privilege (c.f. Lev 24:9), but in Exodus 24 God invites representatives from the whole people (Moses "Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel") up the mountain, his holy place, to eat and drink with him. But after Exodus 32, the God restricts such activities to the Levites, and this seems to be particularly tied to their willingness to take violent action.

That priests should be particularly violent may seem strange to us, but Phinehas later in Numbers 25 was certainly not afraid to draw the sword, and a significant part of the priest's job description was guard duty (Num 1:53; 3:6-38; 18:3-7).

It could even be argued that when God declares that he has "taken the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the people of Israel" (Num 8:18), indicates that before the Golden Calf it would have been the firstborn who would have been priests (the "young men" of Exodus 24:5?).

What is Exodus about?

I suspect when most of us think about the book of Exodus we think about the plagues, crossing of the sea and the Ten Commandments. The book of Exodus is a message of release from slavery, and of the giving of the law. But the structure of the book suggests a different focus.

The centre of the book is the arrival at Sinai and that is where the people remain for the rest of the book. As RWL Moberly comments, God's first message to Israel when they arrive at Sinai summarises the whole of the two-part structure to the book:

1. "You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself"
2. "Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (19:4-6)

The theme that over-arches these two halves is the presence of God with his people (David Clines). In the first half the focus is on the bringing of the people to the presence of God at Sinai. In the second half the focus is on the presence of God going with the people as they prepare leave Sinai for Canaan.

1. "brought you to myself"

The first half of the book is not primarily about the escape from Egypt, but the bringing of people to Mount Sinai and to God. Right at the beginning of the book Moses meets with God on Sinai and is told "when you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God on this mountain" (3:12). God's repeated demand to Pharaoh is that he "Let my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness" (7:16; cf. 7:16, 8:1, 20, 9:1, 13, 10:3).

These passages suggest that to be in the presence of God is to serve him. That is to worship him. And this is what we find both at Sinai and in the Tabernacle, when the people offer sacrifices as they draw near to the presence.

2. "make us gods who shall go before us"

However, the presence of God at Sinai presents a problem to the people of Israel. Firstly, God is distant and unapproachable in his dwelling at the top of his mountain. Secondly, the mountain is immovable and the people have somewhere else they need to be; i.e. Canaan. Every idolatry has a reason, and the Golden Calf finds its reason in their response to both of these problems. Firstly, God is made visible and accessible, and secondly, he can be taken with them on their journey. But God has another plan. The mountain will move with them.

3. "my presence will go with you"

By far the largest portion of the book of Exodus is devoted not to the action set-pieces, but to the instructions about, and construction of, the Tabernacle. It dominates all of chapters 25-40. We may be tempted to skip over this, yet the presence of God with his people in the Tabernacle is central to understanding the whole book (e.g. I was struck that Alec Motyer devotes only 25% of the pages of his commentary to chapters 25-40).

God's answer to the problem the people tried to solve with the Golden Calf was a "portable mountain" (Jim Jordan). As well as symbolising the whole of the cosmos and the Garden of Eden, the Tabernacle was also a mini mountain that could dwell in the midst of the camp and go with the people as they faced the daunting task of conquering Canaan.

At the foot of Mount Sinai Moses built an altar where the people served God (24:4), the similarly the Tabernacle had the bronze altar nearest the doorway. God set limits around Sinai to keep the people from coming too close (24:12), and similarly the Tabernacle was characterised by barriers to keep people out. Cloud and fire displayed God's presence as he led them through the wilderness and then surrounded the mountain, and then the book climaxes with the same cloud of God's presence settling on the Tabernacle (which usually would be full of the cloud of incense and fire of the altars/lamps). The book ends:

"Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. And Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud settled on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. Throughout all their journeys, whenever the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the people of Israel would set out. But if the cloud was not taken up, then they did not set out till the day that it was taken up. For the cloud of the Lord was on the tabernacle by day, and fire was in it by night, in the sight of all the house of Israel throughout all their journeys." (40:34-38)

This great dwelling of God with man only occurred because of the struggle of Moses with God in the last portion of the book to forgive the sin of the people. However, if we do not see the presence of God with his people as the great theme of Exodus this struggle may not make much sense to us.

After the Golden Calf incident God sends plagues on the people but then holds back from further destruction. He promises them that they will be given the land and that he will send an angel with them to accomplish this. But that kind of blessing is not enough for the people, or for Moses. The people mourn when they "heard this disastrous word" because they wanted God's presence with them even if they would still get the land with a mere angel. In response God agrees to think about it his decision. Moses then enters into negotiations in the neutral ground of the tent of meeting set up outside the camp, and doesn't give up until God promises to dwell in the midst of the people as they leave from Sinai.

I also don't want to be satisfied with blessings of God apart from the presence of God. But I want the passion of the book of Exodus to grow that hunger in my heart. Hopefully, it is obvious where we need to look to find the true and full satisfaction to that hunger.

The Theme of the Pentateuch by David Clines

I've just read David Clines's influential work, The Theme of the Pentateuch (1978). It is well worth the read. Short, well written and very persuasive it has a substantial and important point to prove, and you can see why it had the impact it did.

Overview of the Pentatuach

He summarises his proposal (p.29) as:

The theme of the Pentateuch is the partial fulfilment - which implies the partial non-fulfilment - of the promise to or blessing of the patriarchs. The promise or blessing is both the divine initiative in a world where human initiatives always lead to disaster and a re-affirmation of the primal divine intentions for man. The promise has three elements: posterity, divine-human relationship, and land. The posterity element of the promise is dominant in Genesis 12-50, the relationship element in Exodus and Leviticus, and the land-element in Numbers and Deuteronomy.

On Genesis 1-11 he concludes that in isolation it could be considered to have one of two themes: "(a) Mankind tends to destroy what God has made good", whether God responds in judgement or grace sin continues inextricably to spread; or "(b) No matter how drastic man's sin becomes, destroying what God has made good and bringing the world to the brink of uncreation, God's grace never fails to deliver man from the consequences of his sin" (p.76). However, he concludes that the genealogy of Abram makes it impossible to isolate Genesis 1-11 from the rest of the Pentatuach and read in the light of the whole "The patriarchal (or, Pentatuachal) narratives can then function as the "mitigation" element of the Babel story, and what is more, the divine promise to the patriarchs then demands to be read in conjunction with Genesis 1 - as a re-affirmation of the divine intentions for man" (p.78)

Clines concludes by reflecting on the theological function of the Pentatuach and argues that it functions as both story and promise.

Pentatuach as Story

As story it:

1. "highlights the freedom of action enjoyed by men and gods"
2. does not make a "distinction between the real and the unreal. Everything that happens really happens (whether we believe it or not)"
3. "moves through time" but doesn't reach a conclusion instead it "presses beyond itself to a goal that lies still in the future even when its story is over"
4. "is often played out in spatial as well as temporal terms".

Like many stories he explains that the Pentatuach is a travel story where "everyone seems constantly on the move". But it is a travel story that seems to fit with so many other travel stories that spring "from the desire of the unsettled to be settled, and of the settled to be unsettled". We all desire "to be running away and [at the same time] to be heading towards".

The Pentatuach reveals this same tension. In one sense it is a "a homecoming, tortuous and wearisome and rich in experience [to] the land of their fathers (Gen. 48:21; cf. 31:3), the land of the Hebrews (Gen. 40:15)." But at the same time it "is a land that has never really been their own. 'Land of the fathers' it may be called once or twice, but overwhelming it is 'the land of the Canaanites'...which at the return will have to be fought for as if it had never been Israel's at all"

However, in another sense it is "a laborious search for a new home". "But Israel...tells its primal travel story not as a tale of an abandonment of home under the divine impulse to search out a new home... but as the story of an escape from a home that was not a home in order to make for a home that had never been a home. Israel were 'sojourners', and so truly homeless.. They are unsettled in pursuit of the unobtained."

But, Clines asks, "Who wants, in short to view one's own life as neither moving towards a comfortable homecoming nor moving out towards heroic adventure?" "The Pentateuch offers us an unattractive option for our self-understanding... where 'you never reach the promised land; you only march towards it'".

Pentatuach as Promise

As promise it:

1. "binds man to the future";
2. "is more than hope" because it is "the word of the God of the fathers";
3. "indicates that the expected future does not have to develop within the framework of the possibilities inherent in the present, but arises from that which is possible to the God of the promise";
4. "creates a sense for history [because] it binds him to the past"
5. "speaks of what is not now but is only yet to be, the interval between the promise and its redemption is one of tension"
6. will not be exhausted in its fulfilment "because the God of the promises is greater than any fulfilment that cannot be expected" instead "there always remains an overspill

Clines, like the Pentatuach, does not tell us the end of the story, but leaves us there looking forward in anticipation. Thank God, that though we are in still in the midst of the same story longing for the fulfilment of the same promise in us, the future has already been revealed in Christ.

Did Moses let his anger get out of control?

'The Lord said to Moses, "Cut for yourself two tablets of stone like the first, and I will write on the tablets the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke."' (Exodus 34:1)

The first set of tablets were 100% made by God. The second time round Moses contributes. Why?

John Calvin believes it is to serve as a reminder to Israel of their sin, so that "the ignominy of their crime was not altogether effaced". Another alternative is floated by Peter Enns who says it "may indicate God's displeasure with [Moses] at having smashed them" (p. 584, Exodus (NIVAC)).

I'm not sure, and would welcome any suggestions, but find the idea that God did not approve of Moses's actions on finding the golden calf intriguing. In Exodus 32 there are the following facts to consider:

• God's is angry with Israel's sin and warns Moses, "my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them"
• Moses implores God "Turn from your burning anger", and God does so.
• Moses comes down and his "anger burned hot, and he threw the tablets out of his hands and broke them at the foot of the mountain".
• Moses calls together some Levites and "he said to them, 'Thus says the Lord God of Israel, "Put your sword on your side each of you, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and each of you kill his brother and his companion and his neighbour."'" Throughout Moses emphasises that they are doing the LORD's work, and yet the narrator says "the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses."

All in all, the actions of Moses are some of the most brutal in the OT, not very discerning (Aaron suffers no punishment, and the commands to the Levites seem to encourage undiscerning punishment), not specifically commanded by God, and seem to have been done in the heat of the moment.

Nevertheless, God himself offers no opinion on Moses's actions, either positive or negative. When Moses meets God again, God has decided to send a plague on Israel because of their sin, although he sticks to his promise not to destroy them.

There seem to be arguments either way.

Bitter water

When Moses came down the mountain and finds the Golden Calf, he burns it and grinds it up and then scatters it into the water supply of the people so that the people of Israel have no choice but to drink it (Exodus 32:20).

In a way he is reversing the miracle of God at Marah, when the bitter water was made sweet (Exodus 15:22-25).

Peter Enns also notes that there may be a connection with Numbers 5:12-31 which "describes an elaborate ceremony whereby a woman suspected of adultery is made to drink a mixture of water and dust from the tabernacle in order to determine her guilt or innocence [...] it may be that the guilty parties [the 3,000 killed by the Levites] are exposed by the drinking ceremony, thus enabling the Levites know whom to kill" (p.575, Exodus (NIVAC))

Upstairs/downstairs

I wrote some notes on Exodus 19-40. I was having trouble keeping track of all the comings and goings that Moses had meeting God on Sinai. Reading it with this focus, you get the feeling of shuttle diplomacy. The mediating role of Moses is very clear, emphasising the holiness of God. Which makes the final descent from the mountain by God himself all the more amazing.

• 19:3 ↑ Moses goes up
• 19:3-6 Moses given message (reminder what God has done, exhortation to obey, promise of special place of people)
• 19:7 ↓ Moses goes down and reports to people
• 19:8 People respond (express desire to obey)
• 19:8 ↑ Moses goes up and reports to God
• 19:9 Moses given message (God is coming in cloud)
• 19:9 Moses reports to people
• 19:10-13 Moses given message (Preparation of people for God's visit)
• 19:14-15 ↓ Moses goes down and reports to people
• 19:16-20 ↓ God comes down to top of mountain
• 19:20 ↑ Moses goes up
• 19:21-24 Moses given message (for people to keep their distance)
• 19:25 ↓ Moses goes down and reports to people
• 20:1-17 God speaks the 10 commandments to his people directly
• 20:18-19 People respond (in fear, ask Moses to mediate)
• 20:21 ↑ Moses goes up
• 20:22-24:2 Moses given message (book of the covenant: exposition of 10 commandments, festivals & Sabbath, promise of conquest)
• 24:3 ↓ Moses goes down and reports to the people
• 24:3 People respond (express desire to obey)
• 24:9 ↑ Moses goes up (with others)
• 24:11 Covenant meal
• 24:13 ↑ Moses goes up further with Joshua
• 24:15-18 ↑ Moses goes up further alone and remains 40 days/nights
• 25:1-31:18 Moses given more instructions (all about tabernacle except ending with reminder about Sabbath)
• 32:7-14 God threatens to destroy Israel because of the golden calf, but Moses persuades God not to.
• 32:15-30 ↓ Moses goes down, breaks tablets, kills people
• 32:31 ↑ Moses goes up
• 32:31-33:3 Moses offers himself as substitute, God rejects this and says he will send a plague then will bring them to Canaan but will not go with them
• 33:4 ↓ Moses goes down (?) and reports to people
• 33:4-6 People respond (in mourning)
• 33:7-34:3 Moses meets God in the tent of meeting (asks that God will go with Israel, and that he will see God's glory)
• 34:4 ↑ Moses goes up
• 34:5-28 Moses given message (sees God's glory, promise of conquest, festivals and Sabbath)
• 34:29 ↓ Moses goes down
• 34:31-36:1 Moses delivers message
• 36:2-40:33 Tabernacle built
• 40:34-38 ↓ God comes down to the tabernacle and dwells with his people

A few notes on not coveting

Listening to: Belle and Sebastian: The Life Pursuit

Mark 10:19 (parallel: Luke 18:20)

The Christianity Explored booklet asks "What did Jesus expect the man to notice about his list of the commandments in Mark 10:19?" I can't remember what it exactly wants to answer to be, but you have commands 5-9 listed - i.e. not the first table and not the command not to covet. I think Jesus was pointing out to the rich young man that while he had not done the external acts prohibited by the second table of the law, he had not obeyed the spirit of them.

I have been challenged before that honouring your father and mother is not an external act but, like coveting, is about the state of your heart. But Exodus 21:15-17 expounds the commandment as not striking or cursing your parents. Deuteronomy 27:16 talks about not dishonouring and Matthew 15:4 (parallel: Mark 7:10) expands on honouring by saying that it is not reviling. All of which suggests it was seen more as an external act.

1 Timothy 1:9-10

the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers [5th commandment], for murderers [6th], the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality [7th], enslavers [8th? cf. Deuteronomy 24:7], liars, perjurers [9th], and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,

Again the absence of the 10th commandment not to covet is notable. Also interestingly, I believe the Reformers considered this passage to be mainly about the 'civil use of the law'.

Hosea 4:2

there is swearing, lying [9th], murder [6th], stealing [8th], and committing adultery [7th]; they break all bounds, and bloodshed follows bloodshed.

... no commandment to honour father and mother, or not to covet.

James 4:2

You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask.

James sees coveting as the cause behind murder. Justifiably you could also quite easily see that it is the cause of breaking all the rest of the second table, or at least commandments 6-9. This is anticipated in part within the 10th commandment itself which lists some of the things we may covet - i.e. wives who we may commit adultery with and possessions we may steal.

Romans 7

When Paul chooses to explain how the law works to bring knowledge of sin, he picks the commandment not to covet. Mark Seifrid commenting on this passage explains this not an insignificant choice:

All other transgressions against other (the dishonouring of parents, murder, adultery, theft and false witness, and so on) have their root in coveting, which is the antithesis of the love commandment. In this commandment the whole weight of the law comes to bear on us.

(p. 117, Christ Our Righteousness)

The approach to God

Tom Torrance remembers a trip to the Sinai desert:

Night after night we made our camp in the wilderness, and as the darkness fell we gathered sticks of acacia and camelthorn, the dry sapless bushes of the desert, with which to make a fire. They burned up so quickly and brilliantly, but almost as soon they died away. They had so little substance that when kindled they were consumed almost immediately.

I always thought of Moses when that happened, and his astonishment at the fire in the desert that did not die down. But what was even more astonishing was that the bush itself was not consumed but remained intact [...]

What are we to see in [the burning bush]? Fire that is steady and undying, fire that burns and does not burn away, fire that has no tendency to destruction in its own nature, and fire that is not consumed by its own activity. Surely all that may well be taken as a symbol of the One divine Being whose being derives its law and life from itself [...]

But here is a remarkable fact in this Old Testament record that we must consider: The fire of God had no destructive nature - on the contrary it gave life - but immediately Moses approached the burning bush there leapt out of its flames a voice of urgent command: "Draw not nigh hither put off they shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground." Instantly, Moses knew that his life was threatened [...] Now why was it that although the fire carried no threat to the desert bush, but rather enhanced its life, yet when Moses came near, it terrified him and menaced his soul? Burning in this bush and not consuming it was the eternal flame of the life of God, the power of an endless life, the inexhaustible source of love. This is the very God to whom all men aspire, and for whom our mortal souls pant. Human beings grow weary and decay and crumble away into the dust, but here is the fountain of unending life, life that burns like a fire, so gently that it does not burn or consume [...]

Moses draws near, but immediately he is thrust back, and he is afraid because he is a sinner. He is unclean, and God is infinitely holy, and in the presence of sin even God's love is as a consuming fire [...] How are we, then, to approach Him? How can we share in the life and the love which He offers to us, who are sinners? [...]

Jesus washes the feet of the disciples and makes them clean, and in which through the Holy Supper He gives them to participate in the life and love of God.

(pp.127-135, When Christ Comes and Comes Again)

That is a bit of a long quote. But I thought it was about time I gave you a taste of When Christ Comes and Comes Again which is a beautifully written book of evangelistic sermons by the young(ish) Tom Torrance. Highly recommended, although you will have to get it second hand.

Watching in the night

'At the end of 430 years, on that very day, all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt. It was a night of watching by the Lord, to bring them out of the land of Egypt; so this same night is a night of watching kept to the Lord by all the people of Israel throughout their generations.' (Exodus 12:41-42)

'But concerning that day or that hour, no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. Be on guard, keep awake. For you do not know when the time will come. It is like a man going on a journey, when he leaves home and puts his servants in charge, each with his work, and commands the doorkeeper to stay awake. Therefore stay awake—for you do not know when the master of the house will come, in the evening, or at midnight, or when the rooster crows, or in the morning— lest he come suddenly and find you asleep. And what I say to you I say to all: Stay awake.' (Mark 13:32-36)

'And they went to a place called Gethsemane. And he said to his disciples, "Sit here while I pray." And he took with him Peter and James and John, and began to be greatly distressed and troubled. And he said to them, "My soul is very sorrowful, even to death. Remain here and watch." And going a little farther, he fell on the ground and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. And he said, "Abba, Father, all things are possible for you. Remove this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will." And he came and found them sleeping, and he said to Peter, "Simon, are you asleep? Could you not watch one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak." And again he went away and prayed, saying the same words. And again he came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were very heavy, and they did not know what to answer him. And he came the third time and said to them, "Are you still sleeping and taking your rest? It is enough; the hour has come. The Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going; see, my betrayer is at hand."' (Mark 14:32-42)

With great thanks to my friend Jonny who showed me the Exodus connection.

And in case you ask I don't really understand Mark's 'Little Apocalypse'. I find it interesting how much of what it talks about happened in the Passion story, but I can't tie it up all neat and tidy. However, that does make clear that the focus is on the cross as the centre-point of history around which all else turns (even the remaking of the world).