Commentary on Exodus 32:7-14

This passage is part of the golden-calf episode. The previous verses (Exodus 32:1–6) describe the Israelites’ request and Aaron’s compliance to mold a calf from gold that would lead the Israelites since Moses has been absent for a long time. That calf was referred to with the words “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you out of the land of Egypt.” Whether this calf represents a foreign god or YHWH, the God of Israel, does not matter in evaluating this incident as a form of idolatry. YHWH has prohibited the Israelites from representing the deity in any material form (Exodus 20:1–5). Idolatry is a human attempt to have control over an unfathomable God. 

The fact that the text uses the plural “gods,” whereas Aaron only molded one calf, supports the argument that this incident is a parody of King Jeroboam’s golden calves that he set in Bethel and Dan (1 Kings 12:28). In this sense, the golden-calf story is a criticism of the state’s monopoly over faith and religion. When humans act out of fear, they fashion idols for themselves that lead them away from their covenantal relationship with God. 

Human apostasy, however, is not the final word. The prophet-leader Moses intercedes on behalf of the people, and the God of the covenant, though angry at the people and threatening to bring about judgment, still desires to dwell in their midst. Hence, this story is surrounded by the instructions for (Exodus 25–31) and the building of the divine abode, the Tabernacle (Exodus 35–40). 

God’s response to the golden calf (32:7–10)

While the people celebrated in front of the golden calf, YHWH was in conversation with Moses about their fate (32:6). The Lord said to Moses, “Go down at once! Your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have acted perversely.” In Exodus 5:1, YHWH told Pharaoh, “Let my people go, so that they may hold a festival (ḥg) for me in the wilderness.” However, in this instance, the festival and sacrifices were offered to the golden calf (32:5–6). Consequently, “my people” shifts to “your people,” and it is no longer YHWH who delivered them from Egypt but rather Moses who is credited with that (32:7). 

Although the people sought to draw nearer to the deity by creating a tangible image, their sin of idolatry alienated them from their God, who had claimed them as God’s people through the covenant. 

The word that describes the people as “acting perversely” or “have become corrupt” (šḥt; 32:7) is used in the flood story to describe all humanity (Genesis 6:12). The people quickly turned away from the path YHWH had commanded them to follow. Up to this point, the Hebrew word drk, “way or path,” has not been used to refer to the divine commandments. But the word is used elsewhere in Exodus to refer to the path the people must take to worship, celebrate, and sacrifice to YHWH in the wilderness (3:18; 5:3; 8:27). 

The people deviated from this path by prostrating themselves to the golden calf and offering sacrifices to it (32:8). Now it has become visible to YHWH that these people are “stiff-necked” (qšh ‘rp). Earlier in the book of Exodus, the word “hard” or “stiff” described Pharaoh’s heart (7:3). Here, the text uses the same adjective as an attribute of the people of Israel (see also Ezekiel 2:3; 3:7; Jeremiah 17:23). YHWH is not very hopeful about the people. Therefore, the deity asks Moses to let YHWH alone to grow in anger to the point of consuming them. YHWH’s alternate plan is to make a great nation out of Moses (32:10). 

Moses bargains with YHWH

But Moses did not leave YHWH alone. Instead, he opposed YHWH’s plans to consume the people in anger. Moses resisted the temptation to be the nexus of a new nation. In this way, Moses models a leadership that does not seek personal greatness at the expense of the people. With the boldness of a person called to a great task such as that of leading YHWH’s people from oppression to freedom, Moses pleaded before the Lord. 

To implore (ḥlh + pnh) the deity means seeking the favor of this God (see also 1 Kings 13:6; 2 Kings 13:4). It almost means to be sick before God from the intensity or the humility of entreating. Moses’ boldness to confront a deity who is powerful and angry at the people is rooted in the recognition of his place in relation to this God. Moses can do this because YHWH is described as “his God.” 

Moses reminds YHWH that the deity was the one who brought the people out of the land of Egypt. YHWH did such a miracle with great power and a strong hand (Exodus 32:11). Bringing the people out of Egypt is ultimately YHWH’s project to form a covenantal people that would embody justice. Moses would not have been able to do it alone, without YHWH’s leadership. This is the reverse of the call of Moses. 

In Exodus 4, YHWH assures Moses of the ability to bring the Israelites out of Egypt. Here, it is Moses who is reminding YHWH of the meaning of all this work. An essential part of the exodus was that YHWH would be known to the Israelites and also to the other nations, especially the Egyptians (7:5). Therefore, Moses raises the question: What will the other nations say about YHWH, and what kind of message will be proclaimed if YHWH destroys the people in the wilderness? (32:12; compare Ezekiel 20:8-10; Numbers 14:13-19). Then, Moses asks YHWH to “turn” from the deity’s fierce anger and to repent (nḥm)—that is, to change God’s mind and decision to bring calamity (r’h) against the people. 

The basis upon which Moses relies in his prayer is that this great act of leading the people out of Egypt is essentially a continuation of God’s faithfulness to the divine covenant with the ancestors to whom YHWH had promised descendants like the stars of heaven who would possess the land (32:13). In response to Moses’ prayer, the text states that YHWH repented—that is, God’s mind was changed toward the people of Israel (see also Jonah 4:2). This verb “to repent, to change one’s mind, to relent” (nḥm) shows that God in the Old Testament is a relational God who responds to human prayers. 

Theological questions around sin and forgiveness

The rest of the chapter reflects a more complex picture of the relationship between human sin, divine grace, and justice. For example, though Moses calmed the deity who was angry when he came down from the mountain, he too was angry and asked the Levites to participate in violent retribution against those who worshipped the calf (Exodus 32:19–28). Moses also confronted the people with their transgression, telling them he would go and seek divine forgiveness (32:30). One would assume that Moses’ prayer earlier in the chapter was sufficient (32:7–14). Further, God, who seemed to have forgiven the people, still brought a plague to punish those who sinned (32:33–35). 

And finally, while the divine speech says that judgment will be in the future, it actually takes place immediately. Thus, it seems that this chapter is wrestling with some important theological questions around sin and forgiveness: Does the divine judgment impact the whole people or only those who have sinned? Is the judgment immediate or in the future? Is it the responsibility of the prophet-leader to bring violence against those who sinned, or to intercede on their behalf?