Exodus 19:4–8

Here a huge change was taking place in Israel's position. Until then the promise made to them had no conditions. Look over chapters 15 to 19. You will find that God had given them everything freely, even while they complained — the manna, water to drink, the sabbath, and so on. He had also supported them in their fight with Amalek at Rephidim. He reminds them of all this: "You yourselves have seen," He says to them, "how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to Myself; now therefore, if…" This is the first time in God's dealings with Israel that the little word if appears.

These words point to divine power. In the deliverance out of Egypt God jealously shut out every other power. Israel was to learn the grace and might of a Saviour-God.

He brought Israel into the wilderness to have them completely alone with Himself. There He could teach them what He was. As He said later: "You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to Myself." He lets us pass through these trials so that we may fully understand that everything there comes from God. The eagle's wing never tires or fails.

Then we find redemption — the active intervention of God to make good the promises made. We do not now have a promise of something still to come, but actual deliverance, as Exodus 19:4 says. Peter says the same in 1 Peter 3:18: "For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God." The work done to put away sin is so complete that now not one thing stands — morally, I mean — between God and the one who has part in it.

Israel's special privilege was nearness to God: He "brought you to Myself." Compared with all the nations around them, this gave Israel a priestly standing before God.

In the very giving of the law, God spoke these words: "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery." The ways of God are very precious; God must be true to Himself. He did not command obedience so that they might be redeemed, but because they were redeemed.

This is God's emphatic way of putting before them the two things — grace and law. Would they accept everything as the gift of grace, or risk everything on their obedience? "Say to the house of Jacob" should have reminded them of Jacob's failures. They belonged to his house, and they would fail just as he did. "Tell the children of Israel" should have told them in the loudest tones that God gave the name Israel — which means prince — in pure grace.

Here was an immense change taking place in the state of Israel: until then the promise made to them had been unconditional. Look over chapters 15 to 19. You will find that God had given them all things freely, even though they murmured — the manna, water to drink, the sabbath, and so on. He had also sustained them in their fight with Amalek at Rephidim. He recalls all this to their memory. "You have seen," He says to them, "how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to Myself; now therefore, if …" This is the first time, in the relationship between God and Israel, that the little word if appears.

Notice, it is "My voice" and "My covenant." What was the utterance of that "voice"? and what did that "covenant" involve? Had the Lord's voice spoken to lay down the rules of a severe and unbending lawgiver? Not at all. It had spoken to demand freedom for the captives. It had spoken to provide a refuge from the sword of the destroyer, and to make a way for the ransomed to pass over. It had spoken to bring down bread from heaven and to draw water out of the hard rock.

And as to His "covenant," it was one of unmixed grace. It proposed no condition. It made no demands. It put no yoke on the neck, no burden on the shoulder… His word to Abraham was, "I WILL GIVE." The land of Canaan was not to be bought by man's doings. It was given by God's grace.

They could not have forgotten what had already happened. In the short three months since they crossed the Red Sea, they had sinned again and again. Every fresh difficulty had only shown their failure and sin. So if they had gone over their past experience, they would have seen that accepting these new terms would cost them everything. They would surely have said to one another, "We have disobeyed time after time. We fear the same thing might happen again, and then we forfeit everything. No; we must throw ourselves without reserve on that same grace which has saved, led and preserved us." But instead they accepted the condition at once and said, "All that the Lord has spoken we will do." Their past experience counted for nothing… Their own felt helplessness should have made them cling to what God was for them, which is grace. Instead they foolishly offered to make everything depend on what they could be for God, which is the principle of law.

You could translate this expression as "My own possession." God used those very words of His people (see Exodus 19:5), if only they would hear His voice and keep His covenant.

When Abraham's nation appeared, the Lord had chosen them to be His witnesses. He put them in possession of a portion of the earth, to hold it under Him as their Lord. This showed that He, who took whatever portion He pleased, had title to the whole. Israel, established as God's people, should have stayed among the nations yet formally separate from them, reflecting the light of God's glory as King of all the earth.

Because of the people's transgressions under the first covenant, this purpose of God was never realised. That did not cancel it. It still holds good that the Lord "has chosen Jacob for Himself, and Israel for His peculiar treasure" (Ps. 135:4).

Had Israel obeyed the voice of God and kept His covenant, they would have been to God "a peculiar treasure", a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Exodus 19:5-6). They failed. The nation was set aside, and believers are now seen as taking the place of Israel as a witness to God before the world.

Priesthood was what God proposed to Israel. It was what He had in mind in connection with redemption... This was His original thought for them, and He held to it all through, although it could not be carried out then. In Christianity the redeemed are in fact priests, as the apostle to the Jewish people shows. "I brought you to Myself," fully realised, is priesthood in at least one of its essential characters: the ability to draw near to God. "The priests who come near to the LORD" (Ex. 19:22) is one of the earliest titles describing them.

For this, holiness was an absolute requirement. A "kingdom of priests" implies a "holy nation." And so in Israel the official nearness was only outward, because the holiness was so largely outward. God was, as we know, teaching spiritual truths by means of outward representation. In Christianity we have the substance of these shadows.

Here was an immense change taking place in the state of Israel: until then the promise made to them had been unconditional. If you look over chapters 15 to 19, you will find that God had given them all things freely, even despite their murmurings — the manna, water to drink, the sabbath, and so on. He had also sustained them in their fight with Amalek at Rephidim. He recalls all this to their memory, and then adds: "now therefore, if…" This is the first time in the relationship between God and Israel that the little word if appears.

Notice, it is "my voice" and "my covenant." What did that voice say? Had it made itself heard to lay down the rules and regulations of a severe and unbending law-giver? By no means. It had spoken to demand freedom for the captives, and to provide a refuge from the sword of the destroyer. It had spoken to make a way for the ransomed to pass over, to bring down bread from heaven, and to draw water out of the hard rock. These were the gracious, clear words of the LORD's voice, right up to the moment when "Israel camped before the mount."

Israel was not willing to take this blessed position. Instead of rejoicing in God's "holy promise," they made the most presumptuous vow that human lips could utter. All the people answered together and said, "All that the LORD has spoken we will do." This was bold language. They did not even say "we hope to do" or "we will try to do." That would have expressed some measure of self-distrust. But no; they took the most absolute ground.

Israel never became a "kingdom of priests" under the law. The choice of Aaron and his family afterwards shows this fully. The people as a body were shut out of the priesthood. For anyone not of Aaron's line, entering the priestly office meant death.

It is a clear allusion to Exodus 19. It follows the Hebrew idiom in the true reading: not exactly "kings and priests" here, but "a kingdom, priests." There is of course this essential difference. There it was only an offer, conditional on Israel's legal obedience. Here grace has given us the position.

In that day Israel will stand in priestly nearness to God, compared with other nations. At Sinai He said, "If you will obey My voice… you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests" (Ex. 19:6). This has never yet been realised. In Hosea 4:6 we hear the voice of Israel's indignant God: "I reject you from being a priest to me." But in the day of kingdom-glory, "you shall be called the priests of the LORD; they shall speak of you as the ministers of our God" (Isa. 61:6).

There are two things in the message which the Lord commissioned Moses to carry to the people. First, He reminds them of what He had done for them. That reminder should have taught them how helpless they were, and that all their resources were in God. "You yourselves have seen," He says, "what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to Myself." … Then, secondly, He makes a proposal. "Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, you shall be My treasured possession among all peoples." … But now, to test them, He says: "Until now I have done everything for you. Now I propose to make My continued favour depend on your own works."

Notice, it is "My voice" and "My covenant." What had that "voice" been saying? And what did that "covenant" involve? Had the Lord's voice spoken to lay down the rules and regulations of a severe and unbending lawgiver? By no means. It had spoken to demand freedom for the captives. It had spoken to provide a refuge from the sword of the destroyer. It had spoken to make a way for the ransomed to pass over, to bring down bread from heaven, and to draw water out of the hard rock.

It proposed no condition — it made no demands — it put no yoke on the neck, no burden on the shoulder. … His word to Abraham was, "I WILL GIVE." The land of Canaan was not to be bought by man's doing, but given by God's grace.

And Moses faithfully carried out his mission. He "called the elders of the people and set before them all these words that the LORD had commanded him" (v. 7). Surely such a message would produce deep searching of heart. They could not have forgotten their own record. In the short three months since they crossed the Red Sea, they had sinned again and again. Every fresh difficulty had only exposed their failure and sin. If they had gone back over that past, they would have seen that accepting these new terms meant losing everything. They would say to one another, "We have disobeyed time after time, and we fear the same thing might happen again, and then we forfeit everything."

He proposes a condition to them: if they obeyed His voice, they should be His people. The people did not know themselves. They should have said, "We are bound to obey, but we dare not place ourselves under such a condition. It would risk our blessing — no, it would make sure of losing it." Instead, they undertake to do all that the Lord had spoken. The blessing now took the form of dependence, like Adam's, on the faithfulness of man as well as of God.

To see the difference between law and grace, compare verses 4 and 5 of this chapter with 1 Peter 2:9. In Exodus the people were to be "a treasured possession," "a kingdom of priests," "a holy nation," but only if they truly obeyed God's voice. Peter reminds Christians of Jewish background what they are, without any "if." They are "a royal priesthood," "a holy nation," "a people for His own possession" — almost the same three things as in Exodus. But they are a fourth thing that Exodus never names. They are "a chosen race," and that made a difference of immense importance. They were a new generation of God's choosing — a born-again people.

Law can only say, "Do and live," whereas grace says, "Live and do."

God brought the people out of Egypt in grace, and they stood in grace until they came to Sinai. But there they came under the covenant of works, and from that day everything changed. They came under law with a little grace added, or none of them would have left Sinai alive.

This was bold language. They did not even say, "we hope to do," or "we will try to do." That would have shown some distrust of themselves. But no; they took the most absolute ground: "We will do." And this was not the language of a few proud, self-confident people who dared to set themselves apart from the whole congregation. No; "all the people answered together."

They made this promise before they had heard what God required of them. How little they knew their own hearts! Moses took their answer back to the Lord.

The people accepted the terms of the covenant offered them, and it was certainly their duty to do so. But they went further. They declared that they were able to obey God's commands. In the light of their recent rebellions, that was without doubt a most serious misjudgement of human power.

If they had valued grace, that thing more precious than words can say, they would all have cried out with one heart: "Lord, do not put such terms to us; do not lay such responsibility on us. We dare not place ourselves under such conditions. We would surely lose our blessing. Your grace, O Lord, is our only hope as sinners." But no, they took it on themselves to do all that the Lord had spoken.

This was a very marked change. The One who had just said, "I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to Myself," now wraps Himself in a thick cloud and says, "set bounds to the people round about." The sweet tones of grace and mercy give way to the thunder and lightning of the fiery mountain. Man had dared to talk of his own poor doings in the presence of God's magnificent grace. Israel had said, "we will do," and now they must be kept at a distance, so that everyone may see plainly what they are able to do.

They promised this in Exodus 19:8, before the law was given. Now that God had given it, they repeat their promise. In doing so they show us that they knew nothing of their own sinfulness and weakness. But God gave the law so that these painful facts would come to light.

Jeremiah follows. He predicts that these new things will rest not on the old covenant of law but on a new covenant of grace. Read Jeremiah 31:31-34 and notice how "I will" appears again and again, rather than the "If you will" of Exodus 19:8. In this new covenant God acts according to His own thoughts and purposes in grace, based on the work of Christ.

The very nature of a vow is that it assumes the ability to keep it. And where is man's ability? A man who is bankrupt might as well write a cheque on the bank, as a helpless sinner make a vow. A man who makes a vow denies the truth about his own nature and condition.