B'shalach question

[rosends]

I actually have a couple but this one needs the most unpacking (and is, probably, the most borderline heretical):

During the events of Bereishet and early Sh'mot, there are only a few "commandments". Adam and Chava are told not to eat a fruit, the 7 law of Bnei Noach are there, along with Pru Urvu (procreate). Pick up not eating the sciatic nerve, circumcision and eventually, the new month and the korban Pesach. For the most part, these laws were followed, at least by the few individuals given these particular laws. Great so far.

The children of Israel become a nation at the dawn of the exodus, being given the law of setting up a calendar and then performing and eating the paschal sacrifice. They followed those laws. Then, off into the wilderness, following God. They get through the Reed Sea after a bit of whining (but no commandments) and then, after more complaints, God gives the Mon. God says "I'm going to test them and see if they can keep some rules, so here goes:" Then MOSES says (Ex 16:19) "Don't leave any over." This does not seem to be a divine commandment.

Some leave some over and it goes bad. Lesson learned. Then on Friday, a double portion falls so Moses, when asked, says that God said "no collecting on Saturday, so snag a bunch o' extra now. It won't go bad this time."

[Not every commentator says that Moses conveyed this important lesson]

Yet SOME go out the next day and look for more. God gets angry and scolds Mo, saying (16:28) "for how long are you (plural) going to refuse to observe my commandments?"

Now, if Moses had NOT told the people, then why is this written in the plural as it is really only on Moses. The people didn't refuse to observe. They just didn't know. If Moses DID tell the people then I still don't see why God gets so angry -- the people have, as far as I can read, not refused to perform any other commandment so the "until when will you continue to refuse" seems a bit of an over-reaction. Either this is the first time Moses didn't convey, or the first time the people didn't follow a commandment.

So why is God so knee-jerk angry all of a sudden?

 

[Rachel Rugelach]

I actually have a couple but this one needs the most unpacking (and is, probably, the most borderline heretical):

During the events of Bereishet and early Sh'mot, there are only a few "commandments". Adam and Chava are told not to eat a fruit, the 7 law of Bnei Noach are there, along with Pru Urvu (procreate). Pick up not eating the sciatic nerve, circumcision and eventually, the new month and the korban Pesach. For the most part, these laws were followed, at least by the few individuals given these particular laws. Great so far.

The children of Israel become a nation at the dawn of the exodus, being given the law of setting up a calendar and then performing and eating the paschal sacrifice. They followed those laws. Then, off into the wilderness, following God. They get through the Reed Sea after a bit of whining (but no commandments) and then, after more complaints, God gives the Mon. God says "I'm going to test them and see if they can keep some rules, so here goes:" Then MOSES says (Ex 16:19) "Don't leave any over." This does not seem to be a divine commandment.

Some leave some over and it goes bad. Lesson learned. Then on Friday, a double portion falls so Moses, when asked, says that God said "no collecting on Saturday, so snag a bunch o' extra now. It won't go bad this time."

[Not every commentator says that Moses conveyed this important lesson]

Yet SOME go out the next day and look for more. God gets angry and scolds Mo, saying (16:28) "for how long are you (plural) going to refuse to observe my commandments?"

Now, if Moses had NOT told the people, then why is this written in the plural as it is really only on Moses. The people didn't refuse to observe. They just didn't know. If Moses DID tell the people then I still don't see why God gets so angry -- the people have, as far as I can read, not refused to perform any other commandment so the "until when will you continue to refuse" seems a bit of an over-reaction. Either this is the first time Moses didn't convey, or the first time the people didn't follow a commandment.

So why is God so knee-jerk angry all of a sudden?

That's a puzzle, all right. Here's something else (related) that has puzzled me: Weren't the Hebrews supposed to gather only as much as what they each could eat? So, if each gathered only as much as he could eat (an omer of manna), and if God knew exactly how much nourishment to send them, then how could there have been any manna left over on that first day? How could the Hebrews have disobeyed God by leaving over any of the manna, if they'd already gathered up their quota for the day? Besides, the excess manna simply melted away, anyway.

Was all this, including God getting angry with Moses for telling the people to collect a double portion in anticipation of Shabbos (when a double portion was specifically sent by God), some kind of test?