Êxodo 32
David Guzik · Citado em PreceptAustin
Êxodo 32
Guzik - Moses refused to do nothing. He did not fatalistically say, “Well, whatever God will do, God will do.” He pleaded with the LORD, according to what he believed to be God’s heart. Moses’ prayer was not long but it was strong. “It is not the length, but the strength of prayer that appeals to heaven.” (Meyer). “Thus did Jehovah lead His servant into fellowship with the deepest things of His own heart. Therefore his intercession prevailed.” (Morgan) (Exodus 32 Commentary) Bush - Why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, &c. This is not probably to be understood as an expostulation, as if there were not sufficient cause for God to be angry; but rather as an earnest entreaty that he would not in wrath consume them. The same usage of speech is common both in the prophets and the Psalms. Thus Ps. 44:23, 24, ‘Awake, why sleepest thou, O Lord? arise, cast us not off for ever. Wherefore hidest thou thy face, and forgettest our affliction and our oppression?’ See also the interrogative and optative modes of expression interchanged, Mat. 5:39, and Luke. 8:52, Mat. 8:29, and Luke, 8:28. (Notes Critical and Practical on the Book of Exodus Volume 2 different source - Volume 2) Johnston has an interesting note on the value of intercessory prayer - Moses attempted to appease the LORD. This bold anthropomorphism (lit. "Moses attempted to "soften the face of the LORD") dramatically depicts the impact of intercessory prayer. The expression hlh pnym “to soften the face [of someone" is used (1) literally of the physical action of caressing rough facial skin, and (2) figuratively of courting someone's favor (positive) or appeasing his anger (negative) (Ex 32:11; 1 Sa 13:12; 1 Ki 13:6;2 Chr 33:12; Job 11:19; Ps 45:13; Ps 119:58; Pr 19:6; Jer. 26:19; Da 9:1.3; Zech 7:2; 8:21; Ma1. 1:9) For example, after God struck Jeroboam's hand so that it shriveled up, the king pleaded for the prophet to implore God to relent from his anger (1 Ki 13:6). When the LORD's anger burned against Israel for its sin, Jehoahaz pleaded that God might relent from judgment (2 Ki 13:3-4). When Manasseh was suffering in Babylonian imprisonment as divine discipline for his apostasy, he sought to "weaken the face" of God by repenting of his sin, and God restored him (2 Chr 33:12). When Micah announced that Jerusalem would be destroyed, Hezekiah sought to weaken the angry resolve of God, and the LORD relented-he did not bring the disaster he had pronounced against Zion (Jer 26:18-19). God Himself exhorts his sinful people to repent and to "implore" him to be gracious to them (Mal. 1:9). When the people fashioned the golden calf, Yahweh announced his intent to totally destroy the nation, sparing only Moses (Ex 32:9-10). But Moses interceded on their behalf, imploring the LORD to stand down from his resolve to destroy Israel, and to curb his anger. Amazingly; Moses succeeded in appeasing God’s anger and weakening his resolve. This is powerful evidence that God is responsive to human entreaty. He does not simply answer prayers concerning what he already planned to do; he is also willing on occasion to alter his resolve and to do otherwise. In answer to the question, "Can prayer change anything?" the answer is a resounding, "Yes!" (ED COMMENT - HAVE YOU EVER HEARD THIS? "prayer doesn't change anything; it only changes the pray-er." WRONG!) Abraham negotiated with God to turn away his anger from destroying Sodom and Gomorrah on the condition that ten righteous people be found (Ge 18:20-32). Although such a small remnant did not exist, Abraham's negotiations won the rescue of Lot and his family. Moses proclaims that had he not fervently interceded on their behalf, God would have certainly destroyed the nation (Dt. 9:7-20). God later destroyed Jerusalem because he could not find anyone like Moses to stand in the gap to intercede for the people (Ezek. 22:30) (The Bible Knowledge Key Word Study - Gen- Deut) Peter Marshall emphasizes a point through restatement in his sermon “The Art of Moving Mountains”: I am sure that each of you has read this statement many times: Prayer Changes Things You have seen it painted on posters which adorn the walls of our Sunday school rooms. You have seen it stamped on little metal plates, read it in the Bible, heard it from the pulpit, oh, so many times. But do you believe it? Do you actually, honestly, believe that prayer changes things? Have you ever had prayer change anything for you? Your attitudes your circumstances your obstacles your fears? Question: Does prayer change God’s mind? Answer: This question can be best answered by breaking it into two questions: 1) Does prayer change God’s mind? and 2) Does prayer change things? The answer to the first is, no, God does not change His mind. The answer to the second is, yes, prayer changes things. So how can prayer change circumstances without changing God’s mind? First of all, in order for God to change His mind, He would have to improve upon Himself in some way. In other words, if God changed His mind, that action would suggest that His first way of thinking was deficient, but, because we prayed, He improved His plan concerning our situation. We change our minds when we see a better way to do something. We thought A but realized B was better, so we change our mind. But, since God knows all things, the beginning from the end (Revelation 22:13; Ephesians 1:4), it is not possible for Him to improve upon any plan that He has made. His plans are already perfect (2 Samuel 22:31), and He has stated that His plans will prevail (Isaiah 46:9–11). What about passages like Exodus 32:14 that seem to imply that God “repented of” His action? The Hebrew word nacham, often translated “repent” or “change one’s mind,” can also mean “sorrow” or “to bring comfort.” Genesis 6:6 is the first occurrence of this word in reference to the Lord: “The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled.” This appears to mean that God had second thoughts about His decision to create human beings. But, since God’s ways are perfect, we need to look for an alternate understanding. If we apply the secondary definitions of the word translated “regretted,” we can understand this verse to mean that the wickedness of man brought great sorrow to God’s heart, especially in light of what He must do to restore them. Jonah 3:10 is another example of the Hebrew word nacham: “When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.” In other words, God took comfort in the fact that He did not have to destroy the Ninevites as He had said He would. He did not change His mind; He already knew they would repent. His actions are always a part of His bigger plan that was formed before He created the world. Jeremiah 18:8 helps explain this concept: “And if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned.” God is not changing His mind; He is taking comfort in the truth that man’s repentance will curb the consequences that He, in His righteousness, has already established. So if prayer does not change God’s mind, why do we pray? Does prayer change our circumstances? Yes. God delights in changing our circumstances in response to our prayers of faith. Jesus instructed us to “always pray and not lose heart” (Luke 18:1). First John 5:14–15 also reminds us that, when we pray according to God’s will, He hears and answers. The key phrase is “according to His will.” That will also includes His timing. We can think of it this way: a father plans to give his daughter a car when she turns 16. He knows by that time she will have a job, be active in church and school activities, and be able to pay for her own insurance. But he also plans to wait to give it until she asks for it, because he wants her to value such a gift. But at age 11, she begins to beg for a car. She pleads, bargains, and gets angry when on her 12th, 13th, and 14th birthdays there is still no car. She matures a bit and stops asking, but then at 16 she approaches her father in a more thoughtful way, explains her need for a car, and expresses her confidence that her dad will take care of this need. In a very short time, he joyfully hands her the keys. Did he change his mind? No, he had always planned to give it to her. Did she need to ask? Yes, that was part of his decision. In a similar way, our heavenly Father invites us to ask Him for everything we need. He delights to give it to us when it is within His plan. He knows we don’t always understand His timing, but He expects us to trust and not doubt (James 1:5–6; Matthew 6:8). Our prayers help to align our hearts with His heart until His will is our highest goal (Luke 22:42). He promises to listen and grant the desires of our hearts when our hearts are wholly His (Psalm 37:4; 2 Chronicles 16:9).(Source: GotQuestions.org) Exodus 32:12 "Why should the Egyptians speak, saying, 'With evil intent He brought them out to kill them in the mountains and to destroy them from the face of the earth'? Turn from Your burning anger and change Your mind about doing harm to Your people. Victor Hamilton - Why should the Egyptians say, ‘For evil he brought them out, to kill them in the mountains, to annihilate them from off the face of the earth’? Turn away from your blazing anger and rescind the evil directed at your people. NET Exodus 32:12 Why should the Egyptians say, 'For evil he led them out to kill them in the mountains and to destroy them from the face of the earth'? Turn from your burning anger, and relent of this evil against your people. NLT Exodus 32:12 Why let the Egyptians say, 'Their God rescued them with the evil intention of slaughtering them in the mountains and wiping them from the face of the earth'? Turn away from your fierce anger. Change your mind about this terrible disaster you have threatened against your people! ESV Exodus 32:12 Why should the Egyptians say, 'With evil intent did he bring them out, to kill them in the mountains and to consume them from the face of the earth'? Turn from your burning anger and relent from this disaster against your people. NIV Exodus 32:12 Why should the Egyptians say, 'It was with evil intent that he brought them out, to kill them in the mountains and to wipe them off the face of the earth'? Turn from your fierce anger; relent and do not bring disaster on your people. KJV Exodus 32:12 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. LXE Exodus 32:12 Take heed lest at any time the Egyptians speak, saying, With evil intent he brought them out to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from off the earth; cease from thy wrathful anger, and be merciful to the sin of thy people, ASV Exodus 32:12 Wherefore should the Egyptians 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. CSB Exodus 32:12 Why should the Egyptians say, 'He brought them out with an evil intent to kill them in the mountains and wipe them off the face of the earth'? Turn from Your great anger and relent concerning this disaster planned for Your people. NKJ Exodus 32:12 "Why should the Egyptians speak, and say,`He brought them out to harm them, to kill them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth '? Turn from Your fierce wrath, and relent from this harm to Your people. NRS Exodus 32:12 Why should the Egyptians say, 'It was with evil intent that he brought them out to kill them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth'? Turn from your fierce wrath; change your mind and do not bring disaster on your people. YLT Exodus 32:12 why do the Egyptians speak, saying, For evil He brought them out to slay them among mountains, and to consume them from off the face of the ground? turn back from the heat of Thine anger, and repent of the evil against Thy people. should: Nu 14:13-16 De 9:28 32:26,27 Jos 7:9 Ps 74:18 79:9,10 Eze 20:9,14,22 Turn from: De 13:17 Jos 7:26 Ezr 10:14 Ps 78:38 85:3 change: Ex 32:14 Ge 6:6 De 32:36 Ps 90:13 106:45 Am 7:3,6 Jon 3:9 Zec 8:14 Exodus 32 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries MOSES APPEALS TO YAHWEH'S REPUTATION Why should the Egyptians speak, saying, 'With evil intent He brought them out to kill them in the mountains and to destroy them from the face of the earth'? - If God destroyed Israel after bringing them out, it would seem to the Egyptians that God's original intent was evil in that he delivered them simply to destroy them! So Moses appeals to God to vindicate His Own name. NLT = "Change your mind about this terrible disaster you have threatened against your people!" G Campbell
Êxodo 32
Guzik - This wasn’t the Spirit-inspired craftsmanship of Bezaleel and Aholiab mentioned in Exodus 31:1–6. This was the sin-inspired work of Aaron. He thought it out, melted the gold, molded it, and fashioned it carefully with an engraving tool. (Exodus 32 Commentary) and made it into a molten calf; and they said, "This is your god, O Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt." - The Hebrew word molten (massēkâ) a Hebrew word for “(cast) idol” (Ex 34:17; Lev. 19:4; Dt. 9:12, 16; 27:15; Jdg. 17:3, 4; 18:14; 2 Ki 17:16; Hos 13:2; etc.). This is a direct violation of the second commandment "You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth." (Ex 20:4) The statement brought you up from the land of Egypt shows the delusion of idolatry, for this idol had not existed the day before. Guzik on calf - “Calf is not a good translation of the Hebrew egel. A young bull in his first strength is meant: for instance, the word can describe a three-year-old animal (Genesis 15:9).” (Exodus 32 Commentary) NET Note on calf - The word means a “young bull” and need not be translated as “calf” (although “calf” has become the traditional rendering in English). The word could describe an animal three years old. Aaron probably made an inner structure of wood and then, after melting down the gold, plated it. The verb “molten” does not need to imply that the image was solid gold; the word is used in Isa 30:22 for gold plating. So it was a young bull calf that was overlaid with gold, and the gold was fashioned with the stylus. Kaiser on this is your god - Jeroboam borrowed this statement when he installed the two golden calves at the division of the kingdom in 931 B.C. (1 Kings 12:28). (EBC-Ex) Hamilton - Occasionally the calf is an acceptable sacrifice (Lev. 9:2–3, 8), but most often it is a common designation for an idol (Deut. 9:16, 21; 1 Kings 12:28, 32; 2 Kings 10:29; 17:16; 2 Chron. 11:15; 13:8; Neh. 9:18; Ps. 106:19; Hosea 8:5–6; 13:2)....Not only can you worship and obey him, but now you can also produce him! You can be responsible for his existence even if the product is intended only for surrogacy. (Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary) John Hannah - Some commentators have suggested that this represented the Egyptian bull-god Apis, but this seems unlikely because Apis was not worshiped as an image. Even so, the bull symbolized fertility and sexual strength. This explicitly violated the second commandment (20:4–6; cf. 20:23), which the people had already received from God verbally through Moses. Perhaps the people considered the calf-idol an image of God. Since only one idol was made, the word gods (32:1, 4, 8, 23, 31) may refer both to the idol and to God whom it supposedly represented. It seems unlikely that Aaron would attribute the Exodus to anyone but the true God.(BKC)
Êxodo 32
Guzik - It was bad enough to have a golden calf the people praised for their escape from Egypt. This second step of Aaron’s was worse. He honored and sanctified the idol with animal sacrifice. He made the calf, and then he made the altar to worship it. (Exodus 32 Commentary) And Aaron made a proclamation and said - Aaron seems to be "all in" regarding this idol-calf and now calls for a "worship service." The Septuagint for made a proclamation (qara) is kerusso which is a bit ironic as kerusso is frequently used in the NT of proclaiming good news (cf Mk 1:4, Mk 13:10). Tomorrow shall be a feast to the LORD - Note that the feast is not in honor of the idol but of Jehovah, to the LORD. This would support the premise that the calf-idol was intended to be a representation of Jehovah (cf Dt 4:12-22, 23, 24), i.e., syncretism. Hamilton on Aaron's "decision to proclaim “a festival to the LORD tomorrow” (v. 5b) is not an attempt to temper the Israelites’ egregious sin as much as it is an act of baptizing blasphemy. Love may cover a multitude of sins (1 Pet. 4:8). Religious activity does not. This is the one time I am aware of in the Bible where somebody’s building an altar gets him into a lot of hot water. A simple altar of dirt or undressed stones (Exod. 20:24–26), or a blood-spattered altar (Ex 24:6), yes. An altar on the heels of god-making, no. The contrast between Moses’s building an altar (Ex 24:4) and Aaron’s building an altar (Ex 32:5) is transparent. Understandably, Aaron does not use the altar that Moses has built for the ceremony of sealing the covenant. (Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary) NET Note on feast - The word is חַג (chag/khag), the pilgrim’s festival. This was the word used by Moses for their pilgrimage into the wilderness. Aaron seems here to be trying to do what Moses had intended they do, make a feast to Yahweh at Sinai, but his efforts will not compete with the idol. As B. Jacob says, Aaron saw all this happening and tried to rescue the true belief (Exodus, 941). Bush- And Aaron made a proclamation, and said, To-morrow is a feast to the Lord. Heb. הג ליהוה hag laihovah, a feast to, for, or of Jehovah. By Aaron’s building an altar and proclaiming this feast to the true God, it would seem that he still proposed within himself to lead the thoughts of the people through the outward medium and fix them upon Jehovah himself, the only proper object of adoration. But such a mixture of divine and idolatrous worship (SYNCRETISM) never fails to mislead the mass of men, and though the priests of a corrupt religion, in imitation of Aaron, may plead that the use of paintings, images, and sacrifices, is intended merely as a help, by sensible media, to spiritual worship, yet there can be no doubt that its practical effects are always just the same with those here recorded, and that it comes under the same condemnation. Whatever were Aaron’s private views or wishes, the transaction is thus again characterised by the Holy Ghost, Acts, 7:41, ‘And they made a calf in those days, and offered sacrifices unto the idol, and rejoiced in the work of their hands.’ So Jehu, led away by the same delusion, could boast of his zeal for the Lord of hosts, while yet he was a worshipper of the golden calves of Jeroboam, 2 Kings, 10:16, 29. (Notes Critical and Practical on the Book of Exodus Volume 2 different source - Volume 2) Question: What is religious syncretism? Answer: Syncretism, as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary, is “the reconciliation or fusion of differing systems of belief.” This is most evident in the areas of philosophy and religion, and usually results in a new teaching or belief system. Obviously, this cannot be reconciled to biblical Christianity. Religious syncretism often takes place when foreign beliefs are introduced to an indigenous belief system and the teachings are blended. The new, heterogeneous religion then takes a shape of its own. This has been seen most clearly in Roman Catholic missionary history. Take, for example, the Roman Catholic Church’s proselytizing of animistic South America. Threatened with the fear of death, natives were baptized into the church by the tens of thousands without any preaching of the Gospel whatsoever. Former temples were razed, with Catholic shrines and chapels built on the same spot. Natives were allowed to substitute praying to saints instead of gods of water, earth and air, and replaced their former idols with new images of the Roman Catholic Church. Yet, the animistic religion the natives had formerly practiced was never fully replaced—it was adapted into Catholic teachings, and this new belief system was allowed to flourish. More recently, religious syncretism can be seen in such religious systems as the New Age, Hinduism, Unitarianism, and Christian Science. These religions are a blending of multiple different belief systems, and are continually evolving as the philosophies of mankind rise and fall in popularity. Therein lies the problem, for syncretism relies on the whim of man, not the standard of Scripture. The Bible makes it very clear what true religion is. Think on just a few things stated in Scripture: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind" (Deuteronomy 6:5; Matthew 22:37); "Jesus replied, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me'" (John 14:6); "Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name" (John 20:31); and “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). Religious syncretism is simply not compatible with true Christianity. In fact, any modification to biblical law and principle for the sake of a “better” religion is heresy (Revelation 22:18-19). (Source:GotQuestions.org) Exodus 32:6 So the next day they rose early and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play. NET Exodus 32:6 So they got up early on the next day and offered up burnt offerings and brought peace offerings, and the people sat down to eat and drink, and they rose up to play. NLT Exodus 32:6 The people got up early the next morning to sacrifice burnt offerings and peace offerings. After this, they celebrated with feasting and drinking, and they indulged in pagan revelry. ESV Exodus 32:6 And they rose up early the next day and offered burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. And the people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play. NIV Exodus 32:6 So the next day the people rose early and sacrificed burnt offerings and presented fellowship offerings. Afterward they sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry. KJV Exodus 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. LXE Exodus 32:6 And having risen early on the morrow, he offered whole burnt-offerings, and offered a peace-offering; and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. ASV Exodus 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. CSB Exodus 32:6 Early the next morning they arose, offered burnt offerings, and presented fellowship offerings. The people sat down to eat and drink, then got up to play. NKJ Exodus 32:6 Then they rose early on the next day, offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. NRS Exodus 32:6 They rose early the next day, and offered burnt offerings and brought sacrifices of well-being; and the people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to revel. YLT Exodus 32:6 and they rise early on the morrow, and cause burnt-offerings to ascend, and bring nigh peace-offerings; and the people sit down to eat and to drink, and rise up to play. offered: Ex 24:4,5 sat down: Nu 25:2 Jud 16:23-25 Am 2:8 8:10 Ac 7:41,42 1Co 10:7 Rev 11:10 Exodus 32 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries So the next day they rose early and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink - Note the phrase they rose early, etc, indicating their zeal to worship the idol. They couldn't wait. Burnt offerings are completely consumed but peace offerings are for fellowship, in this case sadly communion with an idolatrous manifestation of Jehovah. 19 They made a calf in Horeb And worshiped a molten image. 20 Thus they exchanged their glory For the image of an ox that eats grass. What was "their glory?" Was it not the Glorious God Who had delivered them and spoken to them? They fell into the same trap we see in Romans when one forgets God For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them (IT WAS EVEN EVIDENT ON MT SINAI TO ISRAEL!); for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature (ISRAEL HAD SEEN ALL OF THESE ATTRIBUTES!), have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God (ISRAEL KNEW THE TRUE GOD), they did not honor Him as God or give thanks (THE SLIPPERY SLOPE BEGINS), but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened (NOTE: WAS DARKENED IS A "DIVINE PASSIVE" = WHEN WE DENY HIS CLEAR LIGHT, BEWARED FOR HE GIVES US OVER TO SPIRITUAL DARKNESS!). 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over (paradidomi in active voice = God willing actively did this!) in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that (WHAT WAS GOD'S PURPOSE?) their bodies would be dishonored among them (IS THIS WHAT THE REVELRY WAS ABOUT? THE TEXT IS NOT ABSOLUTELY CLEAR BUT IS CERTAINLY SUGGESTIVE OF IMMORAL BEHAVIOR). 25 For (TERM OF EXPLANATION - HERE IS THE SUMMARY EXPLANATION) they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, Who is blessed forever. Amen. (Ro 1:17-25+) Stuart - Again imitating orthodoxy through idolatry, the people “sacrificed burnt offerings and presented fellowship offerings,” which were forms of offering otherwise appropriate for Yahweh (on burnt offerings see Ex 10:25; 18:12; 20:24; 24:5; 29:18, 25, 42; 30:9, 28; 31:9; on fellowship offerings see Ex 20:24–25; 29:28). “Burnt offerings,” also known as “whole burnt offerings,” sought atonement for the worshiper’s sin. “Fellowship offerings,” also known as “sacrifices/offerings of well-being” celebrated the worshiper’s ongoing covenant relationship with Yahweh. (NAC-Exodus) Peace Offerings in the OT - Exod. 20:24; Exod. 24:5; Exod. 29:28; Exod. 32:6; Lev. 3:1; Lev. 3:3; Lev. 3:6; Lev. 3:9; Lev. 4:10; Lev. 4:26; Lev. 4:31; Lev. 4:35; Lev. 6:12; Lev. 7:11; Lev. 7:13; Lev. 7:14; Lev. 7:15; Lev. 7:18; Lev. 7:20; Lev. 7:21; Lev. 7:29; Lev. 7:32; Lev. 7:33; Lev. 7:34; Lev. 7:37; Lev. 9:4; Lev. 9:18; Lev. 9:22; Lev. 10:14; Lev. 17:5; Lev. 19:5; Lev. 22:21; Lev. 23:19; Num. 6:17; Num. 6:18; Num. 7:17; Num. 7:23; Num. 7:29; Num. 7:35; Num. 7:41; Num. 7:47; Num. 7:53; Num. 7:59; Num. 7:65; Num. 7:71; Num. 7:77; Num. 7:83; Num. 7:88; Num. 10:10; Num. 15:8; Num. 29:39; Deut. 27:7; Jos. 8:31; Jos. 22:23; Jos. 22:27; Jdg. 20:26; Jdg. 21:4; 1 Sam. 10:8; 1 Sam. 11:15; 1 Sam. 13:9; 2 Sam. 6:17; 2 Sam. 24:25; 1 Ki. 3:15; 1 Ki. 8:63; 1 Ki. 8:64; 1 Ki. 9:25; 2 Ki. 16:13; 1 Chr. 16:1; 1 Chr. 16:2; 1 Chr. 21:26; 2 Chr. 7:7; 2 Chr. 29:35; 2 Chr. 30:22; 2 Chr. 31:2; 2 Chr. 33:16; Prov. 7:14; Ezek. 43:27; Ezek. 45:15; Ezek. 45:17; Ezek. 46:2; Ezek. 46:12; Amos 5:22 Notice that peace offerings were described in the ceremony leading to the ratification of the Book of the Covenant - He sent young men of the sons of Israel, and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed young bulls as peace offerings to the LORD. (Ex 24:5). How quickly they perverted what should have been a fellowship celebration with a glorious God into a fellowship celebration with a golden calf Guzik - They served their idol with eagerness, energy, and personal sacrifice. People usually find a way to rise early for the things that are really important to them. This shows that Israel was willing to give their time, their sleep, and their money in the service of this idol. (Exodus 32 Commentary)
Êxodo 32
Guzik says it this way - Moses appealed to God on the basis of His goodness. “LORD, keep Your promises. You are a good God who is always faithful. Don’t break Your promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Israel.” (Exodus 32 Commentary) Bush - Remember Abraham, Isaac, &c. This was doubtless the great argument of all, the promise made to the fathers. To the fulfilment of this promise the veracity of God would have been pledged, had it been given simply in the form of a plain declaration; but there was more than this; it was a promise confirmed by an oath, and an oath sworn by himself, than whom he could swear by no greater. Consequently nothing could be conceived more binding by which the honor of divine truth could be engaged to the performance of its stipulations. It is as if he had said, ‘Lord, if thy people be now destroyed, shall not thy promise fail for evermore? And shall their unbelief be allowed to make thy truth of none effect? God forbid.’ (Notes Critical and Practical on the Book of Exodus Volume 2 different source - Volume 2) Exodus 32:14 So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people. Victor Hamilton - And the LORD rescinded the evil about which he had spoken to do to his people. John Currid - So Yahweh had compassion regarding the harm which he had said he would do to his people. NET Exodus 32:14 Then the LORD relented over the evil that he had said he would do to his people. NLT Exodus 32:14 So the LORD changed his mind about the terrible disaster he had threatened to bring on his people. ESV Exodus 32:14 And the LORD relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people. NIV Exodus 32:14 Then the LORD relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened. KJV Exodus 32:14 And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people. LXE (Lexham) Exodus 32:14 And so the Lord was favorably inclined to preserve his people. ASV Exodus 32:14 And Jehovah repented of the evil which he said he would do unto his people. CSB Exodus 32:14 So the LORD relented concerning the disaster He said He would bring on His people. NKJ Exodus 32:14 So the LORD relented from the harm which He said He would do to His people. NRS Exodus 32:14 And the LORD changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people. YLT Exodus 32:14 and Jehovah repenteth of the evil which He hath spoken of doing to His people. De 32:26 2Sa 24:16 1Ch 21:15 Ps 106:45 Jer 18:8 26:13,19 Joel 2:13 Jonah 3:10 4:2 Exodus 32 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries JEHOVAH RELENTED So the LORD changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people - The psalmist explains Jehovah's "change of mind" declaring "And He remembered His covenant for their sake, and relented according to the greatness of His lovingkindness." (Ps 106:45) The verb changed His mind (naham/nacham) is translated in the Septuagint with hilaskomai which means to show kindness or compassion to one who does not deserve it (as in Lk 18:3+). And so the Lexham English translation of the Septuagint has "so the Lord was favorably inclined to preserve his people." Note that God did not say He would do nothing, but just that He would not follow through on total destruction of Israel. He did in fact end up punishing them with a plague (Ex 32:34-35), so He clearly head them to some degree responsible for their sin. Currid - Some translations (e.g., NASB) say that Yahweh ‘changed his mind’. But there is a theological problem with that rendering, since other Scriptures highlight the immutability of God. For example, 1 Samuel 15:29 states: ‘And indeed the Glory of Israel will not lie or change his mind (naham/nacham), because he is not a man, that he should change his mind(naham/nacham).’ The Hebrew verb used in our verse (naham/nacham) does not always mean to change one’s mind, but can also mean ‘to be moved to pity / to have compassion for others’. The fact of the matter is that judgement and wrath did come on the Hebrews because of their sin (see Ex 32:34–35). Yet the judgement was tempered by the mercy of God—a mercy that came because of the pleadings of the covenant mediator, Moses. (Epsc Exodus Volume 2 ) This would be easy to misunderstand and to cause one to question the fact that God is Immutable or unchangeable. John MacArthur helps understand what seems to be somewhat at odds with God's attribute of immutable writing that "Moses’ appeal for God to change His mind, to relent, succeeded because God had only threatened judgment, not decreed it. A divine intention is not an unchangeable divine decree. Decrees or sworn declarations (cf. Ge 22:16–18; Ps 110:4) or categorical statements of not changing or relenting (cf. Jer 4:28; Eze 24:14; Zec 8:14, 15) are unconditional and bind the speaker to the stated course of action regardless of the circumstances or reactions of the listeners. Intentions retain a conditional element and do not necessarily bind the speaker to a stated course of action (cf. Jer 15:6; 18:8–10; 26:3, 13, 19; Joel 2:13; Jon 3:9, 10; 4:2)." (MSB-bolding added) Robert Chisholm - The article then argues that if God has issued a decree, He will not change His mind or deviate from it. However, the majority of God’s statements of intention are not decrees. And God can and often does deviate from such announcements. In these cases He “changes His mind” in the sense that He decides, at least for the time being, not to do what He had planned or announced as His intention. (See full article “Does God ‘Change His Mind’?” Bibliotheca Sacra 152). Excerpt from Chisholm's article - When God saw the Israelites worshiping the golden calf, He angrily announced to Moses His intention to destroy the people and raise up a new nation through Moses. “Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them, and that I may destroy them; and I will make of you a great nation” (Exod. 32:10). The form of the statement (imperative + jussive + cohortative + cohortative) indicates that it is not a decree, but an expression of God’s frustration with His people. The implication is that Moses, if he did not leave God alone, might be able to persuade Him to change His mind. In fact this is exactly what happened (vv. 11-14). Moses appealed to God's reputation (“What will the Egyptians think?”), asked Him to relent from His stated course of action (v. 12), and reminded Him of His unconditional decree to the patriarchs (v. 13). Verse 14 states that God did indeed change His mind. Moses was able to succeed because God had only threatened judgment, not decreed it. Guzik - God answered Moses’ prayer. God was going to destroy the nation—all Moses had to do was leave God alone and let Him do it. But Moses did not leave God alone; he labored in intercession according to what He knew of the heart of God. In the King James Version this phrase is translated the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people...Based on this, some (ERRONEOUSLY) believe God sometimes needs to repent of evil, or that God changes His mind (SEE THE BETTER TRANSLATIONS ABOVE)....Moses’ prayer did not change God, but it did change the standing of the people in God’s sight—the people were now in a place of mercy, when before they were in a place of judgment. (Exodus 32 Commentary) Alan Cole helps us understand the LORD changed His mind writing "The meaning is not that God changed His mind; still less that He regretted something that He had intended to do. It means, in biblical language, that he now embarked on a different course of action from that already suggested as a possibility, owing to some new factor which is usually mentioned in the context. In the Bible, it is clear that God’s promises and warnings are always conditional on man’s response: this is most clearly set out in Ezekiel 33:13–16." We are not to think of Moses as altering God’s purpose towards Israel by this prayer, but as carrying it out: Moses was never more like God than in such moments, for he shared God’s mind and loving purpose. (TOTC-Exodus) Bush - And the Lord repented, &c. Heb וינחם יהוה va-yinnahem Yehovah. Greek ἱλασθη (hilaskomai) κυριος, the Lord was propitiated; the same term which occurs in the prayer of the publican, Luke, 18:13, ‘God, be merciful (hilaskomai, be propitiated) to me a sinner;’ i. e. by the intervention of a mediator. The publican therefore does not rely upon the absolute mercy of God irrespective of an atonement.—The suit of Moses prevails with Jehovah. He so redoubles and multiplies the obstacles which he would fain throw in the way of the execution of vengeance, that God virtually acknowledges himself overcome, and accordingly the Psalmist says, Ps. 106:23, ‘He would have destroyed them had not Moses his chosen stood before him in the breach.’ (Notes Critical and Practical on the Book of Exodus Volume 2 different source - Volume 2) Changed His mind (relented) (05162)(naham/nacham) is a verb which means to be sorry, to pity, to console oneself, repent, regret, comfort, be comforted, to get revenge for oneself (Ge 27:42, Ezek 5:13). According to the TWOT nacham reflects the idea of "breathing deeply" and hence refers to the physical display of one's feelings, such as sorrow, or in this case compassion or comfort. NET NOTE on nacham on Genesis 6:6 "The LORD was sorry (nacham)" - Or “was grieved”; “was sorry.” In the Niphal stem the verb נָחָם (nakham) can carry one of four semantic meanings, depending on the context: (1) “to experience emotional pain or weakness,” “to feel regret,” often concerning a past action (see Ex 13:17; Judg 21:6, 15; 1 Sam 15:11, 35; Job 42:6; Jer 31:19). In several of these texts כִּי (ki, “because”) introduces the cause of the emotional sorrow. (2) Another meaning is “to be comforted” or “to comfort oneself” (sometimes by taking vengeance). See Gen 24:67; 38:12; 2 Sam 13:39; Ps 77:3; Isa 1:24; Jer 31:15; Ezek 14:22; 31:16; 32:31. (This second category represents a polarization of category one.) (3) The meaning “to relent from” or “to repudiate” a course of action which is already underway is also possible (see Jdg 2:18; 2 Sam 24:16 = 1 Chr 21:15; Ps 90:13; 106:45; Jer 8:6; 20:16; 42:10). (4) Finally, “to retract” (a statement) or “to relent or change one’s mind concerning,” “to deviate from” (a stated course of action) is possible (see Exod 32:12, 14; 1 Sam 15:29; Ps 110:4; Isa 57:6; Jer 4:28; 15:6; 18:8, 10; 26:3, 13, 19; Ezek 24:14; Joel 2:13–14; Am 7:3, 6; Jonah 3:9–10; 4:2; Zech 8:14). See R. B. Chisholm, “Does God ‘Change His Mind’?” BSac 152 (1995): 388 (SEE ALSO ANOTHER ARTICLE BY CHISHOLM). The first category applies here because the context speaks of God’s grief and emotional pain (see the following statement in v. 6) as a result of a past action (his making humankind). For a thorough study of the word נָחָם, see H. Van Dyke Parunak, “A Semantic Survey of NHM,” Bib 56 (1975): 512–32 - you can set up a free account to read it. John Currid has a convicting application - The Westminster Confession of Faith (1645) lists eight primary duties of the office of pastor. It is quite significant that the first one deals with the issue of intercessory prayer: ‘First, it belongs to his office, to pray for and with his flock, as the mouth of the people unto God, Acts 6:2, 3, 4 and 20:36, where preaching and prayer are joined as several parts of the same office. The office of the elder (that is, the pastor) is to pray for the sick, even in private, to which a blessing is especially promised; much more therefore ought he to perform this in the public execution of his office, as a part thereof.’ There is no greater task for the pastor (and ruling elders) than to pray for his flock. Unfortunately there is an almost total lack of attention given to this subject by denominations, seminaries and individual churches. And many pastors seem to have made intercessory prayer supplemental rather than fundamental. It is no wonder that the rot of materialism and secularism is corrupting the church today. (Epsc Exodus Volume 2 ) Guzik - Some are frustrated because the Bible describes God’s actions in human terms, but they really cannot be described in any other way. “I suppose that I need not say that this verse speaks after the manner of men. I do not know after what other manner we can speak. To speak of God after the manner of God, is reserved for God himself; and mortal men could not comprehend such speech. In this sense, the LORD often speaks, not according to the literal fact, but according to the appearance of things to us, in order that we may understand so far as the human can comprehend the divine.” (Spurgeon) (Exodus 32 Commentary) Question: Does God change His mind? Answer: Malachi 3:6 declares, “I the LORD do not change. So you, O descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed.” Similarly, James 1:17 tells us, “Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.” Numbers 23:19 is clear: “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should change His mind. Does He speak and then not act? Does He promise and not fulfill?” Based on these verses, no, God does not change. God is unchanging and unchangeable. He is also all-wise. So He cannot “change His mind” in the sense of realizing a mistake, backtracking, and trying a new tack. How then do we explain verses that seem to say that God does change His mind? Verses such as Genesis 6:6, “The LORD was grieved that He had made man on the earth, and His heart was filled with pain.” Also, Exodus 32:14 proclaims, “Then the LORD relented and did not bring on His people the disaster He had threatened.” These verses speak of the Lord “repenting” or “relenting” of something and seem to contradict the doctrine of God’s immutability. Another passage that is often used to show that God changes His mind is the story of Jonah. Through His prophet, God had told Nineveh He would destroy the city in forty days (Jonah 3:4). However, Nineveh repented of their sin (verses 5–9). In response to the Assyrians’ repentance, God relented: “He had compassion and did not bring upon them the destruction He had threatened” (verse 10). There are two important considerations involving the passages that say God changed His mind. First, we can say statements such as “the LORD was grieved that He had made man on the earth” (Genesis 6:6) are examples of anthropopathism (or anthropopatheia). Anthropopathism is a figure of speech in which the feelings or thought processes of finite humanity are ascribed to the infinite God. It’s a way to help us understand God’s work from a human perspective. In Genesis 6:6 specifically, we understand God’s sorrow over man’s sin. God obviously did not reverse His decision to create man. The fact that we are alive today is proof that God did not “change His mind” about the creation. Second, we must make a distinction between conditional declarations of God and unconditional determinations of God. In other words, when God said, “I will destroy Nineveh in forty days,” He was speaking conditionally upon the Assyrians’ response. We know this because the Assyrians repented and God did not, in fact, mete out the judgment. God did not change His mind; rather, His message to Nineveh was a warning meant to provoke repentance, and His warning was successful. An example of an unconditional declaration of God is the Lord’s promise to David, “Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever” (2 Samuel 7:16). There is no qualification expressed or implied in this declaration. No matter what David did or did not do, the word of the Lord would come to pass. God tells us of the cautionary nature of some of His declarations and the fact that He will act in accordance with our choices: “If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it. Now therefore say to the people of Judah and those living in Jerusalem, ‘This is what the Lord says: Look! I am preparing a disaster for you and devising a plan against you. So turn from your evil ways, each one of you, and reform your ways and your actions’” (Jeremiah 18:7– 11). Note the conditional word if: “If that nation I warned repents [like Assyria in Jonah 3] . . . then I will relent.” Conversely, God may tell a nation they will be blessed, but “if it does evil in my sight [like Israel in Micah 1] . . . then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do.” The bottom line is that God is entirely consistent. In His holiness, God was going to judge Nineveh. However, Nineveh repented and changed its ways. As a result, God, in His holiness, had mercy on Nineveh and spared them. This “change of mind” is entirely consistent with His character. His holiness did not waver one iota. The fact that God changes His treatment of us in response to our choices has nothing to do with His character. In fact, because God does not change, He must treat the righteous differently from the unrighteous. If someone repents, God consistently forgives; if someone refuses to repent, God consistently judges. He is unchanging in His nature, His plan, and His being. He cannot one day be pleased with the contrite and the next day be angry with the contrite. That would show Him to be mutable and untrustworthy. For God to tell Nineveh, “I’m going to judge you,” and then (after they repent) refuse to judge them may look like God changed His mind. In reality, God was simply staying true to His character. He loves mercy and forgives the penitent. “Has God forgotten to be merciful?” (Psalm 77:9). The answer is, no. At one time we were all enemies of God due to our sin (Romans 8:7). God warned us of the wages of sin (Romans 6:23) in order to cause us to repent. When we repented and trusted Christ for salvation, God “changed His mind” about us, and now we are no longer enemies but His beloved children (John 1:12). As it would be contrary to God’s character to not punish us had we continued in sin, so it would be contrary to His character to punish us after we repent. Does our change of heart mean that God changes? No, if anything, our salvation points to the fact that God does not change, because had He not saved us for the sake of Christ, He would have acted contrary to His character. (Source: GotQuestions.org) Exodus 32:15 Then Moses turned and went down from the mountain with the two tablets of the testimony in his hand, tablets which were written on both sides; they were written on one side and the other. NET Exodus 32:15 Moses turned and went down from the mountain with the two tablets of the testimony in his hands. The tablets were written on both sides– they were written on the front and on the back. NLT Exodus 32:15 Then Moses turned and went down the mountain. He held in his hands the two stone tablets inscribed with the terms of the covenant. They were inscribed on both sides, front and back. ESV Exodus 32:15 Then Moses turned and went down from the mountain with the two tablets of the testimony in his hand, tablets that were written on both sides; on the front and on the back they were written. NIV Exodus 32:15 Moses turned and went down the mountain with the two tablets of the Testimony in his hands. They were inscribed on both sides, front and back. KJV Exodus 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. LXE Exodus 32:15 And Moses turned and went down from the mountain, and the two tables of testimony were in his hands, tables of stone written on both their sides: they were written within and without. ASV Exodus 32:15 And Moses 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. CSB Exodus 32:15 Then Moses turned and went down the mountain with the two tablets of the testimony in his hands. They were inscribed on both sides-- inscribed front and back. NKJ Exodus 32:15 And Moses turned and went down from the mountain, and the two tablets of the Testimony were in his hand. The tablets were written on both sides; on the one side and on the other they were written. NRS Exodus 32:15 Then Moses turned and went down from the mountain, carrying the two tablets of the covenant in his hands, tablets that were written on both sides, written on the front and on the back. YLT Exodus 32:15 And Moses turneth, and goeth down from the mount, and the two tables of the testimony are in his hand, tables written on both their sides, on this and on that are they written; turned: Ex 24:18 De 9:15 the testimony: Ex 16:34 40:20 De 5:22 Ps 19:7 written: Rev 5:1 Exodus 32 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Then Moses turned and went down from the mountain with the two tablets of the testimony in his hand, tablets which were written on both sides; they were written on one side and the other - This detail is described no where else in Scripture. Notice that in vv 15-16 there is an emphasis on tablets. Stuart has an interesting comment - These two tablets were the most valuable material thing on earth at that time, as the reader is now informed clearly, so that later when Moses breaks them, the reader can appreciate the severity of the sin that would have caused him to do something so destructive to something so precious. Criswell - The Ten Commandments were easily placed on both sides of two tablets small enough to fit in the ark (Dt. 10:1-5; 1 Ki 8:9; Heb 9:4). Moses had nothing whatsoever to do with originating these tablets. The Lord not only delivered the thoughts, but He did so by writing the words Himself upon the stones (Ex 24:12; 31:18; Deut. 4:13; 5:22; 9:9-11). It's bad enough to blame our parents, peers, or circumstances for our sins, but it's much worse to blame God. I read about a person on a weight-loss program who bought some donuts. When asked why, he implied that it was God's fault, because He had opened up a parking place right in front of the bakery just as he was driving by. In Exodus 32, we read how the high priest, Aaron, supervised the making of a golden image for worship. This resulted in the death of 3,000 Israelites and brought a terrible plague on the nation. Instead of repenting immediately and taking responsibility as the leader, Aaron first blamed the people, saying they had put such pressure on him that he had no choice. Then he went even further and lied. He said that all he did was throw the gold into the melting pot, and the image of a calf mysteriously appeared (Exodus 32:24). Moses rejected Aaron's excuse. He confronted his brother with his sin and then prayed for him (Deuteronomy 9:20). We can be sure that the Israelites who acknowledged their guilt were forgiven. But God judged the sin, and many died. My sin, O Lord, defies Your Word, It shames Your holy name; I will not make excuse for wrong— Christ's blood is all I claim. —D. De Haan A good test of character: When you do wrong, do you accept the blame? Exodus 32:16 The tablets were God's work, and the writing was God's writing engraved on the tablets. NET Exodus 32:16 Now the tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, engraved on the tablets. NLT Exodus 32:16 These tablets were God's work; the words on them were written by God himself. ESV Exodus 32:16 The tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, engraved on the tablets. NIV Exodus 32:16 The tablets were the work of God; the writing was the writing of God, engraved on the tablets. KJV Exodus 32:16 And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables. LXE Exodus 32:16 And the tables were the work of God, and the writing the writing of God written on the tables. ASV Exodus 32:16 And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables. CSB Exodus 32:16 The tablets were the work of God, and the writing was God's writing, engraved on the tablets. NKJ Exodus 32:16 Now the tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God engraved on the tablets. NRS Exodus 32:16 The tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, engraved upon the tablets. YLT Exodus 32:16 and the tables are the work of God, and the writing is the writing of God, graven on the tables. Ex 31:18 34:1,4 De 9:9-11,15 10:1 2Co 3:3,7 Heb 8:10 Exodus 32 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries The tablets were God's work, and the writing was God's writing engraved on the tablets - This is divine inspiration to the max - God's work and God's writing! It is notable that in a sense God's writing the Law on tablets of stone, foreshadow the New Covenant where He writes the law on their hearts (Jer 31:33). Hamilton has an interesting comment - The emphasis on the divine origin of these tablets may be to draw a subtle contrast between something God makes—two tablets—and something the Israelites under Aaron’s supervision make, one golden calf (Moberly 1983: 53). Both will be destroyed, the tablets through smashing, and the calf through burning and grinding. (Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary) Exodus 32:17 Now when Joshua heard the sound of the people as they shouted, he said to Moses, "There is a sound of war in the camp." NET Exodus 32:17 When Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said to Moses, "It is the sound of war in the camp!" NLT Exodus 32:17 When Joshua heard the boisterous noise of the people shouting below them, he exclaimed to Moses, "It sounds like war in the camp!" ESV Exodus 32:17 When Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said to Moses, "There is a noise of war in the camp." NIV Exodus 32:17 When Joshua heard the noise of the people shouting, he said to Moses, "There is the sound of war in the camp." KJV Exodus 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. LXE Exodus 32:17 And Joshua having heard the voice of the people crying, says to Moses, There is a noise of war in the camp. ASV Exodus 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. CSB Exodus 32:17 When Joshua heard the sound of the people as they shouted, he said to Moses, "There is a sound of war in the camp." NKJ Exodus 32:17 And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said to Moses, "There is a noise of war in the camp." NRS Exodus 32:17 When Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said to Moses, "There is a noise of war in the camp." YLT Exodus 32:17 And Joshua heareth the voice of the people in their shouting, and saith unto Moses, 'A noise of battle in the camp!' Joshua: Ex 17:9 24:13 they shouted: Ex 32:18 Ezr 3:11-13 Ps 47:1 There is a noise: Jos 6:5,10,16,20 Jud 15:14 1Sa 4:5,6 17:20,52 Job 39:25 Jer 51:14 Am 1:14 2:2 Exodus 32 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries A WAR IN THE CAMP BUT A SPIRITUAL ONE! Now when Joshua heard the sound of the people as they shouted, he said to Moses, "There is a sound of war in the camp." - Clearly Joshua had not been with Moses when God told him about Israel's rebellion. And for Joshua to think there was war indicates the intensity of the celebration (for Joshua knew the sound of war having battled the Amalekites). But yes, in a sense Joshua was right. There was spiritual war between light and darkness, the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Satan, a spiritual war for men's hearts. Exodus 32:18 But he said, "It is not the sound of the cry of triumph, Nor is it the sound of the cry of defeat; But the sound of singing I hear." NET Exodus 32:18 Moses said, "It is not the sound of those who shout for victory, nor is it the sound of those who cry because they are overcome, but the sound of singing I hear." NLT Exodus 32:18 But Moses replied, "No, it's not a shout of victory nor the wailing of defeat. I hear the sound of a celebration." ESV Exodus 32:18 But he said, "It is not the sound of shouting for victory, or the sound of the cry of defeat, but the sound of singing that I hear." NIV Exodus 32:18 Moses replied: "It is not the sound of victory, it is not the sound of defeat; it is the sound of singing that I hear." KJV Exodus 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. LXE Exodus 32:18 And Moses says, It is not the voice of them that begin the battle, nor the voice of them that begin the cry of defeat, but the voice of them that begin the banquet of wine do I hear. ASV Exodus 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. CSB Exodus 32:18 But Moses replied: It's not the sound of a victory cry and not the sound of a cry of defeat; I hear the sound of singing! NKJ Exodus 32:18 But he said: "It is not the noise of the shout of victory, Nor the noise of the cry of defeat, But the sound of singing I hear." NRS Exodus 32:18 But he said, "It is not the sound made by victors, or the sound made by losers; it is the sound of revelers that I hear." YLT Exodus 32:18 and he saith, 'It is not the voice of the crying of might, nor is it the voice of the crying of weakness -- a voice of singing I am hearing.' but : Ex 15:1-18 Da 5:4,23 Exodus 32 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries NEITHER THE CRY OF THE VICTOR OR THE VANQUISHED But he said, "It is not the sound of the cry of triumph, Nor is it the sound of the cry of defeat; But the sound of singing I hear - Moses quickly corrects the younger Joshua's misinterpretation of the sound. Hamilton points out that "How he identifies the noise depends on how one translates the last line of v. 18 (see the lengthy grammatical note above): “It is the sound of debauchery/an orgy I hear,” or “it is the sound of music I hear,” or “the sound I hear I cannot make out.”" (Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary) Alan
Êxodo 32
Guzik - Aaron gave the classic “it just happened” excuse. But it didn’t just happen. Aaron thought it out, melted the gold, molded it, and fashioned it carefully with an engraving tool (Exodus 32:4). (Exodus 32 Commentary) Currid - The absurdity of his remark lies not in the concept that a god could self-create, because that was a common idea in the ancient Near East, and in Egypt in particular. For example, the creator god Atum is pictured as materializing in this way: Praise to you, Atum! Praise to you, Kheprer, who created himself! You became high in this your name High Ground. You created yourself in this your name Kheprer. It is common in the southern United States for prisoners to help in the building of prisons. That is ironic because every brick that they lay makes them more imprisoned, and every nail they hammer makes their escape more impossible. In a sense sin is like that—each sin committed makes it easier to perform more sin, sin upon sin. And so it was with Aaron. After breaking the first two commandments through idolatry, he now compounds it with lying, a smashing of the ninth commandment. And so his guilt and shame are that much greater. Is it not so with us? (Epsc Exodus Volume 2 ) Exodus 32:25 Now when Moses saw that the people were out of control--for Aaron had let them get out of control to be a derision among their enemies-- Modern Language Bible (Berkeley) When Moses saw that the people were unrestrained—for Aaron had allowed them to cast off restraint until their foes would deride them— NET Exodus 32:25 Moses saw that the people were running wild, for Aaron had let them get completely out of control, causing derision from their enemies. NLT Exodus 32:25 Moses saw that Aaron had let the people get completely out of control, much to the amusement of their enemies. ESV Exodus 32:25 And when Moses saw that the people had broken loose (for Aaron had let them break loose, to the derision of their enemies), NIV Exodus 32:25 Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughingstock to their enemies. KJV Exodus 32:25 And when Moses saw that the people were naked; (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame among their enemies:) LXE Exodus 32:25 And when Moses saw that the people was scattered,-- for Aaron had scattered them so as to be a rejoicing to their enemies,-- ASV Exodus 32:25 And when Moses saw that the people were broken loose, (for Aaron had let them loose for a derision among their enemies,) CSB Exodus 32:25 Moses saw that the people were out of control, for Aaron had let them get out of control, resulting in weakness before their enemies. NKJ Exodus 32:25 Now when Moses saw that the people were unrestrained (for Aaron had not restrained them, to their shame among their enemies), NRS Exodus 32:25 When Moses saw that the people were running wild (for Aaron had let them run wild, to the derision of their enemies), YLT Exodus 32:25 And Moses seeth the people that it is unbridled, for Aaron hath made it unbridled for contempt among its withstanders, out of control: Ex 33:4-6 Ge 3:10 Isa 47:3 Ho 2:3 Mic 1:11 Rev 3:17,18 16:15 Aaron: De 9:20 2Ch 28:19 shame: Eze 16:63 Da 12:2 Ro 6:21 their enemies: Heb. those that rose up against them Exodus 32 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries SONS OF ISRAEL RUNNING WILD! Now when Moses saw that the people were out of control - This is interesting because he had already dealt with the golden calf, but apparently the celebration was still going on and if not overtly sexual seems to be at least sensual! NJPS renders it: “Moses saw that the people were out of control—since Aaron had let them get out of control—so that they were a menace to any who might oppose them.” What is the "key word" in this verse? "Out of control!" Used twice. The same verb for out of control is used in Pr 29:18+ which says "Where there is no vision, the people are unrestrained ("run wild" = Berkeley Version), (THEY BECOME UNGOVERNABLE - DOES THIS SOUND FAMILIAR IN AMERICA CIRCA 2020?) But happy is he who keeps the law." No vision means no prophetic word from God and/or failure to give attention to the Word of God. So just as no Word of God results in people going wild, the absence of the prophet Moses resulted in the people going wild! THOUGHT - Sound doctrine ("vision") that exalts God as Supreme (cp "King" in Jdg 21:25+) must not seek to tickle ears (2Ti 4:2+, 2Ti 4:3,4+) must be boldly and uncompromisingly proclaimed by God's appointed and anointed prophets from the pulpits (and all Christ followers)! Could this principle (absence of sound doctrine/"running wild") have anything to do with the fact that the modern church in America seems to be having so little "salt" and "light" effect on a decaying, devolving culture which has in effect "cast off all restraints" (even "morals" have become "immoral!"? Out of control (06544)(para) means to let go, to let loose, to unbind, show lack of restraint Hamilton - The basic meaning of the verb is “let go, let alone, disregard.” Six of the sixteen occurrences of the verb are in Proverbs: (1) Pr 1:25, “ignored advice”; (2) Pr 4:15, “avoid” the way of the wicked; (3) Pr 8:33, “ignore” instruction; (4) and (5) Pr 13:18 and Pr 15:32, “ignore” discipline; (6) Pr 29:18 (Niphal), “cast off restraint.” In all these instances the verb carries the idea of (not) neglecting or brushing aside something. If the basic meaning of the verb is “let go,” then with hair the verb means to loosen the hair, letting it grow “wild.” From that nuance we move to the verb as conveying the derivative idea of wild, disruptive, unruly behavior in Exod. 32. Also, 2 Chron. 28:19 carries this nuance when it describes Ahaz as promoting wickedness (Hiphil) in Judah (Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary) Gilbrant - The Hebrew word pāraʿ means "to be loose." By extension, the term may be understood as "to let alone," "to release" or "to show lack of restraint." The general sense of the word is to loose something, and pāraʿ is occasionally used in reference to hair which hung loosely and uncut. For example, the priests were prohibited from letting their hair become unkempt (Lev. 10:6; 21:10). Also, in the community of Israel, a person infected by a disease was required to leave his hair disheveled as one of the observable indicators to others of his uncleanness (Lev. 13:45). Furthermore, loosening the hair of a woman accused of adultery was part of the priestly test of her fidelity (Num. 5:18). Permitting an individual or group to get out of control is another aspect of "letting loose." For example, while Moses met with God on Mount Sinai, Aaron allowed the Israelites to run wild into pagan practices so that they became a "laughingstock to their enemies" (Exo. 32:25, NIV; cf. 2 Chr. 28:19). Proverbs 29:18 indicates a similar sense by stating, "Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; but blessed is he who keeps the law" (NIV). Several times in Proverbs, pāraʿ denotes willful rejection of wise instruction which results in suffering such consequences as poverty and shame (Prov. 1:25; 8:33; 13:18; 15:32). Elsewhere, the wise man avoids a dangerous option such as the path of the wicked (Prov. 4:15). According to Pharaoh, the Hebrews in Egypt were exhorted by Moses and Aaron to discontinue the slave labor forced upon them (Exo. 5:4). Finally, the Lord will not ignore nor relent from punishing the wicked conduct of Israel (Ezek. 24:14). (Complete Biblical Library Hebrew-English Dictionary) NIDOTTE - The basic sense of the word (para) may be seen in a variety of related nuances. Sometimes the word suggests the lifting of prior social restraint from people, as when Aaron allowed the Israelites to run wild in the absence of Moses (Ex 32:25; cf. 2 Chr 28:19 = "lack of restraint"). This is probably the sense of פָּרַע in Pr 29:18+: “Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint.” Sometimes the word refers to a willful ignoring of available instructions and thereby suffering the appropriate consequences (Pr 1:25; 8:33; 13:18; 15:32). Para can also refer to a wise avoidance of a dangerous alternative, such as the path of evildoers (Pr 4:15), or to influencing people to desist from some activity or action, as Moses and Aaron attempted to do with Israelite slave labor in Egypt (Ex 5:4). In Ezek 24:14 the word occurs in Yahweh’s warning that he will not refrain from decisive action against rebellious behavior. The word is used 4× in reference to disheveled hair, perhaps caused by removal of the turban or headdress. So the priest dishevels (NIV, loosens) the hair of the woman undergoing moral examination (Nu 5:18). Disheveled hair is part of the assigned lot of the leper (Lev 13:45); it is prohibited for Aaron and his sons (Lev 10:6) and for priests (Lev 21:10) Para - 14v - avoid(1), brought about a lack(1), control(1), draw the away(1), get out of control(1), go loose(1), lack of restraint(1), let(1), neglect(1), neglected(1), neglects(2), relent(1), uncover(2), uncovered(1), unrestrained(1). Exod. 5:4; Exod. 32:25; Lev. 10:6; Lev. 13:45; Lev. 21:10; Num. 5:18; 2 Chr. 28:19; Prov. 1:25; Prov. 4:15; Prov. 8:33; Prov. 13:18; Prov. 15:32; Prov. 29:18; Ezek. 24:14 For - This is a crucial term of explanation, in this case explaining why they are out of control. The blame fell squarely on the shoulders of Aaron! Aaron had let them get out of control to be a derision among their enemies - ESV has "Aaron had let them break loose, to the derision of their enemies." NIV says "become a laughingstock to their enemies." Derision is used only here in the OT so it is difficult to arrive at an accurate definition. The Septuagint translates it with epicharma which means an object of malignant joy, malicious joy or secret joy (LSJM quotes one secular source as "condemned by"). The last two words of the verse read literally “for a whispering among those who rose up against them.” The foes would have mocked and derided them when they heard that they had abandoned the God who had led them out of Egypt (S. R. Driver, Exodus, 354) (NET) THOUGHT - Is this not what happens when Christian leaders are exposed for being involved in heinous (usually sexual) sins? The world sees the church as "out of control" and they laugh, deride and mock it and God's heart breaks! Holy lives are like bright beacons in our increasingly dying, darkening culture. Read 1 Peter 1:13-17+. Currid on derision - The Hebrew word is a feminine noun that is found only here in this form. It does appear on two other occasions as a masculine noun (Job 4:12; 26:14), and there it means a ‘whisper’. In that context the term perhaps reflects a type of muted suspicion. The Septuagint translates it as a ‘secret joy’. (Epsc Exodus Volume 2 ) Exodus 32:26 then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, "Whoever is for the LORD, come to me!" And all the sons of Levi gathered together to him. NET Exodus 32:26 So Moses stood at the entrance of the camp and said, "Whoever is for the LORD, come to me." All the Levites gathered around him, NLT Exodus 32:26 So he stood at the entrance to the camp and shouted, "All of you who are on the LORD's side, come here and join me." And all the Levites gathered around him. ESV Exodus 32:26 then Moses stood in the gate of the camp and said, "Who is on the LORD's side? Come to me." And all the sons of Levi gathered around him. NIV Exodus 32:26 So he stood at the entrance to the camp and said, "Whoever is for the LORD, come to me." And all the Levites rallied to him. KJV Exodus 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. LXE Exodus 32:26 then stood Moses at the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the Lord's side? let him come to me. Then all the sons of Levi came to him. ASV Exodus 32:26 then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Whoso is on Jehovah's side, let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him. CSB Exodus 32:26 And Moses stood at the camp's entrance and said, "Whoever is for the LORD, come to me." And all the Levites gathered around him. NKJ Exodus 32:26 then Moses stood in the entrance of the camp, and said, "Whoever is on the LORD'S side-- come to me." And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together to him. NRS Exodus 32:26 then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, "Who is on the LORD's side? Come to me!" And all the sons of Levi gathered around him. YLT Exodus 32:26 and Moses standeth in the gate of the camp, and saith, 'Who is for Jehovah? -- unto me!' and all the sons of Levi are gathered unto him; Who is on: Jos 5:13 2Sa 20:11 2Ki 9:32 Mt 12:30 Exodus 32 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries MOSES DRAWS A "LINE IN THE SAND" then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, "Whoever is for the LORD, come to me - The reference to the gate is uncertain for camps usually did not have gates but it in some way describes the central hub of tribal activities. Notice Moses did not say "Whoever is for me," but "for the LORD." He is calling for separation which reminds me of Paul's words to believers in 2 Cor 6:17 (cf Rev 18:4). Currid on gate - In antiquity the area around the gate was the most important part of a town because it was there that much of the social, economic and political business of the people was transacted. There Moses speaks to the people, and he gets to the very heart of the issue (Epsc Exodus Volume 2 ) This same theme is echoed in other passages... (Josh 24:14-15) Now, therefore, fear the LORD and serve Him in sincerity and truth; and put away the gods which your fathers served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the LORD. 15 “If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” (1 Kings 18:21) Elijah came near to all the people and said, “How long will you hesitate between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him.” But the people did not answer him a word. (ED: THANK GOD, THE LEVITES DID RESPOND TO MOSES' COMMAND!) (Mt 6:24+) “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth. Currid comments that "It is a serious cause for concern that many in the church today continue to waver between Christ and the world—but man cannot serve two masters." (Epsc Exodus Volume 2 ) NET Note on come to me - S. R. Driver suggests that the command was tersely put: “Who is for Yahweh? To me!” (Exodus, 354). And all the sons of Levi gathered together to him - God always has a remnant of righteous. Kaiser points out that the "All in “all the Levites” is undoubtedly a generalization, since Deuteronomy 33:9 (ED: NOT SURE KAISER MEANT THIS REFERENCE AS IT DOES NOT MAKE GOOD SENSE TO ME = COMPARE CONTEXT Dt 33:8NLT) implies that some of the Levites also were slain in the action that followed (v.28). (EBC-Ex)