from God. God appointed him as the Israelites’ leader to bring them out of captivity in Egypt. Since Moses protested that he was slow of speech, God appointed Aaron to speak for him to Pharaoh. For God, Aaron is very much a subordinate but he appears to the Egyptians and Israelites as close to being on a level with Moses. During the Exodus, the Israelites were faced with threatening problems, one after another. The Israelites continually blamed Moses, with Aaron in the background. Moses’ father-in-law warned him he was wearing himself out, hearing law suits all day long, and told him he must find a solution. And God intervenes with the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai. When Moses returns from the mountain he finds that there has been a revolt against God, and therefore against himself, with Aaron very much involved. The revolt is ruthlessly crushed though -- not atypically -- Aaron is coopted. Moses was appointed leader by God and his authority depended on God. Moses was a leader in constant trouble with his own people. He needed further authority that only God could provide. Moses’ leadership depended on his authority which derived directly from God. Hence the Ten Commandments. On the theories about leadership and legislation that I am proposing it is only to be expected that the stress in the commandments would be on the relationship with God. That bolsters Moses’ authority. He had little interest in inter-personal law -- that did not relate to his authority, that was not the ground of the Israelites’ objection to him-- hence the weakness of these provisions. It remains to mention the last provision against coveting, which seems purposeless. Not at all. Moses’ rule was threatened when Aaron coveted his position. The fourth Lecture takes us on to new ground which is nonetheless interrelated. Law is everywhere, even when this is not expressed. It must have authority, though this need not be spelled out. This law need not be that of a state -- in this case it is of a higher
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=