|
The Lord’s concern for His chosen people can be seen in the call of Moses. So great was Moses that forever after the Lord and His people have used him as a standard, or model, of a prophet. Even Jesus Christ was called a prophet like unto Moses (see Acts 3:22; 7:37; Deuteronomy 18:15, 18–19; 1 Nephi 22:20–21; 3 Nephi 20:23–24). Indeed, Moses was a similitude or living symbol of Jesus Christ (see Moses 1:6).
Moses was a man who, like us, possessed both weaknesses and strengths. The key to Moses’ character is his meekness, the capacity to be molded by the Lord and His Spirit. “Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth” (Numbers 12:3).
In this chapter you will learn of Moses’ foreordination, his youthful preparation, the patient tempering of his character in the desert, his call from God, and his assumption of prophetic leadership. Perhaps it will encourage you to analyze your life so that, like Moses, you can identify your weaknesses, purge yourself of them, and take up the assignment the Lord has for you in this life. Like Nephi, you may be led to say “let us be strong like unto Moses” (1 Nephi 4:2). Elder Mark E. Petersen testified:
“The true Moses was one of the mightiest men of God in all time. . . .
“He walked and talked with God, received of divine glory while yet in mortality, was called a son of God, and was in the similitude of the Only Begotten.
“He saw the mysteries of the heavens and much of creation, and received laws from God beyond any other ancient man of whom we have record.” (Moses, p. 49.)
Instructions to Students
1. Use Notes and Commentary below to help you as you read and study Exodus 1–10.
2. Complete Points to Ponder as directed by your teacher. (Individual study students should complete all of this section.)
“The fulfillment of God’s promises to Abraham required that Israel should become numerous. To accomplish this, the little family, numbering only 70 persons (Genesis 46:26–27), needed sufficient time and a peaceful place in which to grow. Egypt was that place. . . .
“. . . Palestine was a battleground for warring nations that moved back and forth in their conquests between the Nile and the Euphrates. Israel would have found no peace there. They required stable conditions for their eventual growth and development. . . .
“Their bondage certainly was not all on the negative side. It too served a good purpose. The cruelty of the taskmasters, the hatred that existed between the Hebrews and the Egyptians, and the length of their trying servitude fused Jacob’s children into a united people. . . .
“The hatred they felt toward the Egyptians prevented intermarriage between the Hebrews and their neighbors. To reap the benefits of the Abrahamic promises, Israel had to remain a pure race, and the Lord used this means to achieve it. . . .
“Yes, Egypt had her role in the Lord’s mighty drama, and she played it well.
“At the end of 430 years, the Lord now decreed that the time had arrived for Israel to occupy her own land and there become that ‘peculiar people’ who would await the coming of their Messiah.” (Petersen, Moses, pp. 27–30.)
Many scholars speculate that Joseph came to power in Egypt while the nation was under the domination of the Hyksos people. The ancient historian Manetho called the Hyksos the shepherd-kings and told how their conquest and dominion were bitterly hated by the Egyptians. The Hyksos were Semitic peoples from the lands north and east of Egypt. Since Jacob and his family were also Semitic, it is easy to understand how Joseph would be viewed with favor by the Hyksos and also how, when the Hyksos were finally overthrown and driven out of Egypt, the Israelites would suddenly fall from favor with the native Egyptians.
Many people have wondered how Joseph could be vice-regent for so many years without having his name in any of the records or monuments of Egypt. If the theory of Hyksos domination is correct, then Joseph’s name would have been purged from records and monuments along with those of the other Hyksos rulers. Nevertheless, one scholar claimed that he found the Egyptian name Yufni, which would be the equivalent in Egyptian of the Hebrew Yosef (see Donovan Courville, “My Search for Joseph,” Signs of the Times, Oct. 1977, pp. 5–8). While the evidence is not conclusive, at least it can be said that there may be extra-biblical evidence of Joseph’s existence.
 |
| A colossal statue of Ramses II, who may have been the pharaoh at the time of the Exodus. |
The oppressive measures of the pharaoh were not able to thwart the purposes of God in creating a great nation. Through the courageous faith of the midwives and their refusal to carry out the pharaoh’s orders to execute the male children, Israel continued to prosper. The life of Moses, who was a similitude of the Savior (see Moses 1:6), was threatened by the ruler of the land, just as the life of Christ was threatened by Herod, who decreed the death of the children of Bethlehem.
Both the ancient Jewish historian Josephus and Jonathan ben Uzziel, another ancient Jewish writer, recorded that the pharaoh had a dream wherein he was shown that a man soon to be born would deliver Israel from bondage, and this dream motivated the royal decree to drown the male children (see Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, bk. 2, chap. 9, par. 2; Clarke, Bible Commentary, 1:294).
Moses was a descendant of Levi through both his father, Amram (see Exodus 6:16–20), and his mother, Jochebed (see Exodus 2:1; 6:20).
 |
| [click for scalable version] |
Both the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible (see Genesis 50) and the Book of Mormon (see 2 Nephi 3) show that as early as the time of Joseph, son of Jacob, the future mission of the deliverer had been prophesied. So detailed had been the prophecy by Joseph that even the name of Moses was known, as well as incidents of his ministry (see Reading 8-27 for the Joseph Smith Translation additions to Genesis 50).
In the New Testament Stephen made a lengthy speech about the dealings of the Lord with the house of Israel. Concerning Moses’ youth, Stephen related, “And Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and in deeds” (Acts 7:22).
Josephus said that Moses was a very handsome and educated prince and a mighty warrior in the cause of the Egyptians (see Antiquities, bk. 2, chap. 9, par. 7; chap. 10, pars. 1–2).
As a prince, Moses may have had access to the royal libraries of the Egyptians as well as the scriptural record of the Israelites as taught by his mother. Quite possibly he read the prophecies of Joseph and was led by the Spirit to understand his divine appointment to deliver his brethren the Israelites. Stephen’s address implied that Moses understood his responsibility: “And when he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren the children of Israel. . . . For he supposed his brethren would have understood how that God by his hand would deliver them: but they understood not.” (Acts 7:23, 25.)
Paul, in Hebrews, added further to the concept, “By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter; . . . esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt” (Hebrews 11:24, 26). Moses’ mother, Jochebed, likely taught him the principles and righteous traditions of the Hebrews as she nursed and cared for him (see Exodus 2:7–9).
“‘Smote’ and ‘slew’ in King James English are both translated from Hebrew nakhah, meaning ‘to beat down’; it is the word used in describing the action taken by soldiers in combat against each other. It would be correct to say that Moses slew a man who was slaying another, or took a life in saving a life. His looking ‘this way and that’ before doing so, simply indicates that he was aware that the Egyptians would not condone his defense of a slave.” (Rasmussen, Introduction to the Old Testament, 1:74.)
“However, the historian Eusebius says that the slaying was the result of a court intrigue in which certain men plotted to assassinate Moses. In the encounter it is said that Moses successfully warded off the attacker and killed him. (Eusebius IX:27.)
“In the Midrash Rabbah, the traditional Jewish commentary on the Old Testament, it is asserted that Moses, with his bare fists, killed an Egyptian taskmaster who was in the act of seducing a Hebrew woman. This is confirmed in the Koran.
“Certainly there must have been good reason for Moses’ act, and most assuredly the Lord would not have called a murderer to the high office of prophet and liberator for his people Israel.” (Petersen, Moses, p. 42.)
The more common name for Reuel is Jethro (see Exodus 3:1; Numbers 10:29). Jethro was a descendant of Midian, who was a son of Abraham and Keturah (see Genesis 25:1–6). Through this line Moses received the priesthood (see D&C 84:6–13).
Acts 7:30 indicates that the “process of time” described here was another forty years.
Horeb is the same as Mount Sinai, where Moses received the law from the Lord. Elijah also later sought refuge at Horeb (see 1 Kings 19:8).
“A manifestation was given to Moses by a messenger of light, causing a bush to appear to burn; it was really not afire and was not consumed. The word ‘angel’ could better have been rendered ‘messenger’ which is the basic meaning of the Hebrew word malakh. A flame in a bush, a mighty wind, a small voice, a great thundering, or other phenomena may herald a message from God, as a malakh of God. After Moses’ attention was drawn to the bush, the voice of the Lord Himself spoke to Moses; Moses responded in awe and reverence.” (Rasmussen, Introduction to the Old Testament, 1:74.)
The Joseph Smith Translation of Exodus 3:2 reads, “And again the presence of the Lord appeared unto him” (emphasis added).
When the Lord appeared to Moses in the burning bush He used the name I AM to identify Himself as the God of Israel, the same God who had appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Although this is the first time this name appears in the Bible, it is obvious that if the name had not been known to the Israelites, its value for identifying the Lord would have been useless. Correct identification was crucial to Moses in authenticating his call to the Israelites. This name does not appear frequently in the Bible; however, Jesus (the Jehovah of the Old Testament) used it on other occasions to identify Himself to Abraham (see Abraham 1:16), to the Jews (see John 8:58), and to modern Israel (see D&C 29:1).
Etymologically, the title I AM is directly related to the most frequently used name of deity in the Old Testament—YHWH. How often the name YHWH appears in the Bible may not always be evident in the King James Version, since the translators substituted the title LORD or GOD almost every place it appeared in the Hebrew. This practice shows deference to the reverential feelings of the Jews who never pronounced the name, substituting instead their word for Lord—Adonai. (Read Genesis 18:1–3 where this distinction between Lord and LORD makes a significant difference in the interpretation. Also see Reading A-2 for a full discussion of this subject.)
I AM is the first person singular form of the verb to be. Therefore, YHWH (which can also be the third person singular) would mean “HE IS” or “HE EXISTS.” The first or third person of the same verb was used by the Lord in the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, depending upon whether He wanted to emphasize His own or our own perspective.
There is some evidence that Moses may have had a mild speech impediment (see Reading 9-22), although some scholars think Moses may only have been suggesting that his facility in both the Hebrew and Egyptian languages was poor after having lived forty years with the Midianites. Whatever the outward cause, the Lord answered Moses with reasoning so simple and yet so profound that it was difficult to refute. Moses’ feelings of inadequacy were so strong, however, that he still insisted he needed help. The Lord became angry at this continued lack of confidence and gave Aaron to Moses as a spokesman. Anyone with normal feelings of his own unworthiness can sympathize with Moses, but all must learn to trust in the power of the Lord. Moroni taught that the Lord specifically gives individuals weaknesses so that they will be humble. But if they have enough faith in God, His grace is sufficient to “make weak things become strong” for them (Ether 12:27). Enoch had a similar response to his own feelings of inadequacy, and yet great things eventually came out of that weakness when he turned to God (see Moses 6:31–32, 47; 7:13).
The great vision Moses received, as recorded in Moses 1, took place after Moses’ original call on Mount Horeb and before his arrival in Egypt. Moses 1:17 refers to the burning bush experience in retrospect. Moses 1:24–25 speaks of the delivery of Israel from bondage as a future event.
The Joseph Smith Translation of Exodus 4:21 says, “I will prosper thee; but Pharaoh will harden his heart, and he will not let the people go.” This truth must be remembered in all subsequent references to the pharaoh’s heart being hardened.
The King James Version lacks detail in this account. The Joseph Smith Translation indicates that the Lord was angry with Moses for failing to circumcise his son. It appears that Zipporah had not wanted to circumcise Gershom but relented when the Lord expressed His anger to Moses.
“And it came to pass, that the Lord appeared unto him as he was in the way, by the inn. The Lord was angry with Moses, and his hand was about to fall upon him, to kill him; for he had not circumcised his son.
“Then Zipporah took a sharp stone and circumcised her son, and cast the stone at his feet, and said, Surely thou art a bloody husband unto me.
“And the Lord spared Moses and let him go, because Zipporah, his wife, circumcised the child. And she said, Thou art a bloody husband. And Moses was ashamed, and hid his face from the Lord, and said, I have sinned before the Lord.
“And the Lord said unto Aaron, go into the wilderness to meet Moses, and he went and met him, in the mount of God; in the mount where God appeared unto him; and Aaron kissed him.” (JST, Exodus 4:24–27.)
 |
| The Great Pyramid of Cheops was nearly a thousand years old when Moses was in Egypt. |
What can be said of the people who had to be converted by signs (see Matthew 12:38–39; D&C 63:7–12)? Although their initial reaction when they saw the signs was very positive, at the first indication of challenge and adversity their commitment began to waver (see Exodus 5:20–23).
God gave the pharaoh a chance to let Israel go, of his own free will, to worship God. Through his refusal the pharaoh could blame no one but himself for the consequences.
The eternal gospel covenant that the Lord God established with Adam and all the patriarchs, including Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, was, at the time of Moses, established with the whole house of Israel.
The King James Version of Exodus 6:3 suggests that the name Jehovah was unknown to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This suggestion, however, obviously cannot be the case (see Genesis 4:26 in which the name LORD [Jehovah] first appears). Also, the Lord (Jehovah) appeared several times to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and others. Obviously there is something wrong with the King James translation of Exodus 6:3. The problem can be resolved if one knows that the verse can be read as a question in the Hebrew, as well as the English, merely by raising the inflection of the voice toward the end of the sentence. (When one translates a text, not spoken aloud, he may not catch the inflection and may therefore miss the original intention of the writer.) The Prophet Joseph Smith rendered this passage as follows: “And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob. I am the Lord God Almighty; the Lord JEHOVAH. And was not my name known unto them?” (JST, Exodus 6:3.) The answer is yes!
The King James Version states that Moses had “uncircumcised lips” (Exodus 6:30). The Joseph Smith Translation clarifies this statement by saying that Moses had “stammering lips” and was “slow of speech” (JST, Exodus 6:29). Exodus 4:10 in the New English Bible reports that Moses was “slow and hesitant in speech.” This characteristic may explain Moses’ original hesitation to be God’s spokesman (see Exodus 4:10; see also Reading 9-14).
The Prophet Joseph Smith corrected this verse to read that Moses was to be a prophet to the pharaoh rather than a god.
“All down through the ages and in almost all countries, men have exercised great occult and mystical powers, even to the healing of the sick and the performing of miracles. Soothsayers, magicians, and astrologers were found in the courts of ancient kings. They had certain powers by which they divined and solved the monarch’s problems, dreams, etc. One of the most striking examples of this is recorded in Exodus, where Pharaoh called ‘the wise men and the sorcerers’ who duplicated some of the miracles the Lord had commanded Moses and Aaron to perform. When Aaron threw down his rod, it became a serpent. The Egyptian magicians threw down their rods, and they also became serpents. . . .
“. . . The Savior declared that Satan had the power to bind bodies of men and women and sorely afflict them [see Matthew 7:22–23; Luke 13:16]. If Satan has power to bind the bodies, he surely must have power to loose them. It should be remembered that Satan has great knowledge and thereby can exercise authority and to some extent control the elements, when some greater power does not intervene.” (Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 1:176, 178.)
 |
| A typical purification scene from the temple in Esna |
There have been numerous attempts through the ages to explain the plagues described in these chapters of Exodus. Some have tried to show that the various plagues were the result of some natural phenomenon such as passing meteorites or the explosion of a volcanic island in the Mediterranean Sea. While there is some degree of logical progression in the plagues (the river’s pollution could have driven the frogs out of the marshes to die, and this situation would then have bred lice, flies, and disease), it is not possible at present to explain how the Lord brought about these miraculous events. The fact that the plagues were selective (that is, sent upon the Egyptians but not the Israelites) adds to their miraculous nature. God often works through natural means to bring about His purposes, but that fact does not lessen the miraculous nature of His work. In the plagues and eventual deliverance of Israel from the bondage of Egypt is a record of remarkable and miraculous intervention by God in behalf of His children. How He actually intervened is not nearly so significant as that He did intervene.
 |
| The sphinx near the mortuary temple of Khafre |
(9-26) The two main characters in these chapters are Moses and the pharaoh. We have learned that the Lord knew both of these men before they were born. Both were introduced to the test of mortality at this time with the Lord knowing that they would perform their respective functions.
Moses was meek and allowed himself to be led by the hand of God. Consequently, great and mighty miracles were performed by him to deliver God’s chosen people, Israel, from bondage.
The pharaoh, on the other hand, was self-centered, power hungry, cruel, and hard-hearted. He was largely unimpressed with the power of the Lord. He preferred to follow the counterfeit power of Satan, which allowed him the false belief that he was a god on earth.
Assume you were going to give a talk in sacrament meeting entitled “Using Exodus 1–10 as a Source of Wisdom for Personal Growth.” What things from the lives of Moses and the pharaoh would you list that we could either emulate or avoid in becoming more Christlike in our characters? Be specific, giving scripture references in each case.
 |
Thomas Carlyle once wrote: “It is in and through symbolism that man consciously or unconsciously lives, works, and has his being. Those ages, moreover, are accounted the noblest which can best recognize symbolical worth, and prize it the highest.” (In Maurice H. Farbridge, Studies in Biblical and Semitic Symbolism, flyleaf.) It should not be surprising, then, that symbolic language and imagery should play a central role in religion, which is concerned with man’s eternal destiny. Religious ordinances and rituals are deeply symbolic, and the scriptures, which contain the word of the Lord revealed for His children, abound with similes, metaphors, parables, allegories, types, and symbols. The symbolism is so profound and so extensive that if one does not have an understanding of the meaning of that symbolism, many of the most important and satisfying truths will be missed.
Many in the world and even some in the Church think of the Old Testament as reflecting a pregospel culture centered around the Mosaic covenant that was given instead of the gospel laws. But the Lord said the following about what the Israelites were given when they rejected the higher law: “And the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel; which gospel is the gospel of repentance and of baptism, and the remission of sins, and the law of carnal commandments” (D&C 84:26–27; emphasis added). The fulness of the gospel was taken, but a preparatory gospel dealing with the basic principles of the gospel was given in its place. Paul taught the Galatian Saints that this action was taken so that the Israelites could be brought to Christ: “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.” (Galatians 3:24–25.) The Old Testament, especially in its types and symbols, richly reflects this gospel orientation, since it contained the preparatory gospel designed to bring Israel to have faith in the Redeemer.
Why does the Lord use so much symbolic language to teach His children? Why does He not just say clearly what He wants them to know? While one probably cannot understand all of the Lord’s purposes for using symbolism to teach His children, the following reasons seem to be important:
(C-4) Symbolic language and imagery have the power to convey important truths through many languages and cultures with great power and impact. A figurative image can provide powerful teaching impact. For example, in the midst of lengthy prophecies of judgment upon Israel, Isaiah gave what at first seems to be a difficult and obscure passage: “Give ye ear, and hear my voice; hearken, and hear my speech.
“Doth the plowman plow all day to sow? doth he open and break the clods of his ground?
“When he hath made plain the face thereof, doth he not cast abroad the fitches, and scatter the cummin, and cast in the principal wheat and the appointed barley and the rie in their place?
“For his God doth instruct him to discretion, and doth teach him.
“For the fitches are not threshed with a threshing instrument, neither is a cart wheel turned about upon the cummin; but the fitches are beaten out with a staff, and the cummin with a rod.
“Bread corn is bruised; because he will not ever be threshing it, nor break it with the wheel of his cart, nor bruise it with his horsemen.
“This also cometh forth from the Lord of hosts, which is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working.” (Isaiah 28:23–29.)
The imagery Isaiah used unfolds a lesson with great teaching power. Isaiah used the symbol of a farmer and how he deals with his fields and crops to show the purposes of God. Israel is the field of Jehovah. Because of her wickedness and apostasy she has become hardened and incapable of producing much fruit. As the husbandman plows the soil, breaking up the hardness with the blade and turning over the soil in preparation for planting, so the judgments and punishments sent upon the covenant people are the plow and the harrow of God (compare Mormon’s commentary in Helaman 12:1–6 on the nature of God’s children). But note Isaiah’s question, “Does the plowman plow all day to sow?” The answer is no. The plowman does not plow the field over and over and over. He plows just enough to prepare the soil for planting the fitches, the cummin (two kinds of herbs) and the wheat.
Likewise, in the image of the farmer threshing his crops is illustrated the divine discretion of God. Different crops are threshed in different ways. Wheat is threshed with a threshing sled, a heavy instrument dragged behind an ox or a donkey. But other means are used to thresh the more tender fitches and cummin, which would be destroyed by that much weight. So it is with God. His punishments are not sent just to grind the people to destruction. If the wickedness of the people requires only the beating “with the staff,” then that is all the Lord sends. If a heavier form of threshing is required, then it is sent. In some extreme cases, such as those of the Flood or of Sodom and Gomorrah, the fields may have to be burned completely so that a new crop can be started.
The Lord could have explained in a more straightforward manner the way He deals with His rebellious children, listing point by point what He wanted all His children to know. But there is more power in imagery than there is in a list. And the power of that imagery carries through numerous translations and various cultures. As Elder Bruce R. McConkie stated:
“To crystallize in our minds the eternal verities which we must accept and believe to be saved, to dramatize their true meaning and import with an impact never to be forgotten, to center our attention on these saving truths, again and again and again, the Lord uses similitudes. Abstract principles may easily be forgotten or their deep meaning overlooked, but visual performances and actual experiences are registered on the mind in such a way as never to be lost.” (The Promised Messiah, p. 377.)
(C-5) Couching great truths in symbolic language helped preserve them from those who sought to take away the plain and precious parts of the scriptures. Unquestionably, many plain and precious things have been taken from the Bible (see 1 Nephi 13:26). The Prophet Joseph Smith said: “I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors.” (Teachings, p. 327.)
The Prophet suggested deliberate mutilation of the text. But those truths couched in symbolic imagery that require the “spirit of prophecy,” or the “testimony of Jesus,” to interpret (Alma 25:16; Revelation 19:10) were not understood by these “designing and corrupt priests” and thus were left basically intact.
(C-6) Figurative language can convey truth and meaning to all levels of spiritual maturity. After teaching the multitude the parable of the four kinds of soil, Jesus admonished them, “Who hath ears to hear, let him hear” (Matthew 13:9). This statement signaled to His listeners that what the Savior had just said was more than just a nice story. The disciples later came to Him and asked, “Why speakest thou unto them [the multitude] in parables?” (Matthew 13:10). The Savior’s answer is at first puzzling. He explained that He taught that way because the multitude refused to see and hear spiritual truths. Elder Bruce R. McConkie pointed out the significance of the Savior’s use of parables:
“Our Lord used parables on frequent occasions during his ministry to teach gospel truths. His purpose, however, in telling these short stories was not to present the truths of his gospel in plainness so that all his hearers would understand. Rather it was so to phrase and hide the doctrine involved that only the spiritually literate would understand it, while those whose understandings were darkened would remain in darkness. (Matt. 13:10–17; [JST], Matt. 21:34.) It is never proper to teach any person more than his spiritual capacity qualifies him to assimilate.” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 553.)
To the spiritually illiterate the parable of the soils is a lovely little story. To one in tune with the Spirit and full of understanding of gospel truths, it is far more. Thus, symbolic language can both reveal and conceal truth, depending on the readiness of the individual who hears.
(C-7) Symbols deeply affect the emotions and attitudes of an individual. The national flag of a country is, in reality, nothing but a large piece of cloth with its colors arranged in a particular pattern. But for such a piece of cloth, people are moved to tears, go to war, risk persecution, or suffer death. It is not, of course, the specific piece of cloth that matters, for that could be easily replaced. What does matter is what the cloth symbolizes to the individual. This meaning can be very profound in its effect on the heart and mind. One need only ponder the effect on the emotions of such symbolic objects or acts as a wedding ring, the temple, baptism, the sacrament, and so on to understand one reason the Lord teaches through symbols.
(C-8) Spiritual power comes when one is forced to ponder and search out the meaning of symbolic imagery in an attitude of quest. When a price is paid in personal effort and sacrifice for something, it is appreciated far more than when it is received without effort. To unveil great spiritual truths clothed in figurative dress requires that the student of the scriptures search and ponder. A price must be paid, and when understanding does come, it is much more satisfying and appreciated than it otherwise would have been.
Occasionally some try to discourage others from seeking for figurative imagery in the scriptures. Of course, one must not seek to read in meaning that was not intended, but to ignore symbolic meaning where it was intended is to miss much. In The Promised Messiah Bruce R. McConkie encouraged people to seek for the symbolic meaning in the scriptures: “It is wholesome and proper to look for similitudes of Christ everywhere and to use them repeatedly in keeping him and his laws uppermost in our minds” (p. 453).
When is an act or object used in the scriptures to be taken literally and when should it be interpreted figuratively? Symbols can be taken too literally and their true meaning lost in a grotesque parody of reality. On the other hand, sometimes the actual meaning of a passage is explained away by saying it is only figurative. The following guidelines may be helpful in correctly interpreting the types and symbols used in the scriptures.
(C-10) Look beyond the symbol for its intended meaning. Symbols both denote and connote meaning. A symbol’s denotation is what it is. For example, a picture of the Salt Lake Temple denotes a particular large building with six towers and ornate spires, topped by a golden figure with a trumpet. As a symbol, however, the Salt Lake Temple also connotes meaning. Connotation is what a symbol suggests through association, even though such associations may not be part of the symbol itself. For example, the Salt Lake Temple connotes temple marriage, holiness, beauty, reverence, or a place of spiritual comfort. It has also come to represent the Church itself. One does not look at the actual building and see temple marriage as part of the architecture. The idea of temple marriage is only connoted, or associated, with the symbol in one’s mind. Often the connotation of a scriptural image gives it more real significance than does its denotation. Thus, one must look beyond the symbol’s denotation at what it was meant to connote.
In looking at the symbol, however, one must not become so bound up in one’s own culture that one misses the imagery behind the symbol. For example, the fact one has been raised in a large city and has never had farming experience does not mean that one cannot appreciate figures and similitudes drawn from the agricultural life of ancient times. With some study and thought one can sense the significance of sowing, reaping, winnowing, threshing, treading grapes, and so on.
Perhaps a more difficult problem for some is the nature of many symbols used in the Old Testament. Reading about the shedding of the blood of sacrificial animals and how that blood was caught in basins and thrown against the altar, or used in various other ways, may be offensive to some modern readers. In today’s world many people come no closer to the slaughtering of animals than the meat department in a supermarket, where the meat is neatly packaged and attractively displayed. The blood and entrails of the animals are never seen, and thus, when they are discussed in some detail, as they are in the Old Testament, the modern reader may experience a squeamish, negative reaction.
Two things should be kept in mind. First, these practices were not offensive to the people of the Old Testament. The killing of animals for food, the sight of blood, the cleansing of the meat were all part of everyday life. The typical family in those times kept animals and slaughtered them for food. Even in large cities people purchased meat in open-air markets where often the animal was killed on the spot so that the meat would be fresh. Such a practice is common in the Middle East to this day. Second, it is the denotation of these practices that may be offensive to today’s urbanized reader. But when one looks beyond the symbol itself to what it was meant to connote, then the offense is replaced by appreciation for the spiritual truths being taught.
(C-11) Do the scriptures themselves give the interpretation of the symbol? Sometimes people debate what a symbol was meant to connote when the answer is given very clearly in the scriptures. What do the seven golden candlesticks in the book of Revelation signify? The Lord answered that question directly, so there is no need for speculation (see Revelation 1:20). When Jesus talked about the seed falling on four different kinds of soil, what did He mean? He specifically explained the symbolism (see Matthew 13:18–23). What was the meaning of the great image in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (see Daniel 2:36–45)? There are hundreds of other examples of such direct interpretations. Through a careful study of the scriptures, many of the interpretations are quickly found. But a price must be paid by the reader if he is to find these interpretations, for often they are given elsewhere in the scriptures.
(C-12) Look for the Savior in the symbols and imagery of the scriptures. Since Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice are the central and most fundamental part of the Latter-day Saint religion, it is not surprising that virtually all scriptural symbols are Christ-centered. One could say that all of the parables, every simile, each metaphor, and all of the types are designed to teach the children of God what they must do to incorporate the infinite sacrifice of Christ into their own life. This concept is as profoundly true of the Old Testament as it is of all other scripture. Nephi taught the all-embracing pervasiveness of scriptural symbolism when he said, “Behold, my soul delighteth in proving unto my people the truth of the coming of Christ; for, for this end hath the law of Moses been given; and all things which have been given of God from the beginning of the world are the typifying of him” (2 Nephi 11:4; emphasis added).
Amulek taught the same principle when he said, “And behold this is the whole meaning of the law, every whit pointing to that great and last sacrifice; and that great and last sacrifice will be the Son of God, yea, infinite and eternal” (Alma 34:14).
King Benjamin taught the same principle (see Mosiah 3:14–15), as did Abinadi (see Mosiah 13:29–31). (See Reading 1-5 for a statement about the pervasiveness of the idea of a divine Redeemer in the Old Testament.)
The key to the true meaning of the law of Moses was suggested by Mormon: “Now they did not suppose that salvation came by the law of Moses; but the law of Moses did serve to strengthen their faith in Christ; and thus they did retain a hope through faith, unto eternal salvation, relying upon the spirit of prophecy, which spake of those things to come” (Alma 25:16; emphasis added). John was taught that the “spirit of prophecy” is “the testimony of Jesus” (Revelation 19:10). Without this testimony a person cannot see the full significance of the Old Testament laws and ordinances.
(C-13) Let the nature of the object used as a symbol contribute to an understanding of its spiritual meaning. The peoples of the East loved imagery and drew figures and similes from the things that surrounded them. They looked for the natural characteristics of something to see if it conveyed spiritual truths. For example, Psalm 83:13 reads, “O my God, make [Thy enemies] like a wheel; as the stubble before the wind.” The word wheel translates the Hebrew word galgal, which means a large thorny plant, native to the Middle East. One Bible commentator explained the significance of this metaphor:
“Galgal is a thorny plant, a member of the Aster family (Asteracea or Compositae). The galgal is inactive during the dry summer months. After the first winter rain, a rosette of leaves develops out of the thick perennial root. . . . The flower clusters, or inflorescenses, develop during the late winter and early spring. From the flowers, the fruit with its seeds develops. Then the whole plant dies—part of the process by which the seeds are dispersed. The stem leaves have a stiff blade and veins; these leaves look like wings facing in every direction. The whole plant is round—so that it can roll like a ball. When the seeds of the dead fruit are ready to be dispersed, the base of the stem is disconnected from the thick root by means of an especially weak tissue which develops at just the right time. The plant then rolls, driven by the wind, dispersing its seeds on steppe and field. (Galgal also means wheel in Hebrew; the plant’s name probably derived from its habit of rolling across the fields like a wheel.)
“Just before the round plant disconnects from the root, the plant appears frightening indeed—full of thistles and strong and stable looking. In fact the base of the plant is extremely weak and the whole plant can be easily driven by the wind. The sound of dry galgal plants rolling with the wind is a memorable experience to those who live amid these plants.
“By the metaphor of galgal, the Psalmist is asking the Lord to make Israel’s enemies like galgal: although they look frightening, their base is weak. The whole plant can be driven by the wind and it will be gone.
“Galgal is also used in Isaiah 17:13:
“‘The nations roar like the roaring of many waters, but he will rebuke them, and they will fly far away, chased like chaff on the mountains before the wind and like a rolling thing before the storm.’
“The ‘rolling thing’ . . . is galgal. A ‘rolling thing’ is only part of the meaning of the word. The prophet is really forecasting the destruction of the Assyrian empire—a frightening enemy, but with a weak base that may easily be blown away by the wind of the Lord.” (Anivoam Danin, “Plants as Biblical Metaphors,” Biblical Archaeology Review, May–June 1979, p. 20.)
Thus, an understanding comes from an examination of the symbolic object. Studying the history and cultures of these people often helps one to see both the significance of the objects used and their spiritual impact.
(C-14) One truth may be taught by numerous symbols; one symbol may convey numerous truths; and, whereas the Lord may change the symbols He uses to teach truths, the truths never change. Sometimes when one finds an interpretation of a particular symbol, one tends to be satisfied with that interpretation and does not explore it further, or one may be confused when one finds another symbol conveying the same truth. The vastness and the depths of the truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ are such that a myriad of images, types, and similitudes is required to convey them. For example, there are so many varied aspects of Jesus’ life and mission that He is typified or symbolized as the Lamb (see John 1:29), the Light (see John 1:7–8), the Advocate (see D&C 45:3–5), the Rock (see 1 Corinthians 10:4), the Good Shepherd (see John 10:11, 14), the True Vine (see John 15:1–5), the Word (see John 1:1, 14), the Lion (see Revelation 5:5), the Cornerstone (see Ephesians 2:20), the Living Bread (see John 6:51), the Amen (see Revelation 3:14), the Bright and Morning Star (see Revelation 22:16), the High Priest (see Hebrews 3:1), the Bridegroom (see Matthew 25:1–13), the Treader of the Winepress (see D&C 133:50), and a Consuming Fire (see Hebrews 12:29). Careful pondering of the connotations of these titles can provide significant enlightenment about the Savior and His mission.
Likewise, one symbol can convey numerous spiritual truths. For example, the olive tree was used as a symbol of the house of Israel (see Jacob 5:3). Applying the guideline of looking at the nature of the symbol, one finds many significant things in an examination of the olive tree:
1. The olive tree is a living thing and produces much fruit.
2. The olive tree requires constant pruning by a husbandman if the young shoot is to be brought into production. Without this constant pruning, the tree would grow into the wild olive, which is little more than a bushy tangle of limbs and branches that produces only a small, bitter, worthless fruit.
 |
| An olive tree |
3. To become productive, the wild olive must be cut back completely and then a branch from a tame olive tree must be grafted onto the stem of the wild tree. With careful pruning and cultivating, the tree will begin to produce fruit in seven years and become fully productive in about fourteen to fifteen years.
4. Although it takes a long time to bring the tree into production, once the tree begins to produce it continues to do so for a remarkably long time. Some trees in the Holy Land have been producing abundantly for over four hundred years.
5. When the tree finally grows old and dies, the roots send up a number of new, green shoots which, if properly cultivated, will each grow into a mature olive tree. Thus, the same tree may go on reproducing itself for millennia. (One cannot help but see a symbol of the Resurrection in this phenomenon, and also think of the numerous times when the various groups of the house of Israel seemed to have died and yet new shoots sprang forth from the root to become Israel again.)
6. The fruit of the tree provides the staple of the Middle Eastern diet. In addition to its use as a food, the olive and its oil were and are used for lighting lamps, anointing the body, cooking, as ingredients in cosmetics, and as medicine.
Many of the signs and tokens given under the Mosaic covenant have been replaced, but that fact does not imply that they were inferior. The Lord commanded the Israelites to put fringes on the borders of their clothing as a reminder of their relationship to the Lord (see Numbers 15:38–39; Deuteronomy 22:12). In response to one scholar who called such peculiar dress the coarse rudiments of a spiritually immature people, a Bible commentator wrote:
“Men dress in diverse and strange ways to conform to the world and its styles. What is so difficult or ‘coarse’ about any conformity to God’s law, or any mode God specifies? There is nothing difficult or strange about this law, nor any thing absurd or impossible.”
He then made this significant point about such symbols:
“It [the wearing of fringed garments] is not observed by Christians, because it was, like circumcision, the Sabbath, and other aspects of the Mosaic form of the covenant, superseded by new signs of the covenant as renewed by Christ. The law of the covenant remains; the covenant rites and signs have been changed. But the forms of covenant signs are no less honorable, profound, and beautiful in the Mosaic form than in the Christian form. The change does not represent an evolutionary advance or a higher or lower relationship. The covenant was fulfilled in Jesus Christ; but God did not treat Moses, David, Isaiah, Hezekiah, or any of His Old Testament covenant people as lesser in His sight or more childish in ability and hence in need of ‘coarse rudiments.’” (Rushdoony, Institutes of Biblical Law, p. 23.)
(C-15) Before one can fully understand what a symbol is meant to convey, one must understand the spiritual truths being conveyed. The Old Testament is full of types, symbols, metaphors, and similitudes of Christ, and yet for the most part the leaders of Judah in Christ’s time rejected Jesus when He came among them. They knew the language, the culture, the idioms, and yet they rejected the significance of what the scriptures taught, and they refused to be converted. They were ignorant of the truths of the gospel which gave the symbols their real meaning. One author emphasized this point by use of an interesting analogy:
“The most perfect representation of a steam-engine to [someone living in a totally undeveloped part of the world] would be wholly and hopelessly unintelligible to him, simply because the reality, the outline of which was presented to him, was something hitherto unknown. But let the same drawing be shewn to those who have seen the reality, such will have no difficulty in explaining the representation. And the greater the acquaintance with the reality, the greater will be the ability to explain the picture. The [person] who had never seen the steam-engine would of course know nothing whatever about it. Those who had seen an engine but know nothing of its principles, though they might tell the general object of the drawing, could not explain the details. But the engineer, to whom every screw and bolt are familiar, to whom the use and object of each part is thoroughly known, would not only point out where each of these was to be found in the picture, but would shew, what others might overlook, how in different engines these might be made to differ.” (Jukes, Law of the Offerings, pp. 14–15.)
The reality behind Old Testament types and symbols is Jesus Christ and His teachings of salvation. The better one understands Him, the more clearly one will see the meaning of the symbols. Without that understanding, the message will be lost.
One does not go to a great museum such as the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C., and fully explore its treasure in an hour or two of leisurely browsing. Similarly, one does not exhaust the typology of the Old Testament in one quick reading of the book. A lifetime of exploration and pondering may be required before the Lord will fully reveal the extent to which He has filled the treasure house of symbolic teaching. Note His own words to Adam:
“And behold, all things have their likeness, and all things are created and made to bear record of me, both things which are temporal, and things which are spiritual; things which are in the heavens above, and things which are on the earth, and things which are in the earth, and things which are under the earth, both above and beneath: all things bear record of me” (Moses 6:63).
As one studies the Old Testament, especially the types and symbolism of the Mosaic dispensation, one must pay the price in careful study, pondering, and praying, and he will find the Lord unfolding many precious and plain truths to his eyes. The Old Testament is full of Jesus Christ if one will only have eyes to see and ears to hear.
 |
As past chapters have shown, the Lord has often influenced history in such a way that it becomes in and of itself symbolically significant. Jacob in the Book of Mormon taught that the commandment for Abraham to sacrifice Isaac provided a similitude of God’s sacrifice of His Only Begotten Son (see Jacob 4:5). Joseph, who was sold into Egypt, provided a type or symbol of Christ and His ministry (see Reading 8-19). Nephi taught that from the beginning of the world all things have been given to typify or symbolize Christ and His Atonement (see 2 Nephi 11:4).
These chapters of Exodus contain one of the grandest and most profound of all historical types. The deliverance of the house of Israel from bondage is not only one of history’s most dramatic events, but it is also full of symbolic significance for the Saints of all times.
As preparation for reading the scriptural account of this remarkable event, consider Elder Bruce R. McConkie’s summary of the significance of these events:
“At the time appointed for their deliverance from Egyptian bondage, the Lord commanded each family in Israel to sacrifice a lamb, to sprinkle its blood on their doorposts, and then to eat unleavened bread for seven more days—all to symbolize the fact that the destroying angel would pass over the Israelites as he went forth slaying the firstborn in the families of all the Egyptians; and also to show that, in haste, Israel should go forth from slavery to freedom. As a pattern for all the Mosaic instructions yet to come, the details of the performances here involved were so arranged as to bear testimony both of Israel’s deliverance and of her Deliverer. Among other procedures, the Lord commanded, as found in Exodus 12:
“1. ‘Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year,’ signifying that the Lamb of God, pure and perfect, without spot or blemish, in the prime of his life, as the Paschal Lamb, would be slain for the sins of the world.
“2. They were to take of the blood of the lamb and sprinkle it upon the doorposts of their houses, having this promise as a result: ‘And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you,’ signifying that the blood of Christ, which should fall as drops in Gethsemane and flow in a stream from a pierced side as he hung on the cross, would cleanse and save the faithful; and that, as those in Israel were saved temporally because the blood of a sacrificial lamb was sprinkled on the doorposts of their houses, so the faithful of all ages would wash their garments in the blood of the Eternal Lamb and from him receive an eternal salvation. And may we say that as the angel of death passed by the families of Israel because of their faith—as Paul said of Moses, ‘through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them’ (Heb. 11:28)—even so shall the Angel of Life give eternal life to all those who rely on the blood of the Lamb.
“3. As to the sacrifice of the lamb, the decree was, ‘Neither shall ye break a bone thereof,’ signifying that when the Lamb of God was sacrificed on the cross, though they broke the legs of the two thieves to induce death, yet they brake not the bones of the Crucified One ‘that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.’ (John 19:31–36.)
“4. As to the eating the flesh of the sacrificial lamb, the divine word was, ‘No uncircumcised person shall eat thereof,’ signifying that the blessings of the gospel are reserved for those who come into the fold of Israel, who join the Church, who carry their part of the burden in bearing off the kingdom; signifying also that those who eat his flesh and drink his blood, as he said, shall have eternal life and he will raise them up at the last day. (John 6:54.)
“5. As ‘the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt’ because they believed not the word of the Lord delivered to them by Moses and Aaron, even so should the Firstborn of the Father, who brings life to all who believe in his holy name, destroy worldly people at the last day, destroy all those who are in the Egypt of darkness, whose hearts are hardened as were those of Pharaoh and his minions.
“6. On the first and seventh days of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Israelites were commanded to hold holy convocations in which no work might be done except the preparation of their food. These were occasions for preaching and explaining and exhorting and testifying. We go to sacrament meetings to be built up in faith and in testimony. Ancient Israel attended holy convocations for the same purposes. Knowing that all things operate by faith, would it be amiss to draw the conclusion that it is as easy for us to look to Christ and his spilt blood for eternal salvation as it was for them of old to look to the blood of the sacrificed lamb, sprinkled on doorposts, to give temporal salvation, when the angel of death swept through the land of Egypt?
“It was, of course, while Jesus and the Twelve were keeping the Feast of the Passover that our Lord instituted the ordinance of the sacrament, to serve essentially the same purposes served by the sacrifices of the preceding four millenniums. After that final Passover day and its attendant lifting up upon the cross of the true Paschal Lamb, the day for the proper celebration of the ancient feast ceased. After that Paul was able to say: ‘Christ our passover is sacrificed for us,’ and to give the natural exhortation that flowed therefrom: ‘Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.’ (1 Cor. 5:7–8.)” (The Promised Messiah, pp. 429–31.)
Instructions to Students
1. Use Notes and Commentary below to help you as you read and study Exodus 11–19.
2. Complete Points to Ponder as directed by your teacher. (Individual study students should complete all of this section.)
In Reading 10-1, Elder McConkie noted the similarities between the smiting of disobedient and hard-hearted Egypt and the spiritual death of those who refuse to hearken to the Firstborn of God. There is, however, one additional comparison that could be made. In the typology of the Passover, the children of God (Israel) are in bondage to an evil power (Egypt). Similarly, all of God’s children come into a world of sin and may find themselves in bondage to Satan and the powers of sin. (The terminology of slavery is used in such scriptures as 2 Nephi 2:29; Alma 34:35; D&C 84:49–51; Moses 4:4; 7:26.) Thus, the pharaoh could be thought of as a type or symbol of Satan. In light of this truth, it should be noted that what finally released the children of Israel from the bondage of the pharaoh (the symbol of Satan) was the death of the firstborn of Egypt. In like manner the atoning sacrifice of the Firstborn Son of God freed the children of God from death, a bondage to Satan.
Adam Clarke, a Bible scholar, commented on the translation of the Hebrew word sha’al as “borrow.”
“This is certainly not a very correct translation: the original word . . . shaal signifies simply to ask, request, demand, require, inquire, &c.; but it does not signify to borrow in the proper sense of that word, though in a very few places of Scripture it is thus used. In this and the parallel place, chap. xii. 35, the word signifies to ask or demand, and not to borrow, which is a gross mistake. . . . God commanded the Israelites to ask or demand a certain recompense for their past services, and he inclined the hearts of the Egyptians to give liberally; and this, far from a matter of oppression, wrong, or even charity, was no more than a very partial recompense for the long and painful services which we may say six hundred thousand Israelites had rendered to Egypt, during a considerable number of years. And there can be no doubt that while their heaviest oppression lasted, they were permitted to accumulate no kind of property, as all their gains went to their oppressors.” (Bible Commentary, 1:307.)
The Egyptians, who seem to have been less hard-hearted than their pharaoh and more impressed with the powers of Moses, responded to this commandment, and the Israelites seem to have taken great wealth with them (see Exodus 12:35–36). Probably some of these spoils were later used in the construction of the golden calf (see Exodus 32:1–4) and in the building of the tabernacle (see Exodus 35:22–24). The wealth of the Egyptians also fulfilled the promise given to Abraham that the children of Israel would “come out with great substance” (Genesis 15:14).
So significant was the event about to take place that the Lord commanded Israel to use this event as the beginning of their calendar. Thus the sacred calendar of Israelite feasts and festivals begins with the month of Abib (later called Nisan), which corresponds to late March and early April. The so-called “Jewish New Year,” which may come either in September or October, began while the Jews were captive in Babylon.
Sodden with water means “boiled or stewed.” The lamb was to be roasted, not cooked in water. The phrase “with the purtenance thereof” means that the entrails, or internal organs, were to be roasted with the animal. Keil and Delitzsch translated verse 9 as follows: “They shall eat the lamb in that night . . . and none of it ‘underdone’ (or raw), or boiled; . . . but roasted with fire, even its head on (along with) its thighs and entrails.” They explained that the lamb was thus “‘undivided or whole, so that neither head nor thighs were cut off, and not a bone was broken [see Exodus 12:46], and the viscera were roasted in the belly along with the entrails,’ the latter, of course, being first of all cleansed. . . . It is very certain that the command to roast was not founded upon the hurry of the whole procedure, as a whole animal could be quite as quickly boiled as roasted, if not even more quickly, and the Israelites must have possessed the requisite cooking utensils. It was to be roasted, in order that it might be placed upon the table undivided and essentially unchanged. ‘Through the unity and integrity of the lamb given them to eat, the participants were to be joined into an undivided unity and fellowship with the Lord, who had provided them with the meal.’” (Commentary, 1:2:14–15.)
“The Feast of the Passover was fulfilled in that form in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The Passover was a law given to Israel which was to continue until Christ, and was to remind the children of Israel of the coming of Christ who would become the sacrificial Lamb. After he was crucified the law was changed by the Savior himself, and from that time forth the law of the sacrament was instituted. We now observe the law of the sacrament instead of the Passover because the Passover was consummated in full by the death of Jesus Christ. It was a custom looking forward to the coming of Christ and his crucifixion and the lamb symbolized his death. . . .
“The word forever used in the Old Testament does not necessarily mean to the end of time but to the end of a period.” (Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 5:153–54.)
Leaven, or yeast, was seen anciently as a symbol of corruption because it so easily spoiled and turned moldy. Jesus used this imagery when He warned the disciples of the “leaven of the Pharisees” (Matthew 16:6), meaning their corrupt doctrine (see Matthew 16:6–12). In the law of Moses no leaven could be offered with the trespass offering (see Leviticus 6:17), suggesting that the offering must be without any corruption. For the Israelites, eating the unleavened bread symbolized that they were partaking of the bread which had no corruption or impurity, namely, the Bread of Life, who is Jesus Christ (see John 6:35). The careful purging of the household of all leaven (see Exodus 12:19) was a beautiful symbol of putting away all uncleanliness from the family. Paul drew on this imagery of the unleavened bread when he called upon the Corinthian Saints to put away sin from their lives (see 1 Corinthians 5:7–8). (Note: Christ’s comparison of the kingdom of heaven to leaven does not refer to yeast’s tendency to spoil but to the fact it causes dough to rise or swell [see Matthew 13:33].)
The bitter herbs served to remind Israel of the bitter and severe bondage they had endured in Egypt.
The figure given here of six hundred thousand men agrees approximately with the official census of the Israelites given in Numbers 1:45–46. There, however, men means only the males twenty years and older who were capable of going to war. This fact means that the total company could easily have been over two million people. (See Enrichment Section E, “The Problem of Large Numbers in the Old Testament.”)
The “mixed multitude” of verse 38 seems to refer to people of other nationalities who attached themselves to the Israelites and accompanied them in the Exodus. These seem to be the same people mentioned in Deuteronomy 29:10–11 who did menial labor for the Israelites. Also, they later joined the Israelites in the rebellions against God (see Numbers 11:4).
The Bible contains two versions of how long Israel was in Egypt. According to Exodus 12:40–41, the period was exactly 430 years. Paul, however, in Galatians 3:17, seems to suggest that it was 430 years from the time Abraham received the covenant to the Exodus, although Paul may have meant something else.
The Samaritan text, one of the oldest manuscripts of the Old Testament, reads, “Now the sojourning of the children of Israel and of their fathers, which they sojourned in the land of Canaan and in the land of Egypt was 430 years” (in Clarke, Bible Commentary, 1:358). Other equally significant texts do not support this addition, however.
When Abraham was shown the future bondage of Israel in vision, the Lord said, “Thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years” (Genesis 15:13; emphasis added). This passage suggests strongly that the captivity would be four hundred years. One scholar wrote a summary of the evidence for both views and concluded that the idea of the longer captivity is the best supported. He said:
“Some years ago it was fashionable to date the Exodus to the fifteenth century B.C. First Kings 6:1 says it was 480 years from the Exodus to the fourth year of Solomon’s reign. This points to the fifteenth century. Moreover, the discovery of the fourteenth-century Amarna Letters, letters from vassal princes in Canaan to Amenophis IV (the famous Ahkenaton) speak of confusion in the land. The disturbance was occasioned by the relaxation of Egyptian rule coupled with marauding bands of brigands who are called ‘Hapiru.’ The Hapiru were associated in some scholars’ minds with the invading Hebrews. Furthermore, Professor John Garstang, the excavator at Jericho, said that that city was destroyed in the Late Bronze Age, a time which would fit with other evidence. This city was, of course, the one which the Bible says was the first to be taken by the Hebrews in Canaan as they marched around its walls and blew their trumpets and the walls came tumbling down. So a number of factors converged to support what seemed to be a Biblical dating for the Exodus. The suggestion was that the pharaoh of the Exodus was either Thutmoses III (ca. 1490–1435) or Amenophis III (ca. 1406–1370).
“Today the picture has changed entirely. One by one the factors which pointed to an early date for the Exodus have either been called into doubt or have been shown to have nothing to do with the question. At the same time new evidence has come to light which points to a later date: the thirteenth century, perhaps early in the reign of Ramses II (1290–1224). Exodus 1:11 tells us that the Hebrews’ bondage had to do with rebuilding the royal treasure cities of Pithom and Ramses (Tanis). The nature of this bondage as described in Exodus 1:14 strongly suggests that, being nomads close to the building sites, these people were pressed into labor gangs. They were forced to develop the fields which would support the populations of the cities as well as make brick out of which the splendid new royal bastions were being constructed. Archaeologically recovered history of these sites indicates that they went into decline when the Hyksos were driven from the land, but that they were rebuilt under Ramses II or possibly his father, Seti I (1309–1290 B.C.). There is also the statement in chapters 20 and 21 of Numbers that when the Hebrews sought to cross Edom and Moab they were turned back and had to make their way along the border between these lands. Again archaeological research can now tell us about the history of this Transjordanian area. It did not have a settled population until the thirteenth century. Before that time there would have been no Edom and no Moab to refuse passage to the Hebrews. There has also come to light another written source of interest in dating the Exodus. This is an Egyptian inscription celebrating the victories of Pharaoh Merneptah in Canaan around the year 1220 B.C. This speaks of ‘Israel’ and is indeed the oldest written mention of Israel we know. Of course, this only shows the latest date one can give for the presence of Israel in Canaan. But the date of the inscription—1220 B.C.—is taken by some to be significant in light of other evidence. A part of that evidence, in addition to what has been mentioned, is the violent destruction of a number of Canaanite cities in the thirteenth century. Was this the work of invading Hebrews?
“Clearly the question of the date of the Exodus cannot be settled decisively. Yet the weight of evidence is strong, and almost all scholars today agree upon Ramses II or possibly his father as the ruler whose heart was hardened against the Hebrews.” (Frank, Discovering the Biblical World, p. 56.)
The Passover was an ordinance and ceremony identifying Israel as a chosen nation, a people selected by Jehovah and a people who had in turn elected to serve Him. The Lord forbade strangers, or “nonmembers” of Israel, from partaking of the Passover just as He has said that partaking of the sacrament is only for those who have repented and are baptized and worthy (see 3 Nephi 18:16, 28–32). To partake of either as a “nonmember” would imply a renewal of covenants which, in fact, had never been made. The Lord has always emphasized, however, that if a stranger “will [desire to] keep the passover” (Exodus 12:48), he must join Israel by circumcision, or, today, be baptized (see 3 Nephi 18:30; see also Elder McConkie’s fourth point in Reading 10-1).
“Again, the Lord, through the sprinkling of the blood of a lamb on the door-posts of the Israelites, having saved the lives of all the first-born of Israel, made a claim upon them for their services in His cause. . . .
“But the first-born of the Egyptians, for whom no lamb as a token of the propitiation was offered, were destroyed. It was through the propitiation and atonement alone that the Israelites were saved, and, under the circumstances they must have perished with the Egyptians, who were doomed, had it not been for the contemplated atonement and propitiation of Christ, of which this was a figure.
“Hence the Lord claimed those that He saved as righteously belonging to Him, and claiming them as His He demanded their services; but afterwards, as shown in [Numbers 3:12–13]; He accepted the tribe of Levi in lieu of the first-born of Israel; and as there were more of the first-born than there were of the Levites, the balance had to be redeemed with money, which was given to Aaron, as the great High Priest and representative of the Aaronic Priesthood, he being also a Levite. [See Numbers 3:50–51.]” (Taylor, Mediation and Atonement, p. 108.)
Of further significance is the truth that Christ is the Firstborn among all of Heavenly Father’s spirit children (see D&C 93:21). He came as the Redeemer, paying the price for all, and thus is justified in requesting that they serve Him. As Paul said, all mankind is “bought with a price” (1 Corinthians 6:20).
See Reading 19-12 for an explanation of the commandment to bind the sign on the hand and between the eyes.
“The route Israel was to go was indicated by a pillar of fire signifying the presence of the Lord going before them. They would have had a short journey had they been ready and capable of following the coastal route through Philistine lands to Canaan” (Rasmussen, Introduction to the Old Testament, 1:80). Their faith, however, was not yet sufficient for such a task. God does not require a trial too great for one’s faith. (See 1 Corinthians 10:13.) The phrase they “went up harnessed” (Exodus 13:18) seems to imply organization and orderliness and probably preparation for possible attack. Although the logistics of taking up to two million people into the wilderness is absolutely staggering, this verse suggests that it was not a disorganized flight but rather an orderly exodus.
Joseph Smith changed these two verses to show that the pharaoh hardened his own heart (see Reading 9-16).
Some modern scholars have argued that Moses did not take Israel directly to and then through the Red Sea proper (the Gulf of Suez branch of the Red Sea), but rather through the “Reed Sea,” since in Hebrew Yam Suph means “The Reed Sea.” These scholars believe the area crossed was a marshy lowland near the Bitter Lakes. (See the map of the Exodus in Maps and Charts). They maintain that the chariots of the Egyptians bogged down in the mud and then the soldiers drowned when higher waters came in. But Latter-day Saints have information that the Exodus account is correct. Both the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants state directly that it was the Red Sea (see 1 Nephi 17:24–27; D&C 8:3). Exodus 14:22, 29 says that “the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left,” certainly implying more than passing through a marshy area dried by a sudden wind.
The Lord may have had at least two reasons for taking Israel through the Red Sea. First, the action displayed His awesome and great protective power. He was the only warrior in this battle against one of the most formidable armies in the world. Therefore, this event was the prelude and proof of His demand henceforth for trust and obedience. Second, when that battle was over, the power of the Egyptian army was destroyed. The time necessary for rebuilding Egypt’s power left Israel unmenaced until she became established in the promised land.
Paul taught that the passage through the Red Sea and the overshadowing of the cloud or pillar of fire were clearly types or symbols of the baptism of water and fire (see 1 Corinthians 10:1–4).
 |
| The Red Sea divided at Moses’ command. |
This verse contains the first of over twenty uses of the word murmur in its various forms in the record of Israel’s wanderings. Murmuring seems to have been a dominant part of their natures and a root of some of the problems they faced. The word is used nearly the same number of times to describe the attitude of the rebellious members of the Lehi colony who traveled through the same general wilderness area after leaving Jerusalem (see Topical Guide, s.v. “murmuring, murmur”).
Murmuring is defined as “a half-suppressed or muttered complaint” (Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, 1979 ed., s.v., “murmur”). Instead of open expression of concern and criticism so a problem can be dealt with, it is behind-the-scenes grumbling. That problem was not unique to the Israelites or to Laman and Lemuel. It is too often prevalent among Latter-day Saints today. Elder Marion G. Romney said:
“I desire to call your attention to the principle of loyalty, loyalty to the truth and loyalty to the men whom God has chosen to lead the cause of truth. I speak of ‘the truth’ and these ‘men’ jointly, because it is impossible fully to accept the one and partly reject the other.
“I raise my voice on this matter to warn and counsel you to be on your guard against criticism. . . . It comes, in part, from those who hold, or have held, prominent positions. Ostensibly, they are in good standing in the Church. In expressing their feelings, they frequently say, ‘We are members of the Church, too, you know, and our feelings should be considered.’
“They assume that one can be in full harmony with the spirit of the gospel, enjoy full fellowship in the Church, and at the same time be out of harmony with the leaders of the Church and the counsel and directions they give. Such a position is wholly inconsistent, because the guidance of this Church comes, not alone from the written word, but also from continuous revelation, and the Lord gives that revelation to the Church through His chosen leaders and none else. It follows, therefore, that those who profess to accept the gospel and who at the same time criticize and refuse to follow the counsel of the leaders, are assuming an indefensible position.” (In Conference Report, Apr. 1942, pp. 17–18.)
President David O. McKay showed the direct relationship between criticism and murmuring in this statement:
“In the Church we sometimes find two groups of people: the builders and the murmurers. Let each ask himself: ‘In which class should I be placed?’
“We are called upon to perform duties. When the priesthood and auxiliary leadership introduce new programs, many of the members will say, ‘Yes, we will do it. Let us perform in these new programs.’ But sometimes we hear a murmurer, a faultfinder, who will say, ‘No. We cannot do that.’ Misjudging motives, some soon find themselves with Laman and Lemuel instead of with Nephi, whose actions expressed willingness to follow the voice of God. (See 1 Ne. 17:17ff.)
“Let us watch ourselves and be true to the examples set by our leaders. The warning is sometimes expressed: ‘Speak not against the authorities.’ What does it mean? It means ‘be not a murmurer.’ Murmuring against priesthood and auxiliary leadership is one of the most poisonous things that can be introduced into the home of a Latter-day Saint. Why are leaders called to their positions? To benefit themselves? No, not once can one point to an instance in this Church where a person was called for his personal benefit. When a call is made, it is made to bless someone, some class, or humanity at large. That is the mission of every member, from the President of the Church down to the latest convert. Everyone holds his position to build up, to bless, to establish righteousness, purity, and virtue among mankind.” (“Four Guideposts,” Improvement Era, Mar. 1969, p. 3.)
 |
| An oasis in the Sinai |
“The manna was used by God to teach lessons for spiritual instruction as well as physical sustenance. Israel was told that with the failure of other food (‘suffered thee to hunger’), His provision of manna was to ‘make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live’ [Deuteronomy 8:3, see v. 16]. God used the provision of manna on six days and not the seventh to teach Israel obedience, and convicted them of disobedience [see Exodus 16:19, see vv. 20, 25–30]. Jesus Christ uses the manna, God-given ‘bread from heaven’, as a type of Himself, the true bread of life, and contrasts the shadow with the substance: ‘your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead’ [John 6:49], but He could say, ‘I am the bread of life . . . which came down from heaven; if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever’ [John 6:35, 51; see vv. 26–59].” (Douglas, New Bible Dictionary, s.v. “manna,” p. 780.)
Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 10:1–4 makes clear what the Lord was seeking to teach Israel regarding Christ when He provided both manna and water for them. Elder Bruce R. McConkie’s commentary on Paul’s statement is very enlightening:
“Christ is the bread which came down from heaven, the Bread of Life, the spiritual manna, of which men must eat to gain salvation. (John 6:31–58.) He is the spiritual drink, the living water, the water of life, which if men drink they shall never thirst more. (John 4:6–15.)” (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 2:355.)
The “hidden manna” mentioned by John in Revelation 2:17 was explained by Elder McConkie as being “the bread of life, the good word of God, the doctrines of Him who is the Bread of Life—all of which is hidden from the carnal mind. Those who eat thereof shall never hunger more; eternal life is their eventual inheritance.” (Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3:451.)
 |
| Aaron and Hur stay up the hands of Moses (see Exodus 17:12). |
The Amalekites may have been descendants of Esau (see Genesis 36:12, 16). They attacked the Israelites in a most cowardly way, killing first the feeble, the faint, and the weary at the rear of the marching nation (see Deuteronomy 25:17–19). For this lack of respect toward God, the Amalekites were cursed by the Lord. The Israelites were subsequently commanded to “utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven” (Exodus 17:14).
In this first battle with other people, only when Moses held up his hand did the Israelites prevail. When Moses’ hands grew weary, Aaron and Hur brought him a stone to sit on and “stayed up his hands” (Exodus 17:12). President Harold B. Lee, who was then First Counselor in the First Presidency, commented:
“I think that is the role that President [N. Eldon] Tanner [Second Counselor in the First Presidency] and I have to fulfill. The hands of President [Joseph Fielding] Smith [President of the Church] may grow weary. They may tend to droop at times because of his heavy responsibilities; but as we uphold his hands, and as we lead under his direction, by his side, the gates of hell will not prevail against you and against Israel. Your safety and ours depends upon whether or not we follow the ones whom the Lord has placed to preside over his church. He knows whom he wants to preside over this church, and he will make no mistake. The Lord doesn’t do things by accident. He has never done anything accidentally. And I think the scientists and all the philosophers in the world have never discovered or learned anything that God didn’t already know. His revelations are more powerful, more meaningful, and have more substance than all the secular learning in the world.
“Let’s keep our eye on the President of the Church and uphold his hands as President Tanner and I will continue to do.” (In Conference Report, Oct. 1970, p. 153.)
What evidence is there that Moses actually recorded information which was passed down and which would refute the claim by some that the Bible is based on an oral tradition and recorded much later than Moses?
“Jethro made a valuable contribution to Moses in suggesting an organization of leaders over units of ten, fifty, one hundred and one thousand to instruct and to judge the people in all but the most difficult of matters, which would be passed up through the system of inferior and superior courts if necessary, until they reached Moses at the head. Moses showed commendable humility and wisdom in accepting the old Priest’s advice. (A modern use of the same type of organization is seen in D&C 136.)” (Rasmussen, Introduction to the Old Testament, 1:82–83.)
Joseph Smith changed Exodus 18:1 to read “the high priest of Midian” (emphasis added), confirming what is recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 84:6–7, that Jethro held the Melchizedek Priesthood.
Today the word peculiar is used to mean something different and unusual. Since Israel was to be a peculiar people in this sense also, Exodus 19:5 and similar scriptures (see Deuteronomy 14:2; 1 Peter 2:9) are often read in that way. The original word in both Hebrew and Greek, however, means “property, wealth, private property, which is laid up or reserved; the leading idea is that of select, precious, endeared; something exceedingly prized and [diligently] preserved” (Wilson, Old Testament Word Studies, s.v. “peculiar,” p. 305).
“If they had accepted all of the privileges offered them and followed the instructions which would have qualified them to receive the fulfillment of all God’s promises, they could have been accorded the grandest of all revelations: He offered to come down in the sight of all the people and let them hear when He spoke to Moses that they might know for themselves about His will and His law, and believe in Moses’ future revelations from God, and revere the Lord evermore (cf. Deuteronomy 4:10). Note the need of cleanliness and spiritual dedication in their preparation for this great spiritual experience.
“At the prearranged signal, the sounding of the trumpet ‘exceeding long,’ the people trembled in anticipation and awe, but apparently they were not fully ready to come up ‘in the sight’ of the Lord on the mount where Moses was, for the Lord told him to go down and warn them not to come up. Hints as to why this was so are found in the next chapter, 20:18–19, and in D&C 84:21–25. But even though their hearts were not fully prepared to endure His presence, they did hear the voice and the words of God as the Ten Commandments were given, as will be seen later when we study Moses’ review of these great events in his valedictory, in Deuteronomy 4:10, 12, 33, 36; 5:22–26.
“(The presentation of the Ten Commandments on the stone tablets is recounted a little later in the narrative, in Exodus 31:18; 32:15, 19; and a second set of tablets, prepared after the first set were broken, and are spoken of in Exodus 34:1 ff.)” (Rasmussen, Introduction to the Old Testament, 1:83.)
(10-23) The Passover happened over three thousand years ago but is still commemorated by Jews all over the world. With Christ’s sacrifice, we no longer celebrate the actual feast but still look to the event as highly significant for Saints of all times. Assume that you were present on that night and on the days which followed and were a faithful journal keeper. On a separate sheet of paper (or in your own journal, if you wish) record the feelings you would have had if you had experienced the great events described in Exodus 11–19. Do not record what happened but rather what you would have thought and felt during these events. Try as much as possible to keep your writing in the style of a journal entry.
 |
Many in the world today seem to think that the Ten Commandments were part of the Mosaic dispensation only and are not a part of the full gospel. As you begin your study of these ten principles revealed over three thousand years ago, ask yourself how relevant they are today. Do they form part of the gospel, or were they only for the ancient Israelites? This question is critical for you. Cecil B. DeMille, producer of the movie The Ten Commandments, made this observation:
“Some, who do not know either the Bible or human nature, may see in the orgy of the Golden Calf only a riot of Hollywood’s imaginations—but those who have eyes to see will see in it the awful lesson of how quickly a nation or a man can fall, without God’s law.
“If man will not be ruled by God, he will certainly be ruled by tyrants—and there is no tyranny more imperious or more devastating than man’s own selfishness, without the law.
“We cannot break the Ten Commandments. We can only break ourselves against them—or else, by keeping them, rise through them to the fulness of freedom under God. God means us to be free. With divine daring, He gave us the power of choice.” (Commencement Address, Brigham Young University Speeches of the Year, Provo, 31 May 1957.)
Instructions to Students
1. Use Notes and Commentary below to help you as you read and study Exodus 20.
2. Complete Points to Ponder as directed by your teacher. (Individual study students should complete all of this section.)
Perhaps the greatest indication of the importance of the Ten Commandments is that they are found in three of the four standard works of the Church. In addition to the first time they were given (see Exodus 20), Moses repeated them when he summarized the experiences of Israel in the wilderness (see Deuteronomy 5:6–21). The prophet Abinadi quoted them to the wicked priests of King Noah (see Mosiah 13:12–24), so they are also found in the Book of Mormon. And, although not given in the exact form that they appear in these scriptures, the same principles are also found in the New Testament (see Matthew 5:17–37) and in the Doctrine and Covenants (see D&C 42:18–29; 59:5–9). When the Lord emphasizes something with that much repetition, it must be important. Elder Mark E. Petersen said:
“By his own finger the Lord wrote the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. They represent the basic law of the Almighty and have formed the underlying elements of civil and religious law ever since.
“They are fundamental to our relationships with God. They are an integral part of the restored gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and are essential to our becoming perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect. (D&C 42; D&C 59.)
“Variations of these laws are given in the rules laid down in Leviticus and Deuteronomy as they are applied to specific matters, but generally they form the foundation for all proper human conduct.” (Moses, p. 110.)
These commandments show us the three great priorities of life. The first four commandments show us our proper relationship to God. The fifth commandment establishes the importance of the family and proper family relationships. The last five commandments regulate our relationships with others. If we are committed to the perfecting of our relationships with God, family, and others, we are well on our way to being perfected in all things.
The first commandment gives mankind their first priority in life. If God is not first, then all other things are affected. Nothing in life, not even life itself, can come before God. Christ said: “Be not afraid of your enemies, for I have decreed in my heart, saith the Lord, that I will prove you in all things, whether you will abide in my covenant even unto death, that you may be found worthy. For if ye will not abide in my covenant ye are not worthy of me.” (D&C 98:14–15.)
“God will not favor us if we put him in second place in our lives and if we follow after worldly things regardless of what they may be.
“The command of the Savior was: ‘Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness.’ (Matthew 6:33.) In revelations to the Prophet Joseph Smith the Lord taught that we must have an eye single to the glory of God. (D&C 27:2; 55:1; 59:1; 88:67.)” (Petersen, Moses, p. 111.)
At first some may think that this demand for exclusive worship and devotion by God for Himself sounds selfish. But two things should be remembered. First, as Lord and Creator of all the universe, and as one who has all power, knowledge, and glory, God does not need man’s adoration and worship to add to His state of being. So, His jealousy is not a protective concern for His own status.
The second thing to remember is that the Lord taught Moses that God’s work is “to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39). Anytime His children set anything before God in importance, they begin to thwart His work for them. He is the only source of power and knowledge sufficient to save. To set anything above Him lessens their ability to draw on that power and knowledge for their salvation. That is why He says to His children, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3).
One Bible scholar put it this way: “This commandment prohibits every species of mental idolatry, and all inordinate attachment to earthly and sensible things [things which appeal to the senses]. . . . God is the fountain of happiness, and no intelligent creature can be happy but through him. . . . The very first commandment of the whole series is divinely calculated to prevent man’s misery and promote his happiness, by taking him off from all false dependence, and leading him to God himself, the fountain of all good.” (Clarke, Bible Commentary, 1:402–3.)
In the preface to the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord said that one of the characteristics of the modern world was that “every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own God, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol” (D&C 1:16). Commenting on modern idolatry, Elder Spencer W. Kimball said:
“The idolatry we are most concerned with here is the conscious worshipping of still other gods. Some are of metal and plush and chrome, of wood and stone and fabrics. They are not in the image of God or of man, but are developed to give man comfort and enjoyment, to satisfy his wants, ambitions, passions and desires. Some are in no physical form at all, but are intangible. . . .
“Modern idols or false gods can take such forms as clothes, homes, businesses, machines, automobiles, pleasure boats, and numerous other material deflectors from the path to godhood. What difference does it make that the item concerned is not shaped like an idol? Brigham Young said: ‘I would as soon see a man worshipping a little god made of brass or of wood as to see him worshipping his property’ [Journal of Discourses, 6:196].
“Intangible things make just as ready gods. Degrees and letters and titles can become idols. Many young men decide to attend college when they should be on missions first. The degree, and the wealth and the security which come through it, appear so desirable that the mission takes second place. Some neglect Church service through their college years, feeling to give preference to the secular training and ignoring the spiritual covenants they have made.
“Many people build and furnish a home and buy the automobile first—and then find they ‘cannot afford’ to pay tithing. Whom do they worship? Certainly not the Lord of heaven and earth, for we serve whom we love and give first consideration to the object of our affection and desires. Young married couples who postpone parenthood until their degrees are attained might be shocked if their expressed preference were labeled idolatry. Their rationalization gives them degrees at the expense of children. Is it a justifiable exchange? Whom do they love and worship—themselves or God? Other couples, recognizing that life is not intended primarily for comforts, ease, and luxuries, complete their educations while they move forward with full lives, having their children and giving Church and community service.
“Many worship the hunt, the fishing trip, the vacation, the weekend picnics and outings. Others have as their idols the games of sport, baseball, football, the bullfight, or golf. These pursuits more often than not interfere with the worship of the Lord and with giving service to the building up of the kingdom of God. To the participants this emphasis may not seem serious, yet it indicates where their allegiance and loyalty are.
“Still another image men worship is that of power and prestige. Many will trample underfoot the spiritual and often the ethical values in their climb to success. These gods of power, wealth, and influence are most demanding and are quite as real as the golden calves of the children of Israel in the wilderness.” (Miracle of Forgiveness, pp. 40–42.)
The Hebrew root kanah denotes “ardour, zeal, jealousy” (Gesenius, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, p. 888). The implication is that the Lord possesses “sensitive and deep feelings” about idolatry (Exodus 20:5b). The reason seems clear. The only power to save mankind from sin lies with God. Any false worship cuts the sinner off from that power. Since God loves His children and wishes only their best eternal welfare, He is jealous (that is, feels very strongly) about any vain or false worship they perform.
The explanation given as a footnote to verse 5 is helpful. Commenting on the phrase “visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children,” the note says: “insofar as the children learn and do the sinful things the parents do; but see v. 6 concerning those who repent and serve the Lord” (Exodus 20:5f; see also D&C 98:46–47; 124:50–52).
 |
| The rugged cliffs of Mount Sinai |
Two aspects of this commandment are important. First, the third commandment implies that His children must have a deep and reverential attitude about God and His name.
“This precept not only forbids all false oaths, but all common swearing where the name of God is used, or where he is appealed to as a witness of the truth. It also necessarily forbids all light and irreverent mention of God, or any of his attributes.” (Clarke, Bible Commentary, 1:404.)
In an age when profanity dominates so much of the world’s conversation, it is well to remember the Lord’s warning that He will not hold such people guiltless. Elder LeGrand Richards said this of profanity:
“It is difficult to understand how a person may truly and sincerely approach God in prayer, seeking a blessing at his hand, at the same time be so disrespectful as to take his name in vain.
“Profanity is incompatible with reverence. Surely at this critical time in our nation’s history, when we need the sustaining help of God, we should see that we do not offend him by reason of our language. We appeal to our young people everywhere to hold in reverence the sacred name of Deity, that they may walk acceptably before the Lord, so that, should there come a time in their lives when they need his sustaining help, they may go to him with good conscience and call upon him with faith that he will hear their plea.” (In “The Third Commandment,” The Ten Commandments Today, pp. 52–53.)
There is an additional implication in the commandment to avoid taking the name of God in vain. An integral part of living the gospel is the making of oaths and covenants with God. When a person is baptized he covenants to take the name of Christ upon himself (see D&C 20:37). If he forgets that solemn oath made at baptism, he has taken the name of the Lord in vain. At temple altars men and women covenant to abide by sacred commitments. If they leave those temples and live as though the promises have no meaning, they violate the third commandment even though they may not speak actual profanity. Those who take the sacrament each week with little or no thought for the covenant to take His name upon them, keep His commandm