John Calvin Commentary Exodus 32:25

"And when Moses saw that the people were broken loose, (for Aaron had let them loose for a derision among their enemies,)" — Exodus 32:25 (ASV)

And when Moses saw that the people were naked. The vengeance Moses employed to expiate the sin is recorded here. This punishment was not satisfactory, as they call it, before God, but it was useful to erase the memory of their guilt or, at any rate, was beneficial as an example.

For by the slaughter of three thousand of them, they were reminded that they all had deserved the same. Nor can it be doubted that he cleansed the camp of the chief authors of the evil, so that God might be more inclined to pardon.

First, therefore, the cause is set forth by which he was inflamed to such severity: namely, because he saw the people in such a state of nakedness as to be exposed as a laughing-stock to their enemies.

The interpretation³⁴⁵ that some give of their nakedness—that is, that they were stripped of their ornaments—is by no means consistent. For it is immediately added that it was “to their shame among their enemies”; and it will be seen in the next chapter that they were still splendidly ornamented; indeed, they wore the outward tokens of profane rejoicing.

There is no doubt, then, that he signifies that they were rejected by God, who was, as it were, their sole ornamental garment, and under whose protection they were secure.

The enormity of the evil is therefore set forth in these words: they were not only deprived of God’s assistance (who is called “the dwelling-place” of His people, Psalms 90:1) but also abandoned to disgrace, while they were surrounded on all sides by enemies.

Hence the holy indignation of Moses in inflicting punishment on the leaders of the rebellion. Furthermore, it is to be noted that Aaron is charged with the chief part of the crime because he had not resisted the people’s folly with sufficient firmness.

In this, the astonishing power of God was manifested: when Moses had summoned the Levites and commanded them openly in the gate to gird themselves with their swords, the other tribes did not all mutiny. For it was probable that they were being armed in this way to execute punishment on the criminals. How, then, did it happen that those who were conscious of guilt remained quiet, except because the power of God’s Spirit restrained their courage and fury?

The form of the command is also worthy of observation: “Whoso is the Lord’s, let him betake himself to me:” from which we learn that if we love religion as it deserves, we must not halt between two sides; but a sincere confession is required of us, so that every one of us ranges ourselves under the banner of God. For by calling all God’s servants to Him, He condemns the cowardice, indeed the treachery, of all who stand in indecision.

The question, however, arises: were the Levites not implicated in the crime, since they stepped forward at once to execute His command, like sincere upholders of God’s glory?

I answer that although they were not free from guilt, yet, because they yielded to the people under the influence of fear, their sin was lighter than if they had approved by their consent of the detestable idolatry.

But here we perceive the wonderful indulgence of God, who not only pardoned them but also deigned to assert His glory by their instrumentality, and appointed them His ministers for the punishment of a crime in the toleration of which they had been guilty of contemptible weakness and cowardice.

Again, it may be asked how it happened that of the rest of the multitude not one stirred a foot at Moses’ command. My opinion is that they were kept back not by contempt or obstinacy, but only by shame; and that they were all filled with so much alarm that they waited in astonishment to see what Moses was about and how far he would proceed.

It is, however, probable that the Levites were called out by name, and this we gather from the result, because they all immediately came forward, and not one from any other tribe.

³⁴⁵ The glossa ordinaria gives the three usual opinions as to this statement, viz., either that they were stripped of the ornaments, whereof the idol was made; or that they had manifested their corrupt will, which was previously concealed; or that they had lost the help and protection of God. De Lyra adopts the first. Dathe calls it a very difficult passage; but inclines to the rendering of the LXX., διασκέδασται, were scattered, or dissipated. “The people were in a dissolute, disorderly state; and therefore in a condition to be attacked with advantage.” — Geddes.