Exodus 32:30

[SallyF]

The "Lord" in this case is the biblical Yahweh god.

Yahweh is the mythological deity of Jewish folks.

The writers have the mythological god refuse Moses' offer of himself as atonement for the sins of others.

The human writers have written that the "theology" is that everyone is responsible for their own sins.

It's Jewish biblical theology, right here in the "Word of God".

Why did the Jewish sect the Jesus character belonged to contradict that theology …?

[Elijah John]

Why did the Jewish sect the Jesus character belonged to contradict that theology …?

Excellent question.

But it was not Jesus own sect that advocated "substitutionary atonement", rather it was the Pauline sects of Christianity that followed who were responsible for that notion.

Some historians see Jesus as a Pharisee, (Hyam Macoby, Paul and the invention of Christianity, for one example.) The Pharisees did not believe in human sacrifice.

Jewish apologists often use the passage "the soul that sins, it shall die" as a refutation of that Pauline doctrine and of Christianity in general.

[SallyF]

Why did the Jewish sect the Jesus character belonged to contradict that theology …?

Excellent question.

But it was not Jesus own sect that advocated "substitutionary atonement", rather it was the Pauline sects of Christianity that followed who were responsible for that notion.

Some historians see Jesus as a Pharisee, (Hyam Macoby, Paul and the invention of Christianity, for one example.) The Pharisees did not believe in human sacrifice.

Jewish apologists often use the passage "the soul that sins, it shall die" as a refutation of that Pauline doctrine and of Christianity in general.

Thanks for the reply EJ.

I'd like us to take a trip back and HYPOTHESISE over what may be some genuine history.

We don't know precisely when Yahweh worshippers gained the monopoly on Jewish religion.

And we must remember that Jews were ethnic Canaanites.

And Canaanites - we may understand - practiced human sacrifice: presumably as ultimate sacrifice for ultimate sins of the many.

And there would be no more ultimate a human sacrifice than a princeling who was the son of one of the local gods.

Notions like that just don't vanish in a culture (I suggest).

I hypothesis that when the Yahwists gained the monopoly, they wrote their own god and their own theology into the literature …

Hence the idea that everyone was responsible to the god for their own sins …

And the notion of human sacrifice was banned in the reformed culture.

The Abraham and Isaac fable gives the people the same "human sacrifice is no longer necessary" lesson.

But as we all know …

Conservatives don't just go away and yesterday's ideas are always better than today's fancy notions.

So …

I suggest the sect that Jesus grew up in - possibly the Essenes - were conservatives who remembered the benefits of the true ancient religion and its human sacrifice …

And who believed the deposed (when we don't know) David royal family should be ruling as "Kings of Israel" …

And who believed (sort of) that the David Kings were "Sons of God".

And Sons of God who could summon legions of angels to overthrow the Herods and the Roman Empire.

They just had to wait for the right star to appear over Bethlehem to announce that the Messiah had arrived on Earth through the uterus of one of their virgins.

I hypothesise.

When one extricates oneself completely from the faith trap …

One can find a whole bunch of fascinating human politics and propaganda and superstition in the "scriptures".

[1213]

...The writers have the mythological god refuse Moses' offer of himself as atonement for the sins of others...
...Why did the Jewish sect the Jesus character belonged to contradict that theology …?

Jesus didn’t contradict what God has said and Moses didn’t offer himself as atonement. Moses asked God to forgive, he didn’t offer himself as an atonement.

[SallyF]

...The writers have the mythological god refuse Moses' offer of himself as atonement for the sins of others...
...Why did the Jewish sect the Jesus character belonged to contradict that theology …?

Jesus didn’t contradict what God has said and Moses didn’t offer himself as atonement. Moses asked God to forgive, he didn’t offer himself as an atonement.

Numerous Christian sources say that you are wrong …

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
MOSES’ INTERCESSION ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE.
(30-35) When Moses had, on first hearing of God’s intention to destroy the people, interceded for them (Exodus 32:11-13), his prayers had received no direct answer—he had been left in doubt whether they were granted or no. Having now put an end to the offence, and to some extent punished it, he is bent on renewing his supplications, and obtaining a favourable reply. Once more he ascends into the mount to be quite alone, and so best able to wrestle with God in prayer; and this time he not merely intercedes, but offers himself as an atonement for the people, and is willing to be “blotted out of God’s book,� if on this condition they may be spared. God refuses the offer, but makes known to Moses that He relents—that He will spare the people, and allow them to continue their journey to the promised land; only He will send an angel to lead them instead of leading them Himself, and He will punish the sinners by a different punishment from that originally threatened (Exodus 32:10). https://biblehub.com/commentaries/exodus/32-30.htm

[SallyF]

A Jewish perspective if worth careful consideration, given that Judaism and Christian-Judaism are supposedly following the same god …

And this god is supposedly not just human make-believe …

And this god is supposedly "God" with a capital G …

R. Akiba, in direct opposition to the Christian Atonement by the blood of Jesus, addressed his brethren thus: "Happy are ye, Israelites. Before whom do you cleanse yourselves, and who cleanses you? Your Father in heaven; for it is said: 'I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean; from all your filthiness . . . will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you'" (Ezek. xxxvi. 26); and again it is said that the Lord, "the hope of Israel" (Jer. xiv. 8), is also a "fountain of water" (a play on the Hebrew word "miḳweh"). "As the fountain of water purifies the unclean, so does God purify Israel" (Yoma viii. 9). This doctrine, which does away with all mediatorship of either saint, high priest, or savior, became the leading idea of the Jewish Atonement. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/artic ... -atonement


Which is all part of what guides me to the very strong expectation that the biblical Jehovah is nothing more than make-believe.

But my door is always WIDE open ....

[1213]

… but offers himself as an atonement for the people, and is willing to be “blotted out of God’s book,� if on this condition they may be spared. God refuses the offer, but makes known to Moses that He relents—…. (Exodus 32:10).[/i] https://biblehub.com/commentaries/exodus/32-30.htm

Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.
Ex. 32:32 (King James)
Yet now, if you will, forgive their sin- and if not, please blot me out of your book which you have written."
Ex. 32:32 (WEB)

It doesn’t say he offers himself as atonement. It says, if you don’t forgive, “blot me out of your book�. That is not same as offering himself as atonement.

[SallyF]

… but offers himself as an atonement for the people, and is willing to be “blotted out of God’s book,� if on this condition they may be spared. God refuses the offer, but makes known to Moses that He relents—…. (Exodus 32:10).[/i] https://biblehub.com/commentaries/exodus/32-30.htm

Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.
Ex. 32:32 (King James)
Yet now, if you will, forgive their sin- and if not, please blot me out of your book which you have written."
Ex. 32:32 (WEB)

It doesn’t say he offers himself as atonement. It says, if you don’t forgive, “blot me out of your book�. That is not same as offering himself as atonement.

Really …?


Exodus 32:29 Exodus 32:31
Exodus 32:30
And it came to pass on the morrow
The eighteenth day of Tammuz it was, the same writers say, that Moses implored the mercy of God for Israel. Jarchi on ( Exodus 32:11 ) says it was on the seventeenth day the tables were broke, on the eighteenth the calf was burnt, and on the nineteenth that Moses went up to intercede for them:

that Moses said unto the people, ye have sinned a great sin;
the sin of idolatry, see ( Exodus 32:21 ) from whence it appears, that all that were guilty of it were not slain, perhaps only some of one tribe; and there was great reason to fear, that as wrath was gone forth it would not stop here, but others would fall a sacrifice to the divine displeasure; wherefore it is proposed by Moses to make application to the Lord on their behalf, that they might obtain mercy:

and I will go up unto the Lord:
on the top of Mount Sinai:

peradventure I shall make atonement for your sin;
not by any sacrifice offered, but by his prayers prevail with God to forgive their sin, and not punish any more for it: he had by his first prayer obtained of the Lord not to consume them off of the face of the earth, and utterly destroy them as a nation; but that he did not hinder but that resentment might be shown in a lesser degree, or by parts; as not 3000 men had been cut off, chiefly out of one tribe, if not altogether, the rest of the tribes might expect to be visited, according to the number of their delinquents. https://www.biblestudytools.com/comment ... 32-30.html


And ...


Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
30. Ye] the pron. is emphatic.

make propitiation] viz. by intercession. The word (kipper) is used, not in the technical sense which it has in P (see on Exodus 30:10), but in that of propitiating or appeasing—here by intercession, Genesis 32:20 by a present, Proverbs 16:14 by conciliatory behaviour, Isaiah 47:11 (fig., of propitiating calamity) by either a bribe or some religious ceremony (EVV. ‘put it away’). Cf. DB. iv. 129a, § 5.

30–34. Moses, with noble disinterestedness, offers his own life, if he can thereby secure his people’s pardon: Jehovah replies that He cannot on these terms take the life of the innocent; but He yields so far as to permit Moses to lead the people on to Canaan, though without His own personal presence. The passage (esp. vv. 30, 31) hardly reads as if it had been preceded by in vv. 9–14: still, the two passages are so far consistent that whereas in vv. 11–13 Moses had only petitioned that the people might not be destroyed, he now petitions for its entire forgiveness. https://biblehub.com/commentaries/exodus/32-30.htm


And


Geneva Study Bible
And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the LORD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin. https://biblehub.com/commentaries/exodus/32-30.htm


Just goes to show that one can have this human-written "scripture" say just whatever one wants it to say ...

Or not say.

[Difflugia]

Just goes to show that one can have this human-written "scripture" say just whatever one wants it to say ...

Or not say.

To be fair, this particular scripture is neither ambiguous nor does it invite the sort of strained interpretation it's being given. It doesn't make for a general case, but at least here, it wouldn't matter if God did write it.

[SallyF]

Just goes to show that one can have this human-written "scripture" say just whatever one wants it to say ...

Or not say.

To be fair, this particular scripture is neither ambiguous nor does it invite the sort of strained interpretation it's being given. It doesn't make for a general case, but at least here, it wouldn't matter if God did write it.

Yes, and the sticky thing for Christians here is that the writers have the mythological god refuse the possibly fictional Moses character's offer.

The theology here is quite clear …

Individuals are responsible for their own sin and redemption.

The Christian form of Judaism contradicts the form of Judaism written here.

Which says to me that people are just makin' stuff up ….