Exodus 32:31

32:31 So Moses returned to the Lord and said, “Alas, this people has committed a very serious sin, ¹  and they have made for themselves gods of gold.

Exodus 32:1

The Sin of the Golden Calf

32:1 ² When the people saw that Moses delayed ³  in coming down ⁴  from the mountain, they ⁵  gathered around Aaron and said to him, “Get up, ⁶  make us gods ⁷  that will go before us. As for this fellow Moses, ⁸  the man who brought us up from the land of Egypt, we do not know what ⁹  has become of him!”

Exodus 2:17

2:17 When some ¹⁰  shepherds came and drove them away, ¹¹  Moses came up and defended them ¹²  and then watered their flock.

Exodus 12:20

12:20 You will not eat anything made with yeast; in all the places where you live you must eat bread made without yeast.’”

Exodus 12:23

12:23 For the Lord will pass through to strike Egypt, and when he sees ¹³  the blood on the top of the doorframe and the two side posts, then the Lord will pass over the door, and he will not permit the destroyer ¹⁴  to enter your houses to strike you. ¹⁵ 

Exodus 12:2

12:2 “This month is to be your beginning of months; it will be your first month of the year. ¹⁶ 

Exodus 12:9

12:9 Do not eat it raw ¹⁷  or boiled in water, but roast it over the fire with its head, its legs, and its entrails.

Exodus 12:2

12:2 “This month is to be your beginning of months; it will be your first month of the year. ¹⁸ 

Exodus 17:1

Water at Massa and Meribah

17:1 ¹⁹ The whole community ²⁰  of the Israelites traveled on their journey ²¹  from the Desert of Sin according to the Lord’s instruction, and they pitched camp in Rephidim. ²²  Now ²³  there was no water for the people to drink. ²⁴ 

Luke 7:47

7:47 Therefore I tell you, her sins, which were many, are forgiven, thus she loved much; ²⁵  but the one who is forgiven little loves little.”

Luke 15:18

15:18 I will get up and go to my father and say to him, “Father, I have sinned ²⁶  against heaven ²⁷  and against ²⁸  you.

[32:31]  ¹ tn As before, the cognate accusative is used; it would literally be “this people has sinned a great sin.”

[32:1]  ² sn This narrative is an unhappy interlude in the flow of the argument of the book. After the giving of the Law and the instructions for the tabernacle, the people get into idolatry. So this section tells what the people were doing when Moses was on the mountain. Here is an instant violation of the covenant that they had just agreed to uphold. But through it all Moses shines as the great intercessor for the people. So the subject matter is the sin of idolatry, its effects and its remedy. Because of the similarities to Jeroboam’s setting up the calves in Dan and Bethel, modern critics have often said this passage was written at that time. U. Cassuto shows how the language of this chapter would not fit an Iron Age setting in Dan. Rather, he argues, this story was well enough known for Jeroboam to imitate the practice (Exodus, 407-10). This chapter can be divided into four parts for an easier exposition: idolatry (32:1-6), intercession (32:7-14), judgment (32:15-29), intercession again (32:30-33:6). Of course, these sections are far more complex than this, but this gives an overview. Four summary statements for expository points might be: I. Impatience often leads to foolish violations of the faith, II. Violations of the covenant require intercession to escape condemnation, III. Those spared of divine wrath must purge evil from their midst, and IV. Those who purge evil from their midst will find reinstatement through intercession. Several important studies are available for this. See, among others, D. R. Davis, “Rebellion, Presence, and Covenant: A Study in Exodus 32-34,” WTJ 44 (1982): 71-87; M. Greenberg, “Moses’ Intercessory Prayer,” Ecumenical Institute for Advanced Theological Studies (1978): 21-35; R. A. Hamer, “The New Covenant of Moses,” Judaism 27 (1978): 345-50; R. L. Honeycutt, Jr., “Aaron, the Priesthood, and the Golden Calf,” RevExp 74 (1977): 523-35; J. N. Oswalt, “The Golden Calves and the Egyptian Concept of Deity,” EvQ 45 (1973): 13-20.

[32:1]  ³ tn The meaning of this verb is properly “caused shame,” meaning cause disappointment because he was not coming back (see also Judg 5:28 for the delay of Sisera’s chariots [S. R. Driver, Exodus, 349]).

[32:1]  ⁴ tn The infinitive construct with the lamed (ל) preposition is used here epexegetically, explaining the delay of Moses.

[32:1]  ⁵ tn Heb “the people.”

[32:1]  ⁶ tn The imperative means “arise.” It could be serving here as an interjection, getting Aaron’s attention. But it might also have the force of prompting him to get busy.

[32:1]  ⁷ tn The plural translation is required here (although the form itself could be singular in meaning) because the verb that follows in the relative clause is a plural verb – that they go before us).

[32:1]  ⁸ tn The text has “this Moses.” But this instance may find the demonstrative used in an earlier deictic sense, especially since there is no article with it.

[32:1]  ⁹ tn The interrogative is used in an indirect question (see GKC 443-44 §137.c).

[2:17]  ¹⁰ tn The definite article here is the generic use; it simply refers to a group of shepherds.

[2:17]  ¹¹ tn The actions of the shepherds are subordinated to the main statement about what Moses did.

[2:17]  ¹² sn The verb used here is וַיּוֹשִׁעָן (vayyoshi’an, “and he saved them”). The word means that he came to their rescue and delivered them. By the choice of words the narrator is portraying Moses as the deliverer – he is just not yet ready to deliver Israel from its oppressors.

[12:23]  ¹³ tn The first of the two clauses begun with perfects and vav consecutives may be subordinated to form a temporal clause: “and he will see…and he will pass over,” becomes “when he sees…he will pass over.”

[12:23]  ¹⁴ tn Here the form is the Hiphil participle with the definite article. Gesenius says this is now to be explained as “the destroyer” although some take it to mean “destruction” (GKC 406 §126.m, n. 1).

[12:23]  ¹⁵ tn “you” has been supplied.

[12:2]  ¹⁶ sn B. Jacob (Exodus, 294-95) shows that the intent of the passage was not to make this month in the spring the New Year – that was in the autumn. Rather, when counting months this was supposed to be remembered first, for it was the great festival of freedom from Egypt. He observes how some scholars have unnecessarily tried to date one New Year earlier than the other.

[12:9]  ¹⁷ sn This ruling was to prevent their eating it just softened by the fire or partially roasted as differing customs might prescribe or allow.

[12:2]  ¹⁸ sn B. Jacob (Exodus, 294-95) shows that the intent of the passage was not to make this month in the spring the New Year – that was in the autumn. Rather, when counting months this was supposed to be remembered first, for it was the great festival of freedom from Egypt. He observes how some scholars have unnecessarily tried to date one New Year earlier than the other.

[17:1]  ¹⁹ sn This is the famous story telling how the people rebelled against Yahweh when they thirsted, saying that Moses had brought them out into the wilderness to kill them by thirst, and how Moses with the staff brought water from the rock. As a result of this the name was called Massa and Meribah because of the testing and the striving. It was a challenge to Moses’ leadership as well as a test of Yahweh’s presence. The narrative in its present form serves an important point in the argument of the book. The story turns on the gracious provision of God who can give his people water when there is none available. The narrative is structured to show how the people strove. Thus, the story intertwines God’s free flowing grace with the sad memory of Israel’s sins. The passage can be divided into three parts: the situation and the complaint (1-3), the cry and the miracle (4-6), and the commemoration by naming (7).

[17:1]  ²⁰ tn Or “congregation” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV).

[17:1]  ²¹ tn The text says that they journeyed “according to their journeyings.” Since the verb form (and therefore the derived noun) essentially means to pull up the tent pegs and move along, this verse would be saying that they traveled by stages, or, from place to place.

[17:1]  ²² sn The location is a bit of a problem. Exod 19:1-2 suggests that it is near Sinai, whereas it is normally located near Kadesh in the north. Without any details provided, M. Noth concludes that two versions came together (Exodus [OTL], 138). S. R. Driver says that the writer wrote not knowing that they were 24 miles apart (Exodus, 157). Critics have long been bothered by this passage because of the two names given at the same place. If two sources had been brought together, it is not possible now to identify them. But Noth insisted that if there were two names there were two different locations. The names Massah and Meribah occur alone in Scripture (Deut 9:22, and Num 20:1 for examples), but together in Ps 95 and in Deut 33:8. But none of these passages is a clarification of the difficulty. Most critics would argue that Massah was a secondary element that was introduced into this account, because Exod 17 focuses on Meribah. From that starting point they can diverge greatly on the interpretation, usually having something to do with a water test. But although Num 20 is parallel in several ways, there are major differences: 1) it takes place 40 years later than this, 2) the name Kadesh is joined to the name Meribah there, and 3) Moses is punished there. One must conclude that if an event could occur twice in similar ways (complaint about water would be a good candidate for such), then there is no reason a similar name could not be given.

[17:1]  ²³ tn The disjunctive vav introduces a parenthetical clause that is essential for this passage – there was no water.

[17:1]  ²⁴ tn Here the construction uses a genitive after the infinitive construct for the subject: “there was no water for the drinking of the people” (GKC 353-54 §115.c).

[7:47]  ²⁵ tn Grk “for she loved much.” The connection between this statement and the preceding probably involves an ellipsis, to the effect that the ὅτι clause gives the evidence of forgiveness, not the ground. For similar examples of an “evidentiary” ὅτι, cf. Luke 1:22; 6:21; 13:2. See discussion in D. L. Bock, Luke [BECNT], 1:703-5. Further evidence that this is the case here is the final statement: “the one who is forgiven little loves little” means that the one who is forgiven little is thus not able to love much. The REB renders this verse: “her great love proves that her many sins have been forgiven; where little has been forgiven, little love is shown.”

[15:18]  ²⁶ sn In the confession “I have sinned” there is a recognition of wrong that pictures the penitent coming home and “being found.”

[15:18]  ²⁷ sn The phrase against heaven is a circumlocution for God.

[15:18]  ²⁸ tn According to BDAG 342 s.v. ἐνωπιον 4.a, “in relation to ἁμαρτάνειν ἐ. τινος sin against someone Lk 15:18, 21 (cf. Jdth 5:17; 1 Km 7:6; 20:1).”