x., Numbers xvi., xvii., incense is offered on censers, of which each priest possesses one.  The coals are taken from the altar of burnt-offering (Numbers xvii. 11; [A.V. xvi. 46]), which is plated with the censers of the Korahite Levites (xvii. 3, 4; [A.V. xvi. 38, 39]); whoever takes fire from any other source, incurs the penalty of death (Leviticus x. 1 seq.).  The altar of incense is everywhere unknown here; the altar of burnt-offering is the only altar, and, moreover, is always called simply ‘the altar’, as for example, even in Exodus xxvii., where it would have been specially necessary to add the qualifying expression.  Only in certain later portions of the Priestly Code does the name altar of burnt-offering occur, viz, in those passages which do recognise the altar of incense.  In this connection the command of Exodus xxvii. as compared with the execution in Exodus xxxviii. is characteristic.

The golden altar in the sanctuary is originally simply the golden table; the variation of the expression has led to a doubling of the thing.  Ezekiel does not distinguish between the table and the altar in the temple, but uses either expression indifferently.  For he says (xii.21 seq. ):  “Before the adytum stood what looked like an altar of wood, three cubits in height, two cubits in length and breadth, and it had projecting corners, and its frame and its walls were of wood; this is the table which is before the Lord.”  In like manner he designates the service of the priests in the inner sanctuary as table-service (xliv.16); table is the name, altar the function. 1

**************************************** 1.  Malachi, on the other hand, designates the so-called altar of burnt-offering as a table. ****************************************

In 1Kings vii. 48, it is true that the golden altar and the golden table are mentioned together.  It seems strange, however, that in this case the concluding summary mentions one piece of furniture more—­ and that piece one of so great importance—­than the preceding detailed description; for in the latter only the preparation of the golden altar is spoken of, and nothing is said of the golden table (vi. 20-22).  As matters stand, nothing is less improbable than that some later transcriber should have interpolated the golden table in vii. 48, regarding it, in accordance with the Pentateuch, as distinct from the golden altar, and therefore considering its absence as an omission.  From other considerations also, it is clear that the text of the whole chapter is in many ways corrupt and interpolated.