The text has “he will make it” or “one will make it.” With no expressed subject it is given a passive translation.


The text uses two imperatives: “see and make.” This can be interpreted as a verbal hendiadys, calling for Moses and Israel to see to it that they make these things correctly.


The participle is passive, “caused to see,” or, “shown.”


The word order in Hebrew thrusts the direct object to the front for particular emphasis. After the first couple of pieces of furniture are treated (chap. ), attention turns to the tabernacle itself.


This is for the adverbial accusative explaining how the dwelling place is to be made.


The construction is difficult in this line because of the word order. “Cherubim” is an adverbial accusative explaining how they were to make the curtains. And מַעֲשֵׂה חֹשֵׁב ( ma ’ aseh khoshev ) means literally “work of a designer”; it is in apposition to “cherubim.” The Hebrew participle means “designer” or “deviser” so that one could render this “of artistic designs in weaving” (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 280-81). B. Jacob says that it refers to “artistic weavers” ( Exodus , 789).


Heb “one” (so KJV).


Heb “twenty-eight cubits” long and “four cubits” wide.


This is the active participle, not the passive. It would normally be rendered “joining together.” The Bible uses the active because it has the result of the sewing in mind, namely, that every curtain accompanies another (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 348).


Heb “a woman to her sister,” this form of using nouns to express “one to another” is selected because “curtains” is a feminine noun (see GKC 448 §139. e ).


The phrase “the other” has been supplied.


Here “loops” has been supplied.


Heb “a woman to her sister.”


Heb “one”; KJV “it shall be one tabernacle”; NRSV “that the tabernacle may be one whole”; NLT “a single unit.”


Heb “you will make them”


Heb “one”


Literally “cubit.”


See the note on this phrase in Exod 25:5 .


There is debate whether the word הַקְּרָשִׁים ( haqqÿrashim ) means “boards” (KJV, ASV, NAB, NASB) or “frames” (NIV, NCV, NRSV, TEV) or “planks” (see Ezek 27:6 ) or “beams,” given the size of them. The literature on this includes M. Haran, “The Priestly Image of the Tabernacle,” HUCA 36 (1965): 192; B. A. Levine, “The Description of the Tabernacle Texts of the Pentateuch,” JAOS 85 (1965): 307-18; J. Morgenstern, “The Ark, the Ephod, and the Tent,” HUCA 17 (1942/43): 153-265; 18 (1943/44): 1-52.


“Wood” is an adverbial accusative.


The plural participle “standing” refers to how these items will be situated; they will be vertical rather than horizontal (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 354).


Heb “the frame.”


Or “being joined each to the other.”


Heb “on the south side southward.”


The clause is repeated to show the distributive sense; it literally says, “and two bases under the one frame for its two projections.”


Or “westward” (toward the sea).


Heb “they will be for the two corners.” This is the last clause of the verse, moved forward for clarity.


The noun is מִשְׁפָּט ( mishpat ), often translated “judgment” or “decision” in other contexts. In those settings it may reflect its basic idea of custom, which here would be reflected with a rendering of “prescribed norm” or “plan.”


Although translated “curtain” (traditionally “veil,” so ASV, NAB, NASB) this is a different word from the one used earlier of the tent curtains, so “special curtain” is used. The word פָרֹכֶת ( farokhet ) seems to be connected with a verb that means “to shut off” and was used with a shrine. This curtain would form a barrier in the approach to God (see S. R. Driver, Exodus , 289).


The verb is the third masculine singular form, but no subject is expressed. It could be translated “one will make” or as a passive. The verb means “to make,” but probably has the sense of embroidering both here and in v. 1 .


Heb “put it.”


This clause simply says “and their hooks gold,” but is taken as a circumstantial clause telling how the veil will be hung.


Heb “on four silver bases.”


The traditional expression is “within the veil,” literally “into the house (or area) of the (special) curtain.”


Or “the Holy of Holies.”


The word רֹקֵם ( roqem ) refers to someone who made cloth with colors. It is not certain, however, whether the colors were woven into the fabric on the loom or applied with a needle; so “embroiderer” should be understood as an approximation (cf. HALOT 1290-91 s.v. רקם ).


“will be” has been supplied.


The article on this word identifies this as the altar, meaning the main high altar on which the sacrifices would be made.


The dimensions are five cubits by five cubits by three cubits high.


Heb “four”; this refers to four sides. S. R. Driver says this is an archaism that means there were four equal sides ( Exodus , 291).


Heb “and three cubits its height.”


The text has “to all its vessels.” This is the lamed ( ל ) of inclusion according to Gesenius, meaning “all its utensils” (GKC 458 §143. e ).


The noun מִכְבָּר ( mikhbar ) means “a grating”; it is related to the word that means a “sieve.” This formed a vertical support for the ledge, resting on the ground and supporting its outer edge (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 292).


The verb is the verb “to be,” here the perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive. It is “and it will be” or “that it may be,” or here “that it may come” halfway up.


Heb “to the half of the altar.”


The verb is a Hophal perfect with vav consecutive: וְהוּבָא ( vÿhuva ’, “and it will be brought”). The particle אֶת (’ et ) here introduces the subject of the passive verb (see a similar use in 21:28 , “and its flesh will not be eaten”).


The construction is the infinitive construct with bet ( ב ) preposition: “in carrying it.” Here the meaning must be that the poles are not left in the rings, but only put into the rings when they carried it.


The verb is used impersonally; it reads “just as he showed you.” This form then can be made a passive in the translation.


Heb “thus they will make.” Here too it could be given a passive translation since the subject is not expressed. But “they” would normally refer to the people who will be making this and so can be retained in the translation. sn Nothing is said about the top of the altar. Some commentators suggest, in view of the previous instruction for making an altar out of earth and stone, that when this one was to be used it would be filled up with dirt clods and the animal burnt on the top of that. If the animal was burnt inside it, the wood would quickly burn. A number of recent scholars think this was simply an imagined plan to make a portable altar after the pattern of Solomon’s – but that is an unsatisfactory suggestion. This construction must simply represent a portable frame for the altar in the courtyard, an improvement over the field altar. The purpose and function of the altar are not in question. Here worshipers would make their sacrifices to God in order to find forgiveness and atonement, and in order to celebrate in worship with him. No one could worship God apart from this; no one could approach God apart from this. So too the truths that this altar communicated form the basis and center of all Christian worship. One could word an applicable lesson this way: Believers must ensure that the foundation and center of their worship is the altar, i.e., the sacrificial atonement.


Or “enclosure” (TEV).


Heb “south side southward.”


Or “curtains.”


Heb “and.”


Heb “and thus.”


Here the phrase “there will be” has been supplied.


The word literally means “shoulder.” The next words, “of the gate,” have been supplied here and in v. 15 . The east end would contain the courtyard’s entry with a wall of curtains on each side of the entry (see v. 16 ).


Here “will be” has been supplied.


Heb “shoulder.”


The text uses the passive participle here: they are to “be filleted with silver” or “bound round” with silver.


Here the phrase “are to be” has been supplied.


Heb “a hundred cubits.”


Heb “fifty.” The text has “and the width fifty [cubits] with fifty.” This means that it is fifty cubits wide on the western end and fifty cubits wide on the eastern end.


Here “hangings” has been supplied.


Here the phrase “is to be” has been supplied.


Heb “to all”; for use of the preposition lamed ( ל ) to show inclusion (all belonging to) see GKC 458 §143. e .


Here “used” has been supplied.


The form is the imperfect tense with the vav showing a sequence with the first verb: “you will command…that they take.” The verb “take, receive” is used here as before for receiving an offering and bringing it to the sanctuary.


Heb “lamp,” which must be a collective singular here.


The verb is unusual; it is the Hiphil infinitive construct of עָלָה (’ alah ), with the sense here of “to set up” to burn, or “to fix on” as in Exod 25:37 , or “to kindle” (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 370).


The LXX has mistakenly rendered this name “the tent of the testimony.”


The verb is the Hiphil imperative of the root קָרַב ( qarav , “to draw near”). In the present stem the word has religious significance, namely, to present something to God, like an offering.


This entire clause is a translation of the Hebrew לְכַהֲנוֹ־לִי ( lÿkhahano-li , “that he might be a priest to me”), but the form is unusual. The word means “to be a priest” or “to act as a priest.” The etymology of the word for priest, כֹּהֵן ( kohen ), is uncertain.


The expression is לְכָבוֹד וּלְתִפְארֶת ( lÿkhavod ulÿtif ’ aret , “for glory and for beauty”). W. C. Kaiser (“Exodus,” EBC 2:465), quoting the NIV’s “to give him dignity and honor,” says that these clothes were to exalt the office of the high priest as well as beautify the worship of God (which explains more of what the text has than the NIV rendering). The meaning of the word “glory” has much to do with the importance of the office, to be sure, but in Exodus the word has been used also for the brilliance of the presence of Yahweh, and so the magnificence of these garments might indeed strike the worshiper with the sense of the exaltation of the service.


Heb “And you, you will speak to.”


Heb “wise of heart.” The word for “wise” ( חַכְמֵי , khakhme , the plural construct form) is from the word group that is usually translated “wisdom, wise, be wise,” but it has as its basic meaning “skill” or “skillful.” This is the way it is used in 31:3, 6 and 35:10 etc. God gave these people “wisdom” so that they would know how to make these things. The “heart” for the Hebrews is the locus of understanding, the mind and the will. To be “wise of heart” or “wise in heart” means that they had the understanding to do skillful work, they were talented artisans and artists.


The form is the perfect tense with the vav ( ו ) consecutive; after the instruction to speak to the wise, this verb, equal to an imperfect, will have the force of purpose.


Or “to sanctify him” (ASV) or “to consecrate him” (KJV, NASB, NRSV). It is the garments that will set Aaron apart, or sanctify him, not the workers. The expression could be taken to mean “for his consecration” (NIV) since the investiture is part of his being set apart for service.


The word תָּשְׁבֵּץ ( tashbets ), which describes the tunic and which appears only in this verse, is related to a verb (also rare) of the same root in 28:39 that describes making the tunic. Their meaning is uncertain (see the extended discussion in C. Houtman, Exodus , 3:473-75). A related noun describes gold fasteners and the “settings,” or “mountings,” for precious stones ( 28:11, 13, 14, 20, 25; 36:18; 39:6, 13, 16, 18 ; cf. Ps 45:14 ). The word “fitted” in 28:4 reflects the possibility that “the tunic is to be shaped by sewing, … so that it will fit tightly around the body” (C. Houtman, Exodus , 3:475).


Heb “and they.” The word “artisans” is supplied as the referent of the pronoun, a connection that is clearer in Hebrew than in English.


Heb “receive” or “take.”


Here the Pual perfect with the vav ( ו ) consecutive provides the purpose clause (equal to a final imperfect); the form follows the use of the active participle, “attached” or more Heb “joining.”


This is the rendering of the word חֵשֶׁב ( kheshev ), cognate to the word translated “designer” in v. 6 . Since the entire ephod was of the same material, and this was of the same piece, it is unclear why this is singled out as “artistically woven.” Perhaps the word is from another root that just describes the item as a “band.” Whatever the connection, this band was to be of the same material, and the same piece, as the ephod, but perhaps a different pattern (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 301). It is this sash that attaches the ephod to the priest’s body, that is, at the upper border of the ephod and clasped together at the back.


Heb “from it” but meaning “of one [the same] piece”; the phrase “the ephod” has been supplied.


Although this is normally translated “Israelites,” here a more literal translation is clearer because it refers to the names of the twelve tribes – the actual sons of Israel.


This is in apposition to the direct object of the verb “engrave.” It further defines how the names were to be engraved – six on one and the other six on the other.


Heb “according to their begettings” (the major word in the book of Genesis). What is meant is that the names would be listed in the order of their ages.


Or “you will mount them” (NRSV similar).


Or “rosettes,” shield-like frames for the stones. The Hebrew word means “to plait, checker.”


Heb “a breastpiece of decision” ( חֹשֶׁן מִשְׁפָּט , khoshen mishpat ; so NAB). The first word, rendered “breastpiece,” is of uncertain etymology. This item was made of material similar to the ephod. It had four rows of three gems on it, bearing the names of the tribes. In it were the urim and thummim. J. P. Hyatt refers to a similar object found in the Egyptian reliefs, including even the twisted gold chains used to hang it from the priest ( Exodus [NCBC], 282).


Heb “four.”


“when” is added for clarification (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 375).


The word זֶרֶת ( zeret ) is half a cubit; it is often translated “span.”


For clarity the words “the number of” have been supplied.


The phrase translated “the engravings of a seal” is an adverbial accusative of manner here.


Heb “give, put.”


Here “upper” has been supplied.


Here “the other” has been supplied.


Here “them” has been supplied.


Here “other” has been supplied.


Here “more” has been supplied.


Or “judgment” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV). The term is מִשְׁפָּט ( mishpat ), the same word that describes the breastpiece that held the two objects. Here it is translated “decisions” since the Urim and Thummim contained in the breastpiece represented the means by which the Lord made decisions for the Israelites. The high priest bore the responsibility of discerning the divine will on matters of national importance.


The מְעִיל ( mÿ ’ il ), according to S. R. Driver ( Exodus , 307), is a long robe worn over the ephod, perhaps open down the front, with sleeves. It is made of finer material than ordinary cloaks because it was to be worn by people in positions of rank.


Heb “mouth” or “opening” ( פִּי , pi ; in construct).


The “mouth of its head” probably means its neck; it may be rendered “the opening for the head,” except the pronominal suffix would have to refer to Aaron, and that is not immediately within the context.


Or “woven work” (KJV, ASV, NASB), that is, “the work of a weaver.” The expression suggests that the weaving was from the fabric edges itself and not something woven and then added to the robe. It was obviously intended to keep the opening from fraying.


The expression כְּפִי תַחְרָא ( kÿfi takhra ’) is difficult. It was early rendered “like the opening of a coat of mail.” It occurs only here and in the parallel 39:23 . Tg. Onq. has “coat of mail.” S. R. Driver suggests “a linen corselet,” after the Greek ( Exodus , 308). See J. Cohen, “A Samaritan Authentication of the Rabbinic Interpretation of kephi tahra’ ,” VT 24 (1974): 361-66.


The verb is the Niphal imperfect, here given the nuance of potential imperfect. Here it serves in a final clause (purpose/result), introduced only by the negative (see GKC 503-4 §165. a ).


The text repeats the idea: “you will make for its hem…all around its hem.”


The words “the pattern is to be” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in the translation for clarity and for stylistic reasons.


Heb “it”; the referent (the robe) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The form is a Piel infinitive construct with the lamed ( ל ) preposition: “to minister” or “to serve.” It may be taken epexegetically here, “while serving,” although S. R. Driver takes it as a purpose, “in order that he may minister” ( Exodus , 308). The point then would be that he dare not enter into the Holy Place without wearing it.


The word צִּיץ ( tsits ) seems to mean “a shining thing” and so here a plate of metal. It originally meant “flower,” but they could not write on a flower. So it must have the sense of something worn openly, visible, and shining. The Rabbinic tradition says it was two fingers wide and stretched from ear to ear, but this is an attempt to give details that the Law does not give (see B. Jacob, Exodus , 818).


Heb “the engravings of a seal”; this phrase is an adverbial accusative of manner.


The verb is the perfect tense with the vav ( ו ) consecutive; it follows the same at the beginning of the verse. Since the first verb is equal to the imperfect of instruction, this could be as well, but it is more likely to be subordinated to express the purpose of the former.


Heb “it will be,” an instruction imperfect.


The construction “the iniquity of the holy things” is difficult. “Holy things” is explained in the passage by all the gifts the people bring and consecrate to Yahweh. But there will inevitably be iniquity involved. U. Cassuto explains that Aaron “will atone for all the transgressions committed in connection with the order of the service, the purity of the consecrated things, or the use of the holy gifts, for the declaration engraved on the plate will prove that everything was intended to be holy to the Lord , and if aught was done irregularly, the intention at least was good” ( Exodus , 385).


The clause reads: “according to/by all the gifts of their holiness.” The genitive is an attributive genitive, the suffix on it referring to the whole bound construction – “their holy gifts.” The idea of the line is that the people will consecrate as holy things gifts they bring to the sanctuary.


This clause is the infinitive construct with the lamed preposition, followed by the prepositional phrase: “for acceptance for them.” This infinitive provides the purpose or result of the act of wearing the dedicatory frontlet – that they will be acceptable.


It is difficult to know how to translate וְשִׁבַּצְּתָּ ( vÿshibbatsta ); it is a Piel perfect with the vav ( ו ) consecutive, and so equal to the imperfect of instruction. Some have thought that this verb describes a type of weaving and that the root may indicate that the cloth had something of a pattern to it by means of alternate weaving of the threads. It was the work of a weaver ( 39:27 ) and not so detailed as certain other fabrics ( 26:1 ), but it was more than plain weaving (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 310). Here, however, it may be that the fabric is assumed to be in existence and that the action has to do with sewing (C. Houtman, Exodus , 3:475, 517).


Heb “fill their hand.” As a result of this installation ceremony they will be officially designated for the work. It seems likely that the concept derives from the notion of putting the priestly responsibilities under their control (i.e., “filling their hands” with work). See note on the phrase “ordained seven days” in Lev 8:33 .


Traditionally “sanctify them” (KJV, ASV).


Heb “naked flesh” (so NAB, NRSV); KJV “nakedness.”


Heb “be.”


The construction for this temporal clause is the infinitive construct with the temporal preposition bet ( ב ) and the suffixed subjective genitive.


This construction is also the temporal clause with the infinitive construct and the temporal preposition bet ( ב ) and the suffixed subjective genitive.


The text has וְלאֹ־יִשְׂאוּ עָוֹן וָמֵתוּ ( vÿlo ’ -yis ’ u ’ avon vametu ). The imperfect tense here introduces a final clause, yielding a purpose or result translation (“in order that” or “so that”). The last verb is the perfect tense with the vav consecutive, and so it too is equal to a final imperfect – but it would show the result of bearing the iniquity. The idea is that if they approached the holy things with a lack of modesty, perhaps like the pagans who have nakedness and sexuality as part of the religious ritual, they would pollute the holy things, and it would be reckoned to them for iniquity and they would die.


Heb “seed.”


Heb “the thing.”


Literally: “take one bull, a ‘son’ of the herd.”


The word תָּמִים ( tamim ) means “perfect.” The animals could not have diseases or be crippled or blind (see ). The requirement was designed to ensure that the people would give the best they had to Yahweh. The typology pointed to the sinless Messiah who would fulfill all these sacrifices in his one sacrifice on the cross.


Or “anointed” (KJV, ASV).


The “fine flour” is here an adverbial accusative, explaining the material from which these items were made. The flour is to be finely sifted, and from the wheat, not the barley, which was often the material used by the poor. Fine flour, no leaven, and perfect animals, without blemishes, were to be gathered for this service.


The verb קָרַב ( qarav ) in the Hiphil means to “bring near” to the altar, or, to offer something to God. These gifts will, therefore, be offered to him for the service of this ritual.


Heb “and with.”


Here too the verb is Hiphil (now imperfect) meaning “bring near” the altar. The choice of this verb indicates that they were not merely being brought near, but that they were being formally presented to Yahweh as the offerings were.


The Hiphil of לָבַשׁ ( lavash , “to clothe”) will take double accusatives; so the sign of the accusative is with Aaron, and then with the articles of clothing. The translation will have to treat Aaron as the direct object and the articles as indirect objects, because Aaron receives the prominence in the verse – you will clothe Aaron.


The verb used in this last clause is a denominative verb from the word for ephod. And so “ephod the ephod on him” means “fasten as an ephod the ephod on him” (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 316).


Hebrew has both the objective pronoun “them” and the names “Aaron and his sons.” Neither the LXX nor Leviticus 8:13 has “Aaron and his sons,” suggesting that this may have been a later gloss in the text.


Heb “and you will fill the hand” and so “consecrate” or “ordain.” The verb draws together the individual acts of the process.


The verb is singular, agreeing with the first of the compound subject – Aaron.


The phrase “rest of” has been supplied in the translation for clarification.


S. R. Driver suggests that this is the appendix or an appendix, both here and in v. 22 ( Exodus , 320). “The surplus, the appendage of liver, found with cow, sheep, or goat, but not with humans: Lobus caudatus” ( HALOT 453 s.v. יֹתֶרֶת ).


Heb “turn [them] into sweet smoke” since the word is used for burning incense. sn The giving of the visceral organs and the fat has received various explanations. The fat represented the best, and the best was to go to God. If the animal is a substitute, then the visceral organs represent the will of the worshiper in an act of surrender to God.


Heb “burn with fire.”


Heb “turn to sweet smoke.”


The word אִשֶּׁה (’ isheh ) has traditionally been translated “an offering made with fire” or the like, because it appears so obviously connected with fire. But further evidence from Ugaritic suggests that it might only mean “a gift” (see Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16 , 161).


Here “it” has been supplied.


The verb in this instance is Qal and not Piel, “to be holy” rather than “sanctify.” The result of all this ritual is that Aaron and his sons will be set aside and distinct in their life and their service.


S. R. Driver suggests that this is the appendix or an appendix, both here and in v. 13 ( Exodus , 320). “The surplus, the appendage of liver, found with cow, sheep, or goat, but not with humans: Lobus caudatus” ( HALOT 453 s.v. יֹתֶרֶת ).


Heb “filling.”


Heb “the whole” or “the all.”


Heb “palms.”


The “wave offering” is תְּנוּפָה ( tÿnufah ); it is, of course, cognate with the verb, but an adverbial accusative rather than the direct object. In this seems to be a sacrificial gesture of things that are for the priests – but they present them first to Yahweh and then receive them back from him. So the waving is not side to side, but forward to Yahweh and then back to the priest. Here it is just an induction into that routine, since this is the ordination of the priests and the gifts are not yet theirs. So this will all be burned on the altar.


“turn to sweet smoke.”


“them” has been supplied.


The construction is an infinitive construct with a lamed ( ל ) preposition. The form simply means “for anointing,” but it serves to express the purpose or result of their inheriting the sacred garments.


This form is a Piel infinitive construct with a lamed ( ל ) preposition. It literally reads “for filling the hands,” the idiom used throughout this chapter for ordination or installation. Here too it has a parallel use of purpose or result.


Heb “after him”; NCV, NLT “after Aaron.”


The text just has the relative pronoun and the imperfect tense. It could be translated “who comes/enters.” But the context seems to indicate that this would be when he first comes to the tent to begin his tenure as High Priest, and so a temporal clause makes this clear. “First” has been supplied.


“Seven days” is an adverbial accusative of time. The ritual of ordination is to be repeated for seven days, and so they are to remain there in the court in full dress.


Or “boil” (see Lev 8:31 ).


The clause is a relative clause modifying “those things,” the direct object of the verb “eat.” The relative clause has a resumptive pronoun: “which atonement was made by them” becomes “by which atonement was made.” The verb is a Pual perfect of כִּפֵּר ( kipper , “to expiate, atone, pacify”).


The Hebrew word is “stranger, alien” ( זָר , zar ). But in this context it means anyone who is not a priest (see S. R. Driver, Exodus , 324).


Or “ordination offerings” ( Heb “fillings”).


The verb in the conditional clause is a Niphal imperfect of יָתַר ( yatar ); this verb is repeated in the next clause (as a Niphal participle) as the direct object of the verb “you will burn” (a Qal perfect with a vav [ ו ] consecutive to form the instruction).


Heb “burn with fire.”


The verb is a Niphal imperfect negated. It expresses the prohibition against eating this, but in the passive voice: “it will not be eaten,” or stronger, “it must not be eaten.”


Heb “you will fill their hand.”


The “seven days” is the adverbial accusative explaining that the ritual of the filling should continue daily for a week. Leviticus makes it clear that they are not to leave the sanctuary.


The construction uses a genitive: “a bull of the sin offering,” which means, a bull that is designated for a sin (or better, purification) offering.


The verb is וְחִטֵּאתָ ( vÿhitte ’ ta ), a Piel perfect of the word usually translated “to sin.” Here it may be interpreted as a privative Piel (as in Ps 51:7 [9]), with the sense of “un-sin” or “remove sin.” It could also be interpreted as related to the word for “sin offering,” and so be a denominative verb. It means “to purify, cleanse.” The Hebrews understood that sin and contamination could corrupt and pollute even things, and so they had to be purged.


The construction is a Piel infinitive construct in an adverbial clause. The preposition bet ( ב ) that begins the clause could be taken as a temporal preposition, but in this context it seems to express the means by which the altar was purged of contamination – “in your making atonement” is “by [your] making atonement.”


Once again this is an adverbial accusative of time. Each day for seven days the ritual at the altar is to be followed.


The construction is the superlative genitive: “holy of holies,” or “most holy.”


The verb is “you will do,” “you will make.” It clearly refers to offering the animals on the altar, but may emphasize all the preparation that was involved in the process.


Heb “between the two evenings” or “between the two settings” ( בֵּין הָעַרְבָּיִם , ben ha ’ arbayim ). This expression has had a good deal of discussion. (1) Tg. Onq. says “between the two suns,” which the Talmud explains as the time between the sunset and the time the stars become visible. More technically, the first “evening” would be the time between sunset and the appearance of the crescent moon, and the second “evening” the next hour, or from the appearance of the crescent moon to full darkness (see Deut 16:6 – “at the going down of the sun”). (2) Saadia, Rashi, and Kimchi say the first evening is when the sun begins to decline in the west and cast its shadows, and the second evening is the beginning of night. (3) The view adopted by the Pharisees and the Talmudists ( b. Pesahim 61a) is that the first evening is when the heat of the sun begins to decrease, and the second evening begins at sunset, or, roughly from 3-5 p.m. The Mishnah ( m. Pesahim 5:1) indicates the lamb was killed about 2:30 p.m. – anything before noon was not valid. S. R. Driver concludes from this survey that the first view is probably the best, although the last view was the traditionally accepted one ( Exodus , 89-90). Late afternoon or early evening seems to be intended, the time of twilight perhaps.


The phrase “of an ephah” has been supplied for clarity (cf. Num 28:5 ). The ephah was a commonly used dry measure whose capacity is now uncertain: “Quotations given for the ephah vary from ca. 45 to 20 liters” (C. Houtman, Exodus , 2:340-41).


“Hin” is a transliterated Hebrew word that seems to have an Egyptian derivation. The amount of liquid measured by a hin is uncertain: “Its presumed capacity varies from about 3,5 liters to 7,5 liters” (C. Houtman, Exodus , 3:550).


The translation has “regular” instead of “continually,” because they will be preparing this twice a day.


The relative clause identifies the place in front of the Tent as the place that Yahweh would meet Moses. The main verb of the clause is אִוָּעֵד (’ ivva ’ ed ), a Niphal imperfect of the verb יָעַד ( ya ’ ad ), the verb that is cognate to the name “tent of meeting” – hence the name. This clause leads into the next four verses.


The verb now is a Niphal perfect from the same root, with a vav ( ו ) consecutive. It simply continues the preceding verb, announcing now that he would meet the people.


Or “will be sanctified by my glory” (KJV and ASV both similar). sn The tabernacle, as well as the priests and the altar, will be sanctified by the power of Yahweh’s presence. The reference here is to when Yahweh enters the sanctuary in all his glory (see Exod 40:34 f.).


This verse affirms the same point as the last, but now with an active verb: “I will set apart as holy” (or “I will sanctify”). This verse, then, probably introduces the conclusion of the chapter: “So I will….”


The verb has the root שָׁכַן ( shakan ), from which came the word for the dwelling place, or sanctuary, itself ( מִשְׁכָּן , mishkan ). It is also used for the description of “the Shekinah glory.” God is affirming that he will reside in the midst of his people.


The expression is מִזְבֵּחַ מִקְטַר קְטֹרֶת ( mizbeakh miqtar qÿtoret ), either “an altar, namely an altar of incense,” or “an altar, [for] burning incense.” The second noun is “altar of incense,” although some suggest it is an active noun meaning “burning.” If the former, then it is in apposition to the word for “altar” (which is not in construct). The last noun is “incense” or “sweet smoke.” It either qualifies the “altar of incense” or serves as the object of the active noun. B. Jacob says that in order to designate that this altar be used only for incense, the Torah prepared the second word for this passage alone. It specifies the kind of altar this is ( Exodus , 828).


This is an adverbial accusative explaining the material used in building the altar.


Heb “a cubit.”


Heb “two cubits.”


Heb “its horns from it.”


Heb “roof.”


Heb “its walls around.”


Heb “and make for it border gold around.” The verb is a consecutive perfect. See Exod 25:11 , where the ark also has such a molding.


Heb “And it”; this refers to the rings collectively in their placement on the box, and so the word “rings” has been used to clarify the referent for the modern reader.


Heb “for houses.”


The text uses a cognate accusative (“incense”) with the verb “to burn” or “to make into incense/sweet smoke.” Then, the noun “sweet spices” is added in apposition to clarify the incense as sweet.


The Hebrew is בְּהֵיטִיבוֹ ( bÿhetivo ), a Hiphil infinitive construct serving in a temporal clause. The Hebrew verb means “to make good” and so in this context “to fix” or “to dress.” This refers to cleansing and trimming the lamps.


The word “atonements” (plural in Hebrew) is a genitive showing the result or product of the sacrifice made.


Heb “and Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying.” This full means for introducing a quotation from the Lord is used again in 30:17, 22; 31:1; and 40:1 . It appears first in 6:10 . Cynthia L. Miller discusses its use in detail ( The Representation of Speech in Biblical Hebrew Narrative , 373-86).


The expression is “when you take [lift up] the sum [head] of the Israelites.”


The form is לִפְקֻדֵיהֶם ( lifqudehem , “according to those that are numbered of/by them”) from the verb פָּקַד ( paqad , “to visit”). But the idea of this word seems more to be that of changing or determining the destiny, and so “appoint” and “number” become clear categories of meaning for the word. Here it simply refers to the census, but when this word is used for a census it often involves mustering an army for a military purpose. Here there is no indication of a war, but it may be laying down the principle that when they should do this, here is the price. B. Jacob ( Exodus , 835) uses as a good illustration, showing that the warrior was essentially a murderer, if he killed anyone in battle. For this reason his blood was forfeit; if he survived he must pay a כֹּפֶר ( kofer ) because every human life possesses value and must be atoned for. The payment during the census represented a “presumptive ransom” so that they could not be faulted for what they might do in war.


The “ransom” is כֹּפֶר ( kofer ), a word related to words translated “atone” and “atonement.” Here the noun refers to what is paid for the life. The idea is that of delivering or redeeming by a substitute – here the substitute is the money. If they paid the amount, their lives would be safe (W. C. Kaiser, Jr., “Exodus,” EBC 2:473).


The temporal clause uses a preposition, an infinitive construct, and then an accusative. The subject is supplied: “in numbering them” means “when [you] number them.” The verb could also be rendered “when you muster them.”


Or “contribution” ( תְּרוּמָה , tÿrumah ).


Or “pay more.”


The form is לָתֵת ( latet ), the Qal infinitive construct with the lamed preposition. The infinitive here is explaining the preceding verbs. They are not to increase or diminish the amount “in paying the offering.” The construction approximates a temporal clause.


Heb “the silver of the atonements.” The genitive here is the result (as in “sheep of slaughter”) telling what the money will be used for (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax , 11, §44).


The infinitive could be taken in a couple of ways here. It could be an epexegetical infinitive: “making atonement.” Or it could be the infinitive expressing result: “so that atonement will be made for your lives.”


Heb “and Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying.”


Heb “and its stand bronze.”


The form is the adverb “there” with the directive qamets-he ( ָה ) .


That is, from water from it.


The form is an infinitive construct with the temporal preposition bet ( ב ), and a suffixed subjective genitive: “in their going in,” or, whenever they enter.


“Water” is an adverbial accusative of means, and so is translated “with water.” Gesenius classifies this with verbs of “covering with something.” But he prefers to emend the text with a preposition (see GKC 369 §117. y , n. 1).


The verb is a Qal imperfect with a nuance of final imperfect. The purpose/result clause here is indicated only with the conjunction: “and they do not die.” But clearly from the context this is the intended result of their washing – it is in order that they not die.


Here, too, the infinitive is used in a temporal clause construction. The verb נָגַשׁ ( nagash ) is the common verb used for drawing near to the altar to make offerings – the official duties of the priest.


The text uses two infinitives construct: “to minister to burn incense”; the first is the general term and expresses the purpose of the drawing near, and the second infinitive is epexegetical, explaining the first infinitive.


The translation “as an offering made by fire” is a standard rendering of the one word in the text that appears to refer to “fire.” Milgrom and others contend that it simply means a “gift” ( Leviticus 1-16 , 161).


Heb “and [then] they will wash.”


The verb is “it will be.”


Heb “for his seed.”


Or “for generations to come”; it literally is “to their generations.” sn The symbolic meaning of washing has been taught throughout the ages. This was a practical matter of cleaning hands and feet, but it was also symbolic of purification before Yahweh. It was an outward sign of inner spiritual cleansing, or forgiveness. Jesus washed the disciples feet () to show this same teaching; he asked the disciples if they knew what he had done (so it was more than washing feet). In this passage the theological points for the outline would be these: I. God provides the means of cleansing; II. Cleansing is a prerequisite for participating in the worship, and III. (Believers) priests must regularly appropriate God’s provision of cleansing.


The construction uses the imperative “take,” but before it is the independent pronoun to add emphasis to it. After the imperative is the ethical dative (lit. “to you”) to stress the task to Moses as a personal responsibility: “and you, take to yourself.”


Heb “spices head.” This must mean the chief spices, or perhaps the top spice, meaning fine spices or choice spices. See Song 4:14 ; Ezek 27:22 .


Or “500 shekels.” Verse 24 specifies that the sanctuary shekel was the unit for weighing the spices. The total of 1500 shekels for the four spices is estimated at between 77 and 100 pounds, or 17 to 22 kilograms, depending on how much a shekel weighed (C. Houtman, Exodus , 3:576).


The words “all weighed” are added for clarity in English.


Or “a hin.” A hin of oil is estimated at around one gallon (J. Durham, Exodus [WBC], 3:406).


Heb “it.”


The word “oil” is an adverbial accusative, indicating the product that results from the verb (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax , §52).


The somewhat rare words rendered “a perfumed compound” are both associated with a verbal root having to do with mixing spices and other ingredients to make fragrant ointments. They are used with the next phrase, “the work of a perfumer,” to describe the finished oil as a special mixture of aromatic spices and one requiring the knowledge and skills of an experienced maker.


The verb is a Piel perfect with vav ( ו ) consecutive; in this verse it is summarizing or explaining what the anointing has accomplished. This is the effect of the anointing (see Exod 29:36 ).


This is the superlative genitive again, Heb “holy of holies.”


See Exod 29:37 ; as before, this could refer to anything or anyone touching the sanctified items.


The perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive follows the imperfect of instruction; it may be equal to the instruction, but more likely shows the purpose or result of the act.


Without an expressed subject, the verb may be treated as a passive. Any common use, as in personal hygiene, would be a complete desecration.


Heb “a stranger,” meaning someone not ordained a priest.


The construction is “take to you,” which could be left in that literal sense, but more likely the suffix is an ethical dative, stressing the subject of the imperative.


The word “spice is repeated here, suggesting that the first three formed half of the ingredient and this spice the other half – but this is conjecture (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 400).


Heb “of each part there will be an equal part.”


This is an accusative of result or product.


The word is in apposition to “incense,” further defining the kind of incense that is to be made.


The word מְמֻלָּח ( mÿmullakh ), a passive participle, is usually taken to mean “salted.” Since there is no meaning like that for the Pual form, the word probably should be taken as “mixed,” as in Rashi and Tg. Onq. Seasoning with salt would work if it were food, but since it is not food, if it means “salted” it would be a symbol of what was sound and whole for the covenant. Some have thought that it would have helped the incense burn quickly with more smoke.


Or to smell it, to use for the maker’s own pleasure.


Heb “and Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying.”


Heb “called by name.” This expression means that the person was specifically chosen for some important task (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 342). See the expression with Cyrus in Isa 45:3-4 .


Heb “and in all work”; “all” means “all kinds of” here.


The expression is לַחְשֹׁב מַחֲשָׁבֹת ( lakhshov makhashavot , “to devise devices”). The infinitive emphasizes that Bezalel will be able to design or plan works that are artistic or skillful. He will think thoughts or devise the plans, and then he will execute them in silver or stone or whatever other material he uses.


The expression uses the independent personal pronoun (“and I”) with the deictic particle (“behold”) to enforce the subject of the verb – “and I, indeed I have given.”


Heb “and in the heart of all that are wise-hearted I have put wisdom.” sn The verse means that there were a good number of very skilled and trained artisans that could come to do the work that God wanted done. But God’s Spirit further endowed them with additional wisdom and skill for the work that had to be done.


The form is a perfect with vav ( ו ) consecutive. The form at this place shows the purpose or the result of what has gone before, and so it is rendered “that they may make.”


Heb “all the vessels of the tent.”


Heb “and Yahweh said ( אָמַר , ’ amar ) to Moses, saying.”


Or “your sanctifier.”


This clause is all from one word, a Piel plural participle with a third, feminine suffix: מְחַלְלֶיהָ ( mÿkhalleha , “defilers of it”). This form serves as the subject of the sentence. The word חָלַל ( khalal ) is the antonym of קָדַשׁ ( qadash , “to be holy”). It means “common, profane,” and in the Piel stem “make common, profane” or “defile.” Treating the Sabbath like an ordinary day would profane it, make it common.


This is the asseverative use of כִּי ( ki ) meaning “surely, indeed,” for it restates the point just made (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax , 73, §449).


Heb “the one who does.”


“any” has been supplied.


Literally “her” (a feminine pronoun agreeing with “soul/life,” which is grammatically feminine).


This is an adverbial accusative of time, indicating that work may be done for six days out of the week.


The form is a Niphal imperfect; it has the nuance of permission in this sentence, for the sentence is simply saying that the six days are work days – that is when work may be done.


The expression is שַׁבַּת שַׁבָּתוֹן ( shabbat shabbaton ), “a Sabbath of entire rest,” or better, “a sabbath of complete desisting” (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 404). The second noun, the modifying genitive, is an abstract noun. The repetition provides the superlative idea that complete rest is the order of the day.


The expression again forms an adverbial accusative of time.


The meaning of this verb is properly “caused shame,” meaning cause disappointment because he was not coming back (see also Judg 5:28 for the delay of Sisera’s chariots [S. R. Driver, Exodus , 349]).


The infinitive construct with the lamed ( ל ) preposition is used here epexegetically, explaining the delay of Moses.


Heb “the people.”


The imperative means “arise.” It could be serving here as an interjection, getting Aaron’s attention. But it might also have the force of prompting him to get busy.


The plural translation is required here (although the form itself could be singular in meaning) because the verb that follows in the relative clause is a plural verb – that they go before us).


The text has “this Moses.” But this instance may find the demonstrative used in an earlier deictic sense, especially since there is no article with it.


The interrogative is used in an indirect question (see GKC 443-44 §137. c ).


This “all” is a natural hyperbole in the narrative, for it means the large majority of the people.


Here “the gold” has been supplied.


Heb “from their hand.”


The verb looks similar to יָצַר ( yatsar ), “to form, fashion” by a plan or a design. That is the verb used in Gen 2:7 for Yahweh God forming the man from the dust of the ground. If it is here, it is the reverse, a human – the dust of the ground – trying to form a god or gods. The active participle of this verb in Hebrew is “the potter.” A related noun is the word יֵצֶּר ( yetser ), “evil inclination,” the wicked designs or intent of the human heart ( Gen 6:5 ). But see the discussion by B. S. Childs ( Exodus [OTL], 555-56) on a different reading, one that links the root to a hollow verb meaning “to cast out of metal” (as in 1 Kgs 7:15 ).


The word could be singular here and earlier; here it would then be “this is your god, O Israel.” However, the use of “these” indicates more than one god was meant by the image. But their statement and their statue, although they do not use the holy name, violate the first two commandments.


The preterite with the vav ( ו ) consecutive is subordinated as a temporal clause to the next preterite.


The word “this” has been supplied.


“Before it” means before the deity in the form of the calf. Aaron tried to redirect their worship to Yahweh, but the people had already broken down the barrier and were beyond control (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 413).


Heb “called.”


The second infinitive is an infinitive absolute. The first is an infinitive construct with a lamed ( ל ) preposition, expressing the purpose of their sitting down. The infinitive absolute that follows cannot take the preposition, but with the conjunction follows the force of the form before it (see GKC 340 §113. e ).


The form is לְצַחֵק ( lÿtsakheq ), a Piel infinitive construct, giving the purpose of their rising up after the festal meal. On the surface it would seem that with the festival there would be singing and dancing, so that the people were celebrating even though they did not know the reason. W. C. Kaiser says the word means “drunken immoral orgies and sexual play” (“Exodus,” EBC 2:478). That is quite an assumption for this word, but is reflected in some recent English versions (e.g., NCV “got up and sinned sexually”; TEV “an orgy of drinking and sex”). The word means “to play, trifle.” It can have other meanings, depending on its contexts. It is used of Lot when he warned his sons-in-law and appeared as one who “mocked” them; it is also used of Ishmael “playing” with Isaac, which Paul interprets as mocking; it is used of Isaac “playing” with his wife in a manner that revealed to Abimelech that they were not brother and sister, and it is used by Potiphar’s wife to say that her husband brought this slave Joseph in to “mock” them. The most that can be gathered from these is that it is playful teasing, serious mocking, or playful caresses. It might fit with wild orgies, but there is no indication of that in this passage, and the word does not mean it. The fact that they were festive and playing before an idol was sufficient.


The two imperatives could also express one idea: “get down there.” In other words, “Make haste to get down.”


The verb is a perfect tense, reflecting the present perfect nuance: “they have turned aside” and are still disobedient. But the verb is modified with the adverb “quickly” (actually a Piel infinitive absolute). It has been only a matter of weeks since they heard the voice of God prohibiting this.


Heb “and behold” or “and look.” The expression directs attention in order to persuade the hearer.


The imperative, from the word “to rest” ( נוּחַ , nuakh ), has the sense of “leave me alone, let me be.” It is a directive for Moses not to intercede for the people. B. S. Childs ( Exodus [OTL], 567) reflects the Jewish interpretation that there is a profound paradox in God’s words. He vows the severest punishment but then suddenly conditions it on Moses’ agreement. “Let me alone that I may consume them” is the statement, but the effect is that he has left the door open for intercession. He allows himself to be persuaded – that is what a mediator is for. God could have slammed the door (as when Moses wanted to go into the promised land). Moreover, by alluding to the promise to Abraham God gave Moses the strongest reason to intercede.


S. R. Driver ( Exodus , 351) draws on Arabic to show that the meaning of this verb ( חָלָה , khalah ) was properly “make sweet the face” or “stroke the face”; so here “to entreat, seek to conciliate.” In this prayer, Driver adds, Moses urges four motives for mercy: 1) Israel is Yahweh’s people, 2) Israel’s deliverance has demanded great power, 3) the Egyptians would mock if the people now perished, and 4) the oath God made to the fathers.


The question is rhetorical; it really forms an affirmation that is used here as a reason for the request (see GKC 474 §150. e ).


Heb “speak, saying.” This is redundant in English and has been simplified in the translation.


The word “evil” means any kind of life-threatening or fatal calamity. “Evil” is that which hinders life, interrupts life, causes pain to life, or destroys it. The Egyptians would conclude that such a God would have no good intent in taking his people to the desert if now he destroyed them.


The form is a Piel infinitive construct from כָּלָה ( kalah , “to complete, finish”) but in this stem, “bring to an end, destroy.” As a purpose infinitive this expresses what the Egyptians would have thought of God’s motive.


The verb “repent, relent” when used of God is certainly an anthropomorphism. It expresses the deep pain that one would have over a situation. Earlier God repented that he had made humans ( Gen 6:6 ). Here Moses is asking God to repent/relent over the judgment he was about to bring, meaning that he should be moved by such compassion that there would be no judgment like that. J. P. Hyatt observes that the Bible uses so many anthropomorphisms because the Israelites conceived of God as a dynamic and living person in a vital relationship with people, responding to their needs and attitudes and actions ( Exodus [NCBC], 307). See H. V. D. Parunak, “A Semantic Survey of NHM ,” Bib 56 (1975): 512-32.


Heb “your seed.”


“about” has been supplied.


Heb “seed.”


The disjunctive vav ( ו ) serves here as a circumstantial clause indicator.


Heb “he”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “the sound of the answering of might,” meaning it is not the sound of shouting in victory (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 418).


Heb “the sound of the answering of weakness,” meaning the cry of the defeated (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 415).


Heb “answering in song” (a play on the twofold meaning of the word).


Heb “and the anger of Moses burned hot.”


Here “it” has been supplied.


Here “it” has been supplied. sn Pouring the ashes into the water running from the mountain in the brook ( Deut 9:21 ) and making them drink it was a type of the bitter water test that tested the wife suspected of unfaithfulness. Here the reaction of the people who drank would indicate guilt or not (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 419).


Heb “that on evil it is.”


The word is difficult to interpret. There does not seem to be enough evidence to justify the KJV’s translation “naked.” It appears to mean something like “let loose” or “lack restraint” ( Prov 29:18 ). The idea seems to be that the people had broken loose, were undisciplined, and were completely given over to their desires.


The last two words of the verse read literally “for a whispering among those who rose up against them.” The foes would have mocked and derided them when they heard that they had abandoned the God who had led them out of Egypt (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 354).


“come” is not in the text, but has been supplied.


S. R. Driver suggests that the command was tersely put: “Who is for Yahweh? To me!” ( Exodus , 354).


Heb “put.”


The two imperatives form a verbal hendiadys: “pass over and return,” meaning, “go back and forth” throughout the camp.


The phrases have “and kill a man his brother, and a man his companion, and a man his neighbor.” The instructions were probably intended to mean that they should kill leaders they knew to be guilty because they had been seen or because they failed the water test – whoever they were.


Heb “did according to the word of Moses.”


Heb “fell.”


Heb “Your hand was filled.” The phrase “fill your hands” is a familiar expression having to do with commissioning and devotion to a task that is earlier used in 28:41; 29:9, 29, 33, 35 . This has usually been explained as a Qal imperative. S. R. Driver explains it “Fill your hand today,” meaning, take a sacrifice to God and be installed in the priesthood ( Exodus , 355). But it probably is a Piel perfect, meaning “they have filled your hands today,” or, “your hand was filled today.” This was an expression meant to say that they had been faithful to God even though it turned them against family and friends – but God would give them a blessing.


The text simply has “and to give on you today a blessing.” Gesenius notes that the infinitive construct seems to be attached with a vav ( ו ; like the infinitive absolute) as the continuation of a previous finite verb. He reads the verb “fill” as an imperative: “fill your hand today…and that to bring a blessing on you, i.e., that you may be blessed” (see GKC 351 §114. p ). If the preceding verb is taken as perfect tense, however, then this would also be perfect – “he has blessed you today.”


Heb “and it was on the morrow and Moses said to the people.”


The text uses a cognate accusative: “you have sinned a great sin.”


The form אֲכַפְּרָה (’ akhappÿrah ) is a Piel cohortative/imperfect. Here with only a possibility of being successful, a potential imperfect nuance works best.


As before, the cognate accusative is used; it would literally be “this people has sinned a great sin.”


The apodosis is not expressed; it would be understood as “good.” It is not stated because of the intensity of the expression (the figure is aposiopesis, a sudden silence). It is also possible to take this first clause as a desire and not a conditional clause, rendering it “Oh that you would forgive!”


The word “wipe” is a figure of speech indicating “remove me” (meaning he wants to die). The translation “blot” is traditional, but not very satisfactory, since it does not convey complete removal.


Heb “behold, look.” Moses should take this fact into consideration.


The verse is difficult because of the double reference to the making of the calf. The NJPS’s translation tries to reconcile the two by reading “for what they did with the calf that Aaron had made.” B. S. Childs ( Exodus [OTL], 557) explains in some detail why this is not a good translation based on syntactical grounds; he opts for the conclusion that the last three words are a clumsy secondary addition. It seems preferable to take the view that both are true, Aaron is singled out for his obvious lead in the sin, but the people sinned by instigating the whole thing.


The two imperatives underscore the immediacy of the demand: “go, go up,” meaning “get going up” or “be on your way.”


Or “the land which I swore.”


Heb “seed.”


This verse seems to be a continuation of the command to “go up” since it begins with “to a land….” The intervening clauses are therefore parenthetical or relative. But the translation is made simpler by supplying the verb.


This is a strong adversative here, “but.”


The clause is “lest I consume you.” It would go with the decision not to accompany them: “I will not go up with you…lest I consume (destroy) you in the way.” The verse is saying that because of the people’s bent to rebellion, Yahweh would not remain in their midst as he had formerly said he would do. Their lives would be at risk if he did.


Or “bad news” (NAB, NCV).


The verse simply begins “And Yahweh said.” But it is clearly meant to be explanatory for the preceding action of the people.


The construction is formed with a simple imperfect in the first half and a perfect tense with vav ( ו ) in the second half. Heb “[in] one moment I will go up in your midst and I will destroy you.” The verse is certainly not intended to say that God was about to destroy them. That, plus the fact that he has announced he will not go in their midst, leads most commentators to take this as a conditional clause: “If I were to do such and such, then….”


The Hebrew text also has “from on you.”


The form is the cohortative with a vav ( ו ) following the imperative; it therefore expresses the purpose or result: “strip off…that I may know.” The call to remove the ornaments must have been perceived as a call to show true repentance for what had happened. If they repented, then God would know how to deal with them.


This last clause begins with the interrogative “what,” but it is used here as an indirect interrogative. It introduces a noun clause, the object of the verb “know.”


Heb “and Moses took.”


The infinitive absolute is used here as an adverb (see GKC 341 §113. h ).


The clause begins with “and it was,” the perfect tense with the vav conjunction. The imperfect tenses in this section are customary, describing what used to happen (others describe the verbs as frequentative). See GKC 315 §107. e .


The form is the Piel participle. The seeking here would indicate seeking an oracle from Yahweh or seeking to find a resolution for some difficulty (as in 2 Sam 21:1 ) or even perhaps coming with a sacrifice. B. Jacob notes that the tent was even here a place of prayer, for the benefit of the people ( Exodus , 961). It is not known how long this location was used.


The clause is introduced again with “and it was.” The perfect tense here with the vav ( ו ) is used to continue the sequence of actions that were done repeatedly in the past (see GKC 331-32 §112. e ). The temporal clause is then formed with the infinitive construct of יָצָא ( yatsa ’), with “Moses” as the subjective genitive: “and it was according to the going out of Moses.”


Or “rise up.”


The subject of this verb is specified with the individualizing use of “man”: “and all Israel would station themselves, each person (man) at the entrance to his tent.”


The perfect tense with the vav ( ו ) continues the sequence of the customary imperfect. The people “would gaze” (after) Moses until he entered the tent.


This is a temporal clause using an infinitive construct with a suffixed subject.


Heb “and it was when.”


Heb “and he”; the referent (the Lord ) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Both verbs, “stand” and “speak,” are perfect tenses with vav ( ו ) consecutive.


All the main verbs in this verse are perfect tenses continuing the customary sequence (see GKC 337 §112. kk ). The idea is that the people would get up (rise) when the cloud was there and then worship, meaning in part bow down. When the cloud was not there, there was access to seek God.


“Face to face” is circumstantial to the action of the verb, explaining how they spoke (see GKC 489-90 §156. c ). The point of this note of friendly relationship with Moses is that Moses was “at home” in this tent speaking with God. Moses would derive courage from this when he interceded for the people (B. Jacob, Exodus , 966).


The verb in this clause is a progressive imperfect.


Heb “he”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The Hiphil imperative is from the same verb that has been used before for bringing the people up from Egypt and leading them to Canaan.


That is, “chosen you.”


The prayer uses the Hiphil imperative of the verb “to know.” “Cause me to know” is “show me, reveal to me, teach or inform me.” Moses wanted to know more of God’s dealings with people, especially after all that has happened in the preceding chapter.


The imperfect tense of the verb “to know” with the vav follows the imperative of this root, and so this indicates the purpose clause (final imperfect): “in order that I may know you.” S. R. Driver summarizes it this way: that I may understand what your nature and character is, and shape my petitions accordingly, so that I may find grace in your sight, and my future prayers may be answered ( Exodus , 361).


The purpose clause simply uses the imperfect, “that I may find.” But since he already has found favor in God’s eyes, he is clearly praying that it be so in the future as well as now.


The verb “see” (an imperative) is a request for God to acknowledge Israel as his people by providing the divine leadership needed. So his main appeal will be for the people and not himself. To underscore this, he repeats “see” the way the section opened.


Heb “and he said”; the referent (the Lord ) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The phrase “with you” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied.


Heb “and he said”; the referent ( Moses ) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The construction uses the active participle to stress the continual going of the presence: if there is not your face going.


“with us” has been supplied.


Heb “from this.”


The verb in this place is a preterite with the vav ( ו ) consecutive, judging from the pointing. It then follows in sequence the verb “you have found favor,” meaning you stand in that favor, and so it means “I have known you” and still do (equal to the present perfect). The emphasis, however, is on the results of the action, and so “I know you.”


The expression “make proclamation in the name of Yahweh” (here a perfect tense with vav [ ו ] consecutive for future) means to declare, reveal, or otherwise make proclamation of who Yahweh is. The “name of Yahweh” (rendered “the name of the Lord ” throughout) refers to his divine attributes revealed to his people, either in word or deed. What will be focused on first will be his grace and compassion.


In view of the use of the verb “can, be able to” in the first clause, this imperfect tense is given a potential nuance.


Gesenius notes that sometimes a negative statement takes the place of a conditional clause; here it is equal to “if a man sees me he does not live” (GKC 498 §159. gg ). The other passages that teach this are Gen 32:30 ; Deut 4:33, 5:24, 26 ; Judg 6:22, 13:22 , and Isa 6:5 .


The deictic particle is used here simply to call attention to a place of God’s knowing and choosing.


Heb “and you will,” or interpretively, “where you will.”


The circumstantial clause is simply, “my hand [being] over you.” This protecting hand of Yahweh represents a fairly common theme in the Bible.


The construction has a preposition with an infinitive construct and a suffix: “while [or until] I pass by” ( Heb “in the passing by of me”).


The plural “my backs” is according to Gesenius an extension plural (compare “face,” a dual in Hebrew). The word denotes a locality in general, but that is composed of numerous parts (see GKC 397 §124. b ). W. C. Kaiser says that since God is a spirit, the meaning of this word could just as easily be rendered “after effects” of his presence (“Exodus,” EBC 2:484). As S. R. Driver says, though, while this may indicate just the “afterglow” that he leaves behind him, it was enough to suggest what the full brilliancy of his presence must be ( Exodus , 363; see also Job 26:14 ).


The Niphal imperfect could simply be rendered “will not be seen,” but given the emphasis of the preceding verses, it is more binding than that, and so a negated obligatory imperfect fits better: “it must not be seen.” It would also be possible to render it with a potential imperfect tense: “it cannot be seen.”


The imperative is followed by the preposition with a suffix expressing the ethical dative; it strengthens the instruction for Moses. Interestingly, the verb “cut out, chisel, hew,” is the same verb from which the word for a “graven image” is derived – פָּסַל ( pasal ).


The perfect tense with vav consecutive makes the value of this verb equal to an imperfect tense, probably a simple future here. sn Nothing is said of how God was going to write on these stone tablets at this point, but in the end it is Moses who wrote the words. This is not considered a contradiction, since God is often credited with things he has people do in his place. There is great symbolism in this command – if ever a command said far more than it actually said, this is it. The instruction means that the covenant had been renewed, or was going to be renewed, and that the sanctuary with the tablets in the ark at its center would be built (see Deut 10:1 ). The first time Moses went up he was empty-handed; when he came down he smashed the tablets because of the Israelites’ sin. Now the people would see him go up with empty tablets and be uncertain whether he would come back with the tablets inscribed again (B. Jacob, Exodus , 977-78).


The form is a Niphal participle that means “be prepared, be ready.” This probably means that Moses was to do in preparation what the congregation had to do back in Exod 19:11-15 .


Heb “he”; the referent has been specified here and the name “Moses,” which occurs later in this verse, has been replaced with the pronoun (“he”), both for stylistic reasons.


The line reads “and Moses got up early in the morning and went up.” These verbs likely form a verbal hendiadys, the first one with its prepositional phrase serving in an adverbial sense.


Some commentaries wish to make Moses the subject of the second and the third verbs, the first because he was told to stand there and this verb suggests he did it, and the last because it sounds like he was worshiping Yahweh (cf. NASB). But it is clear from v. 6 that Yahweh was the subject of the last clause of v. 5 – v. 6 tells how he did it. So if Yahweh is the subject of the first and last clauses of v. 5 , it seems simpler that he also be the subject of the second. Moses took his stand there, but God stood by him (B. Jacob, Exodus , 981; U. Cassuto, Exodus , 439). There is no reason to make Moses the subject in any of the verbs of v. 5 .


Here is one of the clearest examples of what it means “to call on the name of the Lord,” as that clause has been translated traditionally ( וַיִּקְרָא בְשֵׁם יְהוָה , vayyiqra ’ vÿshem yÿhvah ). It seems more likely that it means “to make proclamation of Yahweh by name.” Yahweh came down and made a proclamation – and the next verses give the content of what he said. This cannot be prayer or praise; it is a proclamation of the nature or attributes of God (which is what his “name” means throughout the Bible). Attempts to make Moses the subject of the verb are awkward, for the verb is repeated in v. 6 with Yahweh clearly doing the proclaiming.


See Exod 33:19 .


That is, “for thousands of generations.”


The first two verbs form a hendiadys: “he hurried…he bowed,” meaning “he quickly bowed down.”


The Hebrew term translated “Lord” two times here is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonay ).


Heb “it is.” Hebrew uses the third person masculine singular pronoun here in agreement with the noun “people.”


Here again is a use of the futur instans participle; the deictic particle plus the pronoun precedes the participle, showing what is about to happen.


The verb here is בָּרָא ( bara ’, “to create”). The choice of this verb is to stress that these wonders would be supernaturally performed, for the verb is used only with God as the subject.


The covenant duties begin with this command to “keep well” what is being commanded. The Hebrew expression is “keep for you”; the preposition and the suffix form the ethical dative, adding strength to the imperative.


Again, this is the futur instans use of the participle.


The exact expression is “take heed to yourself lest you make.” It is the second use of this verb in the duties, now in the Niphal stem. To take heed to yourself means to watch yourself, be sure not to do something. Here, if they failed to do this, they would end up making entangling treaties.


Or “images of Asherah”; ASV, NASB “their Asherim”; NCV “their Asherah idols.” sn Asherah was a leading deity of the Canaanite pantheon, wife/sister of El and goddess of fertility. She was commonly worshiped at shrines in or near groves of evergreen trees, or, failing that, at places marked by wooden poles. These were to be burned or cut down ( Deut 12:3; 16:21 ; Judg 6:25, 28, 30 ; 2 Kgs 18:4 ).


Heb “bow down.”


The sentence begins simply “lest you make a covenant”; it is undoubtedly a continuation of the imperative introduced earlier, and so that is supplied here.


The verb is a perfect with a vav consecutive. In the literal form of the sentence, this clause tells what might happen if the people made a covenant with the inhabitants of the land: “Take heed…lest you make a covenant…and then they prostitute themselves…and sacrifice…and invite…and you eat.” The sequence lays out an entire scenario.


The verb זָנָה ( zanah ) means “to play the prostitute; to commit whoredom; to be a harlot” or something similar. It is used here and elsewhere in the Bible for departing from pure religion and engaging in pagan religion. The use of the word in this figurative sense is fitting, because the relationship between God and his people is pictured as a marriage, and to be unfaithful to it was a sin. This is also why God is described as a “jealous” or “impassioned” God. The figure may not be merely a metaphorical use, but perhaps a metonymy, since there actually was sexual immorality at the Canaanite altars and poles.


There is no subject for the verb. It could be rendered “and one invites you,” or it could be made a passive.


In the construction this verb would follow as a possible outcome of the last event, and so remain in the verbal sequence. If the people participate in the festivals of the land, then they will intermarry, and that could lead to further involvement with idolatry.


This is an adverbial accusative of time.


The words “do this” have been supplied.


Heb “everything that opens the womb.”


Here too: everything that “opens [the womb].”


The verb basically means “that drops a male.” The verb is feminine, referring to the cattle.


Heb “and the one that opens [the womb of] the donkey.”


The form is the adverb “empty.”


Or “cease” (i.e., from the labors).


The imperfect tense expresses injunction or instruction.


The imperfect tense means “you will do”; it is followed by the preposition with a suffix to express the ethical dative to stress the subject.


The expression is “the turn of the year,” which is parallel to “the going out of the year,” and means the end of the agricultural season.


“Three times” is an adverbial accusative.


Heb “all your males.”


Here the divine name reads in Hebrew הָאָדֹן יְהוָה ( ha ’ adon yÿhvah ), which if rendered according to the traditional scheme of “ Lord ” for “Yahweh” would result in “Lord Lord .” A number of English versions therefore render this phrase “Lord God ,” and that convention has been followed here. sn The title “Lord” is included here before the divine name (translated “ God ” here; see Exod 23:17 ), perhaps to form a contrast with Baal (which means “lord” as well) and to show the sovereignty of Yahweh. But the distinct designation “the God of Israel” is certainly the point of the renewed covenant relationship.


The verb is a Hiphil imperfect of יָרַשׁ ( yarash ), which means “to possess.” In the causative stem it can mean “dispossess” or “drive out.”


The construction uses the infinitive construct with a preposition and a suffixed subject to form the temporal clause.


The expression “three times” is an adverbial accusative of time.


Once again the preposition with the suffix follows the imperative, adding some emphasis to the subject of the verb.


These too are adverbial in relation to the main clause, telling how long Moses was with Yahweh on the mountain.


Heb “the ten words,” though “commandments” is traditional.


The temporal clause is composed of the temporal indicator (“and it happened”), followed by the temporal preposition, infinitive construct, and subjective genitive (“Moses”).


The second clause begins with “and/now”; it is a circumstantial clause explaining that the tablets were in his hand. It repeats the temporal clause at the end.


Heb “in the hand of Moses.”


The temporal clause parallels the first temporal clause; it uses the same infinitive construct, but now with a suffix referring to Moses.


Heb “and Moses.”


The word קָרַן ( qaran ) is derived from the noun קֶרֶן ( qeren ) in the sense of a “ray of light” (see Hab 3:4 ). Something of the divine glory remained with Moses. The Greek translation of Aquila and the Latin Vulgate convey the idea that he had horns, the primary meaning of the word from which this word is derived. Some have tried to defend this, saying that the glory appeared like horns or that Moses covered his face with a mask adorned with horns. But in the text the subject of the verb is the skin of Moses’ face (see U. Cassuto, Exodus , 449).


This clause is introduced by the deictic particle הִנֵּה ( hinneh ); it has the force of pointing to something surprising or sudden.


Heb “and Moses finished”; the clause is subordinated as a temporal clause to the next clause.


The Piel infinitive construct is the object of the preposition; the whole phrase serves as the direct object of the verb “finished.”


Throughout this section the actions of Moses and the people are frequentative. The text tells what happened regularly.


The construction uses a infinitive construct for the temporal clause; it is prefixed with the temporal preposition: “and in the going in of Moses.”


The temporal clause begins with the temporal preposition “until,” followed by an infinitive construct with the suffixed subjective genitive.


The form is the Pual imperfect, but since the context demands a past tense here, in fact a past perfect tense, this is probably an old preterite form without a vav consecutive.


Now the perfect tense with vav consecutive is subordinated to the next clause, “Moses returned the veil….”


Verbs of seeing often take two accusatives. Here, the second is the noun clause explaining what it was about the face that they saw.


Heb “with him”; the referent (the Lord ) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “to do them”; this is somewhat redundant in English and has been simplified in the translation.


This is an adverbial accusative of time.


The word is קֹדֶשׁ ( qodesh , “holiness”). S. R. Driver suggests that the word was transposed, and the line should read: “a sabbath of entire rest, holy to Jehovah” ( Exodus , 379). But the word may simply be taken as a substitution for “holy day.”


Heb “dwelling places”; KJV, ASV “habitations.”


Heb “from with you.”


“Heart” is a genitive of specification, clarifying in what way they might be “willing.” The heart refers to their will, their choices.


The verb has a suffix that is the direct object, but the suffixed object is qualified by the second accusative: “let him bring it, an offering.”


The phrase is literally “the offering of Yahweh”; it could be a simple possessive, “Yahweh’s offering,” but a genitive that indicates the indirect object is more appropriate.


See the note on this phrase in Exod 25:5 .


Heb “and stones.”


Heb “filling.”


Heb “wise of heart”; here also “heart” would be a genitive of specification, showing that there were those who could make skillful decisions.


In Hebrew style all these items are typically connected with a vav ( ו ) conjunction, but English typically uses commas except between the last two items in a series or between items in a series that are somehow related to one another. The present translation follows contemporary English style in lists such as this.


“for” has been supplied.


Heb “man.”


The verb means “lift up, bear, carry.” Here the subject is “heart” or will, and so the expression describes one moved within to act.


Heb “his spirit made him willing.” The verb is used in Scripture for the freewill offering that people brought ().


Literally “the garments of holiness,” the genitive is the attributive genitive, marking out what type of garments these were.


The expression in Hebrew is “men on/after the women,” meaning men with women, to ensure that it was clear that the preceding verse did not mean only men. B. Jacob takes it further, saying that the men came after the women because the latter had taken the initiative ( Exodus , 1017).


Heb “all gold utensils.”


The verb could be translated “offered,” but it is cognate with the following noun that is the wave offering. This sentence underscores the freewill nature of the offerings people made. The word “came” is supplied from v. 21 and v. 22 .


The text uses a relative clause with a resumptive pronoun for this: “who was found with him,” meaning “with whom was found.”


The conjunction in this verse is translated “or” because the sentence does not intend to say that each person had all these things. They brought what they had.


Here “them” has been supplied.


This translation takes “offering” as an adverbial accusative explaining the form or purpose of their bringing things. It could also be rendered as the direct object, but that would seem to repeat without much difference what had just been said.


Here “it” has been supplied.


Heb “wisdom of heart,” which means that they were skilled and could make all the right choices about the work.


The text simply uses a prepositional phrase, “with/in wisdom.” It seems to be qualifying “the women” as the relative clause is.


Heb “and stones of the filling.”


Heb “by the hand of.”


Heb “called by name” (so KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV). This expression means that the person was specifically chosen for some important task (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 342). See the expression with Cyrus in Isa 45:3-4 .


Heb “to set.”


Heb “in every work of thought,” meaning, every work that required the implementation of design or plan.


The expression “wisdom of heart,” or “wisdom in heart,” means artistic skill. The decisions and plans they make are skilled. The expression forms a second accusative after the verb of filling.


The expression “all the work” means “all kinds of work.”


Here “They are” has been supplied.


Heb “doers of all work.”


Heb “designers of designs.”


Heb “wise of [in] heart.”


Heb “wisdom.”


Heb “understanding, discernment.”


The relative clause includes this infinitive clause that expresses either the purpose or the result of God’s giving wisdom and understanding to these folk.


This noun is usually given an interpretive translation. B. Jacob renders the bound relationship as “the holy task” or “the sacred task” ( Exodus , 1019). The NIV makes it “constructing,” so read “the work of constructing the sanctuary.”


The first word of the verse is a perfect tense with vav ( ו ) consecutive; it is singular because it agrees with the first of the compound subject. The sentence is a little cumbersome because of the extended relative clause in the middle.


The verb קָרָא ( qara ’) plus the preposition “to” – “to call to” someone means “to summon” that person.


Here there is a slight change: “in whose heart Yahweh had put skill.”


Or “whose heart was willing.”


In the Hebrew text the infinitive “to do it” comes after “sanctuary”; it makes a smoother rendering in English to move it forward, rather than reading “brought for the work.”


Heb “in the morning, in the morning.”


Heb “a man, a man from his work”; or “each one from his work.”


The construction uses the verbal hendiadys: מַרְבִּים לְהָבִיא ( marbim lÿhavi ’) is the Hiphil participle followed (after the subject) by the Hiphil infinitive construct. It would read, “they multiply…to bring,” meaning, “they bring more” than is needed.


Heb “for the service” (so KJV, ASV).


The last clause is merely the infinitive with an object – “to do it.” It clearly means the skilled workers are to do it.


The verse simply reads, “and Moses commanded and they caused [a voice] to cross over in the camp.” The second preterite with the vav may be subordinated to the first clause, giving the intent (purpose or result).


Heb “voice.”


The verse ends with the infinitive serving as the object of the preposition: “from bringing.”


This part of the sentence comes from the final verb, the Hiphil infinitive – leave over, meaning, have more than enough (see BDB 451 s.v. יָתַר ).


Heb “for all the work, to do it.” sn This lengthy section ( 35:1-36:7 ) forms one of the most remarkable sections in the book. Here there is a mixture of God’s preparation of people to do the work and their willingness to give and to serve. It not only provides insight into this renewed community of believers, but it also provides a timeless message for the church. The point is clear enough: In response to God’s commission, and inspired by God’s Spirit, the faithful and willing people rally to support and participate in the Lord ’s work.


The verb is singular since it probably is referring to Bezalel, but since he would not do all the work himself, it may be that the verbs could be given a plural subject: “they joined.”


The words “the other” have been supplied.


Heb “one.”


Heb “eleven curtains he made them.”


The construction uses the infinitive construct from the verb “to be” to express this purpose clause: “to be one,” or, “so that it might be a unit.”


See the note on this phrase in Exod 25:5 .


There is debate whether the word הַקְּרָשִׁים ( haqqÿrashim ) means “boards” or “frames” or “planks” (see Ezek 27:6 ) or “beams,” given the size of them. The literature on this includes M. Haran, “The Priestly Image of the Tabernacle,” HUCA 36 (1965): 192; B. A. Levine, “The Description of the Tabernacle Texts of the Pentateuch,” JAOS 85 (1965): 307-18; J. Morgenstern, “The Ark, the Ephod, and the Tent,” HUCA 17 (1942/43): 153-265; 18 (1943/44): 1-52.


“Wood” is an adverbial accusative.


The plural participle “standing” refers to how these items will be situated; they will be vertical rather than horizontal (U. Cassuto, Exodus , 354).


Heb “the frame.”


Heb “the one.”


Heb “two hands to the one frame.”


Heb “joined one to one.”


The clause is repeated to show the distributive sense; it literally says, “and two bases under the one frame for its two projections.”


Heb “under the one frame” again.


This is the last phrase of the verse, moved forward for clarity.


This difficult verse uses the perfect tense at the beginning, and the second clause parallels it with יִהְיוּ ( yihyu ), which has to be taken here as a preterite without the consecutive vav ( ו ). The predicate “finished” or “completed” is the word תָּמִּים ( tammim ); it normally means “complete, sound, whole,” and related words describe the sacrifices as without blemish.


Literally “houses”; i.e., places to hold the bars.


The verb is simply “he made” but as in Exod 26:31 it probably means that the cherubim were worked into the curtain with the yarn, and so embroidered on the curtain.


Heb “and their hooks gold.”


The word is “their heads”; technically it would be “their capitals” (so ASV, NAB, NRSV). The bands were bands of metal surrounding these capitals just beneath them. These are not mentioned in Exod 26:37 , and it sounds like the posts are to be covered with gold. But the gradation of metals is what is intended: the posts at the entrance to the Most Holy Place are all of gold; the posts at the entrance to the tent are overlaid with gold at the top; and the posts at the entrance to the courtyard are overlaid with silver at the top (S. R. Driver, Exodus , 387, citing Dillmann without reference).


Or “molding.”


“that he put” has been supplied.


This is taken as a circumstantial clause; the clause begins with the conjunction vav.


Heb “and he made.”


Heb “from/at [the] end, from this.”


The repetition of the expression indicates it has the distributive sense.


The construction is a participle in construct followed by the genitive “wings” – “spreaders of wings.”


“The cherubim” has been placed here instead of in the second clause to produce a smoother translation.


Heb “and their faces a man to his brother.”


Heb “to the atonement lid were the faces of the cherubim.”


The suffixes on these could also indicate the indirect object (see Exod 25:29 ).


Heb “from it”; the referent (“the same piece” of wrought metal) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “the one branch.” But the repetition of “one…one” means here one after another, or the “first” and then the “next.”


Heb “thus for six branches….”


As in Exod 26:35 , the translation of “first” and “next” and “third” is interpretive, because the text simply says “under two branches” in each of three places.


Heb “were from it.”


Heb “it”; the referent (the lampstand) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “from it were its horns,” meaning that they were made from the same piece.


Heb “roof.”


Heb “its walls around.”


Heb “and he made for it border gold around.”


Heb “and he made.”


Heb “for houses.”


Heb “its horns were from it,” meaning from the same piece.


Heb “it”; the referent (the altar) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “south side southward.”


While this verse could be translated as an independent sentence, it is probably to be subordinated as a circumstantial clause in line with Exod 27:10-12 , as well as v. 12 of this passage.


Here the phrase “the hangings were” has been supplied.


The phrase “there were” has been supplied.


The text simply has “their posts ten and their bases ten”; this may be added here as a circumstantial clause with the main sentence in order to make sense out of the construction.


The text simply says “seventy-five feet.”


The word literally means “shoulder.” The next words, “of the gate,” have been supplied here. The east end contained the courtyard’s entry with a wall of curtains on each side of the entry (see v. 15 ).


Heb “from this and from this” (cf, 17:12; 25:19; 26:13; 32:15 ; Josh 8:22, 33 ; 1 Kgs 10:19-20 ; Ezek 45:7 ).


Heb “they were banded with silver.”


This word is different from the word for hangings; it has more of the idea of a screen, shielding or securing the area.


The Hebrew word is פְּקוּדֵי ( pÿqude ), which in a slavishly literal way would be “visitations of” the tabernacle. But the word often has the idea of “numbering” or “appointing” as well. Here it is an accounting or enumeration of the materials that people brought, so the contemporary term “inventory” is a close approximation. By using this Hebrew word there is also the indication that whatever was given, i.e., appointed for the tabernacle, was changed forever in its use. This is consistent with this Hebrew root, which does have a sense of changing the destiny of someone (“God will surely visit you”). The list in this section will also be tied to the numbering of the people.


The same verb is used here, but now in the Pual perfect tense, third masculine singular. A translation “was numbered” or “was counted” works. The verb is singular because it refers to the tabernacle as a unit. This section will list what made up the tabernacle.


Heb “at/by the mouth of.”


The noun is “work” or “service.” S. R. Driver explains that the reckonings were not made for the Levites, but that they were the work of the Levites, done by them under the direction of Ithamar ( Exodus , 393).


Heb “by the hand of.”


These words form the casus pendens , or independent nominative absolute, followed by the apodosis beginning with the vav ( ו ; see U. Cassuto, Exodus , 469).


Heb “and it was.”


Heb “upward.”


The phrase “in all” has been supplied.


Here the word “shekels” is understood; about 45 pounds.


The verb is the infinitive that means “to do, to work.” It could be given a literal rendering: “to work [them into] the blue….” Weaving or embroidering is probably what is intended.


Heb “from it” or the same.


Or “as seals are engraved.”


Or “attached.”


That is, they set in mountings.


The phrase “the number of” has been supplied.


Here “upper” has been supplied.


Here “other” has been supplied.


Heb “homeward side.”


Here “more” has been supplied.


The word is simply “twined” or “twisted.” It may refer to the twisted linen that so frequently is found in these lists; or, it may refer to the yarn twisted. The LXX reads “fine twined linen.” This is not found in the text of Exod 28:33 , except in Smr and LXX.


The words “there was” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.


The infinitive “to minister” is present; “to be used” is supplied from the context.


See the note on this phrase in Exod 25:5 .


Or “shielding” (NIV); NASB “the screening veil.”


Possibly meaning “pure gold lampstand.”


Heb “utensils, vessels.”


The form is the infinitive construct; it means the clothes to be used “to minister” in the holy place.


Or “examined” (NASB, TEV); NCV “looked closely at.”


The deictic particle draws attention to what he saw in such a way as to give the reader Moses’ point of view and a sense of his pleasure: “and behold, they…”


Heb “and Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying.”


Heb “you will raise,” an imperfect of instruction.


Heb “and you will set in order its setting” or “arrange its arrangement.” See 25:29-30 for items that belonged on the table.


Heb “give” (also four additional times in vv. 6-8 ).


Heb “there.”


Heb “and.”


The verb is “bring near,” or “present,” to Yahweh.


The verb is also “bring near” or “present.”


Heb “set up,” if it includes more than the curtain.


Or “shielding” (NIV); Heb “the veil of the covering” (cf. KJV).


Heb uses a cognate accusative construction, “he arranged the arrangement.”


The construction is the infinitive construct with the temporal preposition and the suffixed subjective genitive. This temporal clause indicates that the verb in the preceding verse was frequentative.


This is another infinitive construct in a temporal clause.


In this explanatory verse the verb is a customary imperfect.


The construction uses the Niphal infinitive construct to form the temporal clause.


The imperfect tense in this context describes a customary action.


The clause uses the Niphal infinitive construct in the temporal clause: “until the day of its being taken up.”


Here is another imperfect tense of the customary nuance.


Heb “to the eyes of all”; KJV, ASV, NASB “in the sight of all”; NRSV “before the eyes of all.”


Heb “And he (the Lord ) called ( וַיִּקְרָא , vayyiqra ’) to Moses and the Lord spoke ( וַיְדַבֵּר , vayÿdabber ) to him from the tent of meeting.” The MT assumes “ Lord ” in the first clause but places it in the second clause (after “spoke”). This is somewhat awkward, especially in terms of English style; most English versions reverse this and place “ Lord ” in the first clause (right after “called”). The Syriac version does the same. sn The best explanation for the MT of Lev 1:1 arises from its function as a transition from to . The first clause, “And he (the Lord ) called to Moses,” links v. 1 back to Exod 40:35 , “But Moses was not able to enter into the tent of meeting because the cloud had settled on it and the glory of the Lord had filled the tabernacle” (cf. J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:134). Exod 40:36-38 is a parenthetical explanation of the ongoing function of the cloud in leading the people through the wilderness. Since Moses could not enter the tent of meeting, the Lord “called” to him “from” the tent of meeting.


“When” here translates the MT’s כִּי ( ki , “if, when”), which regularly introduces main clauses in legislative contexts (see, e.g., Lev 2:1, 4; 4:2 , etc.) in contrast to אִם (’ im , “if”), which usually introduces subordinate sections (see, e.g., Lev 1:3, 10, 14; 2:5, 7, 14; 4:3, 13 , etc.; cf. כִּי in Exod 21:2 and 7 as opposed to אִם in vv. 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, and 11 ). sn Lev 1:1-2 serves as a heading for Lev 1-3 (i.e., the basic regulations regarding the presentation of the burnt, grain, and peace offerings) and, at the same time, leads directly into the section on “burnt offerings” in Lev 1:3 . In turn, Lev 1:3-17 divides into three subsections, all introduced by אִם “if” ( Lev 1:3-9, 10-13, and 14-17 , respectively). Similar patterns are discernible throughout Lev 1:2-6:7 [5:26 HT].


Heb “a man, human being” ( אָדָם , ’ adam ), which in this case refers to any person among “mankind,” male or female, since women could also bring such offerings (see, e.g., Lev 12:6-8; 15:29-30 ; cf. HALOT 14 s.v. I אָדָם ); cf. NIV “any of you.”


The verb “presents” is cognate to the noun “offering” in v. 2 and throughout the book of Leviticus (both from the root קרב [ qrb ]). One could translate the verb “offers,” but this becomes awkward and, in fact, inaccurate in some passages. For example, in Lev 9:9 this verb is used for the presenting or giving of the blood to Aaron so that he could offer it to the Lord . The blood is certainly not being “offered” as an offering to Aaron there.


The whole clause reads more literally, “A human being ( אָדָם , ’ adam ), if he brings from among you an offering to the Lord .”


The shift to the second person plural verb here corresponds to the previous second person plural pronoun “among you .” It is distinct from the regular pattern of third person singular verbs throughout the rest of Lev 1-3 . This too labels Lev 1:1-2 as an introduction to all of Lev 1-3 , not just the burnt offering regulations in (J. Milgrom, Leviticus [AB], 1:146; cf. note 3 above).


Heb “from the domesticated animal, from the herd, and from the flock.” It is clear from the subsequent division between animals from the “herd” ( בָּקָר , baqar , in Lev 1:3-9 ) and the “flock” ( צֹאן , tso ’ n ; see Lev 1:10-13 ) that the term for “domesticated animal” ( בְּהֵמָה , bÿhemah ) is a general term meant to introduce the category of pastoral quadrupeds. The stronger disjunctive accent over בְּהֵמָה in the MT as well as the lack of a vav ( ו ) between it and בָּקָר also suggest בְּהֵמָה is an overall category that includes both “herd” and “flock” quadrupeds. sn The bird category ( Lev 1:14-17 ) is not included in this introduction because bird offerings were, by and large, concessions to the poor (cf., e.g., Lev 5:7-10; 12:8; 14:21-32 ) and, therefore, not considered to be one of the primary categories of animal offerings.


Heb “door” (so KJV, ASV); NASB “doorway” (likewise throughout the book of Leviticus). The translation “door” or “doorway” may suggest a framed door in a casing to the modern reader, but here the term refers to the entrance to a tent.


The NIV correctly has “it” in the text, referring to the acceptance of the animal (cf., e.g., RSV, NEB, NLT), but “he” in the margin, referring to the acceptance of the offerer (cf. ASV, NASB, JB). The reference to a “flawless male” in the first half of this verse suggests that the issue here is the acceptability of the animal to make atonement on behalf of the offerer ( Lev 1:4 ; cf. NRSV “for acceptance in your behalf”).


“To make atonement” is the standard translation of the Hebrew term כִּפֶּר , ( kipper ); cf. however TEV “as a sacrifice to take away his sins” (CEV similar). The English word derives from a combination of “at” plus Middle English “one[ment],” referring primarily to reconciliation or reparation that is made in order to accomplish reconciliation. The primary meaning of the Hebrew verb, however, is “to wipe [something off (or on)]” (see esp. the goal of the sin offering, , “to purge” the tabernacle from impurities), but in some cases it refers metaphorically to “wiping away” anything that might stand in the way of good relations by bringing a gift (see, e.g., Gen 32:20 [21 HT], “to appease; to pacify” as an illustration of this). The translation “make atonement” has been retained here because, ultimately, the goal of either purging or appeasing was to maintain a proper relationship between the Lord (who dwelt in the tabernacle) and Israelites in whose midst the tabernacle was pitched (see R. E. Averbeck, NIDOTTE 2:689-710 for a full discussion of the Hebrew word meaning “to make atonement” and its theological significance).


Heb “Then he”; the referent (the offerer) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The LXX has “they” rather than “he,” suggesting that the priests, not the offerer, were to slaughter the bull (cf. the notes on vv. 6 a and 9a).


Heb “the son of the herd”; cf. KJV “bullock”; NASB, NIV “young bull.”


“Splash” (cf. NAB) or “dash” (cf. NRSV) is better than “sprinkle,” which is the common English translation of this verb ( זָרַק , zaraq ; see, e.g., KJV, NASB, NIV, NLT). “Sprinkle” is not strong enough (contrast נָזָה [ nazah ], which does indeed mean “to sprinkle” or “to splatter”; cf. Lev 4:6 ).


Heb “Then he”; the referent (the offerer) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The LXX and Smr have “they” rather than “he” in both halves of this verse, suggesting that the priests, not the offerer, were to skin and cut the carcass of the bull into pieces (cf. the notes on vv. 5 a and 9a).


A few medieval Hebrew mss , Smr, LXX, Syriac, and Tg. Onq. have plural “priests” here (cf. 1:5, 8 ) rather than the MT singular “priest” (cf. NAB). The singular “priest” would mean (1) Aaron, the (high) priest, or (2) the officiating priest, as in Lev 1:9 (cf. 6:10 [3 HT], etc.). “The sons of Aaron” is probably a textual corruption caused by conflation with Lev 1:5, 8 (cf. the remarks in J. E. Hartley, Leviticus [WBC], 13).


A few Hebrew mss , Smr, LXX, Syriac, and Tg. Onq. have the conjunction “and” before “the head,” which would suggest the rendering “and the head and the suet” rather than the rendering of the MT here, “with the head and the suet.” sn “Suet” is the specific term used for the hard, fatty tissues found around the kidneys of sheep and cattle. A number of modern English versions have simplified this to “fat” (e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, CEV, NLT).


Heb “on the wood, which is on the fire, which is on the altar.” Cf. NIV “on the burning wood”; NLT “on the wood fire.”