EXODUS – CHAPTER THIRTY-TWO

Verses 1-6:

The people saw Moses ascend into the cloud which enveloped Mount Sinai (Ex 24:17). Days went by, and there was no sign of him. They did not know what had happened to their leader. He might have been slain on the mountain. They grew impatient with waiting. They wanted to be on their way, but they wanted a visible token of divine leadership to go before them.

Moses had instructed that in his absence, the people were to consult with Aaron regarding any emergency (Ex 24:14). No mention here is made of Hur, who was co-regent with Aaron.

Israel demanded of Aaron, “Make us gods” (literally, a god). It is likely that they did not intend to forsake Jehovah, but merely to serve Him under a visible symbol.

Aaron instructed that they “break off” parak, rend or remove, the gold earrings of the wives, women, and sons (Ge 35:4), and bring them to him. Some suggest that Aaron secretly hoped they would not part with thier valuable jewelry, and he would not have to do as they asked. There seems to be no basis for this attempt to justify Aaron’s attitude and actions, however.

Aaron remembered the Egyptian god Apis. This god represented the powers of nature, in the form of a bull. The principle seat of Apis worship was in the very region in Egypt where Israel had lived for generations.

Aaron melted the gold, and formed an image. He than used an engraving tool to finish the image, made in the likeness of a calf or bull. He set this calf of gold before the people, and proclaimed, “This is your god (elohim), O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt.”

Verse 5 implies that Aaron intended this image to be a symbol of Jehovah. He proclaimed the following day as a festival in honor of this event. But in this festival, the people indulged in the licentious practices of drunkenness and sexual immorality which were common to the worship of pagan gods (1Co 10:7).

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

1 And when the people saw that Moses. In this narrative we perceive the detestable impiety of the people, their worse than base ingratitude, and their monstrous madness, mixed with stupidity. For their sakes Moses had been carried up above the state of terrestrial life, that he might receive the injunctions of his mission, and that his authority might be beyond the reach of controversy. They perversely declare that they know not what has become of him, nay, they speak contemptuously of him as of a person unknown to them. It is for this that Stephen severely blames them, (324) This is that Moses (he says) whom your fathers rejected, though he was the minister of their salvation. (Act 7:35.) They confess that he had been their deliverer, yet they cannot tolerate his absence for a little time, nor are they affected with any reverence towards him, unless they have him before their eyes. Moreover, (325) although God offered Himself as if present with them by day and by night in the pillar of fire, and in the cloud, they still despised so illustrious and lively an image of His glory and power, and desire to have Him represented to them in the shape of a dead idol. For what could they mean by saying, “make us gods which shall go before us?” Could they not see the pillar of fire and the cloud? Was not God’s paternal solicitude abundantly conspicuous every day in the manna? Was he not near them in ways innumerable

Yet, accounting as nothing all these true, and sure, and manifest tokens of God’s presence, they desire to have a figure which may satisfy their vanity. And this was the original source of idolatry, that men supposed that they could not otherwise possess God, unless by subjecting Him to their own imagination. Nothing, however, can be more preposterous; for since the minds of men and all their senses sink far below the loftiness of God, when they try to bring Him down to the measure of their own weak capacity, they travesty Him. In a word, whatever man’s reason conceives of Him is mere falsehood; and nevertheless, this depraved longing can hardly be repressed, so fiercely does it burst out. They are also influenced by pride and presumption, when they do not hesitate to drag down His glory as it were from heaven, and to subject it to earthly elements. We now understand what motive chiefly impelled the Israelites to this madness in demanding that a figure of God should be set before them, viz., because they measured Him by their own senses. Wonderful indeed was their stupidity, to desire that a God should be made by mortal men, as if he could be a god, or could deserve to be accounted such who obtains his divinity at the caprice of men. Still, it is not probable that they were so absurd as to desire a new god to be created for them; but they call “gods” by metonymy those outward images, by looking at which the superstitious imagine that God is near them. And this is evident from the fact, that not only the noun but the verb also is in the plural number; for although they were satisfied with one God, still they in a manner cut Him to pieces by their various representations of Him. Nevertheless, however they may deceive themselves under this or that pretext, they still desire to be creators of God.

Those who suppose that confusion is implied by the word “delayed,” are, in my opinion, mistaken; for, although the word בשש, boshesh, with its third radical doubled, is derived from בוש, bush, which means to be ashamed, still it is clear from Jud 5:28, that it is used simply for to delay, where it is said, in the address of the mother of Sisera, “Why (326) does his chariot delay (or defer) to come?”

Hence we may understand that hypocrites so fear God as that religion vanishes from their hearts, unless there be some task-master ( exactor) standing by them to keep them in the path of duty. They duly obeyed Moses and reverenced his person; but, because they were only influenced by his presence, as soon as they were deprived of it they ceased to fear God. Thus, whilst Joshua was alive, and the other holy Judges, they seemed to be faithful in the exercise of piety, but when they were dead, they straightway relapsed into disobedience.

(324) It will be seen that C. does not give the actual words, but the sense of Stephen.

(325) “Mais qui pis est;” but what is worse. — Fr.

(326) “Why is his chariot so long in coming?” — A. V.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES.

Exo. 32:1. Zeh Mosheh hish = this Moses the man]. The Israelites, thinking that the man who brought them out of the land of Egypt had acted the part of a truant, and that they ought to fill up his place by substituting, not another man, but a deity, as a more reliable guide. Extravagant and foolish as the idea was, it is not evident that they contemplated wittingly to defy Gods commandment (Exo. 20:4), by demanding of Aaron to make them gods. That such was Aarons view of the case is quite clear from the words in which he defends his conduct (Exo. 32:23). When, however, they beheld the image, then all the evils with which the worship of it in Egypt, the land of their birth, was associated in their minds, seized upon their imaginations with such power that they lost all self-control, and they said, These are thy gods, O Israel, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt (Exo. 32:4). They were maddened with delight, and when Aaron saw it (Exo. 32:5), i.e., the effect the image of the golden calf had produced upon the people, he perceived that it was too late to reason with them; and, having weakly yielded to their first sinful demand, he had now no choice, probably, to prevent a mutiny or to save his life, if he manifested any signs of disapproval of their conduct, so he built them an altar before it, viz., the golden calf; and perhaps also, in his endeavour to stave off the evil of an idolatrous celebration, he proclaimed a feast to the Lord (= Jehovah) for the following day, and that too with the hope, by the mention of the name of Jehovah, of the people calling to mind His commandment against all image worship, and so affording them time to reflect upon it over night, and of Moses returning in the meanwhile.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Exo. 32:1-7

IDOLATRY

In consequence of the absence of Moses in the mount, the children of Israel are betrayed into an act of gross idolatry. Let us observe

I. The crime of which they were guilty. That crime was not altogether forsaking God. It is quite evident that these Jews intended to recognise Jehovah in these emblems or this emblem. They wanted a visible representation of Jehovah, and Aaron made the calf as such. Their crime was in making any such visible representation; it was a culpable breach of the second commandment of the covenant words (Exo. 20:4). But is there not ever in us this tendency to obscure our vision of God by resting in natural things? The passion for gods in the text is a passion still active in our fallen nature. Is not much of the nature-worship of our age a similar sin? Men talk of honouring God in His works, but really they allow the works of God to hide the personal, spiritual, holy God of Revelation. Is not the worldliness of the age a similar sin? Do we not often think so much of human love, of material wealth, of social honour, of sensational pleasure, that we but feebly realise our spiritual nature, and our dependence upon a spiritual duty for the satisfaction of life? Is not much of the ritualism of the Church in our age a similar sin? We multiply forms and ceremonies, and attach to them a supreme importance. It is all the visible Church until you can hardly see the spiritual Jesus. God is a Spirit, and is to be loved, worshipped, served as such; but there is in us a sad tendency to sink into the worldly, the carnal, the material, and to forget the true and the living God.

II. The inexcusableness of this crime. It was regarded, as this chapter fully shows, as a great and unpardonable crime, and very dreadful was the punishment which followed it. Here we learn

1. That the expensiveness of such idolatry does not excuse it. They gave their golden earringsthey sacrificed wealth and pride. Will-worship, creature-worship, is often costly, but this does not condone it (1Co. 13:3).

2. That the superior nature of the object which comes between us and God does not excuse it. The god was gold. Thine may be no vulgar God,nature, humanitybut however noble in itself may be the object which eclipses the vision of God, the sin is none the less.

3. That the beauty of the object does not lessen the fault. The calf was fashioned with a graving toolartistically correct. A Church which comes between me and the spiritual Jesus, may be perfect in its architecture, pictures, robes, music, &c., but it is none the less a curse for that.

4. That religious ceremonies going with the idolatry does not justify it, Exo. 32:5-6.

ILLUSTRATIONS

BY
REV. WILLIAM ADAMSON

Idol-Idiosyncrasy. Exo. 32:1-35.

(1.) Material idolatry has passed away among civilised nations in its literal import. As Macmillan says, the old worship of stocks and stones is now impossible among a professedly Christian people. But although the outward mode has passed away, the essence of the temptation remains the same. Human society is changed, but human nature is unchanged. The impulse which led Israel to seek the golden calf is as strong as ever, and images are set up and worshipped now as fantastic as any pagan fetish or joss. For what is idolatry! Is it not in its essence the lowering of the idea of God and of Gods nature, and the exaltation of a dead image above a mans own living spirit! Is not an idol whatever is loved more than God, whatever is depended upon for happiness and help independent of God?

(2.) Sooner or later, as Moses pounded the calf and gave the Israelites the dust to drink in punishment of their idolatry, will all such moral idolaters have to drink the dust of their idols. Our sin will become our punishment, our idols our scourges. God is a jealous God, and every soul that turns aside from His love to the lying vanities of the world must drink the bitter water of jealousy, filled with the dust of the bruised and mutilated idols of spiritual idolatry: This shall ye have at My hand, ye shall lie down in sorrow.

Thou art the man within whose hearts deep cell

All evil sleeping lies;

Lust, in a dark hour waking, breaks the spell,

And straightway there arise

Monsters of evil thoughts and base desire.

Greok.

Israels Insurrection! Exo. 32:1-6. SCENE

I.The Camp of Insurrection.

1. Infidelity of the people (Exo. 32:1) may be illustrated by the glacier and crevasse, and of Aaron by the story of Arnold Winkelreid.

2. Idolatry of the people (Exo. 32:4). Breaking the law may be illustrated by the familiar figure of a chain-link which holds a person up, being broken, or by Samuel and Sauls disobedience as to sacrifices; and making the calf by the homely idea of the Great Eastern having a wooden engineer to pilot her over the ocean waves. Mosaic Intercession! Exo. 32:7-14. SCENE II.The Mount of Indignation.

1. Indignation of Jehovah (Exo. 32:7) at Israels folly may be illustrated by the story of a father going to New Zealand, leaving his children with certain commands till his return: or by the natural figure of a lamp hung up by a chain being broken in its fall.

2. Intercession of Moses (Exo. 32:14) for Israels forgiveness, with his pleas of Gods

(1) perfections,
(2) partiality towards,
(3) purpose in, and

(4) promises to Israel, may find simple illustrations, if any are needed, in a mothers intercession with the father for her offending boys pardon; or by the Queens intercession at Calais with her husband, King Edward, on behalf of its citizens. Levitical Intervention! Exo. 32:15-29. SCENE III.The Valley of Intervention.

1. Indignity (Exo. 32:15) resented by breaking of stone tablets, and by causing Israel to drink of powdered wood and gold. Allusions might be appropriately made here to Dagon, Achan, Saul, or the story of the Chinese boy and the gods.

2. Integrity (Exo. 32:25) of the Levites contrasts with the fear, folly, and falsehood of Aaron. Apt references might be found in the histories of Melancthon and Luther, and in the noble tale of the boy stopping the leak in the Dutch dyke.

Rain and sunshine doth combine,

One side dark, the other bright;

Thus, by natures grand design,

In one rainbow both unite.

Maguire.

Self-will! Exo. 32:1.

(1.) It was but a little boy crying, as he limped towards his father on the rough common. Yet what a lesson it taught! His father had promised to take him to a lovely scene across the stony waste if he would promise to be led by the hand, and not be rebellious or impatient. And he had promised, as boys will promise, and failed, as boys will fail. Hardly had he set out than he began to murmur at the length of the walk. When the father seriously reminded him of the promise to obey and exercise patience, he was silent and submissive. But presently he let go of the strong, wise hand, turned aside from the path, struck his foot against a rugged rock, and straightway cried out with pain. The scar remained till death.
(2.) Israel was Gods wayward, self-willed child. They thought that they could do without the Fathers hand, though they had promised to be guided by Him, who was able and ready to conduct them to the green fields of Eden. And so they wander aside, stumble against the rough flints, experience the misery of self-sufficiency and disobedience, and learn that the way of transgressors is hard. On Israels national life the scar was visible, even to the hour when Titus shivered its massive structure.

Therefore, O man, remember that thy heart
Will shed its pleasures as thine eye its tears;
And both leave loathesome furrows.

Bailey.

Sinful Self-Sacrifice! Exo. 32:2-3. Whale says, People often spend more in superstition than Christians for the truth. To gratify self they do not mind making many sacrifices. To have his golden calf of ambition or popular adulation the man of the world will freely scatter largesses on all sides with bounteous hand. With what lavish magnificence did the ancient heathen adorn their temples of superstition! With what profuse prodigality will some modern men of science, or some wealthy student of atheisim, spend his riches to gratify his selfishit may be sinfulmotives! Who amongst us is willing to do as much for Jesus as these Israelites did to have self gratified in the golden calf? At the present time, in our own country, a man of great wealth spends his whole fortune in the issue of infidel tracts and pamphlets, which are disseminated broadcast over the world. Atheism is his idol-deity. He worships the golden calf of blank atheism. He devotes his immense riches to its exaltation. There are few Christians willing to make such supreme sacrifices for their God.

I gave My life for thee,

My precious blood I shed,

That thou mightst ransomed be,

And quickened from the dead.

I gave My life for thee;
What hast thou given for Me?

Havergal.

Sins Deceit! Exo. 32:3-6. There is a beautiful picture of a female with a sweet but melancholy expression of countenance. She kneels on the top of the rock, and is singing to a harp, which she strikes with her graceful fingers. Below is a boat with two men in itthe one old and the other young. The boat is rapidly hearing the rocks, but both the men are utterly unconscious of their danger. The old man has ceased to hold the helmthe young man has dropped the oars. Both are fondly stretching out their hands towards the deceiving spiritwholly entranced with her song. A few moments more, and their boat will be a wreck. Israel was thus captivated. Lured on by the weird melody of a craving for visible worship, they were now on the wide river borne onwards toward the jagged rocks of destruction.

The fruit of sin, goodly and fair to view,
Deceives us in its beauty. Pluckd, it turns,
To ashes on our lips.

Webster.

Bull-Worship! Exo. 32:4.

(1.) From the earliest times the Egyptians adopted certain animals as representatives of their deities. The symbolism of these selections has been entirely lost, inasmuch as the deities were lost sight of in the creatures by whom they were symbolised. It was so with Apis-adoration: an animal most sacred in the later age of Egypt. It is supposed that the Israelites borrowed their idolatrous idea of the calf from this form of bull-worship, which they had observed in Egypt.
(2.) Sir Gardner Wilkinson, however, says that they borrowed their notion of the golden calfnot from Apis-adoration, but from the worship of Mnevis. This was the sacred ox of Heliopolis. At his worship were offerings, dancing, and rejoicings. And it is supposed that the Israelites adopted these; or rather, resumed them as religious revelries in which they had joined during their sojourn in Egypt. Satan

Moved Israel and their timid priest to carve
Their idol god, and interweave with songs
Their naked dances round the golden calf:
Vision of horror and of grief.

Bickersteth.

Aaronic Action! Exo. 32:4-5.

(1.) Among the high Alps, the traveller is told in certain places to proceed as quietly as possible. On the steep slopes overhead, the snow hangs so evenly balanced that the sound of the voice, the crack of a whip, the report of a gun, or the detachment of a snow-ball may destroy the equilibrium and bring down an immense avalanche that will overwhelm everything within reach in ruin.
(2.) The Israelites were in such a position. Their moral character was unstabletheir principles unfixed. They were so evenly balanced between good and evil that a word from Aaron in the wrong direction threw them down into the abyss of idolatry. Had Aaron stood firmstiff and silent as the rocks around, the tumultuous heaving would have ceased.
(3.) Are there not souls around us hanging so nicely poised on the giddy slopes of temptation, ready, on the least encouragement or yielding on our part as Aaron did, to come down in terrible avalanches of moral ruin, crushing themselves and others in their fall? To stand firm, says Richter, may save a world.

Be great in act! So shall inferior eyes,

That borrow their behaviour from the great,
Grow great by your example, and put on
The dauntless spirit of resolution.

Shakespeare.

Visible Gods! Exo. 32:5.

(1.) Adam Clarke says there is one pretence that Roman Catholics have for the idolatry of their image-worship. Their high priest, the Pope, collects the ornaments from the people, and makes an Imagea crucifixa Madonna. The people worship it; but the Pope says that it is only to keep God in remembrance. But of the whole, God says, They have corrupted themselves. He will have nothing to do with visible media through which He is to be worshipped. God is a Spirit, and they that worship Him must do so in Spirit and in truth.
(2.) Therefore, as Hallam says, any image substituted for the living and loving God, who is invisible, is a portentous shadow projected from the slavish darkness of an ignorant heart. It is as much idolatry to worship God under a visible symbol, as it is to worship the image of a false divinity. Both forms of idolatry deceive the soul, harden the heart, and drag their votaries into complete alienation from God.

The heart surrendered to the ruling power
Of some ungoverned passion, every hour
Finds by degrees the truth that once bore sway,
And all their deep impressions wear away,
So coin grows smooth, in traffic current passed,
Till Csars image is effaced at last.

Cowper.

Revelry Rites! Exo. 32:6. The worship of Apis assumed a bacchanalian character, attended by the wildest and most extravagant revels. Herodotus says, that on the feast day of the gods all the Egyptians arrayed themselves as soon as the bull left his gilded asylum, and gave way to feasting and revelry. Hilarious processions formed an important feature of the Egyptian ritual; as might be expected in a country where the cloudless sky and the elastic air predispose men to mirth and indolence. Drumann remarks, that they were like orgiesthat even women appeared in themthat they were followed by indecent songs and dancesand that they were accompanied by clamorous music and drunken feasts. There were also mims and mummeries, like the Roman Saturnalia, in which the actors painted their faces, and ridiculed or struck the bystanders.

Men are but children of a larger growth;
Our appetites are apt to change as theirs,
And full as craving too, and full as vain;
And yet the soul shut up in her dark room,
Viewing so clear abroad, at home sees nothing;
But like a mole in earth, busy and blind,
Works all her folly up, and casts it outward,
To the worlds open view.

Dryden.

Divine Omniscience! Exo. 32:7-8. Israel lost sight of the fact that though Moses could not see, God could. Creeping down stairs at night towards the orchard, the little boy forgot that while his fathers eyes were locked in slumbers deep, yet there was One whose eye neither slumbers nor sleeps. But when he stood beneath the favourite apple-treewhen he stretched forth his hand to the branchwhen he lifted up his eye to the tempting, coveted, rosy-cheeked fruit; lo! a star twinkled its ray upon him, and seemed to say, God sees. And the little fellow shrank backretreated from the gardenbetook himself upstairs, repeating to himself the Scripture words Thou God seest. Ah! had Israel only remembered this, the sin had not been committed, and the dire mischief had not been wrought.

Though all the doors are sure, and all our servants
As sure bound with their sleeps, yet there is ONE
That wakes above, whose eye no sleep can blind;
He sees through doors, and darkness, and our thoughts.

Chapman.

Self-Corruption! Exo. 32:7. Thy people have corrupted themselves, i.e., as the original and English words imply, they have broken themselves up together.

(1.) Material disintegration! The clay and soil of our fields are caused by the oxidation or burning of pure metals. They are, in fact, the ashes of metals. The dirt that cleaves to our footsteps, as the emblem of all impurity, is produced by the disintegration of the brightest metals, or the most sparkling jewels.

(2.) Mental disintegration! Jehovah tells Moses that Israel had corrupted itself. A few days before they were as His jewels; now they had voluntarily entered upon a process of disintegration. Passion had broken loose from the law of cohesion to God; and they were fast becoming as mudthe foul product of the pure crystal under self-corruptive influences.

(3.) Moral disintegration! All sinful thoughts, and words, and deeds, have such corrupting effects. By this, man breaks the order and law of his existence, and his whole nature disintegrates in the atmosphere of sin. The whole being becomes vitiated, disordered, and corrupt. What was once more or less solid and valuable has become dust and ashes.

The basis sinks, the ample piles decay,
The stately fabric shakes and falls away.

Crabbe.

Retribution! Exo. 32:2-8.

(1.) Yes, they were rebels taken red-handed in revolt against their king. Not only had they taken up arms against their liege lord, and entered into negotiations with his relentless foe, but they had endeavoured to induce many of their fellow-countrymen to join them in their rebellious and lawless course. To spare them from punishment would be to leave them opportunity of bringing wider ruin upon all and sundry. For the sake of the people, and especially the weak, it was necessary that retribution should overtake these red-handed communistic leaders.
(2.) Daniel Defoe, in his far-famed Life of Robinson Crusoe, and John Bunyan, in his widely-known allegory of the Holy War, have shown how this apparently severe treatment was in reality true charity and compassion. And is it not from the same cause that the lost angels and men are to be for ever shut up in darkness, and precluded from entering amongst the redeemed? It is often the greatest mercy to exercise strictest justice. Severity to one may save the many from temptation, nay, from ultimate destruction. Pity!

I share it most of all when I share justice,
For then I pity those I do not know,
Which a dismissd offence would after gall?
And do him right that, answering one foul wrong,
Lives not to act another.

Shakespeare.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

THE TEXT OF EXODUS
TRANSLATION

32 And when the people saw that Mo-ses delayed to come down from the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aar-on, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Mo-ses, the man that brought us up out of the land of E-gypt, we know not what is become of him. (2) And Aar-on said unto them, Break off the golden rings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me. (3) And all the people brake off the golden rings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aar-on. (4) And he received it at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, and made it a molten calf: and they said, These are thy gods, O Is-ra-el, which brought thee up out of the land of E-gypt. (5) And when Aar-on saw this, he built an altar before it; and Aar-on made proclamation, and said, To-morrow shall be a feast to Je-ho-vah. (6) And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt-offerings, and brought peace-offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.

(7) And Je-ho-vah spake unto Mo-ses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, that thou broughtest up out of the land of E-gypt, have corrupted themselves: (8) they have turned aside quicky out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed unto it, and said, These are thy gods, O Is-ra-el, which brought thee up out of the land of E-gypt. (9) And Je-ho-vah said unto Mo-ses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people: (10) now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation. (11) And Mo-ses besought Je-ho-vah his God, and said, Je-ho-vah, why doth thy wrath wax hot against they people, that thou hast brought forth out of the land of E-gypt with great power and with a mighty hand? (12) Wherefore should the E-gyp-tians speak, saying, For evil did he bring them forth, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. (13) Remember Abraham, I-saac, and Is-ra-el, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever. (14) And Je-ho-vah repented of the evil which he said he would do unto his people.

(15) And Mo-ses turned, and went down from the mount, with the two tables of the testimony in his hand; tables that were written on both their sides; on the one side and on the other were they written. (16) And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables. (17) And when Josh-u-a heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said unto Mo-ses, There is a noise of war in the camp. (18) And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome; but the noise of them that sing do I hear. (19) And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf and the dancing: and Mo-ses anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount. (20) And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it with fire, and ground it to powder, and strewed it upon the water, and made the children of Is-ra-el drink of it.
(21) And Mo-ses said unto Aar-on, What did this people unto thee, that thou hast brought a great sin upon them? (22) And Aar-on said, Let not the anger of my lord wax hot: thou knowest the people, that they are set on evil. (23) For they said unto me, Make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Mos-ses, the man that brought us up out of the land of E-gypt, we know not what is become of him. (24) And I said unto them, Whosoever hath any gold, let them break it off: so they gave it me; and I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf.

(25) And when Mo-ses saw that the people were broken loose (for Aar-on had let them loose for a derision among their enemies), (26) then Mo-ses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Whoso is on Je-ho-vahs side, let him come unto me. And all the sons of Le-vi gathered themselves together unto him. (27) And he said unto them, Thus saith Je-ho-vah, the God of Is-ra-el, Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his neighbor. (28) And the sons of Le-vi did according to the word of Mo-ses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. (29) And Mo-ses said, Consecrate yourselves to-day to Je-ho-vah, yea, every man against his son, and against his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day.

(30) And it came to pass on the morrow, that Mo-ses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto Je-ho-vah; peradventure I shall make atonement for your sin. (31) And Mo-ses returned unto Je-ho-vah, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. (32) Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. (33) And Je-ho-vah said unto Mo-ses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. (34) And now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine angel shall go before thee; nevertheless in the day when I visit, I will visit their sin upon them. (35) And Je-ho-vah smote the people, because they made the calf, which Aar-on made.

EXPLORING EXODUS: CHAPTER THIRTY-TWO
QUESTIONS ANSWERABLE FROM THE BIBLE

1.

After careful reading, propose a topic or title for the chapter. (This one is easy!)

2.

How long had the people waited for Moses? (Exo. 24:18)

3.

To whom did the people come with a request? (Exo. 32:1; Exo. 24:14)

4.

What was their request? (Exo. 32:1)

5.

What was the condition of the peoples hearts just then? (Psa. 106:21; Act. 7:39-40; Neh. 9:17-18)

6.

Where did Aaron obtain material to make the calf? (Exo. 32:2-3)

7.

How could a graving tool be used to make a molten calf? (Exo. 32:4)

8.

What did the people say about the golden calf when they saw it? (Exo. 32:4) What did they say that contradicted themselves? (Exo. 32:1)

9.

What did Aaron build after he made the calf? What proclamation did he make? (Exo. 32:5)

10.

What sacrifices did the people make? (Exo. 32:6; Exo. 20:24)

11.

What is involved in they rose up to play? (Exo. 32:18-19; 1Co. 10:7)

12.

Did the Lord know about their idolatry? (Exo. 32:7-8)

13.

Whose people did the Lord say they were? (Exo. 32:7. Compare Exo. 32:11)

14.

What is meant by a stiffnecked people? (Exo. 32:9; Deu. 9:6; Isa. 48:4; 2Ch. 30:8; Act. 7:51)

15.

Did God suggest by saying to Moses, Let me alone, that Moses very probably could affect and influence His intentions? (Exo. 32:10)

16.

What did God at that moment intend to do with the people? (Exo. 32:10; Psa. 106:23)

17.

What would God make of Moses? (Exo. 32:10; Compare Num. 14:12; Gen. 12:2; Deu. 9:14)

18.

Would this offer have been a strong temptation to Moses?

19.

What three arguments did Moses use to influence God to spare the people? (Exo. 32:11-13)

20.

Did God spare the people? (Exo. 32:14)

21.

How can God repent when he changes not? (Mal. 3:6; Exo. 32:14) (For other examples of God repenting, see Jon. 3:10; Jer. 26:19; Joe. 2:13; 2Sa. 24:16; Jer. 18:10; Gen. 6:6-7.)

22.

How were the stone tablets written? (Exo. 32:15-16)

23.

Who was with Moses on the mount? (Exo. 32:17; Exo. 24:13)

24.

What did the minister of Moses think about the noise from the people? (Exo. 32:17)

25.

What sort of sound did Moses say they heard? (Exo. 32:18)

26.

What did Moses do when he saw the calf and the dancing? (Exo. 32:19)

27.

What did Moses do with the calf? (Exo. 32:20; Deu. 9:21)

28.

What question did Moses ask of Aaron? (Exo. 32:21)

29.

By what title did Aaron address Moses? (Exo. 32:22; Num. 12:11) Why use such a title?

30.

Was it really true that the people were set on evil (mischief)? (Exo. 32:22; See Deut. 10:6, 24)

31.

What tall tale did Aaron tell Moses? (Exo. 32:24) What does this show about the character of Aaron or the condition of his heart?

32.

How did the Lord feel about Aaron at that time? (Deu. 9:20)

33.

In what way were the people broken loose? (Exo. 32:25). (Compare the King James translation of Exo. 32:25.)

34.

How would Israel now be regarded among their enemies since they had broken loose? (Exo. 32:25)

35.

What call did Moses issue to the people? (Exo. 32:26)

36.

Who answered the call? (Exo. 32:26)

37.

What were the Levites told to do? (Exo. 32:27) Wasnt this rather extreme? Compare Num. 25:5; Num. 25:7-11; Deu. 33:9; Luk. 14:26; Exo. 22:20.

38.

How many were slain? (Exo. 32:28. Compare Act. 2:41)

39.

What were the Levites called to do? (Exo. 32:29)

40.

What did Moses tell the people that he would do for them? (Exo. 32:30) Was he certain that his efforts would be successful?

41.

What did Moses ask God to do for the people? (Exo. 32:31-32)

42.

Is the first part of Exo. 32:32 a complete or an incomplete sentence? What is the significance of this?

43.

What self-sacrificing request did Moses make? (Exo. 32:32) Who made a somewhat similar statement? (Rom. 9:3)

44.

Did Jehovah forgive the peoples sins? (Exo. 32:33-34; Compare Exo. 34:7; Eze. 18:20)

45.

Did God agree to let the people go to the promised land? (Exo. 32:34)

46.

Who (two persons) would lead them? (Exo. 32:34; Exo. 23:20; Num. 20:16)

47.

How did God punish the people? (Exo. 32:35)

EXODUS THIRTY-TWO: IDOLATRY!

I.

Causes of Idolatry

1.

Forgetful people; (Exo. 32:1).

2.

Weak leadership; (Exo. 32:2; Exo. 32:21-25).

3.

Lust of flesh; (Exo. 32:6).

II.

Consequences of Idolatry

1.

Anger of God; (Exo. 32:7-10).

2.

Anger of leaders; (Exo. 32:19).

3.

Punishments; (Exo. 32:20; Exo. 32:35).

4.

Derision of enemies; (Exo. 32:25).

III.

Cure of Idolatry

1.

Call for decision; (Exo. 32:26).

2.

Discipline; (Exo. 32:27-28).

3.

Prayer for forgiveness; (Exo. 32:30-31).

INTERCESSOR!

1.

Need for an intercessor; (Exo. 32:7-10).

2.

Test of an intercessor; (Exo. 32:10).

3.

Pleas of an intercessor; (Exo. 32:11-13).

a.

Must be earnest.

b.

Must be based on truth.

4.

Power of an intercessor; (Exo. 32:14).

5.

Truthfulness of an intercessor; (Exo. 32:30-31).

6.

Self-sacrifice of an intercessor; (Exo. 32:32).

7.

Limitations of an intercessor; (Exo. 32:33).

THE REPENTANCE OF GOD! (Exo. 32:14)

A.

What it is not!

1.

Not a change in Gods standards; (Mal. 3:6).

2.

Not partiality to Gods favorites (pets); (1Pe. 1:17).

3.

Not getting over a temper tantrum.

4.

Not withholding just punishment; (Exo. 32:33; Exo. 32:35).

B.

What it is!

1.

A consistent pattern for God; (Jon. 3:10; Jer. 26:19; Joe. 2:13; 2Sa. 24:16; Jer. 18:10; Gen. 6:6-7).

2.

An act of compassion. (Repent here means have compassion.)

3.

A change in Gods response based on a change in mans relation to Him.

FAILURE OF LEADERS! (Exo. 32:21-24)

1.

Failure brings sin on the people; (Exo. 32:21).

2.

Failure brings Gods anger on the leaders; (Deu. 9:20).

3.

Failure leads to blame-shifting; (Exo. 32:22-24).

a.

Blames the people; (Exo. 32:22-23).

b.

Blames chance happenings; (Exo. 32:24).

MOSES A SPIRITUAL STATESMAN! (Exo. 32:19-20; Exo. 32:25-35)

1.

Reacted strongly to sin; (Exo. 32:19).

2.

Administered discipline; (Exo. 32:20).

3.

Called for decision; (Exo. 32:26).

4.

Placed spiritual relationships over fleshly ties; (Exo. 32:27; Exo. 32:29).

5.

Denounced sin as sin; (Exo. 32:30-31).

6.

Prayed for the people; (Exo. 32:30).

7.

Willing to sacrifice himself; (Exo. 32:32).

EXPLORING EXODUS: NOTES ON CHAPTER THIRTY-TWO

1.

What is in Exodus thirty-two?

The chapter contains the familiar story of the making of the golden calf, Gods anger, Moses breaking the ten commandments, and Moses prayer.

The chapter makes clear that the idolatry of the people brought upon them later punishments that could never be all averted: I will visit their sin upon them! (Exo. 32:34). Israels idolatry caused them to be rejected temporarily as Gods special people, until Moses prayed for their restoration with great earnestness. Note Exo. 33:13 : Consider that this nation is thy people! Exo. 33:9 : Pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for thine inheritance. The chapter portrays a RUPTURE of the covenant between God and Israel.

Ramm accurately entitles the section Israel in Idolatry; or Israel is out of Egypt, but Egypt isnt out of Israel.[430]

[430] Op. cit., p. 179.

The chapter reveals the power of idolatry. We need this dramatic reminder, because we tend to think idolatry is a temptation only to primitive peoples. We do not always recognize our own idolatries. John wrote, Little children, guard yourselves from idols (1Jn. 5:21). Paul cautions us, Neither be ye idolaters, as some of them were (1Co. 10:7).

Many critics view the chapter as a resumption of the Sinai story left off after Exo. 19:24. They consider the story in Exodus 32-34 to have been written shortly after the time of King Solomon to condemn Jeroboam I for making the golden calves (1Ki. 12:28-33). According to this theory the author of 3234 was the writer commonly called J (for Jehovist, or Yahwist). Js story was interrupted after Exodus 24 by the insertion of a long section of Priestly instructions (Exodus 25-31), written about the time of the Babylonian captivity. With chapter 32 the J (or JE) section is resumed. In addition, some critics hold that within chapters 3234 themselves there are evidences of later interpolations.[431]

[431] Martin Noth, op. cit., pp. 243245.

We cannot accept these critical views. There is utterly no evidence in any ancient manuscripts of the existence of the separate source documents that the critics write of. The supposed lack of unity in the material seems evident to those who want to believe it and not evident to those who do not want to believe it. To us, the book of Exodus has a remarkable unity and progressiveness. And even the critics cannot agree among themselves as to exact points of division between the various sources.

King Jeroboam I deliberately created religious ceremonies that would conflict with the Mosaic law, so as to get the people in this new nation completely cut off from loyalty to the Jerusalem temple. Thus it appears that the laws and stories in Exodus were things he was familiar with, things that had been written centuries before his time. It is quite hard to believe that someone (J) wrote Exodus 32-34 AFTER Jeroboam had already made his golden calves.

2.

What request did the people make to Aaron? (Exo. 32:1)

They requested that Aaron make them gods who would go before them on their journey.
They referred to Moses as this Moses (this guy!) that brought us up out of the land of Egypt. They did not mention that JEHOVAH had brought them up! The lofty truth of an eternal, imageless God had not yet penetrated their minds, much less their religious habits. They wanted visible gods who would go before them gods they could SEE!

Moses endured as seeing him who is invisible. (Heb. 11:27). But the people wanted a visible god.

We marvel at how quickly the Israelites had forgotten the LORD! Scarcely five months before they were singing, Jehovah is my strength and song, and he is become my salvation: This is my God . . . (Exo. 15:2).

The story of the making of the golden calf is a plain demonstration that seeing miracles and experiencing Gods great wonders will not save and uphold those who have a weak faith. Those who cannot endure as seeing the invisible (God) will probably not be saved by an abundance of visible miracles.

Moses had been gone forty days (Exo. 24:18), and the people thought he would never return. Moses had delegated authority to Aaron and Hur (Exo. 24:14). After Exo. 24:14 we hear no more of Hur. Jewish tradition (unverified) says he resisted the peoples demands and was put to death by them. Josephus (Antiquities III, v, 78) mentions the peoples anxiety over Moses delay; but he says not even one word about the golden calf! Josephus tends to glorify Israel and to super-glorify Moses.

There has been MUCH discussion about the identity of the gods which the Israelites requested Aaron to make. Were these gods (plural) or a god? The story mentions only one golden calf (Exo. 32:8). But the Hebrew verbs translated go up and brought (in Exo. 32:4) are forms used with plural subjects. The Hebrew word for God (elohim) is naturally plural in form, although when referred to the LORD it normally takes a singular verb (as in Gen. 1:1 : God [plural form] created [singular verb] . . . .). The word elohim frequently has a definitely plural meaning, gods. In such cases the verb is plural also, as it is in Exo. 32:1.[432] We agree with John Davis[433] that the people were thinking of gods (plural) when they made their request to Aaron. Compare Exo. 32:31. (Isnt it remarkable that the people asked for gods to lead them instead of another man like Moses?)

[432] Interestingly, Neh. 9:18, in telling of this very event, quotes the people as saying, This (singular) is thy God (elohim) that brought thee up out of Egypt.

[433] Moses and the Gods of Egypt (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1971), p. 283.

Exo. 34:4 quotes the people as saying when they saw the ONE golden calf, These are thy gods, O Israel. It has been proposed that the words gods and these in this verse are plurals of majesty, which only refer to one god. This is a possible and commonly-accepted explanation as to why elohim often takes a singular verb. But examples of the pronoun these with a singular meaning are RARE indeed. 2Ch. 3:3; Eze. 46:24; and Ezr. 1:9 have been proposed as examples of this; but these are extremely uncertain passages, as a little study will reveal.

Our opinion, is that the Israelites were not trying to be grammatically consistent at that moment. They were too excited to be bothered about grammatical points, such as whether the word god took a singular or plural verb. We should not be surprised if they were inconsistent. Theologically they were very inconsistent. Why not also grammatically?
Another much-discussed question is this: Were the people desiring to make another god instead of Jehovah? Or was their idol a representation of Jehovah? Was it an adaptation of some Egyptian idol? Or perhaps of some Canaanite idol?

The prevailing opinion among scholars is that the golden calf was in some way a representation of Jehovah, or a mount for Jehovah to sit or stand upon. Scholars feel it was probably NOT a representation of an Egyptian god, because the feast held in connection with the worship of the calf was announced as a feast of Jehovah (Exo. 32:5).[434] (At least Aaron proclaimed a feast unto Jehovah.) Cassuto[435] thinks that the Israelites were not actually asking for a substitute for the God of Israel, but were only asking for a replacement for Moses; and that Aaron did not consider that he was making another God instead of Jehovah. Scholars who hold views such as these assume that Aaron and the Israelites were thinking about god-images like those of Canaan and Syria, rather than like those of Egypt. The Canaanites at ancient Ugarit called their father-god El, Father Bull. These Canaanite and related gods are very often pictured as sitting or standing on wild beasts bulls, lions, cattle, etc. The Ancient Near East in Pictures (Princeton Univ. Press, 1969), pp. 163, 164, 167, 179, shows pictures of numerous such gods riding upon animals. Thus according to this view, when Aaron made the calf, he was seeking to fashion a mount for the LORD, a bull calf upon which the invisible God could ride, like Canaanite deities. As the mercy-seat was indeed sort of a throne for Yahweh, so the bull calf was to be sort of a vacant throne for Yahweh. Thus, according to this view, Aaron did not really intend to commit the sin of idolatry when he made the calf.

[434] Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary, p. 141.

[435] Op. cit., pp. 411413.

Though the theories just presented are frequently expressed, there are problems in adopting them. The Biblical text does NOT state that the golden calf was designed like the idols of any particular people. Then there is the problem as to why the Israelites should have tried to make a calf like some Canaanite or Syrian image when they had lived in Egypt for centuries, and had become thoroughly Egyptianized. When the Israelites were in the wilderness and experienced difficulties, they always wanted to go back to EGYPT, and not to Canaan. (See Neh. 9:17; Exo. 14:11; Exo. 16:13; Num. 14:4.) Jos. 24:14 and Eze. 20:7-8 both speak of the Israelites serving the gods of EGYPT. Ezekiel even mentions that they did not forsake the idols of Egypt. Act. 7:39 quotes Stephen as saying that they turned back in their hearts unto EGYPT (not to Canaan or Syria); and then they made a calf in those days and brought a sacrifice unto the idol. Observe that the calf is plainly called an idol. Psa. 106:21 says that when they made the likeness of the ox They forgot God their savior who had done great things in Egypt. Surely if they had forgotten God, they were not trying to make an image of him or for him to ride upon.

This scriptural evidence causes us to think that the golden calf actually was an idol in the worst sense of that word; and that it was probably adapted from some Egyptian model, rather than being patterned after a Canaanite bull-statue upon which some god-figure was standing.

It is well-known that the Egyptians made statues of animals that were worshipped as gods. These included the Hathor cow images, and the image of the Apis bull. The Apis bull was most often worshipped as a living bull, another one being picked to replace each former one at death. But statues of the Apis bull have indeed been found, dating as far back as the seventh century B.C., and possibly older.[436]

[436] Ancient Near East in Pictures (Princeton Univ. Press, 1969), p. 190, has a photograph of an Apis statue wearing a sun-disk between its horns and a sacred cobra (uraeus) from its forehead. It is dated in the Saite period, 663525 B.C. See also Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary, p. 141.

3.

Where was material obtained for the golden calf? (Exo. 32:2-3)

It was obtained from the golden rings in the ears of the families of the Israelites. The text does not clearly state this, but possibly Aaron thought that the request for costly earrings might restrain the Israelites. Not only was the value of the earrings great, but the Israelite men had to take them away from their family members, who might be uncooperative. If that was in Aarons mind, his hopes were in vain. ALL the people BROKE OFF the earrings, and brought them to him. Aaron underestimated their fanaticism, and in so doing put himself in position where he needed to reject his own offer; and he was not equal to it. Thus he was swept along by the mob pressure to make an idol, an act that he certainly did not personally approve.

The Israelites did wear earrings in ancient times (Gen. 35:4). But in later years they did not (Jdg. 8:24). The taboo on earrings seems to have started at Mt. Sinai after the golden calf incident (Exo. 33:4-6). Gideon made an ephod from earrings, but they were the earrings of the Midianites (Jdg. 8:24-27).

4.

What was the technique used in making the calf? (Exo. 32:4; Exo. 32:8)

It was first molten and then fashioned (cut, form, make) with an engraving tool. Molten indicates that the gold was first melted. We are not informed how it was made after the gold was melted. We suppose that a wooden model or a wooden frame of the idol was then made, and the gold was then overlaid upon this wood.[437] Isa. 30:22; Isa. 40:19 suggest that idols were made in this manner. The fine details (such as eyes) would then be engraved into the golden shell. This would explain how the image could be burned (Exo. 32:20). We get the impression that the calf was made in one day. If so, it could hardly have been anything but CRUDE.

[437] An alternate translation of fashioned it with a graving tool is he bound it up in a bag. To arrive at this rendering one must read chant (bag, purse, pocket) for the word cherit (graving tool) that is actually in the text. Then we must translate the verb tsarar as wrap or bind up. This translation is found in 2Ki. 5:23, where Naaman put two talents in a bag. But this rendering seems incongruous and superfluous. Why should Aaron tie up the earrings in a bag? Why should such a triviality be mentioned? See Keil and Delitzsch, op. cit., p. 221.

We cannot excuse Aarons action of making this idol. His heart was surely not in his work, but he did it. This did not disqualify him from the priesthood, any more than the sins of Abraham, Jacob, and David disqualified them from being great leaders in Gods program for the ages. Gods gifts are bestowed on the basis of grace rather than merit.

5.

How did the people respond when they saw the golden calf? (Exo. 32:4)

They became almost delirious with ecstasy! They said, These are thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt! Whereas they had said shortly before (Exo. 32:1) that MOSES brought them up from Egypt, now they say the calf-idol had brought them up. What insanity! The calf had not even been in existence when they left Egypt!

The use of the plural forms these and gods gives problems, because only one idol was made. See notes on Exo. 32:1. Cassuto[438] writes that the Jews never had the foolish idea that the calf led them from Egypt, but only that they considered the calf an emblem of God, itself worthy of divine honor along with the Lord, and thus spoke of these, referring to the LORD and to the calf. This idea, as appealing as it might be, just isnt what the text says. The people upon seeing the calf said, These are thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up.

[438] Op. cit., p. 413.

The words of the people are the very words later used by King Jeroboam I (931909 B.C.) to refer to his golden calves set up at Dan and Bethel (1Ki. 12:28). Jeroboams allusion to Aarons golden calf could hardly be missed. The people were probably just as ready to worship a golden calf in Jeroboams time as they were in Aarons time.

The term calf (Heb., egel) is masculine, and refers to a young bull in full strength. A three-year old animal is referred to as an egelah (same word with a feminine ending). The same word refers to an ox (or to the female heifer counterpart) mature enough to work at plowing or threshing (Jdg. 14:18; Jer. 50:11; Hos. 10:11). Psa. 106:19-20 makes the calf synonymous with an ox.

6.

What did Aaron do when he saw the peoples reaction to the calf? (Exo. 32:5)

Aaron built an altar before the calf, and he cried out.
A feast to Yahweh tomorrow!

What was Aaron thinking when he built the altar and proclaimed a feast to Yahweh (if indeed he really was thinking in any coherent way at all)? It is proper for us to give Aaron whatever credit there may be possible. Love believeth [the best possible about] all things (1Co. 13:7).

Aarons making the altar was surely a legitimate act (Exo. 20:24), and the altar was not mentioned later as a cause for criticism. Making the altar was Aarons own idea; the people had said nothing (as far as we know) about an altar.

Proclaiming a feast to Yahweh was also Aarons own idea. We cannot assert on the evidence of the text that Aaron was trying to link the molten calf to Jehovah worship (as some have alleged). If that was his idea, it did not work. Jehovah himself told Moses that the people had sacrificed TO THE CALF, and not to Him (Exo. 32:8). It seems to us that Aaron was probably trying to divert the peoples minds from the calf to the altar, and thus from calf-worship to Jehovah worship. It hardly compliments Aaron to represent him as thinking that he could transform the calf into a Jehovah-worship accessory by making an altar before it and proclaiming a Jehovah feast. (That would be somewhat like trying to make a cocktail party or a dance holy by having an invocation at the start.) Aaron did not later attempt to excuse himself by saying something such as, Well, I thought we could use the calf to symbolize Jehovah, or use it for Jehovah to ride upon. Compare Exo. 32:21-24.

Whatever Aaron had on his mind, it did not cancel his sin. God became so angry with him that He was ready to kill him (Deu. 9:20). The decisiveness of Moses in situations of idolatry makes Aaron look very shaky. See Exo. 32:19-20; Num. 25:4-5.

7.

How did the people worship around the calf? (Exo. 32:6)

The people responded enthusiastically, rising up early the next morning. (Perhaps it was late in the evening when the calf was completed.) They broke loose. (See notes on Exo. 32:25 concerning this expression.) They offered burnt-offerings (Exo. 20:24) and peace offerings. Then they sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.

Eating and drinking are innocent enough, but the play was another matter. Paul classifies this play as idolatry (1Co. 10:7). The play including singing and dancing (Exo. 32:18-19). The play included laughter, probably loud and uproarious. The Hebrew word translated play (tsachaq) means to laugh (Gen. 17:17), jest, mock (Gen. 19:14; Gen. 21:9), make sport of (as in Jdg. 16:25, where the Philistines made sport of Samson), and play. The word is used in Gen. 26:8 to refer to Isaac sporting with his wife, Rebekah. On the basis of this one use of the word many interpreters have read into the play around the golden calf the idea of a wild sex orgy,[439] such as the Canaanites might have indulged in at a Baal festival.

[439] Cole, op. cit., p. 216. Cassuto, op. cit., p. 414.

We seriously question that the play around the idol involved any sex orgy. Tsachaq does not basically refer to sex acts. What Isaac was doing with Rebekah was out-of-doors in plain sight, and probably involved nothing more than teasing, or joking, or laughing with Rebekah. The passage about Isaac does not indicate that the word meant fondling or even caressing. Paul does not mention in 1Co. 10:7-8 that fornication was associated with the play around the golden calf, as it was with later idolatry (Num. 25:1).

It is not necessary, or even possible, to assume that all the people (600,000 men!) were involved in the idolatry. But many were, and therefore the whole nation was collectively involved in the transgression.

8.

How did God react to the golden calf? (Exo. 32:7-8; Deu. 9:12)

Jehovah was angry enough to destroy them (Deu. 9:19). His displeasure was HOT. Observe the statement that They have made. . . . They all made it by contributing materials, by requesting that it be made. See Exo. 32:20; Exo. 32:35.

Note that God referred to Israel as THY (Moses) people (Exo. 32:7). For that moment He disowned them. But Moses reversed this, and (in Exo. 32:11) referred to them as thy (Gods) people.

God accused the Israelites of three things:
(1) They had corrupted themselves. Corrupt means destroy, lay waste, corrupt morally (Gen. 6:11), overthrow. All acts of forsaking God corrupt those who disobey.

(2) They had turned aside quickly. Quickly indeed! It was scarcely six weeks since they had heard the ten commandments, which forbade the making of any type of image.

(3) They had made a molten calf and worshipped it and sacrificed unto it (NOT unto God). Concerning the plurals these and gods, see notes on Exo. 32:1.

9.

What did God threaten to do to the Israelites? (Exo. 32:9-10; Deu. 9:13-14).

To consume them, that is, burn them up (literally to devour them).

God declared that they were a stiff-necked people. This was a common expression (Deu. 9:6; 2Ch. 30:8; Isa. 48:4; Act. 7:51), which described people as being like oxen or horses that would not respond when the guiding rein was tugged.

God declared that He would make of MOSES a great nation, once He had consumed the Israelites. The same promise was made to Moses later at Kadesh (Num. 14:12). The promise was like that given to Abraham (Gen. 12:2). Moses later mentioned this promise to Him in his speech to the people (Deu. 9:14).

Whether this promise was actually an alluring temptation to Moses or not, he rejected it instantly. If he had accepted it, his own descendants would not necessarily have been better people than the other Israelites. His grandson became an idolatrous priest (Jdg. 18:30).

God said to Moses, Now therefore, let me alone. But Moses refused to let God alone. Like Jacob, he would not let go until he obtained the blessing (Gen. 32:24-29). In Let me alone there is an acknowledgement that Moses intercession could alter (or at least delay) Gods threatened punishment. God placed the fate of the whole nation into the hands of Moses. Would Moses, as the mediator of the covenant, show himself worthy of his calling, and sacrifice his own exaltation for the sake of a guilt-laden people?

He (God) said that he would destroy them, Had not Moses his chosen stood before him in the breach, To turn away his wrath, lest he should destroy them (Psa. 106:23).

10.

What three appeals did Moses make to God to spare Israel? (Exo. 32:11-13)

(1) Remember your special relationship with Israel. They are thy people, which thou hast brought out of the land of Egypt.

(2) The Egyptians would hear of it and think God had brought Israel forth to slay them, and they would gloat, (Joshua later used a similar argument, Jos. 7:9.)

(3) Remember your covenant promises with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to multiply their seed and give them the promised land. The promises mentioned in Exo. 32:13 can be read in Gen. 22:17; Gen. 13:15.

Moses mentioned mountains in Exo. 32:12. The Sinai area was very well supplied with mountains.

Regarding repent in Exo. 32:12, see notes on Exo. 32:14.

Note in Exo. 32:13 that God had sworn by his own self. God can swear by none greater. (Heb. 6:13)

11.

How can God REPENT? (Exo. 32:14)

It should not be surprising to us that God repents of His threats to do evil (bodily punishment). Repenting of evil is one of the most prominent and basic aspects of Gods nature. See Joe. 2:13; Jon. 3:2. The Old Testament very frequently mentions Gods repentance. See Jer. 26:19; Jer. 18:10; Jon. 3:10; 2Sa. 24:16; Gen. 6:6-7. Arent you glad that God will repent (change his mind about) the evil which He would be absolutely just to inflict?

The word here translated repent (nacham) most often means to have compassion, to pity, to be comforted, to console. It is used in Psa. 23:4 : Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me. Exo. 34:14 could be translated, And Jehovah had compassion concerning the evil which He said he would do to his people. (Note the reassuring reference to his [Gods] people.) Of thirty-five occurrences of this verb in the Old Testament, thirty refer to God as the subject and only five to mens acts of repenting.

God does not repent in the sense that he acknowledges He was in error or made a bad judgment. See Mal. 3:6. God does not have temper tantrums, of which He needs to repent. God NEVER really desires or gets pleasure from the death of the wicked (Eze. 33:11).

God was totally just in being angry over Israels idolatry. God would be unworthy of our worship if He did not abhor evil. But at the very moment God was angry, He left the door open to Moses intercession for the people, with the clear hint that if Moses prayed, the consequences would be different. In all of these things, God showed no shiftiness, no uncertainty, no variation. (Jas. 1:17)

We are not told whether Moses was informed at that moment that God had repented. But the fact that God did not object to Moses prayer for the people was itself a reassurance to Moses. Later when Moses wrote the book of Exodus, he knew that God had forgiven at that moment, and thus Moses wrote of what had actually happened just then.
Many commentators have tried to explain Gods repentance as a figure of speech that seeks to express Gods feelings in human terms that we can understand, because His feelings are beyond human comprehension. They speak of Gods repentance as an anthropopathism (attributing human feeling to God) or an anthropomorphism (attributing human forms to God). This explanation seems to us rather unnecessary. Mankind learned of repentance from God, not God from man. We do not assume we know all about God. But one revelation from God about Himself is worth a thousand of our speculations about Him.

12.

What did Moses carry as he came down from the mount? (Exo. 32:15-16)

He carried the two tables (tablets) of stone inscribed with the ten commandments. See notes on Exo. 31:18. It was unusual for ancient inscribed stones to be written on both sides.

13.

What did Joshua think about the noise in the camp? (Exo. 32:17-18)

He thought it was a sound of war in the camp. Being a military man, he was probably conditioned to interpret all loud sounds from people as war. See Exo. 17:9.

Joshua had been left on the lower slopes of the mount when Moses went up (Exo. 24:13). As Moses descended, he met Joshua, but he did not tell him what God had said in Exo. 32:8. Even when Joshua commented about the uproar, Moses did not tell Joshua what God had said, but merely corrected his false impression of the sound.

Exo. 32:18 very definitely has a poetic rhythm in Hebrew. However, this does not necessarily indicate that the whole book was originally written in verse, of which a fragment is here preserved.[440] Poetic lines sometimes drop from the lips of gifted people without the lines being in a poetic setting.

[440] Cole, op. cit., p. 218.

The words shout, cry, and sing are all actually translated from one Hebrew word (anah). This word refers to antiphonal singing in Exo. 15:21, and may do so here, as if one group of idolaters were singing and another group were echoing their words.

14.

How did Moses react when he saw the idolatry? (Exo. 32:19)

He was surprised, shocked, stunned, and indignant! Though he had been told about it, the impact of seeing it was much stronger than of hearing about it.
The word dancing is plural, as if referring to dances, or different types of dances. Cole[441] suggests that the plural is a plural of indignation, as if to say such goings-on!

[441] Op. cit., p. 218.

Moses slammed down the tables of ten commandments, and broke them beneath the mount (that is, at the foot of the mount). In the very place where the covenant had been made (Exo. 24:4), the tables of the covenant were broken. How sad, but how appropriate.

We are not informed as to whether we should interpret the breaking of the ten commandments as merely an act of Moses in anger, or as a symbol of the breaking of the covenant between God and Israel. The scripture does not definitely state the latter idea, but the symbolism comes immediately into our minds. Certainly there was a rupture in the covenant relationship. Observe Moses fervent pleas to God to accept Israel back as His people (Exo. 33:13; Exo. 34:9).

Perhaps God blamed Moses slightly for breaking the ten commandments. See notes on Exo. 34:1.

Moses breaking ALL the laws seems to illustrate Jas. 2:10 : Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. Israel in breaking one law had broken all the law.

S. C. Barlett tells of climbing up and descending Mt. Sinai:

We started to descend … by the gorge on the northeast side [called Jethros path], by which possibly Moses may have descended when he heard the sounds of the camp, before he could see what was taking place there. We were completely shut in by the sides of the gorge till just as we emerged from it near the bottom. There was no sound below for us to hear, but we could readily accept Mr. Palmers statement that while descending here, he had distinctly heard the sounds of his own camp at the foot of the mountain, while entirely hidden from view. . . . The passage by which we [and presumably Moses] descended was of the steepest, the rocks often loose, and the descent hard. Between the almost perpendicular cliffs, sometimes singularly honey-combed . . .we made our way . . . in an hour and a quarter from the top of Ras Safsafeh.[442]

[442] From Egypt to Palestine (New York: Harper, 1879), pp. 269, 270.

15.

What did Moses do with the golden calf? (Exo. 32:20; Deu. 9:21)

He utterly destroyed it, even making the Israelites drink the water containing its ashes. Deu. 9:21 mentions that the water was that in the brook that descended out of the mount.

Moses GROUND the calf, probably between stones. See notes on Exo. 32:4 regarding how the golden calf might be burned.

Moses treatment of the idol surely showed the worthlessness of it. It also humiliated the idolaters. In later years King Josiah treated the altar at Bethel in a way similar to the way Moses treated the golden calf. (2Ki. 23:15)

Numerous Jewish and modern commentators have associated the water of bitterness used as a test of a wife suspected of adultery (Num. 5:17-22), with Moses act of making the people drink the water bearing the ashes of the golden calf. To us this does not appear to be a legitimate association.

Firstly, the scripture does not associate the two passages. Secondly, the law given in Numbers five was apparently revealed by God to Moses some time AFTER the golden calf was destroyed. Thirdly, Exodus 32 does not mention any examination of the people to see who passed and who flunked the water-drinking test.

In spite of these barriers to associating the two passages (Exodus 32 and Numbers 5), writers still speak as if Moses used the gold-dusted water as a guilt-detector, a sort of trial, or ordeal, by water. Supposedly the peoples physiological or psychological reactions to drinking the water would show which ones were guilty of participating in the idolatry. The smiting of the people referred to in Exo. 32:35 has been considered to be a reference to those who got sick after drinking the water because they were guilty of the idolatry. But Exo. 32:35 appears to be a statement about punishment rather than about testing.

16.

What excuse did Aaron give to Moses? (Exo. 32:21-24)

Aaron blames the people. Also he said that the calf formed itself (miraculously!) in the fire, and came out (under its own power!). It is hard to imagine that Aaron did not have a sheepish grin after he told his story about the calf. What a tall tale! God was ready to destroy Aaron (Deu. 9:20).

Moses said, What did the people do unto thee, that thou hast brought a great sin upon them? Moses was astounded at Aaron. Aaron had failed miserably to be a strong leader. Moses question was more designed to convict and reprove Aaron than to get information.

What Aaron said about Israel in Exo. 32:22 was very true. They were constantly in evil. See Exo. 14:9; Exo. 15:24; Exo. 16:2; Exo. 16:20; Exo. 17:2; Exo. 17:4. Israel had been rebellious ever since Moses knew them (Deu. 9:7; Deu. 9:24).

Nevertheless, Aarons answer was very evasive and defensive, like that of Adam and Eve in the garden (Gen. 3:12-13). Aaron shows no real sorrow for his sin.

Aaron addresses Moses as My lord. See also Num. 12:11. This title has a servile tone about it that seems most unfitting from the one who stood with Moses on the bank of the Nile when it turned to blood (Exo. 7:20).

17.

What call for decision did Moses make? (Exo. 32:25-26)

He stood in the gate of the camp and said, Who is for Jehovah? Unto me!
While this had the nature of an ultimatum, it also contained the opportunity of an amnesty.

Exo. 32:25 speaks of the people having broken loose (K.J.V., being naked). They had broken loose from all the regulations of God. The word does not mean to make naked, and it is not so translated that way anywhere in the American Standard version. The Hebrew verb para means to loosen, to let loose, unbridle, to break out (as a disorder). It may mean to uncover (or let loose), as of the hair (Num. 5:18; Lev. 13:45). But there is not one passage where it clearly refers to nakedness. This has a bearing on whether or not the play of Exo. 32:6 refers to a sex orgy. See notes on that verse.

Israels breaking loose had given their enemies an opportunity for derision (literally, a whispering). The enemies would include the nearby Amalekites and others who would hear about this. Compare Deu. 28:37. The sins of saints cause unbelievers to blaspheme God.

In these circumstances Moses made his ultimatum amnesty proclamation. And all the sons (meaning descendants) of Levi gathered together unto Moses.

The response of the Levites comes as a surprise to us. Nothing previously written about the tribe of Levi (except possibly the faith of Moses parents) causes us to think very highly of them. Levi and his brother Simeon were angry and cruel men. They massacred the Shechemites (Gen. 34:25-26). They hocked an ox (Gen. 49:5-7). Still, when the call came for men to stand with Moses, the tribe of Levi responded to a man, (Possibly the all may be used here a bit hyperbolically, as in other places. Compare Exo. 9:6.)

Several questions must remain unanswered: Were the Levites as a whole less guilty of participating in the idolatry than the other tribes? Was their family association with Moses cause for their response? Were they more willing to confess their sins than the other tribes?
The immediate response of the Levites suggests that if Aaron had boldly stood up and opposed the peoples request that he make them gods, he would have had many loyal Israelites to stand with him.

18.

What were the Levites commissioned to do? (Exo. 32:27-28)

They were to put on their swords and go through the camp slaying people. About 3000 fell that day.
Note that it was Jehovah the God of Israel who commanded this mass execution, but the word of Moses proclaimed it. A similar order to execute violators is in Num. 25:5.

The expression from gate to gate indicates that Israels wilderness encampment had definite boundaries, and probably a fence with gates.

Brother means fellow-Israelite. Fleshly ties must not be stronger than spiritual relationships. (Mat. 12:46-50; Mat. 10:37 : Luk. 12:52-53; Luk. 14:26).

The small number slain (small in contrast to the total population) may indicate that not all the people were involved in the idolatry, or that God in His grace spared many offenders.

Three-thousand men were slain at Sinai for breaking the law. On the day of Pentecost after Christ ascended three-thousand law-breakers were made alive (Act. 2:41; Eph. 2:5). This is a vivid object lesson showing the differing natures of the law and the gospel.

The command to slay was a drastic test of faith for the Levites. But the punishment was just: He that sacrificeth unto any God save unto Jehovah only, shall be utterly destroyed (Exo. 22:20).

How could the Levites rampage through the camp killing without resistance? Was the meekness of the people due to the suddenness of the attack, or the guilt they felt for their sin, or the authority projected by Moses language and bearing? It would seem reasonable that 22,000 Levites could slay 3000 people before the people realized what was happening (Num. 3:39). The people did not know what Moses had ordered the Levites to do. We suppose that the Levites slew only guilty idolaters, those whom they may have seen participating.

19.

What were the Levites called to consecrate themselves to? (Exo. 32:29)

They were to consecrate themselves to Jehovah, for a holy war against sinners. Consecrate means literally fill the hand. Compare Exo. 29:9.

Exo. 32:29 is a difficult verse. Does the command refer to something that the Levites were called to do AFTER the 3000 were slain? (We favor this view.) Or is it merely a restatement of the order in Exo. 32:27? Or is it merely a report on the consequences of their slaying the 3000?

The R.S.V., which follows the Septuagint here, gives the verse the latter meaning: Today you have ordained yourselves. The Septuagint reads, Ye have filled your hands this day to the Lord. It definitely seems that the imperative reading, Consecrate yourselves, is the correct reading, rather than the indicative reading, Today you have ordained yourselves.[443]

[443] The Hebrew reading is an imperative, Consecrate yourselves. The verb could possibly be rendered as an indicative (reading it as piel perfect instead of Qal imperative); They have filled your (plural) hand. But the presence of the plurals they and your indicate that the imperative reading is the correct one, and the Greek reading is incorrect.

The words of Exo. 32:29 stand AFTER the report of the slaughter. Thus it seems preferable to interpret them as being Moses words to the Levites after they had completed the punitive slaughter. After that fearsome event, they are called on to present themselves. (Fill your hand!) They are to give themselves to service to the Lord that day, for service in time to come, so that every man of them might, if need be, be against his own father and mother, and thus to get themselves a blessing that day. They accepted the call.

The blessing which Levi was to obtain that day was the privilege of service in Gods tabernacle (Num. 3:6-9).

Moses blessed Levi in Deu. 33:9 with these words:

Who said of his father, and of his mother, I have not seen him,
Neither did he acknowledge his brethren;
Nor knew he his own children:
For they have observed thy word
And keep thy covenant.

The previous ferocity of the Levites was now disciplined and consecrated to serve God alone. And thus the curse that once rested on them (Gen. 49:7) was turned into a blessing.

20.

What did Moses promise to do for the people? (Exo. 32:30)

He promised to go unto Jehovah (back up in the mount) to try to make atonement (covering) for them.

The Ye is emphatic: You! you have sinned a great sin.

The word peradventure (meaning perhaps) is a word that expresses hope in Jer. 20:12. But the same word expresses fear and doubt in Gen. 27:12. The use of this word suggests that Moses was not at all sure his efforts would be successful.

21.

What did Moses pray unto God? (Exo. 32:31-32)

Moses confessed their sin. He requested God to forgive (literally lift up) their sin. And if God would not do this, to blot out his name out of Gods book.

Exo. 32:31 mentions for the third time their great sin. See Exo. 32:21; Exo. 32:30-31. Regarding the gods, see Exo. 32:1.

Moses prayer was utterly selfless. He lived only for the people. His prayer was similar to Pauls in Rom. 9:3. He was willing to sacrifice himself for the people.

The last part of the request for forgiveness in Exo. 32:32 is not stated, leaving its conclusion to be supplied by the mind of the reader. The last part of Exo. 32:32 might have been then I will be content, or I will say no more, or please do so! For similar incomplete sentences, see Dan. 3:15; Luk. 13:9; Luk. 19:42; Rom. 9:22; 1Sa. 12:14-15. (This type of expression is called aposiopesis.)

Moses reference to the book of God is the first reference to this book in the scriptures. We do not know how Moses even knew such a book existed. We do not know what Moses understood the nature of this book to be. (Many facts and practices in divine religion had been taught to the pre-Mosaic patriarchs, concerning which we are told nothing of the way or time they were revealed. Examples include tithing, the priesthood, burnt-offerings, etc.)

This book is elsewhere called the book of the living (Psa. 69:28; Isa. 4:3), the book of remembrance (Mal. 3:16), and the book of life (Php. 4:3; Rev. 3:5; Rev. 20:15; Rev. 13:8; Rev. 17:8).

We do not know for sure that the book mentioned by Moses was the same book that we know as the book of life. Possibly this book was a list of those granted more lifetime on earth, and did not have reference to eternal life. We do feel, however, that it probably was the same book that we know as the book of life, because the names of those to be saved by God have been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world (Rev. 17:8). We do not assume that Moses knew as much about the book as we have learned by revelation since his time.

Moses prayed for Aaron also at this time. The exact time of Moses prayer is hard to specify. Possibly it was during the forty-day period in the mountain that Moses was to in a few days (Deu. 9:18-20; Exo. 34:1-2; Exo. 34:28).

There would come a time when not even the prayers of Moses or Samuel could avert judgment upon Israel, but that time was not yet (Jer. 15:1).

22.

Was Moses prayer granted? (Exo. 32:33-35)

The request (or offer) of Moses was refused. Moses could not be a substitute for Israel. (Only Christ could be a substitute.) Whoever had sinned would be blotted out of the book, not Moses.

Though God is forgiving, there are times when He will be no means clear the guilty (Exo. 34:7). This gives God no pleasure. For he doth not afflict willingly (from his heart), nor grieve the children of men. (Lam. 3:32-33) But justice must often be administered, even when it is painful.

God foresaw that that generation would continue in their ways of unbelief. He foreknew that that generation would be rejected at Kadesh-barnea (Num. 14:22-35), and all perish in the desert (Exo. 32:34 b).

Forty years long was I grieved with that generation, And said, It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways: Wherefore, I sware in my wrath. That they should not enter into my rest (Psa. 95:10-11). Heb. 4:5-7 quotes this passage, and indicates that Israel not only did not get to enter into the promised rest of Canaan-land, but they did not enter Gods eternal rest. How totally tragic! (But the sad fate of Israel was written to warn us of the same danger! Heb. 4:11)

Nonetheless, God did allow the people to be led on by Moses and an angel to the place of which God had spoken (to the promised land). God foreknew they would never make it.

God promised that My angel shall go before your face (or presence). Regarding this angel see Exo. 33:2; Exo. 23:20-24; Num. 20:16.

The statement is Exo. 32:35 that Jehovah smote the people is indefinite as to when and how the smiting was done. The verb translated smote is related to the word translated plague (negeph) in Exo. 12:13; Num. 16:47. This suggests a deadly smiting. The R.S.V. translates it The LORD sent a plague upon the people. It has been suggested that this plague was the possible consequence of the potion (the gold-dusted water) that Moses had made them drink.[444] This notion seems untrue. See notes on Exo. 32:20.

[444] Broadman Bible Commentary, Vol. 1 (1969), p. 454.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XXXII.
THE IDOLATRY OF THE GOLDEN CALF.

(1) When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down.After seven chapters of directions, which belong to the Mosaic or Levitical Law, the writer here resumes his historical narrative. Leaving Moses still in the mount, he returns to the plain at its base in order to relate the events which had there occurred during Moses absence. It has been suggested that Exodus 31 was originally followed by Exodus 35, and that Exodus 32-34 form a distinct composition, which was subsequently inserted at this point (Cook). But this supposition is improbable. Exodus 35 does not cohere with Exodus 31. Passing from one to other, we should be sensible of a gap which required filling up. Neither does Exodus 32 commence like an independent narrative. It rests on the fact of the long delay of Moses in Sinai, which requires Exodus 25-31 to explain it; and its mention of the people, and the mount, without further designation, implies reference to something that has gone before. Exodus 32-34 occur really in their natural, their proper, and, no doubt, in their original place.

The people gathered themselves together unto Aaron.Moses, before his departure, had left directions that the people should in any difficulty take the advice of Aaron and Hur (Exo. 24:14). It is not surprising, however, that, when the difficulty arose, Aaron alone was consulted. Aaron had been jointleader with Moses from the first (see Exo. 4:29-30; Exo. 5:1; Exo. 5:4; Exo. 5:20, &c.); Hur had only very recently been advanced into a position of authority (Exo. 17:10; Exo. 24:14). He was, at the most, the Lepidus of the Triumvirate.

Up, make us gods.Rather, make us a god. The religious condition of the Israelites during the sojourn in Egypt has been so entirely passed over in the previous narrative, that this request comes upon us as a surprise and a shock. True, there have been warnings against idolatry, reiterated warnings (Exo. 20:4-5; Exo. 20:23; Exo. 23:32-33), but no tendency towards it has manifested itself, no hint has been given that it was an immediate and pressing danger. When, however, we carefully scrutinise the rest of Scripture, we find reason to believe that a leaning towards idolatry had, in point of fact, shown itself among the people while they were in Egypt, and had even attained some considerable development. (See Lev. 17:7; Jos. 24:14; Eze. 20:8; Eze. 23:3.) This tendency had been checked by the series of extraordinary manifestations which had accompanied the exodus. Now, however, in the absence of Moses, in the uncertainty which prevailed as to whether he still lived or not, and in the withdrawal from the camp of that Divine Presence which had hitherto gone before them, the idolatrous instinct once more came to the front. The cry was raised, make us a godmake us something to take the place of the pillar of the cloud, something visible, tangible, on which we can believe the Divine Presence to rest, and which may go before us and conduct us.

This Moses, the man that brought us up . . . Contemptuous words, showing how short-lived is human gratitude, and even human respect. An absence of less than six weeks, and a belief that he was no more, had sufficed to change the great deliverer into this Moses, the man who brought us up.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

WORSHIP OF THE GOLDEN CALF, Exo 32:1-6.

1. Moses delayed to come down Literally, shamed to come down, that is, put to shame those who were waiting for him . This delay was provided for and suggested in Moses’s charge to the elders, (Exo 24:14,) but Israel’s faith was not sufficient for the test . Up,

make us gods The language suggests the excitement and persistency of a mob . Probably a better translation would be, Up, make us a god . The manner in which Aaron complied with their demand shows that the people desired a visible image of God. The religious nature of man, uneducated into a high spiritual conception of God, has always clamoured for some visible sign or representation of the Deity.

This Moses, the man that brought us This manner of speech implies not only impatience, but also a measure of indignation.

We wot not We know not. Not improbably they began to think that Moses had perished in the fires which they had seen on the top of the mountain, (Exo 24:17. )

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

The People’s Rebellion and the Molten Calf ( Exo 32:1-6 ).

While Moses was in the Mount for forty days and forty nights receiving his instructions from Yahweh, the people waiting in the plain below became disquieted. They had somewhat fearfully seen him ascend and disappear into the cloud and then they had waited and waited and he had not returned. After that a whole moon period had passed and he had still not returned. And they knew the fearful nature of this God Who was in the Mountain (Exo 19:18-19; Exo 20:18) and the warning of what would happen to any who approached the Mountain (Exo 19:21). Thus they began to be certain that they would see Moses no more.

And by now they were not sure whether they wanted to have any more to do with this terrible God Who revealed Himself in the way that He had, and made such terrible threats. They had agreed a covenant with Him out of a combination of gratitude and fear, but now they were not so sure that that was what they wanted. They preferred gods with whom they could be more familiar, like the gods they had known in Egypt whom others worshipped. They wanted a compromise.

a The people see that Moses delays in his descent from the Mountain and call on Aaron to make them gods to go before them (Exo 32:1).

b Aaron tells them all to break off their multiplicity of earrings (Exo 32:2).

c All the people broke off the golden earrings which were in their ears and brought them to Aaron (Exo 32:3).

d Aaron received them and fashioned the gold with a graving tool and made it a molten calf (Exo 32:4 a).

d And they said, “These are your gods, Oh Israel’ who brought you up out of the land of Egypt (Exo 32:4 b).

c And when Aaron saw it he built an altar before it, and made proclamation and said, “Tomorrow shall be a feast to Yahweh” (Exo 32:5).

b They rose up early in the morning and offered whole burnt offerings and brought peace offerings (Exo 32:6 a).

a And the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play (Exo 32:6 b).

Note the parallels which are deliberately cynical. In ‘a’ the people call on Aaron to make them gods to go before them and in the parallel reveal what kind of gods they have received by their feasting and dancing. In ‘b’ Aaron calls for their earrings and in the parallel the people offer whole burnt offerings before them. In ‘c’ the people break off their earrings and bring them to Aaron, and in the parallel he builds an altar before them and declares a feast to Yahweh (the writer is viewing it ironically). In ‘d’ Aaron fashions from the earrings a molten calf, and in the parallel they declare them to be the gods who delivered them from Egypt. The stress all through is on the folly of their actions.

Exo 32:1

‘And when the people saw that Moses delayed from coming down from the mountain, the people gathered themselves together to Aaron, and said to him, “Up, make us gods (or ‘a god’ or ‘God’) who will go before us, for as for this man Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what is become of him.” ’

It is understandable that the people would become alarmed. Their nerves had reached breaking point at some of the revelations from the mountain. And Moses had now been gone for over a moon period. But how are to understand their request? They surely knew that Aaron was Yahweh’s man, and would be faithful to Moses as his brother. It is probable therefore that by ‘gods’ they meant images of Yahweh that they could worship and appeal to and with whom they could feel at ease (for an image of Yahweh compare Jdg 17:3-6; Jdg 18:12; Jdg 18:20; Jdg 18:30-31). Yes, Yahweh had delivered them. But they wanted nothing to do with this God of the mountains Who had almost certainly consumed Moses, as He had almost consumed them (Exo 20:18), and had certainly threatened to (Exo 19:21; Exo 19:24). Rather would they like to approach Yahweh through the kind of images they were familiar with in Egypt, awe inspiring but without causing trouble. They wanted a god made to their own requirements.

“ Up, make us a god/gods who will go before us.” Up to this point it was Yahweh Who had gone before them in the pillar of cloud and fire (Exo 13:21). But that pillar had disappeared onto the mountain along with Moses. Now they wanted visible representations of Yahweh instead, so that He could go before them in a way that was controllable. They wanted Yahweh’s power on their behalf, but they wanted to feel comfortable with Him. They had had enough of this fierce God of the mountains, Who fortunately seemed to remain in the Mountain. They wanted to be on their way, and quickly, so that they could get away from Him. Thus they wanted Aaron to make God (or ‘a god’ or ‘gods’). (Whichever way we translate it this is the basic point. They wanted a man-made God, a contradiction in terms which is the basis of idolatry). And if Aaron could give Yahweh a bit of a back up, even better.

Note the peremptory command. They were in an ugly mood (compare Exo 16:2; Exo 17:3; Num 14:2; Num 14:4; Num 16:41). They were putting great pressure on him. There was strong feeling about, and Aaron felt threatened.

“ For as for this man Moses , the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what is become of him.” The narrator wants us to see the attitude that lay behind this statement and its double edged nature. It was a mixture of contempt and anger, and yet of grudging recognition of what he had done for them. But their resentment is loud and clear. No sympathy with Moses, only enmity. Yes, he had delivered them from Egypt, but what had happened to him now? He had trusted this mountain God, Who surely was not the Yahweh Who had delivered them out of Egypt. And look what good it had done him. Where was he? He had disappeared and they did not know where he was. Indeed he was probably dead. And he deserved it.

This attitude is in distinct contrast with Yahweh’s estimate of Moses in Exo 32:32-33. They may dismiss Moses but Yahweh would not.

But Aaron also had delivered them from Egypt, and they knew both where he was and that they could trust him. And what was more they knew that he was more pliable. That suited them. Would he not now make them images of Yahweh so as to lead them? Would he not bring back to them the great Deliverer? There is a sense in which this was not open rebellion against Yahweh. They were not rejecting Him altogether. What they wanted was help and assurance from someone they relied on, and to return to the old compromising ways (about which we know very little, but can surmise much from this narrative).

Aaron no doubt felt trapped. It was true that Moses appeared to have disappeared, and that there was sense in what they said. And he perhaps had visions of himself as priest and leader to these people. Why else did he do what he did? Pride and vanity make us do strange things.

The temptation for images and like things to intrude into the worship of Yahweh is familiar from the past. They had had to put such things aside at Bethel (Gen 35:2; Gen 35:4). And we can only assume from this incident that they had had similar problems in Egypt. It is doubtful if many of them had then been pure Yahwists, even if they had in general believed in the God of their fathers, and of their tribes. And there were among them the mixed multitude (Exo 12:38) who probably had not worshipped Yahweh at all until He provided a good means of escape from slavery. Furthermore Aaron’s response suggests that he was at least familiar with their ideas. None of this just arrived out of the blue.

Exo 32:2

‘And Aaron said to them, “Pull off the golden rings which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons and of your daughters, and bring them to me.” ’

It is clear from this that both men (‘your sons’) and women in Israel wore earrings, and Gen 35:4, where their earrings are closely connected to their false gods and have to be disposed of, makes clear that these had strong religious significance. They were thus very suitable for the making of ‘gods’ and would automatically give credence to the gods which were made. The fact that these leaders themselves are not told to pull off their own earrings may suggest that Aaron knew that they would be unwilling to sacrifice their own which may well have been important status symbols. Some suggest that by demanding these sacred objects Aaron was hoping to receive a denial. But in that case he would have asked for theirs too.

“ Your wives — sons — daughters.” Everyone apart from the elders, which makes it unlikely that the elders did not also wear them.

Exo 32:3

‘And all the people pulled off the golden rings which were in their ears, and brought them to Aaron.’

The people responded willingly. This demonstrates how concerned they were and how urgently they felt the need to escape. After the extraordinary events of a month previously they felt a religious need, and that they had been deserted, and so they were willing to offer their talismans if it meant that they could have a god whom they could see.

Exo 32:4

‘And he received it at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, and made it a molten calf. And they said, “This is your god, O Israel, who delivered you out of the land of Egypt.” ’

Aaron received the earrings from them, melted them down and fashioned a golden calf. Notice how specific this is. Later he will make the excuse that it just somehow happened.

“ A molten calf.” Note that it is never described as ‘the golden calf’. It is a ‘molten calf’. One fashioned and shaped. The use of ‘calf’ rather than ‘bull’ is probably deliberate in order to put it in proper perspective. Before God this great bull was but an infant.

The significance of this raises complicated questions which are linked. Why did Aaron make a molten calf? What did the people see it to mean?

The golden calf. Bull worship was common in Egypt in many forms. Quite apart from the Apis-bull of Memphis and the Mnevis bull of Heliopolis, there was combined bull worship and worship of Horus in lower Egypt, which was near Goshen, and other traces are known of it. The bull was prominent in Egypt as a symbol of the fertility of nature and as a symbol of raw physical power.

But the Canaanite Baal was also worshipped in the form of a bull, again symbolising fertility and strength, and Baal worship was also well known in parts of lower Egypt (e.g. at Baal-zephon). It is true that the people knew that the bull-gods of Egypt had been defeated by Yahweh, but how more likely than by one who was Himself like a strong bull-calf? And ‘baal’ meant ‘lord’. So Aaron knew already of divine bulls called ‘lord’. Thus he might well have seen a bull-calf as a suitable way of representing the strong and powerful Yahweh, the Lord. (Later in Canaan confusion would arise between Baal and the Lord Yahweh because Yahweh could be called ‘baali’ (my Lord)).

Alternately bulls could elsewhere, like cherubim, be seen as bearers of the gods, and the idea of the bull-calf may therefore have been as a throne-bearer of the invisible Yahweh, an insidious equivalent of the Ark of the Covenant. And this must certainly have been the significance of the calves set up at Dan and Bethel by Jeroboam I later, for they raised no protest from pronounced Yahwists, which would have been unlikely had they been seen as similar to Baal images. So why not the same here?

So whatever the source the image was intended to represent Yahweh worship in one way or another, the worship of the great deliverer from Egypt (Exo 32:4).

“ And they said, “ This is your god, O Israel, who delivered you out of the land of Egypt.” ” The molten calf was made of many earrings which had all had occult significance. There was only one calf and therefore we are probably to see here a plural of intensity, ‘This is your God’. But we are also probably intended to see in it a sarcastic reference by the writer to the fact that this is no Yahweh, it is a conglomerate of all their earrings. The mockery extends to the ridiculous idea that this molten image could have delivered them from Egypt.

“ They said.” This was expressing their view, but put in such a way as to mock them. They were so deceived, it is being suggested, that they intended it seriously. They rather foolishly saw the molten calf as the One Who had delivered them from Egypt, so ridiculous can men be. The writer saw that they had made the great Yahweh into a lump of metal made up of precisely the religious amulets that had been unable to deliver them before. How then could it be seen as the deliverer from Egypt?

Exo 32:5

‘And when Aaron saw it he built an altar before it. And Aaron made a proclamation and said, “Tomorrow shall be a feast to Yahweh.” ’

Having produced the image Aaron, in spite of the fact that he had fashioned it, was impressed by it, and raised up an altar before it so that they could offer sacrifices to it. He recognised that it had been made of sacred gold, and saw it as a suitable way to represent Yahweh. And no doubt he persuaded himself that they would be able to see Yahweh in His invisible power behind the bull-calf. So does sinful man always reason before sliding into full blown idolatry.

We may feel that there is no way in which we could have been as deceived as these people were. But idol worship is insidious, and it is surprising how easy it is to begin to sense something other worldly when facing a great image in a religious setting, being worshipped and chanted to by adherents. Such an atmosphere can make people think great folly. And there is evil behind the idol (Deu 32:17; 1Co 10:20).

Or we may feel like Aaron that a physical representation can do no harm. The bull-calf will make men recognise the strength and power of God. They will see God through the bull. But, alas, in the end the bull becomes all. And God is diminished. And men’s ideas of God become earthbound.

And then he proclaimed a feast to Yahweh on the morrow. This demonstrates again that the image was intended to represent Yahweh in some way. But he had by his action, probably unintentionally (he had probably not thought his ideas through), reduced Yahweh to a nature god, a fertility god, a divine being who was merely a part of natural forces, a beast, with all that that would entail for forms of worship, and not the great Lord of heaven and earth. He had dragged Him down, and that is how the people would worship Him, as a nature god and no longer the Lord Yahweh.

“ Tomorrow shall be a feast to Yahweh.” He was making his best effort to ensure the continued worship of Yahweh, Whom he and the elders had seen in the Mount. He informed them that they would on the morrow celebrate Yahweh in His new form. It would appear that he, as well as the children of Israel, was not knowledgeable enough to strictly distinguish Yahweh from other gods, in spite of His great deliverance from Egypt. So while Yahweh was proposing him as ‘the Priest’ in the Mount, Aaron was demonstrating how much he still had to learn about God.

Exo 32:6

‘And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered whole burnt offerings and brought peace offerings, and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.’

The people were eager to commence their new relationship with this god. With no thought of deliberately diminishing Yahweh they quickly reduced Him to their own level. This god could be treated with awe, but there was no danger of fearful repercussions, and then he could be manipulated by their activities. He would not thunder from the mountains. He was a cosy god.

So they rose early to meet the new day and celebrated a great feast, and then, necessarily affected by how he had been fashioned, and by overmuch wine, they began to worship him as a nature god. ‘The people sat down to eat and drink’. There is a deliberate contrast here with the elders who ‘Beheld God and did eat and drink’ (Exo 24:11). So far had they fallen. ‘They rose to play.’ That is to sing, and dance, and engage in sexual and immoral activity, loosening up their clothes and stripping them off as they would have done had they been Baal worshippers. The idea was to stir this god into action by their behaviour before him. How Yahweh had been diminished in their eyes.

“ Offered whole burnt offerings and brought peace offerings.” Both whole burnt offerings and peace offerings had been known for many years past (Exo 20:24), and are known of elsewhere, and were now offered to the molten calf as they had previously been offered to Yahweh.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Exo 32:1  And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.

Exo 32:1 Comments – The people needed to put their eyes on the Lord, and not on a leader. We need to be led by the Spirit of the Living God Almighty. Amen!

Exo 32:1 Comments – We find a reference to Exo 32:1 in Act 7:40, “Saying unto Aaron, Make us gods to go before us: for as for this Moses, which brought us out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.”

Exo 32:2  And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me.

Exo 32:3  And all the people brake off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron.

Exo 32:4  And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.

Exo 32:4 “And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf” – Comments – Aaron built the calf that the people requested. He sinned before Moses and died before him in the wilderness.

Exo 32:4 “and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt” – Comments – So quickly did the Israelites forget God even after God’s appearance on Mount Sinai in Exodus 19-20. Note:

Gal 1:6, “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.”

Evidently, many of the Israelites had embraced pagan Egyptian polygamy.

Exo 32:6 Comments – In 1 Corinthians Paul dealt with this problem of eating, drinking, and making merry as a dishonor to the Lord.

1Co 10:4, “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.”

Exo 32:6 Scripture References – Note:

1Co 10:7  Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.”

Exo 32:7 “your people” Comments – In other words, God denied them.

Exo 32:8 “They have turned aside quickly” Scripture References – Note:

Gal 1:6, “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.”

Exo 32:9 “a stiffnecked people” – Comments – God speaks the facts as He sees them.

Exo 32:9 Comments – God is a jealous God, His name is Jealous.

Exo 32:10  Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation.

Exo 32:10 Scripture References – Note:

Num 14:12, “I will smite them with the pestilence, and disinherit them, and will make of thee a greater nation and mightier than they.”

Exo 32:11 Comments – This is one of the greatest intercessory prayers in the Bible. See two other examples:

1. Abraham praying for Sodom and Gomorrah.

2. Jesus Christ receiving for the sins of the world in his own body.

Exo 32:11-12 Comments – Moses denied the people also and said “God’s people”.

Exo 32:14 Comments – God, His purpose and character does not change, but His way of dealing with people does change in different dispensations. God kept His Word (Exo 32:13).

Exo 32:15  And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tables of the testimony were in his hand: the tables were written on both their sides; on the one side and on the other were they written.

Exo 32:16  And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables.

Exo 32:17  And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said unto Moses, There is a noise of war in the camp.

Exo 32:17 Comments – Joshua was a man of war. He had just defeated the children of Amalek and was thinking about battles.

Exo 32:18  And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome: but the noise of them that sing do I hear.

Exo 32:18 Comments It was not the sound of winning or losing a battle, but the sound of a party.

Exo 32:19  And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses’ anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.

Exo 32:19 “Moses’ anger waxed hot” – Comments – The Scriptures record several occasions when Moses displayed negative actions as a result of his anger. All of these actions resulted in consequences in the life of Moses. Moses’ anger at the abuse of his people moved him to murder:

Exo 2:11-12, “And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren. And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand .”

Moses was angry with Pharaoh:

Exo 11:8, “And all these thy servants shall come down unto me, and bow down themselves unto me, saying, Get thee out, and all the people that follow thee: and after that I will go out. And he went out from Pharaoh in a great anger .”

Moses was angry with the children of Israel:

Exo 16:20, “Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them left of it until the morning, and it bred worms, and stank: and Moses was wroth with them .”

God commanded Moses to speak to the rock, but in his anger, he smote the rock twice. This cost Moses his trip into the Promised Land:

Num 20:11, “And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice : and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also.”

Exo 32:23 Scripture References – Note:

Act 7:40, “Saying unto Aaron, Make us gods to go before us: for as for this Moses, which brought us out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.”

Exo 32:24  And I said unto them, Whosoever hath any gold, let them break it off. So they gave it me: then I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf.

Exo 32:24 Comments – We try to make our wrong sound minimum when we have to confess our faults.

Exo 32:25  And when Moses saw that the people were naked; (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame among their enemies:)

Exo 32:26  Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD’S side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him.

Exo 32:27  And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.

Exo 32:27 Comments – Moses was carrying out God’s commandments.

Exo 22:20, “He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed. Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.”

Exo 32:32 “ thy book which thou hast written” – Comments – Note other references to this book:

Dan 12:1, “And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book .”

Php 4:3, “And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life .”

Rev 3:5, “He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life , but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.”

Rev 21:27, “And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb’s book of life .”

Exo 32:33  And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.

Exo 32:33 Comments – This is a clear example of people losing their salvation.

Exo 32:34  Therefore now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them.

Exo 32:35  And the LORD plagued the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made.

Exo 32:35 Scripture References – Note:

1Co 10:22, “Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Golden Calf

v. 1. And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the text implies that they had waited for his return in vain, and therefore foolishly concluded that he had forsaken them, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, not in the spirit of an orderly congregation, but of a mob bent on violence, and said unto him, Up, make us gods which shall go before us! For as for this Moses, as they now contemptuously called him, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot (know) not what is become of him. They had given up all hopes regarding the leadership of Moses, and therefore proposed to establish their own gods, fashioned according to the ideas of their perverted mind.

v. 2. And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, the heavy ring pendants worn according to Oriental fashion, and bring them unto me. If Aaron, as some commentators state, made this demand in a spirit of cunning, thinking that the great sacrifice which this involved would keep the people from carrying out their plan, he found himself badly in error.

v. 3. And all the people brake off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron. Swept along by a wave of mob activity, the people showed a fanatical readiness to part with the possessions which they prized most highly. It is the same tendency which may be observed in the case of the many cults and heresies of our days, which spread with such alarming rapidity and command such great resources.

v. 4. And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving-tool after he had made it a molten calf. After melting the golden rings, Aaron cast a rough figure of a young ox, or bullock, and then finished the outline with the tools of an engraver. It may not have been a work of art, but it served its purpose. And they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. In these words the people proclaimed the idol as god and rejected the true and only God.

v. 5. And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation and said, Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord. The name of Jehovah was introduced to cover up the evil, the implication being that he, Aaron, at least, had erected this figure in honor of Jehovah, the true God. St. Paul expressly calls the children of Israel idolaters in speaking of this incident, 1Co 10:7.

v. 6. And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, in honor of the false god, and brought peace-offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, in a joyful sacrificial meal, and rose up to play, in merry festive games, in wilful abandon. The worship of the golden calf is a picture of the idolatry of our days, for these are the gods of the world, mammon, gold, money, luxury, eating, drinking, lascivious merriment. It is the very height of hypocrisy if Christians take part in the idolatrous ways of the world and then try to cover their sin with a sanctimonious behavior.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

THE IDOLATRY OF THE GOLDEN CALF. During the absence of Moses in Mount Sinai, an absence of nearly six weeks, the Israelites grew impatient, and regarding their leader as lost to them, and the Divine Presence which they had hitherto enjoyed as lost with him, insisted on having a symbol of that presence made for them, which should henceforth go in front of the host and so lead them on in their journeyings. It would seem that the pillar of the cloud, which had gone before them from Succoth to Sinai, was now removed from the camp, and resting upon the “mount” where Moses was (Exo 24:15). Under these circumstances they wanted a visible tangible something, in which they could regard the Divine Presence as resting, and whereto they might offer worship and sacrifice (Exo 32:8). They therefore went to Aaron, whom Moses had bid them consult in any difficulty (Exo 24:14), and requested him to “make them a god.” Aaron had not the courage to meet this request with a plain negative. As Augustine and Theodoret conjecture with much probability, he sought to turn them from their purpose by asking them to give up those possessions which he conceived that they most valuedviz, the personal ornaments of their wives and children. But he had miscalculated the strength of their fanaticism. The people immediately compliedthe ornaments were brought inand Aaron was compelled, either to fly from his word, or to lend himself to the people’s wishes. He did the latter. Either looking to Egypt for a pattern, or falling back on some old form of Syrian or Chaldaean idolatry (see the comment on Exo 32:4), he melted down the gold and cast it into the form of a calf. The “god” being thus made, an altar was built to it (Exo 32:5) and sacrifice offered (Exo 32:6). Such was the condition of affairs when Moses, having just received the two tables of stone, was warned by God of what had occurred, and bidden to descend from Sinai.

Exo 32:1

The people saw that Moses delayed to come down. He had been absent, probably, above a month. It was the first day of their worship when he descended; and a week would suffice for the collection of the ornaments, the formation of the mould, and the casting of the idol. Unto Aaron. It is not clear why no mention is made of Hur, who had been made co-regent with Aaron (Exo 24:14); but perhaps Aaron was known to be the weaker of the two. Up, make us gods. Most moderns translate” a god.” But the word is vague, and the speakers did not themselves perhaps care whether one idol was made or more. Which shall go before us. The Israelites were apparently tired of their long delay at Sinai, and were anxious to proceed upon their journey. They wanted a visible god at their head, to give them confidence and courage. Compare 1Sa 4:3-8. We wot not what is become of him. He might, they thought, be deadhe might have returned to Egypthe might be going to stay always with God in the mount which they did not dare to approach. At any rate, he was lost to them, and they might never see him again.

Exo 32:2

Break off. “Take off” would perhaps be a better translation. The ear-rings would not require any breaking. They were penannular, and could be removed by a smart pull. Your wives, your sons, and your daughters. See the comment on Exo 3:22. It is implied that the men did not wear earrings. At an earlier date the household of Jacob, chiefly men, had worn them (Gen 35:4).

Exo 32:3

All the people broke off the golden ear-rings. Thus, as is supposed, disappointing Aaron, who had counted on the refusal of the women to part with their finery, and the reluctance of the men to compel them. Had ear-rings been still regarded as amulets (Gen 1:1-31.s.c.) it is not likely that they would have been so readily given up.

Exo 32:4

And fashioned it with a graving tool. Rather, “and bound it (the gold) in a bag.” Compare 2Ki 5:23, where the same two Hebrew words occur in the same sense. It is impossible to extract from the original the sense given in the Authorised Version, since the simple copula van cannot mean “after.” When two verbs in the same tense are conjoined by van “and,” the two actions must be simultaneous, or the latter follow the former. But the calf cannot have been graven first, and then molten. It is objected to the rendering, “he bound it in a bag,” that that action is so trivial that it would be superfluous to mention it (Keil). But it is quite consonant with the simplicity of Scripture to mention very trivial circumstances. The act of putting up in bags is mentioned both here and also in 2Ki 5:23, and 2Ki 12:9. They said. The fashioners of the image said this. These be thy gods. Rather, “This is thy God.” Why Aaron selected the form of the calf as that which he would present to the Israelites to receive their worship, has been generally explained by supposing that his thoughts reverted to Egypt, and found in the Apis of Memphis or the Mnevis of Hellopolis the pattern which he thought it best to follow. But there are several objections to this view.

1. The Egyptian gods had just been discredited by their powerlessness being manifestedit was an odd time at which to fly to them.

2. Apis and Mnevis were not molten calves, but live bulls. If the design had been to revert to Egypt, would not a living animal have been selected?

3. The calf when made was not viewed as an image of any Egyptian god, but as a representation of Jehovah (2Ki 12:5).

4. The Israelites are never taxed with having worshipped the idols of Egypt anywhere else than in Egypt (Jos 24:14; Eze 20:8; Eze 23:3). To us it seems probable that Aaron reverted to an earlier period than the time of the sojourn in Egypt, that he went back to those “gods on the other side of the flood,” which Joshua warned the Israelites some sixty years later, to “put away” (Joshua l.s.c.). The subject is one too large for discussion here; but may not the winged and human-headed bull, which was the emblem of divine power from a very early date in Babylon, have retained a place in the recollections of the people in all their wanderings, and have formed a portion of their religions symbolism? May it not have been this conception which lay at the root of the cherubic forms, and the revival of which now seemed to Aaron the smallest departure from pure monotheism with which the people would be contented?

Exo 32:5

He built an altar before it. Aaron thus proceeded to “follow a multitude to evil” (Exo 23:2), and encouraged the idolatry which he felt himself powerless to restrain. Still, he did not intend that the people should drift away from the worship of Jehovah, or view the calf as anything but a symbol of him. He therefore made proclamation and said, Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord (literally, “to Jehovah “).

Exo 32:6

They rose up early on the morrow. The people were like a child with a new toy. They could scarcely sleep for thinking of it. So, as soon as it was day, they left their beds, and hastened to begin the new worship Burnt offerings and peace offerings. It is evident that both of these were customary forms of sacrificeneither of them first introduced by the Law, which had notexcept so far as the “Book of the Covenant” was concernedbeen promulgated. Compare Jethro’s offerings (Exo 18:12). The people sat down to eat and drink. A feast almost always followed upon a sacrifice, only certain portions of the victim being commonly burnt, while the rest was consumed by the offerers. See the comment on Exo 18:1-27 :32. And rose up to play. This “play” was scarcely of a harmless kind. The sensualism of idol-worship constantly led on to sensuality; and the feasts upon idol-sacrifices terminated in profligate orgies of a nature which cannot be described. See the application of the passage by St. Paul in the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Exo 10:7), and compare Exo 18:25

HOMILETICS

Exo 32:1-6

The hankering after idols, and its consequences.

There is a war ever going on in human nature between the flesh and the spirit (Rom 7:23; Rom 8:1-13). The two are “contrary the one to the other.” From the time of their leaving Egypt, the Israelites had been leading a spiritual life, depending upon an unseen Godfollowing his mandatesreposing under the sense of his protection. But the strain was too much for them. So long as they had Moses with them, to encourage them by his exhortations and support them by his good example, they managed to maintain this higher life, to “walk in the spirit,” to “live by faith and not by sight.” When he was gone, when he seemed to them lost, when they had no hope of seeing him again, the reaction set in. The flesh asserted itself. They had given way to idolatry in Egypt, and worshipped, in part, Egyptian gods, in part, “the gods which their fathers served on the other side of the flood” (Jos 24:14, Jos 24:15); they had, no doubt, accompanied this worship with the licentiousness which both the Egyptians (Herod. 2.60) and the Babylonians (ib, 1.199) made a part of their religion. Now the recollection of these things recurred to them, their desires became inflamedthe flesh triumphed. The consequences were

I. THAT THEY BROKE A PLAIN COMMAND OF GOD, AND ONE TO WHICH THEY HAD RECENTLY PLEDGED THEMSELVES. “All the words which the Lord hath said,” they had declared “we will do” (Exo 24:3); and among these “words” was the plain one”Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image, nor the likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the water under the earth; thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them.” Nevertheless they required Aaron to make them a material god, and it was no sooner made than they hastened to worship it with burnt-offerings and other sacrifices.

II. THAT THEY PROCEEDED TO BREAK THE MORAL LAW WRITTEN IN THEIR HEARTS, AND LATELY REINFORCED BY THE PLAIN PROHIBITION OF THE SEVENTH COMMANDMENT. “They sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.” They engaged in licentious dancing (Exo 32:19), and perhaps laid aside some of their usual garments (Exo 32:25). They turned a worship, which they still pretended to render to Jehovah (Exo 32:5) into an orgy. If they did not proceed to the lengths of completed sin, they entered upon the slippery path which, almost of necessity, leads to it. By this conduct they so provoked God

III. THAT THEY RAN THE RISK OF BEING SWEPT AWAY FROM THE EARTH. A sentence of death was at first pronounced against the whole people (Exo 32:10), and would infallibly have taken effect, had not Moses interceded, and by his intercession prevailed. Universal apostasy deserved universal destruction. There is no reason to believe that the execution of the sentence pronounced would have been stayed, but for the expostulation and the prayer recorded in Exo 32:11-13.

IV. THAT THEY ACTUALLY BROUGHT UPON THEMSELVES A HEAVY PUNISHMENT. The immediate slaughter of three thousand was required to purge the offence (Exo 32:28). The sin was further visited upon the offenders subsequently (see comment on Exo 32:34). Some were, on account of it, “blotted out of God’s book” (Exo 32:33). Christians should take warning, and not, when they have once begun “living after the Spirit,” fall back and “live after the flesh” (Rom 8:13). There are still in the world numerous tempting idolatries. We may hanker after the “lusts of the flesh,” or “of the eye”we may weary of the strain upon our nature which the spiritual life imposeswe may long to exchange the high and rare atmosphere in which we have for a while with difficulty sustained ourselves, for the lower region where we shall breathe more easily. But we must control our inclinations. To draw back is to incur a terrible dangerno less a one than “the perdition of our souls.” It were better “not to have known the way of righteousness,” or walked in it for a time, “than, after we have known it,” and walked in it, “to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto us” (1Pe 2:21).

HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG

Exo 32:1-6

The Golden Calf.

I. THE PEOPLE‘S REQUEST TO AARON.

1. The cause of the request. There are really two causes to be considered here, first, a cause of which they were conscious, and then, secondly, a deeper cause of which they were not conscious. The delay of Moses to return was the reason they put forward. We must do them the justice of noticing that they seem to have waited till the forty days were well-nigh expired before preferring their request; and an absence of forty days was inexplicable to minds as yet so spiritually darkened and benumbed as those of the majority of the people. What he could have to do, and how he could live so long, away up on a barren mountain, was beyond their power of imagination. Moses was given up just as a ship is given up when it has not been heard of for many days after the reasonable period of the voyage. It was not a case of being out of sight, out of mind; he had been a great deal in mind, and the general conclusion was that in some mysterious way he had vanished altogether. But there is also the deeper reason of the request to be found in the people’s continued ignorance of the real hold which Jehovah had upon them, and the sort of future towards which he would have them look. Their action here was founded not on what they knew, but emphatically on what they did not know. They could not say, “Moses is dead,” or “he has forsaken us.” They could only say, “We wot not what is become of him.” So far as outward circumstances were concerned, the people seem to have been in a state of comparative security and comfort. When Moses went up into the mountain, he knew not how long he would have to wait; that was not for him or Aaron or any man to know. But however long he was to be away, all due provision had been made for the people’s welfare. The daily morning manna was there; and Aaron and Hur were appointed to settle any disputes that might arise. There is no word of any external enemy approaching; there is no threatening of civil strife; there is not even a recurrence of murmuring after the fleshpots of Egypt. All that was needed was quiet waiting on the part of the people; if they had waited forty months instead of forty days, there would have been nothing to cause reasonable astonishment; for Jehovah and not man is the lord of times and seasons.

2. The request itself. There is a certain unexpectedness in this request. Who is it that is missing? Moses, the visible leader,” the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt.” Hence we might suppose the first feeling of the people would be to put some one in Moses’ place; even as later they said, “Let us make a captain, and let us return into Egypt” (Num 14:4). But instead of this their cry to Aaron is, “Make us gods.” How little did Moses expect, when he put Aaron to be counsellor of the people in his absence, that it was for image-worship they would seek his help! And yet the more we ponder, the more we shall be led. to feel that this was just the kind of request that might be expected from the people. Their ancestors, Abraham, IsaActs and Jacob believed in the invisible Jehovah; but faith in the invisible will not go down from generation to generation, as if it were a blood quality. The God of Abraham was one whom, though Abraham could not see, he could hear as speaking with most miraculous organ. But these people at Sinai wanted above all things a god whom they could see, even though it was but a lifeless, sightless, voiceless image. Great is the mystery of idolatry. How men have come to bow down to stocks and stones is not a question to be dismissed with a few contemptuous words. These idolatrous Israelites were seeking satisfaction for a desire of the heart as imperious in its own way as bodily hunger and thirst. They wanted something to be a centre of worship and religious observances in general, and the quickest way seemed to fabricate such a centre by the making of gods. Whereas, if they had only been patient and trustful and waited for Moses, they would have found that, even by the very absence of Moses, God himself was providing for the worship of the people. We have here another illustration of the frequent follies of popular decisions. The greatest thing that required to be done for these Israelites was the thing that needed to be done in them.

II. AARON‘S COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUEST. He shewed great readiness in falling in with the request; and it has been suggested that his readiness was only in appearance, and that he hoped the women would refuse to surrender their cherished ornaments, thus making the construction of a suitable image impossible. It may have been so; but why should we not think that Aaron may have been as deeply infected with the idolatrous spirit as any of his brother Israelites? There is everything to indicate that he went about the execution of the request with cordiality and gratification. And it must not be forgotten that in the midst of all his forgetfulness of the command against image-worship, he evidently did not think of himself as forsaking Jehovah. When the image and the altar were ready, it was to Jehovah he proclaimed the feast. What Aaron and the people along with him had yet to learn was that Jehovah was not to be served by will-worship or by a copy of the rites observed in honouring the gods of other nations. Thus all unconsciously, Israel demonstrated how needful were the patterns given in the mount. The feast to Jehovah, indicated in Exo 32:6, was nothing but an excuse for the most reckless and degrading self-indulgence. How different from the ideal of those solemn seasons which Jehovah himself in due time prescribed; seasons which were meant to lift the people above their common life into a more hearty appreciation of the Divine presence, goodness and favour, and thus lead them into joys worthy of the true people of God.Y.

HOMILIES BY J. ORR

Exo 32:1-7

The sin of the golden calf.

Disastrous effects followed in the camp of Israel on the withdrawal of Moses’ to the mount. Moved as by a common impulse, the people “gathered themselves together,” and demanded of Aaron that he should make them “a god,” i.e. an idol, that it might gobe carried in processionbefore them (cf. Amo 5:26). It was a case of “hand joined in hand” to do iniquity (Pro 11:21). Many, doubtless, looked on the movement with dismay and horror (cf. Exo 32:26); but their voices were drowned in the general clamour. The “lewd fellows of the baser sort” (Act 17:5) had, for the moment, the upper hand in the host, and swept all before them. Intimidated by the show of violence, Aaron weakly acceded to the people’s request. The whole incident strikingly illustrates the commanding space which must have been filled in the camp of Israel by the personality of Moses, and affords some measure of the turbulent and refractory dispositions of the multitude whom ordinarily he had to deal with. It sheds light, also, on the greatness of Moses’ character, set as that is in contrast with the weakness and irresolution exhibited by Aaron. Consider

I. THE PEOPLE‘S TRIAL (Exo 32:1). Every situation in which we can be placed has its elements of trial. These are purposely mingled with our lot

(1) that dispositions may be tested, and

(2) that life may be to us in fact, what it is needful that it should be for the proper development of character, viz. a succession of probations. The trial of the Israelites consisted:

1. In the delay in the return of Moses. Moses had disappeared in the mountain. Weeks had passed without his return. It had not been told the people how long his absence was to last. This constituted a trial of faith and patience. It gave colour to the allegation that Moses had perishedthat he had gone from them for e

Cf. what is said in Luk 12:37-49 of the uncertainty left to rest upon the time of the Lord’s second advent. Faith has its trial here also. Because Christ’s coming is delayed, there are those who would fain persuade themselves that he will not return at all (2Pe 3:4).

2. In the scope given by his absence for the manifestation of character. On this, again, compare Luk 12:37-49. It was the first time since the departure from Egypt that the people had been left much to themselves. Hitherto, Moses had always been with them. His presence had been a check on their wayward and licentious tendencies. His firm rule repressed disorders. Whatever inclinations some of them may have felt for a revival of the religious orgies, to which, perhaps, they had been accustomed in Egypt, they had not ventured, with Moses in the camp, to give their desires publicity. The withdrawal of the lawgiver’s presence, accordingly, so soon after the conclusion of the covenant, was plainly of the nature of a trial. It removed the curb. It left room for the display of character. It tested the sincerity of recent professions. It showed how the people were disposed to conduct themselves when the tight rein, which had hitherto kept them in, had been a little slackened. It tested, in short, whether there were really a heart in them to keep all God’s commandments always (Deu 5:29). Alas! that in the hour of their trial, when so splendid an opportunity was given them of testifying their allegiance, their failure should have been so humiliating and complete.

II. THE PEOPLE‘S SIN. Note

1. The sin itself. They had made for them “a molten calf” (Luk 12:4), which, forthwith, they proceeded to worship with every species of disgraceful revelry (Luk 12:6). The steps in the sin are noted in the narrative.

(1) They approached Aaron with a demand to make them “a god.” The light, irreverent way in which, in connection with this demand, they speak of their former leader”As for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wet not what is become of him” (Luk 12:1)betrays an extraordinary levity, ingratitude, and callousness of nature.

(2) They stripped themselves of their ornaments of gold for the making of the “god” (Luk 12:3). They did this gladly. People, as a rule, spend freely on their vices. They are not so ready to part with their valuables for the service of Jehovah.

(3) They mixed up their calf worship with the service of the true God. On the supposed connection with the ox- and calf-worship of Egypt, see the exposition. The calf made by Aaron was evidently intended as a symbol of Jehovah (Luk 12:4). The result was an extraordinary piece of syncretism. An altar was built before the calf, and due honours were paid to it as the god which had brought Israel out of Egypt (Luk 12:4, Luk 12:5). A feast was proclaimed to Jehovah (Luk 12:5). When the morrow came, the people “offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings,” only, however, to engraft on the sacrificial festivities the rites of the filthiest heathen worships (Luk 12:6; cf. Luk 12:25). It was their own passions which they sought to gratify; but, in gratifying them, they still endeavoured to keep up the semblance of service of the revealed God. Strange that the wicked should like, if possible, to get the cloak of religion even for their vices. But light and darkness will not mingle. The first requirement in worship is obedience. “To obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams” (1Sa 15:22). “The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord” (Pro 15:8). It was monstrous to propose to worship the spiritual Jehovah, who had expressly forbidden the use of graven images in his service, under the symbol of a calf, albeit the idol was of gold. It was worse than monstrous, it was hideous, to employ the name of the Holy One to cover the shameless and revolting orgies with which their calf-worship was associated.

(4) They were eager in this worship. They rose up early in the morning to engage in it (Luk 12:6). Would that God’s people were as eager in his service as these servants of Belial were in the service of their idol!

2. The sin in its generic character. The sin at Sinai was a case

(1) of sense reasserting its supremacy over faith. “As for this Moses, we wot not what has become of him” (Luk 12:1).

(2) Of carnal tendencies regaining the ascendancy over temporary religious impressions.

(3) Of engrained evil habits resuming their sway after having been for a time forcibly kept in check. The incident shows that nothing short of a thorough regeneration, of a radical change of heart, can be relied on to keep men in the way of good. It is the heart that needs renewal. David seized the matter at the root when he was led to pray, “Create in me a clean heart” etc. (Psa 51:10). It was the want of this thorough renewal which was the bane of Israel (Deu 31:27-30).

3. Aggravations of the sin. The circumstances under which the sin was committed added greatly to its enormity.

(1) It was a sin committed immediately after solemn covenant with God. The transactions recorded in Luk 24:1-53. were not yet forty days old. The people had literally heard God speaking to them. They had acknowledged the solemnity of the situation by entreating Moses to act as mediator. They had formally, and under awful impressions of God’s majesty, pledged themselves to life-long obedience. Yet within this brief space of time, they had thrown off all restraints, and violated one of the main stipulations of their agreement. A more flagrant act of impiety it would be difficult to imagine.

(2) It was a sin committed while Moses was still in the mount transacting for them. He had gone to receive the tables of the law. He had been detained to receive instructions for the making of the sanctuarythat God might dwell among them. A solemn time, truly! While it lasted, the people might surely have been depended on to conduct themselves with at least ordinary propriety. Instead of this, witness their mad gambols round their calf. The very time when, of all others, their frame of mind ought to have been devout, sober, prayerful, was the time chosen for the perpetration of this great iniquity.

III. AARON‘S SHARE IN THE TRANSGRESSION. This, it is to be noted, the narrative makes no attempt to conceal. It tells the story with perfect impartiality. The Bible, like its author, is without respect of persons. If Aaron leads the people astray, he must, like others, submit to have the truth told about him. This is not the way of ordinary biographies, but it is the way of Scripture. It is one mark of its inspiration. It is a guarantee of its historic truthfulness. The conduct of Aaron cannot be justified; but suggestions may be offered which help to render intelligible.

1. Aaron was placed in a situation in which it was very difficult to know exactly what to do. A mob confronted him, evidently bent on gratifying its dangerous humour, its demand was peremptory. To resist its will was to run the risk of being stoned. The temptation which, in these circumstances, naturally presented itself to a timid mind, and to which Aaron yielded, was to put the people off, and endeavour to gain time by some show of concession. In the interval, Moses might return, and the difficulty would be solved. See the mistake of this policy. It was

(1) wrong. It involved a sacrifice of principle. It was temporising.

(2) Weak. Had Aaron been brave enough to take a firm stand, even at the risk of losing his life for it, not improbably he might have crushed the movement in its bud. As it was, his sanction and example gave it an impetus which carried it beyond the possibility of being subsequently controlled.

(3) Self-defeating. A temporising policy usually is. The favourable chance on which everything has been staked, does not turn up. Moses did not return, and Aaron, having yielded the preliminary point, found himself hopelessly committed to a bad cause.

2. Aaron may have thought that by requiring the women of the camp to part with their personal ornaments, he was taking an effectual plan to prevent the movement from going further (Luk 24:2). They might, he may have reasoned, be very willing to get gods, and yet not be willing to make this personal sacrifice to obtain them. If this was his idea, he was speedily undeceived. The gold ornaments came pouring in (Luk 24:3), and Aaron, committed by this act also, had no alternative but to proceed further. “He received them at their hands,” etc. (Luk 24:4).

3. Aaron may have thought that, of the two evils, it would be better to put himself at the head of the movement, and try to keep it within bounds, than to allow it to drift away, without any control whatever. He may have argued that to allow himself to be stoned would not make matters better, but would make them greatly worse. On the other hand, by yielding a little, and placing himself at the head of the movement, he might at least succeed in checking its grosser abuses. This is a not uncommon opiate to conscience, in matters involving compromise of principle. It is the idea of the physician who humours a mad patient, in the hope of being able to retain some control over him. The step was a false one. Even with madmen, as wiser doctors tell us, the humouring policy is not the most judicious. With a mob, it is about the worst that could be adopted.

IV. GENERAL LESSONS.

1. The strength of evil propensities in human nature.

2. The fleetingness of religious impressions, if not accompanied by a true change of heart.

3. The degrading character of idolatry. Sin bestialises, and the bestial nature seeks a god in bestial form (cf. Rom 1:21-32). “Men,” says Xenophanes, “imagine that the gods are born, are clothed in our garments, and endowed with our form and figure. But if oxen or lions had hands, and could paint and fashion things as men do, they too would form the gods after their own similitude, horses making them like horses, and oxen like oxen.” But we have seen that men also can fashion their gods in the similitude of oxen. “They that make them are like unto them” (Psa 115:8).

4. Mammon-worship is a worship of the golden calf. Cf. Carlyle on “Hudson’s Statue” (“Latter-Day Pamphlets”).J.O.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Exo 32:1. And when the people saw that Moses The long delay of Moses in the mount led this ever-murmuring and incredulous generation to think that he had utterly forsaken them; that an attempt to go forward into Canaan would, therefore, be absurd; and that it would be better to follow their groveling inclination, and return into Egypt. That this was their intention, we collect from Act 7:39-40 where St. Stephen says, that in their hearts they turned back again into Egypt; saying unto Aaron, Make us gods to go before us; for as for this Moses, who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we know not what is become of him: see Num 14:4. The expression, this Moses, who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, plainly intimates their design. It appears, from the whole account of this transaction, that the defection was very general. The sons of Levi, Exo 32:26 appear to have preserved themselves from it, as, most probably, did many others; see 1Co 10:7 nevertheless, both from Acts 7 and this chapter, it is clear that the major part were guilty. It is not to be supposed that the people were so stupid, as to believe that Aaron could absolutely form for them such gods as were really invested with Divine power: their meaning, it is evident, could only be, that he should form such a visible image and representation of the Deity, as might always be present with them; as the cloud, the visible emblem of JEHOVAH, had hitherto been with them under the ministration of Moses; but which now, they conceived, Moses disappearing, would cease itself to appear. The word rendered gods in this verse is elohim; and must certainly mean, “make us a representative of that Divine Power, who may go before us as our Conductor, in the manner that the visible emblem of Jehovah has hitherto gone before us.”

REFLECTIONS.When Moses is now ready to descend from the Mount, the perverseness and impatience of the people destroy all the blessings which were designed for them. They had before been often distrustful and disobedient, but now they break out into open rebellion. They riotously assemble, and present a petition to Aaron, to make them gods to go before them. Two grievous sins are the consequences of this proceeding.

1. Impious idolatry against God. They were not satisfied with the repeated evidences he had given them of his presence in the midst of them. Note; Where the heart is not truly converted to God, though for a time partial reformations may deceive, the old sins will again break out, and the dog return to his vomit.

2. Base ingratitude to Moses. He had been long their governor; they were most highly indebted to him. He was now gone expressly on their affairs. As he had God’s call to go, they had sufficient reason to expect his return; but should he not return, they were at least bound to treat him with respect and regard. But they overlook every consideration, and, with a careless mention of their great Deliverer, insinuate, that he has forsaken them, and never intends to return. Note; (1.) The best of men, and the greatest ministers, may expect to meet with most ungrateful returns from many whom they have served. (2.) They who are inclined to think evil will pretend, in the clearest case, not to know what to think. (3.) Forgetfulness, and doubt of the return of Jesus from the Mount of glory, is the great means of hardening the sinner; while it is among the sorest temptations of the true believer, that in times of greatest difficulty our Lord seems to delay his coming: but if he tarry, let us wait for him.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

THIRD DIVISION

The legislation as modified by the lapse of the people, and the intensified distinction between Jehovah and Israel as expressed in the more hierarchical constitution of the theocracy

Exodus 32-34

FIRST SECTION

The Erection and worship of the golden calf. gods judgment and moses intercession. his anger. the sentence of destruction on the golden calf, and of punishment on the people. the conditional pardon

Exo 32:1-35

A.The golden calf

Exo 32:1-6

1And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of [down from] the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods1 which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot [know] not what is become of him. 2And Aaron said unto them, Break [Pluck] off the golden ear-rings [rings], which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me. 3And all the people brake [plucked] off the golden ear-rings [rings] which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron. 4And he received them at [took them from] their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made [and he made] it a molten calf:2 and they said, These be [are] thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. 5And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, To-morrow is a feast to Jehovah. 6And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt-offerings, and brought peace-offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.

B.Gods judgment, and Moses intercession

Exo 32:7-14

7And Jehovah said unto Moses, Go, get thee down, for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves [behaved corruptly]: 8They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be [are] thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out 9of the land of Egypt. And Jehovah said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people: 10Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation. 11And Moses besought Jehovah his God, and said, Jehovah, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand? 12Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief [evil] did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. 13Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I 14have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever. And Jehovah repented of the evil which he thought [threatened] to do unto his people.

C.The trial and punishment of Aaron

Exo 32:15-24

15And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tables of the testimony were in his hand: the tables were written on both their sides; on the one side and on the other were they written. 16And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables. 17And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said unto Moses, There is a noise of war in the camp. 18And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery [noise of the cry of victory], neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome [the noise of the cry of defeat]: but the noise of them that sing [of singing] do I hear. 19And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount. 20And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the [with] fire, and ground it to powder, and strawed [scattered] it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it. 21And Moses said unto Aaron, What did this people [hath this people done] unto thee, that thou hast brought so great a [a great] sin upon them? 22And Aaron said, Let not the anger of my lord wax hot: thou knowest the people, 23that they are set on mischief [evil]. For [And] they said unto me, Make us gods, which shall go before us: for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot [know] not what is become of him. 24And I said unto them, Whosoever hath any gold, let them break [pluck] it off. So they gave it me: then [and] I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf.

D.The punishment of the people

Exo 32:25-29

25And when Moses saw that the people were naked [unrestrained], (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame [had left them unrestrained for a hissing] among their enemies:) 26Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the Lords side? [Whoso is for Jehovah,] let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. 27And he said unto them, Thus saith Jehovah, God [the God] of Israel, Put [Put ye] every man his sword by his side, and go in and out [go to and fro] from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor. 28And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. 29For Moses had [And Moses] said, Consecrate yourselves to day to Jehovah, even every man upon [against] his son, and upon [against] his brother; that he may bestow upon you [so as to bring upon yourselves] a blessing this day.

E.Moses intercession, and Jehovahs conditional pardon of the people

Exo 32:30-35

30And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin; and now I will go up unto Jehovah; peradventure I shall make an [make] atonement for your sin. 31And Moses returned unto Jehovah, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. 32Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin;and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book 33which thou hast written. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. 34Therefore now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine angel shall go before 35thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them. And Jehovah plagued [smote] the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

[Exo 32:1. is here connected with a plural verb, and in Exo 32:4 with a plural pronoun, so that the A. V. certainly seems to be correct. Yet the term is used only of the golden calf, and there is no indication that it referred to anything else. Probably the plural verb and pronoun are used for the very purpose of distinguishing the calf as a false godone of the many gods of polytheism. Yet in other cases, e. g., Jdg 11:24; Jdg 16:23-24, the singular verb is used of a heathen god.Tr.]

[We leave the A. V. rendering, only substituting and he for after he had; but it must be confessed that the passage is obscure. Frst, Gesemus, Knobel, Maurer, Glaire, Rosenmller, Cook, Kurtz, and others understand to be = (vid. 2Ki 5:23), meaning a bag. It occurs only once more, viz., Isa 8:1, where it means a pen (metal style). If the word here means bag, then must mean bound up, as indeed it most naturally does (coming from , not ), though it is also used (but rarely) in the sense of form or fashion. We are therefore compelled to decide mainly according to the sense. Against the A. V. rendering is to be urged that a molten image would not be made with a graving tool. The reply, that the tool was used only to polish the image after it was cast, is a mere assumption, and moreover requires us to resort to the device, adopted by the A. V., but unwarranted by the grammatical construction, of inverting the natural relation of time between the two clauses, fashioned it with a graving tool, and, made it a molten Gulf. The other rendering would be: Ho took it from their hands, and bound it up in a bag, etc.Tr.]

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

One of the grandest contrasts contained in the Scriptures is presented in the fact that Moses on the top of the mountain was having his vision of the tabernacle, i. e., was receiving the revelation of the true system of worship, and, as the central feature of it, the tables of the law, whilst the people at the foot of the mountain in their impatience resorted to the worship of the golden calf, and in this lapse even secured the services of the man just called to be high-priest. The Bible, it is true, is rich in kindred contrasts, e. g., the transfiguration of Christ on the mount contrasted with the scene of the impotence of the disciples in relation to the demoniac in the valley; or the institution of the Lords Supper contrasted with Judass treason. But this Old Testament contrast is distinguished above others by its scenic and artistic grandeur. For all periods of the history of the kingdom of God and of the church the fact is here set forth, that every individual period of time has a double historythe one above on the mount, the other beneath in the valley: whenever the popular rabble, with the connivance of high-priests, are dancing around the golden calf, there is taking place above upon the mountain of light. of terror, and of salvation something new and mysterious, which also in due time manifests itself in judgment and deliverance.

a. The Golden Calf. Exo 32:1-6

Knobel calls the account of the tables of the law and of the golden calf a Jehovistic interpolation, p. 310. The manner in which he unfolds his thought strikingly illustrates the dulness in apprehending the spirit of the text which characterizes the theory that the text is a patchwork of two heterogeneous elements. According to him, Exo 33:7-11 presents an account of the tabernacle, whereas the Elohist does not narrate the erection of it till as late as chap. 35. This style of criticism seems not to have the faintest conception of the reason why, in Exo 33:7, Moses is said to have removed the tent (by which undoubtedly is meant the chief or central tent which as a matter of course any army must have had before the building of a tabernacle) far away outside of the camp, and erected it at a distance from the camp; although the reason is unfolded throughout chaps, 33 and 34 in the thought of a conditional separation between Jehovah and the camp of the sinful people, or of an intensified unapproachableness of Jehovah, expressed in a stricter form of the hierarchy. As the people at first (Exo 20:18-19) gave provocation for the hierarchical mediatorship which Moses still provisionally administers, so now by their guilt they have made it stricter. Here belongs the circumstance that they could not endure the splendor on Moses face. That the real tabernacle is not here treated of, is evident from the fact that Moses at once applied to this tent the name tent (or tabernacle) of the testimony in the sense that Jehovah was to be accessible to the people only at a distance from the camp.3 According to the familiar style of criticism the idea of a sanctuary arises only in connection with the actual building, whereas, on the contrary, in fact the idea of the sanctuary long preceded the erection of the symbolic building, and might well have been all along provisionally represented. See further conclusions in Knobel, p. 310 sqq. It is to be considered, in reference to this theory of a combination of different documents, that each part by itself would yield only a caricature, though one may admit the thought of editorial changes to accord with further developments of the same institution. On the tables of the law vid. archological observations in Knobel, p. 314.

Exo 32:1. When the people saw.Moses long absence made the people feel like a swarm of bees that have lost their queen. We must consider that they were waiting, idle, and in suspense, at the foot of the mountain; that they were accustomed to see in Moses a representative of the Deity that was now wanting; that all the way from Egypt they had in their memory visible signs from God, and were conscious that they were required to go onward from Sinai. Moreover, they had seen how Moses went into the darkness and fiery flames of the mountain, so that it was natural to imagine that he had perished. Furthermore, Aaron, on account of his personal weakness, could not satisfy them as Moses representative. Therefore impatience, tear, sensuous religious conceptions, vexation at Moses audacious marching into the terrors of Jehovah and into invisible regions,these things, and in addition Aarons weakness as a substitute for Moses, worked together to transform the trial of faith which was laid on the people into a great temptation, to which they succumbed. Their vexation is directed against Aaron, the second leader, whom they now wish violently to make their chief, but on condition that he yields to them and supplements himself by means of an idol. That they are not asking for foreign gods (plural), is shown by the connection. For the theocracy, therefore, they wish to substitute a hierarchical democracy and a superstitious worship. This is not strictly an apostasy from Jehovah; they only want an image of Him to symbolize His leadership. The image of the golden calf, the young bull (), borrowed from the Egyptian Apis, but designed symbolically to represent Jehovah, is not expressly named in their request, but was doubtless from the first in their minds. This image is to go before them, an ill-chosen symbol for them, since the ox, which afterwards again appears in the vision of the cherubim, acquires a significance in the theocratic system only as supplemented by the lion or the eagle; by itself alone it represented the Egyptian conception of death (or the generative power of nature). Nevertheless the Israelites are not conscious that their demand implies an apostasy, just as Jeroboam also thought, that he could preserve the Israelitish faith in the form of the calf-worship. They intend to associate Jehovah with the image, and to go on under His guidance. But how hopeless they are respecting Moses leadership, as if he had brought them out of Egypt to leave them in the wilderness (a mood of mind which Protestants often cherish and express in reference to the Reformers), is to be seen in their utterance concerning Moses; and how far advanced they are on the downward road to apostasy, is shown at once by the jovial festival which is connected with the now worship, in imitation of heathen rites.

Exo 32:2. And Aaron said unto them.With a mistaken cunning, such as is apt to grow up with a hierarchy, he hopes to deter them from their desire by bruskly demanding a great sacrifice; but he deceived himself. Religions that are the outgrowth of sensuous and selfish passions generally produce a fanatical readiness to make sacrifices.

Exo 32:3. And fashioned [Lange: sketched] it. It seems to us more natural to refer [it] forwards to the golden calf than backwards to the ear-rings, instead of which gold must be understood as the object. Moreover it would be an inversion of the natural order to speak first of the polishing of the cast with a chisel, and then of the casting itself. We therefore translate with Luther, he sketched it with a pen (style)a more probable meaning of than chisel.4 On Aarons excuse, see Exo 32:24. That the golden calf consisted of a wooden figure overlaid with gold plate, is urged by Keil [especially from Isa 40:19; Isa 30:22, where such images are described and in the latter passage are called even molten images, and] from the circumstance that the manner of its destruction implies the existence of wooden [combustible] elements. And they said.The god is proclaimed. Aaron thinks he can relieve the matter by building an altar and proclaiming a feast to Jehovah for the morrow.

Exo 32:6. And offered burnt-offerings.There is nothing about sin-offerings in connection with this new worship. The chief feature consists in the peace-offerings and the sacrificial meal, followed by the merry festive games.

b. Gods Judgment and Moses Intercession. Exo 32:7-14

Exo 32:7. And Jehovah said.It is not known below what is taking place upon the mountain; but on the mountain it is well known what is going on below.Go, get thee down. Lively expression of indignation, affecting even Moses. Under such a condition of Gods people, His work on the mountain is interrupted. Thy people, it is significantly said, though Keil questions this [explaining the phrase as merely meaning that Moses, as mediator of the people, must represent them.] The covenant is broken. Thus the people practically deny that Jehovah has brought them up out of Egypt.

Exo 32:8. Turned aside quickly.As if they had been in a hurry about it. Hence the guilt was all the greater, comp. Galatians 1.And have worshipped it. So Jehovah judges concerning the image-worship of the people; that they intend to worship Him in their service, He does not acknowledge. Hence we translate here too, These are thy gods; in the pretended image of God He sees the germ of idolatry, a deviation from the way of revelation which He had commanded.

Exo 32:9. A stiff-necked people.vid. Exo 33:3; Exo 33:5; Exo 34:9; Deu 9:6. Literally, hard of neck. The expression seems to have been borrowed from the trait of an unruly draught-animal. The self-will of the people has shown itself to be an obstinate repugnance to Jehovahs guidance, hard to overcome.

Exo 32:10. Let me alone.That which delays the destruction of the people is even now Moses mediatorial connection with his people, as expressed in his mood of mind even before he made any utterance. Yet the promise given to Abraham cannot faila fact continually re-appearing in the prophetic writings, and, in all its grandeur, in the New Testament (vid. Rom 4:11). The remnant of Israelitish fidelity is now concentrated in Moses; hence God says, I will make of thee a great nation. The judgment is a , distinction and separation. It was natural to think that Moses might separate himself from his people, and that then the people would fall a prey to destruction in the wilderness. The motives contend with one another in Moses soul, as if between God and Moses. The phrase let me alone, according to Gregory the Great and Keil, was designed only to give to Moses an opportunity to utter deprecations. But this neat remark of theirs obliterates the sentiment of righteousness expressed in the phrase.

Exo 32:11-12. And Moses besought JehovahHere appears the original, real priest. He contends in a most fervent prayer with the face of Jehovah, with His revealed form now present to him; not, however, chiefly for himself, but for his people, even with a renunciation of self and of the grand prospect opened to him. He appeals to Jehovahs self-consistency, and, in contrast with Jehovahs expression thy people, Moses, he says, thy people, Jehovah, which thou hast brought out of Egypt. His appeal to Jehovahs honor, as not enduring that the Egyptians should scoff at His word and revile Him. expresses the genuinely religious sentiment, which pervades the whole Bible, that the ruin of Gods people, merited as it is on account of their sins, would also plunge the heathen nations into complete destruction. According to Keil the expression, I will make of thee a great nation, was only a great temptation. vid. Num 14:12; Deu 9:14.Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil. This strong anthropopathic expression conveys the correct sentiment, that Jehovah may assume another attitude towards the people, when He sees that Moses compassion for, and adherence to, his people opens to them a different and better prospect.

Exo 32:13. Remember Abraham.This calling to Jehovahs mind the great promises which He had made to the patriarchs is seen in its full importance, when we consider that Moses not only has declined the splendid offer of becoming the patriarch of Gods people, but also in his humility is not conscious of the fact that his own intercession for the people has any weight.

Exo 32:14. And Jehovah repented of the evil.In the sphere of personal life, of the theocratic world, of the kingdom of God, the believer may talk,may even reason, with his God. It is not here mans part to be absolutely silent before the silent infliction, and give way to rancor and despair, but as a personal being to talk with the personal God, as a child with his mother. Of course headstrong selfishness is in this case entirely forbidden; but to make inquiry of Jehovah is not only allowable, but is in accordance with the spiritual nature; and it is only by way of inquiry, wrestling inquiry, that man obtains the answer which brings at once tranquillity and knowledge, and whose consummate result is that lofty absence of will which consists in surrender to, and union with, the will of God. Thus then Moses asks, Wherefore? as afterwards so many saints, and as at last Christ did in Gethsemane and on the cross. With mans attitude towards God, however, Gods attitude towards man is changed; and He repents of the threatened evil, because He is the unchangeable one, not in fatalistic caprice, but in truth and grace. On Exo 32:14 Keil remarks, by way of correction, This is a remark which anticipates the history. God dismissed Moses without any such assurance, in order that He might disclose to the people the full severity of the divine wrath. This explanation destroys the fine contrast between the two facts that, on the one hand, Moses in the mountain presents nothing but intercessions to God, and also receives the assurance that the people are pardoned; while, on the other hand, at the foot of the mountain he denounces a stern judgment on the sin of the people with an anger which is heightened especially by the sight of the apostasy. The full severity of the divine anger would have been the destruction of the people. Moses intercession in Exo 32:32 does not refer to the existence of the people, but their covenant relations. Peter, too, needed a twofold assurance of pardon, vid. Joh 20:21.

c. The Trial and Punishment of Aaron. Exo 32:15-24.

Exo 32:15-16. And Moses turned. Special mention is made of the fact that he was carrying in his hand an invaluable treasure, the two tables of the testimony. The tables themselves had been prepared by God, the writing also by God; and the tables were written all over. It was therefore all the more frightful, that the people at the foot of the mountain had so entirely destroyed the value of the heavenly treasure, had so decidedly annulled the covenant writing by their breach of the covenant, that Moses felt moved to dash the tables to pieces.

Exo 32:17-18. When Joshua heard.It is a very characteristic feature, that the young hero (vid. chap. 17) imagines that in the noise he hears the tumult of war. Keil, referring to Exo 24:13, conceives that Moses, as he was going away from God, met Joshua on the mountain. The text clearly represents Joshua as having gone upon the mountain in company with Moses. As a servant he belongs to his master, and in so far he has the precedence over Aaron. But Moses correctly detects the antiphonies of the new worship amidst the tumult. That which was common to the two in their apprehension seems to have been the perception of two kinds of sound.We are to distinguish between the Kal and the Piel of the verb . Keil renders: It is not the sound of the answer of power, and not the sound of the answer of weakness, i.e., they are not sounds such as the strong (the victorious) and the weak (the conquered) utter. The antiphonal songs were sung for the round dance.Knobel thinks there is a contradiction between this and Exo 32:7 [where it is said that Moses was informed of what was going on below. But it is not said that Joshua had been informed, and there is no evidence that Moses had mistaken the sound.Tr.]

Exo 32:19. Moses anger waxed hot.And yet he is the same one who by his intercession has saved Israel. His anger and his compassion have a common source. But he is excited by the actual sight. Of this power of physical perception the Scriptures mention many instances, e.g., when Jacob saw the wagons, etc. (Gen 45:27). The breaking of the tables is nowhere rebuked; therefore his emotion was justifiable. The tables as representing the enactment of the covenant had been annulled by the people; the breaking of them symbolizes the breach of the covenant. Moreover this act of breaking the tables shows that Moses did not regard the law as a law of curses, but as a great gift from Jehovah of which the people had made themselves unworthy; otherwise he would just at this time have been inclined to hold the tables aloft. But could he not have concealed them? This question suggests another point. The tables of the law, in case the people repented, might have become to them an object of superstitious adoration. Hence afterwards the new tables lay covered in the ark in the obscurity of the Holy of holies. So also at a later time Hezekiah had to destroy the brazen serpent in order to keep it from superstitious regard. The temple had to be twice consumed with fire. Gods people often had to be driven by the terrors of God from the outward to the inward; for it is only as one looks within that he looks up.

Exo 32:20. And he took the calf.First of all the object of their adoration, the idol, had to be destroyed. A calf of solid gold could not be burned, but it might have been put into the fire. The wooden image was thus burned. The golden plate was melted, and this was then in particular beaten to pieces. The whole powdered mass was thrown upon the water, the gold sinking and serving then only a symbolic purpose, whilst the ashes of the wood might have been served up to the people as a drink of penance or of cursingall which is doubtless to be conceived as a symbolic act enforced chiefly on the most guilty, especially as the brook into which the dust had been thrown was a flowing one (Deu 9:21). Knobel says, He shames them by making clear to them the nothingness of their god, and humbles them by such a treatment of it: they are obliged even to devour their own goda severe punishment for the idolaters. The Egyptians had a very lively horror of consuming the animals revered as deities, and would sooner have eaten human flesh (Diod. I., 84). This is intelligible. But what Keil says is unintelligible: This making the people drink was certainly (!) not for the purpose of shaming them by making manifest to them the nothingness of their god , but was designed symbolically to incorporate (?) for them sin with its consequences, to pour it, as it were, with the water, into their inwards, as a symbolic sign that they would have to bear it and suffer for it, just as the woman suspected of adultery was obliged to drink the water of cursing (Num 5:24). The cases here made parallel are entirely different. In the precept in Numbers 5 no guilt is to be incorporated by the water of cursing, but it is to be determined whether there is any guilt. But in the present case there was no occasion for any process of detecting guilt; the Jews themselves certainly had an immediate consciousness of it in consequence of Moses denunciation, whereas they would hardly have understood Moses obscure symbol. If we consider the analogy of the red heifer, whose ashes were sprinkled as a hherem, it would be more natural to assume that the people by drinking the ashes of this hherem were themselves marked as involved in the hherem, and so were prepared for a sentence which was soon afterwards executed. Anxiety to maintain the letter of the narrative has led some to speak of a chemical calcination of the gold, as being necessary in order to its being ground fine (Rosenmller and others). Knobel imputes this meaning to the writer in order to convict him of error, while Keil seems inclined to suppose that the gold for the most part disappeared in the melting process.

Exo 32:21 sqq. And Moses said unto Aaron. The question is sharp.It makes Aaron morally the chief author of the sin, even though in reference to the motive it admits some excuse. The word (hath done) maybe understood in two ways. Keil explains it to mean, What have they done unto thee? so that the question implies that the people have compelled Aaron by some act of great violence. But it is more obvious to find in the question the sharper rebuke: Has this people committed an offence against thee, that thou couldst let them fall into such a sin? Aarons excuse is an expression of his weakness of character. The best thing about him is, that he submits entirely to Moses authority; the worst, that he throws the blame entirely on the people, and that he represents the golden calf as an almost accidental image produced by the fire, while he pretends that he himself threw the gold into the fire with a feeling of contempt, and for the purpose of destroying it. Deu 9:20 supplements the narrative. That Moses makes no reply, must mean something more than that he deems him not worthy of an answer (Keil); his answer is involved in the ensuing judgment, in which it must be made manifest that there is a difference between Aarons sin of weakness and the wickedness of the apostates.

d. The Punishment of the People. Exo 32:25-29

The ground for the severe procedure now following is given in Exo 32:25. A real distinction is made between the principal sin, that of the apostate people, and the sin of Aaron (or the Levites). The cure of the evil is quite analogous to the cure effected for the people by the campaign against the Midianites (Numbers 31) In this case the Midianites were the tempters, the Jews the tempted. But they were to be healed of their moral torpor by being required to inflict punitive judgment on the Midianites. So here it is the Levites, involved in the guilty weakness, whose approach in response to his call Moses seems from the first to have expected. Knobel can understand the procedure only by assuming contradictions: The narrative, he says, is entirely improbable; such a bloody command one cannot believe Moses to have made. Of course he has no conception of the significance of an army of God, nor of the fact that the decimations which still take place in the modern military history of Christendom are not yet recorded in archological statistics, although they date from antiquity.For a hissing among their enemies. Keil understands this of the punishment of the people; but by this very punishment the hissing of the adversaries was suppressed.

Exo 32:26. Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp.The camp is unclean and lies under sentence (Heb 13:13); from without the camp new purity must be procured. With this circumstance is connected the subsequent removal of the provisional tabernacle from the camp, as well as Jehovahs refusal to go with the people in the midst of the camp. Knobel says, He takes his stand at. the head-quarters of the camp (!). Moses heroic decision, expressed in the most energetic language, has the effect of bringing all the Levites to his side. But since the other tribes, although terrified, did not come to him, a division, a contest, and condemnation became necessary. Why the Levites? Keil quotes, in answer to this, Cornelius a Lapide: [Because the most of the Levites did not join in the sin of the people and the worship of the calf, and because this displeased them.] Why not the other tribes? Keil quotes Calvins answer: [They were not held back by contempt or obstinacy, but only by shame, and all of them were so smitten with terror that they waited in astonishment to see what Moses intention was, and how far he would proceed.]5 In this matter one must guard against such a view of historic causes as deals with merely outward motives. A peculiar religious energy was inherited by the tribe of Levi from their ancestor (Genesis 34); and though it was liable to lead astray, yet here it followed a higher summons, as it also atoned for the wrong done at the water of strife, Deu 33:8 sqq.

Exo 32:27-28. Put ye every man his sword by his side.The frightful command clearly does not contemplate a slaughter as great as possible. They are to pass twice through the length of the camp, going and returning. In this course every one is to kill his brother, friend, neighbor. Does that mean, simply, without any regard to existing relations of friendship? Chiefly this, no doubt. But when we consider that the Levite had no longer any literal brother in the camp, the Levites having all joined Moses, it follows that reference is made to figurative brotherhood and friendship, such as had just acted as a snare to the Levite. That only three thousand men fell indicates that a selection was made according to special considerations. And in this way also the fact is explained, that the terified people could let this punitive infliction take place. Various solutions of the difficulty involved in this event are given by Keil.

Exo 32:29. Consecrate yourselves [Lit. Fill your hands].According to the context it is necessary to suppose that Moses uttered these words before the execution of the offenders, and in order to explain that it was like an offering for Jehovah, an offering of the hardest kind of self-denial and self-renunciation; furthermore we must suppose that he did not mean this in the literal sense, but comparatively, in order in the strongest manner to express the truth that their obedience and self-denial were pleasing to God. The slain were indeed made a hherem, or curse-offering, because after their great wickedness they had defiantly remained in the camp; but the hherem was nevertheless not properly an offering for Jehovah. The addition, so that a blessing may be given to you, also presents the execution in the light of the removal of a curse. On the untenable explanation, that they were obliged, after the slaughter, to make atonement by means of an offering (Jonathan, Kurtz), see Keil [who says, To fill the hands for Jehovah does not mean to bring Him an offering, but to provide ones self with something to bring to God Moreover it is incomprehensible how the execution of a divine command, or an act of obedience towards the expressed will of God, can be imputed to one as blood-guiltiness or as an offence needing expiation.]

e. Moses Intercession and Jehovahs Conditional Pardon of the People. Exo 32:30-35

Exo 32:30. As in the history of the fallen Peter we must distinguish between the pardon which he received as a Christian (John 20) and that which he received as an apostle (John 21), so in reference to Israel we must distinguish between the first abrogation of the sentence of destruction and the renewal of the peoples calling. The first pardon is expressed in Exo 32:14; the other is first introduced by the judgment upon the people, and in this section it is conditionally secured through Moses powerful intercession and mediation. Keil makes so little distinction between the two things that he even says that Moses after his first petition (Exo 32:11-13) received no assurance of favorwhich is inconsistent with Exo 32:14. But we have here nothing to do, as Keil represents, with an anger that threatens destruction. Israel might now indeed continue to exist as a people, but yet have forfeited their vocation. This is just the point here treated of. Hence Moses does not say to the people, The offence is expiated; but he also does not speak of a crime which is still to be expiated with a hherem. He speaks of a great sin which, however, may perhaps be covered by means of an expiation. In what this expiation is to consist, he does not tell the peoplefor therein, too, his nobleness appearsbut he says to Jehovah that he will surrender himself to the judgment of God in behalf of the people. Since now the question is here not one of existence, but one of vocation, Moses offer to sacrifice himself is also modified accordingly. It is true, this intercession is vastly more intense than the former one (Exo 32:11). He would rather be blotted, with the people, out of the book of life, of theocratic citizenship, than without the people to stand in the book alone. As mediating priest he has come as far as to the thought of going to destruction with the people, but not for them. Moreover he offers to submit to the sentence only hypotheticallyin case Jehovah will not pardon the people. But he is primarily seeking for the pardon of only this one great sin. Thus we see expiation germinant in the form of suffering loss; it is not yet seen in its bloom and fruitage: else the condition would not be, Grace or judgment, but, Through judgment the highest grace. Nevertheless this is the moment when Moses comes into closest contact with the priesthood of the New Testament. Abrahams intercession for Sodom is one precursor of it; stronger still is Judahs intercession for Benjamin (vid. Comm. on Gen 44:18 sqq.); and, as a N. T. analogy, Pauls language in Rom 9:3 has been adduced (vid. Comm. on Romans). In Pauls words appears indeed the phrase for the Jewish people; but it is a question what the exact meaning is. In intercession there are indeed degrees of self-denial and ecstasy in which human logic seems almost to be swallowed up in a sort of divine folly.Jehovah brings Moses back to the legal stand-point, and all the more, as he has not yet attained the full expression and full act of expiation, and the realization of it is conditioned on an antecedent visitation of the people (Exo 32:34). This visitation, however, can be realized only as the people are conducted further on their way. So then there is involved a conditional re-adoption of the people in the words, Go, lead the people, etc. It is conditioned, in the first place, by the bscure expression, My angel shall go before thee, the stern meaning of which is afterwards explained; secondly, by the proviso of a future visitation which was to be at once a gracious and a judicial visitation. Thus the people are smitten doubly: first, by Moses judicial punishment (Exo 32:27); secondly, by the above-mentioned conditions connected with their re-adoption. And this is done because, as Exo 32:35 declares, the people, strictly speaking, had made the calf which they had induced Aaron to make. The book which Jehovah has written is the book of life, or of the living, Psa 69:29 (28); Dan 12:1. This conception is derived from the custom of making a list of the names of the citizens of a kingdom or of a city (Keil).From this it appears that the book is primarily the roll of citizens of the kingdom of God, in the theocratic sense; and the notion becomes more and more profound as we advance through the Scriptures, comp. Isa 4:3; Dan 12:1; Php 4:3; Rev 3:5. Keil finds the day of visitation in the judicial infliction at Kadesh (Num 14:26 sqq.), according to which that generation was to die in the wilderness. But the text allows a distinction to be made between the day of visitation in the more general sense and the special retributive visitation. It designates the whole perspective of punitive judgments as seen in the light of grace.

Footnotes:

[1][Exo 32:1. is here connected with a plural verb, and in Exo 32:4 with a plural pronoun, so that the A. V. certainly seems to be correct. Yet the term is used only of the golden calf, and there is no indication that it referred to anything else. Probably the plural verb and pronoun are used for the very purpose of distinguishing the calf as a false godone of the many gods of polytheism. Yet in other cases, e. g., Jdg 11:24; Jdg 16:23-24, the singular verb is used of a heathen god.Tr.]

[2][We leave the A. V. rendering, only substituting and he for after he had; but it must be confessed that the passage is obscure. Frst, Gesemus, Knobel, Maurer, Glaire, Rosenmller, Cook, Kurtz, and others understand to be = (vid. 2Ki 5:23), meaning a bag. It occurs only once more, viz., Isa 8:1, where it means a pen (metal style). If the word here means bag, then must mean bound up, as indeed it most naturally does (coming from , not ), though it is also used (but rarely) in the sense of form or fashion. We are therefore compelled to decide mainly according to the sense. Against the A. V. rendering is to be urged that a molten image would not be made with a graving tool. The reply, that the tool was used only to polish the image after it was cast, is a mere assumption, and moreover requires us to resort to the device, adopted by the A. V., but unwarranted by the grammatical construction, of inverting the natural relation of time between the two clauses, fashioned it with a graving tool, and, made it a molten Gulf. The other rendering would be: Ho took it from their hands, and bound it up in a bag, etc.Tr.]

[3][This is obscure. If the reference is (as apparently it is) to the tent spoken of in Exo 33:7 sqq., then it is incorrect to say that Moses called it the tent of the testimony. And even if he had so called it, it is not clear how that name would indicate that Jehovah was to be found only outside the camp.Tr.]

[4][See under Textual and Grammatical. Langes interpretation is plausible; but can hardly be made to mean sketchedall the less, inasmuch as the supposed object, the calf, has not yet been hinted at.Tr.]

[5][It should be said that Keil regards neither of these answers as satisfactory. On the first point he says that the reason assigned is not the only or the chief one, but that it is to be found partly in the fact that the Levites came mole promptly to a recognition of their offence and to a resolution of penitence and conversion, partly in their regard for Moses, who belonged to their tribe.Tr.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

This is a most interesting Chapter, but no less distressing to read. We have therein related to us, that God, by his divine foreknowledge, having seen, that in consequence of Moses being with him longer in the Mount than the people below in the camp expected, they fell away to idolatry: the Lord commands Moses to go down to the people: the Lord informs his servant what had taken place during his absence; Moses intercedes for the people: Moses descends from the Mount; arrives at the Camp: beholds the idol of the people: his anger is so great that he casts the Tables of Testimony, which the Lord had given him, out of his hands, and they are broken; the conference between Moses and the people, and Moses returns unto the Lord.

Exo 32:1

Observe, what unbelief induceth in the heart of man. Believers have too much of this in them. The Lord Jesus is gone up into the heaven of heavens, there to appear in the presence of God for his people; and yet how often do they cry out in doubts and misgivings. Isa 40:27 ; Psa 13:1-2 . And ungodly men are here from led to question the truth of divine promises. 2Pe 3:4 . It was this impious disregard of the divine threatenings which induced the wicked servant, in the parable, to smite his fellow servants. Mat 24:48 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Exo 32:2

Who would not have been ashamed to hear this answer from the brother of Moses, ‘Pluck off your earrings’? He should have said, ‘Pluck this idolatrous thought out of your hearts’.

Bishop Hall.

Exo 32:3

Unless reason be employed in ascertaining what doctrines are revealed, humility cannot be exercised in acquiescing in them; and there is surely at least as much presumption in measuring everything by our own fancies, feelings, and prejudices, as by our own reasonings. Such voluntary humiliation is a prostration, not of ourselves before God, but of one part of ourselves before another part, and resembles the idolatry of the Israelites in the wilderness: ‘The people stripped themselves of their golden ornaments, and cast them into the fire, and there came out this calf.

Archbishop Whately, Annotations to Bacon’s Essays (i.).

Exo 32:4

It is the very joy of man’s heart to admire, where he can; nothing so lifts him from all his mean imprisonments, were it but for moments, as true admiration. Thus it has been said, ‘All men, especially all women, are born worshippers’; and will worship, if it be but possible. Possible to worship a Something, even a small one; not so possible a mere loud-blaring Nothing! What sight is more pathetic than that of poor multitudes of persons met to gaze at Kings’ Progresses, Lord Mayors’ Shows, and other gilt-gingerbread phenomena of the worshipful sort, in these times; each so eager to worship; each, with a dim fatal sense of disappointment, finding that he cannot lightly here! These be thy gods, O Israel? and thou art so willing to worship poor Israel.

Carlyle in Past and Present.

Exo 32:5

Writing in 1657 to Lord Craighall, Samuel Rutherford warns him seriously against kneeling before the consecrated elements. ‘Neither will your intention help, which is not of the essence of worship; for then, Aaron in saying, “To-morrow shall be a feast for Jehovah,’ that is, for the golden calf, should not have been guilty of idolatry; for he intended only to decline the lash of the people’s fury, not to honour the calf. Your intention to honour Christ is nothing, seeing that religious kneeling, by God’s institution, doth necessarily impart religious and Divine adoration.’

Recreations and Amusements

Exo 32:6

I. We must have ‘play’. Even the children of Israel must. We have great examples in this matter. Our Incarnate Lord and His Apostles had their feasts as well as their fasts; their quiet hours as well as their hours crowded with holy toil.

Such ‘play’ is greatly needed in our overworked days. Physical labour requires mental amusement, and mental labour demands physical recreation.

The words ‘amusement’ and ‘recreation’ are in themselves full of suggestiveness. The idea of the word ‘amusement’ is ‘to draw the mind to’ something lighter. ‘Recreation’ obviously signifies a fresh creation.

Everything, however, depends upon the quality and the quantity of our recreations and amusements.

II. Let me enumerate some good amusements and recreations. Some ‘play’ that is to be held honourable to all.

Earliest in such a category I would place pure light literature.

Music, at home and in public, is one of the most exalted and delightful of recreations.

Art offers splendid and tranquil amusement and recreation.

What delights modern science opens to the multitude! Nature teems with instructive delights.

I hardly need to remind young men or young women in these times of the athletic pleasures which abound.

A good walk in the city streets will, if we practise an educated observation, be a manifold benefit to us. Charles Kingsley said that a walk along Regent Street was an intellectual tonic. A walk in the country, especially with the ministry of pleasant and profitable conversation, may be a memorable and every way beneficial experience.

The pleasures of travel are happily now by the cooperative plan within reach of large numbers of young people.

Church life affords the best recreation to some. Ever remember the noble words of Dean Church, ‘Every real part of our life ought to be part of our Christian life’.

III. Suffer me to warn you against certain evil amusements and recreations.

Shun that class of entertainments which vulgarizes and sullies mind and soul.

It is not wholly superfluous to caution you against exhausting amusements. Whatever impairs your vital energy and lowers your physical tone is a foe to your highest well-being. Nor is it fatuous to enter a caution against such amusements and recreations as disincline you for more serious pursuits. Few, if any, amusements work such injury as do betting and gambling.

The ‘play’ in which Israel occupied itself and to which my text refers was arrantly unworthy. May this ancient lapse save us from similar lapse. Take heed lest evil ‘play’ discredit and ruin you.

Christ is the ultimate source of true pleasures. He causes these to abound to the believing soul. Dinsdale T. Young, Messages for Home and Life, p. 47.

Illustration. You have heard the story of the young hunter at Ephesus: returning from the chase with his unstrung bow in his hand he entered the house of the venerable St. John. To his utter astonishment John was playing with a tame dove. He indicated his surprise that the seer should be so frivolously occupied. St. John asked him why he carried his bow unstrung. ‘In order that my bow may retain its elasticity,’ was his immediate reply. ‘Just so,’ said St. John; ‘and mind and body will not retain their elasticity or usefulness unless they are at times unstrung; prolonged tension destroys their power.’

Dinsdale T. Young, Messages for Home and Life, p. 47.

References. XXXII. 7-14. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlii. No. 2486. XXXII. 10, 31, 32. T. G. Selby, The God of the Patriarchs, p. 185. XXXII. 14. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xli. No. 2398. XXXII. 15-26. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Exodus, etc., p. 177.

Epiphany

Exo 32:18

I. The pleading supplication, ‘I beseech Thee, show me Thy glory,’ is the language of the human heart, under the pressure of the deepest desire man can experience. It is the voicing of the ceaseless, agelong yearning on the part of man for tangible, ocular demonstration of God. And the answer given to Moses is an authoritative declaration of the only demonstration of the existence and character of God possible to beings in the finite condition of earth’s education.

The only proof of the existence of any primal force is that force in action; the absolute is only known as it is conditioned. God to us, only is as He acts; and so the answer to the universal appeal of humanity is, ‘I will make all My goodness pass before thee’.

II. The unwillingness on the part of man to accept this answer of God as final has been the cause of most of the defective apprehension, narrowness, superstition, and second-hand religion which have clipped the wings of Godward growth. He who follows God’s clue is he whose eyes are slowly opened. God makes all His goodness to pass before him. He has discovered and acknowledged physical beauty in the universe, and moral beauty in man; he infers logically that there must be a Divine ideal of both physical and moral beauty, of which he has recognized the shadow, and he knows that that Divine ideal must be God.

Moses, the servant of the Lord, affords a striking example, from the ancient world, of a standard thus slowly raised, till his one absorbing need was to see God. He had followed the clue. Symbolisms and limitations had no power to satisfy the instincts of his heart, and his whole soul goes out in the cry, ‘I beseech Thee, show me Thy glory’. A picture-lesson of the same process is afforded by our Lord’s dealings with His disciples. Slowly He unfolds their aspirations, as the sun unfolds a flower. At, last, one of them, as the spokesman of the rest, bursts out with the cry, ‘Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us’. And in each case the answer is the same: to Moses it is, ‘I will make all My goodness pass before thee’; to Philip it is, ‘Have I been so long time with you, and hast thou not known Me, Philip? He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father.’

III. Now, is not this the meaning of the Festival of the Epiphany? The story of that star leading thoughtful Zoroastrians across the wilderness to Bethlehem, is the analogy of the secret drawing of the Infinite Mother-Heart, leading watchful souls through the deserts of materialism, idolatry, imperfect Theism, to the oasis of the Incarnation, the highest philosophical demonstration of the character of God.

Two conditions appear to be suggested by today’s Epiphany teaching as pre-requisite for the right apprehension of this full restful revelation of God: the one is aspiration, the other is activity. God is often not known because He is not wanted. At the threshold of every spiritual function there is a want, a restlessness, a desire, a hunger, that the largest promises of the world cannot fill. Prayer, thought, aspiration, will quicken and vitalize that blessed restlessness.

The second condition is activity, usefulness, ministry. A life of selfish vanity, a life of idle indulgence, a life of mean self-concentration, may have a good deal of religion in it, but it cannot see God.

B. Wilberforce, Following on to Know the Lord, p. 57.

Illustration. O, my God, let me see Thee; and if to see Thee is to die, let me die, that I may see Thee.

Prayer of St. Augustine, p. 58.

References. XXXII. 24. J. H. Halsey, The Spirit of Truth, p. 261. XXXII. 26. H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, God’s Heroes, p. 197. C. Perren, Revival Sermons in Outline, p. 303. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxvi. No. 1531; see also vol. 1. No. 2884. XXXII. 31, 32. E. L. Hull, Sermons Preached at King’s Lynn (3rd Series), p. 106.

Exo 32:32

‘Not by reading, but by some bitterly painful experience,’ said Maurice ( Life, i. p. 171), ‘I seem to have been taught that to aim at any good to myself while I contemplate myself apart from the whole body of Christ, is a kind of contradiction.

Let my name be blotted out, and my memory perish, if only France may be free.

Danton.

Exo 32:35

Afflictions speak convincingly, and will be heard when preachers cannot. If our dear Lord did not put these thorns under our head, we should sleep out our lives and lose our glory.

Baxter, Saints’ Rest, chap. x.

References. XXXIII. W. Gray Elmslie, Expository Lectures and Sermons, p. 295. XXXIII. 7. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. vii. No. 359. XXXIII. R. J. Campbell, City Temple Sermons, p. 27. C. Brown, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxix. 1906, p. 273. XXXIII. 12-14. H. Varley, Spiritual Light and Life, p. 97. XXXIII. 12-23. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Exodus, etc., p. 186.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Aaron’s Idolatry

Exo 32

Moses had been sent for to go up to the top of the mountain and speak to God. The man was sent for: he owed nothing to his own originality or invention. It is a mistake to suppose that Moses invented anything, originated or outlined anything of his own imagination. The Bible is of God, or it is not a word to be believed or received into the heart, or made the monitor of the troubled life. The minister does not make his own sermons: if he does, what wonder that they are not heard, or being heard are quickly forgotten; that they take no hold of the life, dominating over it with sweet and gracious sovereignty, ruling it into order, and charming it into hope? The man made it out of his own mind: he invented phrases and set them in order; the sermon is a kind of intellectual mosaic thinly sprinkled with the baptism of dew, but a human manufacture, a very clever and stirring invention nothing more. The true minister goes up to consult the Master for a long time. He is on the mountain, and the people think he is wasting the opportunity. They say, “We are waiting, the world is waiting, and as for this man Moses and all his tribe, where are they?” They are where they ought to be out of sight, but communing with God; away from the fray, the battle, the race, but receiving nourishment, nutriment, inspiration, comfort, and even words by which to express the Divine thought. And what is true of Moses and the minister is true of every genuine believer in God. He has his interviews with the Lord in the mountain, his periods of solitude, his seasons of withdrawment from strife, and noise, and unholy revelry; and coming back from the mountain of contemplation he touches life with a steadier hand, and does his duty with a completer obedience and more radiant cheerfulness. We should fight better if we prayed more; we should be more original if we were more spiritual; we should startle the world more if our face burned with the lustre which reflects our interviews with God face to face. The general is on the top of the mountain receiving marching orders; he is asking what to do next; he will invent nothing, plan nothing, start nothing, be responsible for nothing. He says, “I stand until I am told to go forward; I do the Lord’s bidding; I do not act upon my own ingenuity.” That is the truly religious life; that is the inner, spiritual, Divine, immortal life: that takes nothing into its own hands, but offers those hands as instruments through which the Divine Being himself may operate upon the destinies of the world. Do we love solitude? Do we ever go up for our marching orders? Is it our habit to shut out the world and keep it far below us that we may have every day some five minutes at least with God say in the morning, say early in the morning, or be it noontide, or in the quiet eventide? Do we ever clip out of the day some five minutes and say, “You shall be God’s minutes; through you I will receive messages from the Eternal One; I will carve a five minutes’ sanctuary out of every day”? for in five minutes how much can be done! what great speeches made! what oaths and vows exchanged! what memories touched into new vividness! and what vows formed with solemn and pregnant meanings! Let God have part of every day; then, when his own our own full day comes, it will be all too short for the interviews we wish to hold with him, and for the messages we wish to deliver and to receive.

When Moses was away the people became impatient; they said:

“As for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him” ( Exo 32:1 ).

Were they then dependent upon one man? Yes, to a large extent. I thought every man was one? Not at all. We are dependent upon our elder brother, our strongest man, our noblest suppliant, our wisest leader, in many of the crises and agonies of life. For a long time we are as good as he is; we know no difference between him and us; we wonder sometimes at apparent tokens of superiority, but suddenly we are confronted with circumstances which classify men: we come in face of great claims and demands which search us, and try us, and see what our quality really is, then we know which is Moses, which is Aaron, which is the man of prayer, and which is the man of mighty talk. The people did not understand the discipline of keeping still. That is a difficult discipline really to understand. We understand the discipline of going on, that suits our impatience and our littleness; but the discipline of standing still, simply waiting, doing everything by doing nothing, reducing life to a process of breathing, being nothing in the great tragedy, who can understand that? Who is equal to that strain? Who has the patience that can simply stand still and see the salvation of God? And yet this is the way in which we are sometimes trained. Let us own our impatience in this matter. I want to be going on, and I cannot stir; I want every stroke of my arm to win a battle, and behold I cannot raise my hand to my head. So much could be done before sunset, and we are not allowed even to make the endeavour. That discipline may be accepted either in the way of fretfulness, chafing, vexation, kicking against the pricks; or it may be so accepted as to chasten the soul, clarify it, make it without flaw or stain, a holy and beautiful thing laid in daily sacrifice upon the high altar. How shall we accept it? You want the appointment now; you want to come into your blessing to-day; you want the answer to the great question you have put immediately; and God says, “No; not to-day, nor tomorrow, nor this year, but by-and-by.” How do you take that answer? Do you fret, chafe, kick, rebel? or do you say “Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight”? If you can say that, you need no more growth in grace: you are ripe; you are matured under the blessed and all-comforting sun of God’s glory, and may surely be quickly transplanted to the higher gardens. That is the last conquest of grace, the supreme acquisition of the soul, to have no will, to be ready to stand, to go, to fight, to wait, to suffer, saying always, “Not my will, but thine be done.”

And yet the people were religious all the time. They said: “Up, make us gods, which shall go before us,” an unintended tribute to the majesty of their leader. “Make us gods which shall go before us,” an unintended rebuke to Aaron. The responsibility did not devolve upon him. They did not say “Come, thy elder brother is lost; be thou our leader and our king, and we will do thee homage.” Moses gone he can be replaced only by gods! It is thus that we reluctantly and sometimes unconsciously pay tribute to our masters, and leaders, and noblest teachers, and benefactors. One Moses gone gods must supply his place! Moses was one nominally, but Moses was influentially a host. It will take a good many gods such as Aaron can make to fill up the place of Moses. But Aaron did not feel the rebuke; the people perhaps did not intend it as a compliment or tribute to Moses. But you will find if you give up the Church, you will require a good many theatres to make up its place. You will discover that if you give up the poor preacher, the praying man, you will be driven to many expedients to find an equivalent in the place he really occupied. You did not think so at the time; you said you would find an equivalent next door over the way tomorrow, ay, it can easily be done. But when the terrific vacancies in life occur, then we begin to feel how much we have lost. We say, now that the old father is gone, how we miss him; we did not know he was so much to us until now; why, he did everything so quietly, easily, graciously, that we did not know that he was doing so much; we miss him morning, noon, and night; we miss him in the garden and on the street, at the table and in all the ways of life: the sunshine all gone: the helping story no longer told: the gracious advice no longer available. Ay, you will have to gather a great many people together before you find a total equal to the father whom you did not really appreciate when he was with you. It takes an innumerable host of acquaintances to equal one friend. It takes a whole furnaceful of gods to equal one Moses. Do not wait for the vacancy to occur to honour the man, the woman, the child, the teacher, the helper, the companion; but honour to whom honour is due now; and away with the cant, the hypocrisy, the falsehood, which says, “Had we but known what Moses was when he was with us, we should indeed have honoured and obeyed him.” If you do not honour and obey your dear old mother now, I will not listen with complacency to the canting lie which attempts to shed tears over her tomb. Pay her court now, be civil to her now with a generous courtesy, wait upon her now with filial homage and obedience; and as for the epitaph, let any writer of phrases invent that. You keep her out of her grave, no matter who writes upon the stone which marks the sod under which she lies. Oh that we might have apt minds and good, clear, penetrating sense in these matters! and remember that many acquaintances are not equal to one friend, many gods not equal to one Moses, many casual helpers and assistants not equal to one father, and all the amusements in the world not equal to one holy service in God’s blessed house. Could we seize these truths and make them the bread on which our heart lives and grows, we should be sad and weak no more.

Moses came down from the mount bringing great messages from God. What was in his heart as he carried the two tables of the testimony? Here is writing for Israel, here is God’s gospel of law, written by God’s own finger, graven upon the tables. What a day Israel will have! What reading of the testimony! What gluttonous eyes will devour the holy feast of truth! Oh, what spiritual voracity will consume this word of the Lord! Hark! what is that noise clanging, shouting? “The voice of them that shout for mastery?” No. “The noise of them that cry for being overcome?” No. What then? “the noise of them that sing do I hear.” Then they are glad with a false gladness. Singing is religious? Often very irreligious. But the hymn is a religious one. True, but the singers are not religious singers; and religious songs on the lips of irreligious singers is an irony which might make the angels weep. To hear great Bible words sung by people who value the music rather than the truth is an anticlimax full of sad pathos to hearts that worship truly at the altar. I would these sinners did not double their sin by singing God’s words. Why not invent empty phrases? Why not employ incoherent speeches? Why not sing the unrelated words of the dictionary just as they stand in thick columns, and let God’s great words alone? Thus we are always paying homage to the very God we deny. There are no words like his. We borrow them to sin against them; we steal them to make money out of them. There is no book with so many oratorios in it as the Bible ay, and great anthems and swelling songs, could they but be sung aright, sung with the soul. It is robbery, it is sevenfold murder, to sing God’s words without God’s meaning, to laugh over them, and jest about them, and ask how they “went” in the vocal dance. God’s words sung with God’s meaning, then make the church a place of music in very deed; sing morning, noon, and night, for then singing will be preaching, and such preaching as will make the heart cry for the very agony of love. It is not enough that we sing: we must sing with the spirit and with the understanding, and have a right object, and a right subject, and a right soul; then the singing will be good. Moses drew near and with eyes purged by visions Divine, with a soul out of which had been taken every filament of evil, he saw the situation at once as with the burning eyes of purity, and he first inflicted judgment and then asked for explanation. Ay, that is right in great crises, in solemn eras of the soul. Moses did not first hold judgment; his

The Lord mourned that Israel “turned aside quickly out of the way.” The word quickly seems to contain most of the meaning. It is always so. We go with eagerness in the wrong direction, and with leaden feet we climb the steep which leads us away to the upper places. There is but a step between us and death, not physical death only, but moral death, intellectual death, social death. The thing nearest life is death. Even physically the strongest man is always walking by the edge of his own grave. In a moment a man may speak a word which will bring down the tower which a lifetime was required to build. One action of the hand will shatter the character of the most venerable man. A character is not destroyed a blow at a time though even the slow process is not impossible, but the slowness is only on the social side; it is the one act done in one moment that shatters the character in the sight of God. Towards society we may go down by slow and almost imperceptible depreciation; but to the eye of God we rise or fall by one action. The departure is accomplished in a moment, and the return is but the act of one contrite prayer. A series of appalling thoughts is started by this circumstance. Life is a continual peril and can only be sustained by a continual prayer. “Hold thou me up, and I shall be safe.” Never leave me; never forsake me. The higher my attainments the deeper will be my faith, if my watchfulness be not found wanting. Who can measure the time required for a stone to fall from the highest pinnacle into the lowest depth? If we would know the rapidity of the descent, we must watch the stone as it falls from its place of honour; it seems to be the work of a moment. Destruction cometh suddenly upon the sons of men. No destruction comes so suddenly as the destruction of the soul’s attitude towards things Divine.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXV

THE FEAST OF THE COVENANT, THE ASCENT OF MOSES AND JOSHUA INTO THE MOUNTAIN, THE BREACH OF THE COVENANT, THE COVENANT RESTORED BUT MODIFIED

Exo 24:9-34:35

1. What is this lesson and its outline?

Ans. The lesson is from Exo 24:9 to the end of that chapter, with a mere glance at the next seven chapters, 25-31, and then 32; it covers three full chapters, nearly all of another chapter, and a glance at seven other chapters. I will explain to you about that glance as we go along.

The outline of the lesson is:

The Feast of the Covenant, Exo 24:9-11 .

The Ascent of Moses and Joshua into the Mountain, Why and How Long, Exo 24:12-31:18 .

The Breach of the Covenant, Exo 22:1-6 .

The Covenant Restored but Modified, Exo 32:1-34:35 .

We commence at the first item of the outline, viz.:

The Feast of the Covenant. That part of the lesson is Exo 24 and commences at Exo 24:9-11 . Let us read that: “Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu [two sons of Aaron], and seventy of the elders of Israel [and we learn from Exo 24:17 that Joshua, the minister or servant of Moses, was along. That makes seventy-five persons [: and they saw the God of Israel; and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stone, and as it were the very heaven for clearness. And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: and they beheld God and did eat and drink.” That is the feast of the covenant.

2. What of the custom after ratifying a covenant and an example from Genesis?

Ans. Nearly always just after a covenant was ratified the parties to the covenant partook together of a meal to show their fraternity and communion. The Genesis example you will find where Laban and Jacob made a covenant. The covenant is prepared, they agree to enter into a covenant, they put up a token of the covenant, they build an altar, they make sacrifices, they ratify the covenant in the blood of that sacrifice. Then they sit down and eat a meal together, which is the feast of the covenant. You will find all of that in the Genesis account of Laban and Jacob. So here a covenant having been proposed, an agreement to enter into it made, a preparation for it, the terms of the covenant given as stated in their threefold characters, that covenant carefully read, an altar erected, sacrifices offered, the blood of the covenant sprinkled upon the altar and upon the people, and so ratified, then follows this feast of the covenant.

3. What are the provisions used at the feast in such cases?

Ans. The provisions are the bodies of the peace offering. There are two offerings, viz.: the burnt offering, which has to be burned up, then the eucharistic or thank offering. That thank offering furnishes the material of the feast after the covenant is ratified.

4. Who was the representative at this feast with God and a New Testament analogy?

Ans. The representatives here are: First, Moses, then his servant Joshua, his army chief; second, the high priest and his two sons that is five; and third, the seventy elders of Israel. All Israel did not meet God and partake of a feast, but the representatives of Israel in the persons of Moses, Joshua, Aaron and his two sons, and the seventy elders, who meet God and partake of this feast. Now the New Testament analogy is that the Lord’s Supper which was to memorialize the sacrifice of Christ was participated in by representatives of the church, the apostles. The apostles were there, but not there as individuals. They represented the church just as they represented the church in receiving the Commission, so that it was simply a church observance even at the time of its institution.

5. What of the communion in this feast and the New Testaments analogy?

Ans. The communion is not the communion between Moses, Aaron, and the elders, that is, it is not a communion with each other, but it is a communion with God, and the New Testament analogy is as Paul expresses in his first letter to the Corinthians: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion, or participation, of the blood of Christ?” and yet how often people misrepresent the idea of that communion, as when A, B, and C commune together to show their fellowship for each other, or a man’s communing to show his fellowship for his wife. The word means “participation” and the one in whom is the participation is God: “The loaf which we bless, is it not a participation, the communion of the body of Jesus?” So here these representatives of all Israel communed with God a little way up the mountain, not far.

6. The record says that they saw God. What kind of a sight of God did they see, and what other cases in the Old and New Testaments?

Ans. They did not see any form or likeness of God. Moses is very careful to say that “no man can see God and live.” He is careful to say in Deu 4 that at Sinai they saw no similitude or likeness. Now, in Isa 6 he (Isaiah) sees God as they saw him, that is, he sees the throne; he sees the pavement; he sees a great many things about the throne, the angels, the cherubim and the seraphim, but he doesn’t see any likeness of God, though he hears God talking. Precisely so you find it in Eze 1 . He sees the chariot of God, four cherubim, their wheels, their wings, and their faces looking every way, but he doesn’t see the One in the chariot, and so it is in Rev 4 where John is caught up to heaven and he sees the very same thing, this very pavement, and the throne, the cherubim, the angels round about the throne, and he sees something that represents the Holy Spirit, and he sees something that represents Jesus Christ, a precious stone which represents God, but he doesn’t see God.

7. Apply this thought to transubstantiation and consubstantiation in our feast, as the Romanists and Luther taught.

Ans. The Romanist says, “This is the very body and the very blood of Christ; you can see it and you can taste it.” And the consubstantiation advocate, Luther, says, “The bread is not the body of Christ and the wine is not the blood of Christ, but Christ is there this way: You take a knife and put it in the fire and take it out of the fire when it is red hot, and you have the same metal, but you have something there that was not there before, viz.: heat, you can touch it and feel the effect of that heat burning.” You can take cognizance of that kind of a presence, but in this analogous communication with God they saw no similitude, no form.

8. Explain that part of the feast where it is said that “God laid not his hand on the elders of Israel, though they saw him.”

Ans. It means that God did not slay them. The declaration is often made, “Whoever sees God shall die.” They can’t bear the sight of God. But the kind of a sight of God that these people saw, they were able to see without having the hand of God laid on them, and what a beautiful lesson! Before the covenant was made, when the trumpet sounded and the darkness came and the earth quaked and the lightning flashed, and that strange, awful voice speaking the ten words, the people were scared almost to death; they wanted a mediator, somebody to come between them and that awful Being. But knowing that a covenant had been established and had been ratified by the blood of a substitute, they can see God in the sacrifice of the substitute and not die; see him in perfect peace, just as you, before you are converted, look upon God as distant and unapproachable, but after you see him in Christ in the covenant, the terror of God is taken away and you can sit there just as if eating a meal with a friend.

9. Give again a complete outline of the covenant.

Ans. The complete outline of the covenant is:

(1) God’s proposition of a covenant and their agreement to enter into a covenant;

(2) Their preparation for the covenant;

(3) The three great terms of the covenant;

(4) The ratification of the covenant;

(5) The feast that follows the covenant. Will you keep that in mind? You need to be drilled on that every now and then, so that when anybody asks you where there can be found a copy of the Sinai covenant and all the parts of it, you can answer: “It commences with Exo 19 , and closes with Exo 24 .” That is the whole thing in all its parts.

The Ascent of Moses into the Mount, Why and How Long? This is the second item of the outline. That is found immediately after what we have been discussing, commencing at Exo 24:12 . “And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there”: that means, Moses, you are to be there quite awhile; “and I will give thee the tables of stone, and the law and the commandment, which I have written, that thou mayest teach them.” And Moses rose up, and his servant Joshua; and Moses went up into the mount of God. And he said unto the elders, Tarry ye here for us, until we come again unto you: and, behold, Aaron and Hur are with you; if any man have any matters to do, let him come unto them. And Moses went up into the mount, and the cloud covered the mount. And the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day he called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud. And the sight of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel. And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and went up into the midst of the mount: and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.” Now here are the questions on that:

10. Why is Moses, after the covenant is ratified and the feast is held, taken up into the mount? (He and Joshua alone go).

Ans. He is carried up to receive the same law which had been spoken orally, now in writing “which I have written.” And what he went up particularly to get was the two tables or the Ten Commandments, and in God’s own handwriting that he might keep them as a witness. “The tables of the Testimony” is the name of them. Moses wrote a copy that the people learned, but that particular copy was God’s own autograph. That was put up and preserved as “tables of the testimony.”

11. What is the meaning of “tables of stone,” “the law,” and “the commandment”?

Ans. The tables of stone I have just described. But what was the law that Moses goes up after? You would miss that if you had to answer it off-hand, and the commentators all miss it. They don’t get in a thousand miles of it. You will find that it was what he received when he went up there a special law, and that special law was that the sabbath, God’s sabbath, should be the sign of the covenant. You find that at the end of this section that we are now on. So the law he went after was the law of the sign. Then what was the commandment he went after? The Commandments are all given in seven chapters (25-32) and every one of them touches the law of the altar. We will glance at the outline of that directly.

12. Why were these tables of testimony and this sign of the covenant and these laws concerning the altar given to Moses?

Ans. The lesson says, “That thou mayest teach them.”

13. Who was to represent Moses in the camp while he was absent in the mount?

Ans. Aaron and Hur.

14. What reminder of a New Testament incident is in these words of Moses: “Tarry ye here for us until we come again”?

Ans. It is Jesus in Gethsemane, when he let the representatives stop, and said, “Stay here while I go yonder and pray.”

15. What was the visible token that God was present with Moses, and why that token?

Ans. Exo 24:16-17 : “And the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it and the sight of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel.” Now, why is that last word, or clause, “In the eyes of the children of Israel”? That was a token to them not to get impatient. “When you begin to say, ‘Moses stays a long time,’ you look up there at that cloud on top of that mountain, how exceedingly glorious it is, you may know that Moses is right in that cloud communing with God.”

16. How long was Moses up there in that cloud before God spoke to him, and why did he speak to him on the particular day that he did?

Ans. Moses was up there six days. God called him up there: “Don’t you get impatient. Here is the test of your faith. You wait. I have called you up here, to have an interview and to receive certain things, and you wait; be patient.” Now on the seventh day, that is, the sabbath, which was the sign of the covenant, God spoke.

17. How long was Moses in the mount, and what is the New Testament parallel?

Ans. Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights, and the New Testament parallel is that after Christ was sacrificed for the ratification of the covenant and they had eaten the feast of the covenant and Christ was risen from the dead, he remains with them forty days, instructing them. That is just exactly what God is doing with Moses. Just as Jesus uses forty days after his sacrifice in careful instruction of his disciples, so God after this sacrifice and ratification of the covenant, takes Moses up into that mountain for forty days of continued explanation.

18. Give, for the present, a mere summary of what Moses received on the mount, set forth in the seven chapters, 25-31.

Ans. Just now all we want is a summary and the reason we don’t want to go into the details is that we take that up in the next chapter in connection with what follows. But all you want to know now is the outline. The outline is:

(1) He received the tables of the testimony;

(2) He received the law of the sign;

(3) He received the commandments as follows:

(a) The commandment upon the people to furnish voluntary offerings for what was to be made;

(b) The making of the ark with the mercy seat on it where God was to be met; the making of a tabernacle for the shewbread; the making of the candlestick; the making of a tabernacle or tent with its subdivisions and its marvelous veil between the divisions; and the court and the oil that was to supply the lampstand or candlestick;

(c) The garments for Aaron, the high priest, when he officiated before God;

(d) The law of the consecration of Aaron to the office of high priest;

(e) The law of the consecration of the altar by which approach to God was to be made;

(f) The law of the daily sacrifice;

(g) The law of the golden altar, or the altar of incense, and bow it is to be offered. Incense is to be offered twice a day just like the lamp is to be lit twice a day and the sacrifice is to be offered twice a day in the morning Aaron goes to trim the lamps as the morning offering and the ascent of the morning cloud of incense representing the going up of the prayers of God’s people, and in the afternoon he goes to light the lamp, and there is the evening sacrifice and the going up of the incense;

(h) The atonement or ransom money and what that signifies;

(i) The laver, that was to be between the altar and the mercy seat, and what it was to be used for;

(j) The marvelous recipe of the anointing oil that was to be poured upon the head of a prophet or a priest or a king or a sacrifice;

(k) The perfume that was to be put at the place of entrance, indicating that they were to meet the fragrance of God right at the threshold of entrance or approach to him;

(l) The inspiration of the artificers of all this work. Just as an apostle was inspired to do his work, so certain men were here named that were inspired to do this work called for in all these things;

(m) That sabbath for a sign which I have already mentioned.

The Breach of the Covenant. This is the third item. Where do you find that breach of the covenant? In chapter 32. We are coming to awful things now. The most interesting thing in the Old Testament: “And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we know not what is become of him. And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden rings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me. And all the people brake off the golden rings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron. And he received it at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, and made it a molten calf: and they said, These are thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And when Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, To-morrow shall be a feast to Jehovah. And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace-offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.”

19. Give the seven elements of this breach of the covenant.

Ans.

(1) The rejection of Moses and of God and a demand for other gods to be made: “Make us gods.”

(2) This god, of course, being man made, was an idol.

(3) The form of the god was the Egyptian god, Apis, calf or ox, the Egyptian god that died of the murrain through one of the miracles of Moses.

(4) They built an altar of worship and of sacrifice.

(5) They offered both burnt and peace offerings.

(6) They had a feast to follow this covenant they were making with this new god, and,

(7) Stripping off their clothes, naked, they go into a drunken orgy and practice all of the beastly and infamous lusts that characterized that worship in Egypt and in other idol worshiping countries. Paul says, “The people sat down to eat and rose up to play,” and then adds, “Be ye not fornicators and adulterers as they were.”

20. What was God’s announcement to Moses and what were the purposes announced concerning Israel and the raising up of a new people?

Ans. God saw that breach of the covenant that had just been made. The answer is this, commencing with Exo 32:7 : “The Lord said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves: they have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and have said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And the Lord said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and now, behold it is a stiffnecked people: now therefore let me alone that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation.” That is the terrible announcement. They have broken the covenant. “I will instantly destroy them; I will raise up a new people from Moses. He will be the basis of the new people.” Now before they get out of this trouble there will be four intercessions of Moses.

21. What was the first intercession of Moses and its result?

Ans. I quote it, commencing at Exo 32:11 : “And Moses besought the Lord his God, and said, Lord, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swearest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever.” So the first thing was to stop instant destruction of that people. The result: “And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.” He didn’t kill them right then, but he at least suspended that terrible bolt of divine wrath that was about to fall upon them.

22. What did Moses and Joshua see on their return to the camp?

Ans. All the above happened before Moses came down from the mount. Joshua says, “I hear a great shout down in the camp. There must be an army or there must be a battle.” Moses says, “No, that is not the shout, neither of men on the battlefield, nor of men crying for mercy. That is the shout of singing; those people are singing down there.” And they came down and saw that calf; they saw their naked and beastly orgies; they saw the whole hideous sin which the people had committed.

23. What was the first token that the covenant was broken?

Ans. Moses took the tables of the testimony and broke them all to pieces right in the sight of the people. “You do not need these tokens any more. I have brought you in the handwriting of God the witness of the covenant; you broke it; let the token be broken.”

24. What, in order, are the other things done in that camp by Moses when he got down there?

Ans. Moses was not a man to go down there and hold his finger in his mouth. When he sees that thing he is stirred. Let us see now what, in order, were the things that he did. First, he took that calf and burned it until it pulverized; then he mingled the ashes of it in water and made the people drink it. Second, he shook his finger in the face of Aaron and said, “What have these people done unto you that you led them into this sin? I went up in that mountain to meet God; I left you as my representative. Now what have these people ever done to you that you should lead them into this?” And Aaron pleads the baby act if ever a man did in the world. He says, “Well, they they they said, ‘Make us a god,’ and I told them to bring me the earrings and I put the earrings into the fire and there came out this calf; the fire did it.” An old father who, when his boy came home disappointed and broken in health and knowing nothing, after several years away at school, said, “All that money I put into the fire of education and there came out this calf.” Third, Moses said unto them in the camp, while naked and half drunk they stood before him not daring to open their lips, “Whoso is on the Lord’s side, let him stand by me. I am going to draw a line. Somebody in this great camp surely is on the Lord’s side.” And the Levites came. You remember when Jacob pronounced the prophecy of blessing on his children he gave a big slice to Levi. When Moses goes to pronounce a blessing he is going to pronounce a great honor on Levi, and he is going to assign as a reason what Levi does this day. That whole tribe lined up on the side of Moses. They didn’t stand up there just as a show. “Now, if you are on the Lord’s side, draw your swords and wade into that crowd. Don’t stop if it is your brother, or father, or mother, no matter how close kin to you. There must be a penalty inflicted for this awful sin,” and Levi pitched in and slew three thousand. Fourth, he began to take steps toward saving those people from temporal and eternal destruction, and that brings us to the next question:

25. What was the second intercession of Moses and God’s reply?

Ans. Moses said, “You have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the Lord: peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.” Now you come to the next intercession of Moses: “And Moses returned unto the Lord, and said [and this is the greatest piece of intercession that ever took place on earth except in the case of Christ], Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin ; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.” Only one other man ever said anything like that, and concerning this same stiffnecked people, and that was Paul, “I could wish myself accursed from Christ for my brethren’s sake.” Moses, in other words, offered himself as a substitute for the people: “Don’t, don’t destroy them! Destroy me!” It was a grand proposition. Now, what did God say to that intercession? “The Lord said to Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me,, him will I blot out of my book. I will not blot you out for them. The soul that sinneth it shall die. Therefore now go, lead these people unto the place of which I have spoken unto them; behold mine angel shall go before thee; nevertheless in the day when I visit, I will visit their sin upon them. And the Lord plagued the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made.”

26. What of the effect of this upon the people?

Ans. They mourned and laid aside their ornaments and did not put them on from Mount Horeb onward.

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Exo 32:1 And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us; for [as for] this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.

Ver. 1. Up, make us gods. ] Aaron might make a calf, but the people made it a god, by adoring it.

“Qui fingit sacros auro vel marmore vultus,

Non facit ille Deos; qui rogat, iste facit.” – Martial.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Exodus

THE GOLDEN CALF

Exo 32:1 – – Exo 32:8 ; Exo 32:30 – – Exo 32:35 .

It was not yet six weeks since the people had sworn, ‘All that the Lord hath spoken will we do, and be obedient.’ The blood of the covenant, sprinkled on them, was scarcely dry when they flung off allegiance to Jehovah. Such short-lived loyalty to Him can never have been genuine. That mob of slaves was galvanised by Moses into obedience; and since their acceptance of Jehovah was in reality only yielding to the power of one strong will and its earnest faith, of course it collapsed as soon as Moses disappeared.

We have to note, first, the people’s universal revolt. The language of Exo 32:1 may easily hide to a careless reader the gravity and unanimity of the apostasy. ‘The people gathered themselves together.’ It was a national rebellion, a flood which swept away even some faithful, timid hearts. No voices ventured to protest. What were the elders, who shortly before ‘saw the God of Israel,’ doing to be passive at such a crisis? Was there no one to bid the fickle multitude look up to the summit overhead, where the red flames glowed, or to remind them of the hosts of Egypt lying stark and dead on the shore? Was Miriam cowed too, and her song forgotten?

We need not cast stones at these people; for we also have short memories for either the terrible or the gracious revelations of God in our own lives. But we may learn the lesson that God’s lovers have to set themselves sometimes dead against the rush of popular feeling, and that there are times when silence or compliance is sin.

It would have been easy for the rebels to have ignored Aaron, and made gods for themselves. But they desired to involve him in their apostasy, and to get ‘official sanction’ for it. He had been left by Moses as his lieutenant, and so to get him implicated was to stamp the movement as a regular and entire revolt.

The demand ‘to make gods’ or, more probably, ‘a god’ flew in the face of both the first and second commandments. For Jehovah, who had forbidden the forming of any image, was denied in the act of making it. To disobey Him was to cast Him off. The ground of the rebellion was the craving for a visible object of trust and a visible guide, as is seen by the reason assigned for the demand for an image. Moses was out of sight; they must have something to look at as their leader. Moses had disappeared, and, to these people who had only been heaved up to the height of believing in Jehovah by Moses, Jehovah had disappeared with him. They sank down again to the level of other races as soon as that strong lever ceased to lift their heavy apprehensions.

How ridiculous the assertion that they did not know what had become of Moses! They knew that he was up there with Jehovah. The elders could have told them that. The fire on the mount might have burned in on all minds the confirmation. Note, too, the black ingratitude and plain denial of Jehovah in ‘the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt.’ They refuse to recognise God’s part. It was Moses only who had done it; and now that he is gone they must have a visible god, like other nations.

Still sadder than their sense-bound wish is Aaron’s compliance. He knew as well as we do what he should have said, but, like many another man in influential position, when beset by popular cries, he was frightened, and yielded when he should have ‘set his face like a flint.’ His compliance has in essentials been often repeated, especially by priests and ministers of religion who have lent their superior abilities or opportunities to carry out the wishes of the ignorant populace, and debased religion or watered down its prohibitions, to please and retain hold of them. The Church has incorporated much from heathenism. Roman Catholic missionaries have permitted ‘converts’ to keep their old usages. Protestant teachers have acquiesced in, and been content to find the brains to carry out, compromises between sense and soul, God’s commands and men’s inclinations.

We need not discuss the metallurgy of Exo 32:4 . But clearly Aaron asked for the earrings, not, as some would have it, hoping that vanity and covetousness would hinder their being given, but simply in order to get gold for the bad work which he was ready to do. The reason for making the thing in the shape of a calf is probably the Egyptian worship of Apis in that form, which would be familiar to the people.

We must note that it was the people who said, ‘These be thy gods, O Israel!’ Aaron seems to keep in the rear, as it were. He makes the calf, and hands it over, and leaves them to hail it and worship. Like all cowards, he thought that he was lessening his guilt by thus keeping in the background. Feeble natures are fond of such subterfuges, and deceive themselves by them; but they do not shift their sin off their shoulders.

Then he comes in again with an impotent attempt to diminish the gravity of the revolt. ‘When he saw this,’ he tried to turn the flood into another channel, and so proclaimed a ‘feast to Jehovah’ !-as if He could be worshipped by flagrant defiance of His commandments, or as if He had not been disavowed by the ascription to the calf, made that morning out of their own trinkets, of the deliverance from Egypt. A poor, inconsequential attempt to save appearances and hallow sin by writing God’s name on it! The ‘god’ whom the Israelites worshipped under the image of a calf, was no less another ‘god before Me,’ though it was called by the name of Jehovah. If the people had their idol, it mattered nothing to them, and it mattered as little to Jehovah, what ‘name’ it bore. The wild orgies of the morrow were not the worship which He accepts.

What a contrast between the plain and the mountain! Below, the shameful feast, with its parody of sacrifice and its sequel of lust-inflamed dancing; above, the awful colloquy between the all-seeing righteous Judge and the intercessor! The people had cast off Jehovah, and Jehovah no more calls them ‘My,’ but ‘ thy people.’ They had ascribed their Exodus first to Moses, and next to the calf. Jehovah speaks of it as the work of Moses.

A terrible separation of Himself from them lies in ‘ thy people, which thou broughtest up,’ and Moses’ bold rejoinder emphasises the relation and act which Jehovah seems to suppress Exo 32:11. Observe that the divine voice refuses to give any weight to Aaron’s trick of compromise. These are no worshippers of Jehovah who are howling and dancing below there. They are ‘worshipping it , and sacrificing to it,’ not to Him. The cloaks of sin may partly cover its ugliness here, but they are transparent to His eyes, and many a piece of worship, which is said to be directed to Him, is, in His sight, rank idolatry.

We do not deal with the magnificent courage of Moses, his single-handed arresting of the wild rebellion, and the severe punishment by which he trampled out the fire. But we must keep his severity in mind if we would rightly judge his self-sacrificing devotion, and his self-sacrificing devotion if we would rightly judge his severity.

No words of ours can make more sublime his utter self-abandonment for the sake of the people among whom he had just been flaming in wrath, and smiting like a destroying angel. That was a great soul which had for its poles such justice and such love. The very words of his prayer, in their abruptness, witness to his deep emotion. ‘If Thou wilt forgive their sin’ stands as an incomplete sentence, left incomplete because the speaker is so profoundly moved. Sometimes broken words are the best witnesses of our earnestness. The alternative clause reaches the high-water mark of passionate love, ready to give up everything for the sake of its objects. The ‘book of life’ is often spoken of in Scripture, and it is an interesting study to bring together the places where the idea occurs see Psa 69:28 ; Dan 12:1 ; Php 4:3 ; Rev 3:5. The allusion is to the citizens’ roll Psa 87:6. Those whose names are written there have the privileges of citizenship, and, as it is the ‘book of life’ or ‘ of the living’, life in the widest sense is secured to them. To blot out of it, therefore, is to cut a man off from fellowship in the city of God, and from participation in life.

Moses was so absorbed in his vocation that his life was less to him than the well-being of Israel. How far he saw into the darkness beyond the grave we cannot say; but, at least, he was content, and desirous to die on earth, if thereby Israel might continue to be God’s people. And probably he had some gleam of light beyond, which enhanced the greatness of his offered sacrifice. To die, whatever loss of communion with God that involved here or hereafter, would be sweet if thereby he could purchase Israel’s restoration to God’s favour. We cannot but think of Paul willing to be separated from Christ for his brethren’s sake.

We may well think of a greater than Moses or Paul, who did bear the loss which they were willing to bear, and died that sin might be forgiven. Moses was a true type of Christ in that act of supreme self-sacrifice; and all the heroism, the identification of himself with his people, the love which willingly accepts death, that makes his prayer one of the greatest deeds on the page of history, are repeated in infinitely sweeter, more heart-subduing fashion in the story of the Cross. Let us not omit duly to honour the servant; let us not neglect to honour and love infinitely more the Lord. ‘This man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses.’ Let us see that we render Him

‘Thanks never ceasing,

And infinite love.’

Fuente: Expositions Of Holy Scripture by Alexander MacLaren

delayed = put them to shame by his not coming down. Compare Psa 44:7; Psa 53:5; Psa 119:3.

out of = from.

make us gods. The great sin of to-day (1Co 10:7, 1Co 10:11). Made now not of materials; but made by imagination; and worshipped by the senses.

man. Hebrew. ‘ish, App-14.

wot not = know not.

all = the greater part. Figure of speech Synecdoche (of Genus), App-6.

them. The Ellipsis (App-6) should be supplied by the word “it “: i.e. the gold (Exo 32:3).

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 32

Now when the people saw that Moses had delayed coming down from the mountain, they gathered to Aaron, and they said unto him, Get up, and make us gods, that shall go before us; for as for Moses, we don’t know what’s happened to him, he brought us out of the land of Egypt, but what’s become of him, we don’t know. [“He’s been gone now for almost forty days.”] And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them unto me. And all the people broke off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them to Aaron. And he received them at their hands, and fashioned with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf ( Exo 32:1-4 ):

So he melted down the gold, and then he fashioned it with a graving tool, a little golden calf. Notice that carefully, because you’re gonna find that Aaron’s a classic liar. He took this graving tool and carved out this little golden calf. Remember he’s the high priest, which might be a warning unto you, that not all who are in the ministry of the gospel are totally honest in all of their dealings. You might get some computerized letters that are filled with hypocrisy, deceit and lies. Ooh, I could get going again.

So the people broke off their golden earrings, he took a graving tool; he carved out this little molten calf.

and he said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought you up out of the land of Egypt ( Exo 32:4 ).

Oh, how quickly these people forget. You know to me the constant, constant burden in my heart is the fact that there are some people that just migrate towards every stupid doctrine. Every wind of doctrine, every concept that’s going on, people just “ooh”, trailing on after it. I wish that the true doctrine, sound doctrine could spread as rapidly as false doctrines. But man, these false doctrines seem to have wings and they spread so rapidly.

The latest one being this prosperity cult. “God wants all of His children to be prosperous and healthy. If you’re not prosperous and healthy, there’s something wrong with your relationship with God.” God help us; what a cruel, corrupt doctrine. But oh, how it is spread. Sad. The people, so quickly-Paul wrote to the Galatians and he said, “Oh, foolish Galatians. Who has bewitched you that you should so soon turn away from the truth? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now gonna be made perfect in the flesh? Foolish Galatians. You turned from the truth so quickly”( Gal 3:1 , Gal 3:3 ).

“Foolish Israelites, you turned from the truth so quickly. God is drawing you to Himself to worship the holy living true God, and now here you are with a little golden idol before you.” “This is your god that brought you out of Egypt”, and the people demanding “Make us a god that we might worship it.” This is the result.

And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord. And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and they rose up to play. And the Lord said to Moses, Get down; for thy people, which you brought out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves ( Exo 32:5-7 ):

Notice the Lord isn’t even claiming them at this point. “Thy people, which you brought out of the land of Egypt corrupted themselves.”

And they have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: and they have made them a molten calf, and are worshiping it, and have sacrificed unto it, and they have said, These are the gods, O Israel, which have brought you out of the land of Egypt. The Lord said unto Moses, I have seen the people, behold, they are stiffnecked: Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, that I may consume them: and I will make thee a great nation. [“I’ll wipe them out and I’ll make a great nation out of you, Moses. We’ll start over again.”] And Moses besought the Lord his God, and said, Lord, why does your wrath wax hot against thy people, [“Not mine Lord, don’t put them on me.”] which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and a mighty hand? [Nobody wants to claim them at this point.] Why should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. Remember Abraham, Isaac, Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swearest by thine own self, and said unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of the heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of I will give to your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever. And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people ( Exo 32:8-14 ).

Now, faced with a problem. For in Num 23:19 we read that, “God is not a man that He should repent”, or “God is not a man that He should lie, nor the Son of man that He should repent has He not spoken, shall He not do it?” What does it mean, “the Lord repented”? The obvious reading of the scripture looks like God is angry, ready to destroy the children of Israel, and Moses uses some good logic and reasons with God to spare them. “Look if you wipe them out, the Egyptians are gonna say, Look you just brought them out of the land to destroy them here. They’re gonna speak evil against You. Why should they speak evil against You, God? Lord, now turn from Your fierce anger, don’t do this.” God is just angry, ready to wipe them out. Moses was the cool head, and he’s pulling God off.

Now remember Moses wrote this. But our problem, our problem is that we have to describe God’s actions in human terms. Therein lies the problem. The actions of an infinite God cannot adequately be described in human language. But we have to describe in human terms, the activities of God. So we use the word “God repented”, but in reality God does not and can-has no need to change or to repent, which it means “to change” or “to turn from”. But from the human standpoint, how can I describe the fact that the judgment of God is due these people, but the judgment of God doesn’t come upon these people. “So, God changed.” No, He didn’t change.

Again we see Moses standing there interceding, holding God off. But who put it in the heart of Moses to intercede? Who put it in the heart of Moses to pray? Who put a love for these people in the heart of Moses? It was God’s work in the life of Moses to begin with. The inspiration of Moses’ prayer came from God Himself. All true prayer begins with God. Thus, God was the inspiration behind the prayer.

Now God knows all things from the beginning. He knew that the children of Israel were gonna mess things up. He knew they were gonna be worshiping this calf. In fact, He knew it before they ever did it. God is speaking to Moses about their sin in need of judgment. Moses is now inspired of God to plead for their salvation. But it’s difficult to describe the activity; it’s impossible to describe the activities of God in human terms, but we have nothing else to describe them. Thus, we have to have human terms to describe what are apparent activities of God, but yet the human terms fall short and cannot adequately describe God’s actions here.

Let it be said if God had determined to destroy them, He would have destroyed them, and nothing Moses could’ve said could have changed Him. The fact that they weren’t destroyed only indicates that God had no intention to destroy them in the beginning. But Moses is having to describe the anger of God against these people and the deserving justice that was coming to them in the human terms, and yet the justice of God doesn’t fall upon them. Thus, I have to describe that also in human terms, and give some sort of an explanation why these people were able to survive this great sacrilege against God. I only have human terms to do it, but I’m dealing in those mysterious, divine inner councils of God of which I have no clear understanding at all. God said, “My ways are not your ways, My ways are beyond your finding out” ( Isa 55:8 ). But yet I only have human terms to describe the activities of God, and thus I have to use terms that do not adequately describe what God has done, but only describes the effect of the actions in human terms.

“God is not a man that He should lie, nor the son of man that He should repent.” But yet we read over and over in the New Testament-or the Old Testament where, “God repented”. But that’s only describing the activity of God with a human term, which is a poor term, to say the best, but yet we have nothing else. So there is the limitation always of seeking to describe the things of God with human language. It always falls short.

Paul the apostle, when he was in heaven, when he came back, he said, “It would be against the law”, it would be a crime, “if I tried to describe to you in human terms the things that I heard.” You just can’t do it; he didn’t even try. There’s no language that man understands or knows, no words have yet been formed or created, or devised that could adequately describe the glory, the beauty, the majesty of that heavenly realm. It’s just so far beyond anything we’ve ever experienced or known or seen, or whatever. That it’s just ridiculous to try to use human language, because anything you would say would be less than it really is. So far less, that it would be a crime to use human language to try to describe it.

Yet we must describe the activities of God, and we only have human vocabulary to do it; and thus, we have to use terms that we understand as human beings to describe the supposed actions of God. But in reality what God has purposed, He will fulfill. Had God purposed their extermination and wiping them out, He would’ve done it. God did use Moses’ intercession as the excuse not to do it, because God delights in mercy.

So Moses turned, and he went down from the mount, and with the two tables of testimony in his hands: the tables were written on both of their sides; And the tables were the work of God, the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables ( Exo 32:15-16 ).

Oh, wouldn’t it be exciting to see those two tables that God actually inscribed with His finger, the commandments upon? Ooh, wouldn’t it be priceless to just look at those two tables of stone?

Now when Joshua [who was the servant of Moses, who was with Moses] heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said to Moses, There must be a war in the camp. And Moses said, it’s not the voice of those that shout for mastery, neither the voice of those that are crying because they’re overcome: but I hear the noise of singing. And it came to pass, as soon as they came close to the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses’ anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and broke them beneath the mount. And he took the calf which they had made, he burned it in the fire, he ground it into powder, and he put the powder in water, and he made them drink the water. [“There, drink your god.”] And Moses said to Aaron, What did this people unto thee, that thou hast brought so great a sin upon them? And Aaron said, Let not the anger of my lord wax hot: you know the people, that they are set on mischief. For they said unto me, Make us gods, which shall go before us: for as for this Moses, the man that brought us out of the land of Egypt, we don’t know what’s become of him. And I said unto them, Whosoever has any gold, let him break it off. So they gave it to me: and I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf ( Exo 32:17-24 ).

“Hocus, pocus, dominocus.” Aaron, shame on you.

And when Moses saw that they were naked; (for Aaron had made them naked to their shame among their enemies:) Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and he said, Who is on the Lord’s side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. And he said unto them, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from the gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. [That is those who were leading in this blasphemous sacrilege.] And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. For Moses had said, Consecrate yourselves today to the Lord, even every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow a blessing this day. And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said to the people, You have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the Lord; peradventure I shall make a covering for your sin. And Moses returned to the Lord, and he said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold ( Exo 32:25-31 ).

Now we see Moses in the position of an intercessor, offering intercessory prayer before God.

Intercessory prayer is that form of prayer that reaches out beyond me and my own needs, to bring a guilty world before God, that God might work in it. Prayer has three forms, basic forms, variations within each. The first is worship, praise, adoration, acknowledging God for who He is. It’s something that goes on constantly in my heart day by day; my awareness of God, my consciousness of God, my worship of God for His goodness, for His blessings, for His mercies, for His love. For all that He is to me, and all that He means to me, for the beauties of the world, for the beauties of His presence and grace in my life. That continual thanksgiving within my heart because God loves me.

But then prayer has a second form of petition, where I bring before God my needs, my requests. I need strength, I need guidance, I need help, I need wisdom, I need so many things, and I come before God that He might supply my needs. But then prayer moves into the realm of intercession, where I bring before God your needs. I bring before God the needs of the community. I bring before God the needs of this nation, the needs of the world; intercessory prayer. No prayer is really complete except it enter into the area of intercession. We really need real intercessors. If you want a book to really understand intercessory prayer, read Howell’s book, “The Intercessors”. Fantastic. Just a beautiful prayer-book on intercessory prayer, Reese Howell, “The Intercessors”.

I believe that one of the greatest needs today really is for people to really have the ministry, and exercise the ministry of intercessory prayer. More things are wrought through prayer than the world will ever know. The real power behind the scenes. How I thank God for the hundred and thirty men in the church who are engaged in the intercessory prayer all night long, each night of the week. God bless these men. What a power they are for good in this whole community, as they intercede in their ministry of intercessory prayer. No wonder God is working so marvelously because of the intercession that is going on, day and night continually.

Moses is in intercessory prayer. The first thing is the confession of the sins of the people. Confession of sin is so important, because without confession there can be no forgiveness. Unless you confess your sins to God, there’s no way God can forgive your sins. If you try to hide your sins, there’s no forgiveness. You try to cover your sins there’s no forgiveness. “Whoso seeks to cover his sin shall not prosper, but whoso shall confess his sin, the same shall be forgiven”( Pro 28:18 ).

Many times we’re trying to cover our guilt, we’re trying to make ourselves look not quite so guilty. We’re trying to sort of gloss over the sins, the guilt in our lives that it doesn’t look as bad as it really is. As long as we’re seeking to do a snow job on God, we’re never gonna get anywhere. It’s only when you’re honest and open with God, and you openly confess your sin and your guilt before God, that now you open the door for God to work. Now God can forgive, because you’ve been open and you’ve confessed your sins. If you confess your sins, He’s faithful and just to forgive you your sin, and to cleanse you from all unrighteousness. But it’s not until there’s been that open confession of sin that God can work and do it. Be open with God; be honest with God, confessing.

Moses confessed the sin of the people, and then Moses said,

Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin- ( Exo 32:32 );

Notice that line, the dash with the semicolon. That dash with the semicolon indicates a passing of time. How much time, we don’t know, but an interim of time passed as Moses was waiting for God to answer. He waited and he waited, and there was no voice from heaven. There was no voice of grace or mercy. There was no voice declaring, “I will forgive, I will cleanse, I will pardon.” Moses waited, and it seemed like the silence was a refusal by God. “If Thou wilt forgive their sin”, no answer. Maybe God won’t forgive; maybe there’s a refusal.

So Moses goes on to say,

if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou has written ( Exo 32:32 ).

Jesus speaks to the church of Sardis declaring, “He that overcomes, I will not blot his name out of the book of life”( Rev 3:5 ). Moses is asking for his name to be blotted out of the book that God has written, the book of life, if God will not forgive the sins of the people. This certainly shows to us a depth of love that very few of us can really comprehend or understand. Where Moses, for the sake of the people, could wish himself blotted out if God won’t forgive them. “Then forget me”, where Moses is willing to take the place with the guilty people, and to stand with the guilty people.

But again where did this love come from? It wasn’t natural with Moses. When God spoke to Moses out of the burning bush and told him to go and lead these people out of Egypt, he had-he really wanted nothing to do with it, and nothing to do with them. He was satisfied where he was. They’d already given him a bad time, and he wanted nothing to do with it.

So he began to offer to God all kinds of excuses why he could not go and lead them out of Egypt. God answered every one of his excuses. “I can’t speak” “All right, Aaron can be your mouthpiece.” “They won’t believe me.” “All right, take the rod and I’ll work miracles with it.” After God answered every one of his excuses, Moses said, “God please send someone else, I don’t want to go.” Moses really didn’t have any desire to go and get involved. But God put it in his heart. And the compassion and the love that Moses had for these people was something that God had placed in his heart.

That is why it is sheer folly for us to try to generate compassion. It’s got to come from God; that kind of compassion you can’t generate. You can’t say, “Well, I’m just gonna love everybody.” You’re gonna find more hatred in your heart than you’ve ever known was there. The moment you start out from the door with the determination in your mind, “I’m gonna love everybody today, just gonna be a picture of love today. Gonna love everybody.” Man, I’ll tell you, you’ll not get three blocks from your house until somebody will swerve in front of you and cut you off, and you’ll be, “You come back here. Where’d you get your driver’s license?” Where’s the love, you know. This kind of compassion can only come from God, the work of God. So don’t exalt Moses, because it was God that gave him this great compassion.

Paul said much the same thing, “I could wish myself accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh”( Rom 9:3 ). Hard for me, I cannot, I cannot say that. I do not have that kind of compassion. I pray, “God, give me more compassion for the lost”. I have sort of an attitude, “Hey man, if you want to be stupid and go to hell, that’s your business”, because I know that I can’t turn you or save you, or do anything about it. I mean, if you’re determined, you know, what can I do? But I desire a greater compassion.

I think that that’s one of the needs of the church today is a greater compassion for the lost. We just couldn’t sit by complacently and see the terrible condition of the lost around us without being more moved, without being touched, without being burdened, without being driven to a greater witness unto them. “Oh God, give me a heart like Thine, a compassion for those that are lost.” The compassion of John Knox. Oh God, give me-stop when they’re all dying. Oh God, give me the United States, or I’ll die. A real burden for a lost soul.

We don’t have it; we don’t possess it. May God give it to us, a great burden for lost souls, that we too might become intercessors, because that is the secret behind all intercession is that great love and burden for the lost. That’s always the underlying factor of a great intercessor. It begins with a compassion, begins with a love; it’s expressed in intercession.

Now Moses’ request was a foolish request. “Blot my name out of your book of remembrance”. Moses, that’s foolish. That’s off the wall.

The Lord said unto Moses, [“Moses, that’s off the wall.”] Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book ( Exo 32:33 ).

“Don’t ask me to blot your name out, that’s ridiculous. I’ll blot out the names of those who have sinned against me.”

There was a time when the Lord spoke to me somewhat the same way as He spoke to Moses. When my mother was dying, I went into her bedroom, and I sat there for awhile looking at her as she was suffering, trying to understand in my heart, crying out to God. I looked at those neat hands, those beautiful hands, and I thought of all the pies, and the cookies, and the rolls, and all that those hands had baked for my pleasure. I thought of all the times that those hands had wiped my forehead when it was hot and sweaty with a fever. I thought of all of the ministry of those hands for me and my benefit, the clothes that were washed with those hands, and hung out, and brought in and folded, all of the beds that those hands had made for me. I just sat there weeping. Such a beautiful person. One of the dearest persons I’ve ever known. To see her suffering was more than I could take. To know that night and day she could not sleep because of the pain.

I went over to the foot of the bed, and I fell on my face before God. I said, “Lord I’m no hero, and I’m not demanding that You heal her. But she’s Yours, her life is Yours, she belongs to You. But God I can’t stand to see her suffer anymore. Though I’m not a hero, Oh Lord, would you please take her pain and put it on me for today, and I’ll be glad to bear the pain all day for her, so that she can have relief today. I’m not asking for it forever, but Lord for today, let me bear it for her so she can have one day’s relief.”

Jesus came to me and He stood right by my side, and He said, “Chuck, that’s off the wall.” He said, “I already bore her pain for her, there’s no need for you to do it.” I said, “Lord, forgive me for such an off-the-wall statement. I know You bore her pain. I thank You for bearing her pain for her.” In that very moment, my mother sort of sighed, and she said, “Oh, the pain is gone.” She never experienced a moment’s pain after that. For all of a sudden, I saw the greatness of God, and the power of Jesus Christ rather than the ugliness of the cancer. I realized what are a few malign cells against the mighty creative force and power of God in Jesus.

We are human and we are prone to sometimes make statements to God that are off the wall, as Moses. “Lord blot my name out.” Lord said, “Ah, come on, Moses. Whoever sins against me, those names I’m gonna blot out.” Yet the expression behind it, surely the compassion that was there, the willingness of Moses has to be admired.

We can admire the work that God is able to do in changing a man from a cold, calloused position, “The children of Israel; I could care less. Let me alone, I’m happy and content here in the wilderness.” From that not wanting to get involved to such a compassion to say, “Lord, forgive their sins, and if not, then blot, I pray Thee, my name out of Your book.” I’ll tell you that kind of compassion is only can come from God, and a work of God. But I admire the work that God is able to do in each of our lives in transforming us, and changing us and taking us from a noncommittal kind of a “don’t care, let’s not get involved”, to just a complete involvement in the needs of the world around us, as we intercede and pray for God’s help for this sick people, and this sick nation.

Therefore now go, and lead the people into the place which I have spoken unto thee: behold, my Angel shall go before thee: nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them. And the Lord plagued the people, because they had made the calf, which Aaron made ( Exo 32:34-35 ).

The Lord said, “All right, now go and lead them, and I’m gonna send my angel before you.” Now Moses is gonna respond to this, and this will be our message next Sunday morning. Moses responds to God saying, “I’m gonna send My Angel before you.” As he realizes and recognizes the necessity of the presence of God. So next Sunday you’ve already got a clue on the Sunday morning sermon as you’ll find Moses’ response to God saying, “I’m gonna send my angel. Go ahead, get out there and lead them now, and I’ll send My Angel.” Moses responds to that.

So next week, the Lord willing, we’ll finish the book of Exodus. The latter part gets a little redundant, because then they go ahead and make the thing just like he said. So we’re gonna be skipping a lot of that because it’ll just be redundant. We’ve already looked at the blueprints. So now they are just gonna follow the blueprints that God has given, and we don’t need to follow them through the making of it as we get into the blueprints. So next week, finish the book of Exodus.

May the Lord bless you and give you wisdom and understanding, as you realize that Christ is now our tabernacle. He is the place where we meet God. You cannot meet God apart from Jesus Christ. The place of meeting, and now this is the place where God will meet you, even Jesus Christ.

Silver, the metal that was used in the sockets, is the metal of redemption in the scriptures. Gold is the metal of heaven, deity. Brass is the metal of judgment. So as you get into these metals, you’ll see the place of the silver in redemption, the place of gold, the place of God’s presence, and the place of brass, the place of God’s judgment against sin. It all has beautiful symbolism. The colors also have their symbolisms, which we’ll get into more next week.

Shall we stand? Now may the Lord be with you and guide and bless your life, and keep you in the love of Jesus Christ. May He increase your burden for the lost. May the anointing of God rest upon your life that you might hear His voice, that you might do His work, that you might walk in His path, in Jesus’ name. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Exo 32:1. And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us, for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.

They wanted something to look at, something visible that they could adore. It was not that they meant to cease to worship Jehovah, but they intended to worship him under some tangible symbol. That is the great fault of Ritualists and Romanists, they aim at worshipping God, but they must do so through some sign, some symbol, some cross, some crucifix, or something or other that they can see.

Exo 32:2-3. And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me. And all the people brake off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron.

People are often very generous in their support of a false religion; and, to make idol gods, they will sacrifice their most precious treasures, as these idolaters willingly gave their golden earrings.

Exo 32:4. And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a gravinq tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.

No doubt they copied the Egyptian God, which was in the form of a bull, which the Holy Spirit, by the pen of Moses, here calls a calf. The psalmist probably also alludes to it when he speaks of an ox or a bullock that hath horns and hoofs. It seems strange that these people should have thought of worshipping the living God under such a symbol as that.

Exo 32:5. And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, Tomorrow is a feast to the LORD.

To Jehovah. They intended to worship Jehovah under the form of a bull the image of strength. Other idolaters go further, and worship Baal and various false gods, but, between the worship of a golden calf and the worship of false gods, there is very little choice; and, between the idolatry of the heathen and Popery, there is about as much difference as there is between six and half a dozen.

Exo 32:6. And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.

It was usual to worship false gods with music and dancing and with orgies of drunkenness and obscene rites, and the Israelites fell into the same evils as they had seen among their neighbours.

Exo 32:7. And the LORD said unto Moses,

Just in the midst of his hallowed communion, the Lord said to him:

Exo 32:7. Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves:

God would not own them as his people. He called them Moses people: thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves.

Exo 32:8-10. They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, these are thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people: now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation.

For Moses began at once to pray for the people, to interpose between God and the execution of his righteous wrath; and, therefore, the Lord said to him, Let me alone,… that I may consume them.

Exo 32:11. And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people,

See how he dares even to say to God, They are thy people, though they have acted so wickedly. Why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people,

Exo 32:11-13. Which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand? Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever.

Moses pleaded the covenant which the Lord had made with Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, and there is no plea like that. Although it might have been to his own personal interest that the people should be destroyed, Moses would not have it so; and he pleaded with God, for the sake of his own honour, his faithfulness, and his truth, not to run back from the word which he had spoken.

Exo 32:14-15. And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people. And Moses turned, and went down from the mount,

Does it not seem sad for Moses to have to go down from the immediate presence of God, and to stand among the idolatrous and rebellious people in the camp? Yet that is often the lot of those whom God employs as his servants. They have, as it were, to come down from heaven to fight with hell upon earth.

Exo 32:15-17. And the two tables of the testimony were in his hand: the tables were written on both their sides, on the one side and on the other were they written. And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables. And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said unto Moses, There is a noise of war in the camp.

For Joshua was a younger man than Moses, and also a soldier, so his ear was quicker to hear what he took to be a noise of war in the camp.

Exo 32:18. And he said, It is not the voice of them that shout for mastery, neither is it the voice of them that cry for being overcome: but the noise of them that sing do I hear.

Moses knew that it was not a battle cry either of the victors or the vanquished; but the song of idolatrous worshippers.

Exo 32:19. And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing and Moses anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.

In righteous indignation, preserving those sacred tablets from the profane touch of the polluted people, by dashing them to fragments in his holy anger

Exo 32:20. And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and strawed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it.

Think of the courage of this one man, to go single handed right into the middle of the idolaters camp, and deal thus with their precious god!

Exo 32:21-24. And Moses said unto Aaron, What did this people unto thee, that thou hast brought so great a sin upon them? And Aaron said, Let not the anger of my lord wax hot: thou knowest the people, that they are set on mischief. For they said unto me, Make us gods, which shall go before us: for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him. And I said unto them, Whosoever hath any gold, let them break it off. So they gave it me: then I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf.

Which was a lie. Aaron was a poor weak-minded creature, easily persuaded to do wrong; and when his stronger-minded and more gracious brother was absent, he became the willing tool of the idolatrous people; and yet Aaron is called, by the psalmist, the saint of the Lord, and so he was, taking him as a whole. One black spot, on the face of a fair man, does not prove him to be a negro; and so, one sin, in the life of a man who is usually holy, does not put him among the ungodly.

Exo 32:25-28. And when Moses saw that the people were naked, (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame among their enemies) then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORDS side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses:

The rebellious, the idolatrous, the men who had defied the authority of God, were to be summarily executed on the spot.

Exo 32:28-29. And there fell of the people that day about three thousand men. For Moses had said, Consecrate yourselves to day to the LORD, even every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day.

Such a colossal crime as that must be expiated before the Lord could again bless the chosen race.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible

Immediately following the account of this period of communion between Moses and God we have the record of the sin of the people. When they said, “Up, make us Gods,” they were seeking something to represent God rather than seeking a new god. The day after the calf was erected they observed a feast to Jehovah.

In this connection Moses is seen in one of the greatest hours of his life as he stood and pleaded with God. It is to be observed that his plea was not so much on behalf of the people as on behalf of God. He spoke to Him of “Thy people, that Thou hast brought out of the land of Egypt” and then pleaded the covenant made with Abraham, Isaac, and Israel. Undoubtedly Moses was filled with compassion for the people, but his chief concern was for the honor of the name of God. In such a man God found vantage ground for the activity of mercy and the carrying out of purpose.

Another side of Moses’ character is revealed in the story of his return to the people. He came in anger, broke the tables of stone, ground the calf to powder, and compelled the people to drink of the water into which it was flung. These actions were far more than a mere outburst of passion. They were followed by inquisition. From this inquisition Moses returned into the presence of God and there confessed the sin of the people, pleading that they might be spared, even though he be blotted out of the Book. God’s answer was strict justice and mercy. Moses was commanded to return and lead the people, and it was promised that an angel would lead them.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

Aarons Golden Calf Offends the Lord

Exo 32:1-14

The people never thought of taking Aaron as a substitute for Moses, because they instinctively recognized his moral weakness. Though he was dressed in the garments of the high priest, he was essentially a weak man. This came into evidence:

(1) By his reply to the people. When they demanded the calf he ought to have met them with an indignant negative; but instead, and to prevent the unpopularity which such an attitude might have evoked, he contented himself with putting difficulties in the way of their project. Surely, he thought, they will never go on with their mad scheme, if they have to pay for it with their jewels. But the event did not justify his expectations.

(2) By his reply to Moses. There came out this calf. It was the furnace, not I, that did it. Blame my heredity, environment, companions, says the wrongdoer. The weak becomes the sinful one. Strong Son of God, help us! Make us strong! See Jer 15:20.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Exo 32:1

Notice:-

I. The very essence of idolatry is not spiritual ignorance and obtuseness, but a wilful turning away from the spiritual knowledge and worship of God. (1) This act of idolatry was in the very front of the majesty and splendour of Jehovah revealed on Sinai. It was in the very face of the mount that might not be touched and that burned with fire, and the sound of the trumpet, and the voice of words, by which the Lord God of hosts was declaring Himself to the people there. The people saw the glory of God, and while the vision was there, and all its impressions fresh on their hearts, they made themselves a molten calf, and sang, “These, O Israel, be thy gods.” (2) With the idol before him, the priest proclaimed a feast unto the Lord; and the people pleased themselves with the thought that they were “fearing the Lord, while they served their own gods.” The real heart of idolatry is here laid bare. It is, in plain terms, an effort to bring God within reach, to escape the trouble, pain, and weariness of spiritual effort, and substitute the effort of the eye, hand and tongue for the labour of the soul. (3) In God’s sight, that is, in reality, this is a turning away from Him. They meant this bull to be an image of God their Leader. God saw that it was an image of their own idolatrous and sensual hearts.

II. The contrast between the prophet and the priest. Priests have in all ages been the willing ministers of idolatry; as an order they have rarely lifted up their voice against it unless inspired by the prophets of truth. The prophet becomes the censor of the priesthood; while the priesthood marks the prophet as a man to be silenced and, if possible, put down. The perfect Mediator is both Priest and Prophet. He reveals God to man in conducting man to God. The Christian priesthood partakes of this double character.

III. The central principle of idolatry is the shrinking of the spirit from the invisible God. It is the glory of the Incarnation that it presents that image of the invisible God which is not an idol, that it gives into the arms of the yearning spirit a Man, a Brother, and declares that Jesus Christ is the God of heaven.

J. Baldwin Brown, The Soul’s Exodus and Pilgrimage, p. 178.

References: Exo 32:1.-Old Testament Outlines, p. 28. Exo 32:7.-G. Matheson, Moments on the Mount, p. 12.

Exo 32:24

I. There never was a speech more true to one disposition of our human nature than this of Aaron. We are all ready to lay the blame on the furnaces. “The fire did it,” we are all of us ready enough to say. “In better times we might have been better, broader men, but now, behold, God put us into the fire, and we came out thus.”

Our age, our society, is what, with this figure taken out of the old story of Exodus, we have been calling it. It is the furnace. Its fire can set, and fix, and fasten what the man puts into it. But, properly speaking, it can create no character. It can make no truly faithful soul a doubter. It never did. It never can.

II. The subtlety and attractiveness of this excuse extends not only to the results which we see coming forth in ourselves; it covers also the fortunes of those for whom we are responsible. Everywhere there is this cowardly casting off of responsibilities upon the dead circumstances around us. It is a very hard treatment of the poor, dumb, helpless world which cannot answer to defend itself. It takes us as we give ourselves to it. It is our minister, fulfilling our commissions for us upon our own souls.

III. There is delusion and self-deception in this excuse. Very rarely indeed does a man excuse himself to other men and yet remain absolutely unexcused in his own eyes. Often the very way to help ourselves most to a result which we have set before ourselves is just to put ourselves into a current which is sweeping on that way, and then lie still, and let the current do the rest, and in all such cases it is so easy to ignore or to forget the first step, and so to say that it is only the drift of the current which is to blame for the dreary shore on which at last our lives are cast up by the stream.

IV. If the world is thus full of the Aaron spirit, where are we to find its cure? Its source is a vague and defective sense of personality. I cannot look for its cure anywhere short of that great assertion of the human personality which is made when a man personally enters into the power of Jesus Christ.

Phillips Brooks, Sermons Preached in English Churches, p. 43.

References: Exo 32:24.-S. Macnaughton, Real Religion and Real Life, p. 244; S. Cox, The Genesis of Evil, p. 212. Exo 32:26.-Spurgeon, vol. xxvi., No. 1531, and My Sermon Notes, p. 36; G. Brooks, Outlines of Sermons, pp. 121, 282. Exo 32:29.-J. Burns, Sketches of Sermons on Special Occasions, p. 254. 32-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., pp. 223, 225.

Exo 32:31-32

I. There are three reasons why intercession is a very high duty. (1) It is a power given to every man to wield, a mighty instrument for which we are responsible. (2) It is love’s utterance in its holiest expression. (3) You are never walking so accurately in the likeness of Jesus Christ as when you are praying for a fellow-creature. On these three pillars the duty of intercession rests.

II. There are great privileges connected with intercession. (1) It is a beautiful way of giving expression to love. (2) It revives the spirit of prayer in ourselves.

III. Intercessory prayer must be: (1) intensely earnest; (2) accompanied with thanksgiving; (3) we should have a regular, defined period for it.

Intercession is the climax of prayer, because it was the climax of Christ’s prayers.

J. Vaughan, Meditations in Exodus, p. 78.

The nobler meekness is that which comes forth victorious from the struggle with strong emotion, and wins a glory from the passion it has subdued. The indication of an impetuous, fiery spirit in Moses only reveals the beauty of the meek patience which marked his life.

I. In the story of the golden calf we see (1) man’s natural tendency to worship; (2) we see the Israelites employing the very tokens of their deliverance to build a god for themselves. The very gifts of Heaven-wealth, intellect, power-men turn into idols. (3) In worshipping a golden calf the Israelites utterly degraded themselves.

II. The godliness of Moses manifested itself in self-sacrificing sympathy. Fronting death and its mystery, he stood sublimely willing even to be cut off from God if the sin of the people might thereby be forgiven. (1) His revulsion from their sin mingled with his own love for the people. The holiest men ever feel most deeply the sin of their fellows-they see its seeds in themselves; they find its shadow falling across their heaven. (2) He felt the promise of his people’s future. In them lay the germ of the world’s history; through them might be unfolded the glory of Jehovah before the face of all nations. Gathering these feelings together, we understand his prayers.

E. L. Hull, Sermons, 3rd series, p. 106.

References: Exo 32:30-35.-Parker, vol. ii., p. 273. Exo 32:31.-R. D. B. Rawnsley, Sermons in Country Churches, 3rd series, p. 148. Exo 32:31, Exo 32:32.-H. Grey, A Parting Memorial, pp. 135, 155. Exo 32:32.-C. J. Vaughan, The Liturgy and Worship of the Church of England, p. 167. 32-Parker, vol. ii., p. 265. 32-34.-W. M. Taylor, Moses the Lawgiver, p. 214. 32-39.-J. Monro Gibson, The Mosaic Era, p. 119. Exo 33:2.-Parker, vol. ii., p. 280. Exo 33:7.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. vii., No. 359. Exo 33:8.-J. Burns, Sketches of Sermons on Special Occasions, p. 140. Exo 33:9-23.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. v., p. 338. Exo 33:12.-J. Baldwin Brown, The Divine Life in Man, p. 266.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

4. Israel s Sin and Rebellion

CHAPTER 32

1. The people in rebellion (Exo 32:1-6)

2. Jehovah threatens his wrath (Exo 32:7-10)

3. Moses beseeches Jehovah (Exo 32:11-14)

4. Moses descends and in the camp (Exo 32:15-29)

5. Moses offer and failure (Exo 32:30-35)

This chapter records the breaking of the covenant by Israel s sin, rebellion against Jehovah, and idolatry. Here we find mans heart fully uncovered, that wicked heart of unbelief. What manifestations of Gods power they had seen! Their eyes beheld the dreadful judgments which fell upon the land of Egypt and wiped out the Egyptian hosts. They were guided by the visible sign of Jehovahs presence. He had given them manna, yea, they were eating that bread the very day on which they rebelled. The smitten rock had yielded water. God had entered into covenant with them. And now when Moses delayed, they requested of Aaron, Up, make us gods. God was not mentioned at all by the rebellious mass. It seemed Moses and not God was the object of their faith. The heathen had gone that way and changed the glory of the Uncoorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts and creeping things (Rom 1:23). The favored nation shows that their heart is as corrupt as the heart of the Gentiles, who know not God. They plunged into the degradation of idolatry. The unseen One, the One who had honored Abrahams faith, who spake to the fathers, was rejected by them, and they preferred a golden calf fashioned with a graving tool. And Aaron plays the leading part in this awful scene of degradation and wickedness. He announces a feast unto the Lord, after he had made the golden calf from the golden ear-rings (copied, no doubt, after the Egyptian idol Apis; see Psa 106:19-20). Then the people rose up to play; wild dances, licentious and filled with the abominations of the heathen, the flesh let loose, is what followed. The people were naked (verse 25).

Alas! the same has been repeated on Christian ground. The ritualistic, religious worship, appealing to the senses, filled with God, Christ and the Holy Spirit dishonoring counterfeits, the inventions of the religious nature of man under satanic control, is nothing but idolatry. It rejects the invisible One, who demands our faith and trust, and puts something else in His place. That is idolatry. All Gods true people are in danger of that sin in the most subtle forms. Whenever we lean on the arm of flesh and not exclusively upon the I Am, our gracious Lord, then we are guilty of the same sin. Little children, keep yourselves from idols (1Jn 5:21).

As Moses went up, so our great High Priest has gone to the Father. We see Him not, but we know He is there and will come back again. May we live by faith during His absence and be kept from idols.

Then Jehovah told Moses what was going on in the camp. Note that He said to Moses, thy people which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt . The Lord puts them, so to speak, upon Moses and commits them into his hands. Moses only needed to say the word and the rebellious nation would have been consumed and Moses and his offspring would become a new beginning. It was a test of Moses, but Jehovah knew beforehand what His servant would do. Beautiful is Moses intercession. He uses the same words the Lord had used. Thy people which Thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt . The Lord had put them into Moses hands; Moses puts them back upon the Lord. How wonderful was Moses intercession in their behalf. He reminds Him of His promises and the covenant made with Abraham, Isaac and Israel (avoiding the word Jacob). His intercession is typical of our great intercessor before the throne.

The covenant was broken and the first tables of stone were broken. The golden calf was burnt and ground to powder. This was cast into the water (the brook, Deu 9:21), and the children of Israel had to drink it. They had to drink their own shame; a humiliating experience. Aaron is questioned first, and he adds a new sin to the one already committed. (Compare verse 24 with verse 4). The sons of Levi gathered themselves to Moses. They, too, had shared in the rebellion, but were now the first to confess and take their stand with the Lord. Judgment follows and three thousand fell by the sword. They did not spare their nearest relations (Deu 33:9). Besides this, the people were plagued (32:35). Moses returned to the Lord. But he failed in his proposition. None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give unto God a ransom for him (Psa 49:7). Yet Moses willingness to be blotted out of the Book foreshadows Him who alone could do the atoning work. He offered himself without spot unto God, (Heb 9:14) and gave His life a ransom for many. He died for that nation (Joh 11:51-52).

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

tables of stone

(See Scofield “Exo 20:4”).

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

am 2513, bc 1491, An, Ex, Is 1, Ab

delayed: Exo 24:18, Deu 9:9, Mat 24:43, 2Pe 3:4

Up: Gen 19:14, Gen 44:4, Jos 7:13

make: Exo 20:3-5, Deu 4:15-18, Act 7:40, Act 17:29, Act 19:26

which shall: Exo 13:21, Exo 33:3, Exo 33:14, Exo 33:15

the man: Exo 32:7, Exo 32:11, Exo 14:11, Exo 16:3, Hos 12:13, Mic 6:4

we wot: Gen 21:26, Gen 39:8, Gen 44:15, Mat 24:48, 2Pe 3:4

Reciprocal: Exo 6:26 – Bring Exo 16:6 – the Lord Exo 20:4 – General Exo 20:23 – General Exo 23:2 – follow Exo 24:14 – Tarry ye Exo 32:4 – which brought Exo 32:23 – General Deu 27:15 – maketh 1Sa 8:8 – General Neh 13:6 – But Psa 81:11 – would none Eze 16:17 – hast also Eze 20:16 – for their Act 3:17 – wot Rom 11:2 – Wot Phi 1:22 – I wot

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

SUBSTITUTES FOR GOD

Gods which shall go before us.

Exo 32:1

We see that the Israelites residence in Egypt had familiarised them with the idea of symbols for God, so that there was no strangeness in it, but even a certain attraction in the pomp, and circumstance, and excitement, of idolatrous ceremonial.

I. It must be borne in mind that, at the time of their lapse, they had no Tabernacle, and no religious rites, such as were soon after established. They had nothing of external form and interest to satisfy the desire for a sensuous expression of religion. This desire had been previously met, at least, in part, by the shining of the pillar cloud, as the symbol of Divine presence; and the relation in which they stood to Moses, as the earthly representative of the Will. But for weeks the pillar cloud had not been seen in the sky; it was swallowed up in the great cloud about the summit of the Holy Mount; and the man Moses was, to their thought, certainly lost; it was inconceivable that he was alive, after being all those weeks without food. That awful majesty and glory, which had so alarmed the people that they had drawn back from the Mount, must have burned up Moses; and they felt that they were left to all the perils of the unknown wilderness, with no Divine leader and no Divine signs.

II. The suggestion seemed at first innocent enough.Cannot we make for ourselves a sign to go before us, something that shall indicate we are Jehovahs people; some symbol that shall be an earthly reminder of our absent God? It seemed innocent, but it was wholly wrong from the first. It was not indeed a sin against the Divine Unity. No hint is given to us of their intention to abandon the service of Jehovah, and substitute another God for Him. But they sinned against the Divine Spirituality; against their second great truth, God is a Spirit, and therefore no material likeness can be made of Him. Their sin lay in their pretending to worship a visible symbol of Him whom no symbol could represent.

The suggestion to make a molten figure must have come from some one man, but it could have had no influence if the doubt and fear, and the half-formed wish or some material sign, had not been generally in the thought of the people. Such national movements must be in the heart of the people, if the genius, or the forwardness, of some individual is to waken the movement into activity; and this may be illustrated in the cases of Luther and the Reformation, and John Hampden and the refusal to pay ship money.

III. Once started, the thing went altogether further than was at first intended.A sort of visible marching sign may have been the first thought; but the figure that came forth of the mould seemed at once to inflame the evil passions of the people; they lost all self-control, and gave themselves up to an excitement which easily degenerated into licentiousness and abominations. The evilsmoral evilsinto which the people fell illustrate the peril of moral deterioration which lies in having any sense-image, or likeness, of the spiritual Jehovah. Animal conceptions of God will tend to cultivate the animal passions; and this was found to be true even of the fine Greek conceptions of the Divine, as represented by the perfect body, the ideal human form. Even that animal conception had in it no power to purify or keep pure. There is no possible basis for a pure morality save the full conception of the spirituality of God; and it was this conception which the Golden Calf imperilled.

Illustration

(1) Aaron did not so much initiate the new policy of image making as he sought to control and direct the popular impulse toward idolatry. Like many another leader since, he argued that it was better to retain control of a movement which his conscience could not altogether approve than to break with the people and so lose all power. By so doing, he at once lost character, and, in the end, the popular respect which he valued so highly.

(2) There are idols of the heart as well as idols of gold and silver and brass and stone.

My work may be my idol. I take pride in it. I do it faithfully and diligently, never scamping it, never fulfilling it remissly. Mine is the eye, like Antonio Stradivaris, that winces at false work and loves the true. And that is well; but there is a better Lord than this.

My home may be my idol. Wife and children and friends, the familiar threshold and the dear firesideare they not a happy clime? John Stuart Mill said wistfully of her who had been the desire of his eyes, Her memory is to me a religion. And that also is well; but it is not the best.

My sin may be my idol. So much do I delight in it, that I will not part with its enchantments and pleasuresnot now at least, not for a long season yet. Its glamour bewitches me; its whisper of freedom deceives my heart. As Cleopatra led Antony captive, so my besetting sin enslaves me. But from all idols I turn to the one Lord.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

At the beginning of chapter 32, our thoughts are carried from the mount, where God communed with Moses, to the plain where the people were encamped during his absence. We can well imagine that as the forty days drew toward their close they became restive. They had seen him disappear into the cloud on the crest of Sinai and to them it seemed as though he was gone from them for ever. Tested as they were in this way, they showed very plainly that they walked by sight and not by faith. Moses had at least been a visible leader, though already a rebellious and unbelieving spirit in regard to him had been manifested. They had not the faith which would have made the unseen Jehovah a reality to them.

Consequently they desired a visible something which should represent the invisible before their eyes. They had been familiar with the veneration of bulls and calves in the depraved idolatry of Egypt. Aaron weakly acquiesced. The ears of the people, which should have been used to hearken to the Word of God, were adorned with gold rings like the ears of the heathen, and these were taken to make the golden calf, which they saluted as though it were a god.

Verse Exo 32:5 shows that in some way the unseen Jehovah was to be represented by the visible calf – so they thought. Now it is a fact that among the heathen the visible idol does represent an unseen power as 1Co 10:20 shows. The idol is nothing, but the power it represents is that of a demon. Hence if any power was behind the golden calf, it was of a Satanic kind and not of God.

In this crisis Aaron appears in a very unfavourable light. He had not had the schooling that Moses had endured during the 40 years in the backside of the desert, and hence he was less in touch with God, and more influenced by the wishes of the people, who began to attribute their miraculous deliverance from Egypt to the calf. By instituting an altar and sacrifices he did indeed attempt to give the festivities the semblance of a feast to the Lord. But it was something that he devised out of his own heart and not a feast ordained by the Lord.

The real character of what ensued is indicated in verse Exo 32:6. “The people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.” This is quoted in 1Co 10:7 as a proof that they were idolaters, and a later verse in our chapter (verse Exo 32:5) indicates how such idolatry at once degenerates into licentiousness and obscenity.

Do we wonder at such a warning being needed by the church at Corinth? But if we know how sodden Corinth was with these evils, we are not surprised; nor shall we be surprised that we need the warning today, if we realize how full the present world is of idolatry of a subtle nature. For what is the chief good, to which all the peoples of the earth hope to arrive? It is summed up in the words of the parable; to have, “much goods laid up for many years,” so that they may say to themselves, “take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry” (Luk 12:19). These words are almost identical with what we have just read in verse Exo 32:6. The Lord stigmatized the attitude of the rich fool of Luk 12:1-59 as covetousness, and in Col 3:5 the Apostle Paul writes, “covetousness which is idolatry.”

The programme of the rich fool was: plenty of leisure, plenty to eat and drink in spite of slacking as to work, plenty of fun and pleasure to fill up the hours of leisure. This is precisely the ideal dangled before mankind today. If attained, it means idolatry. As Christians may we have grace to mortify our members which are on the earth, one of which is this covetousness which is idolatry. Israel enjoyed these “pleasures of sin” for a very brief season, until Moses reappeared; a man who, rather than enjoy them, had chosen to “suffer affliction with the people of God.” (Heb 11:25).

The forty days were expired, and God sent Moses back to the people, revealing to him first how they had corrupted themselves and utterly broken the law in its most fundamental requirement. Verses Exo 32:7-10 indicate the completeness of the collapse of the people under the law, that so light-heartedly they had undertaken to keep in all its details. They had revealed themselves to be a stiff-necked people, subject to death and the hot wrath of God. Everything had been lost, and God disowned them, speaking of them to Moses as “thy people,” and not “My people,” as He had spoken of them to Pharaoh in Egypt.

So fully had they placed themselves under the death sentence that God spoke of removing them entirely, and of raising up a new and great nation from Moses himself. He had already set aside the old world and started afresh in Noah and his sons. Again He had turned from the idolatrous world and started afresh with Abraham and Isaac, the child of promise. He could have done the same thing in principle the third time, starting afresh with progeny derived from Moses.

In verses Exo 32:11-13 we have the reply of Moses, which is very fine, and reveals him indeed as, “very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth” (Num 12:3). Here was an offer at which the natural heart of man would have jumped – an offer which would have given Moses a place of extraordinary prominence and renown. Yet Moses besought the Lord against it. He insisted that after all the children of Israel were not his people but Jehovah’s people. This comes out in verse Exo 32:11.

In verse Exo 32:12 he displays his zeal for the name of the Lord, lest it should have its glory dimmed in the minds of the Egyptians. They had felt the mighty power of the arm of the Lord in the deliverance of His people. Were they now to hear that those that had been acknowledged as His people were likewise destroyed? The proposed act of judgment would be right; but would it have the appearance of being right in the eyes of men?

In verse Exo 32:13 we have a third thing of great significance. Moses, the servant of God through whom the law was given, falls back, not on the law covenant – all was lost on that basis – but on the unconditional covenant made much earlier with Abraham, Isaac, and Israel – using that name, and not Jacob, the name after the flesh. By an instinct divinely given, Moses in his plea forsook law for grace. On that ground his plea prevailed, in keeping with what is stated in Gal 3:17, “the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.”

So the Lord “repented” of the proposed evil, and this statement does not in any way clash with Rom 11:29, but rather confirms it. When it is a question of God’s gifts and calling, which are according to His purpose, no change of mind is possible. When it is a question of His ways with sinful men, they vary in detail, though ultimately all achieve His purpose. God tested Abraham, telling him to offer up Isaac, but when he had fully responded, God cancelled the order, having reached His purpose. Similarly here, He tested Moses by this proposal, so attractive to a self-seeking mind, and the test completed, He turned from the proposal and reverted to the ancient covenant which was the expression of His purpose.

In keeping with God’s command Moses descended from the mount, meeting Joshua on his way down, and having the two tables of stone in his hand. The tables themselves were the work of God, and the testimony inscribed on them was the writing of God. In the coming day under the new covenant the law will be written in the hearts of the people. At the present time the Spirit of God is writing not the law but Christ upon the hearts of those who receive the Gospel. But here God’s righteous demands on men were inscribed on stone.

Hence, bearing in mind the condition of things in Israel, we see at once that the tables of the testimony brought a ministration of condemnation and death. Approaching the camp in its dreadful state, Moses instinctively felt this, and he broke the tables before he came amongst the people. We read that, “Moses’ anger waxed hot,” so, directly he saw the evil for himself, he shared the Divine anger, which was made known to us in verse Exo 32:10.

Moses had pleaded for the people and they were not to be destroyed, but the very man who had acted as intercessor on their behalf, now acted in a governmental way to bring home to them the bitterness of their sin. He burnt the golden calf and then ground it to powder – a humiliating end for the supposed “god,” that brought them up from Egypt! And not only this. He also mixed the burnt dust with water and made the people drink their “god,” instead of drinking in honour of it, as they had been doing.

The chemical process involved in doing this unusual thing was known to the Egyptians, and Moses, we must remember, was “learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians,” and so knew well how to do it. There was, we are told, an ironic suitability about this punishment inflicted upon them, since gold thus treated and made into a drink has a most nauseous taste. In this literal and material way the people had brought home to them the filthiness and bitterness of their great sin.

The chief weight of the sin lay upon Aaron, and his attempted defence was feeble in the extreme. He attempted to remove the blame from himself and put it upon the people. When sin first entered, Adam attempted to put the blame on to Eve, as we saw in Gen 3:12. The same thing in principle appears now that we have reached the first and greatest sin under the law. Moreover he attempted to minimize his sin, as we see in verse Exo 32:24. He did indeed cast the gold into the fire, but, as verse Exo 32:4 recorded the calf was not only “molten,” but also he “fashioned it with a graving tool.” By telling a half truth he tried to disguise the whole truth.

In Heb 3:5 we read “Moses verily was faithful in all His house, as a servant,” and though this is not stated specifically of the incident we are considering, it was exemplified here in a striking way. The calf was a direct challenge to the supremacy and glory of God. Moses fresh from the presence of Jehovah was altogether on His side in the controversy, and he challenged all the people to declare themselves. They had been dancing round the calf: now let them gather round Moses, and thus declare themselves as on the side of Jehovah. To this challenge the sons of Levi responded.

The sin was of so drastic a character that judgment was inevitable. They were now under the law, and, “the law worketh wrath” (Rom 4:15). The sons of Levi, who had cleared themselves from the evil, were chosen to execute a limited judgment as a token of the judgment that lay upon all, and about three thousand men died. They had to consecrate themselves to the Lord in this way, for the claims of God are supreme. In Mat 10:37, we find a similar claim made by the Lord Jesus, though He was revealing grace and not law.

Only in Gal 3:19 is Moses spoken of as a mediator, yet in verse Exo 32:30 we see him formally taking his place as such. In consequence we see at once the contrast between him and the Lord Jesus, who is “the Mediator of a better covenant” (Heb 8:6). Moses realized that nothing short of an atonement for the sin was needed, and he proposed to go up to the Lord and offer himself; such was his fervent love to his erring people. His plea was for the forgiveness of the sin, and if not that he instead of the nation might be blotted out of the Divine Book. But he was only able to undertake the office with “Peradventure” on his lips. How great the contrast between this and what we have in 1Ti 2:5, 1Ti 2:6.

Moses, though so eminent and faithful a servant, was not a perfect man, but himself a sinner. The words of the Lord, which are recorded in verse Exo 32:33, reminded him that consequently he himself was liable to be blotted out of the book and hence he could not stand as a ransom for anybody else. The true Mediator, “the Man Christ Jesus,” has given Himself a ransom, not merely for the one sin of one people but for “ALL.” The efficacy of His ransom is guaranteed by the fact that He is God as well as Man.

The answer of the Lord nevertheless assured Moses that He would act in forbearance toward the erring people and lead them onward by His Angel, as He had originally promised in chapter Exo 23:20-23, though His governmental judgment would still further come upon them. This came to pass, as verse Exo 32:35 records, though details of the plague are not given.

Exo 33:1-23 opens with the command that the people prepare themselves to go forward to the land, which was to be theirs, not because they deserved it under the law, but because of the unconditional covenant that had been given originally to Abraham. God would still act on their behalf, driving out the nations before them and bringing them in, but this would be done by the Angel. On Sinai God was in their midst in a special way. Henceforward He would be amongst them by His Angel. His presence in a more immediate way might involve judgment upon them. Verses Exo 32:4-6, show how near they had been to complete destruction, and how their only becoming attitude was to stand mourning in the presence of God, and stripped of all that they might imagine beautified them.

Verses Exo 32:7-11, record how Moses took an action, which was endorsed by the Lord, though there is no record of it having been commanded by Him. He took a tent and pitched it outside and afar off from the camp, calling it the tent of the congregation. We must remember that Moses had only just come down from the mount, having received the instructions as to making the Tabernacle, and there had been as yet no time for its construction. The word used here is not the one indicating the tabernacle proper, but rather the outer covering, as we saw when reading Exo 26:1-37. Yet God honoured the action of Moses and placed the pillar of cloud on this tent outside the camp.

The significance of all this must have been plain to the people. If any of them sought the Lord, outside the camp they had to go, in order to find Him, for they had forfeited His presence by their sin. Communion between Jehovah and Moses was not broken, for he had not participated in their sin. To him God spoke face to face on a friendly basis, but they could only witness this and not in any way participate. Joshua was with Moses in this, for he too had not been involved in the transgression.

This withdrawal from the camp was only provisional and in order to impress on the people the gravity of their sin. Presently normal conditions were restored, and when the Tabernacle was made it stood in the midst of the camp. The reference in Heb 13:13 is not to this incident but to the law of the sin offering. The “camp” out of which the Hebrew believers were to go forth was not one which they were to re-enter long after. The rejected Christ, slain as the sin offering, has been “outside the camp” for nineteen centuries, and we are to be outside with Him, and not return to it.

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

Subdivision 2. (Exo 32:1-35; Exo 33:1-23; Exo 34:1-35.)

The breach of the first covenant, and the mixture of law and grace in the second, -the “ministration of death.”

In that which follows here we have the breach of the first covenant and the establishment of the second, -that under which the people went into the land. Under the first, they could not really be said to have stood at all: it was no sooner made than broken; as under pure law none could stand. The trial of it, however, readily undertaken by those ignorant alike of themselves and of God, was, on that very account, and for the continual lesson of what man is, needed to be made, in order that God’s grace might have room to show itself, as to self-righteousness it could not. Thus from the beginning God contemplated this second covenant rather than the first, and with it the tabernacle-types plainly connect themselves. The people are, according to this, already sinners, and the special priesthood of Aaron, with the whole mediatorial system connected with it, applies itself to this condition.

Yet we must not confound this second legal covenant with the “new” one, under which Israel will inherit the land, and find abiding blessing in the day yet to come. They are still in contrast, as the epistle to the Hebrews at large explains. And the covenant with Abraham, as is shown in that to the Galatians, refuses equally, as a covenant of promise, to be supplemented by conditions of law (Gal 3:15-18). The Abrahamic and the new covenant are in substance one: the second legal covenant is in character but a modification of the first here, and in result like it, -nay, more completely what the apostle calls it, a “ministration of death” and of condemnation.” (2Co 3:1-18.)

The lesson is for us, and in all this Israel only represented man as man -ourselves, therefore, for we are men: “As in water face answereth to face, so the heart of man to man.” (Pro 27:19.) Therefore if “whatsoever the law saith it saith to them that are under the law,” none the less is it “that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.” Our interest in all that we find here is not, therefore, to be such as might be in a past history merely, but fully and intensely personal.

Under pure law, we no more than they could stand a moment. Who could think to stand before Him in rigor of its pure and holy requirements? But the trial is not complete when we have learned that. It is much more than this to realize that we are “without strength,” and that we need, not assistance to keep the law, but true SALVATION.

“When we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.” The “due time” was when that was fully proved and therefore the need of that which proved it, -the “ministration of death” and “of condemnation.”

Not yet could God reveal aright His grace, though in proportion as the need declared itself so did the grace, and thus a mingled system -neither pure grace nor pure law, but just what in the thought of most the gospel should be. Therefore the need that the trial here should be more thorough and patient than the last, as now, when God has spoken of mercy in Himself, it can be. The trial in this case lasted until the captivity. Its issue was decisive, as “a ministration of death” must be. In the grace of the gospel, the dead hear the voice of the Lord, the life-giver, and live (Joh 5:25).

But while the result to the people as a whole was thus protracted, the beautiful system of types connected with the law brought nigh to faith already, in measure, at least, the grace it needed. Externally the vail was over Moses’ face; but where the law was allowed to do its work upon the conscience, and the soul realizing its guilt turned with it to God, it could with the Psalmist learn to say, “Thou art my hiding-place.” The thirty-second psalm, with other kindred ones, throws a comforting light upon the way in which under the shadows of law grace could yet be realized. Let us not on that account confound the two conflicting elements in this second law-giving, nor deceive ourselves as to the necessary result of the mixture of law and grace. The grace thus mixed made it only a more searching exposure and demonstration of man’s condition. It was a ministration of death.

1. In the first section here we have the action of divine righteousness in view of the rebellion of the people, while yet God acts as He will in the sovereignty of His grace. The legal covenant has not, of course, tied His hand in this respect, nor can He forget, though for the moment it might appear so, that promise to the fathers which we have seen to be that upon which He had acted in redeeming them out of Egypt. Nay, in fact, grace governs all, and the law itself is but its handmaid: its lessons, with all their sternness, do but shut us up to the necessity of grace.

(1) In the rebellion of the people, human nature shows itself in the blindness and folly of its religious side. It will make a god rather than not have one, and is not competent to estimate the value of a god so made. Beyond doubt, even with the wisest of those that follow it, there is in idolatry more than the virtue of a symbolic teaching. There is a mysterious supernatural power which is supposed to reside in the image, and which, at least, has a strange fascination for men, as shown in the general spread of idolatry over the earth, its invasion of Judaism, and long afterward of Christianity. No folly seems more complete than that of bowing down to the work of one’s own hands, yet here is shown out what in reality its power is. Not liking to retain God in his knowledge, man makes Him what he wishes Him to be -the reflection of his own passions and desires. These are what already control him, and so he but yields himself to their control in his idol. A new power is added to this when man’s original choice becomes confirmed by the adoption of many and by lapse of time concealing its origin, so that it comes to have authority over the conscience as well as power over the heart, -authority which may soon over-top the other.

What Samuel says to Saul long afterward is illustrated here: “For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is iniquity and idolatry.” (1Sa 15:23.) So we find it in this case; and of how many more subtle forms is this as true!

The effect is seen in the manner of their new worship, consecrated though they would have it with Jehovah’s name. “The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to sport” -after the heathen manner. They were “broken loose,” as was said of them directly afterward. “Inasmuch as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things that are not seemly.” (Rom 1:1-32.) Broken loose from God, as men they degrade themselves. In Aaron’s fall with them, both the ruin of man and the unrepenting grace of God are manifest. God is marking him out for the high-priesthood in Israel, while he is making the golden calf below!

(2) Above, Jehovah now makes known to Moses the sin of the people, laying the burden of them upon him -“Thy people, whom thou broughtest up,” -putting their case into his hands, so that if he but said so, they should be destroyed, and Moses’ own seed become the nucleus of a nation. But He well understands the man whom He is addressing; and Moses shows himself a beautiful type of the great Intercessor, the Servant of the divine glory and the people’s need. Moses is here fully established as the mediator of the covenant in the new condition of things that was to ensue.

(3) So too Levi consecrates himself to his office now (Deu 33:8-9,) by the demonstration of a fidelity to God which in zeal for His glory allows the interference of no human tie. The tables of the first covenant are broken beneath the mount, in token that the covenant itself is at an end; and judgment only remains, executed by the hands of kindred; for the breach with God loosens all bonds at once.

(4) Moses himself also fails in the atonement that he proposes. This is impossible, even to a devotion well-nigh unequaled among mere men. But “none can by any means redeem his brother, nor give unto God a ransom for him.” (Psa 49:7.) To the eager demand, therefore, “And now, if Thou wilt forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of the book that Thou hast written,” God can only reply, “Whoso sinneth against Me, him will I blot out of My book.” Yet He confirms the commission to lead the people to the land He had promised, though the stroke of judgment could not be so averted. Another would one day offer Himself in atonement for more than Israel, and would not fail.

2. Although God will still, therefore, fulfill His promise, and bring them into the land, yet in the meanwhile His own relationship to them is compromised, nor can He in this condition go in their midst as heretofore. They must take the place of those whose sins had separated them from the Lord, for in such a place alone could He show them mercy. Moses too must be recognized as the one through whom alone He could have to say to them, -the mediator, and though not an atoning mediator, the type of Him who would be that. This, then, is plainly the meaning of what is before us in this section; and its importance is plain.

(1) In the first place, then, Jehovah declares to them through Moses why He cannot take His place in the midst. Were He to do so, they would be consumed by His holiness. Let them strip themselves of their ornaments and await His judgment in the attitude of repentance. For to take the place of condemnation is repentance. The people accordingly strip themselves of their ornaments at the mount.

(2) In further sign of where they are, Moses removes from the camp the tent which had been heretofore connected with the worship of Jehovah, and pitches it outside and afar off, and calls it “the tent of meeting,” for all who now sought the Lord had to go out to the tent. There, too, the intercourse between Jehovah and Moses was seen by the awe-stricken people -Jehovah speaking with Moses out of the pillar of cloud, “face to face,” as a man speaketh with his friend. It is here that the peculiar glory of Moses is announced (Deu 34:10), and it is here that we see especially the image of that far greater Prophet whom he represented. Christ, the Son of the Father, in perfect communion with the Father, is the One who alone can thus occupy the Mediator’s place. How blessed to see Him in it! Upon this link with God our all depended when every natural link was broken.

3. The way is now prepared for restoration, and this we find in the concluding section. Moses takes fully the ground of grace and of God’s promise, and God reveals Himself afresh, declaring His grace, though it is not yet the full grace of the gospel. Here, of necessity, all these types fail: they are the shadow, not the image. The special testimony of law to man, that by law the way to God could not be opened, would have in that case itself failed.

(1) In the first place, then, the grace of God is emphasized, and as sovereign grace, in dealing with the sin that had come in. It is Moses’ plea, and to it God answers promptly, proclaiming that He shows mercy as He will. But to Moses’ desire to behold His glory He can only answer in a qualified way. Man cannot see His face and live, and as yet He had not come who could say, “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father.” Moses, therefore, had to be covered by the divine hand while the glory passes by, and then sees but the back part, -a thing most significant as to the character of the law as then given, -the way into the holiest not manifested, no ability to stand before Him, thus God Himself in His full blessedness unknown. It is a thoroughly kindred thought with that which Solomon uttered in the day of the dedication of the temple, when, the glory of God filling the house, all the priests were driven out! -“The Lord hath said that He would dwell in the thick darkness.” Every Spirit-taught Christian will recognize the contrast in the words of the apostle, “We walk in the light as God is in the light.”

(2) The tables are now renewed, and the commingling of grace and law is fully seen in the new-made covenant. God declares Himself as Jehovah, the Self-existent God, merciful and gracious, slow to anger, abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin, -it would seem as if grace were here fully manifest. Straight athwart that magnificent declaration comes this other which seems the antipodes of it,” but who will in no wise clear the guilty, visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, to the third and fourth generation.” There was yet no justification of the ungodly then, -no gospel, -no attainment of a positive standing before Him. This the apostle implies in Rom 3:25-26, where he contrasts God’s dealing with “sins done aforetime” (R.V.) with the grace of the “present season.” In the former case, it was a “passing over of sins.” In the present, it is the justification of him who believeth in Jesus. And it is God’s righteousness as seen in the cross that alone reveals how He could thus “pass over.” With no revealed ground of righteousness thus yet through which grace might reign (Rom 5:21), and man yet under the trial of law, which has since given sentence (Rom 3:19), the gospel could not as yet be spoken out. This was all the ministration of death and condemnation, although God did not by this tie up His own hands, nor was faith left without encouraging assurance, as we have seen.

But as yet even the mercy declared was but the “back part” of God’s glory, and His face could not be seen. He forgave iniquity, transgression, and sin, and went on with those who merited to be cut off; but with One who could not clear the guilty -and where was the man who was not that? -it required a more positive utterance than this to give any one to know how for himself these two things were to be reconciled, and to give the heart its rest.

More than this needs to be considered before the place of the Mosaic legislation can be rightly apprehended. The question of its silence comparatively as to the eternal condition of the soul has been raised and answered in very different ways. The fact itself is plain: there is remarkable silence; which if a Warburton can weave it into an argument for “the divine legation of Moses,” is still a real perplexity to many a soul. Let it be indeed an opinion to be condemned that the fathers only received promises for this transitory life, yet the contrast in this respect between the Old Testament and the New presses for explanation. Only the more so, that we know (but know by the New Testament) that Abraham and the partakers of his faith did look for a heavenly country, and a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God. Why is it left to the New Testament to tell us this? The hearts of men have never been able to satisfy themselves without some faith as to eternity; and where we know they had it, was it likely to have lacked expression? Least of all, where, as the apostle tells us, the life expressed it, is it to be supposed that the lips would not utter the hope of which the life was full?

But if this be so, something must have operated to keep this largely out of the Old-Testament pages, where, as a divine communication, we would expect it not only to be found, but prominent. Can we give any account of this? Any partial account will be helpful surely; and such at least can be given, as we shall see.

A growing revelation, under dispensational differences of light and divine government, has plainly been God’s way of procedure with men from the beginning. He had to teach us both what we are and what He is and does in view of what we are. And the two had to be developed in correspondence with one another. What we are shown to be is the dark background of His own glorious revelation of Himself. But the proof as to what man is (upon which the other waited) required a long detail, slowly accumulating. As Israel had their forty years in the wilderness, so the world had its forty centuries ere “when we were yet without strength,” and in the “due time” at last arrived, “Christ died for the ungodly.” (Rom 5:6.)

The books of the Old Testament -the revelation of all that long waiting-time -are characteristically books of law, the Pentateuch and the outgrowth from it, and partake of its slow development and reserve. While for faith there are all through glimpses of deeper things, which we, looking back, can now see every where through it, yet on the surface it is God dealing with man here in this world to which these dispensational dealings belong. The race is here, though eternity is before each individual of it. But the law settles nothing as to eternity; blessed be God that it does not! God never proposed to take man to heaven by law-keeping, or to send him to hell for not keeping it. Thus you can neither find heaven among its rewards nor hell among its penalties. The “hell” of our common version, into which the Old Testament declares “the wicked shall be turned” (Psa 9:17), is now well known to be “sheol,” or “hades,” the place of the dead. And that which in the New Testament is the real hell of fire -“gehenna” -is in the Old Testament but the valley of Hinnom at Jerusalem. Even “the soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Eze 18:4,) refers not, as is commonly supposed, to the second death, but to the first; the soul of a person being, in the Scripture-language, often just the person himself, as where Balaam, for instance, desires that his “soul may die the death of the righteous” (Num 23:10, marg.), where, of course, the second death is not at all in question.

It is, indeed, the death with which we are all familiar which the law threatens to those who disobey it, just as long life in the land, not eternal life in heaven, is held out as a reward for obedience in the fifth commandment: a life which would have been “eternal” (Mar 10:17,) if the law could have found that perfect obedience which no mere man ever rendered. Failing in this, it stopped every mouth from self-vindication, and brought all the world in guilty before God (Rom 3:19).

As to eternity, God was free still to show His grace, while as to man’s claim upon His righteousness, it was demonstrated that he had none. If death, the death that is upon all, were the law’s penalty, every grey hair upon a man’s head was his manifest condemnation; and this was so complete, so universal, that just the completeness of it has blinded the eyes of most as to the reality of it. They suppose that if the law says, “The man that doeth them shall live in them,” a life beyond death must be meant; or, similarly, that “the soul that sinneth, it shall die” must mean the “second death,” while they do not see that in this case the demonstration intended by the law as to man’s condition would be completely lost. It would be left to eternity to decide whether all had, in fact, failed under it or not; and each one would decide this according to his inclination. But the law as it was, allowed of no such escape; and its sentence, “There is none righteous, -no, not one,” appealed to the handwriting of God Himself for confirmation. The finger that had marked the tables of stone marked with no less clearness its verdict on those that were under them.

Death had come in through sin, and death had passed upon all men because all had sinned. It was the manifest stamp upon the fallen creation. But that which had come in by the sin of one, God in the law would give every one opportunity and help to justify his exemption from, if he were able. How fitting the means used which for the most carnal should bring conviction, even while God’s mercy was left free to display itself in a region where, as the law could not convey the reward, so it could no longer enforce the condemnation!

The silence of the law as to eternity was as significant, then, as its utterance was plain in riveting upon man the conviction that by the deeds of the law should no flesh living be justified. And if God added to the law here given the second time the declaration of forbearance and mercy, without which the trial itself could not have continued to its perfect issue -though God permitted, in His goodness, man to turn over the blotted leaf and begin a new one, -yet as there was still no justification of the ungodly, and the measure of requirement necessarily must be still the measure of those ten commandments now afresh given word for word as before -then all was hopeless under this new covenant as under the old.

Faith might discover, however, that these new tables were destined, in fact, for the safe keeping of the ark of the covenant, and to be covered by the “capporeth,” at once the throne of God and the blood-sprinkled “mercy-seat”!

(3) The promises are now renewed, and with them the warnings as to separation from the Canaanites and their impure idolatries, to worship the Lord with devotedness of heart and life. It is not difficult to see, in the ordinances that are here afresh insisted upon, the typical holiness of the people who are to be as Moses has just now asked that they might be, the Lord’s inheritance.

(4) The covenant is now completed by writing upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments. The period of forty days repeated in the mount may show that this covenant, like the former one, has a probationary character. What follows develops this, as the apostle shows us in his commentary upon it (2Co 3:1-18). Let us remember that the first time Moses went up, when the covenant was purely legal, no glory reflected itself in his face: the second time it was evidently connected with the display of God’s glory in His goodness, though not yet by any means His full-orbed grace. Still there was glory; but under law it could not be beheld even as thus reflected. Moses has, therefore, to cover it with a vail while speaking to the people, -a vail which is removed when he goes again into the presence of the Lord. This vail characterizes the dispensation in which the precious things of God’s grace, as we have been looking at them, were necessarily under the cover of typical ordinances. For us the vail is done away in Christ. For Israel it will be also when they turn to the Lord for it is unbelief only that retains it now.

Thus a probationary law, whatever may be mixed with it, is still but law. The least tincture of this destroys the character of grace, darkens the glory of God, and deprives the soul of all its blessedness, as well as of the moral power, which is only found in happiness in God. For us the glory is in the face of Jesus Christ, where to see it is to rejoice in it. But all through that time of legal distance we may be assured that for those who individually turned to the Lord the vail was in some measure taken away. Christ’s day was seen: types shadowed and prophets prophesied of Him. For us His full glory is revealed, and if there be any distance and any vail, it is in the lingering of a vail upon the heart -it is unbelief.

Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary

THE BREACH MADE AND REPAIRED

Moses for forty days has been absent in the mount, and to the people it seemed long. Had they forgotten the awe-inspired sights and sounds they had seen and heard? Had all the sublime and stirring events of the months since they departed from Egypt been obliterated from their memory? How can we explain the folly into which they now fell? If we cannot explain it, let us ask our own hearts if we know anything like it.

THE MOLTEN CALF (Exo 32:1-6)

What demand was made of Aaron (Exo 32:1)? How was their sinful impatience shown? How does the phrase, who shall go before us, indicate the cause of their impatience? Describe Aarons guilt (Exo 32:2-5). Does this appear to have been a violation of the first or the second commandment?

The idol was probably a piece of wood carved into the shape of a calf, and overlaid with melted gold. The model was the bull worshipped by the Egyptians. The last words of Exo 32:6 refer to unclean practices associated with such worship among the heathen.

DIVINE WRATH (Exo 32:7-14)

By the use of what pronoun in Exo 32:7 does God renounce leadership of the people? What test of loyalty is put to Moses in Exo 32:10? How does he apparently ignore Gods rejection of the people in Exo 32:11 ? Notice the two strong arguments he presents in his expostulation (Exo 32:12-13). One is Gods honor in the sight of Egypt, and the other His honor in keeping of his original promise to Israel. But does Moses excuse the sin of the people? When it says, the LORD repented, does it mean that He had changeable feelings like a man? Or should we say, rather that He acted on His unchangeable principle, always to show mercy to the penitent?

SWIFT PUNISHMENT (Exo 32:15-29)

Joshua probably had been awaiting Moses on the mount outside the cloud that enveloped him, and so had not heard the communication about the idolatrous worship. This explains the conversation in Exo 32:17-18.

Observe what Moses did: (1) He broke the two tablets of testimony, doubtless as emblematic of the breach the sin of the people had made in their covenant with God; (2) he destroyed the image, grinding it into powder and casting it in the brook from which they were supplied with drink; then did they experience in a physical sense the bitter results of their infatuation; (3) he rebuked Aaron, whose act was inexcusable (compare Deu 9:15-21); and (4) he judged the people through the instrumentality of the sons of Levi.

Fill your hand (Exo 32:29) means, as in a previous lesson, consecrate yourselves this day unto the LORD. If it seems strange that the Levites met no effective resistance in their righteously indicative work, an explanation may be found in that many sympathized with them and disapproved of the sin committed. Perhaps also there were many indifferent ones, who simply had been led away by strong and wicked leaders. Then, consider the weakening effect of a conscience stricken by the sense of sin, which must have followed Moses words and actions.

POTENT INTERCESSION (Exo 32:30 to Exo 33:6)

Instant destruction had been stayed, but full pardon had not been obtained, hence Moses action in these verses.

Note the impassionate form of entreaty in Exo 32:32. The consequences if God will not forgive their sin are unutterable. He does not name them. He feels that he could not live or enjoy the blessings of eternity if this were not done. Compare Pauls words concerning the same people (Rom 9:1-5).

What can he mean by the book Thou hast written? How interesting that phrase thus early in the history of revelation! The Israelites were familiar with a register of families. Did Moses grasp by faith that such a register of the saints was to be found above?

What divine principle concerning sin and sinners is laid down in Exo 32:33? (Compare Eze 17:19-23.) What command, promise and warning are found in Exo 32:34? How does Exo 32:35 show that God assumes the responsibility for what Moses and the Levites did? And how does it show that the people were held responsible for what Aaron did?

For My Angel of Exo 32:34, compare Exo 23:20 and recall the previous instruction that He possesses the attributes and prerogatives of God. Subsequent revelation will conclusively show Him to be the second Person of the Trinity.

The last clause of this verse shows that while the intercessor has prevailed, he has not yet heard the word of full remission. The breach is repaired, but the relationship with God is not yet what it was before. The next lesson shows how that is brought about.

Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary

Exo 32:1. The people That is, some of them, as it is explained 1Co 10:7. The defection, however, appears to have been very general, though we find several, particularly the sons of Levi, exempt from it, Exo 32:26. Saw that Moses delayed He had now been absent from them near forty days. For this defection appears to have happened a day or two before he came down from the mount, Deu 9:11-12. Gathered themselves together unto Aaron Or, as the Hebrew is more properly rendered, against Aaron: and so the expression will denote that they came upon him in a tumultuous manner, insisting to have their demands complied with. Up, make us gods No doubt other discourse had passed before this; to which Aaron making some difficulty to consent, they insisted on having their desire gratified, and said in a seditious manner, Up, without further delay, make us gods, or make us a god, as Elohim is generally rendered, and ought to be rendered here, as Le Clerc observes, and that for two plain reasons: 1st, Aaron made but one calf, one idol-god; 2d, It appears from Exo 32:5 that this symbol was consecrated to Jehovah alone. They were weary of waiting for the promised land. They thought themselves detained too long at mount Sinai. They had a God that stayed with them, but they must have a God to go before them to the land flowing with milk and honey. They were weary of waiting for the return of Moses: As for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of Egypt, we know not what is become of him Observe, How slightly they speak of his person, this Moses: and how suspiciously of his delay, we know not what is become of him. And they were weary of waiting for a divine institution of religious worship among them, so they would have a worship of their own invention, probably such as they had seen among the Egyptians. They say, make us gods, or, a god. But what good would a god of their own making do them? They must have such a god to go before them, such as could not go itself farther than it was carried!

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Exo 32:1. Unto Aaron. Some copies read, the people gathered themselves together against Aaron. He sinned through fear of man; but as the Lord did not punish him with the revolters, the latter would seem to be the true reading.

Exo 32:2. Break off your golden ear-rings. Those jewels had been obtained of the Egyptians; and stolen goods do not prosper, as may be seen in the case of the Danites, who carried off Micahs silver idol.

Exo 32:4. After he had made it a molten calf, they said, These be thy gods, O Israel. The ox or calf, on account of its strength, is called a cherub, or as St. Paul says, a mighty angel. 2Th 1:7. The Lord placed cherubims on the east of Eden, to keep the way of the tree of life, Gen 3:24; and Moses made two golden cherubims, to overshadow the mercy-seat. Exo 25:18. In the prophetic vision of four living creatures, the cherub is placed before the eagle, the lion, and the man, Eze 10:14; and the psalmist represents Jehovah as riding on a cherub, which formed his chariot, wafted on the wings of the wind. Psa 18:10. Ezekiel 1. The apostle John beheld a similar vision, in which the four living creatures appear to represent the whole creation, as incessantly worshipping God; and of course the ox or the cherub was far enough removed from every idea of idolatry. Rev 4:7-8.But it may be said, what had Aaron or the Israelites to do with the calf, the Osiris and Isis of Egypt, which all critics allow to be the same as Aarons calf. The mythology of the Egyptians is, that Osiris was son of Jupiter and Niobe, and that he resigned his kingdom over the Argives in order that he might travel. Arriving in Egypt he softened their ferocious manners, taught them laws, how to sow corn, and how to reverence the gods. Being killed by his brother Serapis, the Egyptians prepared him altars, and worshipped him under the form of a bull; and this appears to be the idol which the Israelites had seen worshipped while in Egypt, with all its libidinous and luxurious rites. But whatever were the origin of this idolatry, or whatever allusion it might bear to the offering of bullocks on the patriarchal or Jewish altars, it formed in heathen worship a part of what an apostle calls the darkness of this world.More on this subject may be seen in the notes on Gen 43:32.Jeroboams calves were afterwards formed on the model of the Egyptian Apis, as well as Aarons golden calf; and it was this species of idolatry which eventually procured the total ruin of the Jewish nation. Jos 24:14. Eze 20:7-8.

Exo 32:5. A feast to the Lord. He probably meant to join the worship of the Lord with that of Osiris. But by a feast to the Lord, may be understood a great national festival.

Exo 32:6. Burnt-offerings, for their sins: then followed the peace-offerings, for carnal joy. They sat down to eat and drink, and then rose up to dance and sing the bacchanalian songs; and according to St. Paul, they committed fornication. 1Co 10:8.

Exo 32:20. Ground it to powder. Metals, when about half fusible with heat, will readily break to powder. Moses seems to have granulated the gold by melting and pouring it into water, which communicated to it a mineral poison, and gave it an unpleasant taste. The waters, thus impregnated, as Dr. Lightfoot supposes, caused the belly to swell; and he further supposes, that the Levites slew every man whose belly was swelled. In that case the waters discovered the wicked leaders of this revolt, and they spared not their dearest relatives.

Exo 32:24. I cast it into the fire, and there came out this calf; as though Satan and the workmen had made the calf, while Aaron was merely a spectator! Sinners make but vain defences at the bar of omniscience. Happy for this priest to have had an intercessor, or he had, though a firstborn, assuredly lost his mitre. Moses staked his own life to save him.

Exo 32:32. Blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book. This appeal proves beyond dispute the existence of letters prior to Moses. Pliny, speaking of the 16 letters brought by Cadmus into Greece, thinks that letters had always existed in Chaldea. The Hebrew and the Chaldaic alphabets are the same.The erasure from the book, is illustrated by the Roman custom of a city-register for all the inhabitants; and if any man committed felony, his name was erased from the rank of citizens.The christian fathers with one consent class this sublime sentiment with that of St. Paul, who was willing to be accursed for his brethren and kinsmen after the flesh. In this view, Christ was really made a curse for us. Blotting the peoples name is understood conditionally, if they shall continue in their sin.

REFLECTIONS.

In the whole of the sacred writings we have not a chapter which more strikingly illustrates the ways of God with man, than the history of the golden calf. The Lord tried and proved his people, to show what was in the heart, for the instruction of future ages. And to be deprived of Moses was certainly an exercise of their faith and patience, though he had not retired without deputing judges to execute his office, and apprizing them that the object of his solitude was to receive the law, and a model of the sanctuary. Hence they were like a ship becalmed in the midst of the sea, and the impatience of their hearts rose into open revolt and avowed idolatry. Oh, how could they dare, after seeing the awful glory on the mount, to liken JEHOVAH to a calf that eateth grass. How could they dare to force their way to Canaan, and leave the cloud behind on the sacred mount. Whatever we do without God, shall prove a work of shame.

In Aaron, who ought on this occasion to have come forward as a confessor or a martyr for God, we have a sad instance of the frailty of man complying with popular clamour. Though he was not the cause of the crime, he was however a second and an agent: nor could he make any defence, except that of reproaching the people, which did not diminish his own sin. But all men, though honoured with the highest endowments of heaven, have not grace to stand in the fiery trial. He was one of those who followed not the Lord fully, and therefore he could not see the good land.

We may next remark the indignation of the Lord, and the punishment which immediately followed. In the preseding year, he had appeared to Moses at the burning bush and said, I have seen the affliction of my people. Now, disowning the apostate nation, he says thy people. Moses ventures to intersede; but the Lord at first refused his prayer, and wished him to desist. Let me alone, that I may consume them in a moment, and I will make of thee a greater nation than they. Oh thou backsliding and presumptuous offender, who hast more than once relapsed into drunkenness, and presumptuous sins against God, see in apostate Israel, as on a broad scale, the situation in which thy soul stands. The foul circumstances of Israels sin are highly expressive of the aggravating circumstances attendant on thy guilt. See thy longsuffering and gracious God now so roused to indignation, as to refuse the intercession of the best of men on thy behalf. There seems at last no remedy for thy oft repeated sin: the broken tables of the law proclaim thy covenant violated and forfeited. God is apparently fully resolved to cut thee off; to blot thy name out of his book, and to fill thy place in the church by a man more faithful to his grace.

We learn that, before prayer can be heard for men and nations, their iniquity must be put away. The idol must be destroyed, confusion must cover the guilty; and in Israel the crime was so atrocious, that three thousand leaders of the revolt must die before Moses dared to intersede the second time. How then shall sinners of our age, how shall a nation afflicted with so many evils and calamities, how shall they crowd the temples of God, while they do not purpose to abandon a single sin, nor to abridge themselves of a single luxury! If Gabriel, if Moses, and all the apostles were to weep and pray for such a nation, they could not be heard; nor can Jesus Christ himself intersede for men but in conformity to the covenant of redemption, which stipulates a pardon to those only who confess and forsake their sins. Oh it is this calf, this golden calf, this idol of pleasure, this revelling and drunkenness, this loss of religious principle, this indulgence in dissipation and impurity, which cause the angry cloud to stand opposed to our sins, and the prayers of saints very much to fail of effect.

But in Moses, the high characters of prophet, patriot, and mediator appear in all their excellence. He had loved his people for forty years, he had sacrificed the princely hope and glory of Egypt for their emancipation; nor can he survive the extermination of the stubborn race. It is great occasions which discover greatness of soul. The man of God interposes his own life between the people, and the strokes of vengeance. Without daring to arraign the justice from which the menace had proceeded, he pleads that the heathen would misconstrue so great a judgment, and urges the silent prayer of his country for life; and if that favour cannot be granted, he requests permission to die with the guilty. Here the eloquence of prayer assumed an omnipotent character: mercy prevailed over justice, and the arm of vengeance dropped its thunder. Here the charity of Moses, as St. Clement observes, was made perfect, which constituted him a model for future ages.

In the prayer of Moses, we have also a striking pattern of the mediatorial character of Jesus Christ. When the nations had forsaken the Lord, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator; when darkness had covered the earth, and gross darkness the people; when the anger of heaven was about to pour the most tremendous vengeance on the Jewish nation, and on the Roman world, then Jesus Christ interposed his life for the redemption of man, and with strong cries and tears solicited his pardon. Hence we live, because he ever lives to pray for us.

Lastly observe, it is a very great mercy when a praying people interpose their agonizing souls between an angry God, and their guilty country. The arm of justice ready to strike, seems embarrassed, and unable to smite the wicked without wounding the righteous, who are entwined among them by the most tender ties. This may save for a time, but the day will come when the one shall be separated from the other: and when that awful day arrive, Levi must no longer know father or mother, brother or sister; he must make God his portion, and the covenant his only hope.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Exodus 32

We have now to contemplate something very different from that Which has hitherto engaged our attention. ” The pattern of things in the heavens,” has been before us – Christ in His glorious Person, gracious offices, and perfect work, as set forth in the tabernacle and all its mystic furniture. We have been, in spirit, on the mount, hearkening to God’s own words – the sweet utterances of Heaven’s thoughts, affections, and counsels, of which Jesus is “the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, the first and the last.”

Now, however, we are called down to earth, to behold the melancholy wreck which man makes of everything to which he puts his hand. “And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron and said unto him, Up, make us gods which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.” What degradation is here! Make us gods! They were abandoning Jehovah, and placing themselves under the conduct of manufactured gods – gods of man’s making. Dark clouds and heavy mists had gathered round the mount. They grew weary of waiting for the absent one, and of hanging on an unseen but real arm. They imagined that a god formed by “graving tool” was better than Jehovah; that a calf which they could see was better than the invisible, yet everywhere present, God; a visible counterfeit, than an invisible reality.

Alas! alas! it has ever been thus in man’s history. The human heart loves something that can be seen; it loves that which meets and gratifies the senses. It is only faith that can “endure, as seeing him who is invisible.” Hence, in every age, men have been forward to set up and lean upon human imitations of divine realities. Thus it is we see the counterfeits of corrupt religion multiplied before our eyes. Those things which we know, upon the authority of God’s Word, to be divine and heavenly realities, the professing Church has transformed into human and earthly imitations. Having become weary of hanging upon an invisible arm, of trusting in an invisible sacrifice, of having recourse to an invisible priest, of committing herself to the guidance of an invisible head, she has set about “making” these things; and thus, from age to age, she has been busily at work, with “graving tool” in hand, graving and fashioning one thing after another, until we can, at length, recognise as little similarity between much that we see around us, and what we read in the word, as between ” a molten calf” and the God of Israel.

“Make us gods!” What a thought! Man called upon to make gods, and people willing to put their trust in such! My reader, let us look within, and look around, and see if we cannot detect something of all this. We read, in 1 Cor. 10, in reference to Israel’s history, that “all these things happened unto them for ensamples, (or types,) and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.” (ver. 11) Let us, then, seek to profit by the “admonition.” Let us remember that, although we may not just form and bow down before a molten calf” yet, that Israel’s sin is a “type” of something into which we are in danger of falling. Whenever we turn away in heart from leaning exclusively upon God Himself, whether in the matter of salvation or the necessities of the path, we are, in principle, saying, “up, make us gods.” It is needless to say we are not, in ourselves, a whit better than Aaron or the children of Israel; and if they acknowledge a calf instead of Jehovah, we are in danger of acting on the same principle, and manifesting the same spirit. Our only safeguard is to be much in the presence of God. Moses knew that the “molten calf was not Jehovah, and therefore he did not acknowledge it. But when we get out of the divine presence, there is no accounting for the gross errors and evils into which we may be betrayed.

We are called to live by faith; we can see nothing with the eye of sense. Jesus is gone up on high, and we are told to wait patiently for His appearing. God’s word carried home to the heart, in the energy of the Holy Ghost, is the ground of confidence in all things, temporal and spiritual, present and future. He tells us of Christ’s completed sacrifice; we, by grace, believe, and commit our souls to the efficacy thereof, and know we shall never be confounded. He tells us of a great High Priest, passed into the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, whose intercession is all-prevailing; we, by grace, believe, and lean confidingly upon His ability, and know we shall be saved to the uttermost. He tells us of the living Head to whom we are linked, in the power of the Holy Ghost, and from whom we can never be severed by any influence, angelic, human, or diabolical; we, by grace, believe, and cling to that blessed Head, in simple faith, and know we shall never perish. He tells us of the glorious appearing of the Son from heaven; we, through grace, believe, and seek to prove the purifying and elevating power of “that blessed hope,” and know we shall not be disappointed. He tells us of “an inheritance, incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for us, who are kept by the power of God,” for entrance thereinto in due time; we, through grace, believe and know we shall never be confounded. He tells us the hairs of our head are all numbered, and that we shall never want any good thing; we, through grace, believe, and enjoy a sweetly tranquillised heart.

Thus it is, or, as least, thus our God would have it. But then the enemy is ever active in seeking to make us cast away these divine realities, take up the “graving tool” of unbelief, and ” make gods ” for ourselves. Let us watch against him, pray against him, believe against him, testify against him, act against him: thus he shall be confounded, God glorified, and we ourselves abundantly blessed.

As to Israel, in the chapter before us, their rejection of God was most complete. “And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me….. And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy Gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation, and said, Tomorrow is a feast unto the Lord.” This was entirely setting aside God, and putting a calf in His stead. When they could say that a calf had brought them up out of Egypt, they had, evidently, abandoned all idea of the presence and character of the true God. How “quickly” they must “have turned aside out of the Way,” to have made such a gross and terrible mistake! And Aaron, the brother and yoke-fellow of Moses, led them on in this; and, with a calf before him, he could say, “Tomorrow is a feast unto Jehovah!” How sad! how deeply humbling! God was displaced by an idol. A thing, “graven by art and man’s device,” was set in the place of “the Lord of all the earth.”

All this involved, on Israel’s part, a deliberate abandonment of their connection with Jehovah. They had given Him up; and, accordingly, we find Him, as it were, taking them on their own ground. “And the Lord said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves; they have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them…. I have seen this people, it is a stiff-necked people: now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them; and I will make of thee a greater nation.” Here was an open door for Moses; and here he displays uncommon grace and similarity of spirit to that Prophet whom the Lord was to raise up like unto him. He refuses to be or to have anything without the people. He pleads with God on the ground of His own glory, and puts the people back upon Him in these touching words, “Lord, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people which thou hast brought up out of the land of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand? Wherefore should the Egyptians speak and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth. Turn from thy fierce wrath and repent of this evil against thy people. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swearest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven; and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever.” This was powerful pleading. The glory of God, the vindication of His holy name. the accomplishment of His oath. These are the grounds on which Moses entreats the Lord to turn from His fierce wrath. He could not find, in Israel’s conduct or character, any plea or ground to go upon. He found it all in God Himself.

The Lord had said unto Moses, “Thy people which thou broughtest up;” but Moses replies to the Lord, “Thy people which thou hast brought up.” They were the Lord’s people notwithstanding all; and His name, His glory, His oath were all involved in their destiny. The moment the Lord links Himself with a people, His character is involved, and faith will ever look at Him upon this solid ground. Moses loses sight of himself entirely. His whole soul is engrossed with thoughts of the Lord’s glory and the Lord’s people. Blessed servant! How few like him! And yet when we contemplate him in all this scene, we perceive how infinitely he is below the blessed Master. He came down from the mount, and when he saw the calf and the dancing, “his anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands and brake them beneath the mount.” The covenant was broken and the memorials thereof shattered to pieces; and then, having executed judgement in righteous indignation, “he said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the Lord; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.”

How different is this from what we see in Christ! He came down from the bosom of the Father, not with the tables in His hands, but with the law in his heart. He came down, not to be made acquainted with the condition of the people, but with a perfect knowledge of what that condition was. Moreover, instead of destroying the memorials of the covenant and executing judgement, He magnified the law and made it honourable, and bore the judgement of His people, in His own blessed Person, on the cross; and, having done all, He went back to heaven, not with a “peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin,” but to lay upon the throne of the Majesty in the highest, the imperishable memorials of an atonement already accomplished. This makes a vast and truly glorious difference. Thank God, we need not anxiously gaze after our Mediator to know if haply He shall accomplish redemption for us, and reconcile offended Justice. No, He has done it all. His presence on high declares that the whole work is finished. He could stand upon the confines of this world, ready to take His departure, and, in all the calmness of a conscious victor – though He had yet to encounter the darkest scene of all – say, “I have glorified thee on earth: I have finished the work which thou gravest me to do.” (John 17) Blessed Saviour! we may well adore thee, and well exalt in the place of dignity and glory in which eternal justice has set thee. The highest place in heaven belongs to thee; and thy saints only wait for the time when “every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” May that time speedily arrive!

At the close of this chapter Jehovah asserts His rights, in moral government, in the following words: “Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book. Therefore, now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee: behold, mine angel shall go before thee: nevertheless, in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them.” This is God in government, not God in the gospel. Here He speaks of blotting out the sinner; in the gospel He is seen blotting out sin. a wide difference!

The people are to be sent forward, under the mediatorship of Moses, by the hand of an angel. This was very unlike the condition of things which obtained from Egypt to Sinai. They had forfeited all claim on the ground of law, and hence it only remained for God to fallback upon His own sovereignty and say, “I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.”

Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch

Exo 32:1-6 E, Exo 32:7-14 Rje, Exo 32:15-24 E, Exo 32:25-29 J, Exo 32:30-34 Es, Exo 32:35 E. The Golden Calf.

Exo 32:32-34 stand between the instructions for the Tent and their fulfilment. Their religious value is high and clear. But their literary growth has been too complex to trace here (see Driver, CB 346ff.). It is possible (note these, Exo 32:4; Exo 32:8) that they are a reflection of prophetic criticism on Jeroboams two calves (1Ki 12:28, 2Ki 10:29, cf. Hos 8:4-6 and RV references). In Exo 32:1-6 the withdrawal of the inspired and inspiring leader leaves the people at the mercy of heathenish suggestion. They cry to Aaron for an image to represent Yahweh, and supply him with their gold earrings as covering for the wooden figure of a young bull which he makes. An altar is next made and a feast proclaimed; songs and dances follow. Though the priests of 1Ki 12:31 were non-Levitical, from this passage it would appear that an Aaronic priesthood had at some time been concerned with image-worship, the idea of which came, not from Egypt, but probably from the Hittites or Sumerians, both agricultural peoples. In Exo 32:7-14, interrupting the story, is a solemn expression of Gods abhorrence of idolatry, and a moving description of Mosess effectual intercession. The dramatic account of Mosess discovery and destruction of the image (Exo 32:15-20) follows best on Exo 32:6. In Exo 32:18 the noise heard by Joshua (Exo 32:17) is recognised as song, not the cries of victors or vanquished. Perhaps the breaking of the tables (Exo 32:19) reflects a consciousness that they had been lost. The writing on both sides (Exo 32:15 b) may be an archaic feature, the words of the testimony being a gloss by Rp. The weak apologies of Aaron (Exo 32:21-24) complete the picture of a leader who cannot lead. The patriotic zeal of the Levites (Exo 32:25-29 J) probably refers to a different occasion or another view of Aarons sin (cf. Deu 9:20) as rebellion, and Exo 32:29 (see mg.) may have begun Js account of the origin of the priesthood (cf. Exo 29:24*), cut short by R in view of Leviticus 8. A second and more moving account of Moses as intercessor follows in Exo 32:30-34 : he offers, not to suffer eternal death, but, like Elijah (1Ki 19:4), to die and be blotted out of the roll of living citizens. The closing verse is obscure and isolated.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

THE GOLDEN CALF

(vs.1-6)

Moses forty days in the mount (the number of testing) was too much for the impatient children of Israel. They gathered to Aaron in united determination to have some substitute for the leading of the God of Israel. They say they don’t know what has become of Moses, and ask for “gods” that they may follow. How sadly lacking was faith in the living God! It has always been men’s downfall to prefer some visible, material idol that they are willing to call “god.” This too was so soon after their being delivered from Egypt by the mighty power of the great unseen God of creation. Every testimony was there that ought to have greatly encouraged their faith, but they were spiritually blinded.

Aaron did not have the energy of faith such as did his bother Moses, to boldly withstand them. He weakly gave in to their foolish clamor, telling them to break off the golden earrings that were evidently common among them, having been taken from the Egyptians. From these he made a molten calf, finishing it by means of an engraving tool (vs.2-4), and announced to them that this was their god who brought them out of the land of Egypt! Can we imagine such brazen folly as this? There is a serious lesson here, that our idols, whatever they are, take their character from what decorates or pampers the flesh — the golden earrings. Ears are given for hearing, but Israel was not hearing the first commandment God had given them, “You shall have no other gods before Me” (Exo 20:3).

Likely they excused their idolatry, as many do today, by saying this was only an image made to represent God, but God forbid any such images (Exo 20:4). Actually, though things like this are claimed to be only representations, it is very soon that the thing itself becomes the god that people worship.

Besides this Aaron built an altar before the idol, then announced that the next day they would have a feast “to the Lord”? (v.5). Can we dare to think we can sanctify an idol by attaching the Lord’s name to it? This is gross wickedness. But they continue the mockery by offering both burnt offerings and peace offerings on the altar, then sitting down to eat and to drink and rising up to play. They were simply giving themselves over to the lust of self-indulgence while whitewashing this whole thing with a religious appearance! What hollow vanity! and how insulting to the God who had delivered them from Egypt! They betray themselves as to what conception of God they have. They think of Him as one who, as a lowly calf, takes the place of merely serving their selfish desires! God is given no place of authority, but one of subjection to men!

THE LORD’S ANGER AND MOSES’ INTERCESSION

(vs.7-14)

On the mountain the Lord abruptly tells Moses to go down, for Moses’ people whom he brought out of Egypt had corrupted themselves, making, worshiping and sacrificing to a molten calf, giving it credit for their deliverance from Egypt.

Then God tells Moses to let Him alone that His anger would so burn against Israel because of their stiff-necked rebellion, that He would consume them all (v.10). Then He would make of Moses a great nation.

Could Moses think of grasping an opportunity like this? How could Moses alone bury over two million people? Also, would a nation fathered by Moses be any better than Israel? God knew all this, and He knew the heart of Moses toward Israel. But He spoke in this way to Moses for our sakes, to draw our attention to the intercession of Moses on behalf of Israel, as being a picture of the intercession of the Lord Jesus on our behalf even when we fail miserably. On the one hand, we must realize how fierce is the anger of God against every evil thing that is put in the place He alone is entitled to. On the other hand, we are to see the great value of the intercession of the one Man, the Lord Jesus Christ.

God had said to Moses, “your people whom you brought out of the land of Egypt.” But Moses said to God, “Your people whom You have brought out of the land of Egypt” (v.11). He pled with God on this basis. God’s mighty hand had done that great work. Was God any less mighty now? Moses asked, would not the Egyptians in this case accuse God of being unable to bring Israel through the wilderness, but had taken them out of Egypt in order to destroy them from the face of the earth? He entreats God to turn from His fierce wrath against them, and to remember His covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Israel as to the multiplying of their descendants and giving them the land.

Certainly God knew beforehand that Moses would plead in this way, for it was He Himself who had put this in Moses’ heart. Yet for our benefit it is said that God relented of the harm He had threatened. Does this not encourage us to be intercessors for the children of God?

MOSES RETURNED TO THE CAMP IN JUDGMENT

(vs.15-35)

Moses had taken Joshua with him into the mountain (ch.24:13). Now they come down together. Moses having the two stone tables on which the law was written on both sides. As they came near the camp Joshua, a warrior, hearing the noise of the people, thought this was the noise of war, but Moses corrected him, for the noise was neither that of conquest nor defeat, but singing (v.18).

Still outside the camp, they saw the people dancing in honor of the golden calf. In heat of anger Moses threw the tables of stone on the ground and broke them. Thus those tables never came into the camp. If they had, this surely would have meant awesome judgment upon all the idol worshipers. They had broken the law already. Moses was only being honest in thus breaking the tables. From the very beginning of God’s giving the law, Israel flagrantly broke the first and second commandments and became idol worshipers. Was it likely in succeeding history that they would obey the commandments of God?

Who could lift a finger against Moses when he burnt the calf and ground it to power, sprinkling it on the water? Thus their god was demolished in short order. Then he made Israel drink of the water. Yet this was only preliminary.

He faced Aaron with the question as to what the people had done to him that he had brought so great a sin upon them. But Aaron rather made light of the matter, as though Moses’ anger was unnecessary. He told Moses that he knew the people and their propensity to do mischief. Thus he blamed everything on the people. Where was his faith to withstand the people’s folly? Since they demanded that he make a god for them to follow, he said he cooperated with their wicked demand, took their gold from them and threw it into the fire, and a calf came out! Of course to make a molten calf they had to have a mold of some kind, but Aaron did not mention this, nor the fact that he had finished it with an engraving tool. Certainly he was just as guilty as were the people.

Aaron too was responsible for the people being naked (not nude, but with only scant clothing), and this moved Moses to cry out in the gate of the camp, “Who is on the Lord’s side?” The response of the Levites was evidently immediate, as they gathered themselves to Moses. But his instructions to them were strikingly dreadful. Yet he spoke on behalf of the Lord God of Israel, telling them to take their swords and go from gate to gate throughout the camp, killing without discrimination their brothers, their companions and their neighbors. Whether they thought this was excessive punishment or not, they obeyed and put to death about three thousand men (v.28). This judgment has been contrasted to the marvelous work of God in grace when three thousand were brought to confess the Lord Jesus as a result of Peter’s preaching on the day of Pentecost (Act 2:41).

However, Moses knew that the killing of three thousand was not a judgment commensurate with the enormity of Israel’s sin: it deserved far worse than this. The next day therefore he announced to them that their sin was great, and that he would go up to the Lord to intercede for them and possibly make an atonement for their sin.

When he speaks to the Lord the only solution he proposes is one that shows how deep and real was his love for the people, but it was an impossible solution. He fully confesses the greatness of their guilt, pleading that he might be allowed to be a substitute for them, that is, that he should be blotted out of God’s book in order that they might be forgiven (vs.31-32). How different indeed was Moses’ heart toward his people than that of mere religious leaders! Thus he does beautifully represent the love of Christ in his willingness to sacrifice himself. But he could go no further than this in representing Christ, for he was a sinner himself and his sacrifice could atone for no one. Christ, the Son of God, without sin, is the only One who could possibly atone for guilty mankind.

The Lord could not allow Moses to be a substitute for the people. He says that He will blot out of His book whoever has sinned against Him. The New Testament shows a contrast to this, when God says concerning the overcomer, “I will not blot out his name from the Book of life” (Rev 3:5). No one will be blotted out of the Book of life. The book in Exodus is that connected with the keeping of the law, not the Book of life, though it may be called “the book of the living (Psa 69:28). So long as one continued to keep the law, he would not be blotted out of the book of the living, but disobedience would require his being blotted out. Then certainly no one could continue in that book. But one is in the Book of life because he has been born again, and this can never be changed, for he has eternal life.

Still, God told Moses to lead the people to the promised land, promising that He will send His angel before them, yet indicating that they might be inflicted with more severe punishment yet for their idolatry. In fact, they were immediately plagued because of this, so all was not cleared by any means (vs.34-35).

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

32:1 And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up,

(a) make us gods, which shall go before us; for [as for] this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.

(a) The root of Idolatry is when men think that God is not present, unless they see him physically.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

Israel’s apostasy 32:1-6

Apostasy means "to stand away from" something (Gr. apostasis). This word describes a departure. An apostate is someone who has departed from something. In the religious sense the word refers to extreme departure from God’s will. "Apostate" is not necessarily a synonym for unbeliever. The person who departs from God’s will may be a believer or an unbeliever. The term refers to obedience, not salvation. Most of the apostates in Israel were apparently believers since the Bible consistently regards Israel as a whole as the people of God.

"Throughout the remainder of the Pentateuch, the incident of the worship of the golden calf cast a dark shadow across Israel’s relationship with God, much the same way as the account of the Fall in Genesis 3 marked a major turning point in God’s dealing with humankind." [Note: Sailhamer, The Pentateuch . . ., p. 310.]

It has always been hard for God’s people to wait for Him (cf. 1Sa 8:4-5; Psa 27:14; Psa 37:7; Psa 62:5; et al.). When Moses lingered on the mountain, the people decided to worship a new god (Exo 32:1) and make a new covenant. They did not wait for guidance from God. This reflects a shallow commitment to Him and their leader, Moses. Evidently they concluded that Moses had perished in the fire on Mt. Sinai and decided to select a new leader. Moses was a god to Israel in the sense that he was their leader (Exo 4:16). Now they turned from Moses as their leader to Aaron.

Some commentators have interpreted Aaron’s instruction that the Israelites should sacrifice their jewelry and ornaments (Exo 32:2) as designed to discourage their rebellion. [Note: See Kennedy, p. 138; Meyer, p. 421; and Jacob, p. 940.] If this was his intent, he failed (Exo 32:3). It seems more probable that Aaron approved of their plan.

Aaron could have intended the golden calf to represent a god other than Yahweh or Yahweh Himself.

"In the present passage the term gods, or rather god [Elohim], represented in the golden calf, seems to be understood as an attempt to represent the God of the covenant with a physical image. The apostasy of the golden calf, therefore, was idolatry, not polytheism. Indeed, throughout Scripture Israel was repeatedly warned about the sin of idolatry." [Note: Sailhamer, The Pentateuch . . ., p. 311. See also Keil and Delitzsch, 2:222; and David E. Fass, "The Molten Calf: Judgment, Motive, and Meaning," Judaism 39:2 (Spring 1990):171-83.]

"It is precisely the attempt to worship Yahweh by means he has already declared totally unacceptable that makes the sin of the golden calf so destructive, far more so than a simple shift of allegiance to ’other’ or ’foreign’ gods." [Note: Durham, p. 421.]

The calf provided a visible symbol that the Israelites could and did identify as their deliverer. The English word "idol" derives from the Greek eidolon, meaning "something to be seen." The Apis bull was such a symbol in Egyptian religion. The Egyptians viewed this animal as the vehicle on which a god rode in power, and as such they identified it as divine itself. Sacred bulls or calves were common in the ancient Near East because of this identification. Patterning their worship of Yahweh after the Egyptians’ worship of their god of the sun, Osiris, the Israelites were saying that this was their way of worshipping Yahweh.

"The bull seems to have had manifold meanings in the iconography of the Near East. It symbolized the god. It expressed attributes of a god. It represented a pedestal for the god. Each of these meanings is important in understanding the cult of the golden calves in Israel’s religious experience." [Note: Stephen Von Wyrick, "Israel’s Golden Calves," Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):10. This is a very fine summary article. See also Amihai Mazar, "Bronze Bull Found in Israelite ’High Place’ From the Time of the Judges," Biblical Archaeology Review 9:5 (September-October 1983):34-40.]

The altar and feast that accompanied the construction of the idol (Exo 32:5) support the contention that Aaron was leading the people in a celebration of a new covenant. His disobedience to the second commandment (Exo 20:2-6), which he had received by this time, resulted in his returning to an Egyptian form of worship that repudiated Yahweh’s will. The "play" that followed the feast seems to have been wicked (cf. Exo 32:25).

"The verb translated ’to play’ suggests illicit and immoral sexual activity which normally accompanied fertility rights found among the Canaanites who worshipped the god Baal." [Note: Davis, p. 285.]

"That the sin of Aaron and the people was tantamount to covenant repudiation is clear from the account of the making of the calf. The calf was hailed as ’the god . . . who brought you up out of Egypt’ (Exo 32:4), the exact language of the historical prologue of the Sinaitic Covenant in which Yahweh described the basis of His authority to be Israel’s God (Exo 20:2). Moreover, Aaron built an altar for the purpose of covenant affirmation and ceremony (Exo 32:5), precisely as Moses had done previously on the people’s commitment to the covenant arrangement (Exo 24:4). Aaron’s proclamation concerning a festival and its implementation on the following day (Exo 32:5-6) was again identical to the celebration that attended the mutual acceptance of the covenant terms under Moses (Exo 24:11)." [Note: Merrill, "A Theology . . .," p. 53.]

"From Aaron’s viewpoint it was merely a matter of iconography, representing God by a bull and in that way holding ’a festival to I AM’ (Exo 32:5). But from the people’s viewpoint, as seen from the command to Aaron ’make us gods’ (Exo 32:1), they were turning to a pantheon of gods, represented by a bull god, to lead them." [Note: Waltke, An Old . . ., p. 469.]

Many years later Israel’s King Jeroboam I re-established worship of the golden calves, and this practice became a great stumbling block to Israel (1Ki 12:28-31).

"The calf represented Yahweh on their terms. Yahweh had made clear repeatedly that he would be received and worshiped only on his terms." [Note: Durham, p. 442.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

CHAPTER XXXII.

THE GOLDEN CALF.

Exo 32:1-35

While God was thus providing for Israel, what had Israel done with God? They had grown weary of waiting: had despaired of and slighted their heroic leader, (“this Moses, the man that brought us up,”) had demanded gods, or a god, at the hand of Aaron, and had so far carried him with them or coerced him that he thought it a stroke of policy to save them from breaking the first commandment by joining them in a breach of the second, and by infecting “a feast to Jehovah” with the licentious “play” of paganism. At the beginning, the only fitness attributed to Aaron was that “he can speak well.” But the plastic and impressible temperament of a gifted speaker does not favour tenacity of will in danger. Demosthenes and Cicero, and Savonarola, the most eloquent of the reformers, illustrate the tendency of such genius to be daunted by visible perils.

God now rejects them because the covenant is violated. As Jesus spoke no longer of “My Father’s house,” but “your house, left unto you desolate,” so the Lord said to Moses, “thy people which thou broughtest up.”

But what are we to think of the proposal to destroy them, and to make of Moses a great nation?

We are to learn from it the solemn reality of intercession, the power of man with God, Who says not that He will destroy them, but that He will destroy them if left alone. Who can tell, at any moment, what calamities the intercession of the Church is averting from the world or from the nation?

The first prayer of Moses is brief and intense; there is passionate appeal, care for the Divine honour, remembrance of the saintly dead for whose sake the living might yet be spared, and absolute forgetfulness of self. Already the family of Aaron had been preferred to his, but the prospect of monopolising the Divine predestination has no charm for this faithful and patriotic heart. No sooner has the immediate destruction been arrested than he hastens to check the apostates, makes them exhibit the madness of their idolatry by drinking the water in which the dust of their pulverised god was strewn; receives the abject apology of Aaron, thoroughly spirit-broken and demoralised; and finding the sons of Levi faithful, sends them to the slaughter of three thousand men. Yet this is he who said “O Lord, why is Thy wrath hot against Thy people?” He himself felt it needful to cut deep, in mercy, and doubtless in wrath as well, for true affection is not limp and nerveless: it is like the ocean in its depth, and also in its tempests. And the stern action of the Levites appeared to him almost an omen; it was their “consecration,” the beginning of their priestly service.

Again he returns to intercede; and if his prayer must fail, then his own part in life is over: let him too perish among the rest. For this is evidently what he means and says: he has not quite anticipated the spirit of Christ in Paul willing to be anathema for his brethren (Rom 9:3), nor has the idea of a vicarious human sacrifice been suggested to him by the institutions of the sanctuary. Yet how gladly would he have died for his people, who made request that he might die among them!

How nobly he foreshadows, not indeed the Christian doctrine, but the love of Christ Who died for man, Who from the Mount of Transfiguration, as Moses from Sinai, came down (while Peter would have lingered) to bear the sins of His brethren! How superior He is to the Christian hymn which pronounces nothing worth a thought, except how to make my own election sure.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary