Problem with Exodus 32

  • Thread starter Thread starter clem456
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

clem456

Guest
Having a discussion with a bible study about Exodus 32. We frequently discuss the method withj which scripture is interpreted. This verse causes a huge problem, especially the section in bold.:

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. 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. 27 Then he said to them, "This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor.’ "28 The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people died. 29 Then Moses said, “You have been set apart to the LORD today, for you were against your own sons and brothers, and he has blessed you this day.”

There may be no question that the people were sinful, or that the Levites were ordered by Moses to slay their brothers, or that they actually did the slaying. The problem here is did GOD…litrerally… order them to do this? Would the God who has revealed himself to us, order this action?

I would like to stay away from 2 points: that God can do what he wants. I know that.
And that the people deserved to be slain.
Can anyone give me some Church teaching on this subject?
 
The problem is not with God or Exodus 32.

The problem is with mindset of people today.

We tend to think there are no absolute right or wrong!

We are very much a people like in the days of Noah, each doing what seems right in “his” own mind.

God has not and will not change. There is a day of reckoning coming and many of us will meet a fate we were not expecting.
 
Yes God literally ordered this massacre through Moses.

The God who revealed Himself through Jesus Christ is the same God who revealed Himself through the Old Testament prophets. The order of this massacre is nothing compared to the suffering of condemned people who suffer in hell for all eternity. Besides all else God is teaching the remaining Israelites a lesson “When I commanded you not to bow down to idols I meant it!”. This form of punishment is an example for others not follow the same footsteps and anger the Lord as St Paul tells us** “These things happened to them as an example, and they have been written down as a warning to us, upon whom the end of the ages has come” – 1 Corinthians 10:11**

Our Christian faith is not all lovey dovey, we also believe our Lord punishes the disobedient.

God bless,
 
It wasn’t just a matter of the people being sinful. Remember that the people were under the covenant at that point. When we think of Israel and the Israelites, we always have to be concious of the covenant. The covenant was what set the Jews apart from the rest of the world. Covenants form family bonds and only the Israelites were chosen to be in a family relationship with God. God even calls Israel “My beloved son.”

You will probably remember from your study that the Israelites ratified the covenant with God proir to the slaughter of the 3000 in Exodus 32. The covenant was ratified back in Exodus 24.

When Moses came to the people and related all the words and ordinances of the LORD, they all answered with one voice, “We will do everything that the LORD has told us." Moses then wrote down all the words of the LORD and, rising early in the morning, he built at the foot of the mountain an altar and twelve sacred stones for the twelve tribes of Israel. Then, having sent young men of the Israelites to offer burnt offerings and sacrifice young bulls as communion offerings to the LORD, Moses took half of the blood and put it in large bowls; the other half he splashed on the altar. Taking the book of the covenant, he read it aloud to the people, who answered, “All that the LORD has said, we will hear and do.” Then he took the blood and splashed it on the people, saying, “This is the blood of the covenant which the LORD has made with you according to all these words.” (Exodus 24:3-8)*

At the time the covenant was ratified, every male head of household was his own priest. Eevery male head of household had to sacrifice a lamb at the passover. Only priest’s were allowed to offer sacrifice and prior to the transgression of the covenant and slaughter of the 3000 in Exodus 32, every male head of household was priest of his own house.

But the people, and most importantly the male heads of each household, all worshipped a false God, the molten image of a calf. This was not just sin, but violation of the covenant with God which they had ratified and entered into, and the consequences for voilating the covenant were clear…

If you obey the commandments of the LORD, your God, which I enjoin on you today, loving him, and walking in his ways, and keeping his commandments, statutes and decrees, you will live and grow numerous, and the LORD, your God, will bless you in the land you are entering to occupy. If, however, you turn away your hearts and will not listen, but are led astray and adore and serve other gods, I tell you now that you will certainly perish; you will not have a long life on the land which you are crossing the Jordan to enter and occupy. (Deuteronomy 30:16-18)

It’s not a matter of God being able to do whatever he wants or a matter of what the people deserved. It is a matter of the covenant, and when the people, especially the priests of each houshold, when they worshipped another God, the covenant stated that they must die.

What God did was to take way the common priesthood from the people and give it to the Levites alone. Only the Levites did not worship the molten calf so only the Levites retained the priesthood.

The Levites did as Moses had commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people fell. Then Moses said, “Today you are installed as priests for the LORD, for you went against your own sons and brothers, to bring a blessing upon yourselves this day.” (Exodus 32:28-29)

All other men lost the priesthood. This to me was extremely sad because prior to this event, each household could appeal to God and atone for their own sins. Now they had to go to a Levite to atone for their sins.

To understand the big picture - how all of this points to Christ, how it points to the Church, and how it effects us, we can jump ahead and see what happened at Pentecost.

Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and they asked Peter and the other apostles, “What are we to do, my brothers?” Peter [said] to them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit. … Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand persons were added that day. (Acts 2:37-38,41)

Notice that three thousand died at Mt. Sinai and that three thousand were added at Pentacost. Pentacost is the birth of the Church, and the fact that Luke tells us that three thousand were added that day is an indication that what happened as Mt. Sinai was reversed - the Church was born and the three thousand dead at Sinai was reversed when 3000 were added at Pentacost.

The slaughter of the 3000 happened fifty days after leaving Egypt. Pentecost and the adding of the 3000 happened fifty days after the ressurection of Christ. It’s a reversal, and a restoration. The Bible is a story, and Exodus can’t be viewed in the absence of the rest of the Bible. It all goes together and tells a story. In this case, it is the story of Man’s restoration, a reversal of what happened at Mt. Sinai and of our restoration to the state of Israel right after they ratified the covenant.

And do you know what happened in Exodus 24 when Israel ratified the covenant?

They saw God, and they ate and drank. (Exodus 24:11)

Most people miss that little line. It might just be my favorite line in the whole Bible. It’s a reversal, a return to the state where we see God, and we eat and drink.

We see God, and we eat and drink at every Mass. 👍

-Tim-
 
Thanks for the thorough replies. I still have this point: Does the writer of Exodus assign a motivation and action to God that is consistent with God’s revelation of himself? God repeatedly reveals himself to us through scripture and through Jesus Christ as justice mercy and love. In light of the coming of Good Friday, we see a God who, rather than force himself on us, or turn peoples against each other in a battle over righteousness, accepts death and shows us the only way.

This may seem like a hair splitting point dealing with literalistic interpretation, but I submit this is a very important point that comes up frequently in discussion and evangelization with others… Many non-Christians refuse to come to the water because violence is justified by some to be God’s personal wish and directive.

My own personal bias here is: the lessons that scripture teaches us that you have pointed out are valid and inerrant. But I read the assignment of motivation and action to God in this chapter as I read the 6 days of creation and the garden of eden. Inerrant, but not in a literalistic sense. I believe the literalistic assignment of God’s word and action is inconsisten with who God has specifically reavealed himself to be. It seems to me the church does not propose a rigidly literalistic belief in scripture, based on what the catechism says…
 
God is also one of justice, mercy and love in the Old Testament. Despite God’s manifestation of power through the 10 plagues, crossing of the sea etc. the Israelites disobeyed Him but He still forgave them. In the book of Judges many times did the Israelites forsake God for idols but He still sent the judges for reconciliation. If he allowed his justice to prevail at those moments he would not have forgiven them.

“you shall not bow down before them or worship them. For I, the LORD, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their fathers’ wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the third and fourth generation; but bestowing mercy down to the thousandth generation, on the children of those who love me and keep my commandments.” – Exodus 20:5-6

God bless,
 
TIMOTHY H,

Thanks for that great answer!

It is truly a delight to see an answer that uses scripture the way Tim did.

I was raised as a protestant and have been a catholic for four short years and am amazed at how Bible answers so many of my questions now that I am learning to read the entire book, instead of “proof texting” (grabbing a verse here and a verse there to prop up an arguement).

Great job Tim.
 
Thanks for the thorough replies. I still have this point: Does the writer of Exodus assign a motivation and action to God that is consistent with God’s revelation of himself? God repeatedly reveals himself to us through scripture and through Jesus Christ as justice mercy and love. In light of the coming of Good Friday, we see a God who, rather than force himself on us, or turn peoples against each other in a battle over righteousness, accepts death and shows us the only way.

This may seem like a hair splitting point dealing with literalistic interpretation, but I submit this is a very important point that comes up frequently in discussion and evangelization with others… Many non-Christians refuse to come to the water because violence is justified by some to be God’s personal wish and directive.

My own personal bias here is: the lessons that scripture teaches us that you have pointed out are valid and inerrant. But I read the assignment of motivation and action to God in this chapter as I read the 6 days of creation and the garden of eden. Inerrant, but not in a literalistic sense. I believe the literalistic assignment of God’s word and action is inconsisten with who God has specifically reavealed himself to be. It seems to me the church does not propose a rigidly literalistic belief in scripture, based on what the catechism says…
First off you cannot stand in judgement of the Scriptures and declare one part good and the other inconsistent.

Secondly you cannot declare something to be non-literally inerrant. That is like saying something is untruthfully true. It just doesn’t work. The Bible is either true or it is not.

Thirdly I care little for what the non-Christian thinks about God or what He does. Who are they to judge the motives of the One against whom they stand in open rebellion?

The Bible declares that all sin deserves death, and in your zeal to defend the goodness of God you seemed to have missed the point of good Friday. God the Father nailed His innocent Son to a cross for the sake of His enemies. Death was paid for sin when the Righteous One became the curse for sin. The cross is the most offensive death in the history fo the world, but through the greatest righteousness and the most awesome display of the power of God over sin was displayed.

Remember Isaiah tells us that it pleased the LORD to crush the suffering Servant because He would see the travail of His soul and be satisfied. Should we doubt the wisdom of God because the innocent was made to suffer on behalf of the guilty.

I think not. Because in the holy innocent bitter sufferings of the Lord Jesus Christ we find our great refuge and solace before a Holy God.

Therefore I think it terribly unwise to doubt the wisdom of God when the wicked are compelled to perish for their own sins.

“Shall we accept good from God and not receive evil?” Job 2:10

It is a hard thing to accept, but in it is the wisdom to accept that bad things happen to good people and that does not make God bad.

God Bless
 
TIMOTHY H,

Thanks for that great answer!

It is truly a delight to see an answer that uses scripture the way Tim did.

I was raised as a protestant and have been a catholic for four short years and am amazed at how Bible answers so many of my questions now that I am learning to read the entire book, instead of “proof texting” (grabbing a verse here and a verse there to prop up an arguement).

Great job Tim.
I appreciate your saying so.

The things I learned from scripture were merely scraps off the master’s table given to a dog. If anyone learns anything from what I write or comes closer to God through it, then it is in spite of me, not because of me.

I actually learned to love scripture by studying with Evangelicals. They sometimes drew the wrong conclusions but had a great love for scripture and even verated the written word of God, and they imparted that same love to me. Ultimately, it was scripture which brought me back to the Catholic Church in earnest and when our non-Catholic brothers and sisters come back into the Church, they will bring many gifts with them, including love for scripture. Imagine seventeen million former Southern Baptists all leading Catholic Bible studies. 😃

I’m happy to call you my brother (or sister, can’t tell).

-Tim-
 
It seems that there are many SEEMINGLY unjust killings, and injustices, done in the old testiment by God. These are centuries old, dating well before Christ.

However after Christ, about 150, there lived a wealthy man, Marcion. He was influential and his thinking was that the God of the old testiment was not the same as the God of the new testiment, since the former was not loving, while the latter was. Therefore they must have been different. So in the Catholic christian church this idea has been going on for some time. Marcion tried to solve this problem in his own way by rejecting the books in the old testiment.

My question is, do any of the early fathers and doctors of the church give an answer to this dilema? Since this question has been going on from the beginning surely there must be some good treatments on this subject. Or is there?

Just an idea.
 
Turtullian wrote five books known as “Adversus Marcionem” (Against Marcion) in 207.

Book One: tertullian.org/anf/anf03/anf03-28.htm#P3868_1279225
Book Two: tertullian.org/anf/anf03/anf03-29.htm#P4271_1391977
Book Three: tertullian.org/anf/anf03/anf03-30.htm#P4763_1515567
Book Four: tertullian.org/anf/anf03/anf03-31.htm#P5230_1636728
Book Five: tertullian.org/anf/anf03/anf03-35.htm#P7138_2070665

The titles of the chapters give an idea of what each contains, and the chapters I looked at seemed easy to read and take in. It is a comprehensive work, quite lengthy and in depth.

The Catholic Encyclopedia article on Marcionites at newadvent.org/cathen/09645c.htm, lists a few other writers.

-Tim-
 
The Jewish Study Bible (Oxford) says that this entire passage (31.18 - 34.35) is filled with inconsistencies, contradictions, nonsequiturs, and redundancies showing that it is likely that several sources have been intermingled. It really has no special explanation of 32.27 other than the obvious vengeful judgment.

It is especially relevent to this conversation that Moses himself made the same point as in the OP to God, in 32.17 – to wit, Hey, God, this is going to damage your reputation.

That’s what we’re talking about here, God’s reputation, isn’t it?

Yup, Moses had the same question. You ain’t gonna solve it here, if Moses couldn’t solve it.

God is a God of mercy and judgment, and we see lots of it in the Bible. How would it be persuasive if we didn’t see it?

God is a God of conditional mercy … and conditional justice and judgment. God’s ways are not our ways, etc.
 
Can anyone give me some Church teaching on this subject?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (para 2577) only uses this entire pericope of scripture to illustrate that Moses was a mediator between God and mankind. There is no special treatment there to deal with this question in any particular way.
 
The Jewish Study Bible (Oxford) says that this entire passage (31.18 - 34.35) is filled with inconsistencies, contradictions, nonsequiturs, and redundancies showing that it is likely that several sources have been intermingled. It really has no special explanation of 32.27 other than the obvious vengeful judgment.

It is especially relevent to this conversation that Moses himself made the same point as in the OP to God, in 32.17 – to wit, Hey, God, this is going to damage your reputation.

That’s what we’re talking about here, God’s reputation, isn’t it?

Yup, Moses had the same question. You ain’t gonna solve it here, if Moses couldn’t solve it.

God is a God of mercy and judgment, and we see lots of it in the Bible. How would it be persuasive if we didn’t see it?

God is a God of conditional mercy … and conditional justice and judgment. God’s ways are not our ways, etc.
 
The Jewish Study Bible (Oxford) says that this entire passage (31.18 - 34.35) is filled with inconsistencies, contradictions, nonsequiturs, and redundancies showing that it is likely that several sources have been intermingled. It really has no special explanation of 32.27 other than the obvious vengeful judgment.

It is especially relevent to this conversation that Moses himself made the same point as in the OP to God, in 32.17 – to wit, Hey, God, this is going to damage your reputation.

That’s what we’re talking about here, God’s reputation, isn’t it?

Yup, Moses had the same question. You ain’t gonna solve it here, if Moses couldn’t solve it.

God is a God of mercy and judgment, and we see lots of it in the Bible. How would it be persuasive if we didn’t see it?

God is a God of conditional mercy … and conditional justice and judgment. God’s ways are not our ways, etc.
The correct verse I wanted to refer to was not Ex 32.17, but Ex 32.12, where Moses is pleading with God to avert punishment so that the Egyptians would not think less of God for doing it.
 
God croaked a lot of people in the Great Flood because everybody, excepting Noah and his generation/family, was engaging in rape and violence; and some kind of profane marriage, possibly with another flavor of humanoids like Neandertals that was creating a really ugly situation genetically. This would have ultimately exterminated any chance of life on earth. Perhaps this was so with the slain 3,000.

In my medical anthropology class, it was noted that Moses’ precepts against messing around with the Canaanite women and engaging in their sexual revelry to their idols was followed by what to do with men showing signs of sexually transmitted diseases/discharges. So the possibility of a disease vector or genetic affront (possible if Canaanite orgies included inbreeding) was of such great proportions as to compromise the future of the Hebrew Children. In that event extreme measures had to betaken and the Petri dish once again decontaminated in God’s great science project that is mankind.

God only knows. But we can back-engineer His possible motives from the parallel with Noah’s Flood. And we are reminded that the latter days will be like the time of Noah, people entering profane marriages and engaging in violence. Are we there yet? God help us and insure His abundant life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top