Thursday, May 18, 2023

Thomas B. Dozeman and Nahum M. Sarna on Exodus 32:4 and the use of plural "bulls"

  

The Israelites and Aaron provide an immediate interpretation of the golden calf at the moment of its construction: “These (’ēlleh) are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt” (32:4). Their statement indicates the original sin to be the equation of the calf with “gods.” The proclamation re-appears in the Former Prophets (Joshua-2 Kings); 1 Kings 12 recounts the emergence of the monarchy in the northern kingdom under Jeroboam. Following the pattern of kings as temple builders, the rule of Jeroboam is accompanied by the construction of two cult sites, one in Dan and another in Bethel (12:26–32). The temple complexes include the institution of a non-Levitical priesthood, a liturgical calendar and festival, cultic objects, and altars (12:31–32). The central cultic object at each site is a golden calf, which Jeroboam interprets for the northern Israelites: “Here are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt” (12:28), a near repetition of the words of Aaron and the people in Exod 32:4. In the present structure of the Hebrew Bible, the proclamation of Jeroboam is an inner-biblical quotation, relating the golden calf in the wilderness with the cultic sites in Dan and Bethel. Thus Jeroboam is presented as repeating the original sin of the golden calf.

 

But a closer look at the context indicates that the inner-biblical quotation moves in the other direction: the construction of the golden calf in the wilderness is meant to be an interpretation of the story of Jeroboam. His statement, “Here are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt,” is written in the plural, “gods,” because there are two golden calves, one in Dan and another in Bethel. The statement fits the narrative context of 1 Kings 12. But the proclamation by Aaron and the Israelites, which also refers to the golden calf in the plural, “these (’ēlleh) are your gods,” does not conform to the narrative context of Exodus 32, where there is only one calf. The inner-biblical quotation moves from Jeroboam to the wilderness community, and it indicates how crucial the rise of the northern monarchy is for interpreting the “original sin” of the golden calf in the Non-P History. It is so important that the inner-biblical quotation takes precedence over narrative logic in Exodus 32. This fact did not escape the eye of the author of Nehemiah, who corrects the grammar so that Ezra prays: “Therefore you [God] did not desert them even when they cast for themselves an image of a calf and said, ‘This (zeh) is your god, who brought you up out of Egypt’ ” (Neh 9:17–18). The Non-P historian, unlike the author of Nehemiah, is willing to sacrifice grammar and narrative context to insure that monarchy looms in the background of any interpretation of the golden calf in Exodus 32. As a result, an interpretation of the original sin of the Israelites requires an interpretation of the two golden calves in the Deuteronomistic History.

 

The golden calves are a religious and political metaphor in the Deuteronomistic History. They represent the apostasy of Jeroboam I (1 Kgs 12:26–32), and, indeed, of all monarchs—even reforming kings like Jehu, who destroyed Baal worship, but continued “the worship of the golden calves at Bethel and Dan” (2 Kgs 10:29). The golden calves are the reason for the destruction of the northern kingdom (2 Kgs 17:7–23). It fell because “they forsook all the commands of Yahweh their God and made for themselves two idols cast in the shape of calves” (2 Kgs 17:16). The two calves are also at the center of a range of forbidden worship practices in the Deuteronomistic History, including the Asherah, astrology, child sacrifice, sorcery, and high places. The prophet Hosea echoes the same criticism of the north (Hos 8:5–6; 13:2), providing a glimpse into the cultic practices of the northern kingdom. Hosea proclaims the sin of Ephraim with the words: “People are kissing the calves!” The prophet also provides the divine judgment: “Your calf is rejected, O Samaria.” In the Deuteronomistic History the golden calves and the accompanying cultic practices are not limited to a critique of the cultic practices of the north. The calves become a metaphor for rejecting Yahweh, and the criticism of the calves is also extended to the south. Judah too “followed the practices Israel had introduced.” As a result, Yahweh “rejected all the people of Israel; he afflicted them and gave them into the hands of plunderers, until he thrust them from his presence” (2 Kgs 17:19–20). Van Seters is certainly correct when he concludes: “The Jeroboam apostasy has become a model for the whole people and for their ultimate fate, even of Judah.”

 

The Former Prophets provides a backdrop for interpreting the idolatry of the golden calf in Exodus 32 as a political and religious allegory about the inherent conflict between Yahweh and kings. The inner-biblical quotation by Aaron (and the Israelites) of Jeroboam signals that on one level the golden calf in the wilderness is the taproot, which will inevitably lead to the political idolatry associated with monarchy in the promised land. The content of the idolatry is worshiping the power of the king over Yahweh. On another level the Non-P historian elaborates on the nature of idolatry as any manufactured icon, thus reinforcing the aniconic cultic theology of the Name (see the commentary on 19:1–24:11). Both the Decalogue and the Book of the Covenant introduce a rigid prohibition against any representation of the Deity, or, for that matter, of any other icons. (Thomas B. Dozeman, Commentary on Exodus [The Eerdmans Critical Commentary; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2009], 686–688)

 

It is to be noted that the demonstrative pronoun (ʾelleh) and the verb governed by ʾelohim, “God,” are in the plural form, and that a plural verb is also used in verses 1 and 23. Plural forms with ʾelohim are found in a monotheistic context several times in the Bible, and there is as yet no satisfactory explanation for this anomaly. In the present chapter the plural usage may be a scribal device to emphasize the unacceptable nature of the object. Aaron made only one image, and, significantly, Nehemiah 9:18, in recalling this episode, has the cry of the people in the singular, “This [zeh] is your God who brought you out [heʿelkha] of Egypt.” (Nahum M. Sarna, Exodus [The JPS Torah Commentary; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991], 204)