And so, the long journey from Egypt to Mount Sinai had begun.
Past the happy song of praise in Exodus 15:1-19, Israel murmured - first about the bitter water at Marah (Ex 15:23); and after a short respite in Elim, where twelve springs of water and seventy palm trees seemed to make all the difference in the world, the people murmured about the absence of food. They were as cynical and cranky as could be.
Well, if they wanted food, they would get food. Exodus 16 is where manna first appears in the Bible. The supply of manna would only cease after they had arrived at the Promised Land (Ex 16:35). After 40 long years.
In Exodus 16:4-5, God responded to Israel's murmuring in a different manner from that of the adjacent murmuring narratives (Ex 15 and 17) - i.e. without any prompting from Moses. The aetiology of His response seems ambiguous at first glance. Deryck Sheriffs notes that the verb for “test”, nissah, found in the narratives of Abraham’s test in Genesis 22, as well as Israel’s tests in Exodus 15:25, 16:4 and 20:20, is used “each time in connection with a command from God which demands obedience as response.”[1]
Exodus 16:4 therefore raises a question: Why did God not just feed the Israelites but use bread as a test? It seems to defy the impression that God is gracious and generous. It would also be rather simplistic to assume the statement “...that I may test them, whether they will walk in my law or not” to mean that God was merely experimenting with daily bread to ascertain the level of Israel’s obedience.
Readers may see clues in the
wider canonical context of God’s purpose for this strange enterprise.
First,
the general summary of Israel’s wilderness journey in Deuteronomy 8 not only
reiterates the language of testing used in Exodus 16, but also (1) reveals that
God had humbled Israel and fed the people with manna so that “man does not live
by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD” (Dt
8:3); (2) confirms Israel’s sonship, evidenced by the LORD’s discipline for
Israel, “...as a man disciplines his son” (Dt 8:5); and (3) exhorts Israel to
keep God’s commandments by walking in His ways and fearing Him (Dt 8:6).[2]
Secondly, Ezekiel, among exilic prophets during Israel’s Babylonian captivity
who discerned a new Exodus through which Israel would be renewed, singled out
the element of testing in the wilderness of the first Exodus which had created
a trusting and obedient Israel and interpreted the new Exodus to have a similar
purifying effect (Ez.20:34-38). There are thus, good reasons to see God’s conditional
provision of bread, which began in Exodus 16 and continued for forty years, as a
formative process to mould Israel into a son who fears and obeys God, trusts in
His deliverance during troubled times[3]
and is confident of its privileges as well as responsibilities of sonship. After
all, Israel was God’s firstborn son (cf. Ex 4:22). Through bread, God was also emancipating
Israel from the seductions of Egypt (cf. Ex 16:3) to which a return would be
spiritual suicide and creating a new pattern for Israel whereby life was to be
entered inseparable from a covenant relationship with God as His son. Implicit
in such setting apart was the affirmation of Israel’s election and identity,
which it had doubted and therefore murmured. If bread served only to remedy hunger,
Israel would have remained in her insecurities.
Exodus 16:6-12 present a surprising chronology,
which falls outside the purview of this page to be discussed.[4]
Nevertheless, four observations concerning Exodus 16:6-12 should be listed, as they
are relevant to the motifs of divine provision and testing in Exodus 16. First,
the LORD who would provide was clearly emphasised as Israel’s God - the God of
the Exodus (Ex 16:6,12). Secondly, divine provision was indicated to be God’s
response to Israel’s murmurings (Ex 16:7-9,12). Thirdly, divine provision was
related to the glory of the LORD (Ex 16:7,10). Lastly, the divine source of food
was emphasised several times before it arrived (Ex 16:6-7,8,12). Just as God was
to know Israel, particularly the nature of Israel’s response to the
test (Ex 16:4),[5]
the people were to know God as the committed Provider before instructions for
the gathering of bread and Sabbath were given (and testing began). Through
Moses, God had proven Himself to Israel before Israel was to be put to proof. It
was by every word that came from the mouth of this faithful God that Israel was
to live; the fulfilled promise of food was to compel the people to believe Him.
God, in His glory, was to be feared – and not the unfamiliar, bleak
circumstances that they faced.
It is
noticeable that within the report of the arrival of food, bread is given far
more attention than quail, which was likely a kind side-dish by which the
Israelites were to be eased into their new and unfamiliar diet.[6]
Regarding bread, there is a long history of rationalisation moves that attempt
to conform the miracle to a scientifically-explainable, natural phenomenon. Some
interpreters believe that manna was the sap-like exudation of the tamarisk tree
found in the Sinai Peninsula or the secretion of certain desert insects.[7] In such cases, the miraculous features would have
been the timing with which God provided bread, the abundance of it, its doubling
on the sixth day and preservation over Sabbath when there would be none for
gathering. The viewpoint of the proponents of the natural phenomenon is summed
up by Terrence E. Fretheim:
"Yet, these extraordinary elements are worked in and through natural
features, not in independence from them." [8]
Fretheim’s contention that God’s people would look for God’s
providential care only in that which falls outside the ordinary if the
provisions of God in the wilderness are all subsumed under the extraordinary or
miraculous is valid.[9]
However, there are at least four concerns with Fretheim’s reading. First, the
biblical narrative describes the heavenly bread as derived from the “fine,
flake-like thing, fine as frost on the ground” (Ex 16:14b), which came with the
dew, and mentions neither tamarisk trees nor their produce. Secondly, drawing
the line between natural features and the extraordinary is highly subjective.
Thirdly, bread was to become a memorial of God’s grace to Israel (Ex 16:32-34), to
which Jesus Christ later compared Himself as the Bread Incarnate that gives
life (Jn 6:33, 47-51, 53-58). Fretheim portrays God’s grace as though it is
always worked through the natural features of the world, whereas this is often
not the case – particularly in the life, ministry, death and resurrection of
Christ. Fourthly, it is unclear how far Fretheim’s contention assists readers with
the understanding that God was establishing an unprecedented lifestyle for Israel
in the wilderness, whereby participation in the mystery of God through the
discipline of bread and word was to be central.
An alternative way for the
reader to identify with Israel in the wilderness is perhaps to simply allow the
divine bread to awaken in the heart a sense of wondering awe just as it did
among the Israelites (Ex 16:15) who named the bread “manna”[10]
(Ex 16:31); and to focus on what God’s provision really was, i.e. grace revealed.
Bread was not God’s iron-fisted gimmick for control. It was ultimately God’s
own gracious initiative in order to reveal His heart to care for His people, a
commitment that was further accomplished by His promise to settle them in a
good land (cf. Dt 8:7-10).[11]
Grace does not only signify God’s generosity, which stood in contrast to
Pharaoh’s predatory policies that had wounded the Israelites and caused them to
be wary of scarcity. Grace also characterised God’s redemption of Israel from
Egyptian captivity. “Redeem” in the context of the Exodus deliverance (Ex
15:13) is go’el, the Hebrew term
which denotes rescue from captivity by the rightful redeemer. In the Old
Testament social regime, the beneficiary of such an action becomes indebted to
the redeemer and relates to the redeemer in a special way. Israel would relate
to God as His son. In the same manner, God
would liberate the Israelites from being captives to fear (a survival response),
the origin of their cynical murmuring. God’s testing makes even more sense when
we see it in the light of His loving and gracious intention to remould the life
of the community so that it was rooted in His gifts, rather than unreliable and
deceptive human enterprises devoid of God.
We see such grace weaved into
the tapestry of meticulous instructions concerning the daily gathering of manna
(Ex 16:16-19). First, the Israelites could gather as much manna as each could
eat; an omer per person seemed to be enough to fit anyone’s appetite. Nobody
lacked, despite the disparity in gathering. Secondly, no hoarding for the next
morning was allowed. Bread was guaranteed to come again the next day. Grace
also came in the variable nature of the manna on the sixth day so that Israel
could rest in peace on Sabbath. Firstly, the
manna doubled in amount. Secondly, while it usually melted in the sun’s heat
(Ex 16:21), it could be baked and boiled on the sixth day (Ex 16:23). Thirdly, while
it usually decayed if left overnight (Ex 16:20), it could be preserved on the
sixth day for the next without maggoty repercussions (Ex 16:24). Regarding Israel’s new way of life, Walter Brueggemann
comments:
“...the creator God who presides over the bread supply breaks the grip
of Pharaoh’s food monopoly; food is freely given outside the economic system
that functions like an Egyptian pyramid with only a few on top of the heap.”[12]
The gathering of bread was to be graciously
effective in at least three ways. Firstly, it established a freedom that was to
be enjoyed within the given boundaries of God’s word; those who walked in God’s
law (16:4) would eat and be full (cf. Dt 8:10). Secondly, the Israelites would
never become victims of gluttony or hedonism. Thirdly, if the Exodus was to be
the beginning of Israel’s corporate life, the people would learn to live in
consideration for their neighbours and community; this seemed to anticipate the tenth Commandment of the Decalogue, “You
shall not covet...” (Ex 20:17).
God’s provision and test
pointed to the first Sabbath command in the Old Testament that would become a
recurrent theme in Scripture following the Decalogue statement at Sinai (Ex 20).[13]
Put differently, the provision and test anticipated the seventh day of the week,
of which the people were to be especially mindful as there was a need to
prepare for it. Sabbath was to be a “day
of solemn rest, a holy Sabbath to the LORD” (Ex 16:23), set in a weekly rhythm
that was undeniably and intimately connected with the Creational order (cf. Gen
2:2-3).
A notable observation by Fretheim
is that Sabbath was presented to Israel as a day of rest from gathering manna rather
than a day of worship, and rightfully so.[14]
Other Scriptural passages referring to Sabbath (e.g. Ex 31:14-16; 35:2-3; Dt 5:12-15; Neh
13:15-22; and Jer 17:21-27) also say nothing about Sabbath being a day for
worship. Under the Mosaic Covenant, sacrifices were made daily at the
tabernacle/temple and not on any special day. While the New Testament records
that Jews and converts to Judaism met in the synagogue on Sabbath, such culture
probably arose because Sabbath, being a no-work day, was the most conducive day
for organised worship services. Fretheim
also asserts that by keeping Sabbath, one participated in God's planned
rhythm of Creation.[15] Stephen Geller agrees with
Fretheim. However, he suggests that Sabbath also served as a means of
interrupting the labour of the Israelites, and in the process, reminding them
of their labour as slaves in Egypt;[16]
and testing Israel’s readiness to enter into a covenant relationship with
God.[17] The
views of both Fretheim and Geller on the significance of Sabbath as a day of
rest are valuable. However, I propose that Sabbath was ultimately to bear the
deepest faith of Israel and yet form Israel in that faith. Sabbath was made for
the elect whom God had delivered from Egypt and who were to enter a covenant
relationship with Him. The Israelites’ faith would find concrete expression in
their act of resting, but their resting would at the same time bear testimony
of faith and thus, contribute to the formation of Israel into the chosen nation
- God’s son.
God commanded
that an omer of manna was to be kept for the future generations so that they
would know of His provision for the people while they were in the wilderness
(Ex 16:32).[18] 1
Kings 8:9 implies that the omer of manna had disappeared by the time of King
Solomon’s reign. However, bread still held a special place in the hearts of
Jewish people and thus, persisted as a metaphor[19] in matters of spirituality.[20]
[2] Sheriffs in “Moving on with God: Key motifs in Exodus
13-20”, p.51 supports a re-reading of Exodus through the lens of Dt 8.
[3] Indeed,
Israel’s national laments, e.g. in the Psalms, remember this
journey into the wilderness and trust God to renew His deliverance. See Gillingham, “The Exodus Tradition and Israelite
Psalmnody”, and Hyde, “The Remembrance of the Exodus in the Psalms”.
[4] For a discussion of the logic of the narrative sequence, see Childs, Exodus, pp.276-280.
[5] See Fretheim, Exodus, p.185.
[6] 16:13a gives the final reference to meat in this chapter. The Israelites would eventually crave the meat that they were used to in Egypt (cf. Num 11) following the recurrence of nothing but manna.
[4] For a discussion of the logic of the narrative sequence, see Childs, Exodus, pp.276-280.
[5] See Fretheim, Exodus, p.185.
[6] 16:13a gives the final reference to meat in this chapter. The Israelites would eventually crave the meat that they were used to in Egypt (cf. Num 11) following the recurrence of nothing but manna.
[8] Fretheim, Exodus, p.182; contra Durham, Exodus, p.224.
[9] See Fretheim, Exodus, p.182.
[10] Sarna, in Exodus, p.89 represents the scholarly
consensus when he writes: “Hebrew man
hu (trans: what is that?) is a folk explanation for the term
(manna) by which the inhabitants of the wilderness knew the substance described above.” See also Posner’s
online article, “What Does “Manna” Mean”, available from http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/1410463/jewish/What-Does-Manna-Mean.htm
(accessed 9 Oct 2013).
[11] Supported by
Houston, “Exodus” in TOBC, p.78.
[12] Brueggemann, Journey to the Common Good, p.18: See
also in his footnote, a reference to Berger’s analysis of political/economic
tradeoffs in Ancient Egypt.
[18] Furthermore, this omer of manna was to be placed “before the LORD” (16:33); Aaron placed it before the “testimony” (16:34), a term used in various parts of the Pentateuch in connection with religious items that were non-existent during the time reflected by the Exodus 16 narrative, for example the stone tablets containing the Decalogue, the Ark of the Covenant and the tabernacle. The aetiology, suitability and integrity of “testimony” are matters of dispute among scholars. Suffice it to say that readers should be aware of the religious dimension of this exercise as well as its memorial role for Israel.
[19] Metaphor: a term, object or gesture which engages the human
imagination in a cognitive, affective and even mystical exploration of the
subject or concept that it communicates through poetic relationships that
reveal more than literal explanations.
[20] E.g. in Eze
4:9-17, Isa 55:2, 2 Sam 6:19, Jn 6.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bodenheimer, F. S. “The Manna of Sinai.” Biblical Archaeologist, 10:1 (February 1947): pp.2-6.
Brueggemann, Walter. Journey to the Common Good. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2010.
Childs, Brevard S. The Book of Exodus: A Critical, Theological Commentary. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1974.
Durham, John I. Exodus. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco, Texas: Word, 1987.
Ferris, Paul Wayne Jr. “The Manna Narrative of Exodus 16:1-10.”Journal of Evangelical Theological Society, 18 (Winter 1975): pp. 191-199.
Fretheim, Terrence E. Exodus: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. Louisville, Kentucky Westminster John Knox Press, 1991.
Gillingham, Susan. “The Exodus Tradition and Israelite Psalmnody.” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament, 52 (1999): pp. 19-46.
Geller, Stephen. “Manna and Sabbath: A Literary-Theological Reading of Exodus 16.” Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology, 59.1 (2005): pp.5-16.
Houston, Walter. “Exodus” in The Oxford Bible Commentary, eds. John Barton and John Muddiman. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Humphreys, Colin. The Miracles of Exodus: A Scientist’s Discovery of the Extraordinary Natural Causes of the Biblical Stories. London and New York: Continuum, 2003.
Hyde, Clark. “The Remembrance of the Exodus in the Psalms.” Worship, 62 (1988): pp. 405-414.
Posner, Menachem. “What does “Manna” mean”. Available from http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/1410463/jewish/What-Does-Manna-Mean.htm (accessed 9 October 2013).
Sarna, Nahum M. Exodus. The JPS Torah Commentary. New York: The Jewish Publication Society, 1991.
Sheriffs, Deryck. “Moving on with God: Key motifs in Exodus 13-20.” Themelios, 15.2 (Jan/Feb 1990): pp. 49-60.
Sheriffs, Deryck. The Friendship of the Lord: An Old Testament Spirituality. Carliste, Cumbria: Paternoster Press, 1996.
Brueggemann, Walter. Journey to the Common Good. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2010.
Childs, Brevard S. The Book of Exodus: A Critical, Theological Commentary. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1974.
Durham, John I. Exodus. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco, Texas: Word, 1987.
Ferris, Paul Wayne Jr. “The Manna Narrative of Exodus 16:1-10.”Journal of Evangelical Theological Society, 18 (Winter 1975): pp. 191-199.
Fretheim, Terrence E. Exodus: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. Louisville, Kentucky Westminster John Knox Press, 1991.
Gillingham, Susan. “The Exodus Tradition and Israelite Psalmnody.” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament, 52 (1999): pp. 19-46.
Geller, Stephen. “Manna and Sabbath: A Literary-Theological Reading of Exodus 16.” Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology, 59.1 (2005): pp.5-16.
Houston, Walter. “Exodus” in The Oxford Bible Commentary, eds. John Barton and John Muddiman. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Humphreys, Colin. The Miracles of Exodus: A Scientist’s Discovery of the Extraordinary Natural Causes of the Biblical Stories. London and New York: Continuum, 2003.
Hyde, Clark. “The Remembrance of the Exodus in the Psalms.” Worship, 62 (1988): pp. 405-414.
Posner, Menachem. “What does “Manna” mean”. Available from http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/1410463/jewish/What-Does-Manna-Mean.htm (accessed 9 October 2013).
Sarna, Nahum M. Exodus. The JPS Torah Commentary. New York: The Jewish Publication Society, 1991.
Sheriffs, Deryck. “Moving on with God: Key motifs in Exodus 13-20.” Themelios, 15.2 (Jan/Feb 1990): pp. 49-60.
Sheriffs, Deryck. The Friendship of the Lord: An Old Testament Spirituality. Carliste, Cumbria: Paternoster Press, 1996.
No comments:
Post a Comment