Coromandel Baptist Church

Sunday 1 November 2009 Exodus 33:1-34:9; Deut. 9:4-20

God's Saving Presence

The passage before us today comes in the midst of the deep crisis that was unfolding in the camp of Israel at the foot of the mountain. We have seen how Aaron and Israel had turned (with great eagerness) to the syncretistic worship of the golden calf. We have also seen the remarkable work that God had done in Moses, whereby his first response was intercession for the rebellious people who were in his charge. It is salutary to see the extent of this self-abnegation, whereby he would wish himself obliterated from the book of God's favour rather than see the people destroyed (Ex. 32:32). In Deuteronomy 9 we see something of the depth of agony in Moses' heart during this time, as he describes that period of deep testing, and his conversations with the Lord on behalf of rebellious Israel.

While God's judgements were moderated by his mercy (the Levites had struck down the main perpetrators, and God himself had sent a direct judgement into the camp, but the whole nation was not destroyed), the problem of Israel's persistent rebellion had not gone away. Exodus 33:1-3 indicates that God would not personally accompany the people, since their continual provocation of his holy wrath might end in their destruction. A comparison of the theme of the opening verses of this section (Ex. 33:1-4) and the closing verses (Ex. 34:8-9) indicates that the main issue at stake in Moses' intercession is the continued, personal presence of God.

C. H. Spurgeon wrote, ‘The greatest blessing God gives is his presence. If I could choose any of life's blessings, I would certainly not ask for wealth, because wealth cannot bring freedom from pain, concern, or anxiety. I certainly would not ask for popularity, because there is no rest for the world's leaders. My choice and my highest honour, would be to have God with me always' (commenting on Gen. 22:17 in Beside Still Waters). We understand in our own experience the beauty, joy, peace and deeply securing reality of the Presence, even (or perhaps especially) during times of suffering. This has been given eloquent testimony in the history of God's people, from the Scriptures (e.g. Ps. 23 cf. 51:11; Is. 41:10; 2 Tim. 4:16-17; etc.); through the lives of God's children (e.g. many of the letters of Samuel Rutherford, especially those written from exile in Aberdeen), to the expressions of our public worship (e.g. ‘sometimes your living presence is so near'). But this is not the only way in which we need to think of the matter.

It is clear from the biblical record of creation that we were formed to live in the very presence of God. The Hebrew word for ‘presence' and ‘face' is the same. We have been created to live with the face of God smiling upon us, the presence surrounding us. This indeed, is the goal of the new creation (e.g. Rev. 22:4), and is the blessing anticipated in the Aaronic benediction (Numb. 6:22f.). The ejection of our first parents from Eden following their sin was an ejection from the nearer presence of God, but, as Cain's response to his further judgement indicates (Gen. 4:14-16) it was not a complete experience of God's absence. God is, in some sense, still present to all. But his face is clouded by the necessary judgement for sin, and so the ‘nearer' presence, that for which we are created, is not the current experience of fallen humanity. We may live and move in him, but we do not know him as our Father, and so have no proper relationship with him as his children until we experience the forgiveness of sins. Until then, we live in the presence of the absence (as Geoffrey Bingham has called our state).

God's statement in Exodus 33:1-3 is clearly understood as a ‘disastrous' word (Ex. 33:4 ESV), since by it God was indicating that he would not be personally present in the further history of Israel. He would keep his promise to give them the land (by sending ‘an (unnamed) angel/messenger' ahead of them, Ex. 33:2), but would not be personally present. This is not simply (or mainly) in terms of the personal experience of his presence, but in terms of the greater issue of whether he would dwell in their midst in the Tabernacle(Ex. 25:8; 29:45-46 cf. Rev. 21:3-4). Exodus 25-31 has given us a full description of what this dwelling place would be like, and especially as its function as the centre for atonement for Israel's sin. For God not to go with them would be, in effect, to say that the Tabernacle and all that it stood for would be withheld from Israel. In perpetuity they would live under the condemnation of the broken Law, shattered at the foot of the mountain. This, indeed, would be disastrous. We can well imagine what our experience would be like if we removed the gift of forgiveness from our lives and relationships. We would be, and remain, children of wrath, even as the rest. And we would have no fatherly torah to sweeten our lives and to guide our steps.

Exodus 33:7-10 indicates that the presence of God was now removed from the camp. It was as though Israel, again, stood outside of Eden, where Cain stood, looking at the presence from a distance, with the threat of being sent even father out away from the presence in and even more disastrous way. As Moses made his way to the Tent of Meeting the people humbly bowed in worship, stripped of festive garments and ornaments. They knew that their identity as God's special possession, marked by his near and personal presence, hinged on the life of another. They knew that God was still present to Moses, and if they were to have hope of a future together with God, it lay in that relationship.

Exodus 33:12-17 indicates the remarkable nature of the relationship that Moses had been granted with God. The idiomatic statement in Exodus 33:11 ‘the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend' (cf. Deut. 34:10), shows that Moses was indeed God's chosen companion, in and through whom he had purposed to reveal his full heart (cf. John 15:15). The ‘fly on the wall' record of the conversation is astounding. Moses knew that God's wrath on Israel was not his last word, and could not be so, without him proving untrue to himself. He speaks plainly and, in some senses, bluntly. He tells God that he had made certain promises to him and that now he (God) was not even prepared to tell him who would go with them (Ex. 33:12a). Besides (alluding a hitherto unrecorded statement of the Lord to Moses, in Ex. 33:12b), Moses says, in effect, is this any way to treat a man whom you say is a friend? He asks to see God's ways and that God would remember that Israel was his, i.e. God's, people (Ex. 13:13), not Moses'. The response of God to the intercession (which he knew he had worked Moses' heart with great power) is clear and simple, as a direct version of the French translation has it: ‘don't worry, I'll come in person' (Ex. 33:14). God will go with them. The Tabernacle would be erected. Atonement would be provided. He would dwell with them.

Exodus 33:18, then takes us to the next great revelation of the Lord's ways to Moses. When Moses asks to see his glory (though he had been in the very presence of the glory cloud, as also Israel had seen it), he is really asking that the full personal nature of God be revealed. What sort of God is it, who listens to a man, especially one like Moses? What sort of God is it, who is prepared to lay aside his utterly righteous judgments, so that he may still accompany his people who have dealt with him in utter treachery? What sort of God is it, who keeps his covenant promises, when any other god would have abandoned them in an instant?

The revelation of the glory is at the same time the revelation of the goodness of God and the declaration of the full meaning of the Name of Yahweh (Ex. 33:18 cf. 33:19 cf. 34:5). The declaration of the Name takes place in the context of a fresh giving the treasure trove of the Torah (Ex. 34:1, 4) as Moses is again brought up the holy mountain (Ex. 34:3), and Israel is granted the gift of the Tabernacle, as the Lord again moves their hearts to worship him (Ex.35:1ff.).