Exodus 32

Chapters 32–34 The Episode of the Golden Calf, and incidents arising out of it, or mentioned in connexion with it. The narrative of these chapters, read from a purely religious point of view, is remarkably beautiful and impressive; a striking picture is given not only of Moses’ affection and noble self-devotion for his people, but also of the long intercession by which (cf. Genesis 18) he at last succeeds in winning from Jehovah Israel’s forgiveness, His promise again to be with His people, and the vision of His moral glory for himself. But ‘the connexion between its different parts, and the progress of the narrative, is often so imperfect and so far from clear’ (Di.) that to the historical student it presents problems and difficulties which are not readily solved. As Di. points out, ‘the want of connexion both backwards and forwards is most remarkable in Exodus 33:7-11 : why the Tent of Meeting is here suddenly introduced, is not explained, and can only be conjectured, and v. 12 goes on as if vv. 7–11 or vv. 4–11 were not there at all. The connexion between Exodus 34:9-10 is also imperfect: it is surprising in v. 9 to find Jehovah entreated to go with the people, when He has already in Exodus 33:14-16 promised to do so; and it is also surprising that Exodus 34:10 is no direct answer to the entreaty of v. 9. Even in ch. 32, where the narrative wears the appearance of being more consistent, it is remarkable that the questions put to Aaron in vv. 21–24 lead to nothing further, that in spite of the punishment inflicted in v. 27 f. further punishment is threatened in v. 34b, and that while in v. 35 a punishment is described vaguely, it does not read like the punishment threatened just before in v. 34b.

Further, while in P the erection of the Tent of Meeting is not described till ch. 40, in Exodus 33:7-11 there appears, as already in regular use, a tent, called by precisely the same name. The angel of Jehovah, again, is in Exodus 33:3; Exodus 33:5 represented as distinct from, and exclusive of, Jehovah Himself, whereas in Exodus 23:20 he appears as His full and sufficient representative.

The covenant of Exo 34:10-27 is described as if it were one made for the first time; neither v. 10 nor v. 27 suggests that it is a second, or new, covenant. The laws in Exodus 34:10-26 are mostly identical verbally with a particular section of those contained in chs. 21–23’: what is the relation subsisting between the two recensions, and how is the repetition to be explained? It must be evident that all these difficulties and inconsistencies are due simply to the amalgamation—and sometimes the imperfect amalgamation—of different sources: they are lessened, though they can hardly be said to disappear, when these sources are recognized and disengaged from one another. Details will be better considered in the notes on the separate chapters, Exodus 34:29-35 belongs clearly to P: the rest of the three chapters is due principally to J, or the compiler of JE, but parts belong to E. The excerpts from J and E are also in several cases plainly incomplete at the beginning or the end, so that details or explanations are missing which can only be supplied by conjecture.

Exodus 32:1

1. delayed] Heb. caused shame (i.e. disappointment): the same idiom, Judges 5:28 (lit. ‘Why doth his chariot put to shame in coming?’). to Aaron] who had been left below by Moses (Exodus 24:14). Up, &c.] Hitherto Moses has been Jehovah’s representative: now that he seems to have deserted them, the people want a substitute; so they ask Aaron to make them an image, which, in the manner of antiquity, they may regard as their leader. gods] The Heb. ’ĕ ?lôhim may have either a sing. or a plur. force; but the verb shall go is plur.: it seems, therefore, either that the plur. is a ‘plural of majesty’ (Genesis 35:7; G.-K. § 145i), or, though the image represents Jehovah (v. 5), that the people are represented as speaking polytheistically. So v. 23.

Exodus 32:2

2. of your sons] earrings are not elsewhere in the OT. described as worn by males (unless indeed, by implication, in Genesis 35:4).

Exodus 32:4

4. fashioned it, &c.] the earrings having naturally been previously melted down, and cast approximately into the shape of a young bull. The image may either have been of solid gold, or, in spite of the term ‘molten’ (see Isaiah 30:22; and cf. Deuteronomy 7:25, Isaiah 40:19), have consisted of a wooden core, overlaid with gold: v. 24b—though the terms used can hardly be pressed—would suggest the former view, v. 20 would favour the latter. a graving tool] a pointed metal instrument: the word rendered ‘pen’ (i.e. a sharp metal stylus) in Isaiah 8:1. calf] The Heb. ‘çgel means a young bull, just as the fem. ‘eglâh (EVV. usually ‘heifer’) means a young cow; but it does not mean necessarily an animal as young as a ‘calf’: the ‘eglâh for instance might be three years old (Genesis 15:9), and give milk (Isaiah 7:21), or plough (Judges 14:18). These be thy gods] Cf. almost the same words in 1 Kings 12:28 : in the allusion, Nehemiah 9:18, the sing. ‘This’ is used. ‘These’ must refer to an actual plural, and is of course quite suitable in speaking of Jeroboam’s two calves; here it seems as if the narrator had used the plural for the purpose of introducing a covert polemic against the calf-worship of the N. kingdom. So v. 8. which brought thee, &c.] They recognize in the calf, not only the god who should in the future (v. 1) go before them, but also the god who had already led them forth out of Egypt.

Exodus 32:5

5. Seeing the impression which the image made upon Israel, Aaron at once builds an altar before it, and proclaims a feast to Jehovah. The calf is thus clearly regarded, not as exclusive of Jehovah, but as representing Him.

Exodus 32:6

6. burnt offerings and peace offerings] Cf. on Exodus 20:24. to eat and to drink] i.e. to take part in the sacred meal accompanying the peace-offering; cf. on Exodus 18:12. to play] to amuse themselves, e.g. by singing and dancing, vv. 18, 19. Comp. the quotation in 1 Corinthians 10:7.

Exodus 32:7-8

7, 8. Jehovah makes known to Moses the people’s sin. The verses are not necessarily by a different hand (RJE[218]) from v. 18 f. Moses’ anger may naturally have been kindled by the spectacle of the doings in the camp, the full character of which he did not before realize. [218] E See pp. xi, xii.

Exodus 32:8

8. the way, &c.] See Exodus 20:4; Exodus 20:23.

Exodus 32:9-14

9–14. Jehovah declares that He will exterminate the people: but allows Himself to be diverted from His purpose by Moses’ intercession.

Exodus 32:10

10. and I will make, &c.] The promise given to Abraham (Genesis 12:2) is now restricted to Moses (cf. Numbers 14:12).

Exodus 32:11

11. besought] properly, as Arabic seems to shew, ‘made sweet the face of,’ fig. for, entreated, sought to conciliate: a frequent idiom, e.g. 1 Samuel 13:12, 1 Kings 13:6, Jeremiah 26:19; with a human object, Psalms 45:12, Proverbs 19:6, Job 11:19. In the prayer which follows, Moses urges four motives for mercy: (1) Israel is Jehovah’s people; (2) its deliverance has demanded the exertion of great power; (3) the mockery of the Egyptians, if it now perish; (4) the oath to the forefathers. Cf. the intercession in Numbers 14:13-19. a mighty hand] See on Exodus 3:19.

Exodus 32:12

12. For evil] i.e. with an evil purpose. Cf. Deuteronomy 9:28 b. the mountains] viz. of the Sinaitic Peninsula.

Exodus 32:13

13. to whom, &c.] See Genesis 22:16 (the only place in Genesis where the covenant is confirmed with an oath). I will multiply, &c.] Genesis 22:17; cf. also Exodus 15:5; Exodus 26:4. and all this land, &c.] Genesis 12:7; Genesis 13:15; Genesis 15:7; Genesis 15:18; Genesis 26:4; Genesis 28:13 (all JE).

Exodus 32:14

14. And Jehovah repented, &c.] so Genesis 6:7, Judges 2:18, 1 Samuel 15:11; 1 Samuel 15:35, 2 Samuel 24:16 al. Hebrew writers often express themselves ‘anthropopathically,’ i.e. attribute to God the feelings or emotions of a man. God is thus said to ‘repent,’ not because He really changes His purpose, but because He does so apparently, when, in consequence of a change in the character and conduct of men, He is obliged to make a corresponding change in the purpose towards them which He had previously announced, and adopt towards them a new attitude. See esp. Jeremiah 18, where it is taught that if man repents, a threat may be withdrawn (cf.

Jeremiah 26:3; Jeremiah 26:13; Jeremiah 26:19, Jonah 3:9-10), while on the other hand if man turns to evil a promise may be revoked. Here Jehovah ‘repents,’ as a consequence of Moses’ intercession (cf. Amos 7:3; Amos 7:6). God is also said to ‘repent,’ when he stops a judgement in the midst, as it seems, of its course, through compassion (2 Samuel 24:16, Deuteronomy 32:36). Where, however, nothing is likely to occur to cause a change in Jehovah’s declared purpose, He is said to be ‘not a man, that he should repent’ (1 Samuel 15:29; cf. Numbers 23:19).

Exodus 32:15-20

15–20. Moses’ return to the camp. His punishment of the people for their sin.

Exodus 32:16

16. the work of God, &c.] See Exodus 24:12, Exodus 31:18 b.

Exodus 32:17

17. Joshua] whom Moses had left on the lower part of the mountain (Exodus 24:13), and whom he must be supposed to have now rejoined.

Exodus 32:18

18. Lit. It is not the sound of the answering of might, neither is it the sound of the answering of weakness; the sound of answering-in-song do I hear; i.e. not the answering cries of victors and vanquished, but the answering voices of singers, are what Moses hears. The passage (Di.) ‘has a highly peculiar, almost poetical character’ (cf. v. 25); and there is a play on the double sense of the word ‘answer.’ For the sense of answering responsively in song, see on Exodus 15:21.

Exodus 32:19

19. the dancing] For dancing at a religious ceremony, see on Exodus 15:20.

Exodus 32:20

20. The people are made to drink their own sin. burnt it with fire] i.e. either (cf. on v. 4) burnt the wooden core, and ground the gold plating to powder by rolling large stones to and fro over it; or, if it were wholly of gold, reduced it by fire to shapeless lumps of metal, which were then ground to powder similarly. strewed it upon the water] Deuteronomy 9:21 says ‘and I cast the dust thereof into the wâdy that descended out of the mount’—apparently to carry it away, without any mention of the Israelites being made to drink it. to drink of it] Cf. the curses to be drunk by the suspected wife, Numbers 5:24.

Exodus 32:21-24

21–24. Aaron, taken to task by Moses for what has occurred, makes excuses.

Exodus 32:22

22. Aaron first excuses himself by casting the blame upon the people: they are set on evil, and he merely (v. 33) responded to their request. my lord] as Numbers 11:28; Numbers 12:11.

Exodus 32:24

24. He next excuses himself by declaring that he merely threw the gold which they gave him into the fire, and the calf came out—as it were spontaneously, without any cooperation on his part. Jehovah’s anger with Aaron individually, His threat to destroy him, and Moses’ intercession for him, narrated in Deuteronomy 9:20, are not mentioned in the extant parts of J or E in Exodus.

Exodus 32:25-29

25–29. The people being in rebellion, the Levites, responding in a body to Moses’ appeal for help, seize their swords, and slay 3000 of them. For the zeal thus displayed on Jehovah’s behalf, they are rewarded with the priesthood. It is noticeable that, though Aaron is a ‘Levite’ (Exodus 4:17 : see note), the other ‘Levites’ here take part against him. For another view of these verses,—viz. that they are not in their original context, and that they describe the punishment, not for the worship of the Golden Calf, but for some independent act of rebellion against Jehovah,—see Di., C.-H., and McNeile (pp. xxxiv f., 207 f.).

Exodus 32:26-28

26–28. The zeal of the sons of Levi for Jehovah. At Moses’ summons, they seize their swords, and slay 3000 of the rebels.

Exodus 32:27

27. Thus saith, &c.] as Exodus 5:1, Joshua 7:13, 1 Samuel 10:18 al. Moses speaks as a prophet. Cf. on Exodus 4:22.

Exodus 32:29

29. The Levites are invited to qualify themselves to receive the priesthood as a reward for their zeal. Fill your hand to-day to Jehovah] i.e. (see on Exodus 28:41), Provide yourselves with sacrifices, that you may be installed into the priesthood. for every man (is) against, &c.] That is the spirit which you have shewn to-day, and which is demanded for the priesthood (Di.). Cf. Deuteronomy 33:9 (written under the monarchy), where the priestly tribe is eulogized for its abnegation of natural relationships, though it is uncertain whether the present incident is specifically alluded to. that he may, &c.] The ‘blessing’ is the privilege of officiating as priests. Cf. Kennedy, DB. i. 341b. In view of Deu 10:8 (‘At that time Jehovah separated the tribe of Levi to bear the ark’ &c.), where the fragment of an itinerary in vv. 6 f. must be either parenthetic, or misplaced (so that At that time will refer to the period of the stay at Horeb, the subject of Deu 9:8 to Deuteronomy 10:5), Di. and others can hardly be wrong in holding that JE’s narrative here was followed originally by an account of the consecration of the tribe of Levi—as a reward, presumably, for the display of zeal on Jehovah’s behalf described in vv. 26–29, which the compiler of Ex. did not deem it necessary to retain by the side of the more detailed particulars of P. In P, it will be remembered, the consecration of the priesthood is narrated in Leviticus 8, and that of the ‘Levites’ (in P the inferior members of the tribe, as distinguished from the priests) in Numbers 8:5 ff.; but down to the time when Dt. was written, any member of the tribe had the right to exercise priestly functions (Deuteronomy 18:1; Deuteronomy 18:6-8); and it would be during this stage in the history of the tribe that J or E—like the writer of Deu 10:8 f.—would speak of the whole tribe being set apart or consecrated For priestly functions.

Exodus 32:30-34

30–34. Moses, with noble disinterestedness, offers his own life, if he can thereby secure his people’s pardon: Jehovah replies that He cannot on these terms take the life of the innocent; but He yields so far as to permit Moses to lead the people on to Canaan, though without His own personal presence. The passage (esp. vv. 30, 31) hardly reads as if it had been preceded by in vv. 9–14: still, the two passages are so far consistent that whereas in vv. 11–13 Moses had only petitioned that the people might not be destroyed, he now petitions for its entire forgiveness.

Exodus 32:31

31. returned] viz. to the mountain. Oh] Heb. ’ânnâ, a particle of entreaty: Genesis 50:17 ‘Oh, forgive, we pray’; Isaiah 38:3 ‘Oh, Lord’; Nehemiah 1:5 (EVV. ‘I beseech thee’).

Exodus 32:32

32. Moses’ love for his people finds here noble and pathetic expression. if thou wilt forgive their sin—] For the aposiopesis, comp. Genesis 30:27; Genesis 38:17, Daniel 3:15, Luke 13:9. LXX., Sam., Ps.-Jon. supply ‘forgive.’ and if not, blot me, &c.] i.e. let me die (cf. Numbers 11:15): Moses would rather not live than that his people should remain unforgiven. The ‘book’ which God has written is the ‘book of life,’ or ‘of the living’ (Psalms 69:28; cf. Isaiah 4:3), i.e. the book in which the names of the living are said metaphorically to be inscribed. The figure is borrowed from the custom of keeping registers of citizens (Jeremiah 22:30, Eze_Exodus 13:9). The ‘book’ is not to be understood in the NT. sense of the expression ‘book of life’ (Philippians 4:3, Revelation 3:5; Revelation 13:8; Revelation 17:8; Revelation 20:12; Revelation 20:15; Revelation 21:27), i.e. the register of the saints ordained to eternal life. Cf. Kirkpatrick’s note on Psalms 69:28 (in the Camb. Bible).

Exodus 32:33

33. Jehovah replies that He will blot out of His book not the righteous, but those only who have sinned against Him.

Exodus 32:34

34. He yields, however, so far to Moses’ entreaty as to put off the punishment of the people to an indefinite future, and to bid Moses lead Israel on to Canaan, under the guidance—not indeed of Himself personally, but—of His angel. It is true, the angel usually (see on Exodus 3:1, Exodus 23:20) represents Jehovah so fully as not to be exclusive of Him: but Exodus 33:2 (see the note), 3, shew that (unless the clause is a later insertion) it must be exclusive of Him here.

Exodus 32:35

35. The verse seems here out of place (so Di.): perhaps it originally formed the sequel to v. 20 (We., Bä.). It does not read like a description of the punishment threatened at the end of v. 34. which Aaron made] The words read like a scribe’s correction of the less exact ‘they made’ just before.