We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

What is the significance of Exodus 33:1–3, 14?

“The Lord said to Moses, ‘Go, leave this place, you and the people whom you have brought up out of the land of Egypt, and go to the land of which I swore to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob…I will send an angel before you, and I will drive out the Canaanites…Go up to the land flowing with milk and honey; but I will not go up among you, or I would consume you on the way, for you are a stiff-necked people…’” Moses then pleads with the Lord to stay with the Israelites [vs. 12–13] and the Lord responds, “My presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.”

For several centuries God had planned on leading the Israelites out of Egypt and into the land of Canaan. Now, however, he was so disgruntled with his people that he was considering a “Plan B,” as it were. He wouldn’t destroy them, as he previously threatened. Nor would he cancel his promise to give them the land flowing with milk and honey. Indeed, by sending his angel to lead them he would continue to help them in acquiring this land. But he was now considering withdrawing his presence from them. They would continue on without him, and he would help them do this! Only Moses’ pleading (once again) caused God to change his mind and remain with the Israelites.

I do not see how the classical view can account for a straightforward reading of this fascinating passage. Very clearly we find the Lord offering Moses a rather elaborate “Plan B” in light of the remarkable obstinacy of his people. If the future is eternally settled in God’s mind, however, there really can never be a “Plan B,” however things may appear. That is, if God eternally knew he would never do what he told Moses he was planning on doing, then he wasn’t really planning on doing what he told Moses he was planning on doing. So far as I can see, the entire episode is thereby reduced to a rather elaborate charade. Why go to the bother of distinguishing between his presence and the angel as well as mentioning all the various people he would help drive out (33:2) if it was certain all along that he will never carry out such a plan?

A straightforward reading of this text would rather suggest that God in fact seriously considered this “Plan B” until Moses moved him to do otherwise. And the only way this divine consideration could be serious was if the future was open to the possibility of what God was considering.

Tags: ,

Related Reading

What is the significance of Jeremiah 32:35?

As in Jeremiah 19:5, the Lord expresses his dismay over Israel’s paganism by saying they did this “though I did not command them, nor did it enter my mind that they should do this abomination.” If this abomination was eternally foreknown to God, it’s impossible to attribute any clear meaning to his confession that this…


Free Will: Is it a coherent concept?

Greg is going to be spending the next several blogs talking about the idea of free will. In this first reflection, he discusses whether it is coherent to speak of a decision that is not determined or exhaustively caused.

So Much Evil. Why?

In light of the profound evil being experienced by the people of Paris and countless other locations around the world, we thought we would raise again the question that many ask when things like this occur: Why? Of course, Greg has spent much of his writing and speaking energy addressing this. Here is a basic,…

Divine Wisdom

Why doesn’t God end it all and stop the slaughter? Why does God allow suffering and evil to go on so long? Here, Greg offers two possible answers to these questions. Option A is that all evil somehow is designed by God and somehow brings glory to him. But Greg thinks Option B is a better explanation, and it involves…

Two Ancient (and Modern) Motivations for Ascribing Exhaustively Definite Foreknowledge to God

A historic overview and critical assessment Abstract: The traditional Christian view that God foreknows the future exclusively in terms of what will and will not come to pass is partially rooted in two ancient Hellenistic philosophical assumptions. Hellenistic philosophers universally assumed that propositions asserting’ x will occur’ contradict propositions asserting’ x will not occur’ and…

What is the significance of Genesis 22:12 ?

Abraham passed God’s “test” (vs. 1) by being willing to sacrifice his son. The Lord says “…now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son…” If the classical understanding of foreknowledge is true, God’s statement “now I know” seems disingenuous. The meaning of God’s explanation for this knowledge — “since…