But Moses could not yield. To have done so would have meant to have surrendered all that had been gained in a spiritual way by the Exodus and the Revelation. The apostasy of the whole people, which this act threatened, would have rendered his entire mission fruitless. His sense of despair is well conveyed by the Biblical narrative in the incident of the breaking of the tables of stone on which the words of the Decalogue were inscribed. A radical remedy was needed and Moses did not hesitate to apply it. The support which he received from the tribe of Levi was a justification for its claim to be the priestly tribe.
It is in connection with this event that the character of Moses is shown in its most sublime aspect as the perfect intercessor. His zeal did not hesitate to apply the utmost rigor in punishing the offenders who would not rally to his call, but once the necessary punishment had been administered, his one thought is of his people, how they might still be enabled to fulfill the mission to which they had committed themselves on the day of the Revelation. God suggests destroying the people who had forfeited their claims to redemption and making of the descendants of Moses a chosen people, but Moses, the ideal leader, to whom his charge is dearer than himself, is not satisfied. Rather would he share in the punishment of his guilty people than enjoy a selfish salvation and glory from which they are to be excluded. (Exodus 32.32.) Then God yields to his plea and agrees to let the people return to the land of their fathers and to drive out their enemies from before them in accordance with the terms of the covenant He had made with Israel after the Revelation. There it is said (Exodus 23.20 to 22) "Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Take heed of him and hearken unto his voice, be not rebellious against him; for he will not pardon your transgression, for My name is in him. But if thou shalt indeed hearken unto his voice and do all that I speak, then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies and an adversary unto thine adversaries." God's reply to Moses, therefore, is (Exodus 32. 33) "Whosoever hath sinned against Me, him will I blot out of My book. And now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee; behold, Mine angel shall go before thee; nevertheless in the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them."... And the Lord spoke unto Moses: "Depart, go up hence, thou and the people that thou hast brought up out of the land of Egypt unto the land of which I swore unto Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob, saying: 'Unto thy seed will I give it', and I will send an angel before thee and I will drive out the Canaanite, the Amorite, the Hittite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; for I will not go up in the midst of thee; for thou art a stiff-necked people; lest I consume thee in the way." (Exodus 33. 1-3.)
The general significance of angels has been discussed in a previous chapter.[13] It is to be noted, however, that the notion prevailed that various nations were presided over by special angels delegated for that purpose. Thus Israel was conceived as having been led out of Egypt through the agency of an angel, who was furthermore entrusted with the task of leading the people to the land of Canaan. But angels, as we have previously shown, were conceived of as not having any discretionary power, and this angel of the covenant was only entrusted with leading Israel to the Land of Promise if the people would be faithful to the covenant. In the case of any infidelity they had been specifically warned "He will not pardon your transgression." With the sin of the golden calf, therefore, Moses at first fears that Israel is totally doomed, but he is reassured by God's statement that the punishment which must come will be meted out to each individual sinner on the "day when I visit" and will not involve the immediate destruction of the whole people; that on the contrary, the angel would continue to lead them to their land. But this no longer satisfies Moses. The sin of the golden calf had convinced him that the people were too weak to live up to the covenant that they had accepted at Sinai, and that if their destiny was to be presided over, as that of other peoples, by an angel, who could not forgive any breach of the covenant, they were sure to be destroyed. He, therefore, pleads for a more intimate relation with God, which would exempt Israel from the operations of the natural law of retribution, by providing for the people's forgiveness in view of the higher tasks that it undertook to perform without apparently possessing higher qualifications. If Israel is merely to be led to the realization of its secular destiny through the conquest of Canaan, but is not to be more closely identified with God's cause, by God's going in their midst, Moses prefers to stay in the wilderness. (Exodus 33. 15.) God's declaring, "I will not go up in the midst of thee", (Exodus 33. 3) although it comes immediately after God's renewal of the promise to send His angel to lead Israel to the land of Canaan, is made the occasion of mourning and repentance. Moses removes his tent, in which he was wont to commune with God, and which was consequently known as the Ohel Moed, "The Tent of Meeting," (see Rashi and Ibn Ezra ad loc.), from the camp, upon the principle, according to Rashi, that מְנֻדֶּה לָרַב מְנֻדֶּה לַתַּלְמִיד "The disciple must have no dealings with one who is under the ban of the master." God's refusal to enter the camp of Israel, Moses construes as obligating also his own withdrawal from the camp. Here he pleads with God for a clearer knowledge of His ways that he may be able to lead the people as God had charged him to do. He wants God to make known to him the angel whom He had determined to send with him. It is then that he receives the assurance that he had sought, "My presence shall go with thee and I will give thee rest." (Exodus 33. 14.) He is further vouchsafed a revelation of God's attributes, which assures him of God's readiness to forgive sin, though not to condone it, (Exodus 34. 6, 7), and is instructed to hew out new tablets for the Decalogue in place of those he had broken. Exodus 33. 22, 23 presents difficulty because of the anthropomorphic terms used with reference to God. The general thought it wishes to express, however, seems to be that nobody can grasp the true personality of God, but can only realize by reflection and, as it were, retrospectively, that he had been in God's presence, can, as the Bible expresses it, only catch a glimpse of His retreating form.
Aim. The aim in teaching this chapter should be to arouse in the child an appreciation of the meaning of loyalty and faithfulness, a lesson which is taught negatively by Israel's disloyalty in worshipping the golden calf, and positively by Moses' loyalty in interceding for his people rather than in remaining satisfied with his individual enjoyment of God's favor.
Suggestions to the teacher. There are many lessons with regard to sin and repentance and the attributes of God and other theological topics, which are taught in these chapters, but they are all beyond the comprehension of children. They have, therefore, been excluded from our formulation of the aim in teaching this lesson, and the teacher should omit details of the narrative that do hot emphasize the aim of the lesson, however interesting they may be from the adult point of view. Thus the narrative of Exodus 33. 12 to 23 should be omitted, and much of the dialogue between God and Moses as well. Moreover, the whole discussion of the part played by the angel of the covenant and Moses' plea that not an angel but God himself lead the people, though we have dwelt on it at considerable length in our foregoing remarks for the benefit of the teacher, need not be taught to the child.
To connect the lesson with the previous one, begin by asking one of the children to repeat the Second Commandment. Then explain how, in the absence of Moses, the people began to find it difficult to believe in a God whom they could not see, and, recalling the images of the gods they had known, demanded an image of their own God in violation of their pledge to obey the Decalogue. The conduct of Aaron in yielding to their pleas need not be condoned or explained away, as the only extenuation the Bible suggests is the importunity of the popular demand. This, however, the teacher should endeavor to make his pupils realize by telling them how every day the people would come to Aaron and would say to him, "Where is Moses and where is the God who spoke to us, and who, Moses said, would lead us to the land of our forefathers? We want to see Him. Make an image of Him for us." And though Aaron would refuse them, they would come again the next day and the day after, and insist that he make them an image of their God like the idols, to which they were used, until one day Aaron became weary of their demands and told them that if they wanted an image of God, they should bring all their gold and jewels, their ear-rings, bracelets and rings, out of which he would make them an image.
Attempt to make the child realize the heinousness of the offense involved in the making of the golden calf, as idolatry is so remote from the child's experience, that he is not likely to be much impressed by the significance of it. Emphasize not merely the disobedience involved in violation of the Second Commandment, but the blasphemy involved in conceiving of God in animal form. The emotional attitude which the teacher should endeavor to create should be that which led our forefathers always to speak of the gods of other nations as the "abominations" of the heathen. This can be done by describing, as it were, God's feelings at witnessing the behavior of Israel, as, for instance:
"When God saw what the people were doing, how they danced and sang about the golden calf, and shouted, 'This is thy god, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt', He was very angry. Only forty days before they had heard His voice telling them, 'Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. Thou shalt not make unto thyself any graven image', and they had promised, 'All that the Lord hath spoken we will do', and there they were worshipping a molten god that they had made with their own hands, an image of a calf; as if a calf or anything like it could have sent the ten plagues against Egypt, could have divided the waters of the Red Sea, could have spoken to them the words of the Ten Commandments from the midst of the flaming mountain. So God wanted at first to destroy them altogether, and He said to Moses, who was still with Him on the mountain to learn His law, 'Go; get thee down, for thy people that thou broughtest up out of the land of Egypt have dealt corruptly; they have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them; they have made them a molten calf and have worshipped it and have sacrificed unto it and have said, "This is thy god, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt." Behold they are a stiff-necked people and my anger is kindled against them, and I will destroy them, and I will make of thee a great nation.'"
Give the children to understand the cause of Moses' breaking the tablets of the law by making them feel with the despair of Moses, when, descending from the mount with the tablets in his hand, he saw the people in the very act of violating the laws written upon them. Of what use were the tablets of the law if the law itself was not held sacred?