Exodus · Chapter 6

V. 1. With a strong hand-That is, being forced to it by a strong hand, he shall let them go.

Verse 1. With a strong hand] hqzj dy yad chazakah, the same verb which we translate to harden; see Clarke on “Exodus 4:21”. The strong hand here means sovereign power, suddenly and forcibly applied. God purposed to manifest his sovereign power in the sight of Pharaoh and the Egyptians; in consequence of which Pharaoh would manifest his power and authority as sovereign of Egypt, in dismissing and thrusting out the people. See Exodus 12:31-33.

Verse 1. Now shalt thou see what I will do — Here we have a striking proof of God’s long-suffering. Instead of severely reproving Moses for his impatience, as manifested at the close of the preceding chapter, and his injurious complaints, he condescends to give him fresh assurances of his power and his determination to deliver the Israelites. With a strong hand — That is, being forced to it with a strong hand, or by those terrible judgments which I shall inflict upon him by my power, he shall let them go.

Verse 1. With a strong hand. In a general view we do not find that heaven has recourse to miracles, except when religion is low and greatly depressed, somewhat as a fire which is burnt down has need of the blast to raise the heat. In this view, God graciously favoured the holy prophets, before Jerusalem was destroyed, and when idolatry raised her daring front to heaven. So also when the new covenant superseded the shadows of the old, our Saviour commanded divine obedience by the divinity of his works.

1. Now — In this crisis of Israel’s fortunes, when all peaceful means have failed; a word of emphasis and transition. Of course, these interviews are only sketched; all that was said to Pharaoh is not detailed. These negotiations may have been some time in progress.

V. 2. I am Jehovah-The same with I am that I am, the fountain of being and blessedness, and infinite perfection. The patriarchs knew this name, but they did not know him in this matter by that which this name signifies. God would now be known by his name Jehovah, that is, 1. A God performing what he had promised, and so giving being to his promises. 2. A God perfecting what he had begun, and finishing his own work. In the history of the creation God is never called Jehovah, till the heavens and the earth were finished, Genesis 2:4. When the salvation of the saints is compleated in eternal life, then he will be known by his name Jehovah, Revelation 22:13, in the mean time they shall find him for their strength and support, El-shaddai, a God All-sufficient, a God that is enough.

Verse 2. I am the Lord] It should be, I am JEHOVAH, and without this the reason of what is said in the 3d verse is not sufficiently obvious.

Verse 2. I am the Lord — That is, Jehovah, on which word the emphasis is laid, and it is to be wished that it had been always preserved in this translation, and especially in such passages as this, the sense of which entirely depends on the word. It signifies the same with, I AM THAT I AM, the fountain of being and blessedness, and of infinite perfection. By my name Jehovah was I not known unto them — As it is certain that God declared himself to these patriarchs by the name Jehovah, as may be seen Genesis 15:6, 7, and 22:14, 16, some of the best and most accurate writers conclude that the latter part of this verse ought to be read interrogatively, thus, And by my name Jehovah was I not known unto them? The original words will well bear this translation, and it would entirely remove that apparent contradiction which is implied in our version. At the same time it would greatly improve the sense and force of the passage. But if we do not read it in this manner, we must not understand it of the name itself, but of the power and virtue which the name expresses. And then the meaning of the passage will be, that though God had revealed himself to the patriarchs as the El-shaddai, the Almighty, or All-sufficient, yet they did not live to see the accomplishment of his promises; and therefore, though they believed, yet they did not experimentally know that he was a God of unchangeable truth; nor had they experienced that all the powers of nature were in his hand, and that he could change them as he pleased, and even communicate the power of doing so to man. But it was to Moses that God first showed his power of making alterations in nature, or working miracles and prodigies. What makes this sense of the passage probable is, that the knowing of Jehovah is spoken of in this way, Exodus 7:5, And the Egyptians shall know that I am Jehovah, when I stretch forth my hand on Egypt. Thus, Henry observes, “The patriarchs knew this name, but they did know him in this matter by that which this name signifies.” God would now be known by his name Jehovah, that is, 1st, A God performing what he had promised, and so giving being to his promises. 2d, A God perfecting what he had begun, and finishing his own work. In the history of the creation God is never called Jehovah till the heavens and the earth were finished, Genesis 2:4. When the salvation of the saints is completed in eternal life, then he will be known by his name Jehovah, Revelation 22:13; in the mean time they shall find him for their strength and support, El-shaddai, a God all-sufficient, a God that is enough.

2-8. I am the Lord: (JEHOVAH:) and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, in (the character of) El Shaddai, (God Almighty,) but by my name (that is, in my character) JEHOVAH was I not known (made known) to them. (Nordh., Hebrews Gram., § 1040, 2, c.; Ewald, Gram., § 299, 6.) Concerning the import, of the word “Jehovah,” and the meaning of this declaration, see notes on Exodus 3:13-15. From the call of Abraham God had been unfolding his character, as the patriarchs could by experience become acquainted with him. Man is not instructed by teaching him names, but by unfolding to him the import of names, and this had been the divine education of the fathers of Israel through such appellations as El, Elyon, and El Shaddai; but a deeper and grander lesson was now to be taught their children by experience such as the fathers knew not, so that the depth and richness of the great Covenant Name would become a national possession. It was not the sound, (as some critics imagine,) but the import of the Name that was unknown to their fathers, that is, unknown comparatively, considering the meaning which was now to be known. In interpreting such passages we are to remember that the Hebrew style does not admit of the periodic sentence, with the balanced qualifications and limitations of the Western tongues, and it is thus forced to make statements in an absolute form, which have obviously a comparative sense. Thus Joseph says to his brethren, “It was not you that sent me hither, but God,” (Genesis 45:8;) that is, “Your share in the matter is nothing when compared with his; the evil from your act is trifling compared with the good which God will bring out of it.” So Joseph called his son Manasseh, for, said he, “God hath made me to forget my father’s house” — not absolutely to forget, but that his new home made the old to be comparatively unthought of.

[The name Jehovah was the proper name of the God of Israel, as George or Paul is the proper name of a man, or Molech that of the god of the Ammonites. So profound was the reverence of the Hebrews for this name that they refused to pronounce it, and the vowelled pronunciation was lost, and is restored at this day only by conjecture. In reading the Scriptures vocally the Jews substituted the Hebrew word for Lord — Adonai. The Septuagint translators translated the name by the Greek word for Lord. Our English translators unfortunately followed suit, and translated the word by LORD in capitals. In the word Jehovah the vowels are borrowed, absurdly, from the word Adonai. The more probable, but not certain, form of the word is Jahveh. But the English reader should always mentally read LORD as the true proper name of Israel’s God.]

Verse 3. By the name of God Almighty] ydv la EL-SHADDAl, God All-sufficient; God the dispenser or pourer-out of gifts. See Clarke on “Genesis 17:1”.

But by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.] This passage has been a sort of crux criticorum, and has been variously explained. It is certain that the name Jehovah was in use long before the days of Abraham, see Genesis 2:4, where the words hwhy אלהים Jehovah Elohim occur, as they do frequently afterwards; and see Genesis 15:2, where Abraham expressly addresses him by the name Adonai JEHOVAH; and see Genesis 15:7, where God reveals himself to Abraham by this very name: And he said unto him, I am JEHOVAH, that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees. How then can it be said that by his name JEHOVAH he was not known unto them? Several answers have been given to this question; the following are the chief:-1. The words should be read interrogatively, for the negative particle al lo, not, has this power often in Hebrew. “I appeared unto Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by the name of God Almighty, and by my name Jehovah was I not also made known unto them?” 2. The name JEHOVAH was not revealed before the time mentioned here, for though it occurs so frequently in the book of Genesis, as that book was written long after the name had come into common use, as a principal characteristic of God, Moses employs it in his history because of this circumstance; so that whenever it appears previously to this, it is by the figure called prolepsis or anticipation. 3. As the name hwhy JEHOVAH signifies existence, it may be understood in the text in question thus: “I appeared unto Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob by my name God Almighty, or God All-sufficient, i.e., having all power to do all good; in this character I made a covenant with them, supported by great and glorious promises; but as those promises had respect unto their posterity, they could not be fulfilled to those fathers: but now, as JEHOVAH, I am about to give existence to all those promises relative to your support, deliverance from bondage, and your consequent settlement in the promised land.” 4. The words may be considered as used comparatively: though God did appear to those patriarchs as JEHOVAH, and they acknowledged him by this name, yet it was but comparatively known unto them; they knew nothing of the power and goodness of God, in comparison of what the Israelites were now about to experience.

I believe the simple meaning is this, that though from the beginning the name JEHOVAH was known as one of the names of the Supreme Being, yet what it really implied they did not know. ylv la El-Shaddai, God All-sufficient, they knew well by the continual provision he made for them, and the constant protection he afforded them: but the name hwhy JEHOVAH is particularly to be referred to the accomplishment of promises already made; to the giving them a being, and thus bringing them into existence, which could not have been done in the order of his providence sooner than here specified: this name therefore in its power and significancy was not known unto them; nor fully known unto their descendants till the deliverance from Egypt and the settlement in the promised land. It is surely possible for a man to bear the name of a certain office or dignity before he fulfils any of its functions. King, mayor, alderman, magistrate, constable, may be borne by the several persons to whom they legally belong, before any of the acts peculiar to those offices are performed. The KING, acknowledged as such on his coronation, is known to be such by his legislative acts; the civil magistrate, by his distribution of justice, and issuing warrants for the apprehending of culprits; and the constable, by executing those warrants. All these were known to have their respective names, but the exercise of their powers alone shows what is implied in being king, magistrate, and constable. The following is a case in point, which fell within my own knowledge.

A case of dispute between certain litigious neighbours being heard in court before a weekly sitting of the magistrates, a woman who came as an evidence in behalf of her bad neighbour, finding the magistrates inclining to give judgment against her mischievous companion, took her by the arm and said, “Come away! I told you you would get neither law nor justice in this place.” A magistrate, who was as much an honour to his function as he was to human nature, immediately said, “Here, constable! take that woman and lodge her in Bridewell, that she may know there is some law and justice in this place.”

Thus the worthy magistrate proved he had the power implied in the name by executing the duties of his office. And God who was known as JEHOVAH, the being who makes and gives effect to promises, was known to the descendants of the twelve tribes to be THAT JEHOVAH, by giving effect and being to the promises which he had made to their fathers.

Ver. 3. By my name Jehovah was I not made known to them. From the scope and connection of these words, it would seem, that God encouraged Moses in his bold and daring confliction, by the consideration that when Moses had asked his name, he had declared to him his great and glorious name JEHOVAH, which he had not done to Abraham. If so, Moses must then have used the name in Genesis 22:14, by way of anticipation. Some however read the words interrogatively; Was I not made known to them by my name JEHOVAH; for Abraham had known it, Genesis 22:14; and Isaac, 26:25; and Jacob, 27:20. We find however, that when Jacob asked the stranger’s name, 32:29, he did not favour him with that secret name, as he now favoured Moses.—There is another sense in which these words are taken. I was not made known to them in the fulfilment of my promises. This form is often used by the prophets. And they shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened their graves, and brought them into their own land.—Many of the Jews have thought the name JEHOVAH too sacred to be pronounced, and therefore they substitute Adonai in its place. It signifies that he subsists of himself, independent, immutable, eternal. Hence our Lord Jesus Christ assumes this name. Rev. 1:8. I am Alpha and Omega; the beginning and the ending; which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. The name is appropriate to the Godhead, and cannot be given to any creature. Isaiah 42:8. For God and his name are the same. When he made the promise to Abraham, it was by the name of El Shaddai, God omnipotent or alsufficient. Genesis 17:1. Jehovah is the supreme appellation of God the Father, Psalm 110:1. Of God the Son, Jeremiah 23:6. Of God the Holy Ghost, Isaiah 6:8, 10. For as Dr. Lightfoot observes, according to Acts 28:25, 26, the Holy Ghost spake these things of the Jews who rejected the gospel.

2-8. I am the Lord: (JEHOVAH:) and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, in (the character of) El Shaddai, (God Almighty,) but by my name (that is, in my character) JEHOVAH was I not known (made known) to them. (Nordh., Hebrews Gram., § 1040, 2, c.; Ewald, Gram., § 299, 6.) Concerning the import, of the word “Jehovah,” and the meaning of this declaration, see notes on Exodus 3:13-15. From the call of Abraham God had been unfolding his character, as the patriarchs could by experience become acquainted with him. Man is not instructed by teaching him names, but by unfolding to him the import of names, and this had been the divine education of the fathers of Israel through such appellations as El, Elyon, and El Shaddai; but a deeper and grander lesson was now to be taught their children by experience such as the fathers knew not, so that the depth and richness of the great Covenant Name would become a national possession. It was not the sound, (as some critics imagine,) but the import of the Name that was unknown to their fathers, that is, unknown comparatively, considering the meaning which was now to be known. In interpreting such passages we are to remember that the Hebrew style does not admit of the periodic sentence, with the balanced qualifications and limitations of the Western tongues, and it is thus forced to make statements in an absolute form, which have obviously a comparative sense. Thus Joseph says to his brethren, “It was not you that sent me hither, but God,” (Genesis 45:8;) that is, “Your share in the matter is nothing when compared with his; the evil from your act is trifling compared with the good which God will bring out of it.” So Joseph called his son Manasseh, for, said he, “God hath made me to forget my father’s house” — not absolutely to forget, but that his new home made the old to be comparatively unthought of.

[The name Jehovah was the proper name of the God of Israel, as George or Paul is the proper name of a man, or Molech that of the god of the Ammonites. So profound was the reverence of the Hebrews for this name that they refused to pronounce it, and the vowelled pronunciation was lost, and is restored at this day only by conjecture. In reading the Scriptures vocally the Jews substituted the Hebrew word for Lord — Adonai. The Septuagint translators translated the name by the Greek word for Lord. Our English translators unfortunately followed suit, and translated the word by LORD in capitals. In the word Jehovah the vowels are borrowed, absurdly, from the word Adonai. The more probable, but not certain, form of the word is Jahveh. But the English reader should always mentally read LORD as the true proper name of Israel’s God.]

Verse 4. I have also established my covenant] I have now fully purposed to give present effect to all my engagements with your fathers, in behalf of their posterity.

2-8. I am the Lord: (JEHOVAH:) and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, in (the character of) El Shaddai, (God Almighty,) but by my name (that is, in my character) JEHOVAH was I not known (made known) to them. (Nordh., Hebrews Gram., § 1040, 2, c.; Ewald, Gram., § 299, 6.) Concerning the import, of the word “Jehovah,” and the meaning of this declaration, see notes on Exodus 3:13-15. From the call of Abraham God had been unfolding his character, as the patriarchs could by experience become acquainted with him. Man is not instructed by teaching him names, but by unfolding to him the import of names, and this had been the divine education of the fathers of Israel through such appellations as El, Elyon, and El Shaddai; but a deeper and grander lesson was now to be taught their children by experience such as the fathers knew not, so that the depth and richness of the great Covenant Name would become a national possession. It was not the sound, (as some critics imagine,) but the import of the Name that was unknown to their fathers, that is, unknown comparatively, considering the meaning which was now to be known. In interpreting such passages we are to remember that the Hebrew style does not admit of the periodic sentence, with the balanced qualifications and limitations of the Western tongues, and it is thus forced to make statements in an absolute form, which have obviously a comparative sense. Thus Joseph says to his brethren, “It was not you that sent me hither, but God,” (Genesis 45:8;) that is, “Your share in the matter is nothing when compared with his; the evil from your act is trifling compared with the good which God will bring out of it.” So Joseph called his son Manasseh, for, said he, “God hath made me to forget my father’s house” — not absolutely to forget, but that his new home made the old to be comparatively unthought of.

[The name Jehovah was the proper name of the God of Israel, as George or Paul is the proper name of a man, or Molech that of the god of the Ammonites. So profound was the reverence of the Hebrews for this name that they refused to pronounce it, and the vowelled pronunciation was lost, and is restored at this day only by conjecture. In reading the Scriptures vocally the Jews substituted the Hebrew word for Lord — Adonai. The Septuagint translators translated the name by the Greek word for Lord. Our English translators unfortunately followed suit, and translated the word by LORD in capitals. In the word Jehovah the vowels are borrowed, absurdly, from the word Adonai. The more probable, but not certain, form of the word is Jahveh. But the English reader should always mentally read LORD as the true proper name of Israel’s God.]

V. 5. I have heard the groaning of the children of Israel-He means their groaning on occasion of the late hardships put upon them. God takes notice of the increase of his people’s calamities, and observes how their enemies grow upon them.

Verses 5, 6. I have heard the groaning of the children of Israel — He means their groaning on occasion of the late hardships put upon them. God takes notice of the increase of his people’s calamities, and observes how their enemies grow upon them. I will bring you out: I will rid you: I will redeem you: I will bring you into the land of Canaan; and I will give it you — Let man take the shame of his unbelief, which needs such repetitions, and let God have the glory of his condescending grace, which gives us such repeated assurances. With a stretched-out arm — With almighty power: a metaphor taken from a man that stretches out his arm, to put forth all his strength.

2-8. I am the Lord: (JEHOVAH:) and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, in (the character of) El Shaddai, (God Almighty,) but by my name (that is, in my character) JEHOVAH was I not known (made known) to them. (Nordh., Hebrews Gram., § 1040, 2, c.; Ewald, Gram., § 299, 6.) Concerning the import, of the word “Jehovah,” and the meaning of this declaration, see notes on Exodus 3:13-15. From the call of Abraham God had been unfolding his character, as the patriarchs could by experience become acquainted with him. Man is not instructed by teaching him names, but by unfolding to him the import of names, and this had been the divine education of the fathers of Israel through such appellations as El, Elyon, and El Shaddai; but a deeper and grander lesson was now to be taught their children by experience such as the fathers knew not, so that the depth and richness of the great Covenant Name would become a national possession. It was not the sound, (as some critics imagine,) but the import of the Name that was unknown to their fathers, that is, unknown comparatively, considering the meaning which was now to be known. In interpreting such passages we are to remember that the Hebrew style does not admit of the periodic sentence, with the balanced qualifications and limitations of the Western tongues, and it is thus forced to make statements in an absolute form, which have obviously a comparative sense. Thus Joseph says to his brethren, “It was not you that sent me hither, but God,” (Genesis 45:8;) that is, “Your share in the matter is nothing when compared with his; the evil from your act is trifling compared with the good which God will bring out of it.” So Joseph called his son Manasseh, for, said he, “God hath made me to forget my father’s house” — not absolutely to forget, but that his new home made the old to be comparatively unthought of.

[The name Jehovah was the proper name of the God of Israel, as George or Paul is the proper name of a man, or Molech that of the god of the Ammonites. So profound was the reverence of the Hebrews for this name that they refused to pronounce it, and the vowelled pronunciation was lost, and is restored at this day only by conjecture. In reading the Scriptures vocally the Jews substituted the Hebrew word for Lord — Adonai. The Septuagint translators translated the name by the Greek word for Lord. Our English translators unfortunately followed suit, and translated the word by LORD in capitals. In the word Jehovah the vowels are borrowed, absurdly, from the word Adonai. The more probable, but not certain, form of the word is Jahveh. But the English reader should always mentally read LORD as the true proper name of Israel’s God.]

V. 6. I will bring you out: I will rid you: I will redeem you: I will bring you into the land of Canaan; and, I will give it you-Let man take the shame of his unbelief which needs such repetitions, and let God have the glory of his condescending grace which gives us such repeated assurances. With a stretched out arm-With almighty power: A metaphor taken from a man that stretches out his arm, to put forth all his strength.

Verse 6. Say unto the children of Israel, I am the LORD, and I will bring you out, &c.] This confirms the explanation given of Exodus 6:3, which see Clarke note on “Exodus 6:3”.

Verses 5, 6. I have heard the groaning of the children of Israel — He means their groaning on occasion of the late hardships put upon them. God takes notice of the increase of his people’s calamities, and observes how their enemies grow upon them. I will bring you out: I will rid you: I will redeem you: I will bring you into the land of Canaan; and I will give it you — Let man take the shame of his unbelief, which needs such repetitions, and let God have the glory of his condescending grace, which gives us such repeated assurances. With a stretched-out arm — With almighty power: a metaphor taken from a man that stretches out his arm, to put forth all his strength.

2-8. I am the Lord: (JEHOVAH:) and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, in (the character of) El Shaddai, (God Almighty,) but by my name (that is, in my character) JEHOVAH was I not known (made known) to them. (Nordh., Hebrews Gram., § 1040, 2, c.; Ewald, Gram., § 299, 6.) Concerning the import, of the word “Jehovah,” and the meaning of this declaration, see notes on Exodus 3:13-15. From the call of Abraham God had been unfolding his character, as the patriarchs could by experience become acquainted with him. Man is not instructed by teaching him names, but by unfolding to him the import of names, and this had been the divine education of the fathers of Israel through such appellations as El, Elyon, and El Shaddai; but a deeper and grander lesson was now to be taught their children by experience such as the fathers knew not, so that the depth and richness of the great Covenant Name would become a national possession. It was not the sound, (as some critics imagine,) but the import of the Name that was unknown to their fathers, that is, unknown comparatively, considering the meaning which was now to be known. In interpreting such passages we are to remember that the Hebrew style does not admit of the periodic sentence, with the balanced qualifications and limitations of the Western tongues, and it is thus forced to make statements in an absolute form, which have obviously a comparative sense. Thus Joseph says to his brethren, “It was not you that sent me hither, but God,” (Genesis 45:8;) that is, “Your share in the matter is nothing when compared with his; the evil from your act is trifling compared with the good which God will bring out of it.” So Joseph called his son Manasseh, for, said he, “God hath made me to forget my father’s house” — not absolutely to forget, but that his new home made the old to be comparatively unthought of.

[The name Jehovah was the proper name of the God of Israel, as George or Paul is the proper name of a man, or Molech that of the god of the Ammonites. So profound was the reverence of the Hebrews for this name that they refused to pronounce it, and the vowelled pronunciation was lost, and is restored at this day only by conjecture. In reading the Scriptures vocally the Jews substituted the Hebrew word for Lord — Adonai. The Septuagint translators translated the name by the Greek word for Lord. Our English translators unfortunately followed suit, and translated the word by LORD in capitals. In the word Jehovah the vowels are borrowed, absurdly, from the word Adonai. The more probable, but not certain, form of the word is Jahveh. But the English reader should always mentally read LORD as the true proper name of Israel’s God.]

V. 7. I will take you to me for a people-A peculiar people, and I will be to you a God-And more than this we need not ask, we cannot have, to make us happy.

Verse 7. I will take you to me for a people, &c.] This was precisely the covenant that he had made with Abraham. See Genesis 17:7, and See Clarke note on “Genesis 17:7”.

And ye shall know that I am the LORD your God] By thus fulfilling my promises ye shall know what is implied in my name. See Clarke note on “Exodus 6:3”.

But why should God take such a most stupid, refractory, and totally worthless people for his people? 1. Because he had promised to do so to their noble ancestors Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Judah, &c., men worthy of all praise, because in general friends of God, devoted to his will and to the good of mankind.

2. “That (as Bishop Warburton properly observes) the extraordinary providence by which they were protected, might become the more visible and illustrious; for had they been endowed with the shining qualities of the more polished nations, the effects of that providence might have been ascribed to their own wisdom.”

3. That God might show to all succeeding generations that he delights to instruct the ignorant, help the weak, and save the lost; for if he bore long with Israel, showed them especial mercy, and graciously received them whenever they implored his protection, none need despair. God seems to have chosen the worst people in the universe, to give by them unto mankind the highest and most expressive proofs, that he wills not the death of a sinner, but rather that he may turn from his iniquity and live.

Verses 7-9. I will take you to me for a people — A peculiar people; and I will be to you a God — And more than this we need not ask, we cannot have, to make us happy. I am the Lord — And therefore have power to dispose of lands and kingdoms as I please. But they hearkened not to Moses, for anguish of spirit — That is, they were so taken up with their troubles that they did not heed him.

2-8. I am the Lord: (JEHOVAH:) and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, in (the character of) El Shaddai, (God Almighty,) but by my name (that is, in my character) JEHOVAH was I not known (made known) to them. (Nordh., Hebrews Gram., § 1040, 2, c.; Ewald, Gram., § 299, 6.) Concerning the import, of the word “Jehovah,” and the meaning of this declaration, see notes on Exodus 3:13-15. From the call of Abraham God had been unfolding his character, as the patriarchs could by experience become acquainted with him. Man is not instructed by teaching him names, but by unfolding to him the import of names, and this had been the divine education of the fathers of Israel through such appellations as El, Elyon, and El Shaddai; but a deeper and grander lesson was now to be taught their children by experience such as the fathers knew not, so that the depth and richness of the great Covenant Name would become a national possession. It was not the sound, (as some critics imagine,) but the import of the Name that was unknown to their fathers, that is, unknown comparatively, considering the meaning which was now to be known. In interpreting such passages we are to remember that the Hebrew style does not admit of the periodic sentence, with the balanced qualifications and limitations of the Western tongues, and it is thus forced to make statements in an absolute form, which have obviously a comparative sense. Thus Joseph says to his brethren, “It was not you that sent me hither, but God,” (Genesis 45:8;) that is, “Your share in the matter is nothing when compared with his; the evil from your act is trifling compared with the good which God will bring out of it.” So Joseph called his son Manasseh, for, said he, “God hath made me to forget my father’s house” — not absolutely to forget, but that his new home made the old to be comparatively unthought of.

[The name Jehovah was the proper name of the God of Israel, as George or Paul is the proper name of a man, or Molech that of the god of the Ammonites. So profound was the reverence of the Hebrews for this name that they refused to pronounce it, and the vowelled pronunciation was lost, and is restored at this day only by conjecture. In reading the Scriptures vocally the Jews substituted the Hebrew word for Lord — Adonai. The Septuagint translators translated the name by the Greek word for Lord. Our English translators unfortunately followed suit, and translated the word by LORD in capitals. In the word Jehovah the vowels are borrowed, absurdly, from the word Adonai. The more probable, but not certain, form of the word is Jahveh. But the English reader should always mentally read LORD as the true proper name of Israel’s God.]

V. 8. I am the Lord-And therefore have power to dispose of lands and kingdoms as I please.

Verse 8. Which I did swear] ydy ta ytacn nasathi eth yadi, I have lifted up my hand. The usual mode of making an appeal to God, and hence considered to be a form of swearing. It is thus that Isaiah 62:8 is to be understood: The Lord hath sworn by his right hand, and by the arm of his strength.

Verses 7-9. I will take you to me for a people — A peculiar people; and I will be to you a God — And more than this we need not ask, we cannot have, to make us happy. I am the Lord — And therefore have power to dispose of lands and kingdoms as I please. But they hearkened not to Moses, for anguish of spirit — That is, they were so taken up with their troubles that they did not heed him.

2-8. I am the Lord: (JEHOVAH:) and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, in (the character of) El Shaddai, (God Almighty,) but by my name (that is, in my character) JEHOVAH was I not known (made known) to them. (Nordh., Hebrews Gram., § 1040, 2, c.; Ewald, Gram., § 299, 6.) Concerning the import, of the word “Jehovah,” and the meaning of this declaration, see notes on Exodus 3:13-15. From the call of Abraham God had been unfolding his character, as the patriarchs could by experience become acquainted with him. Man is not instructed by teaching him names, but by unfolding to him the import of names, and this had been the divine education of the fathers of Israel through such appellations as El, Elyon, and El Shaddai; but a deeper and grander lesson was now to be taught their children by experience such as the fathers knew not, so that the depth and richness of the great Covenant Name would become a national possession. It was not the sound, (as some critics imagine,) but the import of the Name that was unknown to their fathers, that is, unknown comparatively, considering the meaning which was now to be known. In interpreting such passages we are to remember that the Hebrew style does not admit of the periodic sentence, with the balanced qualifications and limitations of the Western tongues, and it is thus forced to make statements in an absolute form, which have obviously a comparative sense. Thus Joseph says to his brethren, “It was not you that sent me hither, but God,” (Genesis 45:8;) that is, “Your share in the matter is nothing when compared with his; the evil from your act is trifling compared with the good which God will bring out of it.” So Joseph called his son Manasseh, for, said he, “God hath made me to forget my father’s house” — not absolutely to forget, but that his new home made the old to be comparatively unthought of.

[The name Jehovah was the proper name of the God of Israel, as George or Paul is the proper name of a man, or Molech that of the god of the Ammonites. So profound was the reverence of the Hebrews for this name that they refused to pronounce it, and the vowelled pronunciation was lost, and is restored at this day only by conjecture. In reading the Scriptures vocally the Jews substituted the Hebrew word for Lord — Adonai. The Septuagint translators translated the name by the Greek word for Lord. Our English translators unfortunately followed suit, and translated the word by LORD in capitals. In the word Jehovah the vowels are borrowed, absurdly, from the word Adonai. The more probable, but not certain, form of the word is Jahveh. But the English reader should always mentally read LORD as the true proper name of Israel’s God.]

V. 9. But they hearkened not to Moses for anguish of spirit-That is, They were so taken up with their troubles that they did not heed him.

Verse 9. But they hearkened not] Their bondage was become so extremely oppressive that they had lost all hope of ever being redeemed from it. After this verse the Samaritan adds, Let us alone, that we may serve the Egyptians: for it is better for us to serve the Egyptians than that we should die in the wilderness. This appears to be borrowed from Exodus 14:12.

Anguish of spirit] jwr rxq kotzer ruach, shortness of spirit or breath. The words signify that their labour was so continual, and their bondage so cruel and oppressive, that they had scarcely time to breathe.

Verses 7-9. I will take you to me for a people — A peculiar people; and I will be to you a God — And more than this we need not ask, we cannot have, to make us happy. I am the Lord — And therefore have power to dispose of lands and kingdoms as I please. But they hearkened not to Moses, for anguish of spirit — That is, they were so taken up with their troubles that they did not heed him.

9. They hearkened not — For their cruel oppression now crushed them in an anguish that made them dead to hope. It was the very extremity which is the opportunity of Providence.

10-12. Although Israel has turned away from him in despair, yet is Moses bid go again, alone, in Jehovah’s name, to Pharaoh. But how should Pharaoh hear when Israel herself turns away? Thus is he made to feel that the last resource of intercession has been tried, and that there is no recourse but to God’s judgments.

V. 11. That he let the children of Israel go-God repeats his precepts, before he begins his punishments. Those that have oft been called in vain to leave their sins, yet must be called again, and again.

Verse 11. That he let the children of Israel go — God repeats his precepts before he begins his punishments. Those that have oft been called in vain to leave their sins, yet must be called again and again.

10-12. Although Israel has turned away from him in despair, yet is Moses bid go again, alone, in Jehovah’s name, to Pharaoh. But how should Pharaoh hear when Israel herself turns away? Thus is he made to feel that the last resource of intercession has been tried, and that there is no recourse but to God’s judgments.

V. 12. Behold, the children of Israel have not hearkened to me; they gave no heed to what I have said, how then shall Pharaoh hear me?-If the anguish of their spirit makes them deaf to that which would compose and comfort them, much more will his pride and insolence, make him deaf to that which will but exasperate him. Who am of uncircumcised lips-He was conscious to himself that he had not the gift of utterance.

Verse 12. Uncircumcised lips?] The word lr[ aral, which we translate uncircumcised, seems to signify any thing exuberant or superfluous. Had not Moses been remarkable for his excellent beauty, I should have thought the passage might be rendered protuberant lips; but as this sense cannot be admitted for the above reason, the word must refer to some natural impediment in his speech; and probably means a want of distinct and ready utterance, either occasioned by some defect in the organs of speech, or impaired knowledge of the Egyptian language after an absence of forty years. See Clarke note on “Exodus 4:10”.

Verses 12, 13. Behold, the children of Israel have not hearkened to me — They gave no heed to what I have said; how then shall Pharaoh hear me? — If the anguish of their spirit makes them deaf to that which would compose and comfort them, much more will his pride and insolence make him deaf to that which will but exasperate him. Who am of uncircumcised lips — He was conscious to himself that he had not the gift of utterance. The Lord gave them a charge to the children of Israel and to Pharaoh — God’s authority is sufficient to answer all objections, and binds us to obedience without murmuring or disputing.

Ver. 12. Uncircumcised lips; that is, deficient in the powers of elocution.

10-12. Although Israel has turned away from him in despair, yet is Moses bid go again, alone, in Jehovah’s name, to Pharaoh. But how should Pharaoh hear when Israel herself turns away? Thus is he made to feel that the last resource of intercession has been tried, and that there is no recourse but to God’s judgments.

V. 13. The Lord gave them a charge, both to the children of Israel, and to Pharaoh-God’s authority is sufficient to answer all objections, and binds us to obedience without murmuring or disputing.

Verses 12, 13. Behold, the children of Israel have not hearkened to me — They gave no heed to what I have said; how then shall Pharaoh hear me? — If the anguish of their spirit makes them deaf to that which would compose and comfort them, much more will his pride and insolence make him deaf to that which will but exasperate him. Who am of uncircumcised lips — He was conscious to himself that he had not the gift of utterance. The Lord gave them a charge to the children of Israel and to Pharaoh — God’s authority is sufficient to answer all objections, and binds us to obedience without murmuring or disputing.

13-19. Since Israel is now to be led forth as a nation, Moses and Aaron, their leaders, are fully set before us according to their genealogy. The tribe of Levi now, therefore, comes before us, with its three tribal families and their subdivisions, while the elder tribes, Reuben and Simeon, are mentioned with their general family divisions, in order to show the relative position of Levi. (Knobel here clearly shows the connexion against the documentists.) The fathers’ houses are usually considered as divisions of the tribal families, subdivisions of the tribe, (Geseuius, Furst, Ewald,) but the phrase is considered by Kurtz to be simply another designation for the tribe, the word “fathers” meaning ancestors. But the first view is favoured by the systematic classification in passages like Joshua 7:14, and Numbers 1:20, 22, etc., where the phrase should be translated, as here, “houses of their fathers,” (not house; see Gesen., Gram., § 108, 3; Ewald, Gram., § 270, c.) The twelve tribes were regularly divided and subdivided, according to lineage, with princes or heads over each section or grade, who took their rank by primogeniture. Besides this hereditary nobility there were elders, who appear to have held their position from age and experience, probably owing their rank to popular election, and who always appear as the representatives of the people, and constitute a democratic element in the state. There were, finally, the scribes, or shoterim — officers who may have arisen under Egyptian influences, as already noticed, who exercised a subordinate overseership over government labourers, and probably had charge of the genealogical tables and public writings. Thus the patriarchal and Egyptian governments furnished the groundwork for the elaborate Mosaic system perfected at Sinai.

V. 14. This genealogy ends in those two great patriots, Moses and Aaron; and comes in here to shew that they were Israelites, bone of their bone, and flesh of their flesh, whom they were sent to deliver, raised up unto them of their brethren, as Christ also should be, who was to be the prophet and priest, the Redeemer and law-giver of the house of Israel, and whose genealogy also like this was to be carefully preserved. The heads of the houses of three of the tribes are here named, agreeing with the accounts we had, Genesis 46:8-27. Reuben and Simeon seem to be mentioned only for the sake of Levi, from whom Moses and Aaron descended, and all the priests of the Jewish church.

Verse 14. These be the heads] ycar rashey, the chiefs or captains. The following genealogy was simply intended to show that Moses and Aaron came in a direct line from Abraham, and to ascertain the time of Israel’s deliverance. The whole account from Exodus 6:14-26 inclusive, is a sort of parenthesis, and does not belong to the narration; and what follows from Exodus 6:28 is a recapitulation of what was spoken in the preceding chapters.

Verse 14. This genealogy ends in those two great patriots, Moses and Aaron, and comes in here to show that they were Israelites, bone of the bone, and flesh of the flesh of those whom they were sent to deliver; raised up unto them of their brethern, as Christ also should be, who was to be the Prophet and Priest, the Redeemer and Lawgiver of the house of Israel, and whose genealogy also, like this, was to be carefully preserved. The heads of the houses of three of the tribes are here named, agreeing with the accounts we had, Genesis 46. Reuben and Simeon seem to be mentioned only for the sake of Levi, from whom Moses and Aaron descended, and all the priests of the Jewish Church.

13-19. Since Israel is now to be led forth as a nation, Moses and Aaron, their leaders, are fully set before us according to their genealogy. The tribe of Levi now, therefore, comes before us, with its three tribal families and their subdivisions, while the elder tribes, Reuben and Simeon, are mentioned with their general family divisions, in order to show the relative position of Levi. (Knobel here clearly shows the connexion against the documentists.) The fathers’ houses are usually considered as divisions of the tribal families, subdivisions of the tribe, (Geseuius, Furst, Ewald,) but the phrase is considered by Kurtz to be simply another designation for the tribe, the word “fathers” meaning ancestors. But the first view is favoured by the systematic classification in passages like Joshua 7:14, and Numbers 1:20, 22, etc., where the phrase should be translated, as here, “houses of their fathers,” (not house; see Gesen., Gram., § 108, 3; Ewald, Gram., § 270, c.) The twelve tribes were regularly divided and subdivided, according to lineage, with princes or heads over each section or grade, who took their rank by primogeniture. Besides this hereditary nobility there were elders, who appear to have held their position from age and experience, probably owing their rank to popular election, and who always appear as the representatives of the people, and constitute a democratic element in the state. There were, finally, the scribes, or shoterim — officers who may have arisen under Egyptian influences, as already noticed, who exercised a subordinate overseership over government labourers, and probably had charge of the genealogical tables and public writings. Thus the patriarchal and Egyptian governments furnished the groundwork for the elaborate Mosaic system perfected at Sinai.

13-19. Since Israel is now to be led forth as a nation, Moses and Aaron, their leaders, are fully set before us according to their genealogy. The tribe of Levi now, therefore, comes before us, with its three tribal families and their subdivisions, while the elder tribes, Reuben and Simeon, are mentioned with their general family divisions, in order to show the relative position of Levi. (Knobel here clearly shows the connexion against the documentists.) The fathers’ houses are usually considered as divisions of the tribal families, subdivisions of the tribe, (Geseuius, Furst, Ewald,) but the phrase is considered by Kurtz to be simply another designation for the tribe, the word “fathers” meaning ancestors. But the first view is favoured by the systematic classification in passages like Joshua 7:14, and Numbers 1:20, 22, etc., where the phrase should be translated, as here, “houses of their fathers,” (not house; see Gesen., Gram., § 108, 3; Ewald, Gram., § 270, c.) The twelve tribes were regularly divided and subdivided, according to lineage, with princes or heads over each section or grade, who took their rank by primogeniture. Besides this hereditary nobility there were elders, who appear to have held their position from age and experience, probably owing their rank to popular election, and who always appear as the representatives of the people, and constitute a democratic element in the state. There were, finally, the scribes, or shoterim — officers who may have arisen under Egyptian influences, as already noticed, who exercised a subordinate overseership over government labourers, and probably had charge of the genealogical tables and public writings. Thus the patriarchal and Egyptian governments furnished the groundwork for the elaborate Mosaic system perfected at Sinai.

V. 16. The age of Levi, Kohath, and Amram, the father, grandfather, and great grandfather of Moses is here recorded; and they all lived to a great age, Levi to one hundred thirty seven, Kohath to one hundred thirty three, and Amram to one hundred thirty seven: Moses himself came much short of them, and fixed seventy or eighty for the ordinary stretch of human life. Psalm 90:10. For now Israel was multiplied, and become a great nation, and divine revelation was by the hand of Moses committed to writing, and no longer trusted to tradition; the two great reasons for the long lives of the patriarchs were ceased, and therefore from henceforward fewer years must serve men.

Verse 16. The years of the life of Levi] “Bishop Patrick observes that Levi is thought to have lived the longest of all Jacob’s sons, none of whose ages are recorded in Scripture but his and Joseph’s, whom Levi survived twenty-seven years, though he was much the elder brother. By the common computation this would be twenty-three years: by Kennicott’s computation at the end of Gen. xxxi., (See Clarke note at “Genesis 31:55”) Levi’s birth is placed twenty-four years before that of Joseph; his death, therefore, would be only three years later. But this is not the only difficulty in ancient chronologies. Kohath, the second son of Levi, according to Archbishop Usher was thirty years old when Jacob came into Egypt, and lived there one hundred and three years. He attained to nearly the same age with Levi, to one hundred and thirty-three years; and his son Amram, the father of Moses, lived to the same age with Levi. We may observe here how the Divine promise, Genesis 15:16, of delivering the Israelites out of Egypt in the fourth generation was verified; for Moses was the son of Amram, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, the son of Jacob.”-DODD.

Verse 16. The age of Levi, Kohath, and Amram, the father, grandfather, and great-grandfather of Moses, is here recorded; and they all lived to a great age; Levi to one hundred thirty-seven, Kohath to one hundred thirty-three, and Amram to one hundred thirty-seven: Moses himself came much short of them, and fixed seventy or eighty for the ordinary stretch of human life, Psalm 90:10. For now Israel was multiplied, and become a great nation, and divine revelation was by the hand of Moses committed to writing, and no longer trusted to tradition; therefore the two great reasons for the long lives of the patriarchs were ceased, and from henceforward fewer years must serve men.

13-19. Since Israel is now to be led forth as a nation, Moses and Aaron, their leaders, are fully set before us according to their genealogy. The tribe of Levi now, therefore, comes before us, with its three tribal families and their subdivisions, while the elder tribes, Reuben and Simeon, are mentioned with their general family divisions, in order to show the relative position of Levi. (Knobel here clearly shows the connexion against the documentists.) The fathers’ houses are usually considered as divisions of the tribal families, subdivisions of the tribe, (Geseuius, Furst, Ewald,) but the phrase is considered by Kurtz to be simply another designation for the tribe, the word “fathers” meaning ancestors. But the first view is favoured by the systematic classification in passages like Joshua 7:14, and Numbers 1:20, 22, etc., where the phrase should be translated, as here, “houses of their fathers,” (not house; see Gesen., Gram., § 108, 3; Ewald, Gram., § 270, c.) The twelve tribes were regularly divided and subdivided, according to lineage, with princes or heads over each section or grade, who took their rank by primogeniture. Besides this hereditary nobility there were elders, who appear to have held their position from age and experience, probably owing their rank to popular election, and who always appear as the representatives of the people, and constitute a democratic element in the state. There were, finally, the scribes, or shoterim — officers who may have arisen under Egyptian influences, as already noticed, who exercised a subordinate overseership over government labourers, and probably had charge of the genealogical tables and public writings. Thus the patriarchal and Egyptian governments furnished the groundwork for the elaborate Mosaic system perfected at Sinai.

13-19. Since Israel is now to be led forth as a nation, Moses and Aaron, their leaders, are fully set before us according to their genealogy. The tribe of Levi now, therefore, comes before us, with its three tribal families and their subdivisions, while the elder tribes, Reuben and Simeon, are mentioned with their general family divisions, in order to show the relative position of Levi. (Knobel here clearly shows the connexion against the documentists.) The fathers’ houses are usually considered as divisions of the tribal families, subdivisions of the tribe, (Geseuius, Furst, Ewald,) but the phrase is considered by Kurtz to be simply another designation for the tribe, the word “fathers” meaning ancestors. But the first view is favoured by the systematic classification in passages like Joshua 7:14, and Numbers 1:20, 22, etc., where the phrase should be translated, as here, “houses of their fathers,” (not house; see Gesen., Gram., § 108, 3; Ewald, Gram., § 270, c.) The twelve tribes were regularly divided and subdivided, according to lineage, with princes or heads over each section or grade, who took their rank by primogeniture. Besides this hereditary nobility there were elders, who appear to have held their position from age and experience, probably owing their rank to popular election, and who always appear as the representatives of the people, and constitute a democratic element in the state. There were, finally, the scribes, or shoterim — officers who may have arisen under Egyptian influences, as already noticed, who exercised a subordinate overseership over government labourers, and probably had charge of the genealogical tables and public writings. Thus the patriarchal and Egyptian governments furnished the groundwork for the elaborate Mosaic system perfected at Sinai.

13-19. Since Israel is now to be led forth as a nation, Moses and Aaron, their leaders, are fully set before us according to their genealogy. The tribe of Levi now, therefore, comes before us, with its three tribal families and their subdivisions, while the elder tribes, Reuben and Simeon, are mentioned with their general family divisions, in order to show the relative position of Levi. (Knobel here clearly shows the connexion against the documentists.) The fathers’ houses are usually considered as divisions of the tribal families, subdivisions of the tribe, (Geseuius, Furst, Ewald,) but the phrase is considered by Kurtz to be simply another designation for the tribe, the word “fathers” meaning ancestors. But the first view is favoured by the systematic classification in passages like Joshua 7:14, and Numbers 1:20, 22, etc., where the phrase should be translated, as here, “houses of their fathers,” (not house; see Gesen., Gram., § 108, 3; Ewald, Gram., § 270, c.) The twelve tribes were regularly divided and subdivided, according to lineage, with princes or heads over each section or grade, who took their rank by primogeniture. Besides this hereditary nobility there were elders, who appear to have held their position from age and experience, probably owing their rank to popular election, and who always appear as the representatives of the people, and constitute a democratic element in the state. There were, finally, the scribes, or shoterim — officers who may have arisen under Egyptian influences, as already noticed, who exercised a subordinate overseership over government labourers, and probably had charge of the genealogical tables and public writings. Thus the patriarchal and Egyptian governments furnished the groundwork for the elaborate Mosaic system perfected at Sinai.

13-19. Since Israel is now to be led forth as a nation, Moses and Aaron, their leaders, are fully set before us according to their genealogy. The tribe of Levi now, therefore, comes before us, with its three tribal families and their subdivisions, while the elder tribes, Reuben and Simeon, are mentioned with their general family divisions, in order to show the relative position of Levi. (Knobel here clearly shows the connexion against the documentists.) The fathers’ houses are usually considered as divisions of the tribal families, subdivisions of the tribe, (Geseuius, Furst, Ewald,) but the phrase is considered by Kurtz to be simply another designation for the tribe, the word “fathers” meaning ancestors. But the first view is favoured by the systematic classification in passages like Joshua 7:14, and Numbers 1:20, 22, etc., where the phrase should be translated, as here, “houses of their fathers,” (not house; see Gesen., Gram., § 108, 3; Ewald, Gram., § 270, c.) The twelve tribes were regularly divided and subdivided, according to lineage, with princes or heads over each section or grade, who took their rank by primogeniture. Besides this hereditary nobility there were elders, who appear to have held their position from age and experience, probably owing their rank to popular election, and who always appear as the representatives of the people, and constitute a democratic element in the state. There were, finally, the scribes, or shoterim — officers who may have arisen under Egyptian influences, as already noticed, who exercised a subordinate overseership over government labourers, and probably had charge of the genealogical tables and public writings. Thus the patriarchal and Egyptian governments furnished the groundwork for the elaborate Mosaic system perfected at Sinai.

V. 20. His father’s sister-That is, kins-woman. So the Hebrew word is frequently used.

Verse 20. His father’s sister] wtdd dodatho. The true meaning of this word is uncertain. Parkhurst observes that dwd dod signifies an uncle in 1 Samuel 10:14; Leviticus 10:4, and frequently elsewhere. It signifies also an uncle’s son, a cousin-german: compare Jeremiah 32:8 with Exodus 6:12, where the Vulgate renders ydd dodi by patruelis mei, my paternal cousin; and in Amos 6:10, for wdwd dodo, the Targum has hybyrq karibiah, his near relation. So the Vulgate, propinquus ejus, his relative, and the Septuagint, oi oikeioi autwn, those of their household. The best critics suppose that Jochebed was the cousin-german of Amram, and not his aunt. See Clarke note on “Exodus 2:1”.

Bare him Aaron and Moses] The Samaritan, Septuagint, Syriac, and one Hebrew MS. add, And Miriam their sister. Some of the best critics suppose these words to have been originally in the Hebrew text.

Verses 20-23. His father’s sister — That is, kinswoman, as the Hebrew word frequently means. Amminadab — A prince of the tribe of Judah. The Levites might marry into any tribe, there being no danger of confusion or loss of inheritance thereby.

Ver. 20. Father’s sister; his cousin german, or uncle’s daughter, as in Exodus 2:1.

20. And Amram took him Jochebed his father’s sister to wife — hdwd, here rendered father’s sister, we render daughter of father’s brother, or cousin, in this following the Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate, and Targum Pal., thus understanding the text to declare that Amram married Jochebed his cousin. This is a much disputed text, furnishing a most important chronological item. Our Authorized Version and most modern commentators make Jochebed to have been Amram’s aunt and Levi’s daughter, so that Moses was thus Levi’s grandson. This view certainly is favoured by Numbers 26:59, “And the name of Amram’s wife was Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, whom her mother bare to Levi in Egypt;” as if Levi had a daughter born to him after the descent into Egypt, in addition to the three sons who went down with him from Canaan. But, (1,) It is not probable that Moses’ own father and mother violated a law of nature which was in the next generation so expressly incorporated into the Mosaic ordinances, though it is, of course, possible. (2,) If Jochebed were Amram’s aunt, then Levi must have begotten, and Jochebed have borne, children at such an extreme age that the birth of Jochebed, Miriam, and Aaron, as well as of Moses, must all be set down as miraculous, while the record here gives no hint of a miracle. This may be seen thus: Take the shortest period of the sojourn, two hundred and fifteen years, which will make the difficulties least, and as Moses was eighty at the Exode, we have 215-80, or 135 years, as the time from Jacob’s descent into Egypt to the birth of Moses. Levi was about forty-five when the sojourn began, and as Jochebed was (on this supposition) his daughter, there were then one hundred and thirty-five years from Levi’s forty-fifth year to the birth of his grandson, Moses. Now wherever we divide this period of one hundred and thirty-five years we shall make Levi to have become a father, and Jochebed a mother, in extreme age. Thus, if Jochebed were born when Levi was one hundred, then it would have been fifty-five years after the arrival in Egypt, since 100-45=55. In that case Jochebed must have borne Moses at eighty, since 135-55=80; Aaron, therefore, at seventy-seven, and Miriam when past sixty. If we suppose Jochebed to have been herself born ten or twenty years later, we then make Levi one hundred and ten or one hundred and twenty at her birth, and make her so many years younger at the birth of her children, but we do not relieve the difficulties. If we take the long period of sojourn, four hundred and thirty years, it will be seen at once that all the difficulties are vastly increased. But all are completely obviated by considering Jochebed Amram’s cousin, for this inserts another generation into the one hundred and thirty-five years.

(3.) The Hebrew word hdwd, here rendered father’s sister, is, as noted above, rendered daughter of the father’s brother by the Septuagint, followed by the Syriac, Vulgate, and Palestine Targum. The corresponding masculine, dwd, uncle, also means son of the uncle in Jeremiah 32:12. It seems certain that if dodh may mean uncle’s son, dodha may mean uncle’s daughter. Accordingly it is here rendered cousin by Lyra, Estius, La Haye, and Adam Clarke.

(4.) The difficulty of the common translation may be relieved thus: Numbers 26:59 states that her mother, not mentioning who, bore Jochebed to Levi in Egypt. Is it not a likely supposition that Levi in his old age adopted this granddaughter as his daughter? If so, she might have been considered as the sister of his three famous sons, and this fact was deemed worthy of special mention, since she was the mother of the line of the high priests. Thus she might have been considered Amram’s aunt, although really his cousin.

It is the opinion of Kurtz, Keil, Canon Cook, and others, that two Amrams are here referred to, and that several genealogical links are dropped between Amram the son of Kohath and Amram the father of Moses. But, (1,) The impression is certainly very strongly made, in reading verses 18-20, that the same Amram is referred to throughout. (2,) It is a fact not noted by these scholars that in Leviticus 10:4, Uzziel, Amram’s brother, is called Aaron’s uncle; and though, as seen above, the word rendered uncle has much latitude, yet it would be necessary to suppose a second Uzziel also contemporary with the second Amram. As to the dropping of genealogical links, there is an undoubted example in Matthew i, where the names of three well known kings are omitted in the genealogy of our Lord; and a probable instance, yet more remarkable, in Ezra 7:1, where, if the parallel list in 1 Chronicles vi is correct, six names have been dropped out between Meraioth and Azariah. It is likewise certain that son often means simply descendant, as Christ is called “son of David.” If the sojourn in Egypt were four hundred and thirty years several generations must have been omitted here, but all the events can be brought within two hundred and fifteen years. See note on Exodus 12:40.

Verse 21. Korah] Though he became a rebel against God and Moses, (see Numbers 16:1, &c.,) yet Moses, in his great impartiality, inserts his name among those of his other progenitors.

Verses 20-23. His father’s sister — That is, kinswoman, as the Hebrew word frequently means. Amminadab — A prince of the tribe of Judah. The Levites might marry into any tribe, there being no danger of confusion or loss of inheritance thereby.

Verse 22. Uzziel] He is called Aaron’s uncle, Leviticus 10:4.

Verses 20-23. His father’s sister — That is, kinswoman, as the Hebrew word frequently means. Amminadab — A prince of the tribe of Judah. The Levites might marry into any tribe, there being no danger of confusion or loss of inheritance thereby.

V. 23. Aminadab-A prince of the tribe of Judah. The Levites might marry into any tribe, there being no danger of confusion or loss of inheritance thereby.

Verse 23. Elisheba] The oath of the Lord. It is the same name as Elizabeth, so very common among Christians. She was of the royal tribe of Judah, and was sister to Nahshon, one of the princes; see Numbers 2:3.

Eleazar] He succeeded to the high priesthood on the death of his father Aaron, Numbers 20:25, &c.

Verses 20-23. His father’s sister — That is, kinswoman, as the Hebrew word frequently means. Amminadab — A prince of the tribe of Judah. The Levites might marry into any tribe, there being no danger of confusion or loss of inheritance thereby.

Ver. 23. Aaron took Elisheba to wife. The LXX write, Elizabeth; the Greeks altered old names for ease and elegance of pronunciation.

23-25. Elisheba, (Elisabeth,) which means, God is her oath, that is, She owns and worships God. The family connexions of Aaron and his wife Elisabeth are detailed with far more fulness than these of Moses, since the lineage of the high priests was a matter of the highest importance in Israel. The sons of Moses had no special prominence in the national history, and their names are hardly mentioned. It is recorded here that Aaron’s wife was the sister of Naashon, a well known prince of Judah. It will be noticed that the priestly succession here stops at Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron, who, as a youth, entered Canaan, and was the last of the line that Moses could have seen. This incidental evidence of Mosaic authorship is worthy of attention.

RESUMPTION OF THE NARRATIVE AND RECAPITULATION, Exodus 6:28-7:7.

The foregoing genealogical digression may be regarded as an expansion of verse 13, giving a brief, clear family history of “that Aaron and Moses” who now undertake this weighty charge. The narrative now returns to the incident of verse 12, and repeats the circumstances under which Moses again plead that he was of uncircumcised lips. In Exodus 4:10, he urged this as a reason why he was disqualified to go to his brethren; now he feels it a sore hinderance when bid to go to Pharaoh.

23-25. Elisheba, (Elisabeth,) which means, God is her oath, that is, She owns and worships God. The family connexions of Aaron and his wife Elisabeth are detailed with far more fulness than these of Moses, since the lineage of the high priests was a matter of the highest importance in Israel. The sons of Moses had no special prominence in the national history, and their names are hardly mentioned. It is recorded here that Aaron’s wife was the sister of Naashon, a well known prince of Judah. It will be noticed that the priestly succession here stops at Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron, who, as a youth, entered Canaan, and was the last of the line that Moses could have seen. This incidental evidence of Mosaic authorship is worthy of attention.

RESUMPTION OF THE NARRATIVE AND RECAPITULATION, Exodus 6:28-7:7.

The foregoing genealogical digression may be regarded as an expansion of verse 13, giving a brief, clear family history of “that Aaron and Moses” who now undertake this weighty charge. The narrative now returns to the incident of verse 12, and repeats the circumstances under which Moses again plead that he was of uncircumcised lips. In Exodus 4:10, he urged this as a reason why he was disqualified to go to his brethren; now he feels it a sore hinderance when bid to go to Pharaoh.

Verse 25. Phinehas] Of the celebrated act of this person, and the most honourable grant made to him and his posterity, see Numbers 25:7-13.

23-25. Elisheba, (Elisabeth,) which means, God is her oath, that is, She owns and worships God. The family connexions of Aaron and his wife Elisabeth are detailed with far more fulness than these of Moses, since the lineage of the high priests was a matter of the highest importance in Israel. The sons of Moses had no special prominence in the national history, and their names are hardly mentioned. It is recorded here that Aaron’s wife was the sister of Naashon, a well known prince of Judah. It will be noticed that the priestly succession here stops at Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron, who, as a youth, entered Canaan, and was the last of the line that Moses could have seen. This incidental evidence of Mosaic authorship is worthy of attention.

RESUMPTION OF THE NARRATIVE AND RECAPITULATION, Exodus 6:28-7:7.

The foregoing genealogical digression may be regarded as an expansion of verse 13, giving a brief, clear family history of “that Aaron and Moses” who now undertake this weighty charge. The narrative now returns to the incident of verse 12, and repeats the circumstances under which Moses again plead that he was of uncircumcised lips. In Exodus 4:10, he urged this as a reason why he was disqualified to go to his brethren; now he feels it a sore hinderance when bid to go to Pharaoh.

V. 26. According to their armies-Like numerous armies, in military order, and with great power. In the close of the chapter, he returns to his narrative, from which he had broken off somewhat abruptly ver. 13, and repeats, the charge God had given him to deliver his message to Pharaoh,

Verse 26. According to their armies.] µtabx tsibotham, their battalions-regularly

arranged troops. As God had these particularly under his care and direction, he had the name of twabx hwhy Yehovah tsebaoth, Lord of hosts or armies.

“The plain and disinterested manner,” says Dr. Dodd, “in which Moses speaks here of his relations, and the impartiality wherewith he inserts in the list of them such as were afterwards severely punished by the Lord, are striking proofs of his modesty and sincerity. He inserts the genealogy of Reuben and Simeon, because they were of the same mother with Levi; and though he says nothing of himself, yet he relates particularly what concerns Aaron, Exodus 6:23, who married into an honourable family, the sister of a prince of the tribe of Judah.”

Verse 26. According to their armies — Like numerous armies, in military order, and with great power. In the close of the chapter he returns to his narrative, from which he had broken off some-what abruptly, (verse 13,) and repeats the charge God had given him to deliver his message to Pharaoh, verse 29.

Verse 28. And it came to pass] Here the seventh chapter should commence, as there is a complete ending of the sixth with Exodus 6:27, and the 30th verse of this chapter is intimately connected with the 1st verse of the succeeding.

THE principal subjects in this chapter have been so amply considered in the notes, that little of importance remains to be done. On the nature of a covenant (See Clarke note on “Exodus 6:4”.) ample information may be obtained by referring to Genesis 6:18, and Genesis 15:9-18, which places the reader will do well to consult.

Supposing Moses to have really laboured under some defect in speech, we may consider it as wisely designed to be a sort of counterbalance to his other excellences: at least this is an ordinary procedure of Divine Providence; personal accomplishments are counterbalanced by mental defects, and mental imperfections often by personal accomplishments. Thus the head cannot say to the foot, I have no need of thee. And God does all this in great wisdom, to hide pride from man, and that no flesh may glory in his presence. To be contented with our formation, endowments, and external circumstances, requires not only much submission to the providence of God, but also much of the mind of Christ. On the other hand, should we feel vanity because of some personal or mental accomplishment, we have only to take a view of our whole to find sufficient cause of humiliation; and after all, the meek and gentle spirit only is, in the sight of God, of great price.

EXODUS

28-30. These three verses properly belong to the next chapter, which should have commenced with verse 28. The Lord (JEHOVAH) spake unto Moses in the land of Egypt,… saying, I am the Lord (JEHOVAH). This is in distinction from that first revelation in the land of Midian, (chap. 3,) when the Memorial Name was first proclaimed.

ver. 29.

V. 29. Speak all that I say unto thee-As a faithful ambassador. Those that go on God’s errand must not shun to declare the whole counsel of God.

Verse 29. Speak all that I say unto thee — As a faithful ambassador. Those that go on God’s errand must not shun to declare the whole counsel of God.

28-30. These three verses properly belong to the next chapter, which should have commenced with verse 28. The Lord (JEHOVAH) spake unto Moses in the land of Egypt,… saying, I am the Lord (JEHOVAH). This is in distinction from that first revelation in the land of Midian, (chap. 3,) when the Memorial Name was first proclaimed.

28-30. These three verses properly belong to the next chapter, which should have commenced with verse 28. The Lord (JEHOVAH) spake unto Moses in the land of Egypt,… saying, I am the Lord (JEHOVAH). This is in distinction from that first revelation in the land of Midian, (chap. 3,) when the Memorial Name was first proclaimed.