Exodus · Chapter 4

V. 1. They will not hearken to my voice-That is, they would not take his bare word, unless he shewed them some sign. He remembered how they had once rejected him, and feared it would be so again.

Verse 1. They will not believe me] As if he had said, Unless I be enabled to work miracles, and give them proofs by extraordinary works as well as by words, they will not believe that thou hast sent me.

Verse 1. They will not believe me — He means, they would not take his bare word, unless he showed them some sign. He remembered how they had once rejected him, and feared it would be so again.

Verse 1. They will not believe me. Then the Lord directed him to work a miracle, the most convincing evidence of divine authority, for the removal of unbelief.

MOSES RECEIVES THE THREE SIGNS, 1-9.

1. They will not believe me — Moses pleads that Israel will not accept him as a divinely-commissioned leader, and Jehovah gives him three signs to demonstrate to himself, to Israel, and to the Egyptians, that he is sent of God. Egypt was a land of symbols, and these are symbolic miracles, divine hieroglyphs. Three is the complete or perfect number, and the three signs give to each of the three parties involved complete proof of his mission.

V. 2. A rod-Or staff.

Verse 2. A rod.] htm matteh, a staff, probably his shepherd’s crook; see Leviticus 27:32. As it was made the instrument of working many miracles, it was afterwards called the rod of God; see Exodus 4:20.

Verse 2. He said, A rod — Probably this was his shepherd’s staff, for he was feeding his father-in-law’s flocks when God appeared to him.

Ver. 2. A rod. Milton has displayed his classic and poetic genius on the rod of Amram’s son. Reference has also been made to the Thyrsus of Bacchus, which was a dart surround with leaves of the vine. The fabulous history of Bacchus we have in old Hesiod, fab. 3. Pliny, book 16, chap. 4. Cicero on the nature of the gods, mentions five of that name, men who lived in different places. (book 3.) Modern literature, in the hands of bishop Huet in France, and Dr. Stukeley of London, gives us the fable as first founded on the promised Messiah. Bacchus was called Bimere, twice born, or a child by two mothers. He was son of Jupiter by Semélè, whose brightness having consumed the mother during pregnancy, the child dropped, and was placed by Jupiter in his thigh to complete the time. Thus Bacchus was twice born. Here we have the mystery of the divine and human geniture of Christ.— The vine, the grape, the gay and laughing character of Bacchus, designate, not drunkenness, as feigned by the intemperate heathens, but all the paradisaical state of the earth in the glory of the latter day, when the wilderness shall blossom like the rose, and the deserts shall be glad; when the mountains shall drop down with new wine, and the vallies shall flow with milk; when every man shall sit under his own vine and fig tree, none daring to make him afraid.—Bacchus is also called the god of war, and the most terrible of all the gods. Christ is the Lord of hosts; and there is not a promise of the enlargement of his kingdom, to which the utter destruction of all the incorrigible, expressed or understood, is not subjoined. Bacchus had a double-edged dart; but the Messiah has a sword with two edges to smite the earth. The Thyrsus, rabdos or rod, seems anciently to have been put into the hands of all illustrious characters. Vola, our northern sybil and poetess, says that men played in joyful gambols on the green, and had not known the want of gold, till the arrival of three powerful Thursa maids from Jotunheim.

Tefido I tuni,

Teitur voro

Var theim vettugis,

Want or gulli,

Uns thriar komo,

Thursa meyar.

Amatkar miok,

Or Jotunbeimom.

Ed. Stockholm, 1750.

2-5. A rod — The shepherd’s staff which Moses casts down is the emblem of the shepherd life which now, at God’s call, he abandons. But at once he finds himself confronted by a hissing serpent, the emblem of Egyptian royalty, from which he flees, for his flesh shrinks from this conflict with Pharaoh. In Egypt the asp was the hieroglyph of royalty. But when, at God’s bidding, he boldly grasps his formidable foe, the very wrath of Pharaoh calls forth the power of Jehovah and Jehovah’s messenger. The serpent becomes the “wonder-working rod.” This sign sets forth the character of Moses, God’s messenger.

Verse 3. A serpent] Of what sort we know not, as the word vjn nachash is a general name for serpents, and also means several other things, see Genesis 3:1: but it was either of a kind that he had not seen before, or one that he knew to be dangerous; for it is said, he fled from before it. Some suppose the staff was changed into a crocodile; see Clarke on “Exodus 7:10”.

Verses 3, 4. It became a serpent — Was really changed into a serpent. There was a significancy in this sign: it intimated what and how pernicious his rod would be to the Egyptians. It became a rod in his hand — When stretched forth by the hand of Moses or Aaron, it became a token to Israel of guidance, encouragement, and protection; but to Egypt, like the bite of the most poisonous serpent, it betokened desolating judgments.

2-5. A rod — The shepherd’s staff which Moses casts down is the emblem of the shepherd life which now, at God’s call, he abandons. But at once he finds himself confronted by a hissing serpent, the emblem of Egyptian royalty, from which he flees, for his flesh shrinks from this conflict with Pharaoh. In Egypt the asp was the hieroglyph of royalty. But when, at God’s bidding, he boldly grasps his formidable foe, the very wrath of Pharaoh calls forth the power of Jehovah and Jehovah’s messenger. The serpent becomes the “wonder-working rod.” This sign sets forth the character of Moses, God’s messenger.

Verse 4. He put forth his hand, and caught it] Considering the light in which Moses had viewed this serpent, it required considerable faith to induce him thus implicitly to obey the command of God; but he obeyed, and the noxious serpent became instantly the miraculous rod in his hand! Implicit faith and obedience conquer all difficulties; and he who believes in God, and obeys him in all things, has really nothing to fear.

Verses 3, 4. It became a serpent — Was really changed into a serpent. There was a significancy in this sign: it intimated what and how pernicious his rod would be to the Egyptians. It became a rod in his hand — When stretched forth by the hand of Moses or Aaron, it became a token to Israel of guidance, encouragement, and protection; but to Egypt, like the bite of the most poisonous serpent, it betokened desolating judgments.

2-5. A rod — The shepherd’s staff which Moses casts down is the emblem of the shepherd life which now, at God’s call, he abandons. But at once he finds himself confronted by a hissing serpent, the emblem of Egyptian royalty, from which he flees, for his flesh shrinks from this conflict with Pharaoh. In Egypt the asp was the hieroglyph of royalty. But when, at God’s bidding, he boldly grasps his formidable foe, the very wrath of Pharaoh calls forth the power of Jehovah and Jehovah’s messenger. The serpent becomes the “wonder-working rod.” This sign sets forth the character of Moses, God’s messenger.

V. 5. That they may believe-An imperfect sentence to be thus compleated, This thou shalt do, before them, that they may believe.

Verse 5. That they may believe] This is an example of what is called an imperfect or unfinished speech, several of which occur in the sacred writings. It may be thus supplied: Do this before them, that they may believe that the Lord-hath appeared unto thee.

Verses 5, 6. That they may believe — The sentence is imperfect, but the meaning is, This thou shalt do before them that they may believe. His hand was leprous as snow — For whiteness. This signified, that Moses, by the power of God, should bring sore diseases upon Egypt, that at his prayer they should be removed. And that whereas the Israelites in Egypt were become leprous, polluted by sin, and almost consumed by oppression, by being taken into the bosom of Moses they should be cleansed and cured.

2-5. A rod — The shepherd’s staff which Moses casts down is the emblem of the shepherd life which now, at God’s call, he abandons. But at once he finds himself confronted by a hissing serpent, the emblem of Egyptian royalty, from which he flees, for his flesh shrinks from this conflict with Pharaoh. In Egypt the asp was the hieroglyph of royalty. But when, at God’s bidding, he boldly grasps his formidable foe, the very wrath of Pharaoh calls forth the power of Jehovah and Jehovah’s messenger. The serpent becomes the “wonder-working rod.” This sign sets forth the character of Moses, God’s messenger.

V. 6. His hand was leprous, as snow-For whiteness. This signified, That Moses, by the power of God, should bring sore diseases upon Egypt, that at his prayer they should be removed. And that whereas the Israelites in Egypt were become leprous, polluted by sin, and almost consumed by oppression, by being taken into the bosom of Moses they should be cleansed and cured.

Verse 6. His hand was leprous as snow.] That is, the leprosy spread itself over the whole body in thin white scales; and from this appearance it has its Greek name lepra, from lepiv, a scale. Dr. Mead says, “I have seen a remarkable case of this in a countryman, whose whole body was so miserably seized with it, that his skin was shining as if covered with snow; and as the surfuraceous scales were daily rubbed off, the flesh appeared quick or raw underneath.” The leprosy, at least among the Jews, was a most inveterate and contagious disorder, and deemed by them incurable. Among the heathens it was considered as inflicted by their gods, and it was supposed that they alone could remove it. It is certain that a similar belief prevailed among the Israelites; hence, when the king of Syria sent his general Naaman, to the king of Israel to cure him of his leprosy, he rent his clothes, saying, Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy? 2 Kings 5:7. This appears, therefore, to be the reason why God chose this sign, as the instantaneous infliction and removal of this disease were demonstrations which all would allow of the sovereign power of God. We need, therefore, seek for no other reasons for this miracle: the sole reason is sufficiently obvious.

Verses 5, 6. That they may believe — The sentence is imperfect, but the meaning is, This thou shalt do before them that they may believe. His hand was leprous as snow — For whiteness. This signified, that Moses, by the power of God, should bring sore diseases upon Egypt, that at his prayer they should be removed. And that whereas the Israelites in Egypt were become leprous, polluted by sin, and almost consumed by oppression, by being taken into the bosom of Moses they should be cleansed and cured.

6, 7. His hand was leprous — The second sign symbolizes Israel: first, fresh and young; then, foul and weak; then, clean and strong. Leprosy is a type of ceremonial defilement. As God bid Moses put his hand in his bosom, so had he bidden Israel go down into Egypt, where they had been sheltered from the Canaanitish influences which would have arrested their national life, but where they had also become contaminated with nature-worship, and where their heathen surroundings made them ceremonially unclean. Moses — Mosheh, the drawer or deliverer — was to draw them forth, and thrust them into another land, where they should be a nation clean unto Jehovah.

Verse 7. It was turned again as his other flesh — The inflicting of this disease, and curing it again in an instant, was so much the greater miracle, as the leprosy is a disease generally reckoned incurable by human art, especially the white leprosy, so called, because it overspreads the skin with white spots like snow.

6, 7. His hand was leprous — The second sign symbolizes Israel: first, fresh and young; then, foul and weak; then, clean and strong. Leprosy is a type of ceremonial defilement. As God bid Moses put his hand in his bosom, so had he bidden Israel go down into Egypt, where they had been sheltered from the Canaanitish influences which would have arrested their national life, but where they had also become contaminated with nature-worship, and where their heathen surroundings made them ceremonially unclean. Moses — Mosheh, the drawer or deliverer — was to draw them forth, and thrust them into another land, where they should be a nation clean unto Jehovah.

V. 8. The voice of the first sign-God’s works have a voice to speak to us, which we must diligently observe.

Verse 8. If they will not believe-the voice of the first sign, &c.] Probably intimating that some would be more difficult to be persuaded than others: some would yield to the evidence of the first miracle; others would hesitate till they had seen the second; and others would not believe till they had seen the water of the Nile turned into blood, when poured upon the dry land; Exodus 4:9.

Verse 8. The voice of the first sign — The expression here is peculiarly proper and forcible; for God’s works have a voice as well as his word, to which we ought diligently to attend. And these miracles spoke aloud in the ear of reason, and said, Believe in him whom God hath sent. Bishop Warburton observes here (see Divine Legation, book 4, sect. 4) that “in the first ages of the world, men being obliged to supply the deficiencies of language by significant signs, mutual converse was carried on by a mixed discourse of words and actions. Hence came the eastern phrase of the voice of the sign; and use and custom improving what had arisen out of necessity into ornament, this practice subsisted long after the necessity was over, especially in the East, the natural temperament of the people in that part of the world inclining them to a mode of conversation which exercised their vivacity by motion, and gratified it by a perpetual representation of material images.”

8. First sign… latter sign — These signs are God’s voiceless but visible words to the people. But, like all other words, they may be heard or not, at the hearer’s option. No conceivable miracle can compel conviction. When Christ arose “some doubted.”

9. The third sign symbolizes Jehovah’s power over Egypt and her gods. But for the Nile there would be no Egypt; and when Moses smote the water of the river he turned the very breast milk of Egypt to blood. And, besides, the Nile was a national god, for its fertilizing power was deemed to proceed from Osiris himself. Thus Jehovah smites Egypt’s life-giving god, who is stretched through the land a loathsome corpse.

V. 10. O my Lord, I am not eloquent-He was a great philosopher, statesman, and divine, and yet no orator; a man of a clear head, great thought and solid judgment, but had not a voluble tongue, nor ready utterance; and therefore he thought himself unfit to speak before great men, and about great affairs. Moses was mighty in word, Acts 7:22, and yet not eloquent: what he said was strong and nervous, and to the purpose, and distilled as the dew, Deuteronomy 32:2, though he did not deliver himself with that readiness, ease and fineness that some do.

Verse 10. I am not eloquent] דברים vya al lo ish debarim, I am not a man of words; a periphrasis common in the Scriptures. So Job 11:2, שפתים cya ish sephathayim, a man of lips, signifies one that is talkative. <19E011>Psalm 140:11, לשונ vya ish lashon, a man of tongue, signifies a prattler. But how could it be said that Moses was not eloquent, when St. Stephen asserts, Acts 7:22, that he was mighty in words as well as in deeds? There are three ways of solving this difficulty: 1. Moses might have had some natural infirmity, of a late standing, which at that time rendered it impossible for him to speak readily, and which he afterwards overcame; so that though he was not then a man of words, yet he might afterwards have been mighty in words as well as deeds. 2. It is possible he was not intimately acquainted with the Hebrew tongue, so as to speak clearly and distinctly in it. The first forty years of his life he had spent in Egypt, chiefly at court; and though it is very probable there was an affinity between the two languages, yet they certainly were not the same. The last forty he had spent in Midian, and it is not likely that the pure Hebrew tongue prevailed there, though it is probable that a dialect of it was there spoken. On these accounts Moses might find it difficult to express himself with that readiness and persuasive flow of language, which he might deem essentially necessary on such a momentous occasion; as he would frequently be obliged to consult his memory for proper expressions, which would necessarily produce frequent hesitation, and general slowness of utterance, which he might think would ill suit an ambassador of God. 3. Though Moses was slow of speech, yet when acting as the messenger of God his word was with power, for at his command the plagues came and the plagues were stayed; thus was he mighty in words as well as in deeds: and this is probably the meaning of St. Stephen.

By the expression, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant, he might possibly mean that the natural inaptitude to speak readily, which he had felt, he continued to feel, even since God had begun to discover himself; for though he had wrought several miracles for him, yet he had not healed this infirmity. See Clarke on “Exodus 6:12”.

Verse 10. O my Lord, I am not eloquent — He was a great philosopher, statesman, and divine, and yet no orator; a man of a clear head, great thought, and solid judgment, but had not a voluble tongue, nor ready utterance; and therefore he thought himself unfit to speak before great men and about great affairs. Moses was mighty in word, (Acts 7:21,) and yet not eloquent; what he said was strong and nervous, and to the purpose, and distilled as the dew, (Deuteronomy 32:2,) though he did not deliver himself with that readiness, ease, and fineness that some do.

MOSES HESITATES AND IS REBUKED, 10-17.

10-12. I am not eloquent — Literally, not a man of words. Slow of speech — Rather, heavy of mouth and heavy of tongue. Moses declares that he is no orator, has not the gift of persuasion, and therefore he has not confidence that he can convince Israel of his mission. So Paul tells us that his bodily presence was weak, and his speech contemptible; but where are weighty and immortal words to be found if they fell not from Paul and Moses? Moses, like Paul, felt weak when he measured himself with his work. He did not yet realize how God’s strength is made perfect in such weakness. It would also seem that Moses was not fluent, like Aaron his brother; and, perhaps, from his long separation from his brethren, he had to some degree lost command of his native language. This would naturally make him diffident in undertaking a popular appeal. He may have been conscious, too, that in his forty years’ exile from Egyptian civilization his tongue and manners had caught a desert rudeness, which poorly fitted him to appear in the courts of the Pharaohs. Here, for the first time, prophetic inspiration is promised to man. Henceforth in the whole subsequent history of the Church we see this endowment of the Holy Ghost. So the lips of the shrinking Isaiah were touched with a “live coal” from the heavenly altar. Isaiah 6. So Jehovah laid his hand on the mouth of the wavering Jeremiah. Jeremiah 1. So it was given to the uncultured Apostle to speak boldly before rulers and peoples: and so God’s Spirit has ever been a fire in the words of his genuine messengers. Moses was learned enough to know the vanity of learning, and had now become wise enough to see the folly of wisdom, so that he was just the instrument for God’s hand.

Verse 11. Who hath made man’s mouth? &c.] Cannot he who formed the mouth, the whole organs of speech, and hath given the gift of speech also, cannot he give utterance? God can take away those gifts and restore them again. Do not provoke him: he who created the eye, the ear, and the mouth, hath also made the blind, the deaf, and the dumb.

MOSES HESITATES AND IS REBUKED, 10-17.

10-12. I am not eloquent — Literally, not a man of words. Slow of speech — Rather, heavy of mouth and heavy of tongue. Moses declares that he is no orator, has not the gift of persuasion, and therefore he has not confidence that he can convince Israel of his mission. So Paul tells us that his bodily presence was weak, and his speech contemptible; but where are weighty and immortal words to be found if they fell not from Paul and Moses? Moses, like Paul, felt weak when he measured himself with his work. He did not yet realize how God’s strength is made perfect in such weakness. It would also seem that Moses was not fluent, like Aaron his brother; and, perhaps, from his long separation from his brethren, he had to some degree lost command of his native language. This would naturally make him diffident in undertaking a popular appeal. He may have been conscious, too, that in his forty years’ exile from Egyptian civilization his tongue and manners had caught a desert rudeness, which poorly fitted him to appear in the courts of the Pharaohs. Here, for the first time, prophetic inspiration is promised to man. Henceforth in the whole subsequent history of the Church we see this endowment of the Holy Ghost. So the lips of the shrinking Isaiah were touched with a “live coal” from the heavenly altar. Isaiah 6. So Jehovah laid his hand on the mouth of the wavering Jeremiah. Jeremiah 1. So it was given to the uncultured Apostle to speak boldly before rulers and peoples: and so God’s Spirit has ever been a fire in the words of his genuine messengers. Moses was learned enough to know the vanity of learning, and had now become wise enough to see the folly of wisdom, so that he was just the instrument for God’s hand.

Verse 12. I will be with thy mouth] The Chaldee translates, My WORD, meimeri, shall be with thy mouth. And Jonathan ben Uzziel paraphrases, I and my WORD will be with the speech of thy mouth. See Clarke on “Genesis 15:1”, and “Leviticus 25:10”.

MOSES HESITATES AND IS REBUKED, 10-17.

10-12. I am not eloquent — Literally, not a man of words. Slow of speech — Rather, heavy of mouth and heavy of tongue. Moses declares that he is no orator, has not the gift of persuasion, and therefore he has not confidence that he can convince Israel of his mission. So Paul tells us that his bodily presence was weak, and his speech contemptible; but where are weighty and immortal words to be found if they fell not from Paul and Moses? Moses, like Paul, felt weak when he measured himself with his work. He did not yet realize how God’s strength is made perfect in such weakness. It would also seem that Moses was not fluent, like Aaron his brother; and, perhaps, from his long separation from his brethren, he had to some degree lost command of his native language. This would naturally make him diffident in undertaking a popular appeal. He may have been conscious, too, that in his forty years’ exile from Egyptian civilization his tongue and manners had caught a desert rudeness, which poorly fitted him to appear in the courts of the Pharaohs. Here, for the first time, prophetic inspiration is promised to man. Henceforth in the whole subsequent history of the Church we see this endowment of the Holy Ghost. So the lips of the shrinking Isaiah were touched with a “live coal” from the heavenly altar. Isaiah 6. So Jehovah laid his hand on the mouth of the wavering Jeremiah. Jeremiah 1. So it was given to the uncultured Apostle to speak boldly before rulers and peoples: and so God’s Spirit has ever been a fire in the words of his genuine messengers. Moses was learned enough to know the vanity of learning, and had now become wise enough to see the folly of wisdom, so that he was just the instrument for God’s hand.

V. 13. Send by whom thou wilt send-By any but me.

Verse 13. Send-by the hand of him whom thou wilt send.] Many commentators, both ancient and modern, have thought that Moses prays here for the immediate mission of the Messiah; as if he had said: “Lord, thou hast purposed to send this glorious person at some time or other, I beseech thee send him now, for who can be sufficient to deliver and rule this people but himself alone?” The Hebrew jlvt dyb an jlv shelach na beyad tishlach literally translated is, Send now (or, I beseech thee) by the hand thou wilt send; which seems to intimate, Send a person more fit for the work than I am. So the Septuagint: proceirisai dunamenon allon, on aposteleiv\ Elect another powerful person, whom thou wilt send. It is right to find out the Messiah wherever he is mentioned in the Old Testament; but to press scriptures into this service which have not an obvious tendency that way, is both improper and dangerous. I am firmly of opinion that Moses had no reference to the Messiah when he spoke these words.

Verses 13, 14. Send by whom thou wilt send — By any but me. The anger of the Lord was kindled — Even self-diffidence, when it grows into an extreme, when it either hinders us from duty, or clogs us in duty, is very displeasing to him. I know that he can speak well — Moses excelled in wisdom and conduct, Aaron in eloquence. Such is the wise order of Providence. As in the human body each member has its different use and function, and all ministering to the good of the whole; so in the mystical body of Christ, God has dispensed different gifts to different members, and very seldom, if ever, gives all accomplishments to one; but to preserve a mutual dependance and relation, he distributes some to one and some to others, Romans 12:4.

13. Send, I pray thee, by the hand (of whomsoever else) thou wilt send — All his objections had been removed, yet still he hesitated and shrank. The unreasonableness of unbelief is here most naturally depicted, but with what unworldly fidelity! What an infallible touch of genuineness, when we consider the laws of man’s spiritual development, and note the progress of the faith of Moses! Yet what later scribe of the followers of the great lawgiver would ever, by the invention of such an incident, have blurred the glory of that venerated name? Only Moses himself — and only the inspired Moses — could ever have detailed this humiliating weakness. This is not the style of unrenewed and uninspired man.

V. 14. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against him-Even self-diffidence when it grows into an extreme, when it either hinders us from duty, or clogs us in duty, is very displeasing to him.

Verse 14. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses] Surely this would not have been the case had he only in modesty, and from a deep sense of his own unfitness, desired that the Messiah should be preferred before him. But the whole connection shows that this interpretation is unfounded.

Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother?] Houbigant endeavours to prove from this that Moses, in Exodus 4:13, did pray for the immediate mission of the Messiah, and that God gives him here a reason why this could not be, because the Levitical priesthood was to precede the priesthood of our Lord. Is not Aaron the Levite, &c. Must not the ministry of Aaron be first established, before the other can take place? Why then ask for that which is contrary to the Divine counsel? From the opinion of so great a critic as Houbigant no man would wish to dissent, except through necessity: however, I must say that it does appear to me that his view of these verses is fanciful, and the arguments by which he supports it are insufficient to establish his point.

I know that he can speak well.] awh rbdy rbd yk ידעתי yadati ki dabber yedabber hu, I know that in speaking he will speak. That is, he is apt to talk, and has a ready utterance.

He cometh forth to meet thee] He shall meet thee at my mount, (Exodus 4:27,) shall rejoice in thy mission, and most heartily co-operate with thee in all things. A necessary assurance, to prevent Moses from suspecting that Aaron, who was his elder brother, would envy his superior call and office.

Verses 13, 14. Send by whom thou wilt send — By any but me. The anger of the Lord was kindled — Even self-diffidence, when it grows into an extreme, when it either hinders us from duty, or clogs us in duty, is very displeasing to him. I know that he can speak well — Moses excelled in wisdom and conduct, Aaron in eloquence. Such is the wise order of Providence. As in the human body each member has its different use and function, and all ministering to the good of the whole; so in the mystical body of Christ, God has dispensed different gifts to different members, and very seldom, if ever, gives all accomplishments to one; but to preserve a mutual dependance and relation, he distributes some to one and some to others, Romans 12:4.

14. Aaron the Levite now first appears, and behind him Moses for the time retires. This is just and natural, for during forty years Aaron had been among his brethren, and living in the atmosphere of the highest civilization of the time, while Moses had been tending sheep for a Bedouin priest in the wilderness; but again we ask, what follower of the Sinai legislator would ever have dreamed of this? Aaron is God’s spokesman to the people; it is Aaron’s rod that buds; Aaron is Jehovah’s high priest; it is his sons that come to honour and wear the splendid vestments of the tabernacle, the chosen servants of Jehovah’s altar, while the children of Moses vanish into obscurity. Yet the slow, stammering, vailed prophet is the soul of Israel. Behold, he cometh forth to meet thee — Events had been ripening in Egypt also, and the people as well as the leader had been preparing for the critical hour. He will be glad in his heart to see thee, and ready to unite with thee in the work of national deliverance. So we afterwards read that “he met and kissed him in the mount of God.” The Egyptian traditions of the exodus, though broken and confused, are deemed by some historians to show traces of dynastic rivalries and convulsions which favoured the exit of Israel; but this is extremely uncertain. It is certain, however, that Moses, Pharaoh, and Israel, though all freely acting, were all providentially used in this crisis. See on verse 21.

V. 15. I will be with thy mouth and with his mouth-Even Aaron that could speak well, yet could not speak to purpose, unless God were with his mouth; without the constant aids of divine grace, the best gifts will fail.

Verse 15. I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth] Ye shall be both, in all things which I appoint you to do in this business, under the continual inspiration of the Most High.

Verses 15, 16. I will be with thy mouth and with his mouth — Even Aaron that could speak well, yet could not speak to purpose, unless God were with his mouth; without the constant aids of divine grace, the best gifts will fail. Instead of God — To teach and to command him.

15, 16. Moses was still to be the mediator, while Aaron was to be the interpreter of God’s word as he received it from Moses. Yet it is instructive to notice that as Moses advances in his work and grows in faith, (and shall we not say, wears away the desert rusticity?) Aaron gradually retires from the prominent position which at first he held, and Moses comes more forward. Aaron is the spokesman, but while we read of the lineage of “that Aaron and Moses,” yet it is always “Moses and Aaron” who come before Pharaoh. It is Aaron who casts down the rod which swallows up the magicians’ rods, and who smites Egypt with the first and mildest blows; but it is Moses who prostrates Pharaoh’s sorcerers with such a stroke that they lift their heads no more, (Exodus 9:11,) and it is his rod that strikes the final terrible blows thereafter, till the Red Sea rolls back over Pharaoh.

V. 16. Instead of God-To teach and to command him.

Verse 16. He shall be thy spokesman] Literally, He shall speak for thee (or in thy stead) to the people.

He shall be to thee instead of a mouth] He shall convey every message to the people; and thou shalt be to him instead of God-thou shalt deliver to him what I communicate to thee.

Verses 15, 16. I will be with thy mouth and with his mouth — Even Aaron that could speak well, yet could not speak to purpose, unless God were with his mouth; without the constant aids of divine grace, the best gifts will fail. Instead of God — To teach and to command him.

15, 16. Moses was still to be the mediator, while Aaron was to be the interpreter of God’s word as he received it from Moses. Yet it is instructive to notice that as Moses advances in his work and grows in faith, (and shall we not say, wears away the desert rusticity?) Aaron gradually retires from the prominent position which at first he held, and Moses comes more forward. Aaron is the spokesman, but while we read of the lineage of “that Aaron and Moses,” yet it is always “Moses and Aaron” who come before Pharaoh. It is Aaron who casts down the rod which swallows up the magicians’ rods, and who smites Egypt with the first and mildest blows; but it is Moses who prostrates Pharaoh’s sorcerers with such a stroke that they lift their heads no more, (Exodus 9:11,) and it is his rod that strikes the final terrible blows thereafter, till the Red Sea rolls back over Pharaoh.

V. 17. Take this rod-The staff or crook he carried as a shepherd, that he might not be ashamed of that mean condition out of which God called him. This rod must be his staff of authority, and must be to him instead, both of sword and sceptre.

Verse 17. Thou shalt take this rod] From the story of Moses’s rod the heathens have invented the fables of the thyrsus of Bacchus, and the caduceus of Mercury. Cicero reckons five Bacchuses, one of which, according to Orpheus, was born of the river Nile; but, according to the common opinion, he was born on the banks of that river. Bacchus is expressly said to have been exposed on the river Nile, hence he is called Nilus, both by Diodorus and Macrobius; and in the hymns of Orpheus he is named Myses, because he was drawn out of the water. He is represented by the poets as being very beautiful, and an illustrious warrior; they report him to have overrun all Arabia with a numerous army both of men and women. He is said also to have been an eminent law-giver, and to have written his laws on two tables. He always carried in his hand the thyrsus, a rod wreathed with serpents, and by which he is reported to have wrought many miracles. Any person acquainted with the birth and exploits of the poetic Bacchus will at once perceive them to be all borrowed from the life and acts of Moses, as recorded in the Pentateuch; and it would be losing time to show the parallel, by quoting passages from the book of Exodus. The caduceus or rod of Mercury is well known in poetic fables. It is another copy Of the rod of Moses. He also is reported to have wrought a multitude of miracles by this rod; and particularly he is said to kill and make alive, to send souls to the invisible world and bring them back from thence. Homer represents Mercury taking his rod to work miracles precisely in the same way as God commands Moses to take his. JErmhv de yucav kullhniov exekaleito

Andrwn mnhsthrwn\ ece de JPABDON meta cersin

Kalhn, cruseihn, th tJ andrwn ommata qelgei,

JWn eqelei, touv dJ aute kai upnwontav egeirei.

Odyss., lib. xxiv., ver. 1.

Cyllenian Hermes now call’d forth the souls

Of all the suitors; with his golden WAND

Of power, to seal in balmy sleep whose eyes

Soe’er he will, and open them again.

COWPER.

Virgil copies Homer, but carries the parallel farther, tradition having probably furnished him with more particulars; but in both we may see a disguised copy of the sacred history, from which indeed the Greek and Roman poets borrowed most of their beauties.

Tum VIRGAM CAPIT: hac animas ille evocat Orco

Pallentes, alias sub tristia Tartara mittit;

Dat somnos, adimitque, et lumina morte resignat

ILLA fretus agit, ventos, et turbida tranat.

Æneid, lib. iv., ver. 242.

But first he grasps within his awful hand

The mark of sovereign power, the magic wand;

With this he draws the ghosts from hollow graves,

With this he drives them down the Stygian waves;

With this he seals in sleep the wakeful sight,

And eyes, though closed in death, restores to light.

Thus arm’d, the god begins his airy race,

And drives the racking clouds along the liquid space. DRYDEN.

Many other resemblances between the rod of the poets and that of Moses, the learned reader will readily recollect. These specimens may be deemed sufficient.

Verse 17. Take this rod — The staff or crook he carried as a shepherd, that he might not be ashamed of the mean condition out of which God called him. “This rod must be his staff of authority, and must be to him instead of both sword and sceptre.

17. This rod — This simple shepherd’s crook shall break the sceptre of Egypt, shall break the crook and flail of Osiris. So, long after, a shepherd’s sling delivered Israel; a Galilean fisher’s net enclosed the Gospel multitudes; and a Cilician tentmaker spread the gospel tabernacle over the Gentile nations. Thus the Dispensations ever harmonize. With this decisive command Jehovah closes the interview, and Moses humbly submits and obeys.

THE RETURN OF MOSES TO EGYPT, 18-31.

Moses, as far as we can see, says nothing at this time to Jethro about his divine commission, for as yet, probably, he could not have understood it.

Verse 18. Let me go, I pray thee, and return unto my brethren] Moses, having received his commission from God, and directions how to execute it, returned to his father-in-law, and asked permission to visit his family and brethren in Egypt, without giving him any intimation of the great errand on which he was going. His keeping this secret has been attributed to his singular modesty: but however true it might be that Moses was a truly humble and modest man, yet his prudence alone was sufficient to have induced him to observe silence on this subject; for, if once imparted to the family of his father-in-law, the news might have reached Egypt before he could get thither, and a general alarm among the Egyptians would in all probability have been the consequence; as fame would not fail to represent Moses as coming to stir up sedition and rebellion, and the whole nation would have been armed against them. It was therefore essentially necessary that the business should be kept secret. In the Septuagint and Coptic the following addition is made to this verse: Meta de tav hmerav tav pollas ekinav eteleuthsen o basileuv aiguptou\ After these many days, the king of Egypt died. This was probably an ancient gloss or side note, which in process of time crept into the text, as it appeared to throw light on the following verse.

Verse 18. Moses returned to Jethro — Justice and decency required Moses to acquaint his father-in-law with his intention of going into Egypt; but he thought fit to conceal from him the errand upon which God sent him, lest he should endeavour to hinder or discourage him from so difficult and dangerous an enterprise. So that Moses, in this instance, has given us a rare example of piety and prudence, in that he took care to avoid all occasions and temptations to disobedience to the divine commands; as well as of singular modesty and humility, in that such glorious and familiar converse with God, and the high commission with which he had honoured him, neither made him forget the duty he owed to his father-in-law, nor break out into any vain-glorious ostentation of such a privilege.

V. 19. The Lord said unto Moses-This seems to have been a second vision, whereby God calls him to the present execution of the command given before.

Verse 19. In Midian] This was a new revelation, and appears to have taken place after Moses returned to his father-in-law previous to his departure for Egypt.

Verses 19, 20. The Lord said unto Moses — This seems to have been a second vision, whereby God calls him to the present execution of the command given before. The rod of God — His shepherd’s crook, so called, as it was God’s instrument in so many glorious works.

19. All the men are dead — See Exodus 2:23, where the death of the king is related immediately before Moses’ call. This event seems in several ways to have been critical for the fortunes of Israel.

V. 20. The rod of God-His shepherd’s crook so called, as it was God’s instrument in so many glorious works.

Verse 20. His wife and his sons] Both Gershom and Eliezer, though the birth of the latter has not yet been mentioned in the Hebrew text. See Clarke’s note on “Exodus 2:22”.

Set them upon an ass] The Septuagint reads the word in the plural, eki ta upozugia, upon asses, as it certainly required more than one to carry Zipporah, Gershom, and Eliezer.

The rod of God] The sign of sovereign power, by which he was to perform all his miracles; once the badge of his shepherd’s office, and now that by which he is to feed, rule, and protect his people Israel.

Verses 19, 20. The Lord said unto Moses — This seems to have been a second vision, whereby God calls him to the present execution of the command given before. The rod of God — His shepherd’s crook, so called, as it was God’s instrument in so many glorious works.

20. And Moses took his wife — Zipporah. And his (two) sons — Gershom and Eliezer. Set thereupon an ass — Rather, made them ride upon the ass. Probably only Zipporah and the child Eliezer rode, while Moses and Gershom walked by the side of the ass. This was an humble, an unostentatious, entry of the commander of the hosts of Israel!

V. 21. In thy hand-in thy power: I will harden his heart-After he has frequently harden’d it himself, wilfully shutting his eyes against the light, I will at last permit Satan to harden it effectually.

Verse 21. But I will harden his heart] The case of Pharaoh has given rise to many fierce controversies, and to several strange and conflicting opinions. Would men but look at the whole account without the medium of their respective creeds, they would find little difficulty to apprehend the truth. If we take up the subject in a theological point of view, all sober Christians will allow the truth of this proposition of St. Augustine, when the subject in question is a person who has hardened his own heart by frequently resisting the grace and spirit of God: Non obdurat Deus impertiendo malitiam, sed non impertiendo misericordiam; Epist. 194, ad Sixtum, “God does not harden men by infusing malice into them, but by not imparting mercy to them.” And this other will be as readily credited: Non operatur Deus in homine ipsam duritiam cordis; sed indurare eum dicitur quem mollire noluerit, sic etiam excaecare quem illuminare noluerit, et repellere eum quem noluerit vocare. “God does not work this hardness of heart in man; but he may be said to harden him whom he refuses to soften, to blind him whom he refuses to enlighten, and to repel him whom he refuses to call.” It is but just and right that he should withhold those graces which he had repeatedly offered, and which the sinner had despised and rejected. Thus much for the general principle. The verb qzj chazak, which we translate harden, literally signifies to strengthen, confirm, make bold or courageous; and is often used in the sacred writings to excite to duty, perseverance, &c., and is placed by the Jews at the end of most books in the Bible as an exhortation to the reader to take courage, and proceed with his reading and with the obedience it requires. It constitutes an essential part of the exhortation of God to Joshua, Joshua 1:7: Only be thou STRONG, qzj qr rak chazak. And of Joshua’s dying exhortation to the people, Joshua 23:6: Be ye therefore VERY COURAGEOUS, µtqzjw vachazaktem, to keep and to do all that is written in the book of the law. Now it would he very strange in these places to translate the word harden: Only be thou hard, Be ye therefore very hard; and yet if we use the word hardy, it would suit the sense and context perfectly well: Only be thou HARDY; Be ye therefore very HARDY. Now suppose we apply the word in this way to Pharaoh, the sense would be good, and the justice of God equally conspicuous. I will make his heart hardy, bold, daring, presumptuous; for the same principle acting against God’s order is presumption, which when acting according to it is undaunted courage. It is true that the verb hvq kashah is used, Exodus 7:3, which signifies to render stiff, tough, or stubborn, but it amounts to nearly the same meaning with the above.

All those who have read the Scriptures with care and attention, know well that God is frequently represented in them as doing what he only permits to be done. So because a man has grieved his Spirit and resisted his grace he withdraws that Spirit and grace from him, and thus he becomes bold and presumptuous in sin. Pharaoh made his own heart stubborn against God, Exodus 9:34; and God gave him up to judicial blindness, so that he rushed on stubbornly to his own destruction. From the whole of Pharaoh’s conduct we learn that he was bold, haughty, and cruel; and God chose to permit these dispositions to have their full sway in his heart without check or restraint from Divine influence: the consequence was what God intended, he did not immediately comply with the requisition to let the people go; and this was done that God might have the fuller opportunity of manifesting his power by multiplying signs and miracles, and thus impress the hearts both of the Egyptians and Israelites with a due sense of his omnipotence and justice. The whole procedure was graciously calculated to do endless good to both nations. The Israelites must be satisfied that they had the true God for their protector; and thus their faith was strengthened. The Egyptians must see that their gods could do nothing against the God of Israel; and thus their dependence on them was necessarily shaken. These great ends could not have been answered had Pharaoh at once consented to let the people go. This consideration alone unravels the mystery, and explains everything. Let it be observed that there is nothing spoken here of the eternal state of the Egyptian king; nor does anything in the whole of the subsequent account authorize us to believe that God hardened his heart against the influences of his own grace, that he might occasion him so to sin that his justice might consign him to hell. This would be such an act of flagrant injustice as we could scarcely attribute to the worst of men. He who leads another into an offence that he may have a fairer pretence to punish him for it, or brings him into such circumstances that he cannot avoid committing a capital crime, and then hangs him for it, is surely the most execrable of mortals. What then should we make of the God of justice and mercy should we attribute to him a decree, the date of which is lost in eternity, by which he has determined to cut off from the possibility of salvation millions of millions of unborn souls, and leave them under a necessity of sinning, by actually hardening their hearts against the influences of his own grace and Spirit, that he may, on the pretext of justice, consign them to endless perdition? Whatever may be pretended in behalf of such unqualified opinions, it must be evident to all who are not deeply prejudiced, that neither the justice nor the sovereignty of God can be magnified by them. See Clarke farther on “Exodus 9:16”.

Verses 21-23. Which I have put in thy hand — In thy power: I will harden his heart — After he has frequently hardened it himself, wilfully shutting his eyes against the light, I will at last permit Satan to harden it effectually. Thus saith the Lord — This is the first time that preface is used by any man, which afterward is used so frequently by all the prophets: Israel is my son, my firstborn — Precious in my sight, honourable, and dear to me. Let my son go — Not only my servant, whom thou hast no right to detain, but my son, whose liberty and honour I am jealous for. If thou refuse, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn — As men deal with God’s people, let them expect to be themselves dealt with.

Ver. 21. I will harden his heart. The critics read these words so differently as to make a great difficulty in the sense: and the ancient versions of the bible differ as much as the critics. I will harden—I will fortify—I will magnify—I will hold—I will corroborate—I will fix—settle or retain Pharaoh’s heart. Vide Poli Syn. Crit. in loc. And it is said, Exodus 8:32, that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. “God,” says Theodoret, “had he so pleased, might have cut off Pharaoh by a sudden and single stroke; but his goodness induced him to employ more mild and lenient measures.” This indulgence, Pharaoh abused, turning it in every step to an occasion of confirming himself in his obstinacy, as appears in the course of the history, where we find him wavering under the anguish of the scourge, and disposed to comply; and upon the removal of the plague, resuming his former obstinacy. Hence it is evident, he acted by free choice and consent. Had he been wicked by a physical necessity, he could not so often have changed his mind. Hence also that expression, as the Lord had spoken by Moses, Exodus 9:35, is to be understood of the divine prescience or foreknowledge that it would be so. Biblio. Biblia, in loc. The fact seems to be, that when wicked men resist the works and grace of God, he in righteous judgment withdraws his grace, suffers them freely to take their own way, and then they ultimately pass into a state of reprobation. With men so hardened, God in his mysterious wisdom is sometimes pleased to accomplish the purposes of his providence. But as a good man cannot harden another to oppress and kill, so God could not harden Pharaoh to those cruel acts. Therefore, “Let no man say, when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.” James 1:13.

21. I will harden his heart — Lest Moses should be despondent in his long conflict with Pharaoh’s obstinate disobedience, he is now assured that this also has been fully foreseen and provided for by Jehovah, for it is to be taken up into His plan as one of the evils which “work together for good” to God’s elect. Romans 8:28. It would give Moses hope and courage to know that no step of the struggle had been unforeseen and unprovided for. Every action, good and bad, may be viewed in two aspects, either as proceeding from the voluntary and responsible agent, or as used by God in his providence; and it is the latter, or divine side, that is here specially emphasized, because the history is specially a history of providence — of the divine overruling. Yet both sides of the action are in this narrative equally presented, for it is notable that, while we read here ten times that God “hardened the heart” of Pharaoh, we read precisely the same number of times that “Pharaoh hardened his heart,” or that his heart “was hardened,” “stiff,” or “heavy.”

But this is not the whole meaning, nor is the interpretation adequate, that God permitted rather than caused. Hardness of heart is a judgment proceeding directly from God. It is a consequential punishment of sin. But before God inflicts this penalty man has deserved it by trifling with God’s goodness and mercy. Increasing stubbornness and moral insensibility are the judicial consequences of conscious resistance to God’s will; and this judgment proceeds directly from God, while the sin which invokes the judgment and brings man within the range of these consequences proceeds from man. Thus Pharaoh hardened his heart, and yet it was hardened by Jehovah. While ignorant of Jehovah, disobedience to his law could not harden him; but, from the moment that he knew him, resistance hardened. For this conscious disobedience and this judicial consequence Pharaoh was responsible. This sin of his was, moreover, foreseen. The prediction here made to Moses, and the providential preparations for the punishment of Pharaoh’s sin, were the effects of that sin, divinely foreseen — as, in a lower sphere, the erection of court-houses and jails are the effects of sin humanly foreseen. But knowledge, whether fore or after, in man or God, can never be the cause, but is ever the effect, of the thing known. See notes on Romans 8:29, and 9:18.

V. 22. Thus saith the Lord-This is the first time that preface is used by any man, which afterwards is used so frequently by all the prophets: Israel is my son, my first-born-Precious in my sight, honourable, and dear to me.

Verse 22. Israel is my son, even my firstborn] That is, The Hebrew people are unutterably dear to me.

Verses 21-23. Which I have put in thy hand — In thy power: I will harden his heart — After he has frequently hardened it himself, wilfully shutting his eyes against the light, I will at last permit Satan to harden it effectually. Thus saith the Lord — This is the first time that preface is used by any man, which afterward is used so frequently by all the prophets: Israel is my son, my firstborn — Precious in my sight, honourable, and dear to me. Let my son go — Not only my servant, whom thou hast no right to detain, but my son, whose liberty and honour I am jealous for. If thou refuse, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn — As men deal with God’s people, let them expect to be themselves dealt with.

22. My firstborn — By spiritual generation. In God’s covenant Israel was adopted as the firstborn of the nations, for ultimate good of the whole family of man. By a series of providences, from the call of Abraham to the exode, Israel was given a national being, and adopted as the child of Jehovah. See the plan of Exodus.

Pharaoh, who styled himself Son of RA, the sun-god, was commanded to release Israel, the Son of JEHOVAH. Thus at every turn we see that the blow was struck at Egypt’s gods; this conflict is religious rather than political; the war is waged from heaven.

V. 23. Let my son go-Not only my servant whom thou hast no right to detain, but my son whose liberty and honour I am jealous for. If thou refuse, I will slay thy son, even thy first-born-As men deal with God’s people, let them expect to be themselves dealt with.

Verse 23. Let my son go, that he may serve me] Which they could not do in Goshen, consistently with the policy and religious worship of the Egyptians; because the most essential part of an Israelite’s worship consisted in sacrifice, and the animals which they offered to God were sacred among the Egyptians. Moses gives Pharaoh this reason Exodus 8:26.

I will slay thy son, even thy first-born.] Which, on Pharaoh’s utter refusal to let the people go, was accordingly done; see Exodus 12:29.

Verses 21-23. Which I have put in thy hand — In thy power: I will harden his heart — After he has frequently hardened it himself, wilfully shutting his eyes against the light, I will at last permit Satan to harden it effectually. Thus saith the Lord — This is the first time that preface is used by any man, which afterward is used so frequently by all the prophets: Israel is my son, my firstborn — Precious in my sight, honourable, and dear to me. Let my son go — Not only my servant, whom thou hast no right to detain, but my son, whose liberty and honour I am jealous for. If thou refuse, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn — As men deal with God’s people, let them expect to be themselves dealt with.

V. 24. It seems the sin of Moses, was neglecting to circumcise his son, which perhaps was the effect of his being unequally yoked with a Midianite, who was too indulgent of her child, and Moses so of her. The Lord met him, and, probably, by a sword in an angel’s hand, sought to kill him-This was a great change. Very lately God was conversing with him as a friend, and now coming forth against him as an enemy. In this case of necessity Zipporah herself circumcised the child without delay; whether with passionate words, expressing the dislike of the ordinance itself, or at least the administration of it to so young a child.

Verse 24. By the way in the inn] See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 42:27”. The account in this and the following verse is very obscure. Some suppose that the 23d verse is not a part of the message to Pharaoh, but was spoken by the Lord to Moses; and that the whole may be thus paraphrased: “And I have said unto thee, (Moses,) Send forth jlv shallach, my son, (Gershom, by circumcising him,) that he may serve me, (which he cannot do till entered into the covenant by circumcision,) but thou hast refused to send him forth; behold, (therefore,) I will slay thy son, thy first-born. And it came to pass by the way in the inn, (when he was on his journey to Egypt,) that Jehovah met him, and sought (threatened) to kill him (Gershom.) Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut away the foreskin of her son, and caused it to touch his feet, (Jehovah’s, who probably appeared in a bodily shape; the Septuagint call him the Angel of the Lord,) and said unto him, A spouse by blood art thou unto me. Then he (Jehovah) ceased from him (Gershom.) Then she said, A spouse by blood art thou unto me, because of this circumcision.” That is, I who am an alien have entered as fully into covenant with thee by doing this act, as my son has on whom this act has been performed.

The meaning of the whole passage seems to be this:-The son of Moses, Gershom or Eliezer, (for it does not appear which,) had not been circumcised, though it would seem that God had ordered the father to do it; but as he had neglected this, therefore Jehovah was about to have slain the child, because not in covenant with him by circumcision, and thus he intended to have punished the disobedience of the father by the natural death of his son. Zipporah, getting acquainted with the nature of the case and the danger to which her first-born was exposed, took a sharp stone and cut off the foreskin of her son. By this act the displeasure of the Lord was turned aside, and Zipporah considered herself as now allied to God because of this circumcision. According to the law, (Genesis 17:14,) the uncircumcised child was to be cut off from his people, so that there should be no inheritance for that branch of the family in Israel. Moses therefore, for neglecting to circumcise the child, exposed him to this cutting off, and it was but barely prevented by the prompt obedience of Zipporah. As circumcision was the seal of that justification by faith which comes through Christ, Moses by neglecting it gave a very bad example, and God was about to proceed against him with that severity which the law required.

The sharp stone mentioned Exodus 4:25 was probably a knife made of flint, for such were anciently used, even where knives of metal might be had, for every kind of operation about the human body, such as embowelling for the purpose of embalming, circumcision, &c. Ancient authors are full of proofs of these facts. See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 50:2”.

It is probable that Zipporah, being alarmed by this circumstance, and fearing worse evils, took the resolution to return to her father’s house with her two sons. See Exodus 18:1, &c.

Verse 24. By the way in the inn — Here our translation uses the modern word inn: but the original signifies only the place where they rested that night, which was probably in some cave, or under some shade of trees. The Lord met him — The Septuagint says, The angel of the Lord, with which agree the Chaldee and some other ancient versions: and sought to kill him — He appeared in a threatening posture, probably with a sword drawn in his hand, or inflicted upon him some disease which threatened him with death. This was a great change: very lately God was conversing with him as a friend, and is now coming forth against him as an enemy. The cause seems to have been Moses’s neglecting to circumcise his son; which, perhaps, was the effect of his being unequally yoked with a Midianite, who was too indulgent of her child, and Moses so of her. Now God was offended with him for this neglect of duty, not only because Moses knew that no child could be admitted a member of the Israelitish community without circumcision, nor be entitled to the blessings of God’s covenant with Abraham’s seed, but also, because Moses’s example was of great consequence; for who would have regarded the law if the lawgiver himself had neglected it? As Moses was raised up for an extraordinary service, it was peculiarly proper that he should set an example of exact obedience in his own conduct. Hence he was thus sharply rebuked.

Ver. 24. The Lord met him. The Chaldaic reads, the angel of the Lord. The rabbins make much ado in the illustration of this text. Moses had delayed the rite of circumcising Gershom, surnamed Eliezer, evidently because of family opposition. But now the mother performed the office to avert the impending stroke of death, reproaching Moses as a bloody husband. Christian, be aware, that circumcision of the heart is absolutely required, the mortification of all unlawful desires, else thy soul must die for sin. Nay more, as Moses did this on the day of his journey, so those desires must be suppressed in their first assaults.

24-26. It came to pass… in the inn — An incident which transpired at some well-known halting-place on the road (the lodging-place) is so briefly related as to have occasioned much doubt and perplexity to all interpreters. It is most probably to be understood thus: — Zipporah, the Midianitess, although she loved her husband, yet did not wholly sympathise with his great work, nor enter as she should into Jehovah’s covenant. At least through her influence Moses had not given their youngest son the covenant sign, and Eliezer was yet uncircumcised. But it was now needful that Moses should be most impressively taught the necessity of himself keeping the ordinances which he was about to teach to others, and this is one of the striking incidents in his spiritual education. Sought to kill him — Death was the penalty for neglecting the seal of the covenant. Genesis 17:14. As Moses advanced towards Egypt, Jehovah barred his way, as at a similar crisis in the history of Jacob he had crossed his path at Peniel, and would not allow him to go forward till, after his famous wrestling, he consecrated himself to the God of Israel. In some way, we are not told how, death stood in his path, and Zipporah recognised his mortal danger as a consequence of his neglect and her opposition. Cut off the foreskin — She herself circumcised the child, and threw the bloody token petulantly at Moses’s feet, calling him a husband of bloods, (text, a bloody husband,) in angry allusion to the bloody rite. Then Jehovah released Moses from his danger, (so he let him go,) and Zipporah, regarding him as wedded to her afresh, that is, redeemed from death, and made thus her husband anew, calls him with fresh emphasis a husband of bloods because of the circumcision.

Zipporah uses a stone knife, such as seems generally to have been then employed for this rite — as may be seen in Joshua 5:2, margin — although metallic tools had been in use for ages among these Shemitic peoples. But in this rite, as in the Egyptian process of embalming, (Herodotus, 2:86,) ancient custom seems to have kept in use the more primitive tool. Zipporah seems now, or soon after, to have returned to her father’s house in Midian, for there we find her with the children when Moses returns to Horeb at the head of Israel.

Verse 25. Zipporah took a sharp stone — Or a knife made of flint, a species of knives commonly used, as ancient writers assure us, in those days; and cut off the foreskin of her son — She perceived, it seems, the danger of her husband, and the cause of it, and he being disabled from performing the office, whether by some stroke of affliction, or the terror of so dreadful and unexpected an appearance, and a delay in a matter of such moment being dangerous, she immediately performed the work herself. And now, the cause being removed, God’s anger ceased, and Moses was permitted to pursue his journey. Surely a bloody husband art thou to me — The words in the original are short and ambiguous. As here translated, they imply that she passionately reprobated both him and his religion, which required this bloody ceremony, as if she had said, This I have for marrying a Hebrew. But the words may be understood as expressing great affection, and signifying that she had now espoused him afresh by circumcising her son, the blood of that rite having been the means of restoring him to her again, or that her child was now espoused to God by the covenant of circumcision, as some read it. The Septuagint renders the passage, Zipporah, having taken a sharp knife, circumcised her son, and fell down at his (Moses’s) feet, and said, The blood of the circumcision of my child is stopped, and she went away from him; that is, she and her children went home to Midian, when she found the child was out of danger, and able to travel. It is at least probable, that on this occasion she went back to her father with the children, and that Moses consented to this that they might not create him any further uneasiness. When we have any special service to do for God, we should remove as far from us as we can whatsoever is likely to be our hinderance. Let the dead bury their dead, but follow thou me.

24-26. It came to pass… in the inn — An incident which transpired at some well-known halting-place on the road (the lodging-place) is so briefly related as to have occasioned much doubt and perplexity to all interpreters. It is most probably to be understood thus: — Zipporah, the Midianitess, although she loved her husband, yet did not wholly sympathise with his great work, nor enter as she should into Jehovah’s covenant. At least through her influence Moses had not given their youngest son the covenant sign, and Eliezer was yet uncircumcised. But it was now needful that Moses should be most impressively taught the necessity of himself keeping the ordinances which he was about to teach to others, and this is one of the striking incidents in his spiritual education. Sought to kill him — Death was the penalty for neglecting the seal of the covenant. Genesis 17:14. As Moses advanced towards Egypt, Jehovah barred his way, as at a similar crisis in the history of Jacob he had crossed his path at Peniel, and would not allow him to go forward till, after his famous wrestling, he consecrated himself to the God of Israel. In some way, we are not told how, death stood in his path, and Zipporah recognised his mortal danger as a consequence of his neglect and her opposition. Cut off the foreskin — She herself circumcised the child, and threw the bloody token petulantly at Moses’s feet, calling him a husband of bloods, (text, a bloody husband,) in angry allusion to the bloody rite. Then Jehovah released Moses from his danger, (so he let him go,) and Zipporah, regarding him as wedded to her afresh, that is, redeemed from death, and made thus her husband anew, calls him with fresh emphasis a husband of bloods because of the circumcision.

Zipporah uses a stone knife, such as seems generally to have been then employed for this rite — as may be seen in Joshua 5:2, margin — although metallic tools had been in use for ages among these Shemitic peoples. But in this rite, as in the Egyptian process of embalming, (Herodotus, 2:86,) ancient custom seems to have kept in use the more primitive tool. Zipporah seems now, or soon after, to have returned to her father’s house in Midian, for there we find her with the children when Moses returns to Horeb at the head of Israel.

V. 26. So he let him go-The destroying angel withdrew. But still Zipporah cannot forget, but will unreasonably call Moses a bloody husband, because he obliged her to circumcise the child; and upon this occasion, (it is probable) he sent them back to his father-in-law, that they might not create him any farther uneasiness. When we have any special service to do for God, we should remove that as far from us as we can, which is likely to be our hindrance: let the dead bury their dead, but follow thou me.

24-26. It came to pass… in the inn — An incident which transpired at some well-known halting-place on the road (the lodging-place) is so briefly related as to have occasioned much doubt and perplexity to all interpreters. It is most probably to be understood thus: — Zipporah, the Midianitess, although she loved her husband, yet did not wholly sympathise with his great work, nor enter as she should into Jehovah’s covenant. At least through her influence Moses had not given their youngest son the covenant sign, and Eliezer was yet uncircumcised. But it was now needful that Moses should be most impressively taught the necessity of himself keeping the ordinances which he was about to teach to others, and this is one of the striking incidents in his spiritual education. Sought to kill him — Death was the penalty for neglecting the seal of the covenant. Genesis 17:14. As Moses advanced towards Egypt, Jehovah barred his way, as at a similar crisis in the history of Jacob he had crossed his path at Peniel, and would not allow him to go forward till, after his famous wrestling, he consecrated himself to the God of Israel. In some way, we are not told how, death stood in his path, and Zipporah recognised his mortal danger as a consequence of his neglect and her opposition. Cut off the foreskin — She herself circumcised the child, and threw the bloody token petulantly at Moses’s feet, calling him a husband of bloods, (text, a bloody husband,) in angry allusion to the bloody rite. Then Jehovah released Moses from his danger, (so he let him go,) and Zipporah, regarding him as wedded to her afresh, that is, redeemed from death, and made thus her husband anew, calls him with fresh emphasis a husband of bloods because of the circumcision.

Zipporah uses a stone knife, such as seems generally to have been then employed for this rite — as may be seen in Joshua 5:2, margin — although metallic tools had been in use for ages among these Shemitic peoples. But in this rite, as in the Egyptian process of embalming, (Herodotus, 2:86,) ancient custom seems to have kept in use the more primitive tool. Zipporah seems now, or soon after, to have returned to her father’s house in Midian, for there we find her with the children when Moses returns to Horeb at the head of Israel.

V. 27. In the mount of God-That is, the place where God had met with him.

Verse 27. The Lord said to Aaron] See Exodus 4:14. By some secret but powerful movement on Aaron’s mind, or by some voice or angelic ministry, he was now directed to go and meet his brother Moses; and so correctly was the information given to both, that they arrived at the same time on the sacred mountain.

Verses 27, 28. He met him in the mount of God — Almost as soon as he had set out. For while Moses had met with many delays, through his family, Aaron had made great haste. And, no doubt, his coming was a great encouragement to Moses. Moses told Aaron all — Those that are fellow- servants to God, in the same work, should use a mutual freedom, and endeavour rightly and fully to understand one another.

V. 28. Moses told Aaron all-Those that are fellow-servants to God in the same work, should use a mutual freedom, and endeavour, rightly and fully to understand one another.

Verses 27, 28. He met him in the mount of God — Almost as soon as he had set out. For while Moses had met with many delays, through his family, Aaron had made great haste. And, no doubt, his coming was a great encouragement to Moses. Moses told Aaron all — Those that are fellow- servants to God, in the same work, should use a mutual freedom, and endeavour rightly and fully to understand one another.

29-31. Gathered… the elders — This points to an organization of the people under chiefs of their own, and their reverent acceptance of Moses and Aaron shows that they had not forgotten the God and the covenant of their fathers, although their faith was by no means ready for the impending conflict. Elders — See note on Exodus 6:13-19.

V. 30. Aaron did the signs-By the direction of Moses.

Verse 30. Aaron spake all the words] It is likely that Aaron was better acquainted with the Hebrew tongue than his brother, and on this account he became the spokesman. See Clarke on “Exodus 4:14”. Did the signs] Turned the rod into a serpent, made the hand leprous, and changed the water into blood. See Clarke on “Exodus 4:6”; and “Exodus 4:8”.

Verse 30. Aaron did the signs — By the direction of Moses. Hereby full proof was given to the people of the divine mission of Moses, and their concurrence was gained before he applied to Pharaoh in their behalf.

29-31. Gathered… the elders — This points to an organization of the people under chiefs of their own, and their reverent acceptance of Moses and Aaron shows that they had not forgotten the God and the covenant of their fathers, although their faith was by no means ready for the impending conflict. Elders — See note on Exodus 6:13-19.

Verse 31. The people believed] They credited the account given of the Divine appointment of Moses and Aaron to be their deliverers out of their bondage, the miracles wrought on the occasion confirming the testimony delivered by Aaron.

They bowed their heads and worshipped.] See a similar act mentioned, and in the same words, Genesis 24:26. The bowing the head, &c., here, may probably refer to the eastern custom of bowing the head down to the knees, then kneeling down and touching the earth with the forehead. This was a very painful posture and the most humble in which the body could possibly be placed. Those who pretend to worship God, either by prayer or thanksgiving, and keep themselves during the performance of those solemn acts in a state of perfect ease, either carelessly standing or stupidly sitting, surely cannot have a due sense of the majesty of God, and their own sinfulness and unworthiness. Let the feelings of the body put the soul in remembrance of its sin against God. Let a man put himself in such a position (kneeling for instance) as it is generally acknowledged a criminal should assume, when coming to his sovereign and judge to bewail his sins, and solicit forgiveness.

The Jewish custom, as we learn from Rabbi Maymon, was to bend the body so that every joint of the backbone became incurvated, and the head was bent towards the knees, so that the body resembled a bow; and prostration implied laying the body flat upon the earth, the arms and legs extended to the uttermost, the mouth and forehead touching the ground. In Matthew 8:2 the leper is said to worship our Lord, prosekunei autw\ but in Luke 5:12 he is said to have fallen on his face, peswn epi proswpon. These two accounts show that he first kneeled down, probably putting his face down to his knees, and touching the earth with his forehead; and then prostrated himself, his legs and arms being both extended. See Clarke on “Genesis 17:3”.

THE backwardness of Moses to receive and execute the commission to deliver the children of Israel, has something very instructive in it. He felt the importance of the charge, his own insufficiency, and the awful responsibility under which he should be laid if he received it. Who then can blame him for hesitating? If he miscarried (and how difficult in such a case not to miscarry!) he must account to a jealous God, whose justice required him to punish every delinquency. What should ministers of the Gospel feel on such subjects? Is not their charge more important and more awful than that of Moses? How few consider this! It is respectable, it is honourable, to be in the Gospel ministry, but who is sufficient to guide and feed the flock of God? If through the pastor’s unfitness or neglect any soul should go astray, or perish through want of proper spiritual nourishment, or through not getting his portion in due season, in what a dreadful state is the pastor! That soul, says God, shall die in his iniquities, but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hands! Were these things only considered by those who are candidates for the Gospel ministry, who could be found to undertake it? We should then indeed have the utmost occasion to pray the Lord of the harvest, ekballein, to THRUST OUT labourers into the harvest, as no one, duly considering those things would go, unless thrust out by God himself. O ye ministers of the sanctuary! tremble for your own souls, and the souls of those committed to your care, and go not into this work unless God go with you. Without his presence, unction, and approbation, ye can do nothing.

EXODUS

Verse 31. The people believed — That Moses was God’s messenger, sent for their deliverance, and bowed their heads, and worshipped Jehovah as the true God, and the God of their fathers, acknowledging his goodness, and testifying their gratitude for his thus graciously visiting them.

29-31. Gathered… the elders — This points to an organization of the people under chiefs of their own, and their reverent acceptance of Moses and Aaron shows that they had not forgotten the God and the covenant of their fathers, although their faith was by no means ready for the impending conflict. Elders — See note on Exodus 6:13-19.