mn11strn11, t~ propoRe to worship the spiritual Jebov11.h, who had expressly forbidden tho use 11 1 :zr:wcn images in his service, under the symbol of a calf, 11.lbeit the idol WM of i:nld. 11 was worse than monstrous, it wl\ll hideous, to employ the name of the Holy IJne tn cover the ~hameless and revolting orgios with which their calf-worship WM assoc1Rled. (4) They were eager in this worship. They rose up e:uly in the morning tc, eng:age in it (,•er. 6). Would that God's people were Meager in h,is service as these scn·ants of Be!iru. were in the service of their idol! 2. The stn iri its generic character. The sin at Sinai Wl\6 a case (1) of sense reasserting its supremacy over faith. "As for tins Moses, we wot not what has become of him" (ver. 1). (2) Of carnal tendencies regaining the ascendancy over temporary religious impressions. (3) Of engrained evil habit.~ resuming their sway after having been for a time forcibly kept in check. 'l'he incident shows that nothing short of a thorough regeneration, of a radical change of heart, can be relied on to keep men in the way of good. It is the heart that needs renewal. DaYid seized the matter at the root when he was led to pray, "Create in me a. clean heart" etc. (Ps. l.i. 10). It wa.s the want of this thorough renewal which was the bane of Israel (Deut. xxxi. 27-30). 3. .A.ggra,va,ti<YTUl of the sin. The circumsta.nces under which the sin was committed added greatly to its enormity. (1) It was a. sin committed immediately a.fter solemn covenant with God. The transactions recorded in .::h. xxiv. were not yet forty days old. The people had literally heard God speaking to them. 'l'hey had acknowledged the solemni~y of the situation by entreating Moses to act as mediator. They had formally, and under awful impressions of God's majesty, pk'<iged themselves to life-long obedience. Yet within this brief space of time, they had thrown off all restraints, and violated one of the main stipulations of their agreement. A more flagrant act of impiety it would be difficult to in:ui..,crine. (2) It was a sin com- mitted while Moses was still in the mount transacting for them. He had gone to receive the tables of the law. He had been detained to receive instructions for the making of the sanctuary-that God might dwell among them. A solemn time, truly ! Whlle it la.~ted, the people might 6urely have been depended on to conduct themselves with at least ordinary propriety. Instead of this, witness their mad gambols round their ea.If. The very time when, of all others, their frame of mind ought to have been devout, sober, prayerful, wa.s the time chosen for the perpetration of this great iniquity. 111. AAllON18 SllABE IN THE TRANSGBESSlON. This, it is to be noted, the narrative makes no attempt to conceal. It tells the story with perfect impartiality. The Bible, like its author, is without respect of persons. If Aaron leads the people astray, he must, like others, submit to have the truth told about him. This is not the way of ordinary biographies, but it is the way of Scripture. It is one mark of its inspira- tion. It is a guarantee of its historic truthfulness. The conduct of Aaron cannot be justified.; but suggestions may be offered which help to render intelligible. 1. Aaron W<U pl,acLd in a 11-it~ion in which it was vrrry dit}kwlt to know exactly what to do. A mob confronted him, evidently bent on gratifying its dangerous humour. Its demand wu peremptory. To resist its will was to run the risk of being stoned. The temptation which. in these circumstances, naturally presented itself to a timid mind, and to which Aaron yielded, was to put the people off, and endeavour to gain time by some show of concession. In the interval, Moses might return, and the difficulty would be solve.d.. See the mistake of this policy. It was (1) wrong. It involved a sacrifice of principle. It was iemporising. (2) W ea.k. Had Aaron been brave enough to take a firm stand, even at the risk of loBing his life for it, not improbably he might have crushed the movement in its bud. .A13 it was, his sanction and example gave it an impetus which c:arried. it beyond the possibility of being subsequently controlled. (3) Self-defe.ating. A temporising policy usually is. 'l'he favourable chance on which everything bas been staked, does not turn up. Moses did fWI return, and Aaron, havi.r.g yielded. the preliminary point, found himself hopelessly committed to a bad cal.lJie. 2. .Aaron ,,,,a1y l,.ave thougl,.t that by re,q11,iring the women of the camp to part wit/, t}u;i,r personal or=nts, h.s was taking an effectual plan to prevent the movement frorn going furtlter (ver. 2). They might, he may have reasoned, be very willing to get gods, e.nd yet not be willing to make this personal sacrifice to obtain them. If this wa.s his idea, he was speedily undeceived. 'l'he gold ornaments came pourrng in ( n,r. 3), e.nd .Aaron, committed by this a.et also, had no alternative but to proceed r:11. XUIL T-H.] TIIE BOOK OF EXODUS.
further. ".Ele received. them at their hanrlR," etc. (ver. 4). 3. Aaron mny h1i,1e tho11gltt that, of tT1e two evils, it would be bett"r to ,,ut himself at the head of the mo1Jwient, and try to keep it within lxnmds, than to allow it to drift away, without any control w!t,ite,1er. He may ha.ve argued that to allow himself to be stoned would not mfLke matters better, but, would make them greatly worse. On the other hand, by yielding a. little, and placing himself at the head of the movement, he might at least succeed in checkin"' its grosser abuses. 'l'his is a not uncommon opiate to conscience, in matters involv".'. ing compromise of principle. It is the idea of the physician who humours a ma.cl. patient, in the hope of being 0;ble to retain some control over him. The step was a false one. Even with madmen, as wiser doctors tell us, the humouring policy is not the most judicious. With a mob, it is about the worst that could be adopted. IV. GENERAL LESSONS. 1. 'l'he strength of evil propensities in human nature. 2. The fleetingness of religious impressions, if not accompanied by a true change of heart. 3. The degrading character of idolatry. Sin bestialises, and the bestial nature seeks a god in bestial form (cf. Rom. i. 21-32). "Men," sa.ys Xenopha.nes, "imagine that the gods are born, a.re clothed in our garments, and endowed with our form and figure. But if oxen or lions ha.d hands; a.nd could paint and fashion things as men do, they too would form the gods after their own similitude, horses making them like horse.~, and oxen like oxen." But we have seen that men also can fashion their gods in the similitude of oxen. "They that make them are like unto them" (P8. cxv. 8). 4. Mammon-worship is a worship of the golden calf. Cf. Carlyle on" Hudson's Statue' (" Latter-Day Pamphlets ").-J.. 0.