Introduction
In the Book of Exodus, one of the most daring confrontations with God is the Golden Calf event. The story revolves around the people of Israel who doubted the divinity of the Lord and describes how God and Moses reacted to this treachery. The narrative reveals how arrogant and faithless people may become during trying times. According to The Ten Commandments, true believers should not have any other Gods or somehow depict the image of the Lord (Exod. 20:3-4). Nevertheless, it did not stop the people of Israel from carving the Golden Calf as a replacement for the divine being (Exod. 32:2-4). The focus of the current work is to analyze how God and Moses consequently responded to the faithlessness of the public and concerns the passage Exodus 32:7-14.
Context
To fully comprehend the context of the narrative, it is crucial to look at the background of the story first. The people of Israel had been led by Moses and the divine guidance until they reached the base of Mount Sinai. Upon arrival, they have chosen Moses as a representative in the communication with God since they were scared of direct contact with a divine being (20:18-21). To fulfill his obligations, Moses reached the peak of the mountain and stayed there for forty days while the people of Israel were uninformed about the period of his absence (24:18). This uncertainty has ultimately lead the public to believe that they were left alone.
The thirty-second chapter of Exodus commences with the evident doubts and fears of the people concerning the whereabouts of both God and Moses (32:1). Consequently, they turned to Aaron and asked, “Up, make us gods who shall go before us.” (32:1). Thus, the statue of a golden calf was created out of the accessories possessed by the people of Israel (32:4). Furthermore, Aaron created an altar and proposed a celebration, “tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord.” (32:5). Evidently, such behavior contradicts the Ten Commandments and is considered treachery from God’s perspective.
Contents
The focus of the current work is the passage Exodus 32:7-14, and it tells a story of how both God and Moses have reacted to the faithlessness of the public. It commences with God being furious towards the people of Israel and stating, “Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt.” (32:7). Then, the Lord continues to describe the flawed and wicked nature of the crowd: “They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them”/”they are a stiff-necked people” (32:8-9). God’s anger does not halt, and he states, “Now leave me alone so that my anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them” (32:10). At this point, the dissatisfaction of the Lord is evident and his motives to destroy the people of Israel are apparent.
Nevertheless, in the second part of the passage, Moses comes to an agreement with the Lord; and, thus, protects the people of Israel from the unavoidable death (32:11-14). Despite God’s request to leave him alone in 32.10, Moses does not go away but, on contrary, tries to reason with the Lord. Moses resorts to compliments and clever rhetorics to soothe the rage, “why should your anger burn against your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand” (32:11). Furthermore, he appeals to the promises made by the Lord, “Remember your servants Abraham, Isaac and Israel, to whom you swore by your own self” (32:13). Ultimately, Moses was able to convince God to not annihilate the people of Israel for making a statue of the Golden Calf. Thus, the current passage is not only about the arrogance of the crowd, but also about forgiveness and the leniency of the Lord.
Analysis
Various experts have suggested different approaches to the analysis of the story concerning the Golden Calf. Some authorities believe that the act of anger and following forgiveness is necessary to demonstrate the nature of the Lord. While others consider the whole passage as a complement to the composition of the book and do not see the significance in the event itself. The current chapter of the paper analyzes the story and discusses different perspectives on the narrative.
The Weight of the Sin
As mentioned shortly before, one of the takes on the story about the Golden Calf is that the act of anger and forgiveness by the Lord is merely a literary device to progress narrative. While the event is dramatic and demonstrates God’s leniency, it practically does not affect the composition and flow of the book. In constructing and worshipping the Golden Calf, the people of Israel have contradicted at least four of the Ten Commandments. Furthermore, according to the first rule of the Decalogue, the Lord has brought the people of Israel out of Egypt (20:2). However, in 32:7, God admits that Moses was the one that escorted them; and, therefore, God contradicts himself and violates the Ten Commandments. Nevertheless, despite the weight of the sin, the people of Israel were not punished, and the initial anger of the Lord was quickly soothed by Moses.
Approaches to the Response
Experts generally have several explanations for the weak response to the crimes made by the public. The first perspective is that the sins of the people do not have any consequences due to the irrelevance to the plot of the whole book. That would explain why, despite the alleged severity of the violation, there was no punishment. Furthermore, Kugler states that the passage was added at later stages of the writing; and, therefore, was less structured than the other parts. Therefore, one might assume that the current incident does not have significant narrative value and just complements the structure.
The second perspective follows this idea implying that composition was reversed, and the Ten Commandments concept was implemented after the Golden Calf incident. If this is the case, then it would explain why neither the Lord nor Moses specify what the actual sin of the people of Israel is. After all, God only states, “They have turned aside quickly out of the way that I commanded them” (32:8). Therefore, some authorities believe that the regulation of the Ten Commandments was not yet implemented in the book, and the tale of the Golden Calf was written first.
Another take on the story of the Golden Calf follows a unique perspective and appreciates the essence of the Lord. The nature of God shown in the passage is quite ambiguous commencing with anger and ending up in forgiveness. The fact that the Lord can so quickly change his mind makes him more anthropomorphic and closer to actual people. Therefore, it is plausible to assume that the primary objective of the passage is to demonstrate this nature of God. After all, if the Lord can make false assumptions, then there is nothing shameful if a person does so, too. On contrary, such behavior by God might create more intimacy between divine and natural origins, which would further amplify the faith of the believers. Therefore, the primary objective of the authors could have been not to demonstrate what God can do but rather what God is like. Overall, most approaches to the analysis of the passage are represented by the three mentioned-above perspectives.
Cultural Context
To further comprehend the narrative of the passage, it is essential to turn to the cultural context surrounding the story of the Golden Calf. In Exodus 32:1-14, despite the evident objective of the animal idol, it is not apparent what the statue should represent. Neither the people of Israel nor Moses clearly state what exactly the figure of the Golden Calf is; however, the cultural context might provide insights into the subject.
The image of the bull is a highly frequent occurrence in the context of ancient religion and culture; and, thus, there might be several reasons why the calf was chosen for the statue. Amzallag believes that the bull might represent the other similar deities of that time, ‘calf-shaped gods such as Baal in Canaan, Re, Apis or Ptah in Egypt or Sîn in Mesopotamia’. Secondly, the calf could haven been used as a mere symbol of identifying the divine being or its qualities and not necessarily depict the deity precisely. Lastly, the authors might have implemented the image of the bull to describe a cultural ritual involving a calf. Concerning symbolism, these three approaches are the most prominent ones in the aspect of cultural context.
Nevertheless, it is still quite not certain who the people of Israel wanted to represent. While the evident choice is an abstract deity, some experts suggest that the public could have also wished to depict the Lord or Moses. Hundley states that the possibility that the people of Israel wanted to represent God is low due to the anthropomorphic form of the Lord in Genesis 18 and 32. Therefore, it would make little sense to depict a human-like figure with animal imagery. The crowd could have wanted to represent Moses with the figurine but the religious form of the festival in Exodus 32:5-6 does not support this idea. Overall, it remains unclear who exactly the people of Israel wanted to represent with the imagery of a bull. However, the uncertainty of the cultural context might provide further evidence for the analytical approaches mentioned in the previous chapters.
Contribution
Most likely, the authors wanted to include the passage Exodus 32:7-14 in the narrative to demonstrate the ambiguous nature of the Lord. As mentioned shortly before, such contrast allows the readers to associate themselves with the human essence of the divine being and feel closer to the deity. On the other hand, perhaps, it was a clever usage of a literary device to complement the composition of the book. Up to this day, experts are not certain about the true implications of the passage Exodus 32:7-14. However, it is evident that the dialogue between the Lord and Moses has developed them as characters providing insights into the motives and desires of each other. Therefore, the passage demonstrates the good qualities of both God and Moses and expands the narrative.
The Figure of Moses
In the research of the Golden Calf story, a number of experts specifically target Moses as the central focus of the passage. Throughout the whole book, the divine guide is presented as the quintessence of courage and leadership leading the people of Israel through all the possible obstacles. The Golden Calf event also reveals the virtues of Moses, such as the desire to protect his people and the courage to stand up to the Lord. Furthermore, he denies God’s offer to make a great nation out of him in exchange for annihilating the people of Israel (32:10-11). Such a feat of righteousness and self-sacrifice has turned Moses into the main focus of theological research for many centuries to come.
Conclusion
Summing up, the analyzed passage Exodus 32:7-14 is an essential part of the story about the Golden Calf event. It contributed to the enrichment of the narrative and complemented the characters of the Lord and Moses. The incident demonstrated the ambiguous nature of God consisting of both fury and remission and also portrayed Moses as an advocate and protector of the people. While there are some controversies about the true implications of the passage, it is an undeniable truth that the character development of both the Lord and Moses has had a positive impact on the narrative.
Bibliography
Amzallag, Nissim. 2020. “Beyond Idolatry – The Transgression of the Golden Calf Revisited” Old Testament Essays 33 (2): 207-231.
Byrne, Philippa. 2017. “Exodus 32 and the Figure of Moses in Twelfth-Century Theology” The Journal of Theological Studies 68 (2): 671-689.
Hundley, Michael. 2017. “What is the Golden Calf?” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 79 (4): 559-579.
Kugler, Gili. 2019. When God Wanted to Destroy the Chosen People. Berlin: De Gruyter.
McKimmon, Eric. 2017. “15th October: 19th Sunday after Pentecost: Exodus 32.1–14; Psalm 23; Matthew 22.1–14; Philippians 4.1–9” The Expository Times, 128(12): 599–601.