John Calvin Commentary Exodus 24:5

"And he sent young men of the children of Israel, who offered burnt-offerings, and sacrificed peace-offerings of oxen unto Jehovah." — Exodus 24:5 (ASV)

And he sent young men of the children of Israel. He either means that they were the sacrificial attendants (victimarios), by whose hands the victims were killed, or that some were chosen who might be active and strong to drag the oxen to the altar. The tribe of Levi was not yet consecrated; whereas the word used for “offering,”³¹⁰ is only applied to the priests, where a distinction is marked between the Levites and the rest of the people. The first meaning is therefore the most suitable.

We have stated elsewhere that the³¹¹ sacrifices of prosperities were designed as acts of thanksgiving; and yet they were not only expressions of gratitude, but prayers were also mixed with them in supplication for good success. This offering, however, included a ratification of the Covenant, as appears immediately afterwards. For, to increase the sanctity and security of covenants, they have in all ages, and even³¹² among heathen nations, been accompanied by sacrifices. To this end Moses, after the victims were slain, pours half the blood upon the altar and keeps half in basins to sprinkle the people, so that by this³¹³ symbol the Covenant might be ratified, of which he was the mediator and surety.

Paul, alluding to this custom, says that he would rejoice if he were offered upon the sacrifice and service of their faith whom he had gained for Christ (Philippians 2:17); and he uses the word σπένδεσθαι, which³¹⁴ is primarily applied to covenants. But the case of this sacrifice was peculiar, for God desired the Jews to be reminded of the one solid confirmation of the Covenant, which He made with them, as if He had openly shown that it would then only be ratified and effectual when it should be sealed with blood. And this the Apostle (Hebrews 9:19) carefully takes into consideration when he says that after the Law had been declared, Moses sprinkled both the book and all the people with blood. For, although there is no express mention here made of the book, the Apostle does not unreasonably include it under the word “altar.” He also alludes to another kind of sacrifice, treated of in Numbers 19:5, and therefore mentions the scarlet-wool and hyssop.

The sum is that the blood was, as it were, the medium by which the covenant was confirmed and established, since the altar, as the sacred seat of God, was bathed with half of it, and then the residue was sprinkled over the people. From this we gather that the covenant of gratuitous adoption was made with the ancient people to eternal salvation, since it was sealed with the blood of Christ in type and shadow.

Now, if this doctrine holds true under the Law, it must certainly hold a place with us now. Therefore, so that God’s promises may always maintain their power and certainty, let this sealing be constantly kept before us. Let us remember that the blood of Christ was therefore once shed that it might engrave upon our hearts the covenant by which we are called to the hope of the kingdom of heaven. For this reason, Christ in the Holy Supper commends His blood as the seal of the New Covenant. Indeed, whenever we take the sacred books into our hands, the blood of Christ ought to occur to our minds, as if the whole³¹⁵ of its sacred instruction were written with it; for it is obvious that Christ compares the figure with the truth which was manifested in Himself, to which also the admonition of the Apostle, which I have just quoted, refers.

We must now carefully observe the course of the proceeding. First, Moses states that he read the book before the people; then he adds that the people themselves embraced the covenant proposed to them. Finally, he relates that when the people had professed their obedience, he sprinkled the blood, not without adding his testimony, and that in a loud voice.

The context here shows us the true and genuine nature of the Sacraments, together with their correct and proper use. For unless doctrine precedes them to be a connecting link between God and man, they will be empty and delusive signs, however honorable may be the praises bestowed on them.

But since mutual consent is required in all agreements, so, when God invites His people to receive grace, He stipulates that they should give Him the obedience of faith, so as to answer, Amen. Thus, nothing can be more preposterous than the invention of silent sacraments, such as those childish charms which the Papists hawk about as sacraments, without the word of God. At the same time, it must be added that the word, which gives life to the Sacraments, is not an obscure whisper, like that magical incantation of the Papists when they blow on the bread and the cup (which they call the consecration). Rather, it is a clear and distinct voice which is addressed to men and is able to produce faith in them. Thus Moses here speaks aloud to the people and reminds them that God enters into covenant with them.

Now, although the profession here recorded might seem to be derived from too great confidence when the people declare that they will do whatever God commands, still it contains nothing amiss or reprehensible, since the faithful among them promised nothing except in reliance on the help of God; and gratuitous reconciliation, if they should sin, was included in it. This was not indeed the proper office of the Law, to incline men’s hearts to the obedience of righteousness; similarly, under the Law there was no true and real expiation to wash away the guilt of sins. Instead, the office of the Law was to lead men step by step to Christ, that they might seek from Him pardon and the Spirit of regeneration. It is, therefore, unquestionable that the elect of God embraced by faith the substance and truth of the shadows when they voluntarily offered themselves to keep the covenant of God.

Then went up Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu. This is how I connect the history: Moses, having finished reading the Law and having sprinkled the blood, took with him the companions pointed out to him by God, and having left the people, went with these men some distance up the mountain. I have thought it well to touch briefly on this, because some translators render the verb improperly in the pluperfect tense, as if he and the elders had already³¹⁶ been separated from the people; but this is very absurd, for it was necessary for him to remain in the plain to address the people.

There the glory of God was seen more closely by the elders, so that they might later relate to the people what they had seen, and so that the matter, being proved by competent witnesses, might gain unquestionable credibility. For this reason he says that they saw the God of Israel, not in all His reality and greatness, but in accordance with the dispensation which He thought best, and which He accommodated to human capacity.

The form of God is indeed nowhere described, but the pediment (basis) on which He stood was like a work of sapphire.³¹⁷ The word לבנת, libnath, some translate as stone, others as whiteness, others as brick. Whichever sense one prefers to take it in, it has little effect on the main point of the matter.

For the color of a sapphire was presented to them to elevate their minds by its brightness above the world; and therefore it is immediately added that its appearance was like that of the clear and serene sky. By this symbol they were reminded that the glory of God is above all heavens. Since in His very footstool there is such exquisite and surpassing beauty, something still more sublime must be thought of Himself, and such as would overwhelm all our senses with admiration. Thus the throne of God was shown to Ezekiel as the appearance of a sapphire-stone (Ezekiel 1:26; Ezekiel 10:1).

Finally, on the footstool Infinite Majesty appeared, striking the elders with astonishment, so that they humbled themselves with greater reverence before the incomprehensible glory of God.

³¹⁰ “Ce qui n’est attribuE qu’a ceux qui ont la charge speciale de sacrifier;” which is only applied to those who have the special charge of sacrificing. — Fr..

³¹¹ “Peace-offerings.” — A..V. Vide . Vide ante, , vol. 2, pp. 139 and and 333..

³¹² “In all solemn leagues and covenants, they sacrificed to the gods by whom they swore, offering for the most part either a boar, ram, or goat; sometimes all three; sometimes bulls or lambs instead of any of them. Hence comes the phrase, ὄρκια τέμνειν; in Latin, ferire foedus, i e., to make a covenant.” — Potter’s Arch. Graeca., Book 2. ch. 6. For the same custom, as existing among the Romans, see Liv. 1. 24. Virg. Aen. 8. 641.

³¹³ “Par tel sacrement.” — Fr..

³¹⁴ See C in loco. Calvin Soc. edit., p. 74, where, however, I question whether his statement on the word σπουδὰς is correct.

³¹⁵ “Comme si le Loy, et les Prophetes, et l’Evangile en estoyent escrits;” as if the Law and the Prophets, and the Gospel were written with it. — Fr..

³¹⁶ “Devant que sacrifier;” before sacrificing. — Fr..

³¹⁷ Ainsworth, “A work of sapphire-brick. Heb., brick of sapphire: whereby is meant sapphire-stone, hewed like brick, wherewith the place under Him was paved. So also the Greek translateth it. Or, it may be Englished, ., brick of sapphire: whereby is meant sapphire-stone, hewed like brick, wherewith the place under Him was paved. So also the Greek translateth it. Or, it may be Englished, of whiteness of sapphire, , i..e., of white sapphire-stone: for ., of white sapphire-stone: for brick hath the name in Hebrew of whiteness. The Chaldee translateth, hath the name in Hebrew of whiteness. The Chaldee translateth, under the throne of his glory was, was, as it were, , a work of precious, , stone.”.”