Literary Criticism and Theology of P - Christus Rex

16
E. CORTESE
ferent 17 . This indicates that the composition is late. Further differences are
between single pericopes, particularly between TM 38,22-31 and the
corresponding LXX 39,1-12, an elenchus of metals, and between TM
39,33-43 and the corresponding LXX 39,13-23, an elenchus of the objects
offered to Moses. Moreover the priestly vestments in MT stand at the end
of the series (39,1b-31), which confirms our thesis about their secondary
character in Ex 28, whereas in the LXX they are at the beginning of the
series (36,8a-38).
3. It is not only 40,33, that constitutes the ending of the work, as Pola
affirms, but also 40,34, the Glory’s inhabitation of the tent, appears to be
the necessary theological conclusion of the primitive account and the first
step in the accomplishment of the promise 29,43ff 18 . The final verses, 35-
38, are probably a later addition.
Conclusion. Thus we reach the probable Pg text of the tent description
and of the essential cult. Nevertheless we admit that each element of the
primitive text in Ex 25ff. could have been amplified later by Ps. The Pg
tent is modeled on the Solomonic temple, and is furnished with the
essential cult objects, viz., the ark with the commandments, the shew-bread
table, the candlestick and the altar of sacrifice. Finally the tent is
surrounded by a court (27,9-19). If 27,20f. and 29,38-42 are the original
ending (or at least an early addition) of the complex, then 29,43-46 fits very
well as the theological conclusion of the primitive account.
The offering (terûmâ) of the material for the construction (25,2ff.), the
kappôret on the ark, the vestments and consecration of the priests and the
incense altar are Ps. Similarly the followings pieces are Ps addition, each
of which is introduced by equivalent formulas: the money offering (another
terûmâ, 30,11-16), the laver, the oil of consecration (22-33) and the
perfume (34-38); the artists (31,1-11) and the shabbat (12-17).
31,18, the giving of the lu∆ôt ha‘edût seems necessarily a Pg piece of
information. Pg do not have any other conclusion of the theophany started
in 24,15-18. If so, we have here another theological element about the
already mentioned edût, which is important in our study on account of its
connection with the law.
17. A look at the critical apparatus in BHS, p. 148, at 36,8 or at the Rahlf’s edition of LXX
at each pericope provides a guide. It seems to me that BHS has to be corrected in 36,8a-31
G, putting there: 38 G instead of 31 G; in 39,38 TM, omitted in LXX, putting there 39,39;
and in 39,43 G, putting there 39,23.
18. See M. Oliva, “Interpretación teológica del culto en la perícopa del Sinaí de la Historia
Sacerdotal”, Bib 49 (1968) 345-354.