Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Exodus 4:1

And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The LORD hath not appeared unto thee.

1. they (twice)] not the Egyptians (Exo 3:22), but the Israelites, as v. 30 shews. The verse is the sequel in J to Exo 3:18.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

1 9. Moses’ third difficulty: in spite of the assurance of Exo 3:18 a, the Israelites will perhaps not listen to him, or believe in his divine commission. To enable him to meet this contingency, he is endowed with the power of performing three signs, which may serve as credentials of his commission.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Exo 3:1 to Exo 4:17 . Moses commissioned by Jehovah at Horeb to deliver His people. The dialogue between Jehovah and Moses, as in other cases (cf. Delitzsch on Gen 12:1), must be pictured, not as one audible externally, but as giving expression, in words which are naturally those of the narrators, to Moses’ mental communings with God, through which he was gradually taught by Him that, in spite of the difficulties which he saw before him, he was nevertheless to be His appointed agent for accomplishing Israel’s deliverance (cf. the dialogue in Jeremiah 14-15). See further, on the sense in which God is to be understood as ‘speaking’ to a man, the Introduction, p. xlvii f.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

With this chapter begins the series of miracles which resulted in the deliverance of Israel. The first miracle was performed to remove the first obstacle, namely, the reluctance of Moses, conscious of his own weakness, and of the enormous power with which he would have to contend.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Exo 4:1

But, behold, they will not believe me.

Moses temptation to shrink from, the contest

Our duty to our Lord in this world requires that we should do somewhat more than live a life of obedience to Him. Our obedience must be acknowledged obedience. We must never be loth to say, Whose we are, and Whom we serve. We may read this lesson writ large in the history of Gods sending Moses to deliver His people. Moses went through a trial on Mount Horeb, the exact opposite of the trial of Christ.

I. Moses was tempted to decline the contest with the world altogether, to shrink from action and from prominence, when God called him. Christ was tempted to take the world by storm, to overwhelm it with conviction.

II. Moses was full of sympathy for the poor, full of a desire to see Gods ancient promises realized; but when the time came, and God said, Now go, then, for the first time, it flashed upon Moses that he was unfit to carry out what he had so aspired to be trusted with. His eighty years of life had been given him that in its vast experience he might learn that God was all, man was nothing. He had very nearly learned it in truth; the crust or chrysalis of self was very nearly ready to drop off; it needed just this interview with God to rid him of it entirely. He had seen the miraculous powers with which he had been endowed, but he had not fully understood them, and therefore his will was pausing still.

III. The voice of God within him and without him waxed more imperious. God sternly pointed out that such eloquence as he longed for was but a secondary qualification. Thy brother, I know that he can speak well; the legislator need not be the orator. There is not one of us who ever complained to God of insufficient strength without finding his complaint answered either by ministration of grace or disappearance of difficulties.

IV. What interests trembled in the balance while Moses was debating! It is not for ourselves only that we shall be responsible if we debate till the time is gone, (Archbishop Benson.)

Gods call and mans duty

I. God proposes great things to men. In proportion as any call in life is great, let the heart pause and consider whether its very greatness is not a proof of its divinity.

II. We are not to look at what we are, but at what God is. When He calls, He qualifies for the work

III. What is right in itself may be perverted and abused. Timidity is right in itself; but when pushed into cowardice, it is wrong. Self-distrust is right in itself; but if it degenerates into atheism, then it is the plague and destruction of the soul.

IV. Gods call to faith is the greatest call to his universe. Our duty is to go forward to the unknown and the invisible, and live by faith. (J. Parker, D. D.)

The mission of Moses

I. The nature of the mission.

1. Its difficulty and danger.

2. It was divinely appointed.

II. Moses was trained specially for it.

1. The school of providence.

2. Our need of discipline.

III. Moses was sufficiently equipped. The rod.

1. The use of little things.

2. The use of present means. Use what is in thy hand.

IV. Moses shrank from his mission. Modesty and self-distrust generally go with true greatness and exalted virtue. (P. S. Henson, D. D.)

The lament of the pulpit

I. The preacher has frequently to lament the scepticism of his congregation. Practical unbelief.

II. The preacher has frequently to lament the inattention of his congregation. Nothing worse than disobedience to the messages of God.

III. the preacher has frequently to lament the querulous spirit of his congregation. They question inspiration, preparation, qualification of teacher. And often in unkind, factious spirit. Should rather welcome him as from God, sent to achieve their moral freedom.

IV. That this conduct on the part of congregations has a most depressing influence on the minds of ministers. He needs the attention, sympathy, prayers, help of those whom he seeks to free from the tyranny of sin. He has enough to contend with external hindrances, with the opposition of Pharaoh, without having added to it that of the slave whose fetter he seeks to break. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)

Why did Moses imagine that the Israelites would not believe him

1. Because he knew that they were a stiff-necked people.

2. Because he considered himself of insufficient authority to command their respect.

3. Because the power and tyranny of Pharaoh would deter them from believing him.

4. Because they would think it unlikely that God, who had never been seen by man, should appear to him. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)

Human distrust

Human distrust is a difficulty which every preacher, teacher, and holy labourer has to encounter. All great movements are carried by consent of parties. God Himself cannot re-establish moral order without the concurrence of the powers that have rebelled against His rule. After all, the spiritual labourer has less to do with the unbelief of his hearers than with the instruction and authority of God. We have to ascertain what God the Lord would have us to say, and then to speak it simply and lovingly, whether men will hear or whether they will forbear. The preacher must prepare himself for having doubts thrown upon his authority; and he must take care that his answer to such doubts be as complete as the authority itself. God alone can give the true answer to human doubt. We are not to encounter scepticism with merely ingenious replies and clever arguments, but in the power and grace of the living God. (J. Parker, D. D.)

Ministerial duty in spite of discouragement

Dr. Stevens narrates how an eminent minister was very much depressed by the unbelief of his congregation, and how his spirit of depression was shaken off. He dreamed that he was working with a pick-axe on the top of a basaltic rock, which remained non-riven in spite of repeated strokes of his arm of muscle. When about to give up in despair, a stranger of solemn and dignified demeanour appeared on the scene, who reminded him that as a servant he was bound to go on whether the rock yielded or not. Work is your duty; leave the results to God, were the last words of his strange visitor. The result was that the discouraged pastor resumed his work, and was abundantly rewarded by the shattering of the rock of unbelief and indifference among his flock.

Frailty invested with divinity

If we pause for a moment and consider the almost insurmountable difficulties which stood in the way of Israels redemption from Egypt, we can readily appreciate the hesitation on the part of Moses before undertaking this herculean task. Egypt at that time was one of the most powerful of nations. It was not that Egypt desired simply to hold Israel in subjection, that such a strict and powerful sovereignty was exercised; hut the Israelites had become the servants, the slaves of the Egyptians, and as such were almost necessary to the vigour of the nation. Besides, four centuries of oppression had left their deep and degrading mark upon the children of Israel. They had become in a measure satisfied with their condition. Hope had taken to itself wings. Ambition had died within them. There native fire and energy had wasted away. To redeem a people who do not care to be redeemed, to set free a nation which is content with captivity, is a work well-nigh impossible. And then, to add to the difficulty of the case, supposing even that they were free, where will they go? Their own land, the land promised to their father Abraham, is already occupied. Warlike tribes have come down from the north and strongly entrenched themselves within its borders. Who and what am I, said Moses, that I should go upon this great mission? What proofs can I bring to assure the people that I am come from God? They will not believe my word, and they will ask, Where is the God of our fathers and what is His name? What sign have I to convince them? What power have I to display? At length God answers, What is that in thy hand? And he said a rod. He was told to cast it upon the ground, when all at once it became a writhing serpent. You will notice all through the Scriptures in the dealings of God with His people, that in almost every instance He proceeds upon the principle contained in our text. When any great work is to be done, when any special mission is to be undertaken, God does not bring down to the accomplishment of His purpose strange or wonderful agencies, but He rather takes the simple things that lie about common life, and makes them achieve the Divine will. God seems to take the most exquisite pleasure in clothing human frailty with Divine strength and beauty, and imparting to the most ordinary and trivial things, heavenly meaning and significance. Indeed, Gods constant purpose seems to have been to unite this world with another one, to blend this life with a life infinitely higher and grander. Life is robbed of all its harmony, all its grace, all its impressiveness if we ever allow it to become separated from the Divine and the eternal, and the little boat which is unswung from the davits and carried off by a huge billow from its place on the ocean steamer, is no more helpless as it rolls in the trough of the sea, and is no more pitiable in its desolation, than the life which is adrift from God out upon the great waters of human experience and distress. To many life is a weary drudgery all the way from the cradle to the grave. It is nothing but work and eat and sleep. Once in a great while there is a little change, but not often. The great bulk of life is a sad monotony, and millions look forward to the quiet and rest of the grave. And why are these people in this dismal plight? Simply because their life is not connected with the Divine life, because this world is not made a part of the heavenly world, and like a car which has become detached from the swift express and flung out upon a siding, it stands helpless and forsaken in the dark and dismal night. Suppose that here are three plates of common glass a foot square, an eighth or a quarter of an inch in thickness, and suppose that they are given to three men to dispose of them as they please. One takes his and he covers it with black enamel, and on the ebonized surface he paints a human face, or some lovely flowers. Another takes his and he spreads upon it a solution of quicksilver and it becomes a mirror throwing back to the beholder his own face and expression. But the third takes his to the best room in his house, he inserts it in the window which has the most commanding view, and then carefully removing all the dust and finger-marks, he looks through its open substance and sees the skies in their morning beauty, the fields in living green or glistening white, and thus brings heaven and earth within the circle of that room. Now these are the ways in which most of us live. We take our life and we enamel or ebonize it. We make it opaque. We cannot see through it to anything that lies beyond; and though we paint it, and try to adorn it, yet we in no wise remove the mystery; the darkness in the sad background which even the flowers will not hide away. Some use the coating of mercury, and make their life nothing but a mirror which reflects themselves. Self is the image ever rising before their eyes. But the wise man makes this life simply a transparency through which he can see the life of God. There are three forms of power by which the machinery of clocks is kept in motion. The first and the one of the oldest date is that of the weight suspended upon a chain or rope. The bulk and heaviness of the weight was always in proportion to the size of the clock, and the wheels were literally driven by the sheer force of the big weights as they slowly descended. The second is that of the spring, the band of steel coiled within its cylinder spending its strength in expansion, and forcing the wheels to revolve in its great desire to get free. The third is that of electricity, where the current is carried along the wire from the central battery. Silently, but almost irresistibly, the mysterious force operates upon the machinery, ensuring an accuracy and faithfulness which can be gained in no other way. And in these we have illustrations of how human life is carried on. Many of us go by weight. We are dragged down by heaviness and toil, and compelled by the demands of circumstances to go our weary round. Others go through by the sheer force of their own energy. They have power and strength in themselves to propel them around the dial-plate of common existence, and in this way they fulfil the measure of their days. But some have an electric current. The wires of their thought are in connection with the great battery of God. Life to them is not a mere drag. Life to them is not merely an expenditure of vital force. Life to them means heavenly communion, Divine fellowship, holy enjoyment, and the days of their pilgrimage are accomplished in simple dependence upon the Almighty will. Now, what seems to be the very plain, the very obvious meaning of this rod? Is it not this: that the most common things within our possession, and under our control, can be so wrought upon by Divine influence, and so charged with Divine power, as to accomplish the most strange and glorious results? St. Paul tells us in the Epistle to the Corinthians that God has a strange choice in the selection of His instrumentalities: Not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise. And if you will go down the lines of history you will see that God has carried out this principle in its integrity. And this ought not to strike us as either strange or remarkable, because we do just the same ourselves. We take the most common things that we can find, and we unite them with other things until we finally develop the most potential forces of our time. A few gallons of water, a few pieces of coal are enough to send the mad steam hissing through the pipes, eager to turn yon giant engine, or send the train of cars thundering along the line. A few drops of vitriol, a few pieces of prepared zinc, a single thread of wire, and lo, the electric force flashes as light around our world. A few grains of charcoal and sulphur mixed with nitre are sufficient to give us the dreadful gunpowder which sends iron giants swinging in the air that beat into ruin walls and parapets of stone. We take the most common rods that Nature has in her hand, and we breathe upon them, and they become instinct with life; we give them of our genius and our strength; we lift them up out of their low estate. We take the iron and the coal from the mines, we dig out the metals that are in the hills, we dignify them and ennoble them until at length they become our most valued agents and servants. But we must always remember that the rod of itself will be valueless unless it have with it the presence and favour of God. Of what worth was the mere rod which Moses held in his hand that day as he stood before the burning bush? In all probability it was only the shepherds crook which he used while attending the flocks of Jethro. The rod itself was almost of no value whatever. And so exactly with our life. Before we can be really useful, before we can accomplish any great work, before we can live up to the measure of our power, we must first of all meet with God. We must stand before the burning bush; we must listen to the Divine voice; we must receive the heavenly commission; we must accept the Divine command. Until this is done our life is nothing but a rod–a rod without any special use or intrinsic value, and which will one day break in our hands, and be cast into the fire and be destroyed. Look how this is illustrated: What is that in thy hand? A sling, said David. It is enough; go up against the giant; and the great Goliath fell before the shepherd-boy. What is that in thy hand? A sword, answered Jonathan. It is enough, and the brave youth, followed by his armour-bearer, goes up against an army, and the Philistines are defeated by these twain. What is that in thy hand? A piece of parchment, answered Luther. It is enough, and he proceeds to nail his famous protest upon the doors of the Roman Church and the era of the Reformation broke upon darkened Europe. What is that in thy hand? A pen, said Bunyan, as he spoke from under the arches of Bedford jail. It is enough, and he wrote the story of the Pilgrims Progress, which will live while the world endures. Men and women, with common, simple things about them, have heard the voice of God, and doing just what their hand found to do, they made their life memorable in the history of the Church and accomplished the Divine will. What is that in your hand? Only a rod, answers the mother from beside the cradle, the workman standing at the bench, the clerk behind the counter, the man of business at his desk. Only a rod, and is that all? Oh, there is something of far greater value than you now suppose. Ask that honest farmer in a few weeks from now standing in the open furrows, what is that in his hand, and he will answer, only a few grains of seed. But is that all? Far from it. Those grains of seed contain the germs of the great harvest which will fill our lands with plenty, and crowd the threshing-floors with abundance. Then say not Only a rod. There is no such word as only about human life. Every part of it is invested with mysterious grandeur and possibility. We cannot tell how far the most simple thing will reach. A word dropped from our lips, a hand clasped within ours, something apparently trifling done and then forgotten, will go on long after we have passed away, and a life which throws its shadows all down eternity cannot have anything but which is of value. (J. W. Johnston.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER IV

Moses continuing to express his fear that the Israelites would not

credit his Divine mission, 1;

God, to strengthen his faith, and to assure him that his countrymen

would believe him, changed his rod into a serpent, and the serpent

into a rod, 2-5;

made his hand leprous, and afterwards restored it, 6, 7;

intimating that he had now endued him with power to work such

miracles, and that the Israelites would believe, 8;

and farther assures him that he should have power to turn the water

into blood, 9.

Moses excuses himself on the ground of his not being eloquent, 10,

and God reproves him for his unbelief, and promises to give him

supernatural assistance, 11, 12.

Moses expressing his utter unwillingness to go on any account, God

is angry, and then promises to give him his brother Aaron to be his

spokesman, 13-16,

and appoints his rod to be the instrument of working miracles, 17.

Moses returns to his relative Jethro, and requests liberty to visit

his brethren in Egypt, and is permitted, 18.

God appears to him in Midian, and assures him that the Egyptians who

sought his life were dead, 19.

Moses, with his wife and children, set out on their journey to

Egypt, 20.

God instructs him what he shall say to Pharaoh, 21-23.

He is in danger of losing his life, because he had not circumcised

his son, 24.

Zipporah immediately circumcising the child, Moses escapes

unhurt, 25, 26.

Aaron is commanded to go and meet his brother Moses; he goes and

meets him at Horeb, 27.

Moses informs him of the commission he had received from God, 28.

They both go to their brethren, deliver their message, and work

miracles, 29, 30.

The people believe and adore God, 31.

NOTES ON CHAP. IV

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.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

They will not believe me; which he conjectured both from reason, because the greatness and strangeness of the deliverance made it seem incredible; and their minds were so oppressed with cares and labours, that it was not likely they could raise them up to any such expectation; and from the experience which he had of them forty years before, when their deliverance by his means and interest at court seemed much more credible than now it did.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

1. But, beholdHebrew,“If,” “perhaps,” “they will not believeme.”What evidence can I produce of my divine mission? Therewas still a want of full confidence, not in the character and divinepower of his employer, but in His presence and power alwaysaccompanying him. He insinuated that his communication might berejected and he himself treated as an impostor.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And Moses answered and said,…. In reference to what Jehovah had declared to him in the latter end of the preceding chapter:

but, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken to my voice; this seems to contradict what God had said to him, Ex 3:18 that they would hearken to his voice; but it can hardly be thought, that so good a man, and so great a prophet as Moses was, would directly fly in the face of God, and expressly contradict what he had said. To reconcile this it may be observed, that what the Lord says respects only the elders of Israel, this all the people; or Jehovah’s meaning may be, and so this of Moses, that neither the one nor the other would regard his bare word, without some sign or miracle being wrought; for as his call was extraordinary, so it required something extraordinary to be done that it might be credited:

for they will say, the Lord hath not appeared unto me: in the bush, as he would affirm he did, and might do it with the greatest assurance; yet the thing being so marvellous, and they not eyewitnesses of it, might distrust the truth of it, or be backward to receive it on his bare word; and this Moses might rather fear would be the case, from the experience he had had of them forty years ago, when it was more likely for him to have been a deliverer of them.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Moses now started a fresh difficulty: the Israelites would not believe that Jehovah had appeared to him. There was so far a reason for this difficulty, that from the time of Jacob-an interval, therefore, of 430 years – God had never appeared to any Israelite. God therefore removed it by giving him three signs by which he might attest his divine mission to his people. These three signs were intended indeed for the Israelites, to convince them of the reality of the appearance of Jehovah to Moses; at the same time, as even Ephraem Syrus observed, they also served to strengthen Moses’ faith, and dissipate his fears as to the result of his mission. For it was apparent enough that Moses did not possess true and entire confidence in God, from the fact that he still raised this difficulty, and distrusted the divine assurance, “They will hearken to thy voice,” Exo 3:18). And finally, these signs were intended for Pharaoh, as is stated in Exo 4:21; and to him the ( ) were to become ( ). By these signs Moses was installed as the servant of Jehovah (Exo 14:31), and furnished with divine power, with which he could and was to appear before the children of Israel and Pharaoh as the messenger of Jehovah. The character of the three signs corresponded to this intention.

Exo 4:2-5

The First Sign. – The turning of Moses’ staff into a serpent, which became a staff again when Moses took it by the tail, had reference to the calling of Moses. The staff in his hand was his shepherd’s crook ( Exo 4:2, for , in this place alone), and represented his calling as a shepherd. At the bidding of God he threw it upon the ground, and the staff became a serpent, before which Moses fled. The giving up of his shepherd-life would expose him to dangers, from which he would desire to escape. At the same time, there was more implied in the figure of a serpent than danger which merely threatened his life. The serpent had been the constant enemy of the seed of the woman (Gen 3), and represented the power of the wicked one which prevailed in Egypt. The explanation in Pirke Elieser, c. 40, points to this: ideo Deum hoc signum Mosi ostendisse, quia sicut serpens mordet et morte afficit homines, ita quoque Pharao et Aegyptii mordebant et necabant Israelitas . But at the bidding of God, Moses seized the serpent by the tail, and received his staff again as “the rod of God,” with which he smote Egypt with great plagues. From this sign the people of Israel would necessarily perceive, that Jehovah had not only called Moses to be the leader of Israel, but had endowed him with the power to overcome the serpent-like cunning and the might of Egypt; in other words, they would “believe that Jehovah, the God of the fathers, had appeared to him.” (On the special meaning of this sign for Pharaoh, see Exo 7:10.)

Exo 4:6-8

The Second Sign. – Moses’ hand became leprous, and was afterwards cleansed again. The expression , covered with leprosy like snow, refers to the white leprosy (vid., Lev 13:3). – “ Was turned again as his flesh; ” i.e., was restored, became healthy, or clean like the rest of his body. So far as the meaning of this sign is concerned, Moses’ hand has been explained in a perfectly arbitrary manner as representing the Israelitish nation, and his bosom as representing first Egypt, and then Canaan, as the hiding-place of Israel. If the shepherd’s staff represented Moses’ calling, the hand was that which directed or ruled the calling. It is in the bosom that the nurse carried the sucking child (Num 11:12), the shepherd the lambs (Isa 40:11), and the sacred singer the many nations, from whom he has suffered reproach and injury (Psa 89:50). So Moses also carried his people in his bosom, i.e., in his heart: of that his first appearance in Egypt was a proof (Exo 2:11-12). But now he was to set his hand to deliver them from the reproach and bondage of Egypt. He put ( ) his hand into his bosom, and his hand was covered with leprosy. The nation was like a leper, who defiled every one that touched him. The leprosy represented not only “the servitude and contemptuous treatment of the Israelites in Egypt” ( Kurtz), but the of the Egyptians also, as Theodoret expresses it, or rather the impurity of Egypt in which Israel was sunken. This Moses soon discovered (cf. Exo 5:17.), and on more than one occasion afterwards (cf. Num 11); so that he had to complain to Jehovah, “Wherefore hast Thou afflicted Thy servant, that Thou layest the burden of all this people upon me?…Have I conceived all this people, that Thou shouldest say to me, Carry them in thy bosom?” (Num 11:11-12). But God had the power to purify the nation from this leprosy, and would endow His servant Moses with that power. At the command of God, Moses put his hand, now covered with leprosy, once more into his bosom, and drew it out quite cleansed. This was what Moses was to learn by the sign; whilst Israel also learned that God both could and would deliver it, through the cleansed hand of Moses, from all its bodily and spiritual misery. The object of the first miracle was to exhibit Moses as the man whom Jehovah had called to be the leader of His people; that of the second, to show that, as the messenger of Jehovah, he was furnished with the necessary power for the execution of this calling. In this sense God says, in Exo 4:8, “ If they will not hearken to the voice of the first sign, they will believe the voice of the latter sign.” A voice is ascribed to the sign, as being a clear witness to the divine mission of the person performing it. (Psa 105:27).

Exo 4:9

The Third Sign. – If the first two signs should not be sufficient to lead the people to believe in the divine mission of Moses, he was to give them one more practical demonstration of the power which he had received to overcome the might and gods of Egypt. He was to take of the water of the Nile (the river, Gen 41:1) and pour it upon the dry land, and it would become blood (the second is a resumption of the first, cf. Exo 12:41). The Nile received divine honours as the source of every good and all prosperity in the natural life of Egypt, and was even identified with Osiris (cf. Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 109 transl.). If Moses therefore had power to turn the life-distributing water of the Nile into blood, he must also have received power to destroy Pharaoh and his gods. Israel was to learn this from the sign, whilst Pharaoh and the Egyptians were afterwards to experience this might of Jehovah in the form of punishment (Exo 7:15.). Thus Moses as not only entrusted with the word of God, but also endowed with the power of God; and as he was the first God-sent prophet, so was he also the first worker of miracles, and in this capacity a type of the Apostle of our profession (Heb 3:1), even the God-man, Christ Jesus.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

The Objections of Moses Overruled.

B. C. 1491.

      1 And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The LORD hath not appeared unto thee.   2 And the LORD said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod.   3 And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it.   4 And the LORD said unto Moses, Put forth thine hand, and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand, and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand:   5 That they may believe that the LORD God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee.   6 And the LORD said furthermore unto him, Put now thine hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom: and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow.   7 And he said, Put thine hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again; and plucked it out of his bosom, and, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh.   8 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign.   9 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.

      It was a very great honour that Moses was called to when God commissioned him to bring Israel out of Egypt; yet he is with difficulty persuaded to accept the commission, and does it at last with great reluctance, which we should rather impute to a humble diffidence of himself and his own sufficiency than to any unbelieving distrust of God and his word and power. Note, Those whom God designs for preferment he clothes with humility; the most fit for service are the least forward.

      I. Moses objects that in all probability the people would not hearken to his voice (v. 1), that is, they would not take his bare word, unless he showed them some sign, which he had not been yet instructed to do. This objection cannot be justified, because it contradicts what God had said (ch. iii. 18), They shall hearken to thy voice. If God says, They will, does it become Moses to say, They will not? Surely he means, “Perhaps they will not at first, or some of them will not.” If there should be some gainsayers among them who would question his commission, how should he deal with them? And what course should he take to convince them? He remembered how they had once rejected him, and feared it would be so again. Note, 1. Present discouragements often arise from former disappointments. 2. Wise and good men have sometimes a worse opinion of people than they deserve. Moses sad (v. 1), They will not believe me; and yet he was happily mistaken, for it is said (v. 31), The people believed; but then the signs which God appointed in answer to this objection were first wrought in their sight.

      II. God empowers him to work miracles, directs him to three particularly, two of which were now immediately wrought for his own satisfaction. Note, True miracles are the most convincing external proofs of a divine mission attested by them. Therefore our Saviour often appealed to his works (as John v. 36), and Nicodemus owns himself convinced by them, John iii. 2. And here Moses, having a special commission given him as a judge and lawgiver to Israel, has this seal affixed to his commission, and comes supported by these credentials.

      1. The rod in his hand is made the subject of a miracle, a double miracle: it is but thrown out of his hand and it becomes a serpent; he resumes it and it becomes a rod again, v. 2-4. Now, (1.) Here was a divine power manifested in the change itself, that a dry stick should be turned into a living serpent, a lively one, so formidable a one that Moses himself, on whom, it should seem, it turned in some threatening manner, fled from before it, though we may suppose, in that desert, serpents were no strange things to him; but what was produced miraculously was always the best and strongest of the kind, as the water turned to wine: and, then, that this living serpent should be turned into a dry stick again, this was the Lord’s doing. (2.) Here was an honour put upon Moses, that this change was wrought upon his throwing it down and taking it up, without any spell, or charm, or incantation: his being empowered thus to act under God, out of the common course of nature and providence, was a demonstration of his authority, under God, to settle a new dispensation of the kingdom of grace. We cannot imagine that the God of truth would delegate such a power as this to an impostor. (3.) There was a significancy in the miracle itself. Pharaoh had turned the rod of Israel into a serpent, representing them as dangerous (ch. i. 10), causing their belly to cleave to the dust, and seeking their ruin; but now they should be turned into a rod again: or, thus Pharaoh had turned the rod of government into the serpent of oppression, from which Moses had himself fled into Midian; but by the agency of Moses the scene was altered again. (4.) There was a direct tendency in it to convince the children of Israel that Moses was indeed sent of God to do what he did, v. 5. Miracles were for signs to those that believed not, 1 Cor. xiv. 22.

      2. His hand itself is next made the subject of a miracle. He puts it once into his bosom, and takes it out leprous; he puts it again into the same place, and takes it out well, Exo 4:6; Exo 4:7. This signified, (1.) That Moses, by the power of God, should bring sore diseases upon Egypt, and that, at his prayer, they should be removed. (2.) That whereas the Israelites in Egypt had become leprous, polluted by sin, and almost consumed by oppression (a leper is as one dead, Num. xii. 12), by being taken into the bosom of Moses they should be cleansed and cured, and have all their grievances redressed. (3.) That Moses was not to work miracles by his own power, nor for his own praise, but by the power of God and for his glory; the leprous hand of Moses does forever exclude boasting. Now it was supposed that, if the former sign did not convince, this latter would. Note, God is willing more abundantly to show the truth of his word, and is not sparing in his proofs; the multitude and variety of the miracles corroborate the evidence.

      3. He is directed, when he shall come to Egypt, to turn some of the water of the river into blood, v. 9. This was done, at first, as a sign, but, not gaining due credit with Pharaoh, the whole river was afterwards turned into blood, and then it became a plague. He is ordered to work this miracle in case they would not be convinced by the other two. Note, Unbelief shall be left inexcusable, and convicted of a wilful obstinacy. As to the people of Israel, God had said (ch. iii. 18), They shall hearken; yet he appoints these miracles to be wrought for their conviction, for he that has ordained the end has ordained the means.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

EXODUS – CHAPTER FOUR

Verses 1-5:

Moses’ continued reluctance to accept the role of leadership shows in his reply: “They will not believe me.” It has been about four hundred years since God had spoken to Israel by a prophet. Moses had been absent from his people for forty years. They would likely question anyone who claimed to speak for Jehovah, unless he could produce a sign indicating a Divine commission.

God provided a sign to confirm His presence. Moses carried in his hand a “rod,” matteh, a staff commonly used by shepherds of the day. God used this staff to demonstrate His power, and the choice of Moses as His representative. This shows that God takes the common things of life and uses them in a dramatic way to confirm His Word.

Acting on God’s orders, Moses cast down his “rod,” and it became a serpent, nakhash (a generic term denoting any species of snake). Moses likely thought this snake was venomous, and fled in fear.

God then instructed Moses, “Take it by the tail.” Snake charmers commonly grasp a snake just below the head so it will be unable to bite. But God asked Moses to show his faith by taking the snake by the tail. His response shows both his faith and his courage!

When Moses obeyed God, the snake once more became a rod.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

1. And Moses answered. Moses relates in this chapter how hesitatingly he obeyed God, not from stubbornness, but from timidity, for he does not shake off the yoke, as unruly beasts do, but shrinks away from it, that it may not be placed upon him. (50) And hence we may better perceive under what infirmity he labored, so that his faith was almost stifled. On the one side, he was willing and ready to obey; but when the arduous difficulties of his task presented themselves, he could not escape from this conflict until he had exhausted all efforts to escape. Nor indeed can we greatly wonder that he resisted for a time, since he could see scarcely any advantage in his undertaking. I admit that he ought to have proceeded according to God’s command, even with his eyes shut, since on His will alone all believers are bound to depend; he ought not to have judged of a thing (in itself) incredible, from his own reasoning, but from the voice of God. Nor, in point of fact, did he either refuse to credit God’s words, or wish to reject the burden imposed upon him; but when, on the other hand, he beheld dangers from which he could not disentangle himself, his mind was thus a prey to distracting feelings. Neither is there any believer who is not often drawn into such harassing discussions, whenever his mind is darkened by the perception of obstacles. There was, therefore, in the mind of Moses, willingness and zeal, though alacrity and firmness were wanting; because through his weakness he was compelled to hold back by the hinderances which presented themselves. We must carefully distinguish between the timidity which delays our progress and the bold refusal which is allied to contempt. Many, in flying from trouble, are so withheld from duty, that they grow hardened in their inactivity; while those who desire to act rightly, although through anxiety and fear they apparently recoil, still aspire to ulterior progress, and, in a word, do not so far alternate as to withdraw themselves altogether from the command of God. Moses seems, indeed, to murmur, and to enter into altercation with God; but whether this were audacity or simplicity, there was more of modesty in it, than as if he had hidden himself in silence, as we have said that many do, who by their silence only strengthen themselves in the liberty to disobey. This was clearly his object, that he might afterwards be more fitted to proceed. The holy man was very anxious, because he knew from experience that his countrymen were depraved, and almost intractable; disburdening himself, then, of this anxiety into the bosom of God, he desires to be confirmed by a fresh promise, so that he may be freed from this impediment, and proceed with alacrity.

(50) “Pensant qu’il ne luy peut estre approprie;” thinking that it cannot be fitted to him. — Fr.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

ISRAELS BONDAGE. MOSES AND THE EXODUS

Exo 1:1 to Exo 15:21.

DR. J. M. Grays five rules for Bible reading: Read the Book, Read the Book Continuously, Read the Book Repeatedly, Read the Book Independently, Read the Book Prayerfully, are all excellent; but the one upon which I would lay emphasis in this study of Exodus is the second of those rules, or, Read the Book Continuously. It is doubtful if there is any Book in the Bible which comes so nearly containing an outline, at least, of all revelation, as does the Book of Exodus. There is scarcely a doctrine in the New Testament, or a truth in the Old, which may not be traced in fair delineation in these forty chapters.

God speaks in this Book out of the burning bush. Sin, with its baneful effects, has a prominent place in its pages; and Salvation, for all them that trust in Him, with judgment for their opposers, is a conspicuous doctrine in this Old Testament document. God, Sin, Salvation, and Judgmentthese are great words! The Book that reveals each of them in fair outline is a great Book indeed, and its study will well repay the man of serious mind.

Exodus is a Book of bold outlines also! Its author, like a certain school of modern painters, draws his picture quickly and with but few strokes, and yet the product of his work approaches perfection. How much of time and history is put into these three verses:

And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already. And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation. And the Children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them (Exo 1:5-7).

These three verses contain 215 years of time, and all the events that crowded into that period would, if they were recorded, fill volumes without end. And, while there are instances of delineation in detail in the Book of Exodus, the greater part of the volume is given to the bolder outlines which sweep much history into single sentences.

In looking into these fifteen chapters, I have been engaged with the question of such arrangement as would best meet the demands of memory, and thereby make the lesson of this hour a permanent article in our mental furniture. Possibly, to do that, we must seize upon a few of the greater subjects that characterize these chapters, and so phrase them as to provide mental promontories from which to survey the field of our present study. Surely, The Bondage of Israel, The Rise of Moses, and the Exodus from Egypt, are such fundamentals.

THE BONDAGE OF ISRAEL.

The bondage of Israel, like her growth, requires but a few sentences for its expression.

Now, there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the Children of Israel are more and mightier than we; Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up out of the land. Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pit horn and Raamses. But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were grieved because of the Children of Israel. And the Egyptians made the Children of Israel to serve with rigour: And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in mortar, and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field: all their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigour (Exo 1:8-22).

There are several features in Egypts conduct in effecting the bondage of Israel which characterize the conduct of all imperial nations.

The bondage began with injustice. Israel was in Egypt by invitation. When they came, Pharaoh welcomed them, and set apart for their use the fat of the land. The record is,

Joseph placed his father and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Raamses, as Pharaoh had commanded (Gen 47:11).

There they flourished until a king arose which knew not Joseph. Then a tax was laid upon them; eventually taskmasters were set over them, and those who came in response to Pharaohs invitation, Come unto me and I will give you the good of the, land of Egypt, and ye shall eat of the fat of the land, were compelled by his successors to take the place of slaves. It seems as difficult for a nation as it is for an individual to refrain from the abuse of power. A writer says, Revolution is caused by seeking to substitute expediency for justice, and that is exactly what the King of Egypt and his confederates attempted in the instance of these Israelites. It would seem that the result of that endeavor ought to be a lesson to the times in which we live, and to the nations entrusted with power. Injustice toward a supposedly weaker people is one of those offences against God which do not go unpunished, and its very practice always provokes a rebellion which converts a profitable people into powerful enemies.

It ought never to be forgotten either that injustice easily leads to oppression. We may suppose the tax at first imposed upon this people was comparatively slight, and honorable Egyptians found for it a satisfactory excuse, hardly expecting that the time would ever come when the Israelites should be regarded chattel-slaves. But he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. It is doubtful if there is any wrong in mans moral relations which blinds him so quickly and so effectually as the exercise of power against weakness.

Joseph Parker, in speaking of the combat between Moses and the Egyptian, says, Every honorable-minded man is a trustee of social justice and common fair play. We have nothing to do with the petty quarrels that fret society, but we certainly have to do with every controversysocial, imperial, or internationalwhich violates human right and impairs the claims of Divine honor. We must all fight for the right. We feel safer by so much if we know there are amongst us men who will not be silent in the presence of wrong, and will lift up a testimony in the name of righteousness, though there be none to cheer them with one word of encouragement.

It is only a step from enslaving to slaughter. That step was speedily taken, for Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river (Exo 1:22). Unquestionably there is a two-fold thought in this fact. Primarily this, whom the tyrant cannot control to his profit, he will slay to his pleasure; and then, in its deeper and more spiritual significance, it is Satans effort to bring an end to the people of God. The same serpent that effected the downfall of Adam and Eve whispered into Cains ear, Murder Abel; and into the ears of the Patriarchs, Put Joseph out of the way; and to Herod, Throttle all the male children of the land; and to the Pharisee and Roman soldier, Crucify Jesus of Nazareth. It remains for us of more modern times to learn that the slaughter of the weak may be accomplished in other ways than by the knife, the Nile, or the Cross. It was no worse to send a sword against a feeble people, than, for the sake of filthy lucre, to plant among them the accursed saloon. Benjamin Harrison, in a notable address before the Ecumenical Missionary Conference held in the City of New York years ago, said, The men who, like Paul, have gone to heathen lands with the message, We seek not yours but you, have been hindered by those who, coming after, have reversed the message. Rum and other corrupting agencies come in with our boasted civilization, and the feeble races wither before the breath of the white mans vices.

Egypt sought to take away from Israel the physical life which Egypt feared; but God has forewarned us against a greater enemy when He said, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. * * Fear Him, which after He hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear Him. If in this hour of almost universal disturbance the sword cannot be sheathed, let us praise God that our Congress and Senate have removed the saloona slaughter-house from the midst of our soldiers, and our amended Constitution has swept it from the land.

THE RISE OF MOSES.

I do not know whether you have ever been impressed in studying this Book of Exodus with what is so evidently a Divine ordering of events. It is when the slaughter is on that we expect the Saviour to come. And that God who sits beside the dying sparrow never overlooks the affliction of His people. When an edict goes forth against them, then it is that He brings their deliverer to the birth; hence we read, And there went a man of the house of Levi and took to wife a daughter of the house of Levi, and the woman conceived and bare a son (Exo 2:1-2),

That is Moses; that is Gods man! It is no chance element that brings him to the kingdom at such a time as this. It is no mere happening that he is bred in Pharaohs house, and instructed by Jochebed. It is no accident that he is taught in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. It is all in perfect consequence of the fact that God is looking upon the Children of Israel, and is having respect unto them.

Against Pharaohs injustice He sets Moses keen sense of right. When Moses sees an Egyptian slay an oppressed Israelite, he cannot withhold his hand. And, when after forty years in the wilderness he comes back to behold afresh the affliction of his people, he chooses to suffer with them rather than enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season. God never does a better thing for a nation than when He raises up in it such a man. We have heard a great deal of Socrates wisdom, but it is not in the science of philosophy alone that that ancient shines; for when Athens was governed by thirty tyrants, who one day summoned him to the Senate House, and ordered him to go with others named to seize Leon, a man of rank and fortune, whose life was to be sacrificed that these rulers might enjoy his estate, the great philosopher flatly refused, saying, I will not willingly assist in an unjust act. Thereupon Chericles sharply asked, Dost thou think, Socrates, to talk in this high tone and not to suffer? Far from it, replied the philosopher, I expect to suffer a thousand ills, but none so great as to do unjustly. That day Socrates was a statesman of the very sort that would have saved Athens had his ideas of righteousness obtained.

Against Pharaohs oppression He sets Moses Divine appointment. There were many times when Moses was tempted to falter, but Gods commission constrained his service. When Moses said, Who am I that I should go unto Pharaoh? God answered, Surely I will be with thee. When Moses feared his own people who would not believe in his commission, God answered, Thus shalt thou say unto the Children of Israel, I AM hath sent you. When Moses feared that the Israelites would doubt his Divine appointment, God turned the rod in his hand into a worker of wonders. And, when Moses excused himself on the ground of no eloquence, God replied, Go, and I will be with thy mouth and teach thee what thou shalt say. With any man, a conviction of Divine appointment is a power, but for him who would be a saviour of his fellows, it is an absolute essential.

Pastor Stalker, speaking to the subject of a Divine call to the service of soul-winning, said, Enthusiasm for humanity is a noble passion and sheds a beautiful glow over the first efforts of an unselfish life, but it is hardly stern enough for the uses of the world. There come hours of despair when men seem hardly worth our devotion. * * Worse still is the sickening consciousness that we have but little to give; perhaps we have mistaken our vocation; it is a world out of joint, but were we born to put it right? This is where a sterner motive is needed than love for men. Our retreating zeal requires to be rallied by the command of God. It is His work; these souls are His; He has committed them to our care, and at the judgment-seat He will demand an account of them. All Prophets and Apostles who have dealt with men for God have been driven on by this impulse which has recovered them in hours of weakness and enabled them to face the opposition of the world. * * This command came to Moses in the wilderness and drove him into public life in spite of strong resistance; and it bore him through the unparalleled trials of his subsequent career. How many times he would have surrendered the battle and left his fellows to suffer under Pharaohs heels, but for the sound of that voice which Joan of Arc heard, saying to him as it said to her, Go on! Go on!

Against Pharaohs slaughter God set up Moses as a Saviour. History has recorded the salvation of his people to many a man, who, either by his counsels in the time of peace or his valor in the time of war, has brought abiding victory. But where in annals, secular or sacred, can you find a philosopher who had such grave difficulties to deal with as Moses met in lifting his people from chattel slaves to a ruling nation? And where so many enemies to be fought as Moses faced in his journey from the place of the Pyramids to Pisgahs Heights?

Titus Flaminius freed the Grecians from the bondage with which they had long been oppressed. When the herald proclaimed the Articles of Peace, and the Greeks understood perfectly what Flaminius had accomplished for them, they cried out for joy, A Saviour! a Saviour! till the Heavens rang with their acclamations.

But Moses was worthy of greater honor because his was a more difficult deed. I dont know, but I suppose one reason why Moses name is coupled with that of the Lamb in the Oratorio of the Heavens, is because he saved Israel out of a bondage which was a mighty symbol of Satans power, and led them by a journey, which is the best type of the pilgrims wanderings in this world, and brought them at last to the borders of Canaan, which has always been regarded as representative of the rest that remaineth for the people of God.

THE EXODUS FROM EGYPT

involves some items of the deepest interest.

The ten plagues prepare for it. The river is turned into blood; frogs literally cover the land; the dust is changed to lice; flies swarm until all the houses are filled; the beasts are smitten with murrain; boils and blains, hail, locusts and darkness do their worst, and the death of the first-born furnishes the climax of Egyptian affliction, and compels the haughty Pharaoh to bow in humility and grief before the will of the Most High God (chaps. 7-12).

There is one feature of these plagues that ought never to be forgotten. Without exception, they spake in thunder tones against Egyptian idolatry. The Nile River had long been an object of their adoration. In a long poem dedicated to the Nile, these lines are found:

Oh, Nile, hymns are sung to thee on the harp,

Offerings are made to thee: oxen are slain to thee;

Great festivals are kept for thee;

Fowls are sacrificed to thee.

But when the waters of that river were turned to blood, the Egyptians supposed Typhon, the God of Evil, with whom blood had always been associated, had conquered over their bountiful and beautiful Osiristhe name under which the Nile was worshiped.

The second plague was no less a stroke at their hope of a resurrection, for a frog had long symbolized to them the subject of life coming out of death. The soil also they had worshiped, and now to see the dust of it turned suddenly into living pests, was to suffer under the very power from which they had hoped to receive greatest success. The flies that came in clouds were not all of one kind, but their countless myriads, according to the Hebrew word used, included winged pests of every sort, even the scarabaeus, or sacred beetle. Heretofore, it had been to them the emblem of the creative principle; but now God makes it the instrument of destruction instead. When the murrain came upon the beasts, the sacred cow and the sacred ox-Apis were humbled. And ~when the ashes from the furnace smote the skin of the Egyptians, they could not forget that they had often sprinkled ashes toward Heaven, believing that thus to throw the ashes of their sacrifices into the wind would be to avert evil from every part of the land whither they were blown. Geikie says that the seventh plague brought these devout worshipers of false gods to see that the waters, the earth and the air, the growth of the fields, the cattle, and even their own persons, all under the care of a host of divinities, were yet in succession smitten by a power against which these protectors were impotent. When the clouds of locusts had devoured the land, there remained another stroke to their idolatry more severe still, and that was to see the Sun, the supreme god of Egypt, veil his face and leave his worshipers in total darkness. It is no wonder that Pharaoh then called to Moses and said, Go ye, serve the Lord; but it is an amazing thing that even yet his greed of gain goads him on to claim their flocks and their herds as an indemnity against the exodus of the people. There remained nothing, therefore, for God to do but lift His hand again, and lo, death succeeded darkness, and Pharaoh himself became the subject of suffering, and the greatest idol of the nation was humbled to the dust, for the king was the supreme object of worship.

He is a foolish man who sets himself up to oppose the Almighty God. And that is a foolish people who think to afflict Gods faithful ones without feeling the mighty hand of that Father who never forgets His own.

One day I was talking with a woman whose husband formerly followed the habit of gambling. By this means he had amassed considerable wealth, and when she was converted and desired to unite with the church, he employed every power to prevent it, and even denied her the privilege of church attendance. One morning he awoke to find that he was a defeated man; his money had fled in the night, and in the humiliation of his losses, he begged his wifes pardon for ever having opposed her spirit of devotion. Since that time, though living in comparative poverty, she has been privileged to serve God as she pleased; and, as she said to me, finds in that service a daily joy such as she at one time feared she would never feel again. Gods plagues are always preparing the way for an exodus on the part of Gods oppressed.

The Passover interpreted this exodus. That greatest of all Jewish feasts stands as a memorial of Israels flight from Egypt as a symbol of Gods salvation for His own, and as an illustration of the saving power of the Blood of the Lamb.

The opponents of the exodus perished. Our study concludes with Israels Song of Deliverance, beginning, The Lord is my strength and song, and He has become my salvation, and concluding in the words of Miriam, Sing ye to the Lord, for He hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath He thrown into the sea. See Exo 15:1-21. Such will ever be the end of those who oppress Gods people and oppose the Divine will.

When one studies the symbolism in all of this, and sees how Israel typifies Gods present-day people, and Moses, their deliverer, Jesus our Saviour, and defeated Pharaoh, the enemy of our souls, destined to be overthrown, he feels like joining in the same song of deliverance, changing the words only so far as to ascribe the greater praise to Him who gave His life a deliverance for all men; and with James Montgomery sing:

Hail to the Lords Anointed

Great Davids greater Son

Who, in the time appointed,

His reign on earth begun.

He comes to break oppression,

To set the captive free,

To take away transgression,

And rule in equity.

He comes, with succor speedy,

To those who suffer wrong;

To help the poor and needy,

And bid the weak be strong;

To give them songs for sighing,

Their darkness turn to light,

Whose souls, condemned and dying.

Were precious in His sight.

Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley

CRITICAL NOTES.

Exo. 4:1. Kept] Not merely once upon a time; but statedly, as his usual occupation: lit., he had come to be shepherding, the participle denoting continuance. Backside] That is, to the west: the east being the quarter towards wh. one is supposed to look (Gesenius, Frst, Davies).

Exo. 4:2. A bush] Lit., the thorn-bush. According to Brugsch, the thorny acacia. The definiteness may be accounted for on the ground of either (a) local notorietythe well-known thorn-bush of the neighbourhood; or (b) historical familiaritythe particular thorn-bush of wh. M. had so often spoken. Prob. the humble thorn-bush represented Israel in the fire of affliction. Burned] Render, more vividly: was burning Note also the repetition of the noun; who both for this reason, and because of its position in the Hob., is emphatic, as if asking to be reiterated with the tone of surprise: Behold the THORN-BUSH was burning with fire, and yet the THORN-BUSH was not consumed!

Exo. 4:3. Is not burnt] Better: does not burn up: the imperfect tense.

Exo. 4:5. Shoes] That is, sandals. This command may be accounted from the custom, in the East, of wearing shoes or sandals merely as protection from dirt. No Brahmin enters a pagoda, no Moslem a mosque, without first taking off at least his overshoes; and even in Grecian temples, the priests and priestesses performed the service barefooted. When entering other holy places also, the Arabs and Samaritans, and even the Yezidis of Mesopotamia take off their shoes, that the place may not be defiled by the dirt or dust upon them. (Keil).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Exo. 4:1-5

THE DEGRADATION OF USEFUL THINGS

Moses held a rod in his handuseful for supportfor helpfor advancementfor protectionas a token of officewhich, being cast upon the ground, lost all capability for usefulness, became offensive, injurious, poisonous; but the Divine command restored it to its original condition of utility and worth. This incident is typical of much that is going on around us in every-day life, where useful things, intended for the political, social, and moral good of men, are so cast upon the ground and degraded, that they become positively inimicable to the welfare of the race. Also, there is in the world a Divine power whereby all this degradation is divested of moral injury, and restored to its original condition of utility. We wish to regard this incident in a parabolic light:

I. That man has, to an alarming extent, the ability to degrade useful things. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent.

1. He has the ability to degrade Divine Truth. Heavenly truth and doctrine, as made known by Godas enunciated in the Biblewhen held as a rod in the hand of man for his moral direction, guidance, and advancementis most useful and absolutely needful to his salvation; but when, by profanity, by unholy doubt, by wilful rejection, by cold scepticism, it is cast on the ground, it becomes a serpent, the enemy of man, to predict his ruin. Who can look out upon the world without seeing to what an alarming extent the sublime truths, books, people of God, are degraded by the worldly and the sceptical? We wonder that the men who occasion such degradation do not flee from before their own profanity.

2. He has the ability to degrade the pulpit. All must admit the great utility of the pulpit, especially when they consider how it instructs the mind of the nation, how it appeals to the consciences of men, and how it quickens and cultures the spiritual life of the Church. Yet, how frequently is it cast upon the ground, by giving forth uncertain doctrine, by pandering to the sensational requirements of the age, and by ministerial inconsistency. At such times it becomes as a serpent to inflict moral injury upon the weak and scoffing. How many have been brought to reject religion by the unhallowed conduct of its professed teachers. May the Christian Church be delivered from the venom of this serpent!

3. He has the ability to degrade the press. None will deny the utility of the press. It is the great instrument of civilizationhas done more than any other agency of human invention to instruct the world in the truth of the Bible, in the mystery of science, in the philosophy of history. If you were to remove the printing press out of the world, men would soon return to the darkness of the middle ages. Yet, how has this valuable instrumentality been degraded. Think of the pernicious literature that it annually circulates, with inaccurate views of lifeexciting, false, unhealthyaltogether enervating to the manhood of those who read it. This degradation of the press is one of the most solemn and lamentable facts of the age. It has indeed become a serpent of the most formidable character, and is doing more to injure the mental life of the young than perhaps anything else.

4. That men are often terrified by the degradation they have occasioned. And Moses fled from before it. No doubt many an infidel has fled from before the phantoms of his own unbelief, and from before the dark abyss toward which his conscience has pointed him. Many a fallen minister has fled from before the enormity of his own sin and ruin. And who will say that many a novel writer and newspaper contributor has not, in quiet moments of reflection, trembled at the result of his own profanity. All men will one day experience a desire to flee from before their sins, to escape their terrible retribution.

II. That there is in religion a restoring influence, whereby useful things that have been degraded may be uplifted to their proper condition. And he put forth his hand, and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand.

1. This restoration is exclusive and extensive. It is exclusive in that it can only be accomplished by religion. Nothing can re-change the serpents of daily life into rods but the Word of God, and Divine influence working in the line of human effort. God told Moses to put forth his hand and take it by the tail. Men must do their part, then Heaven will help them in this great work of restoration. Legislation cannot make a sceptic into a believer of Divine truth. It may do much to suppress a pernicious literature, but with great difficulty, as men immediately cry out for the freedom of the press; it will never remove the desire for a mental stimulant in the shape of unreal fiction. Education may do something towards taming the serpents of human life, but it will leave them serpentsit cannot change them into rods. This Christianity alone can do; and happily her influence is co-extensive with the degradation. Not one serpent in the universe is beyond the charm of her voice. She can uplift the press. She has done much already to purify it. Her Bible has already done much to reclaim the literature of our land. It has, in fact, created a heavenly literature of its own, which is exerting a most salutary influence upon thousands of human souls. Thus the restoring influence of Christianity is not only exclusive, but all-extensive in its capability. 2 This restoration is sympathetic and happy. God has great sympathy with the world, afflicted by these degradations, and sends the mitigating influence of a peaceful religion to relieve its woe. And this token of pity and helpthis prophecy of hopeis welcome to, and happy in its effect upon, humanity. A mind permeated with Divine truth, a pulpit refulgent with true piety, a press sending forth to the world the messages of Heaven, are happy results, and are the chief outcome of Divine grace as purifying the heart of society. LEARN

1. That the creation of evil is within the power of man.

2. That our highest gifts may be prostrated to the lowest ends.

3. That it should be the aim of men to elevate everything with which they are brought into contact.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES

THE LAMENT OF THE PULPIT

Verse

Exo. 4:1.

I. The Preacher has frequently to lament the scepticism of his congregation. But behold they will not believe me. Moses feared the Israelites would not credit the probability of the freedom he had to declare unto them. Insuperable difficulties would appear in the way. They would not sufficiently take God into the matter. Ministers have now to complain of this kind of thing. Sinners are told that the intention of Heaven in reference to them is their moral emancipation. They reflect upon their natural wickednessupon their wilful departure from the law of Godand regard the proclamation as visionary. They despair of freedom from sin, self, and Satan. Ministers frequently carry glorious tidings to their congregationsthe willingness of God to save them there and thenthe ultimate conquest of goodness; and yet are treated with practical unbelief.

II. The Preacher has frequently to lament the inattention of his congregation. Nor hearken unto my voice. Nothing is worse on the part of a congregation than inattention, and disobedience to the messages of God. The Divine claims are of the first importance, and demand immediate attention. They respect our futurethey are for our spiritual goodthey design our eternal freedom. To such a message all men ought to give the most earnest heed.

III. The Preacher has frequently to lament the querulous spirit of his congregation. For they will say the Lord hath not appeared unto thee. How many congregations practically question the announcements of the pulpit. They challenge the inspiration, the Divine preparation, the Divine qualification, the heavenly visions of their teacher. And often they do this in an unkind, factious spirit. They should rather welcome him as from God, sent and wishful to achieve their moral freedom. This would be more to their credit.

IV. That this conduct on the part of congregations has a most depressing influence on the minds of ministers. How can a man preach to people whom he knows are in the habit of practically denying, or refusing his statements of the Divine willingness to save them. He needs the attention, sympathy, prayers, help of those whom he seeks to free from the tyranny of sin. He has enough to contend with external hindrances, with the opposition of Pharaoh, without having added to it that of the slave whose fetter he seeks to break.

Human distrust is a difficulty which every preacher, teacher, and holy labourer has to encounter. All great movements are carried by consent of parties. God himself cannot re-establish moral order without the concurrence of the powers that have rebelled against His rule. After all, the spiritual labourer has less to do with the unbelief of his hearers than with the instruction and authority of God. We have to ascertain what God the Lord would have us say, and then to speak it simply and lovingly, whether men will hear or whether they will forbear. The preacher must prepare himself for having doubts thrown upon his authority; and he must take care that his answer to such doubts be as complete as the authority itself. God alone can give the true answer to human doubt. We are not to encounter scepticism with merely ingenious replies and clever arguments, but in the power and grace of the living God [City Temple].

How indisposed is man to believe the testimony of God! Whether He denounce vengeance upon obstinate offenders, or promise acceptance, assistance, and salvation to the returning sinner, we are ever prone to question His truth. Thus some are hardened in presumption, others sink into despondency, and others are discouraged, and through unbelief continue heartless in all they attempt. But the Lord deals not with us according to our sins; else the strongest believer upon earth, instead of being saved by his faith, might righteously be condemned for his unbelief [Henry and Scott].

Moses objects that in all probability the people would not hearken to his voice; that is, they would not take his bare word, unless he shewed them some sign, which he had not yet been instructed to do. God empowers him to work miracles. Miracles are the most convincing proof of a Divine mission. But those who are employed now to enforce the authenticated revelation need not such testimonials; both their character and their doctrine are to be tried by the Word of God, to which they appeal [Henry and Scott].

We might suppose that Moses had seen and heard enough to set his fears entirely aside. The consuming fire in the unconsumed bush, the condescending grace, the precious, endearing, and comprehensive titles, the Divine commission, the assurance of the Divine presenceall these things might have quelled any anxious thought, and imparted a settled assurance to the heart. Still, however, Moses raises questions, and still God answers them; and each successive question brings out fresh grace [C. H. M.].

1. Present discouragements often arise from former disappointments.

2. Wise and good men have sometimes a worse opinion of people than they deserve. Moses said they will not believe me, and yet we find (Exo. 4:31) the people believed.

Dissatisfaction is incident to good souls in difficulty, even after God has answered all their questions.
Infirmity of faith may make men suggest things contrary to the promise of God.
Men may tax others with unbelief, and yet be unbelievers themselves.
The obstinacy of the human heart often makes Gods ministers despair of success.
It is incident to sinners to deny the appearance of God to His ministers; and Gods ministers are apt to regard such denials as discouragements to their work.
Why did Moses imagine that the Israelites would not believe him?

1. Because he knew that they were a stiff-necked people.
2. Because he considered himself of insufficient authority to command their respect.
3. Because the power and tyranny of Pharaoh would deter them from believing him.
4. Because they would think it unlikely that God, who had never been seen by man, should appear to him.

Exo. 4:2. What is that in thine hand? And he said, a rod. A staffa shepherds crookthe staff which indicated his return to the pastoral habits of his fathersthe staff on which he leaned amidst his desert wanderingsthe staff with which he guided his kinsmans flocksthe staff like that still borne by Arab chiefsthis was to be the humble instrument of Divine power. In thisas afterwards in the yet humbler symbol of the crossin this, the symbol of his simplicity, of his exile, of his lowliness, the world was to be conquered [The Jewish Church, by Dean Stanley].

A rodprobably the shepherds crookamong the Arabs; a long staff, with a curved head, varying from three to six feet in length. God followeth expostulations with resolutions to satisfy the troubled souls of His servants.
God sometimes exercises His power in connection with small thingsa rod.
A rod:

1. The subject of Divine inquiry.
2. The token of a shepherds office.
3. The symbol of a leaders power.
4. The prophecy of a nations freedom.

A TRIVIAL POSSESSION

I. God frequently makes inquiry about the most trivial possessions of men.

1. Have they been honourably gained?

2. Are they being put to their proper use?

3. Are they in a line with Divine power?

II. God frequently makes the most trivial possessions of men teach great truths.

1. This shews the Divine adaptability to the circumstances of men.

2. This shews the Divine wisdom in making insignificant things teach Divine truth.

3. This shews the Divine simplicity of the plans and purposes of Heaven.

III. That the most trivial possessions are useful to others as well as those to whom they belong. This rod taught the Israelites that God was with Moses. So the smallest treasure possessed by a man may at times be instructive to other lives around him.

IV. That the most trivial possessions of men prove after all the most useful, and ought therefore to awaken human gratitude. We are taught here not to calculate the worth of things by their market price, but according to their adaptation to the circumstances of life in which we may then be placed. At this moment, and throughout the conflict with Egypt, this rod was the most valuable thing that Moses could have possessed. There are times when the smallest things become of the greatest value. This is true when they are used by God for the moral conviction and freedom of others. Moses would, throughout his life journey in the wilderness, be thankful for the rod. So we ought to be grateful to God that, whether we have great possessions or not, yet we have our little treasure which renders happy and effective our entire life mission.

God takes up the weakest instruments to accomplish his mightiest ends. A rod, a rams horn, a cake of barley meal, an earthen pitcher, a shepherds sling, anything, in short, when used by God, will do the appointed work. Men imagine that splendid ends can only be reached by splendid means; but such is not Gods way. He can use a crawling worm as well as a scorching suna gourd as well as a vehement east wind [C. H. M.].

THE MEANING OF THIS MIRACLE

Exo. 4:3. Varied suppositions as to the meaning of this miracle:

1. That hereby Pharaoh is set forth, who, at the first entering of the Hebrews into Egypt, was as a rod, easy to be handled, but afterwards as a serpent; and again, at the time of their going out, he was as a rod, gentle and harmless
2. That hereby the state of the children of Israel was set forth, who at the first, under Joseph, had dominion, signified by a rod, but afterwards were cast down, and hated, as a serpent; but finally, at their going out of Egypt, returned to their power and authority again.
3. That hereby was signified the honour of Gods judgments; till they be brought none fear them; but, being brought; the very best are made to tremble; but, being renewed again, all fear is taken away.
4. That Moses was set forth by this staff: for he in himself, being but a shepherd, obscure and living in exile, was no more to Pharaoh to move him than a staff in a shepherds hand; but, going to him at the command of the Lord, he became as the staff at his command cast upon the grounda terrible serpent to himhe should not need any other armies to terrify Pharaoh; but, going with this staff, by a Divine virtue, he should be made to flee before him. But in that being laid hold upon by Moses again, it is turned into a staff, it was signified that the same which should be terrible to Pharaoh should be a comfort to Moses and to Israel [Calvin].

5. That hereby Christ crucified is set forth, and by his death, subduing the devil that he cannot hold the people of the Lord any more in bondage, as Pharaoh could not hold the Israelites [Augustine].

The serpent is entirely under the hand of Christ; and when he has reached the highest point in his mad career he shall be hurled into the lake of fire, there to reap the fruits of his work for ever [C. H. M.].

From the story of Moses rod the poets invented fables of the thyrsus of Bacchus, and the caduceaus of Mercury. Homer represents Mercury as taking his rod to work miracles, precisely in the same way as God commanded Moses to take his.
There are many serpents in the world from which a good man should flee.
When God commandeth small things be worketh miracles to confirm them.
The true transubstantiation of creatures is the alone work of God.
Gods miracles may be terrible to his servants, when intended to be comfortable.
Sense is terrified at the miraculous tokens of God.

Exo. 4:4. Faith in Gods word dare meddle with the most terrible signs from God.

God can make staves into serpents, and serpents into staves, terrors to enemies, and supports to His own.
Take it by the tail. Which was dreadful to be done, because of the antipathy and likely danger; but faith fortifies the heart against the fear of the creature, and carries a man through the difficulty of duty [Trapp].

I. That men have often to come into contact with the morally sinful and dangerous. Moses is brought into contact with a serpent. Dangerous to him. So good men are frequently obliged to encounter the morally sinfulfor commercialministerial purposesthey are thus rendered liable to the stingcontagion of sinand will, unless careful, receive spiritual injury.

II. That good men should not enter into contact with the morally sinful and dangerous, except by the direct permission of God. And the Lord said unto Moses, etc. The good are permitted to have intercourse with worldly men, for ministerial and commercial purposesbut they must remember that the Divine sanction does not extend to anything but the furthest point of contact. Moses was only told to take the serpent by the tail. There are many things in the world that the good man is only to touch. They are poisonous.

III. That when good men are brought into contact with the morally sinful and dangerous, they should endeavour to aid its reformation.

And he put forth his hand, and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand. The good may not take hold of serpents for play, or for imagined gratification, but only that they may co-operate with the Divine power and mercy in the holy work of restoration.

IV. That when good men achieve the reformation of the morally sinful and dangerous, they find ample reward in the result. And it became a rod in his hand. How many a good man has found that the sinner converted by his instrumentality has become a helpa staya moral powerin the spiritual life and journeyings of his own soul! Especially do ministers find that their converts become instruments in their hands for great good to others.

THINGS THAT FRIGHTEN

And the Lord said unto Moses, put forth thy hand, and take it by the tail.Exo. 4:4.

We may learn from the text, and the words immediately preceding, that
I. In passing through life we must expect to meet with many things that will frighten us.
II. We shall gain nothing by running away.
III. The best thing we can do is to grapple with them.
IV. Acting thus we may always rely upon Divine aid [Christian World Pulpit].

Exo. 4:5. Miracles are given by God to turn from unbelief to faith in the Divine word.

True miracles are the only work of the true God, the God of Abraham.
That God does much to render easy and successful the mission of the true preacher.
That the great thing for a preacher to demonstrate to his people is that God has appeared to him.

ILLUSTRATIONS
BY THE
REV. WM. ADAMSON

Exo. 4:1-5.Bible Degraded!Some men imagine that they could do well enough without the Bible, the Church, the ministry. Conceive a patient with a shattered limb coming to the sage conclusion that the best way to become whole is to thrust the skilled surgeons and their surgical splints out of doors. They did not fracture the limb; they only propose to set it. The Bible did not dislocate the human intellect, it only proposes to restore it to soundness. Far better to have the leg set than to leave the shattered bone to heal unsplintered.

The Lamp of Revelation not only shows
What human wisdom cannot but oppose,
That manin natures richest mantle clad
And graced with all philosophy can add,
Though fair without, and luminous within,

cannot heal his own maladycannot restore his fractured soul, but it offers to effect the cure. Is anything too hard for the Lord?

Infidel Terrors!Paine boastfully vaunted that he had gone up and down through the Christian garden of Eden, and with his simple axe had cut down one after another of its trees, until scarce a sapling remained to weep over the chaos of ruin. He lived to flee from his own guilt, and amid agonies of remorse to exclaim that he would give worlds never to have published his Age of Reason, never to have moulded his simple axe, never to have lifted its edge upon the Tree of Life. So it was with Bion the atheist philosopher, who on his deathbed offered up prayers to God for mercy and recovery

And as he writhed and quivered, scorched within,
The fury round his torrid temples flapped
Her fiery wings, and breathed upon his lips
And parched tongue, the withered blasts of hell.

Pollock.

Christianity!Quaint Thomas Fuller says that Charnock met with a very sad disaster in his efforts to discover the philosophers stone; for just as he was on the point of completing the grand operation, his work fell into the fire. As this is a calamity which has happened to all alchymists; so is it always the misfortune of legislators. They are always on the point of discovering the grand panacea for all evils, yet they never succeed. Christianity steps in, and succeeds.

Religion! Providence! an after state!
Here is firm footing; here is solid rock!
This can support us; all is sea besides:
Sinks under us; bestorms, and then devours.

Young.

Christianity Beneficent!Ancient tradition records a contest said to have taken place at Romein the presence of the Emperor Constantine and his mother, the Empress Helenabetween the Jewish and Roman philosophers on the one hand, and Sylvester, the Christian patriarch, on the other. The leader of the philosophers showed the superiority of their system over Christianity by miraculously KILLING a fierce bull with uttering in his ear a single word. Sylvester, with a word, not only restored the wild animal to LIFE, but raised it tame and gentle as if it had been in the yoke from birth. Christianity is happy in its effects upon untameable human natureraising it to lifeand making it to sit clothed and in its right mind at the feet of the Founder.

As when a wretch, from thick polluted air,
Darkness and stench, and suffocating damps,
And dungeon horrors, by kind fate discharged,
Climbs some fair eminence, where ether pure
Surrounds him, and Elysian prospects rise,
His heart exults, his spirits cast their load,
As if new born, he triumphs in the change.

Christianity versus Philosophy!Tillotson says that philosophy has given us several plausible rules for attaining peace and tranquility of mind; but these fall very much short of bringing men to it. They have expanded our ideas of creation; but they neither inspired a love to the moral character of the Creator, nor a well-grounded hope of eternal life.

Philosophy did much, refining and exalting man;
But could not nurse a single plant that bore
True happiness. From age to age she toiled;
Shed from her eyes the mist that dimmed them still,
Looked forth on man: and then retired far back
To meditations silent, shady rest.

Like Moses who must DIE on Pisgah, philosophy enables us to ascend to the heights of human discoverythere to PERISH. Christianity is the medium, and the only medium, by which death can be turned into life.

Exo. 4:1Depression!Dr. Stevens narrates how an eminent minister was very much depressed by the unbelief of his congregation, and how his spirit of depression was shaken off. He dreamed that he was working with a pickaxe on the top of a basaltic rock, which remained non-riven in spite of repeated strokes of his arm of muscle. When about to give up in despair, a stranger of solemn and dignified demeanour appeared on the scene, who reminded him that as a servant he was bound to go on whether the rock yielded or not. Work is your duty; leave the results to God, were the last words of his strange visitor. The result was that the discouraged pastor resumed his work, and was abundantly rewarded by the shattering of the rock of unbelief and indifference among his flock. For

Perseverance is a virtue

That wins each Godlike act, and plucks success,
Een from the spear-proof crest of rugged danger.

Havard.

Exo. 4:1Prayers!An anecdote is told concerning a popular preacher who gradually lost his influence and congregation. The church officials were authorized to wait on him with the frank avowal that the whole blame was at his door. With still more frankness the condemned pastor acknowledged his failure, adding that in former times his flock had been a praying people, that many had joined in prayer that his preaching might be blessed to the conversion of souls, but that now prayer had been abandoned. The result, he added, of such restraint in prayer was the failure of his church, and he begged them to renew their pleadings in his behalf. For

More things are wrought by prayer

Than this world dreams of. Wherefore let thy voice
Rise like a fountain for me night and day,
For so the whole round earth is every way
Bound by gold chains about the feet of God.

Tennyson.

Exo. 4:2Miracles!Fuller calls them, in his quaint method of expression, the swaddling clothes of the infant churches. They are not, says Trench, the garments of the full-grown. They are the bright clouds which gather round and announce the sun at his first appearing; but the midday splendour knows not those bright heralds and harbingers of his rising. Such were miracles at the dawns of the Mosaic. Prophetical, and Christian dispensations; they were like the framework on which the arch is rounded, and which is taken down as soon as it is completed. Beecher thinks that they are mid-wives of young moral truths-like candles lit up till the sun rises, and then blown out, While Macmillan declares that they are not only emblems of power in the spiritual world, but also exponents of the miracles of natureexperiments, as it were, made by the Great Teacher, on a small scale, to illustrate to mankind the phenomena that are taking place over longer periods throughout the universe.

Exo. 4:2Ministerial Difficulties!Simeon says that he had been used to read the Scriptures, to get from them rich discoveries of the power and grace of Christ, so that he might learn how to minister to a loving and obedient people; but that now he was studying the Word of God in order that he might know how to minister to a conceited, contentious, and rebellious people Two qualities, he adds, I am sure are requisitemeekness and patience; I have been used to sail in the Pacific, but I am now learning to navigate the Red Sea which is full of shoals and rocks, with a very intricate passage.

Toil on, faint not, keep watch and pray;

Be wise, the erring soul to win;

Go forth into the worlds highway,

Compel the wanderer to come in.

The toil is pleasant, the reward is sure,
Blessed are those who to the end endure.

Bonar.

Exo. 4:2Faith!Faith is the mainspring of a minister.Cecil.

Beware of doubtfaith is the subtle chain
Which binds us to the Infinite; the voice
Of a deep life within, that will remain
Until we crowd it thence.

Smith.

Exo. 4:2Gifts!The discussion about gifts, says a glowing divine, amounts very much to a discussion whether the rifle, the carbine, the pistol, or the cannon is the best weapon. Each is best in its place The great point is that every one shall use the weapon best suited to himthat he charge it welland that he see it is in a condition to strike fire.

The solemn trifler, with his boasted skill,
Toils much, and is a solemn trifler still;
Blind was he born, and his misguided eyes
Grown dim in trifling studies, blind he dies.

Cowper.

Exo. 4:3Serpent-tail!Bishop Patrick notes that Moses found his rod was a serpent until he took it by the tail, and then it became what it was before; and if we lay hold of things only by their END, we should find many things that seem terrible and noxious to be benign and salutiferous. But the band was that of faith; for

Never was a marvel done upon the earth,

but it had sprung of faith.

Tupper.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

THE TEXT OF EXODUS
TRANSLATION

4 And Mo-ses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice; for they will say, Je-ho-vah hath not appeared unto thee. (2) And Je-ho-vah said unto him, What is that in thy hand? And he said, A rod. (3) And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Mo-ses fled from before it. (4) And Je-ho-vah said unto Mo-ses, Put forth thy hand, and take it by the tail (and he put forth is hand, and laid hold of it, and it became a rod in his hand); (5) that they may believe that Je-ho-vah, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of I-saac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee. (6) And Je-ho-vah said furthermore unto him, Put now thy hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom: and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous, as white as snow. (7) And he said, Put thy hand into thy bosom again. (And he put his hand into his bosom again; and when he took it out of his bosom, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh.) (8) And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign. (9) And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe even these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the river shall become blood upon the dry land. (10) And Mo-ses said unto Je-ho-vah, Oh, Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant; for I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. (11) And Je-ho-vah said unto him, Who hath made mans mouth? or who maketh a man dumb, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? is it not I, Je-ho-vah? (12) Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt speak. (13) And he said, Oh, Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send. (14) And the anger of Je-ho-vah was kindled against Mo-ses, and he said, Is there not Aaron thy brother the Le-vite? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. (15) And thou shalt speak unto him, and put the words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do. (16) And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people; and it shall come to pass, that he shall be to thee a mouth, and thou shalt be to him as God. (17) And thou shalt take in thy hand this rod, wherewith thou shalt do the signs. (18) And Mo-ses went and returned to Je-thro his father-in-law, and said unto him, Let me go, I pray thee, and return unto my brethren that are in E-gypt, and see whether they be yet alive. And Je-thro said to Mo-ses, Go in peace. (19) And Je-ho-vah said unto Mo-ses in Mid-i-an, Go, return into E-gypt; for all the men are dead that sought thy life. (20) And Mo-ses took his wife and his sons, and set them upon an ass, and he returned to the land of E-gypt: and Mo-ses took the rod of God in his hand. (21) And Je-ho-vah said unto Mo-ses. When thou goest back into E-gypt, see that thou do before Pharaoh all the wonders which I have put in thy hand: but I will harden his heart, and he will not let the people go. (22) And thou shalt say unto Pha-raoh, Thus saith Je-ho-vah, Is-ra-el is my son, my first-born: (23) and I have said unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me; and thou hast refused to let him go: behold, I will slay thy son, thy first-born. (24) And it came to pass on the way at the lodging-place, that Je-ho-vah met him, and sought to kill him. (25) Then Zip-po-rah took a flint, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet; and she said, Surely a bridegroom of blood art thou to me. (26) So he let him alone. Then she said, A bridegroom of blood art thou, because of the circumcision.

(27) And Je-ho-vah said to Aar-on, Go into the wilderness to meet Mo-ses. And he went, and met him in the mountain of God, and kissed him. (28) And Mo-ses told Aar-on all the words of Je-ho-vah wherewith he had sent him, and all the signs wherewith he had charged him. (29) And Mo-ses and Aar-on went and gathered together all the elders of the children of Is-ra-el: (30) and Aar-on spake all the words which Je-ho-vah had spoken unto Mo-ses, and did the signs in the sight of the people. (31) And the people believed: and when they heard that Je-ho-vah had visited the children of Is-ra-el, and that he had seen their affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshipped.

EXPLORING EXODUS: CHAPTER FOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERABLE FROM THE BIBLE

1.

After reading the chapter carefully, propose a short topic or theme for it.

2.

How did Moses think the Israelites would respond to his message (Exo. 4:1)? How did God say they would respond (Exo. 3:18)? How did they finally respond (Exo. 4:31)?

3.

What did Moses have in his hand? (Exo. 4:2)

4.

Can you name other Bible characters who used for God the things that they had in their hands?

5.

What happened to Moses rod? How did Moses react? (Exo. 4:3)

6.

How was the rod restored? (Exo. 4:4)

7.

List the references in chapters three and four where God refers to Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

8.

What was the second miracle Moses was empowered to do? (Exo. 4:6)

9.

What color was leprosy? (Exo. 4:6) Check the cross references in your Bible on this.

10.

How was Moses leprosy removed? (Exo. 4:7)

11.

What miracle would certainly convince the people? (Exo. 4:8)

12.

What third miracle was Moses empowered to do? (Exo. 4:9)

13.

Was this third miracle ever used? Compare Exo. 7:18-19.

14.

What excuse did Moses give pertaining to his voice? (Exo. 4:10)

15.

Was Moses really NOT able to speak well? Compare Exo. 20:19-20; Exo. 24:7; Exo. 32:26-28; Deu. 1:1 ff.

16.

Who makes every mans mouth, and mens other abilities? (Exo. 4:11)

17.

What is the application of the questions in Exo. 4:11 to Moses?

18.

How would Moses know what to say? (Exo. 4:12)

19.

When God inspired men to reveal His will, did God give them words or just general ideas? (Exo. 4:12; Exo. 4:15; Compare Num. 22:38)

20.

Putting Exo. 4:13 into blunt modern English, what did Moses ask God to do?

21.

How did God react to Moses unwillingness? (Exo. 4:14)

22.

Who was Moses brother?

23.

What ability did Moses brother have?

24.

What feelings would Aaron have upon seeing Moses?

25.

How long had it been since Aaron had seen Moses? (See Act. 7:23; Act. 7:30)

26.

What was Aaron to be for Moses? (Exo. 4:16; Exo. 7:1)

27.

How could Moses be a God to Aaron? (Exo. 4:16)

28.

How significant was the rod in Moses later deeds? (Exo. 4:17; Exo. 4:20; Exo. 7:15; Exo. 14:16)

29.

From who did Moses ask permission to leave? (Exo. 4:18)

30.

Was this permission granted?

31.

What possible reason was there for Gods repeating his commission to Moses in Midian? (Exo. 4:19)

32.

Which direction was Midian from Mt. Horeb (Sinai)?

33.

Who had once sought Moses life? (Exo. 4:19; Exo. 2:15). What had happened since then?

34.

How many sons did Moses have? (See Exo. 18:2-4)

35.

How many rode on one ass? (Exo. 4:20)

36.

How is Moses rod described? (Exo. 4:20)

37.

What was Moses to be sure to do in Egypt? (Exo. 4:21)

38.

What would God do to Pharaoh? (Exo. 4:21)

39.

Was it fair for God to harden Pharaohs heart? (Compare Rom. 9:14-24)

40.

What relationship did Israel bear unto God? (Exo. 4:22; Exo. 6:7; Compare 2Co. 6:18). How did this relationship come to exist? (See Deu. 4:37; Deu. 4:20; Exo. 19:5-6)

41.

What threat was to be made unto Pharaoh? (Exo. 4:23)

42.

When was this threat carried out? (Exo. 12:27; Exo. 12:29)

43.

Where did the Lord meet Moses and his family? (Exo. 4:24)

44.

What did the Lord seek to do to Moses? By what means was the Lord doing this? (Exo. 4:24-25)

45.

Why was the Lord so extreme in his treatment of Moses just because Moses son had not been circumcised? (Compare Gen. 17:10-14)

46.

How did Moses and his family discover that the uncircumcision of the son was the cause of Moses trouble?(Exo. 4:25). (At least propose some answer.)

47.

Who circumcised the son?

48.

How did she like this job? Explain the meaning of A bloody husband . . . because of the circumcision.

49.

Did Zipporah and the sons accompany Moses on to Egypt? (Exo. 4:29; Exo. 18:1-3)

50.

Why did Aaron go out into the wilderness of Sinai? (Exo. 4:27)

51.

Where did Aaron and Moses meet? (Exo. 4:27)

52.

With what act did Aaron greet Moses? (Exo. 4:27)

53.

What did Moses tell Aaron about? (Exo. 4:28)

54.

Did Moses show Aaron the signs (miracles)? (Exo. 4:28)

55.

What did Moses and Aaron &her together in Egypt? (Exo. 4:29; Exo. 3:16)

56.

Who did the talking to the Israelites? (Exo. 4:28)

57.

Who did the signs before the people? (Exo. 4:30)

58.

How did the people react when they heard the words and saw the signs? (Give two answers; Exo. 4:31)

59.

What is the significance of the verb visited in Exo. 4:31?

EXODUS FOUR: HESITANCY OF GODS MAN

A.

Fear the people would not believe; Exo. 4:1 ff.

B.

Fear of his slow speech; Exo. 4:10 ff.

C.

In need of having his commission repeated; Exo. 4:19.

D.

Personal failure to obey Gods convenant; Exo. 4:24 ff.

E.

Victory when hesitancy is overcome; Exo. 4:27-31.

MOSES, A TYPE OF CHRIST

(A type is some person, thing or event in the Old Testament age which resembled and foreshadowed a similar person, thing, or event in the New Testament. The antitype is that person, thing, or event in the New Testament which was foreshadowed by the Old Testament type.)

PEOPLE LIVING ON THE OLD TESTAMENT SIDE OF THE WALL OF TIME COULD SEE IN MOSES AND SUCH LEADERS A FORESHADOWING, OR TYPE, OF CHRIST, THE GREATER ONE WHO WAS TO COME.

ISRAEL, A TYPE OF THE CHURCH (1Co. 10:1-11)

People on the Old Testament side of the wall of time could see only the shadow. We see both the shadow (Moses) and the substance (Christ) that cast the shadow.
Moses said that God would raise up a prophet, like unto me, (Deu. 18:15; Deu. 18:18; Act. 3:22-23; Act. 7:37).

1.

Christ, like Moses, was a prophet. (Mat. 13:57; Deu. 34:10)

2.

Christ, like Moses, was a lawgiver. (Joh. 1:17; Gal. 6:2)

3.

Christ, like Moses, was saved as a babe.

4.

Christ, like Moses, came as a peacemaker. (Luk. 19:42; Exo. 2:13)

5.

Christ, like Moses, was commissioned by God. (Joh. 5:30; Exo. 3:10)

6.

Christ, like Moses, came working miracles. (Joh. 12:37)

7.

Christ, like Moses, came preaching deliverance. (Luk. 4:18; Exo. 4:29-30)

8.

Christ, like Moses, was rejected by many. (Act. 7:23-39; Act. 7:51-52)

9.

Christ, like Moses, put His brethren (the church!) before his own interests (Heb. 2:14-15; Exo. 32:31-32).

EXPLORING EXODUS: NOTES ON CHAPTER FOUR

1.

Why was Moses so sure that Israel would not believe him? (Exo. 4:1).

a. There was no reason why thou should believe a long-absent, sheep-herding, fugitive, who had already failed in one attempt to deliver them.
b. It had been 430 years since God had spoken directly to any Israelite.
They were not accustomed to communications from God.

2.

Did Moses excuse (in Exo. 4:1) indicate that he lacked faith?

It is easy to think that he did. God had said that Israel would hearken (Exo. 3:18). Moses said that they would not believe. It turned out that God was right (as always).

However, because Moses finally did obey, and because he is called a man of faith (Heb. 11:24-29), we are reluctant to say he lacked faith.

3.

Would the people accept Yahweh (the LORD) as Gods name? (Exo. 4:1; Exo. 3:13-15).

Moses seemed to assume that they would do so. The name was almost certainly familiar to some Israelite elders from their knowledge of the distant past. They would recognize it, and use it in speaking of God.

4.

What was the rod of Moses? (Exo. 4:2).

Probably only the familiar shepherds crook, as in Psa. 23:4. This rod became extremely prominent in the acts of Moses and Aaron in later chapters. Thou shalt take this rod in thine hand, wherewith thou shalt do signs (Exo. 4:17).

5.

What special force was there in the rod-to-serpent miracle?

A carving of a serpent (cobra, or uraeus) was placed upon the front of the crown by many Pharaohs. It was a symbol of the royal power in lower Egypt. Thus Moses miracle gave the appearance of an intentional attack upon Egypts supreme authority.
Also, an Egyptian goddess, Buto, was depicted in serpent form. She was the protectress of Egypts northern capital. The miracle discredited her power.

Behind all this lay also the fact that the serpent has been the constant enemy of the seed of the woman (Gen. 3:15). It was the representative and tool of Satan (Rev. 12:9). At the basic level, Israels deliverance involved a confrontation with the devil himself.

6.

When did Moses use the rod-to-serpent sign?

He showed it to the elders of Egypt (Exo. 4:30), and before Pharaoh during his second confrontation with him (Exo. 7:10).

7.

Whose name was to be made vivid by the miracle of the rod?

The name of the LORD (Jehovah, Yahweh), the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham . . . (Exo. 4:5). Note the continued emphasis upon Gods name, and upon Gods association with their forefathers (Exo. 2:24; Exo. 3:15-16; Exo. 4:5; Exo. 6:2;et al).

8.

What particular significance was there in the sign of the leprous hand? (Exo. 4:6).

a. It displayed the limitless and superhuman power of God. Leprosy usually was a disease of long duration. Even the ceremony for cleansing it took eight days (Lev. 14:8-10). But in the case of Moses, the infection, the cure, and the cleansing were all immediate.

b. The leprosy suggested the uncleanness of the people. Compare Lev. 13:45. Moses came to them when they were an unclean people. But God could make the unclean clean.

9.

Was leprosy always white? (Exo. 4:6).

Often it was white: Miriam (Num. 12:10); Elishas servant Gehazi (2Ki. 5:27); Lev. 13:3. We do not think that the leprosy of the Bible was the same disease as Hansens disease, now called leprosy. The whiteness that is so commonly associated with Biblical leprosy is not associated with Hansens disease.

10.

Were Moses miracles convincing to the Israelites? (Exo. 4:8)

Yes, at least temporarily. They were convinced, until subsequent difficulties arose. Then they seemed to forget the miracles, and doubt the constant infinite power of God.

In the same manner the miracles of Christ did not produce an unshakeable faith in most of the people who saw them (Joh. 12:37). People whose faith depends upon seeing signs often require a steady stream of miracles, or they forsake Christ. See Joh. 6:14; Joh. 6:30.

In doing these miracles Moses was a type of Christ, who also came working miracles (Deu. 18:15).

11.

Was the miracle of changing water to blood used by Moses? (Exo. 4:9)

We have no record that Moses did this miracle in Egypt. The first of the ten plagues consisted of a similar miracle on a nation-wide scale (Exo. 7:20-25).

12.

Was Moses excuse about not being eloquent a good excuse? (Exo. 4:10)

No: it was a miserable excuse, and God did not accept it.

Moses great ability to speak afterwards shows that he really was an able speaker. For example, note Exo. 32:11-13. The whole book of Deuteronomy consists of eloquent speeches by Moses.

Moses excuse here comes close to blaming God for his imagined difficulty in speech. He said, in paraphrase, I was not eloquent before now, and I have not miraculously become eloquent since you began speaking to me. How then can you expect me to speak?
Eloquence was highly regarded by the Egyptians as a means for bringing about social justice and political decisions. One Egyptian story, called the Tale of the Eloquent Peasant[125] is an Egyptian classic. It was written in the Egyptian Middle Kingdom (about 2000 B.C.), before Moses time.

[125] Translated by John A. Wilson, in Ancient Near Eastern Texts (Princeton, 1955), pp. 407410.

Moses had to learn that the working of Gods power does not depend upon human eloquence and wisdom (1Co. 2:1; 1Co. 2:4). Many people thought the speech of the apostle Paul was of no account (2Co. 10:10). But his influence was powerful, in spite of this. When we appear weak in ourselves, the power of God may become more obvious and more potent in us (2Co. 12:9-10).

But at that moment Moses could only feel that he was slow of speech (meaning he had a hard time recalling words) and was of a slow tongue (he had a hard time forming the words in his mouth).

13.

Who gives people their abilities or disabilities? (Exo. 4:11)

Yahweh, the LORD! What hast thou that thou hast not received? (1Co. 4:7). Nothing! Therefore, we must neither low-rate the abilities God has given us (and therefore hesitate to use them), or overrate them (and become conceited).

King James version has the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind. The thes are not actually in the Hebrew text. It appears from the scripture that God causes or allows some people to be handicapped and some to be more capable (Joh. 9:1-3). But it is probably an overstatement to say that God is responsible for all the cases of blindness or deafness that exist.

14.

Does God provide to his spokesmen words, or just general ideas? (Exo. 4:12; Exo. 4:15)

He taught Moses what you shall say. This involved general knowledge and ideas, but also frequently specific words, To Jeremiah God gave words (Jer. 1:9). To Paul also (1Co. 2:13). Prophetic inspiration often times involved dictation of divine words. Many scholars of modern times resist this idea with some passion, but it is still true.

We must be careful as believers not to claim the kind of word-by-word revelations that God has given once-for-all to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit (Eph. 3:5; Jud. 1:3). We are promised wisdom (Jas. 1:5), but apparently not the miraculous revelations of words and thoughts such as Moses and the prophets received.

15.

How did Moses show his basic reluctance to go? (Exo. 4:13)

By asking God to send someone else. God had told HIM to go (Exo. 4:13). He asked God to send someone else. In order that his request might not sound so blunt, Moses stated it with extra superfluous words: Send by the hand (that is, by the power and efforts) or him whom thou wilt send. In fact, God was doing exactly what Moses asked him to do: God had decided to deliver Israel by Moses hand, and was therefore sending Moses. God became angry with Moses unwillingness (Exo. 4:14).

16.

Who would help Moses with the speaking? (Exo. 4:14)

Aaron, Moses brother, who could speak well, was at that very time coming to see Moses. Probably Aaron was coming to visit Moses to report the good news of the death of the king (Exo. 2:23; Exo. 4:19). He could not have known just then that the new pharaoh would be as bad as the former one. Aaron would rejoice from his heart upon seeing Moses. It would be interesting to us to know just how Aaron learned of Moses whereabouts.

Aaron is called the Levite, although he would have been no more a Levite by race than Moses would have been. It would seem that the title Levite had taken on some technical connotation of teacher or spokesman.

The reference to Aaron in Exo. 4:14 is the first mention of him.

17.

How would Moses use Aarons assistance? (Exo. 4:15)

Moses would put the words (of God) into Aarons mouth (by first putting them into his ears) (Exo. 4:30). We wonder why Moses could not himself speak to Pharaoh if he could speak the words to Aaron. The fact that Moses put THE words into Aarons mouth reveals the definiteness of Gods communication with Moses (Compare Num. 22:38; Num. 23:5; Isa. 51:16). God would direct both Moses mouth so he would speak to Aaron correctly, and with Aarons mouth so he would relay the message correctly. This passage indicates much about how inspiration worked as men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit (2Pe. 1:21).

18.

How could Moses be as God to Aaron? (Exo. 4:16)

Only in the respect that Aaron must get his utterances totally from Moses, just as Moses got his message totally from God. See Exo. 7:1-2; Exo. 7:19.

19.

What function was Moses rod to play in the events that followed? (Exo. 4:17)

By the rod he would perform the signs (miracles). This surely came to pass (Exo. 7:10; Exo. 7:20; Exo. 8:5; Exo. 8:16; and other passages).

Unbelieving critics argue that passages (like Exo. 7:19; Exo. 8:5) which place the rod in the hand of Aaron are by a different author (P., in post-exilic times!) than passages which place the rod in Moses hand.[126] It seems to us that it would be simpler to suggest that this rod was merely passed back and forth between the hands of Moses and Aaron.

[126] The Broadman Bible Commentary (1969), Vol. 1, p. 335.

20.

Where did Moses go from the burning bush at Horeb? Why? (Exo. 4:18)

He returned back to Jethro, probably in the east part of the Sinai peninsula, to ask permission to go back to Egypt. (He doubtless drove the sheep back with him!) The courtesy of Moses and his thoughtfulness of others feelings are commendable.

Moses did not tell Jethro the whole story about the call at the burning bush to go back and save all Israel, but rather simply said that he wanted to go back and visit his relatives, We cannot condemn Moses for this. Jethro could not have accepted this revelation; he would surely have thought Moses had lost his mind.

Maybe Moses was not yet quite convinced himself. This is suggested by the Lords repeating the command to go in Exo. 4:19. Moses was feeling cold feet.

We admire Jethros agreeable response to Moses request. Moses departure was to involve also the departure of Jethros daughter and Jethros grandchildren.

Jethros name in Exo. 4:18 is spelled as Jether in the Hebrew Bible. The Greek LXX spells it the same as in Exo. 3:1. No significance lies in this slight variation in spelling.

21.

Why the repetition of the command of God to Moses in Exo. 4:19?

As indicated above, Moses was probably still hesitant. Some critics maintain that one supposed source of the text of Exodus (J) said that God called Moses in Midian; another source (E) said that God called him at Horeb.[127] This analysis seems to us to overlook the naturalness in Gods repeating the command to the still-hesitant Moses. It also ends up contradicting the idea that Moses wrote all of Exodus by attributing different passages in Exodus to different authors living centuries after Moses. Our Lord quoted a passage from Exodus (Exo. 3:6) and said that it came from the book of Moses (Mar. 12:26).

[127] W.O.E. Oesterly and T.H. Robinson, Introduction to the Books of the O.T. (Cleveland and New York: World, 1965), p. 36.

22.

When did Moses learn of the death of his enemies in Egypt? (Exo. 4:19)

God told him about it at Jethros house, after he returned from the burning bush at Horeb! There is no indication that he knew it before then. This increases our admiration for Moses greatly. When God first called him, he probably assumed that at least some of those who had tried once before in Egypt to kill him would still be alive, even if older. In the face of that possibility, he arose to go! Can we possibly be surprised if he showed a little reluctance?

Type: The men are dead which sought thy life (Exo. 4:19). Antitype: They are dead that sought the young childs (Jesus) life (Mat. 2:20).

23.

Who went with Moses as he left for Egypt? (Exo. 4:20)

His wife and his two sons (Gershom and Eliezer). The second son is here alluded to for the first time. See Exo. 18:3-4. All three apparently sat on one ass! (However, the Greek LXX reads asses.)

The rod of God in Moses hand is prominently mentioned. This title occurs also in Exo. 17:9. It is called the rod of GOD because God used it in such a powerful way.

24.

Would God really harden Pharaohs heart, and then punish him for his hard-hearted deeds? (Exo. 4:21)

Yes, He would. Yes, He did. And for just causes.
The pronoun I in I will harden is emphatic. God later hardened the heart of Sihon, the Amorite king (Deu. 2:30). Also He hardened the hearts of the Canaanite kings whom Joshua overthrew (Jos. 11:20). God sends strong delusions upon those who receive not the love of the truth (2Th. 2:10-12).

Rom. 9:17-18 : For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardeneth.

SPECIAL STUDYHARDENING PHARAOHS HEART

In the passages about the hardening of Pharaohs heart, sometimes it says that (1) Pharaoh hardened his own heart; sometimes that (2) his heart was hardened, without any clear indication as to whether God or Pharaoh himself was the main agent in the hardening; sometimes that (3) God hardened his heart. The following chart shows how these three different statements about hardening Pharaohs heart occur in the scripture.

There are three different Hebrew words used to describe the hardening of Pharaohs heart. In the order of the intensity of their meaning they are:

(1)

KabadTo be heavy, or insensible; to be honored; to be dull or unresponsive.

(2)

QashahTo be hard, severe, fierce; to be stiff; to make hard, or harden. (Used only in Exo. 7:3 and Exo. 13:15)

(3)

Hazaq (strongest word)To be strong, firm, obstinate, stout, rigid; to make strong or strengthen.

The following chart indicates which word is used in each passage.

A. Hardening Pharaohs heart: Preliminary predictions and declarations:

Reference

Pharaoh hardened his own heart.

Indefinite about who hardened it.

God hardened it.

Exo. 3:19

King of Egypt will not let you go

Exo. 4:21

I will harden (hazaq) his heart.

Exo. 5:2

I will not let Israel go.

Exo. 7:3

I will harden (Qashah) P.s heart

Exo. 7:13

P.s heart was hardened (hazaq)

Exo. 7:14

P.s heart is stubborn (kabad)

B. Hardening Pharaohs heart: During the ten plagues:

Exo. 7:22 (after 1st)

P.s heart was hardened (hazaq)

Exo. 8:15 (after 2nd)

He hardened (kabad) his heart

Exo. 8:19 (after 3rd)

P.s heart was hardened (hazaq)

Exo. 8:32 (after 4th)

Pharaoh hardened (kabad)

Exo. 9:7 (after 5th)

heart of P. was stubborn (kabad)

Exo. 9:12 (after 6th)

the LORD hardened (hazaq)

Exo. 9:34 (after 7th)

he sinned again and hardened (hazaq) his heart

Exo. 9:35

heart of P. was hardened (hazaq)

Exo. 10:20 (after 8th)

the LORD hardened (hazaq)

Exo. 10:27 (after 9th)

the LORD hardened (hazaq)

Exo. 11:10 (summary)

the LORD hardened (hazaq)

Exo. 13:15 (just before Passover) (qashah)

P. was stubborn

Exo. 14:4 (before pursuit)

I will harden (hazaq) P.s heart.

Exo. 14:8

the LORD hardened (hazaq)

Exo. 14:17 (at Red Sea)

I will harden (hazaq) the hearts of the Egyptians,

C.

Conclusions about the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart:

1. The very first reference to Pharaoh’s not letting Israel go places the basic choice about and blame for hardness upon Pharaoh himself (Exo. 3:19).

2. God promised that he would further harden Pharaoh’s heart, since Pharaoh himself had started in this evil way (Exo. 4:21).

3. After the first five plagues, either the statement is made the Pharaoh hardened his own heart, or the scripture is indefinite about who hardened it. Pharaoh himself made the first choices, and started his own troubles.
4. After the sixth plague, God hardened his heart. Probably Pharaoh sensed to some degree that he was being pushed by a power outside of himself. He was being shown what might be the consequences of further determined hardness.

5. After the seventh plague, God again left the choice of response to Pharaoh. Pharaoh confesses that he has sinned (Exo. 9:27). But he sinned yet more, and hardened his own heart again (Exo. 9:34).

6. After all these opportunities to choose right had been spurned by Pharaoh. God finally stepped in and hardened his heart after the last three plagues. Because Pharaoh chose to go the way of disobedient hardness, God pushed him down his self-chosen route to the bitterest end of his folly.

Take heed, lest any one of YOU be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. Heb. 3:13.

25.

In what way was Israel Gods firstborn? (Exo. 4:22)

Israel was Gods firstborn in that Israel was the most sacred of all peoples to God. The term firstborn is applied to the most honored son of a family, who would usually be the oldest. Pharaoh would have no difficulty in understanding the expression. The Pharaohs called themselves the son of Ra (the sun god) or some other deity. Pharaohs oldest son (or heir) would be specially honored and even sacred in many respects. Israel bore a similar relationship with Yahweh to that which the Egyptian pharaohs claimed for themselves with their own deities.

Israel was not to be Yahwehs only son, but certainly his FIRSTBORN son (or people). Other nations would later be adopted.

Hos. 11:1 speaks of Israel as Gods SON whom he called out of Egypt. Isa. 64:8 speaks of the LORD as Israels father.

26.

What threat was directed at Pharaoh? (Exo. 4:23)

Because you refuse to let Israel, my firstborn, go, behold, I will slay your son, your firstborn. Pharaohs firstborn referred to here consisted of all the firstborn of all the people in Egypt. They were Pharaohs firstborn because all the people of Egypt were regarded as belonging to Pharaoh. The death of Egypts firstborn would be a calamity that exceeded any calamity. See Exo. 11:5; Exo. 12:29.

27.

When and why did God try to kill Moses? (Exo. 4:24).

On the journey back to Egypt from Midian, while at an inn with his wife and two sons, Moses was smitten by God. Inns were simple tourist houses with shelter for animals as well as people. Compare Gen. 42:27. They must have been fairly common.

It appears from the scripture that Moses became deathly sick, so sick he could not rise from his cot nor do anything. This event occurred before they went as far from Midian as Mt. Sinai, probably at their first stop after leaving Midian.

The reason for this affliction was that Moses had neglected to circumcise one of his sons, possibly because his wife Zipporah had found the act repugnant to her. But God had long before told Abrahamthe father and founder of the Hebrew covenant peoplethat circumcision was the token of Gods covenant with Abraham and his descendants. And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall but cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant (Gen. 17:14).

Moses was to be the leader of the covenant people Israel. He could not be a leader if he had not first been a follower of God in his own house. We cannot lead where we will not go. This was a serious shortcoming in Moses, and, he nearly died because of it. This incident is a forcible example to Gods servants now. They cannot expect to lead people to obey God in ways that they themselves are unwilling to obey.

Skeptical critics dislike Exo. 4:24-26. The 1969 Broadman Bible Commentary[128] said that the passage has an almost demonic element about it, and that one is hardly justified in concluding that Yahweh actually attempted to take the life of Moses. The same source thinks that feet in Exo. 4:25 is a euphemism referring to the male organ, and that the whole passage is a distorted and ugly allusion to ancient marriage rituals. For our part we find the story edifying and helpful, although not particularly pleasant.

[128] Vol. 1, p. 337. See also Martin Noth, op. cit., p. 49.

28.

How did Zipporah save her bridegroom? (Exo. 4:25-26)

She took a sharp flint, and circumcised her son, and cast the foreskin at his feet (presumably Moses feet). By doing this she purchased Moses life anew by the blood of her son, and she received him back as it were from the dead. Moses recovered.
The fact that she circumcised only her son (singular), although two sons were with them on the trip, suggests that the older son had already been circumcised. Zipporahs act in throwing the foreskin at his feet suggests her abhorrence of the rite. We are not informed how Zipporah was able to know that the failure to circumcise the son was the cause of Moses affliction.

Some interpreters believe that the his in Exo. 4:25 refers to the son, rather than to Moses. The Revised Standard version translates the passage, she touched Moses (emphasis ours) feet with it (the foreskin). Martin Noth, an extreme liberal, says that this insertion of the name Moses is begging the question.[129] We agree that the his should probably be left unaltered and uninterpreted, as it is in the Hebrew text. But, nonetheless, the his does surely seem to refer to Moses feet, rather than to the sons. The pronoun him in Exo. 4:24 and Exo. 4:26 seems to refer to Moses in both places. Why should not the his in between (in Exo. 4:25) also refer to Moses? Also, what significance could there be in casting it at the sons feet?

[129] Noth, op. cit., p. 50.

A quite different view of this passage (Exo. 4:25-26) is often set forth. This is the view that the son is the one called the bridegroom. Gesenius Hebrew Lexicon says that it is customary for [Jewish] women to call a son when he is circumcised, Bridegroom; and that those who apply the words [of Zipporah] to Moses and not to the child, seem to have made a great mistake. By this view the infant son is by the ceremony of circumcision married into Gods covenant.

It appears to us that this view and practice results from a misinterpretation of this passage, and that the more obvious meaning of the text should not be altered by interpreting it by the practice. Judge the practice by the verse, and not the verse by the practice.
Nonetheless, there are problems in the interpretation of the passage. Why should Zipporah refer to Moses as a bridegroom when he had been married to her for nearly forty years? The common King James version renders the Hebrew word hathan as husband; but in all truth hathan means a bridegroom, or daughters husband, and does not simply mean husband. The question is not easy to answer. Possibly Zipporah looked upon Moses near-death and hoped-for recovery as a renewal of their marriage, and therefore called him bridegroom. To us this seems a more reasonable explanation, than any explanations as to how the son could be called anyones bridegroom.

After this circumcision incident, Moses sent Zipporah and the two lads back to Midian, and he went alone on toward Egypt. Compare Exo. 18:2-3. It was over a year later when they were reunited.

29.

Where did Moses meet Aaron? (Exo. 4:27)

He met him at the mountain of God, that is, Horeb, or Sinai (Exo. 3:1). God spoke to Aaron, directing him to a certain place at a certain time, as He did later to Philip (Act. 8:26). Moses had made quite a long trip (perhaps seventy miles) from the burning bush at Horeb, back to Midian, and back again to Horeb with his family. The meeting with Aaron would be a strong sign of divine favor to Moses (see Exo. 4:14).

30.

What did Moses tell Aaron about? (Exo. 4:28)

Two things: the words of God, and all the signs that God had commanded him to do. There is no indication that Moses performed the signs before Aaron; but he told him about them.

31.

What did Aaron do when the elders of Israel were gathered? (Exo. 4:30)

He spoke the words which Jehovah had spoken to Moses; and he did the signs in the sight of the people. We hardly feel that Aaron himself actually did the signs (see Exo. 4:3-9). He probably announced that they would be done, and Moses did them. Note how prominent Aaron was as the spokesman here at the beginning of Moses work of delivering Israel. Aarons prominence later diminished.

32.

What was Israels response to the news of deliverance? (Exo. 4:31)

They believed, and bowed their heads in worship. The people believed, as God had foretold they would (Exo. 3:18), and not as Moses feared (Exo. 4:1).

God twice gave encouragement to Moses as he began his great task: (1) Aaron met Moses, as God had predicted; (2) the people believed, as God had foretold.
On visit, see Exo. 3:16 and Gen. 50:25.

The Israelites believed when they first heard Moses. Their faith did not stand up in subsequent tests. But they started well, and God only gave them one test at a time. Each experience could lead into a harder test to follow, and to the opportunity for even greater victories of faith.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

IV.

(1) Behold.Some render the word here used by perhaps (LXX., Aben-Ezra, Saadia, &c); but it does not appear to have anywhere this meaning. Moses meant to express a positive conviction that he would not be listened to. His faith was weak.

They will say, The Lord hath not appeared.It is very probable that the people would have said this if Moses had not had any credentials to produce. It is even possible that they did say it. There had been no appearance of Jehovah to any one for above four hundred years, and they might well think that the age of miracles was past. Miracles cluster around certain crises in Gods dealings with man, ceasing alto gether between one crisis and another. They were suspended for above 500 years between the time of Daniel and the appearance of the angel to Zacharias.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

MOSES RECEIVES THE THREE SIGNS, Exo 4:1-9.

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 .

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Moses Continues To Object To God’s Request And God Gives Him Three Signs ( Exo 4:1-9 ).

Moses continued to express his doubts so God told him of three signs which he would be able to use in order to demonstrate his credentials. The first deals with a snake, the symbol of much religious belief in Egypt, and a reminder to Israel of the Tempter in the Garden.

The First Sign – The Rod Turned Into A Snake (4:1-5).

a Moses says that the people will not believe his voice or that Yahweh has appeared to him (Exo 4:1).

b Yahweh draws attention to the staff in his hand (Exo 4:2).

c He is to cast it to the ground and it becomes a snake (Exo 4:3 a).

c Moses flees from before it and Yahweh says ‘take it by the tail’ (Exo 4:3-4 a).

b He puts forth his hand and it becomes a staff in his hand (Exo 4:4 b).

a Then the people will believe and accept that Yahweh, the God of their fathers, has appeared to him (Exo 4:5).

Note that in ‘a’ Moses says that the people will not believe his voice or that Yahweh has appeared to him, in the parallel Yahweh confirms that they will do both. In ‘b’ Yahweh draws attention to the staff in his hand, in the parallel the resulting snake becomes a staff in his hand. In ‘c’ he casts his staff to the ground and it becomes a snake, and in the parallel he flees before it and is told to take it by the tail.

Exo 4:1

‘And Moses answered and said, “But look, they will not believe me or listen to my voice, for they will say, “Yahweh has not appeared to you.”

Moses now comes up with his third objection. He had pleaded inability (Exo 3:11) and that the people would want to know by Whose power he came (Exo 3:13), and now he simply states that they will not believe that Yahweh has appeared to him. After all, why should they? And given their situation, and the continual unbelief they would reveal, his objection certainly had substance. But it still demonstrated a lack of faith that later generations would not have imputed to the great Moses. This is genuine tradition.

Note that the use of ‘Yahweh’ is now predominant. He is coming very much as the God of the covenant.

Exo 4:2-3

‘And Yahweh said, “What is that in your hand?” And he said, “A staff.’ And he said, “Throw it on the ground.” And it became a snake, and Moses fled from it.’

Moses staff was something with which he was familiar, an old friend, and he knew how to defend himself with it. It would also be a symbol of his authority. So God uses something familiar and important with which to do something unfamiliar. He tells him to throw it in the ground, and when he does so it becomes a snake. This first sign would be reproduced by the Egyptian magicians by trickery for they were famous with what they could do with snakes. But there was no trickery here. For when Moses saw the snake he ‘fled from it’, that is backed away to a safe distance. He knew what some snakes could do. He was not practising a conjuring trick.

One root meaning of the consonants for ‘snake’ (nachash) is ‘enchantment’. The snake was feared for its insidious behaviour, striking from its hiding place when suddenly disturbed, biting at a horse’s heels (Gen 49:17), and it was commonly used in enchantments, and symbolised the world of the gods in which snakes were a common feature, sometimes good and sometime bad. The Egyptians believed in the sacred uraeus-snake as a symbol of protection, often on Pharaoh’s brow leading him to victory in battle. They also believed in the serpent ‘Apep as the symbol of evil. Thus to have power over such snakes was to have power over good and evil.

But to Israel the snake represented something more. It represented the traditional enemy of God (Genesis 3). Here it would be demonstrated that the one represented by the snake had been mastered by God. This is another example of the repetition of events in early Genesis in this book. They would recognise that it was indeed Yahweh Who had spoken to Moses because of his power over the snake in accordance with their traditions.

Exo 4:4

‘And Yahweh said to Moses, “Put out your hand and take it by the tail.” And he put out his hand and took hold of it and it became a staff in his hand.’

Yahweh then told Moses to take the snake by the tail. This required great faith and courage, for the tail is the last part of a snake that you would take hold of, for it enables it to turn and bite. But, after his initial fear, he recognised that this was no ordinary snake, and was all Yahweh’s doing, and that he could therefore safely do what He said. If Yahweh told him to do it, Yahweh could render the snake powerless. So he did what he was told. He did not seek to bruise its head he took it by the tail. And as soon as he did the snake once more became a staff in his hand.

So Moses learned not to fear ‘the snake’ and all that it symbolised of Pharaoh and of other-world powers, for he now knew that God controlled the snake. This was his first practical step in trusting God. And he had learned by it not to be afraid of the Serpent who lay behind it all, or of the Pharaoh whose head bore the snake. And he could demonstrate to Israel that they need not be afraid either.

There was presumably significance in the fact that he was to tackle the snake in this unusual way. The usual tactic would be to go for the head. One reason probably was in order to show the complete control that Yahweh had over the snake, and therefore over all snakes both human and divine. Another was possibly to give the hint that victory would not be instantaneous or accomplished violently. It would be achieved by a firm hand.

But a further purpose may have been to prevent the idea that this was the fulfilment of Gen 3:15. This was not to be the final subjection of the Evil One, it was to be a preliminary subjection.

Exo 4:5

‘That they may believe that Yahweh, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob has appeared to you.’

Many see a difficulty here in knowing what the ‘that’ refers back to. It may well in fact assume that the reader in his mind adds an introduction in thought of words such as ‘you will do this with your rod so (that) –’. However, it might equally refer back to ‘take it by the tail’, with the remainder (from the modern point of view) in parenthesis. Moses’ action with the snake would be in accordance with their own longstanding tradition about what had happened in Eden. Our problem may simply arise from our lack of knowledge of the idioms of early Hebrew. Either way the meaning is clear. Moses must show this sign to the elders and the people so that they would believe that Yahweh, the God of their fathers, had indeed appeared to them, and could control the enemies of Israel as he had with their first father in Eden.

Note the continued emphasis on ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob’ (Exo 3:15-16 and here). The intention is to bolster both Moses and the people with the fact that the God of the covenant, the God of their past, was now here to fulfil His promises made to those great men of the past, the promises which Israel had been brought up with from their cradles. It is precisely because Yahweh is the God of their fathers that they can have such confidence. He is their own God.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Israel’s Justification ( Exo 1:1 to Exo 15:21 ) The emphasis of Exo 1:1 to Exo 18:27 is Israel’s justification before God through the sacrificial atonement of the Mosaic Law. The Passover was the time when God cut a covenant with the children of Israel, and the Exodus testifies to His response of delivering His people as a part of His covenant promise of redemption. Israel’s justification was fulfilled in their deliverance from the bondages of Egypt. Heb 11:23-29 highlights these events in order to demonstrate the faith of Moses in fulfilling his divine commission. These events serve as an allegory of the Church’s covenant through the blood of Jesus Christ and our subsequent deliverance from the bondages and sins of this world.

The Exodus Out of Egypt Exo 1:1 to Exo 18:27 describes God’s judgment upon Egypt and Israel’s exodus from bondage. In comparing the two Pharaoh’s discussed in this section of the book it is important to note that the pharaoh who blessed the people of Israel during Joseph’s life was himself blessed along with his nation. In stark contrast, the Pharaoh who cursed God’s people was himself cursed with the death of his own first born, as well as his entire nation. God watches over His people and blesses those who bless them and He curses those who curse them (Gen 12:3).

Gen 12:3, “And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Moses’ Divine Commission In the story of Exo 3:1 to Exo 4:17, God breaks the silence of four hundred without a divine visitation to His people. God now calls Moses to bring His people out of Egyptian bondage and into the Promised Land.

Divine Commissions in the Holy Scriptures – We often find a divine commission at the beginning of the story of God’ servants in the Scriptures. We see in the book of Genesis that Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob each received their commissions at the beginning of their genealogies which divide the book of Genesis into major divisions. We also see how Moses received his divine commission near the beginning of his story found within Exodus to Deuteronomy. Joshua received his commission in the first few verses of the book of Joshua. Also, we see that Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel each received a divine commission at the beginning of their ministries. The book of Ezra opens with a divine call to rebuild the Temple and the book of Nehemiah begins with a call to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, which callings Ezra and Nehemiah answered. In the New Testament, we find Paul the apostle receiving his divine commission in Act 9:1-22 at the beginning of the lengthy section on Paul’s life and ministry.

Each of these divine callings support God’s original commission to Adam in the story of Creation to be fruitful and multiply, a charge to produce righteousness offspring upon the earth, for these men were called to bring the about the multiplication of godly seeds. The patriarchs were called to multiply and produce a nation of righteousness. Moses was called to bring Israel out of bondage; but he missed his calling to bring them into the Promised Land. Joshua was called to bring them in to the land. Esther was called to preserve the seed of Israel as was Noah, while Ezra and Nehemiah were called to bring them back into the Promised Land. All of the judges, the kings and the prophets were called to call the children of Israel out of sin and bondage and into obedience and prosperity. They were all called to bring God’s children out of bondage and destruction and into God’s blessings and multiplication. The stories in the Old Testament show us that some of these men fulfilled their divine commission while others either fell short through disobedience or were too wicked to hear their calling from God.

One reason why these prophets received such a mighty visitation is understood in a comment by Kenneth Hagin, who said that when the Lord gives us a vision or a word for the future, it often precedes a trial, and is used to anchor our soul and take us through the trial. [17] If we look at the lives of the three Major Prophets, this is exactly what we see. These three men faced enormous trials and objections during their ministries. Their divine commissions certain were the anchor of their souls as it gave them strength and assurance that they were in God’s will despite their difficulties. We see such dramatic encounters in the lives of Moses and Saul of Tarsus, as God gave them their divine commissions for a work that was difficult and even cost them their lives.

[17] Kenneth Hagin, Following God’s Plan For Your Life (Tulsa, Oklahoma: Faith Library Publications, c1993, 1994), 118.

Note the New Testament reference to this passage in Act 7:33-34:

Act 7:33-34, “Then said the Lord to him, Put off thy shoes from thy feet: for the place where thou standest is holy ground. I have seen, I have seen the affliction of my people which is in Egypt, and I have heard their groaning, and am come down to deliver them. And now come, I will send thee into Egypt.”

Exo 3:1  Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb.

Exo 3:1 Comments – Note that Moses has went from the most honoured position in Egypt to the most despised occupation of Egyptians, shepherding. In Gen 46:34, a shepherd was an abomination to the Egyptians.

Gen 46:34, “That ye shall say, Thy servants’ trade hath been about cattle from our youth even until now, both we, and also our fathers: that ye may dwell in the land of Goshen; for every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians.”

Exo 3:1 Comments – It is very common that the Lord pulls young Christians aside for periods of solitude. It is during these times that God teaches His children in order to prepare them for the work that He has called them to. Moses’ time in Arabia was not wasted time, but a time for the Lord to teach him the ways of God. Note these insightful words from Frances J. Roberts regarding Paul’s visit to Arabia:

“O My beloved, ye do not need to make your path (like a snow plow), for lo, I say unto thee, I go before you. Yea, I shall engineer circumstances on thy behalf. I am thy husband, and I will protect thee and care for thee, and make full provision for thee. I know thy need, and I am concerned for thee: for thy peace, for thy health, for thy strength. I cannot use a tired body, and ye need to take time to renew thine energies, both spiritual and physical. I am the God of Battle, but I am also the One who said: They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength. And Jesus said, Come ye apart and rest a little while.

“I will teach you, even as I taught Moses on the back side of the desert, and as I taught Paul in Arabia . So will I teach you. Thus it shall be a constructive period, and not in any sense wasted time. But as the summer course to the school teacher, it is vital to thee in order that ye be fully qualified for your ministry.

There is no virtue in activity as such neither in inactivity. I minister to thee in solitude that ye may minister of Me to others as a spontaneous overflow of our communion. Never labor to serve, nor force opportunities. Set thy heart to be at peace and to sit at My feet. Learn to be ready, but not to be anxious. Learn to say ‘no’ to the demands of men and to say ‘yes’ to the call of the Spirit…Come away, My beloved, and be as the doe upon the mountains; yea, we shall go down together to the gardens.” [18]

[18] Frances J. Roberts, Come Away My Beloved (Ojai, California: King’s Farspan, Inc., 1973), 145-6.

Exo 3:2 Comments – The angel that spoke to Moses was manifested as a flame of fire (see Act 7:30, Heb 1:7).

Act 7:30, “And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush.”

Heb 1:7, “And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.”

Exo 3:5 Comments – The only other time when the Lord told man to take off his shoes was when the Captain of the Lord of Hosts met Joshua to lead him into the Promised Land.

Jos 5:15, “And the captain of the LORD’S host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so.”

Exo 3:5 Old Testament Quotes in the New Testament – Note the New Testament reference.

Act 7:33, “Then said the Lord to him, Put off thy shoes from thy feet: for the place where thou standest is holy ground.”

Exo 3:6 Comments – God revealed Himself unto Moses as “the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”.

Exo 3:6, “Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.”

This revealed to Moses that his office and ministry was to bring God’s people out of Egyptian bondage. Moses’ name, which means, “drawn out”, indicates his ministry and anointing of bringing out God’s people from bondage. However, unto Joshua the Lord revealed Himself as the “Captain of the Host of the Lord”. This name indicated that Joshua was to walk under this anointing as a warrior and lead God’s people into battle.

Abraham was a stranger in the land of Canaan. Therefore, God revealed Himself to Abraham as a stranger in this land so that Abraham would better understand his office and calling.

Exo 3:6 Old Testament Quotes in the New Testament – Note references to Exo 3:6 in the New Testament:

Mat 22:32, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

Mar 12:26, “And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?”

Luk 20:37-38, “Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.”

Act 3:13, “The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.”

Act 7:32, “Saying, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then Moses trembled, and durst not behold.”

Exo 3:7 Comments – God heard the cry of the children of Israel when they were in bondage in Egypt. However, they had been in Egypt for four hundred thirty (430) years, and it was not until the bondage became so intense that they cried out to God in tears. In fact, their firstborn were being thrown into the Nile River, and this moved them to prayer with tears. This is the prayer that moved God to deliver them from their bondage.

I bring out this point because there are a number of examples in the Scriptures where God does not move until a person sows in tears. For example, we see that Rachel was barren until she cried out to her husband, “Give me children, or else I die.” (Gen 30:1), and “God remembered Rachel, and God hearkened to her, and opened her womb” (Gen 30:22). We see how Hannah was barren for years, until she cried before the Lord, “she was in bitterness of soul, and prayed unto the LORD, and wept sore. She vowed a vow” (1Sa 1:10-11). God gave her a son. It was the intense cries of the Sodomites that brought God’s judgment upon those wicked cities, “And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous; I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it.” (Gen 18:20-21)

Exo 3:8 “unto a land flowing with milk and honey” Comments – We find in Exo 3:8 the first use of the phrase “a land flowing with milk and honey,” a phrase that will be used twenty times in the Old Testament to refer to the Promised Land, with fifteen of those uses in the Pentateuch, one use in Joshua, and another four uses in Jeremiah and Ezekiel. We can quickly observe that milk was a sweet drink, containing lactose, and honey was the sweetest of foods to eat. The word “flowing” means abundance, of more than what is needed. Thus, it implies an overflow of blessings into the lives of other people and other nations.

We can also note a common factor in the nutritional benefits of milk and honey. Milk is necessary in a new born for develop of its immune system. Honey is found to assist and give support to an immune system because of the plant pollen that is used to make it.

Exo 3:9 “ the cry of the children of Israel is come unto me ” Comments – Perhaps not every individual Israelite cried out to God for deliverance; but enough of them cried out to Him that it moved the heart of God to deliver them.

Exo 3:10 Comments – Egypt is a symbol of being in bondage to pleasures and worldly lusts (Rev 11:8).

Rev 11:8, “And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.”

Exo 3:10 Comments – The Lord told Moses to perform a great task. He revealed His name to Moses. As revealed in these next chapters, the Lord is going to equip Moses and show him how to perform this great task. Moses will use the name of God to perform this task.

Exo 3:11  And Moses said unto God, Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt?

Exo 3:11 Comments – Moses immediately looks at his own ability. It had failed to deliver the Hebrew children forty years ago in Exo 1:11-15. Rick Joyner calls this a form of false humility in Moses that is actually the same pride that caused man to fall in the Garden of Eden. [19]

[19] Rick Joyner, The Call (Charlotte, North Carolina: Morning Star Publications, 1999), 143-4.

Exo 3:12 Comments – Note the New Testament reference to Exo 3:12 in Act 7:7, “And the nation to whom they shall be in bondage will I judge, said God: and after that shall they come forth, and serve me in this place.”

Exo 3:14 Word Study on “I AM” Strong says the Hebrew word ( ) (H1961) is a verb that literally means, “to be, to become, to come to pass.” The Hebrew name for God, YHWH ( ) (H3068), which means, “the self Existent or Eternal One,” is a derivative of this verb.

Comments – In this passage of Scripture, God reveals Himself in a more personal way to Moses than He had ever revealed Himself to any other man on earth, including Abraham (see Exo 6:2-3).

This name for God reveals that God is neither subject to time nor space. He is eternal, and does not live in the present, as man does. God sees the past, present, and future all at once.

Joh 8:58, “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”

Afterwards, God reveals three of His divine aspects to Moses and the children of Israel at a time when the people needed this aspect of God’s blessing. In other words, as the people of Israel faced needs in their wilderness journey, God revealed Himself by His names. We see these three aspects of the Lord in:

Exo 15:25-26 “I am the Lord that healeth thee”

Exo 17:15-16 – The Lord thy victor or banner

Exo 31:13 “I am the LORD that doth sanctify you”

This order follows Heb 11:6, “But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”

A person must first have a personal experience with God. Then, the Lord begins to reveal Himself to those who seek Him.

YHWH:

Exo 6:2-3, “And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD: And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.”

The Lord our Healer:

Exo 15:25-26, “And he cried unto the LORD; and the LORD shewed him a tree, which when he had cast into the waters, the waters were made sweet: there he made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved them, And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee .”

The Lord our Banner:

Exo 17:15-16, “And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it

Jehovahnissi: For he said, Because the LORD hath sworn that the LORD will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.”

The Lord who Sanctifies:

Exo 31:13, “Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you .”

Jealous:

Exo 34:14, “For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous , is a jealous God:”

Exo 3:14 Comments – The Lord is the very “life that exists in creation.” He is even the life within the enemies of God. He is ‘the beginning andthe end of all things.” [20] He is the Lord of Hosts and the Prince of Peace, the Lion of the tribe of Judah and the Lamb of God. He is “I AM” because He is our God of the present. We cannot know Him as the God of the past or future, but we must seek him daily in order to abide with him. He is our life and without Him we would die. He is our light and without Him we would walk in darkness. [21]

[20] Rick Joyner, The Call (Charlotte, North Carolina: Morning Star Publications, 1999), 59.

[21] Rick Joyner, The Call (Charlotte, North Carolina: Morning Star Publications, 1999), 59-63.

Exo 3:15 Old Testament Quotes in the New Testament – Note New Testament references to Exo 3:15:

Mat 22:32, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

Mar 12:26, “And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?”

Luk 20:37-38, “Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.”

Act 3:13, “The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.”

Act 7:32, “Saying, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. Then Moses trembled, and durst not behold.”

Exo 3:19 Comments Exo 3:19 can be interpreted in two ways.

(1) The Hand of God This verse is usually understood to say that the king of Egypt will not let the children of Israel out from bondage except by the mighty hand of the Lord.

Brenton, “But I know that Pharaoh king of Egypt will not let you go, save with a mighty hand.”

DRC, “But I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go, but by a mighty hand.”

NIV, “ But I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go unless a mighty hand compels him.”

(2) The Hand of Man This verse can also be interpreted to mean that no one has the strength or power to make Pharaoh let the children of Israel out from bondage. John Durham gives the following paraphrase of this verse, “The Pharaoh will have no thought of granting such a wish and could not even be forced to do so by any power men could muster.” [22] We find additional support for this view in Exo 6:1, “Then the LORD said unto Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh: for with a strong hand shall he let them go, and with a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land.”

[22] John I. Durham, Exodus, in Word Biblical Commentary: 58 Volumes on CD-Rom, vol. 3, eds. Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker (Dallas: Word Inc., 2002), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 3.0b [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2004), notes on Exodus 3:19-20.

Exo 3:21-22 Comments The Wealth of the Egyptians – Where did the Egyptians attain all of this wealth? Much of this gold and silver came into the nation of Egypt during the time of Joseph, when the Lord used Joseph to obtain its wealth. Here, we see how God is providing the needs of the children thru Joseph (Exo 11:1-3; Exo 12:35-36).

Exo 11:1-3, “And the LORD said unto Moses, Yet will I bring one plague more upon Pharaoh, and upon Egypt; afterwards he will let you go hence: when he shall let you go, he shall surely thrust you out hence altogether. Speak now in the ears of the people, and let every man borrow of his neighbour, and every woman of her neighbour, jewels of silver, and jewels of gold. And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians. Moreover the man Moses was very great in the land of Egypt, in the sight of Pharaoh’s servants, and in the sight of the people.”

Exo 12:35-36, “And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment: And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.”

Exo 4:1-3 Comments – God Gives Moses a Rod to Perform Miracles – Many evangelists have preached to the heathen. When they gave no response to accept Jesus, the preacher performed signs and wonders in Jesus’ name, just as Moses performed signs and wonders with the rod so they might also believe. In fact, when Jesus preached in Judea to the many Pharisees and others who challenged His ministry, He operated in the gifts of the Spirit, while in His Galilean ministry He preached to people who received His message, so that they were healed because of their faith in Him.

Exo 4:15 Word Study on “Aaron” Gesenius says the Hebrew name “Aaron” ( ) (H175) means, “mountainous.” Strong says it means, “light bringer,” and is derived from an uncertain origin. BDB says, “light bringer.” PTW interprets this word to mean “enlightened, rich, mountaineer.” Hitchcock reads, “a teacher; lofty; mountain of strength.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

God Gives Moses Miraculous Powers

v. 1. And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice; for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee. The fear and anxiety of Moses here discovered another objection, that based upon the fact that the people were no longer accustomed to prophetic voices and would therefore not acknowledge his call.

v. 2. And the Lord said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod. Moses held his shepherd’s staff in his hand.

v. 3. And He said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it. The serpent was no delusion, but a fact, and looked dangerous enough to fill the heart of Moses with fear.

v. 4. And the Lord said unto Moses, Put forth thine hand, and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand and caught it, and it became a rod in his land;

v. 5. that they may believe that the Lord God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee. The simple shepherd’s staff, according to the will of God, became the instrument by which Pharaoh and his land were punished, for the miracle showed that God would deliver His people from the hostile power which was holding it captive. Moses received the commission, the power. to overcome the might, the wickedness of Satan, and this fact could not be hidden from the eyes of the children of Israel: they were bound to acknowledge his call.

v. 6. And the Lord said furthermore unto him, Put now thy hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow, infected with the white leprosy, Lev 13:3.

v. 7. And he said, Put thine hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again; and plucked it out of his bosom, and, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh. Thereby the Lord signified that He intended to cleanse His people, the children of Israel, of the spiritual leprosy of sin by the sacrifices and purifications which typified the cleansing through the redemption of Christ.

v. 8. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, to its unmistakable evidence, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign.

v. 9. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river (Nile), and pour it upon the dry land; and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land. The Nile was given the veneration of a god in Egypt on account of the fact that the fertility of the entire country depended upon its annual overflow. If Moses, therefore. had the power to turn this water of blessing into blood, he commanded a power which exceeded that of Pharaoh: death and destruction upon the tyrants was in his hand. The same almighty power of God is able to deliver us from every evil work and to give us the possession of the saints in light.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

Exo 4:1-17

The reluctance of Moses to undertake the part of leader, indicated by his first reply at his first calling, “Who am I that I should go?” etc. (Exo 3:11), was not yet overcome. God had promised that he would succeed; but he did not see how he could succeed, either with the people or with Pharaoh. It was not enough for him that God had declared, “They (the people) shall hearken unto thy voice” (Exo 3:18); he does not, cannot believe this, and replies: “Behold, they will not believe, neither hearken unto my voice” (Exo 4:1). This was plain want of faith; but not unnatural, and not, in God’s sight, inexcusable. God therefore condescended to the human weakness of his servant, and proceeded to show him how he intended that he should persuade the people of his mission. He should persuade them by producing the credentials of miracles (Exo 4:2-9). But the laggard heart finds yet a further objection. Moses feels that he labours under a personal defect, which (he thinks) is an absolute disqualification. He is “slow of speech and of a slow tongue” (Exo 4:10), has always been wanting in eloquence, and does not find himself any the more eloquent since God has been speaking with him. In vain does Jehovah promise to “be with his mouth” (Exo 4:12); Moses’ last word indicates all the old feeling of self-distrust. “Send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send” (Exo 4:13). Then at last the anger of the Lord is kindled against Moses, and God inflicts on him a sort of punishmentdegrades him; as it weredeposes him from the position of sole leader, and associates Aaron with him in such sort that Aaron must have appeared, both to the Israelites and to the Pharaoh, as the chief leader rather than Moses. (See Exo 4:30; Exo 7:2, Exo 7:10, Exo 7:19; Exo 8:6, Exo 8:17, etc.)

At this point the interview between Moses and Jehovah ends, and the action of the Exodus commences. Moses obtains leave to quit Midian, and quits itretires to Egypt, after escaping from a dangerous sickness on the way (Exo 4:24-26), is met by Aaron and takes him into his counsels, summons the elders and exhibits before them his miraculous powers, persuades them, and is finally accepted as having, with Aaron, a mission from God, both by the elders and the people.

Exo 4:1

Behold, they will not believe. Attempts have been made to soften down this contradiction of God’s words in Exo 3:18, and to represent Moses as merely saying, “What if the people will not hearken, etc. What shall I do then?” (So the LXX; Geddes, Boothroyd, and others.) But the phrase is really emphatic and peremptory. As Rosenmuller says: “Vox est negantis et detrac-tantis officium.” The Lord hath not appeared to thee. It is quite probable that the Israelites would have so spoken, if Moses had had no sign to show. There had been no appearance of Jehovah to anyone for above four hundred years. And the Israelites, who had not seen Moses for forty years, would not know whether he was a veracious person or not.

Exo 4:2

A rod. Or “a staff.” Some suppose the ordinary shepherd’s staff, or crook, to be meant; but it is objected that this would have been an unfit object to have brought into the presence of Pharaoh (Kalisch), being unsuitable for a court, and emblematic of an occupation which the Egyptians loathed (Gen 46:34); and the suggestion is therefore made, that it was the baton or long stick commonly carried by Egyptians of good position and especially by persons in authority. But Moses in Midian, forty years after he quitted Egypt, is not likely to have possessed such an article; nor, if he had possessed it, would he have taken it with him when shepherding. Probably a simple staff, the natural support of a man of advanced years, is meant.

Exo 4:3

It became a serpent. The word here used for “serpent,” nakhash, is a generic word applicable to any species of snake. We cannot assume that the cobra is the serpent meant, though no doubt Moses, when he fled from before it, believed it to be a venomous serpent. Various reasons for God’s choice of this particular sign have been given. Perhaps the best is, that a trick of the kind was known to the Egyptian conjurors, who would be tempted to exhibit it in order to discredit Moses, and would then be discredited themselves by his stick swallowing theirs. (See Exo 7:10-12.) It is fanciful to suppose a reference either to the serpent of Gen 3:1-24. (Keil and Delitzsch) or to the uraeus (cobra), which the Egyptian kings bore in their headdress as a mark of sovereignty {Canon Cook)

Exo 4:4

By the tail. A snake-charmer will usually take up his serpents by the neck, so that they may not be able to bite him. Moses was bidden to show his trust in God by taking up his serpent by the tail. His courage, as well as his faith, is shown in his ready obedience. It became a rod. A veritable rod once more, not a mere stiffened snake like the “rods” of the magicians (Exo 7:12)

Exo 4:5

That they may believe. The sign was to convince the Israelites, in the first instance, and cause them to accept the mission of Moses (see Exo 4:30, Exo 4:31). It was afterwards to be exhibited before Pharaoh (Exo 4:21), to try him and prove him, but not to convince him.

Exo 4:6

Furthermore. The first sign is followed by a second, equally simple and easy of performance, and perhaps, in the eyes of the Israelites, even more marvellous. Leprosy in a developed form was regarded as absolutely incurable. (Celsus, ‘De Re Medica,’ 5.7-8.) Its instantaneous production and removal were contrary to all experience, and in themselves thoroughly astonishing. Further, while the first miracle was simply a sign of supernatural powera credential, the second was a warning and a lesson. What might not he do to smite or to save on whom God had bestowed such power over the human organism? Each man would naturally fear to resist or disobey one so dangerously gifted. Leprous as snow. The Greek name for the worst form of leprosy, , was based on this fact of whiteness. The loathsome disease is thus described by Kalisch:”It begins with mealy crusts and scurfy scabs, originally not larger than a pin’s point, a little depressed in the skin (Le Exo 13:3, 30), and covered with white hairs (Le Exo 13:3, Exo 13:20). These spots rapidly spread (Le Exo 13:8), and produce wild [proud?] flesh (Le Exo 13:10, Exo 13:14). The leprous symptoms appear most frequently on the hairy parts of the body, and also on members which have been ulcerously affected. When the leprosy has gained ground, the whole skin appears glossy white at the forehead, nose, etc; tuberated, thickened, dry like leather, but smooth; sometimes it bursts, and ulcers become visible. The nails of the hands and feet fall; the eyelids bend backwards; the hair covers itself with a fetid rind, or goes off entirely (Le 13:42). All external senses are weakened: the eyes lose their brightness, become very sensitive, and are continually blearing; from the nostrils runs a fluid phlegm.”

Exo 4:8

The voice of the first sign. Some understand “the voice of Moses as he gave them the first sign;” but it is better to regard the sign itself as speaking to them. According to the sacred writers everything that can teach us anythingday, night, the heavens, the firmament, the beasts, the fowls of the air, the fishes, nay, the very stoneshave a voice. They teach us, speak to us, declare to us, cry out aloud, lift up their voice, shout, sing, proclaim God’s will, whether man will hear or whether he will forbear. (See Psa 19:1-3; Job 12:7, Job 12:3; Hab 2:11; Luk 19:40, etc.) Equally, or rather much more, must a miracle be regarded as having a voice. God speaks to us by it.

Exo 4:9

If they will not believe also. “Even” would be a better translation than “also.” The river is of course “the Nile.” See the comment on Exo 2:3. Of the three signs given, the first would probably convince all those who were religious, well-disposed, and fair-minded; the second, acting upon their fears, would move all but the desperately wicked, who despised Jehovah and put their trust in the gods of the Egyptians (Jos 24:14; Eze 20:7, Eze 20:8; Eze 23:3, Eze 23:8, etc.). The third sign was for these last, who would regard the Nile as a great divinity, and would see in the conversion of Nile water into blood a significant indication that the God who had commissioned Moses was greater than any Egyptian one.

Exo 4:10

And Moses said, O my Lord. The phrase used by Moses is full of force. It is “vox dolentis et supplicantis” (Noldius). Joseph’s brethren use it to the steward of Joseph’s house, when they expect to be fallen upon and taken for bondsmen (Gen 43:20); Judah used it (Gen 44:18) when pleading with Joseph for Benjamin; Aaron when pleading for Miriam (Num 13:11); Joshua when expostulating with God about Ai (Jos 7:8). There is a deprecatory idea in it, as well as a supplicatory one; an idea like that which Abraham expanded into the words, “Oh! let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once” (Gen 18:32). Moses feels that he is trying the patience of God to the uttermost; but yet he must make one more effort to escape his mission. I am not eloquent. Literally, as in the margin, “a man of words.” “Words do not come readily to my tongue when I attempt to speak; I have never been a fluent speaker, neither yesterday (i.e. recently) nor the day before (i.e. formerly). Nor do I even find that I have become eloquent by divine inspiration since thou spakest with me. Still I remain slow of speech and slow of tongue.” A question is raised whether the mere difficulty of finding words and giving them utterancea difficulty felt at first by almost every speakeris here meant, or something further, as “a natural impediment owing to defect in the organs of speech” (Kalisch), or a want of readiness, owing to disuse, in speaking the Hebrew language (Clarke). The latter suggestion is scarcely consistent with the ease and fluency with which Moses had carried on the conversation in Hebrew up to this point. The former is a possible meaning, though not a necessary one. According to a Jewish tradition, Moses had a difficulty in pronouncing the labials b, v, m, ph, p.

Exo 4:11-13

Who hath made man’s mouth! God could and would have cured the defect in Moses’ speech, whatever it was; could and would have added eloquence to his other gifts, if he had even at this point yielded himself up unreservedly to his guidance and heartily accepted his mission. Nothing is too hard for the Lord. He gives all powerssight, and hearing, and speech includedto whom he will. He would have been “with Moses’ mouth,” removing all hesitation or indistinctness, and have “taught him what to say”supplied the thought and the language by which to express itif Moses would have let him. But the reply in Exo 4:13 shut up the Divine bounty, prevented its outpour, and left Moses the ineffective speaker which he was content to be. The words, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom Thou wilt send, are curt and ungracious; much curter in the original than in our version. They contain a grudging acquiescence. But for the deprecatory particle with which they commencethe same as in Exo 4:10, they would be almost rude. And we see the result in the next verse.

Exo 4:14

The anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses. The expression used is a strong one, but does not perhaps here mean more than that God was displeased. At least, he did not punish the offender in any severer way than by the withholding of a gift that he was ready to bestow, and the partition between two of a position and a dignity which Moses might have had all to himself. Perhaps diffidence and self-distrust, even when out of place, are not altogether abhorrent to One whose creatures are continually offending him by presumption and arrogance. Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know, etc. This translation is wrong. The two clauses form one sentence, and should be rendered, “Do I not know that Aaron the Levite, thy brother, speaks well?” Aaron’s designation as “the Levite” is remarkable, and seems to glance at the future consecration of his tribe to God’s especial service. Behold, he cometh forth to meet thee. It has been conjectured that Aaron designed to visit Moses in Midian, in order to convey to him the intelligence that the king who had sought his life (Exo 2:15) was dead. He did not, however, start on the journey till God gave him a special direction (Exo 4:27).

Exo 4:15

Thou shalt speak unto him and put words in his mouth. Moses was to tell Aaron what to sayfurnish, i.e; the matter of his speechesand Aaron was to clothe this matter in fitting words. God promised to be with both of their mouths; with Moses’, to make him give right directions to Aaron; with Aaron’s, to make him utter them persuasively: Moses’ position was still the more honourable one, though Aaron’s might seem the higher to the people.

Exo 4:16

He shall be thy spokesman. Literally, “He shall speak for thee.” He shall be, even he. It is the verb that is repeated, not the pronoun. Probably the meaning is, “he shall surely be.” There is no comparison between Aaron and anyone else. Thou shalt be to him instead of God. Divine inspiration, that is, shall rest on thee; and it shall be his duty to accept thy words as Divine words, and to do all that thou biddest him.

Exo 4:17

Thou shalt take this rod. Not any rod, but the particular one which had already once become a serpent. Wherewith thou shalt do signs. Rather, “the signs,” i.e. the signs which thou wilt have to do, as already declared in Exo 3:20. It is quite gratuitous to suppose that God had already particularised them

HOMILETICS

Exo 4:1-5

The intent of the first sign.

Primarily, no doubt, the object was to empower Moses to show forth a sign easily, readily, without preparation, and so at any moment. He had come to the time of life at which he naturally carried a staff. That he should be able at his will to transform that dead piece of vegetable matter into an active, living organism, would show him endued with supernatural power over both the vegetable and animal worlds, and give him a means, always ready to his hand, of demonstrating the truth of his mission. This alone was a great matter. But the fact that his rod became a serpent, rather than any other living thing, was specially calculated to impress the Egyptians. In one form, the serpent with them meant “a king,” or “a crown;” and the change of a staff into a snake would typify the conversion of a shepherd into a monarch. In another form it was a sign for a “multitude,” and the transformation might remind them that the single stock or stem of Jacob was now become “millions.” The great serpent, Apap, moreover, held a high position in their mythology, as powerful to destroy and punish, whence they might the more fear one who seemed able to create serpents at his pleasure. The Israelites would perhaps view the staff as a rod to smite with, and connect its change into a serpent with the notion that when reds or whips were not thought severe enough, rulers chastised with “scorpions” (1Ki 12:11). Altogether, the sign, if viewed as a type, was threatening and alarming; perhaps the more so on account of its vagueness. Forms ill-defined, seen through mist, affright men more than those which are clear and definite.

Exo 4:6-8

The intent of the second sign.

If the first sign was powerful to convince, the second was still more powerful (Exo 4:8). It showed Moses able to produce, and cure, in a moment of time, the most virulent malady to which human nature was liable. The Egyptians greatly feared leprosy, and declared in their own accounts of the Exodus that they drove the Israelites out of their country because they were afflicted with that loathsome disease. The Israelites regarded it as the worst affliction that could befall a man. The hand of Moses made leprous within the folds of the garment that enwrapped his bosom typified perhaps the Israelitish nation, corrupted by the circumstances that enwrapped it around in Egypt. The cure indicated that Moses would, through the power committed to him, cleanse the people from their defilements, and. restore them to a state of spiritual soundness. Thus it was at once a warning and a promise. The sign appears not to have been used in Moses’ dealings with the Egyptians (Exo 7:10-17), because it was inappropriate as respected them, since they were beyond cleansingthere was no healing of their wound. Thus by this sign were taught two things:

1. That there is a fountain opened for sin and for uncleanness which can wash away, under the condition of repentance, any defilement; and

2. That there is a state of sinfulness and corruption when repentance ceases to be possible, and the moral nature can no longer be restored, and nothing remains but that fearful looking-for of judgment to come whereof the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks (Exo 10:27). The signs of the serpent and the bloodsigns of judgmentwere for the Egyptians and the Israelites alike; the sign of the hand made leprous and then restoreda sign of mercywas for the Israelites only.

Exo 4:9

The intent of the third sign.

Blood poured on the ground could symbolise nothing but war and destruction. That water should be turned into it implied that peace should be changed into war, prosperity into ruin, quiet and tranquillity into a horrible carnage. The special reference would be to the destruction of Pharaoh’s host in the Red Sea; but the other ruinous plagues, as especially the fifth, the seventh, and the tenth, would be glanced at also. That the water became blood on touching the ground of Egypt would indicate that it was the land and people of Egypt who were to be the sufferers. A very dreadful vengeance was thus foreshadowed by the third sign, which should have warned the Pharaoh of the terrible results that would follow his resistance to God’s will as proclaimed by Moses. To the Israelites, on the contrary, the sign was one assuring them of final triumph; that the blood of their enemies would be poured out like water in the coming struggle, and their resistance to God’s will be signally punished.

Exo 4:10

Slowness of speech a drawback on ministerial fitness, but not a disqualification.

It is remarkable that both Moses, the great prophet of the First Covenant, and St. Paul, the “chosen vessel” for the publication of the Second Covenant, were ineffective as speakers; not perhaps both “in presence base,” but certainly both “in speech contemptible” (2Co 10:1, 2Co 10:10). Speakers and preachers should lay the lesson to heart, and learn not to be overproud of the gift of eloquence. A good gift it is, no doubtwhen sanctified, a great giftwhich may redound to God’s honour and glory, and for which they should be duly thankful, but not a necessary gift. The men of action, the men that have done the greatest things, and left their mark most enduringly upon the world, have seldom been “men of words.” Luther indeed was mighty in speech, and John Knox, and Whitfield, and (though less so) John Wesley, but not our own Cranmer, nor Melancthon, nor Anselm, nor Bishop Cosin, nor John Keble. In the secular sphere of statesmanship and generalship the same principle holds even more decidedly. Demosthenes has to yield the palm to Alexander, Cicero to Caesar, Pym to Cromwell, the Abbe Sieyes to Napoleon. On the whole it must be said that those who are great in deed are rarely great in speech. And without eloquence a man may do God good service in every walk of life, even as a minister. The written sermon may go as straight to the heart of the audience as the spoken one. Ministerial effort in house-to-house visiting may do as much to convert a parish as any number of extempore sermons. Example of life preaches better than palaver. Let no one who feels within him the ministerial call, who longs to serve God by bringing his fellow-men to Christ, be deterred by the thought that he is “slow of speech and of a slow tongue.” God, without making him eloquent, can “be with his mouth,” give his words force, make them powerful to the conversion of souls. It has been said that there are many “dumb poets.” So are there many “dumb preachers,” whoso weak and hesitating words God blesses and renders effectual, so that in the end they have no cause to be ashamed, but may point to those whom they have brought to Christ, and exclaim with St. Paul, “Ye are our work, ye are our epistle, the seal of our apostleship are ye in the Lord” (1Co 9:1, 1Co 9:2; 2Co 3:2).

Exo 4:13, Exo 4:14

The sin of self-distrust, and its punishment.

Undoubtedly the general inclination of men is towards self-assertion and self-sufficiency, so that diffidence and distrust of self are commonly regarded as excellences. But there is a diffidence which is wrongful, a self-distrust which Scripture condemns. St. Paul calls it “a voluntary humility” ()a humblemindedness, that is, which has its root in the will; a man not choosing to think that he is fit for high things, and determining to keep down his aims, aspirations, hopes, endeavours. The same apostle exhorts his converts “not to think of themselves more highly than they ought to think” (Rom 12:3), but at the same time, by implication, “not to think too humbly, for he tells them to think soberly, according as God has dealt to every one the measure of faith.” We ought to take true views of ourselves, of our capacities, powers, faculties, even of the graces to which by God’s mercy we have been able to attain; and not to deny them or depreciate them. If we do so we keep ourselves back from high things, and this is how God punishes us. Moses lost the gift of eloquence, which God would supernaturally have bestowed upon him (Exo 4:12), and lost one-half of his leadership (Exo 4:14 16), by his persistent diffidence and distrust. We prevent ourselves from attaining heights to which we might have attained, we keep ourselves down in this world and make our position low in the next, by similar folly. The youth who bore the banner with the word “excelsior” upon it, was wiser than most of us. If we would rise high we must aim high; if we would aim high we must not be too diffident of ourselves.

Exo 4:14

The love of brothers.

Few things are more lovely than the affection of brothers. James and John, Simon and Andrew, Philip and Bartholomew, James and Jude, were sent out together by our Lord, that they might enjoy this sweet companionship. How touching is the love of Joseph for Benjamin! If there is “a friend that sticketh closer than a brother,” the fact is noted for its rarity; and the force of the phrase depends on the known intensity of fraternal affection. Aaron, though so long parted from Moses, perhaps the more because so long parted, would at the sight of him be “glad in his heart.” Though not brought up together, though educated so differently, and gifted so differently, though seemingly intended for such different walks in life, the two had a true affection, each for each, which had survived a long andso far as we are toldcomplete separation. Here, and again in verse 27, it is the affection of Aaron which is especially noticedperhaps because it was the more praiseworthy. Aaron, the elder brother, might naturally have felt some jealousy of Moses’ advancement above himself, of his superior education, social position, privileges, etc. But he seems to have been entirely free from this feeling. Moses might, for aught that he knew, resume his old princely rank on his return to Egypt, and throw him once more into the shade. Aaron did not disquiet himself about this. God knew that he longed for the simple keen pleasure of seeing his brother (“when he seeth thee, he will be glad,” etc.), of pressing him to his heart, and kissing him on the face (verse 27). Well would it be, if among Christians all brothers were thus minded.

Exo 4:14-16

Diversities of gifts a benefit both to individuals and to the Church.

After all, the self-distrust of Moses was turned by God to good. Without it Moses would have been sole leader of the entire enterprise, must have appeared alone before the elders and before the monarch, must have undertaken the entire charge, direction, superintendence of everything, must have had upon his mind an unshared burden which it would have been most trying to bear. God’s strength might indeed have been sufficient for his weakness. But his life could not but have been a weariness to him. He would have lacked the unspeakable solace and comfort of a loved and loving associate, to whom he might openindeed, was bound to open (Exo 4:15)all his mind, and with whom he could constantly “take sweet counsel together.” He would have also lacked the support, so much needed by a shy man, of a companion and coadjutor in crises and times of difficulty, as when he appeared first before the elders (Exo 4:29, Exo 4:30), and when he appeared first before Pharaoh (Exo 5:1). Thus the association of Aaron with himself in the leadership must have been felt by Moses as a benefit. And to Aaron it was an unmixed advantage. The gift with which God had endowed him, and which he had no doubt sedulously cultivated, caused him to be placed almost on a par with his brotherenabled him to be of use to himgave him loving companionshipand caused him to have a large part in the deliverance of his nation. After forty years of separation, during which he had never ceased to long for the return of his brother, Aaron found himself associated in the closest possible way with Moses, made his “right-hand man,” his other self, his constant aider and assister. After a wholly undistinguished life, which had lasted eighty-three years (Exo 7:7), he found himself brought into a position of the highest dignity and responsibility. And the Church was benefited greatly by the double leadership. Moses, the man of thought, was able to devote himself exclusively to thinking out all the details of the great work entrusted to him. Aaron, the man of words, was able to give all his attention to the framing of addresses whereby he might advance the plans of his brother. So in the Christian Church there have always been, and will always be, “diversities of gifts.” At one time they are “gifts of healing, tongues, prophecy, interpretation, discerning of spirits, faith, wisdom, prudence” (1Co 12:8-10); at another, preaching power, administrative energy, learning, scholarship, influence, and the like. Seldom are even two of these gifts united in the same individual. The Church prospers by utilising the gifts of all, assigning to each man the position suited to him, and taking care that he has a fair field for the employment of his special gift. In this way, “the whole building fitly joined together, and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body to the edifying of itself in love” (Eph 4:16).

HOMILIES BY J. ORR

Exo 4:1

Unbelief.

The objection started by Moses to the mission on which he was sent was a very natural one. The people would not believe him, nor hearken to his voice. For

I. HE WAS AS YET UNFURNISHED WITH DISTINCT CREDENTIALS. In so grave a matter Moses could not expect the people to believe his bare word. This was a real difficulty. Before committing themselves to his proposals, the Hebrews would be entitled to ask for very distinct proofs that the message brought to them had really come from Godthat there was no mistake, no deception. God acknowledges the justice of this plea, by furnishing Moses with the credentials that he needed. From which we gather that it is no part of the business of a preacher of the Gospel to run down “evidences.” Evidences are both required and forthcoming. God asks no man to confide in a message as of Divine authority, without furnishing him with sufficient grounds for believing that this character really belongs to it. The reality of revelation, the supernatural mission of Christ, the inspiration of prophets and apostles, the authority of Scripture, all admit of proof; and it is the duty of the preacher to keep this fact in view, and in delivering his message, to exhibit along with the message the evidences of its Divine original.

II. MORAL CAUSES, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM MERE DEFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE, WOULD MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR HIM TO SECURE CREDENCE. Moses anticipated being met, not simply with hesitation and suspense of judgment, which would be all that the mere absence of credentials would warrant, but by positive disbelief. “The Lord hath not appeared to thee.” How account for this?

1. The message he had to bring was a very wonderful one. He had to ask the people to believe that, after centuries of silence, God, the God of the patriarchs, had again appeared to him, and had spoken with him. This in itself was not incredible, but it would assume an incredible aspect to those whose faith in a living God had become shadowy and uninfluentialwho had learned to look on such appearances as connected, not with the present, but with a distant and already faded past. Credulous enough in some things, they would be incredulous as to this; just as a believer in witchcraft or fairies might be the hardest to convince of a case of the supernatural aside from the lines of his ordinary thinking and beliefs. It is a similar difficulty which the preacher of the Gospel has to encounter in the indisposition of the natural mind to believe in anything outside of, or beyond, the sphere in which it ordinarily works and judges,the sphere of things sensible (Joh 14:17). The supernatural is strange to it. It pushes it aside as inherently incredible, or at least as of no interest to it. From this the advance is easy to that which is so peculiarly a characteristic of our age, the denial of the supernatural as suchthe fiat assertion that miracle is impossible.

2. The announcement contained in his message was so good as almost to surpass belief. Great good news has often this effect of producing incredulity. Cf. Gen 45:26,”Jacob’s heart fainted, and he believed them not,” and Psa 126:1-6. And would not the Hebrews require evidence for the great good news that God had visited them, and was about to bring them out of Egypt, and plant them in Caanan! In like manner, is it not vastly wonderful, almost passing belief, that God should have done for man all that the Gospel declares him to have done! Sending his Son, making atonement for sin, etc.

3. The difficulties in the way of the execution of the purpose seemed insuperable. Even with God on their side, it might seem to the Israelites as if the chances of their deliverance from Pharaoh were very small. True, God was omnipotent; but we know little if we have not learned how much easier it is to believe in God’s power in the abstract, than to realise that this power is able to cope successfully with the actual difficulties of our position. The tendency of unbelief is to “limit the Holy One of Israel” (Psa 78:41). And this tendency is nowhere more manifest than in the difficulty men feel in believing that the Gospel of the Cross is indeed the very “power of God unto salvation”able to cope with and overcome the moral evil of the world, and of their own hearts.

4. One difficulty Moses would not have to contend with, viz.: aversion to his message in itself. For, after all, the message brought to the Israelites was in the line of their own fondest wishesa fact which ought, if anything could, powerfully to have recommended it. How different with the Gospel, which, with its spiritual salvation, rouses in arms against itself every propensity of a heart at enmity against God! The Israelites must at least have desired that Moses’ message would turn out to be true; but not so the mass of the hearers of the Gospel. They desire neither God nor his ways; have no taste for his salvation; are only eager to find excuses for getting rid of the unwelcome truths. To overcome an obstacle of this kind, more is needed than outward credentialseven an effectual working of the Holy Ghost.

III. INFERENCES FROM THESE CONSIDERATIONS.

1. Preachers of the Gospel must prepare themselves for encountering unbelief. It is the old complaint”Who hath believed our report?” (Isa 53:1).

2. The success of Moses in overcoming the people‘s unbelief shows that he must have possessed decisive credentials of his mission. The complaint of this verse does not tally with what is sometimes alleged as to the unlimited drafts that may be made on human credulity. Moses did not find the people all readiness to believe him. He was bringing them a message in the line of their dearest wishes, yet he anticipated nothing but incredulity. He had never much reason to complain of the over-credulity of the Israelites; his complaint was usually of their unbelief. Even after signs and wonders had been wrought, he had a constant battle to fight with their unbelieving tendencies. How then, unless his credentials had been of the clearest and most decisive kind, could he possibly have succeeded? For, mark

(1) It was not merely a few enthusiasts he had to carry with him, but the whole body of the people.

(2) He was no demagogue, but a man of slow, diffident, self-distrustful nature, the last man who might be expected to play successfully on popular credulity or enthusiasm.

(3) His plans were not to be laid before the multitude at all, but before the “elders”the cool, cautious heads of the ,nation, who would be sure to ask him for very distinct credentials before committing themselves to a contest with Pharaoh. The inference is that there must have been a true supernatural in the founding of the Mosaic era; as afterwards there must have been a true supernatural in the founding of the Christian era. Imposture, credulity, the force of mere ideas, the commanding power of a great personality, are, together or apart, incapable of explaining all the facts. Wonders must have been wrought, alike in the accrediting of the mission of Moses and in the stupendous work of the deliverance itself.J.O.

Exo 4:1-10

A trilogy of signs.

In reply to his complaint that the people would not believe him, nor hearken to his voice, God gave Moses three signs. These are to be viewed

I. AS ATTESTATIONS OF HIS DIVINE COMMISSION (Exo 4:5, Exo 4:8). Divine power is supernaturally exercised in proof of Moses’ title to speak with Divine authority. This is a clear case of the use of miracles as credentials of a mission, and confutes those who reason that this view of miracles has no basis in Scripture. The character of the signs was not to be disregarded, but the immediate circumstance which gave them evidential value was the fact of supernatural origin. Practically, signs of the kind wrought by Moses would be felt to be incontestable proofs of his Divine commission; and it is difficult to see how otherwise his message could have been authenticated. Why should this be objected to? Why, if the message is worthy of God, and the work of power is also worthy of God, should the work of power not be employed to add authority to the word, as indicating with certainty the source from which it comes?

II. AS SIGNIFICANT OR PARABOLIC ACTS. This is implied in their character as “signs.” They had had of themselves a “voice.” They told over again what Moses had explained in words, while they exhibited in symbol the superiority of Jehovah to the king and gods of Egypt.

1. Sign 1st.The impotence of Pharaoh against Jehovah‘s messenger. This seems to be the import of the turning of the rod into the serpent (Exo 4:2-5). The serpent “was the symbol of the royal and divine power on the diadem of every Pharaoh.”

(1) The rod cast to the ground and changing into a serpent symbolised the effect of the challenge to Pharaoh.

(2) Before this terrible apparition, with its gleaming eyes, inflated neck, hissing tongue, and vehemence of assault, Moses fled in natural terror.

(3) But he is instructed not to fear it, but to seize it by the tail; when there is given a representation of Pharaoh’s absolute powerlessness to hurt him in the reconversion of the serpent into the rod. The foe vanishes, and Moses remains master of the situation. The lesson is, that God’s servants, charged with the execution of his mission, are more than a match for all the powers of ill that can be arrayed against them. God will bruise even Satan”that old serpent”under their feet shortly (Rom 16:20). They wield an authority which gives them for the time a charmed existence, and ensures the defeat of those opposed to them. Cf. with this sign Mar 16:18; Act 28:5; Rev 12:6; and instance Luther before the Diet of Worms.

2. Sign 2nd. The power of Jehovah to smite and heal. The symbol of this was at the same time an instance of itviz, the sudden smiting of Moses’ hand with leprosy, followed by as instantaneous a cure (Rev 12:6-8). Leprosy was peculiarly the theocratic punishment (Miriam, Uzziah, Gehazi). It was probably a common disease among the Israelites, who figure in Egyptian traditions as a nation of lepers, hateful to the gods on account of their pollutions. The obvious teaching of this sign would therefore be

(1) That Jehovah was able to smite with the most grievous plagues, yet

(2) As able to heal when he had smitten.

This conveyed both threat and promise.

(1) If the people obeyed his voice, as he had healed the leprous hand, so would he heal them of their natural and spiritual disorders, and lift them out of their despised and unclean state in Egypt; while conversely,

(2) If they resisted, great and sore strokes of the Divine anger would fall upon them; or, if Egypt resisted God’s will, it in turn would be smitten by his plagues. The power in both cases was omnipotent and resistless. Thus we are instructed

1. To fear the stroke of the Divine anger.

2. That God who smites can also heal (Hos 6:1).

3. That God is more willing to remove judgments than to send them.

4. That God can heal the leprous heart.

5. To fear, above all, that most awful fulfilment of the leprosy symbolthe adjudging of the soul, under Divine wrath, to the unchecked spread of its own corruptionsto the reign of sin within itself.

3. Sign 3rd.The ruin that would descend on Egypt if God‘s will continued to be disobeyed. The sign of the turning of a portion of the water of the Nilethe source of Egypt’s beauty, fertility, and prosperityinto blood (Rev 12:9) could only have one meaning. It portended ruin to the state of Egypt. And such would be the inevitable consequence of a contest between Pharaoh and Jehovah, if protracted by the king’s obstinacy. In this case there was no reversal of the sign. The end of strife with God is judgment without mercyutter destruction. Lessonthe folly of striving with the Almighty.

III. AS A SERIES OF SIGNS ADAPTED TO REMOVE DOUBT AT DIFFERENT STAGES (Rev 12:8, Rev 12:9). Though, strictly speaking, one sign was enough to attest the Divine commission of him who wrought it, yet God, who condescends to man’s infirmity, added sign to sign, thus furnishing a superabundance and accumulation of evidences, and rendering unbelief wholly inexcusable. It has often been observed that the strength of the evidence for revelation lies, not in any single line of proof, but in the cumulative force of a great variety of evidences, some of which strike one class of minds as of peculiar cogency, while minds differently constituted are more impressed by others. In the case before us, a certain progression may be noted; each sign, by peculiar marks, carrying us a step further than its predecessor.

1. In the turning of the rod into the serpent, we have a work of Divine power, but not without a certain resemblance to the feats of the native serpent-charmers. The points of contrast were great, but it might be doubted whether the acts of the magicians were not competent to produce as great a wonder.

2. In the second signthe stroke of leprosythis doubt is eliminated, and the presence of Divine power conclusively demonstrated. But Egypt had her gods also, and the question, as it would present itself to those who believed in them, was not simply, Is Jehovah powerful? but, Is his power greater than theirs?

3. The last sign gives the final proof, by working a miracle on the water of the Nileitself one of Egypt’s greater gods. The turning of that sacred water into blood was the death-blow to all hope of help from the Egyptian idols.

Observe

1. The anxiety of God to remove doubt.

2. The ample provision he has made for its removal.

3. The patience with which he bears with man’s dulness and slowness of heart.

4. The inexcusableness of unbelief.J.O.

Exo 4:10-17

Slow of speech.

The longer Moses pondered the mission on which he was sent, the more he shrank from it. The difficulty which now oppressed him was his want of eloquence. It seemed to him that in this respect he was the least qualified person God could have chosen. There was needed for such a work a man of persuasive tongue, of fluent, forcible, and impressive speech; and his own utterance was hesitating and heavy. Overwhelmed with the sense of unfitness, he again appeals to God, and asks to be relieved from duty. We have here

I. A FELT INFIRMITY. Moses was doubtless right in what he said of his natural difficulty of speech. But his error lay

1. In exaggerating the value of a gift of mere eloquence. He did not possess itthough Stephen calls him “mighty in words” (Act 7:22)and he was apt to overrate its influence. He forgot that the man of deep silent nature has a power of his own, which expresses itself through the very ruggedness and concentration of his speech; and that oratory, while valuable for some purposes, is not the most essential gift in carrying through movements which are to leave a permanent impress on history. What is chiefly wanted is not power of speech, but power of action; and when it is felt that a man can act, a very limited amount of speech will serve his purpose. The smooth persuasive tongue, though pleasant to listen to, is not the weightiest in counsel.

2. In forgetting that God knew of this infirmity when he called him to the work. God knew all about his slowness of speech, and yet had sent him on this mission. Did not this carry with it the promise that whatever help he needed would be graciously vouchsafed? God has a purpose in sometimes calling to his service men who seem destitute of the giftsthe outward giftsneedful for his work.

1. The work is more conspicuously his own.

2. His power is glorified in man’s weakness.

3. The infirmity is often of advantage to the servant himself

keeping him humbled giving him to prayer, teaching him to rely on Divine grace, rousing him to effort, etc. (2Co 12:7-10). Paul was a man “rude in speech” (2Co 11:6), and came not with eloquence of words (1Co 2:1); but his defects of speech only made the Divine power which resided in his utterances the more conspicuous (2Co 2:4, 2Co 2:5).

II. A GRACIOUS PROMISE. God would be with his mouth, and teach him what to say (Exo 4:11). The Maker of speech, he might be trusted to aid its powers, when these were needed in his service. So Christ promises his disciples to give them in their hour of need what they shall speak (Mat 10:19). Lips touched by Divine grace possess a simple, natural eloquence of their own, far excelling the attempts of studied oratory. Then there is the other fact, that gifts of speech are often latent till grace comes to evoke them. Moses’ original awkwardness was no index to what, assisted by God’s grace, he might ultimately have become, even as a speaker. His gift would probably have grown with the necessity. The greatest preachers of the Gospel, with Paul at their head, have not been men naturally eloquent. If they became so afterwards, it was grace that made them. Thus, we are told of Luther that at first he dared not enter the pulpit. “Luther, who subsequently preached with so much power,who gave a new direction, and a force and elevation never before attained, to the whole system of German preaching,who is still the unparalleled master of all who hope to effect more by the internal demonstrativeness of a discourse than by its external ornamentation,this Luther was too humble, too modest, to take the place of a preacher. It was only at the solicitatlon of Slauptitz that he finally consented to preachat first in the oratory of the convent, and afterwards in church” (Hagenbach). Knox was equally diffident about the exercise of his gifts, and when an unexpected appeal was made to him, at the age of forty-two”the said John, abashed, burst forth in most abundant tears, and withdrew himself to his chamber” (Knox’s ‘History’). All may not be eloquent like these; but anyone possessed of earnest feeling and intense convictions, who is content to deliver a plain message with directness and simplicity, will be surprised at what God can sometimes make oven of rude and unskilled lips.

III. A SINFUL SHRINKING FROM DUTY (verse 13). The continued reluctance of Moses, after so gracious an assurance, was not to be excused. It was a direct act of disobedience, and argued, besides a want of faith, a certain measure of stubbornness. God was angry with him, yet forbore with his infirmity. And if God forbore with Moses, it is surely not for us to blame him, who are so often in “the same condemnation.” Let him who has never shrunk from unwelcome duties, or who has never stumbled in believing that Divine grace will, under trying circumstances, be made sufficient for his needs, cast the first stone. Admire rather in this incident

1. The patience and forbearance of God in stooping to his servant’s weakness, and

2. The “exceeding greatness” of the power which accomplished such mighty results by so unwilling an instrumentality. Nothing proves more clearly that the work of Israel’s deliverance was not of man, but of God, than this almost stubborn reluctance of Moses to have anything to do with it.

IV. A SECOND–BEST ARRANGEMENT (verses 14-17). The appointment of Aaron as spokesman to his brother, while in one view of it an act of condescension, and a removal of Moses’ difficulty, was in another aspect of it a punishment of his disobedience. It took from Moses the privilege of speaking for God in his own person, and committed the delivery of the message to more eloquent, perhaps, but also to less sanctified, lips.

1. The arrangement had its advantages.

(1) It supplied one’s defect by another’s gift.

(2) It utilised a talent lying unemployed.

(3) It gave Aaron a share in the honour of being God’s messenger.

(4) It formed a new link of sympathy between the brothers. But

2. It was not the best:

(1) It prevented the development of the gift of speech in Moses himself. Had he relied on God’s promise, he would doubtless have acquired a power of speech to which he was at first a stranger.

(2) The message would lose in force by being delivered through an intermediary. This of necessity. How much of the power of speech lies in its being a direct emanation from the mind and heart of the speakersomething instinct with his own personality! As delivered by Aaron, the messages of God would lose much of their impressiveness. Fluency has its disadvantages. A mind burdened with its message, and struggling with words to give it utterance, conveys a greater impression of force than ready delivery charged with a message that is not its own.

(3) Moses would be hampered in his work by the constancy of his dependence on Aaron. It limits a man, when he cannot act without continually calling in another to his assistance.

(4) It divided Moses’ authority, and gave Aaron an undue influence with the people (cf. Exo 32:1-35.).

(5) It was a temptation to Aaron himself to assume, or at least aspire to, greater authority than of right belonged to him (cf. Num 12:1-16.). Learn

1. That it is not always good for us to have our wishes granted.

2. That God sometimes punishes by granting us our wishes (cf. Hos 13:11).

3. That God’s way is ever the best.J.O.

Exo 4:11

God the Giver of our faculties.

See

1. His power in the creation of them. “Who hath made,” etc. Wisdom also. Eyes, ears, organs of speechmiracles of contrivance.

2. His goodness in the bestowal of them. A reason for thankfulness.

3. His providence in the deprivation of them. “Who maketh the dumb, or deaf,” etc. A reason for not murmuring.

4. His perfection as mirrored in their functions. “He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see?” (Psa 94:9). An answer to the objection against positive revelation. He that formed the mouth, shall he not speak? And he that formed the ear, can he not address to it his own message?

5. LessonHis ability to aid us in using them for his glory (Exo 4:12).J.O.

Exo 4:13

A servant’s difficulties.

Observe

I. WHAT THEY WERE. Moses’ difficulties resolved themselves into three.

1. The power of Pharaoh. “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh?” (Exo 3:10). We may be staggered by the thought of the powers that are arrayed against us.

2. The anticipated unbelief of the people (Exo 4:1). The preacher has to encounter hard and unbelieving hearts, and this may enfeeble and dishearten him.

3. His lack of gifts (Exo 4:10). Humble natures are easily discouraged by the sense of their own short-comingsby the consciousness of ignorance, defective education, lack of gifts of speech, etc.

II. HOW THEY WERE MET.

1. God armed Moses with powers that made him more than a match for the mighty king of Egypt.

2. He gave him the means of overcoming the unbelief of the people.

3. He promised to endow him with power of speech; and, when that was rejected, supplied his defect by giving him a coadjutor.

From which learn:

1. That while it is right to state our difficulties to Godto pour out all our hearts before himit is wrong to make them an excuse for shrinking from duty.

2. That God, if relied on, will give us all sufficiency.J.O.

Exo 4:17

The rod.

The rod a fit emblem of “the word of the truth of the Gospel.”

1. The rod was something definite. “This rod.” Not any rod, but the one which God gives us.

2. The rod was perhaps the instrument of a despised calling. So is the preaching of the Cross “foolishness” (1Co 1:21-25).

3. The rod was to be grasped and used: “in thine hand” Study, preach, expound, apply.

4. By the rod, Moses was to do signs: “wherewith thou shalt do signs.” Spiritual miracles wrought by the preaching of the word.

5. The rod was efficient only as accompanied by Divine power (1Co 2:4).J.O.

HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG

Exo 4:1-9

The third difficulty: how is Moses to deal with an incredulous Israel?

With the mention of this third difficulty, we begin to see how much of doubt, self-distrust, and reluctance disturbed the mind of Moses. And no wonder. This revelation and commandment of God had come very suddenly upon him; and though strong assurances and sufficient information were readily given, yet he could not all at once receive the comforts which flowed from them. Had he attended to what God said by way of removing the difficulties already expressed he would never have given utterance to this third one. His perseverance in suggesting obstacles almost makes us feel that he hoped Somehow to get out of the mission. But God meets him at every point. There is no weak place in the Divine plans. Even a matter which seems so uncertain as the reception of Moses by Israel is confidently taken altogether out of the region of uncertainties. God had already said (Exo 3:18), “They shall hearken to thy voice,” and if Moses had only waited, he would have been made to see how that hearkening would be brought about. The suggestion of this difficulty, therefore, showed how much he was still lacking in calm faith; nevertheless we must bear in mind that the difficulty was a real one. There was only too much reason to apprehend that Israel would receive him in the way he indicated. Consider

I. THE POOR EXPECTATIONS MOSES HAD OF A FAVOURABLE RECEPTION FROM ISRAEL. Why should he have these gloomy anticipations? Was the cause of them to be looked for wholly in Israel or wholly in himself. Did he mean to blame his brethren for their unbelief, or did he thus take another way of indicating his own utter distrust of himself? As he expresses no blame of Israel it is not for us to assume that he intended it. He knew very well that to go to his brethren with such a story, would be the very way to make them reject him and laugh him to scorn. He could not but feel that if he had been in their position, he would probably have behaved in the same way. What could it appear but presumptuous to return after forty years’ absence from the distant and half-barbarous Midian, and pretend that he had been chosen to deliver Israelhe, a mere weather-beaten shepherd? Truth is stranger than fiction, and for this very reason it is too often believed to be the most improbable of all fictions. Moses thus had every ground to expect that he would be treated either as insane or as the most impudent of impostors. He would have been more easily believed in telling some made-up story than when he told the simple truth. God had looked very kindly and favourably on Moses in all his deeply felt unworthiness; but the very things that commended him to God, hindered him with men. In what a humiliating aspect this word of Moses puts our fallen human nature! When the truth in which we are most of all concerned comes before us, we are tempted to neglect and repudiate it because the messenger does not look sufficiently dignified. Nor is unbelief our only danger. We must labour to have a state of mind in which we shall always not only receive the true but reject the false. We have to do with false apostles as well as true ones. The elders of Israel would have done very wrong if they had rushed into a welcome of Moses on his bare ipse dixit. We must not, in our anxiety to avoid unbelief, deliver ourselves over to credulity. If the world has in it only too many of the unbelieving spirit, so, alas! it has only too many of the deceiving spirit; all the more deceivers because thoroughly deceived themselves. We must try the spirits whether they be of God, and ever live in thankful use of the infallible tests which God has given us.

II. GOD GIVES TO MOSES AMPLE EVIDENCES TO PRODUCE FAITH IN ISRAEL. Observe that God does not simply promise these signs. He works them at once, at least the two that were possible, before the very eyes of Moses. Moses has faith enough to be sure that it is indeed God who is with him at the present hour; but what about the future? True, God had said, “Certainly I will be with thee” (Exo 3:12), and he might have repeated these words rebukingly. But he remembered that Moses was as yet very ignorant of the fulness of the Divine nature; and he acted with all his own wisdom and tenderness, to cherish the real but as yet very feeble and struggling faith of his servant. When Moses comes into the presence of his brethren, it is to cast down a rod that has already been a serpent, and to stretch forth a hand that has already been snow-white with leprosy. “What is that in thine hand?”as much as to say, “Take note of it, look at it well, make sure that it is the rough, easily replaced instrument of your daily work.” Moses is to be taught that things are not what they seem. He who according to his good pleasure took some of the original matter of the universe, and from it made the red-nature, and from other made the serpent-nature, now by the same power changes in a moment the dead rod into the living serpent, and the living serpent into the dead rod. The healthy hand is all at once infected with leprosy, and even while-Moses is shuddering with the terrible experience, the leprosy is as suddenly taken away. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. As to the significance of these miracles, there is doubtless much that lies beyond our power to ascertain. Assuredly they had in them perfect propriety beth as to their order and their nature. What the burning hush became to Moses, these three miracles might become to the Israelites; not only paving the way for Moses to act with full authority in their name, but giving many lessons to such as had eyes to see and hearts to understand. For instance how could they but perceive that when God began his dealings with Pharaoh, he began with two out of the three miracles which Moses had shown to them. Moses turned the rod into a serpent, and the water into blood before Israel, and Israel believed (Exo 4:28-31). He did the same things before Pharaoh, and he remained unmoved. Who can tell what terrible things Israel escaped by their timely acceptance of the mission of Moses? and yet that acceptance, as we discover by the rebellions in the wilderness, did not amount to very much. The belief that is produced by miracle, if there be not some more penetrating force behind the mere exhibition of the extraordinary, does not go very deep, nor does it last very long. The greatest benefit of these miracles was to such Israelites as could see in them, not only the power of God, but something of the purposes for which that power was used. Pharaoh caused great pain to Israel, but he did nothing else; he sought no blessed end for the people beyond the pain. God, on the other hand, though he turned a rod into a threatening serpent, and a clean and healthy hand into a leprous, loathsome mass, yet very speedily took these signs of destruction away. When God brings threatening and affliction very near to us, it is only to show how quickly and completely they may he removed. All untoward things are in his hands-all serpents, all diseases, all degrading transformations of what is good and beautiful.Y.

Exo 4:10-12

The fourth difficulty: Moses alleges defect of utterance.

The third time-is often represented in Scripture as the final and decisive time (1Sa 3:8; Mat 26:44, Mat 26:45, Mat 26:75; Joh 21:17; 2Co 12:8). But Moses is not yet either satisfied or even silenced. As fast as one difficulty is swept away, his fearful and fertile mind has another ready to take its place. He began with himself, in stating his objections and difficulties, pleading then his unworthiness in general terms; now in the end he comes back to himself with the mention of a special difficulty. Consider

I. THE DIFFICULTY AS STATED BY MOSES. In the course of the conversation, God has laid before him such particulars of the work required as seem to show him, in his hasty view of them, that he will have much speaking to do. But for speaking he alleges himself to be peculiarly unfit. What he meant by this unfitness we have no means of exactly ascertaining. Perhaps he had some actual defect in the vocal organs; or it may have been nothing more than the well-nigh insurmountable difficulty which some men feel when called on to speak in public. In any case he was bringing the difficulty forward under mistaken views as to the importance of mere utterance.

1. He was exaggerating the service of natural faculties. To say that these are nothing at all would be of course the language of mock humility. God has shown often in the history of his work in the world that he welcomes great natural gifts, lovingly devoted to him and thoroughly sanctified. But the great temptation undoubtedly is, to make too much of natural giftstoo much of the intellect, the voice, the physical presence altogether, and too little of the purposes for which these instruments are to be used. How a thing is said is of much less moment than the thing itself. Better to stammer out a great truth than to deck lying, deception, and worldly vanities in the best-chosen words. When the Jews conspiring against Paul wanted some one to plead their cause before Felix, they sought, very wisely from their point of view, for the practised professional orator. It mattered nothing that he lacked the love of truth and justice. It was his business to do the best he could for even the worst of causes. God might easily have found elsewhere in Israel a thousand fluent and attractive speakers, more pleasant to the ear than Moses, and yet none of them sufficiently endowed, in other ways, for the great work required.

2. He was underrating the power of God working through those whom he chooses for himself. It is inevitable that if we exaggerate in one direction, we shall underrate in another. If we make too much of the work of man, we shall make too little of the work of God. Moses is not yet duly impressed with the fact that God has unmistakably and finally chosen him. He thinks he ought to be able to see clearly why he is chosen, and this is just what he cannot as yet get even a glimpse of. If only he had been able to feel conscious of some improvement in his natural faculties, it would have been a great encouragement, a great help to submission and prompt advance, at least so he thought. Depend upon it, we can never think of the power of God too highly. Nothing, so long as it is agreeable to his character, is beyond him. If he has chosen us for any work, he will always make his choice quite certain to our hearts; though, at the same time, to humble and try us, he may give much to perplex our intellects. In such moments our true and sufficient refuge is to remember the unfailing power of him who directs us. If Moses had only lived, say in the time of Paul, and been able to look back as Paul looked on all the Divine dealings recorded in the Scriptures, he would have seen at once, and gloried in the fact, that his very lack of fluent speech, so far from being against him, was rather in his favour (2Co 4:7).

II. GOD‘S TREATMENT OF THIS PERSEVERING RELUCTANCE. Observe God’s continued patience. So far there has not been a word of rebuke to Moses; no action such as corresponds with the smiting of a stupid or inattentive scholar. But it was really quite time for Moses to begin to reflect a little before he spoke. Moses seemed to hint in this latest appeal that it was desirable at once to confer on him what he judged to be the requisite powers of speech. But God saw that the real want was not speaking, but thinking; quiet, earnest, introspective thinking. There had been quite enough of speaking unadvisedly with the lips, only to be excused by the fact that Moses had become so recently acquainted with Jehovah. Now God gives his servant something to think about. Moses has said in effect, “Here am I, called to a great work, for which, through no fault of my own, I lack the necessary faculties.” And God in return is not slow to meet Moses with a plain admission of the Divine responsibility for many things which we count defects in human nature. “Where,” says the sceptic, “is the wisdom of that God who allows the world to abound in so many human beings deficient in one or another of their natural faculties?” God meets the charge himself, and meets it boldly. He not only allows man to be so, but he makes him so; in other words, what we call defects are not defects at all. The defect is in us, who are not able to look at them in a right and comprehensive way. There are defects and defects. Man, thinking of the blind, the deaf, the dumb, the lame, begins to wail what an imperfect thing creation is; yet he is only complaining of spots on the surface. Our outward senses, with all the knowledge and pleasure that they bring, are only subsidiary parts of humanity. Let Moses consider, and he will see that, inasmuch as these defects come from no fault of his own, God can easily make them up. The fact that Moses was so slow of heart to believe all that God had spoken was a far greater hindrance than all his slowness of speech. We find serious defects and hindrances where, so to speak, God rather finds helps; while the things that hinder God’s work and stir his indignation it takes a great deal to make us conscious of. The worst obstacles to be encountered by Moses did not come from any of the things he had laid such emphasis on; they lay in his own heartthat heart into which the dawning of God’s presence had only just begun to penetrate.Y.

Exo 4:13-16

Moses, taking a step too far, is suddenly arrested.

In Exo 4:13 we must evidently look at the spirit of the words, rather than the words themselves. There is nothing wrong in the words. Uttered in a different tone and in different circumstances they might have drawn forth the approval of God rather than his anger. They might be used as expressing the most devout submissiveness, the consciousness of one who, though he is treading forth into darkness and danger, is sure that he is filled with the fulness of God. But not so had Moses yet learned to speak. God has tried to call him away from the turmoil of his doubts, from his hasty conjectures and crude anticipations; but instead of obeying, instead of acquainting himself with God, and thereby being at peace, he flies in his face with this half-despairing half-defiant cry. It is the crisis of the struggle, and it is very instructive to notice how firmly and yet gently God deals with his servant. Observe, then, how we have here a due mingling of righteous anger and compassionate aid.

I. GOD‘S MANIFESTED ANGER WITH MOSES. The expression is a strong and suggestive one. Not simply that God was angry, but that his anger was kindled. We may take it as meaning that there was some anger already, growing indeed hotter and hotter, but only now under this great provocation breaking into flame. The anger of God must inevitably rise at every contact with human ignorance and stubbornness, though it may be so veiled beneath love, pity, and patience as to be concealed from the man whose conduct excites it. And note in particular that there is no inconsistency in attributing to God anger with Moses. Moses himself was to be excused, as having only recently become acquainted with God; but he could not escape his share of the due effects arising out of the alienation of the entire human race from God. Besides, God’s anger must be looked upon as one of his instruments in bringing us effectually to compliance with his will. God’s anger is really part of the goodness which leads us to repentance; and if gentler methods fall, then the time will come at last when that anger must be decidedly manifested, even for our good. Moses could not but admit that so far he had been dealt with very gently indeed. God, quickly and. tenderly responsive, had met every hint of difficulty with a strong encouragement. But all the encouragements had made no real difference in Moses’ mood of mind. He turns upon God in the querulous unappreciative strain indicated in Exo 4:13. Thus he unconsciously signifies that the time has come for God to change the method of his action. Moses, like a persistently heedless scholar, must be made to feel that his master cannot be trifled with. God speaks, not that we may discuss and parley with him, but that we may obey. Let Moses now understand that the time has come for him at once to go forth.

II. THE ANGER IS MINGLED WITH A GRACIOUS PROMISE OF APPROPRIATE AID. God’s anger with his own chosen ones is but a sudden darkness to make the following light more useful and esteemed. God, who has just shown his power to Moses in the burning bush and the following signs, now shows power in a way even more attractive. He is one who can at the same moment warn and comfort,not only smiting that he may heal, but able to blend smiting and healing together. Even though Moses has provoked his indignation, he does not leave him with a bare promise that somehow or other his defect of utterance will be supplied. God sweeps away this latest difficulty as completely as he had done the previous ones. And note moreover that he disposed of it in his own unexpected way. It was better to leave Moses as he was, and make Aaron his spokesman, than to enrich him in his own person with all gifts of utterance and leave him alone. By linking the two men together, God was constantly teaching them the need of mutual subordination. If they would only be companions in humility they should also be companions in prosperity and in gladness of heart. Sad and disastrous would be the day when Moses should be disposed to say to Aaron, “I have no need of thee,” or Aaron to Moses, “I have no need of thee.” Aaron had what Moses lacked. Moses had the matter of a Divine and gladsome message, but he felt utterly at a loss how he was to get it properly laid before all whom it concerned. Aaron, on the other hand, had voice and faculty of speech, but behind that voice there had hitherto been nothing of commandment, direction, and encouragement. Aaron, says the Lord, was a man who could speak well; that is, as we may take it, a man able to speak distinctly and impressivelyone who could deliver any message entrusted to him in a way which would not obscure the message, nor draw ridicule on the utterer of it. Moses and Aaron went together like the musician and the instrument on which he plays. Thus we see the way in which God binds us together by our very deficiencies. He constitutes us so that we are always more or less dependent on our fellow-men, and sometimes the dependence is very marked indeed. It is well for us in the midway and strength of life to consider that there may be but a step between us and the need of the tenderest sympathy. When we are most independent there are possibilities lying before usyes, there are even certaintieswhich should moderate our pride and self-sufficiency. Manly independence is one of the greatest blessings; egotistic isolation one of the greatest curses. They that are strong should bear the infirmities of the weak; there are none of us so strong but that in some emergency of life we may accept the relief; there are none of us so weak but that we may do something to provide the relief, in a world which is so full of temptations to discord and rivalry it is a great comfort to remember that God is constantly working to counteract them. He guides human affairs, even as he guides the planets themselves; the centripetal force is greater than the centrifugal. If every one of us were free to work out the desires of our selfish hearts, anarchy would come with fearful rapidity.Y.

Exo 4:17

The importance of the rod: God guards Moses against a very natural oversight.

“Thou shalt take this rod in thine hand.” Was Moses, then, likely to forget it? That rod had just been pointed out to him as connected with his favourable reception by Israel. It was to be the instrument for helping to deliver him from one of his chief apprehensions. And yet it was as likely as not that in the hurry of gathering his household goods together, the rod would be thrown into a corner of the fold as a mere bit of wood that could easily be replaced if Moses had once again to become a shepherd. Notice

1. That other things seemed, to the natural eye, of a great deal more consequence. As Martha, when Jesus came to her house, was cumbered with much serving, and in the middle of it all was unwittingly neglecting the one thing needful, so Moses, amid the distracting questions that filled his mind, had no inducement to regard the rod with such attention as corresponded to its real importance. Here is one of the great difficulties in bringing the natural man to discern the things of the Spirit of God. Not only is man, by nature, indifferent to spiritual things, but he is absorbingly occupied in the desires, cares, and apprehensions of the natural life. When the disciples of Christ had their minds filled with carnal anticipations of the kingdom of heaven, they heard even such glorious news as that of the resurrection of their Master as if they heard it not.

2. This rod seemed a thing of particularly little consequence. Were not a thousand such within easy reach? Might not God be trusted to turn any rod Moses took up just as he had turned this? If it had only been some precious stone, something costly, elaborate, and rare, he would not have forgotten it.

3. The real consequence of the rod appeared dearly in the light of after events. Suppose Moses had left the rod behind him. The likelihood is that he would very quickly have been stopped on the way, even as he was stopped and threatened because of his uncircumcised son. And if he had been allowed to go on, assuredly he would have been put to shame on coming into the presence of Israel. God was beginning to teach Moses that strict, unflagging attention to details would be necessary when he again came to this mountain to take his part in serving God on it.

4. The rod itself was a great sign that Israel was to be delivered not by human but by Divine operations. It was probably not only the companion of Moses, but the constant companion. Ever in his hand, it was something by which he could readily turn his thoughts away from his own inability to the all-sufficing power of God. It is our folly, both as concerns our own salvation and the salvation of our fellow-men, that we go out without the rod. When the Israelites saw Moses coming among them with his rod, clinging to it, though there seemed no use for it, some of them perhaps said, “Throw that rod aside; why cumber yourself with it, and become a laughingstock and a puzzle to beholders.” And in like manner how often have those put in trust with the Gospel been exhorted to lay aside those elements which to the natural man appear mere excrescences and deformities. We may well believe that to the first apostles, it was one of the hardest things in the world to keep firm to the essential parts of their message. What the rod was to Moses, going forth with it and working signs, that must the doctrine of the Cross be to all apostles. Christ crucified is to the Jews a stumblingblock and to the Greeks foolishness, but to them which are called, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.Y.

HOMILIES BY J. URQUHART

Exo 4:1-9

Weakness and strength for God’s service.

I. FEAR OF THE REJECTION OF THE MESSAGE WE BEAR FOR GOD MAKES ITS DELIVERANCE IMPOSSIBLE. The tidings he was to bear were so wonderful that he believed his words would be listened to with utter incredulity. Our Gospel is more wonderful still. To speak it, our eye must rest less on the message, and more on God’s power to chastise and to bless. We are not critics of, nor apologists for, the Gospel: we are messengers sent before God’s face. Our Master is behind us.

II. MIRACLES BELONG TO THE INFANCY OF FAITH. The signs are given because of unbelief. Elijah and Elisha work miracles among the tribes which had almost wholly forsaken God; Isaiah, Jeremiah, John, work none. The Apostles alone were empowered to bestow miraculous gifts, and these died out with the men who received them from the Apostles’ hands. To bring again the age of miracles would be retrogression, not advance.

III. THE MIRACLES AS SIGNS.

1. The rod cast upon the ground becomes a serpent; the serpent dealt with in obedience to God s command becomes a rod. They who reject God’s guidance will be pursued by his terrors, and if we deal with our foes as God directs us they will help, not harm us.

2. The hand put in the bosom (the attitude of determined indifference) becomes leprous; placed again in obedience to God’s command, it is made whole. God can make the strength of the disobedient a burden and horror; and if we rest in him our loathsomeness and weakness will be changed into health and strength.

3. The sweet Nile waters changed into blood. The delight of the land to which unbelief will cling will become a loathing and a curse.U.

Exo 4:10-17

God’s wrath will fall where his service is declined.

I. MOSES‘ OBJECTION AND GOD‘S ANSWER (10-12).

1. He deems himself unfit to occupy the place even of spokesman to the Lord. The objection was based upon a real infirmity, which so far God had not removed. The same objection urged as a reason to-day for not engaging in Sunday-school work, etc. The want of power may be real, but is it a sufficient reason for refusal?

2. God’s answer.

(1) He points to his power. Is that realised?

(2) He gives the promise of help.

Our weakness will merely afford a field on which God’s might and faithfulness will be manifested.

II. MOSES‘ REFUSAL AND GOD‘S ANGER (13-17).

1. The disinclination to the service which lay behind his objections is at last manifested. That very name (Adonai) “my master,” by which he addresses God, might have rebuked him. But Moses in this may be the type of ourselves. We acknowledge thai all we have, that we ourselves, are his, and yet is there no service which no amount of reasoning or expostulation can prevail upon us to undertake for God?

2. God’s anger.

(1) A revelation of the judgment which awaits the slothful servant. Its shadows fall now in the withdrawal of his favour and the decay of spiritual life.

(2) It left its mark upon the life of Moses although his refusal was followed by repentance. Aaron was joined with him, and where in the eye of Israel and the world there would have been one figure only, there is henceforth two. The mark of God’s anger is left in a lessened glory.

III. THE POWER OF THE PAST FOR CHRISTIAN SERVICE. “Take this rod”not another. It reminded him of the time when he contended with God, and ministered humility in the moments of mightiest triumph. The Cross of Jesus the memento of our stubbornness and guilt.U.

HOMILIES BY H.T. ROBJOHNS

Exo 4:1-17

Divine supplements for human infirmity.

“Now therefore go, and I will be with thee,” etc. (Exo 4:12.) It is not at all clear whether the four objections urged by Moses against receiving the Divine commission were presented at one interview with the manifested God, or whether the controversy recorded Ex 3:1-4:17, occupied weeks or months. The probabilities are in favour of some considerable time. See Exo 4:10, and specially in the Hebrews In dealing with this particular plea, viz. the lack of eloquence, we must bear in mind that it is not for every man to be a Moses, or a preacher, or even a worker. True, there is a ministry for each and all; but some are called to, one of patience in suffering. Treat the subject therefore as one of Divine supplementing of human infirmity generally. Comp. 2Co 12:7-10.

I. SHRINKING FROM DIVINE SERVICE. Not a doubt of this in the case of Moses. Earlier he was not unwilling to put himself forward as the champion of IsraelAct 7:25; but diffidence came with years. So Jer 1:1-6. So all the prophetstheir message a “burden”something heavy to be carried, to which they braced themselves. So Paul, 1Co 9:16. Nor is the feeling unhealthy or undesirable. Self-confidence looks at first the best preparation for great enterprises. But is it so? Leek at life. In all departments, to estimate aright the greatness of the work, the comparative feebleness of our resources, and yet the weight of our responsibility, is the condition of success; e.g. Lord Clyde in India. The Christian minister. By the reluctance of Moses, measure the irresistible impulse upon his spirit. Nor is consciousness of incapacity always the reality of incapacity.

II. THE EXCUSE THAT IS OFFERED. Take 1Co 9:10, translated thus: “And said Moses unto Jehovah, Let it please Thee, O Lord, not a man of words am I, either since yesterday, or since the day before, or since the time Thou hast spoken unto Thy servant; for heavy of mouth and heavy of tongue am I.”

1. The time-hint. An intimation here of a long controversy between Moses and God.

2. The meaning of Moses. He was not a “man of words”not eloquent, in the popular sense; he was heavydoubly heavyof lip and tongue. A great writer of poetry and prose, but not a speaker. This self-estimate just. Yet there were compensations. He was “mighty in word.” Distinguish between fluency and power. He was, too, a man of thought. A man of action.

3. A lesson in passing: “Take heed how ye hear!””Take heed what ye hear.” Compare the massive eloquence of the Puritan age, and the men it made, with what seems to be now the taste of many for the sensationalwith present impatience of so-called “heavy” preaching. Where would Israel have been, had Israel turned its back on the “heavy” Moses, and followed the lead of the brilliant but perhaps shallow Aaron, who could make molten images under the very shadow of Sinai, the mount of God, ere reverberating thunders had died away in the desolation of the desert.

4. The essence of his excuse. The defect was to the mind of Moses fataleloquence was the one quality material to his mission. To many missions (e.g. military or administrative) eloquence is not essential. The mission of Moses was diplomaticit needed tongue-power. “Say unto the elders of Israel!” “Say unto Pharaoh.” He had to persuade a nation of slaves that he was the heaven-sent deliverer. He had to go into the audience-chamber of the greatest potentate of earth, and speak to him for a nation, and for Jehovah behind the nation. Just the one thing he could not do; and for which he had not the indispensable qualification. So in thousands of other eases, of various forms of duty and responsibility, of sorrow and perplexity. “Tongue” and “lip” and “word” are what the service demands, and all are wanting.

III. THE DIVINE DECLINING OF EXCUSE. Notice

1. The changing tone. It is

(1) Encouraging. 1Co 9:11, 1Co 9:12.

(2) Indignant. Moses said, 1Co 9:13 : “Let it please Thee, O Lord, send I pray Thee by a hand Thou wilt send.” (See the Hebrews) This sounds submissive, as though Moses meant, “Send me.” But from the translation of the LXX. the words seem to have carried a disloyal meaning, now lost in the Hebrews: “I pray Thee, O Lord, prepare for Thyself another capable, whom Thou wilt send.” And so Jehovah was indignant. Self-diffidence may be carried too far. Yet was not Moses wholly cast awayfor Jehovah took up again a tone likely to woo him to his duty.

(3) Encouraging again: 1Co 9:14-17.

2. The counter pleas. God allows the truth of all we say, and then comes in with his own Divine counter pleas why he should not accept either our excuses or decliningof which the main articles are these: The glory of God will be manifested

(1) In the use of man at all. God might have glorified himself in breaking to pieces the empire of Egypt without the intervention of any human agency. Pietists have sometimes thought that they glorified God by making him everything, man nothing. But God glorifies himself more by using men, for men are such poor tools to work with. E.g. Quentin Matsys making the beautiful covering for the well that stands in front of Antwerp cathedral with only a file and hammer. How? Such work with only file and hammer? So great an overthrow here, and such a creation of nation and church by a man, and such a man? The strength of God is evermore working by our weakness.

(2) By the imperfection of our powers: 1Co 9:11, 1Co 9:12. God the Creator of the imperfection as well as the powerthe dumbness of the dumb, as well as the eloquence of the eloquent. He does thisi.e, supplements our imperfect power, by

1. Other faculties in the man. So here “the rod” of might in deed was to supplement the imperfect speech. [See also above, II. 2.]

2. Other men. Here by Aaron, 1Co 9:14 16.

3. Himself. In the earlier part of this controversy it was, “Certainly I will be with thee”a general declaration. Now it is, “I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.“ The Almighty power goes along with the imperfect organ of the Divine will. Apply as suggested above to allwhether in the activity, or in the patience of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ.R.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Exo 4:1. Moses answeredbehold, they will not believe me The plain meaning of these words, as is evident from the miracles which God immediately wrought, and gave Moses also power to perform, is, that his bare word would be insufficient to convince the people, without some extraordinary signs to confirm the truth of his mission: “the people will say, the LORD hath not appeared unto thee: if he had, he would certainly have enabled thee to give some sign: shew us therefore such a sign, or we will not believe or regard thy voice.” This is so natural an interpretation of the passage, that, I think, it renders useless Bishop Warburton’s conjecture, that the backwardness of Moses proceeded from his thinking the recovery of the Israelites, from Egyptian superstition, altogether deliberate.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Exo 4:1 And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice; for they will say, Jehovah hath not appeared unto 2thee. And Jehovah said unto him, What is that [this] in thine [thy] hand? And he said, A rod. 3And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, 4and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Put forth thy hand, and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand, and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand: 5That they may believe that Jehovah, God [the God] of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and 6the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee. And Jehovah said furthermore unto him, Put now thine [thy] hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow. 7And he said, Put thine [thy] hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again, and plucked [took] it out of his bosom, and behold, it was turned again as his other flesh. 8And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither [nor] hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign. 9And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also [even] these two signs, neither [nor] hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land; and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land. 10And Moses said unto Jehovah, O my Lord, [O Lord], I am not eloquent [lit. a man of words], neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant; but [for] I am slow of speech [mouth] 11and of a slow [slow of] tongue. And Jehovah said unto him, Who hath made mans mouth? or who maketh the [maketh] dumb, or deaf, or the seeing [or seeing], or the blind? [or blind?] Have [Do] not I, Jehovah? 12Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say. 13And he said, O my Lord [O Lord], send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send. 14And the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not Aaron, the Levite, thy brother? I know [Do I not know Aaron, thy brother, the Levite,] that he can speak well?5 And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee, and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. 15And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words [the words] in his mouth; and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do. 16And he shall be thy spokesman [shall speak for thee] unto the people, and he [it] shall be, even [that] he shall be to thee instead of 17[for] a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of [for a] God. And thou shalt take this rod in thine [thy] hand, wherewith thou shalt do signs [the signs]. 18And Moses went, and returned to Jethro [Jether] his father-in-law, and said unto him, Let me go, I pray thee,6 and return unto my brethren which [who] are in Egypt, and see whether they be [are] yet alive. And Jethro said to Moses, Go in peace. 19And Jehovah said unto Moses in Midian, Go, return into Egypt; for all the men are dead which [who] sought thy life. 20And Moses took his wife, and his sons, and set them [made them ride] upon an [the] ass, and he returned to the land of Egypt. 21And Moses took the rod of God in his hand. And Jehovah said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh which I have put in thy hand [consider all the wonders which I have put in thy hand, and do them before Pharaoh]; but I will harden his heart that he shall [and he will] not let the people go. 22And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith Jehovah, Israel is my son, even my first-born. 23And I say [said]7 unto thee, Let my son go that he may serve me; and if thou refuse [and thou didst refuse]6 to let him go: behold, I will slay thy son, even thy first-born. 24And it came 25to pass by the way in the inn, that Jehovah met him, and sought to kill him. Then [And] Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband [a bridegroom of blood] 26 art thou to me. So [And] lie [i.e., Jehovah] let him go [desisted from him]; then she 27said, A bloody husband [A bridegroom of blood] thou art, because of the circumcision. And Jehovah said to Aaron, Go into [to] the wilderness to meet Moses. And he went, and met him in the mount of God, and kissed him. 28And Moses told Aaron all the words of Jehovah who had sent him [with which he had charged him]8, and all the signs which he had commanded him. 29And Moses and Aaron went, and gathered together all the elders of the children of Israel. 30And Aaron spake all the words which Jehovah had spoken unto Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people. 31And the people believed, and when they heard9 that Jehovah had visited the children of Israel, and that he had looked upon their affliction, then they bowed their heads [bowed down], and worshipped.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

[Exo 4:14. We have ventured to follow the Vulg., Luther, Cranmer, the Geneva Version, De Wette, Glaire, and Kalisch, in this rendering; for, though grammatically the reading of the A. V. in more natural, yet it is difficult to see the force of the question, Is not Aaron thy brother? Frst, Arnheim, and Murphy, try to avoid the difficulty by rendering, Is there not Aaron, thy brother, the Levite? etc. This, however, is putting in what is not in the original. Bush, following Rashi, translates, Is not Aaron thy brother, the Levite? and understands the question to intimate that, in consequence of Moses reluctance to obey the divine commission, the priesthood, which otherwise would have been conferred on him, will be given to Aaron. As nothing is said about the priesthood, it is hard to see how the phrase the Levite, at this time, before any priesthood bad been established, could have been understood in this way. Knobel, translating in the same way, understands it as pointing forward to the duty of the priests to give public instruction. But the same objection lies against this, as against the previous explanation; Moses was a Levite as much as Aaron was. Lange, translating also the same way, understands the meaning to be: Aaron is a more genuine Levite than Moses. But in this case the definite article is quite out of place; and even without it such a thought would be very obscurely expressed. Keil, following Baumgarten, finds the significance of the question in the etymological meaning of , viz., to join, associate ones-self to. This certainly has the advantage of suggesting a reason for the use of the phrase the Levite, which on other theories seems to be superfluous. But the definite article is out of place on this hypothesis also. Besides, as the special point here is Aarons ability to talk, the notion of association is not just the one needed to be suggested by the term, to say nothing of the subtlety of the mode of conveying either conception.Tr.].

[Exo 4:18. is not to be understood as a request, as the A. V. seems to imply, especially by the phrase, I pray thee, which corresponds to . We have exactly the same form in Exo 3:3, where Moses said I will turn aside, or, Let me turn aside.Tr.].

[Exo 4:23. and are most naturally to be rendered as preterites. It is very doubtful whether can be taken as protasis to the following clause. The translation of the A. V. and of others, seems to have been prompted by the idea that this is the opening message to Pharaoh. But the threat to kill the first-born was in reality the last one made. The declaration, Exo 4:21, covers all the first part of the efforts of Moses to secure the deliverance of the people. In spite of all the plagues and signs, Pharaoh will not let the people go. Therefore (Exo 4:22) Moses is to make his final appearance, and threaten the death of the first-born because of Pharaohs past refusal to obey.Tr.].

[Exo 4:28. may take a double accusative, as e.g. in 2Sa 11:22; 1Ki 14:6. As Kalisch observes, the usual translation, who had sent him, is languid in the extreme.Tr.].

[Exo 4:31. Knobel, following the reading , of the LXX., would change into . There seems to be strong reason for the change. The people, according to the present text, seem to believe, before hearing. Moreover, we have, as Knobel points out, another almost unmistakable instance of the same error. The narrative in 2Ki 20:13 is identical with that in Isa 39:2, with the exception that the first passage has where the second has . The LXX. has here, too in both cases. In reference to 2Ki 20:13, Keil says that seems to be an error of transcription for , though he says of Knobels conjecture concerning the verse before us, that it is without ground. If we adopt the amended reading, we translate, and they rejoiced because Jehovah had visited, etc.Tr.].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Chap. Exo 4:1. Four hundred years of natural development had succeeded the era of patriarchal revelations, and the people were no longer accustomed to prophetic voices. The more ground therefore did Moses seem to have for his anxiety lest the people would not believe him. Jehovah, moreover, does not blame him for his doubts, but gives him three marks of authentication. The symbolical nature of these miraculous signs is noticed also by Keil.

Exo 4:2-5. The casting down of the shepherds rod may signify the giving up of his previous pastoral occupation. As a seemingly impotent shepherds rod he becomes a serpent, he excites all the hostile craft and power of the Egyptians. Pharaoh especially appears in the whole process also as a serpent-like liar. But as to the serpent, it is enough to understand by it the dark, hostile power of the Egyptians which now at first frightened him. It is true, the enemy of the womans seed, the old serpent, constitutes the background of the Egyptian hostility; but here the symbol of the Egyptian snake kind is sufficient. When Moses, however, seizes the serpent by the tail, by its weaponless natural part, as is illustrated in the Egyptian plagues, it becomes a rod again, and now a divine rod of the shepherd of the people.

Exo 4:6-8. The white leprosy is here meant. Comp. Lev 13:3. As to the significance of this sign, it is quite arbitrary, with Theodoret and others, down to Kurtz, to understand the hand to represent the people of Israel; and still more arbitrary, with Kurtz, to make the bosom represent first Egypt, and then Canaan, as the hiding-place of Israel. If the shepherds rod symbolizes Moses vocation, it is the hand which bears the rod, and governs. In his bosom the attendant carries the babe, etc. (Keil). The leprosy has been explained, now as signifying the miserable condition of the Jews, now as the contagious influence upon them of Egyptian impurity. Through the sympathy of his bosom with the leprosy of his people Moses hand itself becomes in his bosom leprous; but through the same sympathy his hand becomes clean again. The actions of his sympathy cause him to appear as an accomplice in the guilt of Israel; and he really is not free from guilt; but the same actions have a sort of propitiatory power, which also inures to the benefit of the people. Jehohovah raises the voice of this second, sacerdotal sign above the voice of the first.

Exo 4:9. As the first miraculous sign symbolized a predominantly prophetic action, the second a sacerdotal, so the third a kingly kind. It gives him the power to turn into blood the water of the Nile, which is for Egypt a source of life, a sort of deity; i.e., out of the very life-force to evoke the doom of death. Let us not forget that a whole succession of Egyptian plagues proceeds from the first one, the corruption of the Nile water.

As these miraculous signs are throughout symbolical, so, in their first application, they are probably conditioned by a state of ecstasy. Yet the first miracle is also literally performed before Pharaoh, and in its natural basis is allied with the Egyptian serpent charming. Vid. Hengst. [Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 100 sqq.].

The third sign, however, is expanded in the result into the transformation of the water of the Nile into blood. This, too, has its connection with Egypt; therefore there must doubtless have been some mysterious fact involved in the second sign, inasmuch moreover as the text reports that Moses did the signs before the people, and thus authenticated his mission before them (Exo 4:30-31), although indeed in Exo 4:17 the signs seem to be reduced to signs done with the staff.

Exo 4:10-12. There were wanted no more signs, but, as Moses modesty led him to feel, more oratorical ability. How could Moses have exercised his slow tongue in his long isolation in the desert, associating with few men, and those who could but little understand him? This difficulty Jehovah also regards. He will impart to him the divine eloquence, which from that time through the history of the whole kingdom of God remains different from that of the natural man. He ordained for him his peculiar organs, and the organic defect of a heavy tongue, as all organs and organic defects in general, and will know how to make of his tongue his divine organ, as the history of the kingdom of God has so richly proved.

Exo 4:13-14. It cannot be said (with Keil) that now the secret depth of his heart becomes open, in the sense that he will not undertake the mission. If this were the case, Jehovah would no longer deal with him. But the last sigh of his ill-humor, of his despondency, finds vent in these words, which are indeed sinful enough to excite the anger of Jehovah, and so also to make him feel as if death were about to overtake him. We are reminded here of similar utterances of Isaiah (Exodus 6), of Jeremiah, (Exodus 1), of the detention of Calvin in Geneva by the adjurations of Farel, and similar scenes. The anger of Jehovah is not of a sort which leads him to break with Moses; and in the further expression of it it appears that the hesitation on account of the slow tongue is still not yet overcome.Is not Aaron thy brother?The Levite means probably a genuine Levite, a model of a Levite, more than Moses.1 With the cautious genius a more lively talent was to be associated. Also he seems, in reference to the affairs of the Israelites, to be more prompt than Moses; for he is already on the way to look for Moses (doubtless in consequence of divine instigation). Vid. Exo 4:27, where the sense is pluperfect. Moses, then, has two things to encourage him: he is to have a spokesman, and the spokesman is already coming in the form of his own brother. For a similar mysterious connection of spirits, vid. Acts 10.

Exo 4:15-16. The fixing of the relation between Moses and God, and between Moses and Aaron, must have entirely quieted the doubter. The relation between Moses and Aaron is to be analogous to that between God and his prophet. This assignment does not favor the notion of a literal verbal inspiration, but all the more decidedly that of a real one. It accords with the spirit of Judaistic caution, when the Targums tone down into for a master or teacher.2

Exo 4:17. And this staff.Out of the rustic shepherds staff was to be made a divine shepherds staff, the symbolic organ of the divine signs. This ordinance, too, must have elevated his soul. Here there was to be no occasion to say, gentle staff, would I had neer exchanged thee for the sword!

Exo 4:18. This request for a leave of absence is truthful, but does not express the whole truth. This Jethro could not have borne. His brethren are the Israelites, and his investigating whether they are yet alive has a higher significance.

Exo 4:19. All the men are dead.This disclosure is introduced with eminent fitness. Among the motives which made Moses willing to undertake the mission, this assurance should not be one. He had first to form his resolution at the risk of finding them still living. Moreover, he has on account of these men at least expressed no hesitation.

Exo 4:20-26. What is here related belongs to Moses journey from Jethros residence to the Mount Horeb, i.e., from the south-eastern part of the desert.

Exo 4:20. His sons.Only the one, Gershom, has been named, and that because his name served to express Moses feeling of expatriation in Midian. The other, Eliezer, is named afterwards (Exo 18:3-4). But his name is introduced here by the Vulgate (according to some MSS., by the LXX.), and by Luther. Moses went on foot by the side of those riding on asses, but bears the staff of God in his hand. Poor as his outward appearance is, yet he has in his hand the staff before which Pharaohs pride and all his power must bow [Keil].

Exo 4:21. On the way from Midian to Horeb, towards Egypt, Jehovah repeats and expands the first commission, as it was in accordance with Moses disposition to become absorbed in meditations on his vocation. All the wonders.. The , or the terrible signs which are committed to him constitute a whole; and accordingly he is to unfold the whole series in order (on miracles vid. the Comm. on Matt., p. 153). And why? Because this is made necessary in order to meet the successive displays of obduracy with which Pharaoh is to resist these terrific signs. But, that he may not on this account become discouraged in his work, he is told thus early that God himself will harden the heart of Pharaoh with his judgments, for the purpose of bringing about the final glorious issue (Vid. the Comm. on Rom., Exodus 9). The three terms expressive of hardening, , to make firm (Exo 4:21), , to make hard (Exo 7:3), and , to make heavy or blunt (Exo 10:1), denote a gradual progress. The first term occurs, it is true, as the designation of the fundamental notion, when the hardening has an entirely new beginning, and a new scope (Exo 14:4; Exo 14:17). It is rightly brought forward as a significant circumstance by Hengstenberg, Keil, and others, that the hardening of Pharaohs heart is ten times ascribed to God, and ten times to himself. Pharaohs self-determination has the priority throughout. The hardening influence of God presupposes the self-obduration of the sinner. But God hardens him who thus hardens himself, by furthering the process of self-obduration through the same influences which would awaken a pious spirit. This he does as an act not merely of permission, but of judicial sovereignty. Vid. Keil, p. 453 sqq.

Exo 4:23. Israel is my son, my first-born. Comp. Deu 14:1-2; Hos 11:1. The doctrine of the Son of God here first appears in its typical germinal form. Keil makes the choosing of Israel begin with Abraham, and excludes from it the fact of creation,3 as well as the spiritual generation, so that there remains only an election of unconditional adoption and of subsequent education, or ethical creation. But the application of these abstractions to the Christology of the N. T. would perhaps be difficult. Vid. Com. on Romans 8. The expression, first-born son, suggests the future adoption of other nations. I will slay thy son.This threat looks forward to the close of the Egyptian plagues.

Exo 4:24. Seemingly sudden turn of affairs. Yet it is occasioned by a previous moral inconsistency, which now for the first time is brought close to the prophets conscience. He who is on his way to liberate the people of the circumcision, has in Midian even neglected to circumcise his second son Eliezer. The wrath of God comes upon him in an attack of mortal weakness, in a distressing deathly feeling (Psalms 90). Probably Zipporah had opposed the circumcision of Eliezer; hence she now interposes to save her husband. She circumcises the child with a stone-knife (more sacred than a metallic knife, on account of tradition); but she is still unable to conceal her ill-humor, and lays the foreskin at his feet with the words: A bridegroom of blood art thou to me.4

Exo 4:26. Zipporah seems to be surly about the whole train of circumcisions. Probably Moses is thereby led to send her with the children back to her father to remain during the remainder of his undertaking. For not until his return to the peninsula of Sinai does his father-in-law bring his family to him.

Exo 4:27. On the one hand, Moses is freed from a hindrance, which is only obscurely hinted at, by the return of Zipporah; on the other hand, a great comfort awaits him in the coming of his brother Aaron to meet him.

Exo 4:29. They went.This is the journey from Horeb to Egypt.

Exo 4:30-31. The elders of the people, after hearing Aarons message, and seeing his signs, believingly accept the fact of Jehovahs commission, and bow adoringly before His messengers. Thereby the people organized themselves. They accepted the vocation of being the people of Jehovah.

Footnotes:

[1][On this point comp. under Textual and Grammatical.Tr.].

[2][The A. V. also softens the expression by using the phrase instead of, whereas the Hebrew would more exactly be rendered, He shall be a mouth to thee, and thou shalt be a God to him. We have here language similar to, and illustrated by, that in Exo 7:1, See, I have made thee a God to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet. As the prophet ( one who speaks for another) is the spokesman (mouth) of God, so Aaron is to receive and communicate messages from Moses.Tr.].

[3][Langes language is: Keil lsst die Erwhlung Israels mit Abraham anfangen, und schliesst von ihr aus auf die Thatsache der Schpfung, etc. In translating we have ignored the preposition auf, which, if recognized, would require the sentence to read: Keil infers from it [the choosing of Israel] the fact of creation, etc. But this would certainly be a misrepresentation of Keil, even if it would convey any clear sense in itself. We conclude that auf is inserted by a typographical error.Tr.].

[4][The text and the commentary both leave it somewhat doubtful whether these words are addressed to Moses or the child; but there can be little doubt that Moses is the one. The meaning is that Moses had been well-nigh lost to her by disease. She regains him by circumcising the son; but the bloody effect excites her displeasure, and by the saying, A bridegroom of blood art thou to me, she means that she has, as it were, regained him as a husband by the blood of her child.Tr.].

[5][Chap.4. Exo 4:14. We have ventured to follow the Vulg., Luther, Cranmer, the Geneva Version, De Wette, Glaire, and Kalisch, in this rendering; for, though grammatically the reading of the A. V. in more natural, yet it is difficult to see the force of the question, Is not Aaron thy brother? Frst, Arnheim, and Murphy, try to avoid the difficulty by rendering, Is there not Aaron, thy brother, the Levite? etc. This, however, is putting in what is not in the original. Bush, following Rashi, translates, Is not Aaron thy brother, the Levite? and understands the question to intimate that, in consequence of Moses reluctance to obey the divine commission, the priesthood, which otherwise would have been conferred on him, will be given to Aaron. As nothing is said about the priesthood, it is hard to see how the phrase the Levite, at this time, before any priesthood bad been established, could have been understood in this way. Knobel, translating in the same way, understands it as pointing forward to the duty of the priests to give public instruction. But the same objection lies against this, as against the previous explanation; Moses was a Levite as much as Aaron was. Lange, translating also the same way, understands the meaning to be: Aaron is a more genuine Levite than Moses. But in this case the definite article is quite out of place; and even without it such a thought would be very obscurely expressed. Keil, following Baumgarten, finds the significance of the question in the etymological meaning of , viz., to join, associate ones-self to. This certainly has the advantage of suggesting a reason for the use of the phrase the Levite, which on other theories seems to be superfluous. But the definite article is out of place on this hypothesis also. Besides, as the special point here is Aarons ability to talk, the notion of association is not just the one needed to be suggested by the term, to say nothing of the subtlety of the mode of conveying either conception.Tr.].

[6][Exo 4:18. is not to be understood as a request, as the A. V. seems to imply, especially by the phrase, I pray thee, which corresponds to . We have exactly the same form in Exo 3:3, where Moses said I will turn aside, or, Let me turn aside.Tr.].

[7][Exo 4:23. and are most naturally to be rendered as preterites. It is very doubtful whether can be taken as protasis to the following clause. The translation of the A. V. and of others, seems to have been prompted by the idea that this is the opening message to Pharaoh. But the threat to kill the first-born was in reality the last one made. The declaration, Exo 4:21, covers all the first part of the efforts of Moses to secure the deliverance of the people. In spite of all the plagues and signs, Pharaoh will not let the people go. Therefore (Exo 4:22) Moses is to make his final appearance, and threaten the death of the first-born because of Pharaohs past refusal to obey.Tr.].

[8][Exo 4:28. may take a double accusative, as e.g. in 2Sa 11:22; 1Ki 14:6. As Kalisch observes, the usual translation, who had sent him, is languid in the extreme.Tr.].

[9][Exo 4:31. Knobel, following the reading , of the LXX., would change into . There seems to be strong reason for the change. The people, according to the present text, seem to believe, before hearing. Moreover, we have, as Knobel points out, another almost unmistakable instance of the same error. The narrative in 2Ki 20:13 is identical with that in Isa 39:2, with the exception that the first passage has where the second has . The LXX. has here, too in both cases. In reference to 2Ki 20:13, Keil says that seems to be an error of transcription for , though he says of Knobels conjecture concerning the verse before us, that it is without ground. If we adopt the amended reading, we translate, and they rejoiced because Jehovah had visited, etc.Tr.].

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

In this Chapter we have the objections which Moses advanced against executing the commission the Lord appointed him to, of undertaking the deliverance of Israel from Egypt; in the people’s unbelief to receive him under this character, and his own incompetency of standing before, Pharaoh. Here are contained also the Lord’s gracious answers for silencing those objections: in imparting to Moses a power of working miracles, assuring, him of his presence to accompany him, and appointing an help-mate in his brother Aaron to act with him. This Chapter relates also the departure of Moses from his father-in-law, to return into Egypt: he meets Aaron in the way: they confer together on the important subject: on their arrival at Egypt, they communicate to the elders of Israel the Lord’s gracious designs towards them: the people in token of holy joy at the report, bow their heads before the Lord and worship.

Exo 4:1

What evils are engendered from unbelief! God hath said Exo 3:18 that the people should hearken to Moses; but Moses notwithstanding is tempted by unbelief to say that they will not. Reader! note similar instances of unbelief. Gen 3:6 ; 2Sa 24:10 ; Num 14:22 , Compared with Heb 3:19 . And when you have done with looking at these examples, look into your own heart and you will find many more.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

The Rod That Is in Thine Hand

Exo 4:2 ; Exo 4:17

I. God often does His greatest works by the humblest means. The great forces of nature are not in the earthquake which tumbles cities into ruins. This power passes in a moment; the soft silent light, the warm summer rain, the stars whose voice is not heard these are the majestic mighty forces which fill the earth with riches, and control the worlds which constitute the wide universe of God.

II. So in Providence. The founders of Christianity were fishermen. Christ Himself the Carpenter, the Nazarene, despised and crucified, was the wisdom and the power of God. For did He not say ‘I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto Me’? So in the text, ‘What is that in thine hand? A rod’ the emblem, the tool of his daily work. With this Moses was to do mighty deeds. Rabbinical tradition has it that Moses was an excellent shepherd. He followed a lamb across the wilderness, plucked it with his rod from a precipice amid the rocks, carried it in his bosom, whereupon God said ‘Let us make this Moses the shepherd of Israel’. He a stranger, a fugitive, a humble shepherd, becomes the lawgiver, the leader, the deliverer of his people.

III. The lesson of the text is plain. God still meets every man and asks the old question ‘What is that in thine hand?’ Is it the tool of an ordinary trade? With that God will be served. The artisan where he is, in his humble workshop, by using the ‘rod which is in his hand,’ the merchant in his business, are in the place where they are now; all are called upon to do service. Few have rank, or wealth, or power, or eloquence. Let those illustrious few use their ten talents, but let us, the obscure millions, use the simple duties of life ‘the rod that is in our hand’. Not extraordinary works, but ordinary works well done, were demanded by the Master.

J. Cameron Lees, British Weekly Pulpit, vol. II. p. 509.

Reference. IV. 5. Christian World Pulpit, vol. lxvi. 1904, p. 171.

Exo 4:9

‘Look into the fourth chapter of Exodus,’ Erskine of Linlathen wrote to Lady Elgin, ‘and read there the account of the two first signs of which there is any record: Moses’ hand becoming leprous and then being cleansed, and his rod becoming a serpent and then returning into the form of a rod. In these two signs we have the history and the prophecy of the world: 1st, human flesh to be sown in corruption, and to be raised in incorruption that is, the fall and the glorious restoration of man’s nature; 2nd, the serpent gaining a terrible dominion over man, and then being overcome by man’s hand. The prophetic part of these facts is that which I believe constitutes the true character of a sign, and that part is the cleansing of the flesh and the paralysing of the serpent…. The fulfilment in reality of these two signs will be the realizing of the twenty-fourth and eighth psalms.’

Exo 4:10

I blush today, and greatly fear to expose my unskilfulness, because, not being eloquent, I cannot express myself with clearness and brevity, nor even as the spirit moves, and the mind and endowed understanding point out.

St. Patrick.

Exo 4:14

When a great sentiment, as religion or liberty, makes itself deeply felt in any age or country, then great orators appear. As the Andes and Alleghanies indicate the line of the fissure in the crust of the earth along which they were lifted, so the great ideas that suddenly expand at some moment the mind of mankind indicate themselves by orators.

Emerson on Eloquence.

Exo 4:14

There is something in life which is not love, but which plays as great a part almost sympathy, quick response I scarcely know what name to give it; at any moment, in the hour of need perhaps, a door opens, and some one comes into the room. It may be a commonplace man in a shabby coat, a placid lady in a smart bonnet; does nothing tell us that this is one of the friends to be, whose hands are to help us over the stony places, whose kindly voices will sound to us hereafter voices out of the infinite?

Miss Thackeray in Old Kensington.

References. IV. 15. R. E. Hutton, The Grown of Christ, vol. ii. p. 497. IV. 22, 23. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxiv. No. 1440. IV. 23. J. Parker, British Weekly Pulpit, vol. ii. p. 542.

Exo 4:25

The silken texture of the marriage tie bears a daily strain of wrong and insult to which no other human relation can be subjected without lesion. Two people, by no means reckless of each other’s rights and feelings but even tender of them for the most part, may tear at one another’s heart-strings in this sacred bond with perfect impunity; though, if they were any other two, they would not speak or look at each other after the outrages they exchange.

W. D. Howells.

He had need to be more than a man, that hath a Zipporah in his bosom, and would have true zeal in his heart.

Bishop Hall

You would think, when the child was born, there would be an end to trouble; and yet it is only the beginning of fresh anxieties…. Falling in love and winning love are often difficult tasks to overbearing and rebellious spirits; but to keep in love is also a business of some importance, to which both man and wife must bring kindness and goodwill.

R. L. Stevenson, El Dorado.

References. IV. 26. J. M. Neale, Sermons for some Feast Days in the Christian Year, p. 18.

Exo 4:31

Logic makes but a sorry rhetoric with the multitude; first shoot round comers, and you may not despair of converting by a syllogism…. So well has this been understood practically in all ages of the world, that no religion yet has been a religion of physics or of philosophy. It has ever been synonymous with revelation. It never has been a deduction from what we know; it has ever been an assertion of what we are to believe. It has never lived in a conclusion; it has ever been a message, a history, or a vision. No legislator or priest ever dreamed of educating our moral nature by science or by argument. Moses was instructed not to reason from the creation but to work miracles.

Newman, Grammar of Assent, pp. 94-96.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Moses Excuses Himself

Exo 3:13-14

The wisdom of Moses is seen in the nature of the inquiry which he proposed. He was resolved not to go a warfare at his own charges. Every man should know upon whose business he is going in life. Who is sending me? is an inquiry which a man should put to himself before venturing upon any course that is doubtful, hazardous, or experimental. Moses wished to be able to identify the personal authority of his mission. It was not enough to have a message, he must also know the name of the Author. There are some doctrines which are independent of personality; there are others which depend upon personality for their authority and beneficence. Amongst the latter are all religious doctrines and appeals. The Giver is greater than the gift. The Speaker is greater than the speech. To know the Speaker is to have deep insight into the meaning of the words spoken. The answer returned to Moses was the sublimest reply ever made to reverent inquiry. God announces himself as Personal, Independent, Self-existent. There is no word to qualify or limit his personality it is, so to speak, pure being it is infinite life it is the fountain out of which all other lives start on their little course. Mark the comprehensiveness of the name. It relates not only to being, but to character, to self-completeness; it is the ONE life which can live without dependence and without society. The element of sublimity must be found in religion; the measure of the sublimity is the measure of the condescension. A man proceeding to his work under the influence of such a revelation as was granted to Moses must be superior to hardship and triumphant in the presence of difficulty. A man’s inspiration should always be in excess of the duty which is imposed upon him. The inspired man descends upon his work and conducts his service with an overplus of power; but he whose inspiration falls below his duty toils fretfully and unsuccessfully, and eventually becomes the prey of the spirit of the hireling. It is here that the Christian worker actually triumphs in his labour, and rejoices even in persecution and tribulation: God the Holy Ghost is in him, and so the whole tone of his life is infinitely superior to the influences which seek to distract his attention and baffle his energy. In the absence of God the Holy Ghost, Christian service becomes a toil, and ends in failure and mortification: but under the influence of the life-giving and light-giving Spirit of God, sorrow itself is turned into joy.

Notwithstanding this revelation, Moses was unable to overcome his infirmity; he still doubted, as well indeed he might, in the presence of such a vocation as had probably never been addressed to man. Let us listen to his excuses, and we shall see how unbecoming it would be on our part to sneer at a man upon whom the Divine burden pressed so heavily. Moses himself was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision, nor did he doubt the authority with which he had been charged; but a difficulty presented itself from the other side. Moses thus puts the case:

“And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee” ( Exo 4:1 ).

Human distrust is a difficulty which every preacher, teacher, and holy labourer has to encounter. All great movements are carried by consent of parties. God himself cannot re-establish moral order without the concurrence of the powers that have rebelled against his rule. Moses had difficulty to fear on the side of Israel, as well as on the side of Pharaoh. His message was to be addressed, in the first instance, to the children of Israel. The tidings of their proposed deliverance might be too much for their faith. They had been the sufferers of so many terrors and disappointments, they had been so long buried in the darkness of despair, that the gospel of emancipation might appear to them to be but a mocking dream. What if they should hear the message of Moses, and treat it in a spirit of unbelief? The suggestion of Moses was not at all unreasonable. He will work none the less effectively for putting these preliminary inquiries, provided he does not carry them to the point of excess. So long as they come out of a humble and reverent spirit, God will answer them with gracious patience; but should they become degraded into mere excuses, or discover a cowardly spirit, the patience of God will become a flame of judgment. After all, the spiritual labourer has less to do with the unbelief of his hearers than with the instruction and authority of God. We have to ascertain what God the Lord would have us say, and then to speak it simply, distinctly, and lovingly, whether men will hear or whether they will forbear. The preacher must prepare himself for having doubts cast upon his authority; and he must take care that his answer to such doubts is as complete as the authority itself. God alone can give the true answer to human doubt. We are not to encounter scepticism with merely ingenious replies and clever arguments, but in the power and grace of the living God.

Moses, having being furnished with signs by which to convince the children of Israel that he was the messenger of God sent to redeem them from the oppression of Egypt, might be supposed to be fully qualified for his mission. Surely, there is now an end of inquiry and debate upon his part. Not so, however; Moses fell back upon his own unworthiness.

“And Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man’s mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord? Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say” ( Exo 4:10-12 ).

Moses has now descended from the high level of the argument, and narrowed the case into one of mere human personality. He has forgotten the promise, “Certainly I will be with thee.” The moment we get away from Divine promise and forget great principles, we narrow all controversy and degrade all service. Self-consciousness is the ruin of all vocations. Let a man look into himself, and measure his work by himself, and the movement of his life will be downward and exhaustive. Let him look away from himself to the Inspirer of his life, and the Divine reward of his labours, and he will not so much as see the difficulties which may stand ever so thickly in his way. Think of Moses turning his great mission into a question which involved his own eloquence! All such reasoning admits of being turned round upon the speaker as a charge of foolish if not of profane vanity. See how the argument stands: “I am not eloquent, and therefore this mission cannot succeed in my hands,” is equivalent to saying, “I am an eloquent man, and, therefore, this undertaking must be crowned with signal success.” The work had nothing whatever to do with the eloquence or ineloquence of Moses. It was not to be measured or determined by his personal gifts: the moment, therefore, that he turned to his individual talents, he lost sight of the great end which he was called instrumentally to accomplish. How sublime is the rebuke of God! Cannot the Maker of man’s mouth touch with eloquence the lips which he has fashioned? What is human eloquence but the expression of Divine music? Pedantic rhetoricians may fashion rules of their own for the refinement of human speech, but he who waits diligently upon God, and whose purpose is to know the will of God that he may speak it to men, will be entrusted with an eloquence rhythmic as the sea, and startling as the thunder. Rhetoric is the gift of God. Eloquence is not a merely human attainment. The secret of convincing and persuasive speech is put into the hearts of those who forget themselves in their homage to God and truth. Moreover, God condescended so far to the weakness of Moses as to find for him a coadjutor in his mission to the children of Israel and to the king of Egypt. Aaron could speak well. Moses was a thinker; Aaron was a speaker. Aaron was to be to Moses instead of a mouth, and Moses was to be to Aaron instead of God. Thus one man has to be the complement of another. No one man has all gifts and graces. The ablest and best of us cannot do without our brother. There is to be a division of labour in the great work of conquering the world for God. The thinker works; so does the speaker, so does the writer. We are a chain; not merely isolated links; we belong to one another, and only by fraternal and zealous cooperation can we secure the great results possible to faith and labour. Some men are fruitful of suggestion. They have wondrous powers of indication: but there their special power ends. Other men have great gifts of expression; they can put thoughts into the best words; they have the power of music; they can charm, fascinate, and persuade. Such men are not to undervalue one another; they are to co-operate as fellow-labourers in the kingdom of God.

Here we leave the region of the miraculous and come into relations with which we are painfully familiar. Man excusing himself from duty is a familiar picture. It is not a picture indeed; it is a personal experience. How inventive we are in finding excuses for not doing the will of God! How falsely modest we can become! depreciating ourselves, and putting ourselves before God in a light in which we could never consent to be put before society by the criticism of others. Is not this a revelation of the human heart to itself? We only want to walk in paths that are made beautiful with flowers, and to wander by streams that lull us by their own tranquillity. Nerve, and pluck, and force we seem to have lost. In place of the inventiveness of love we have the inventiveness of reluctance or distaste. It should be our supreme delight to find reasons for co-operating with God, and to fortify ourselves by such interpretations of circumstances as will plainly show us that we are in the right battle, fighting on the right side, and wielding the right weapon. The possibility of self-deception is one of the most solemn of all subjects. I cannot question the sincerity of Moses in enumerating and massing all the difficulties of his side of the case. He meant every word that he said. It is not enough to be sincere; we must have intelligence and conscience enlightened and enlarged. Mistakes are made about this matter of sincerity; the thing forgotten being that sincerity is nothing in itself, everything depending upon the motive by which it is actuated and the object towards which it is directed. The Church is to-day afflicted with the spirit of self-excusing: it cannot give, because of the depression of the times; it cannot go upon its mighty errands, because of its dainty delicateness; it cannot engage in active beneficence, because its charity should begin at home; it cannot enter into ardent controversy, because it prefers the comfort of inaction. Churches should not tell lies to themselves. The first great thing to be done is for a man to be faithful to his own heart, to look himself boldly in the face, and speak the clear truth emphatically to his own consciousness.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

Moses Before Pharaoh

Exo 4:21

There are of course many difficulties, by us insoluble, in connection with the sovereignty of God. This must be distinctly recognised, and no man must expect to have all mysteries dwarfed to the measure of his own understanding. The greatest of all mysteries is God himself, yet we are not therefore to doubt his existence, or to deny his loving providence. The mere fact of any question being mysterious does not in any way affect its truthfulness. There are mysteries which are against reason, and there are mysteries which are above reason. It is in full view of these principles that we discuss this difficult subject.

Looking at human history generally in relation to Divine sovereignty, three things are clear: First: That all nations are not equally honoured. This difference amongst the nations, let it not be considered trite to say, is not made by the Bible, or by any system of theology; it is simply a matter of fact, whatever may be our views respecting either God or the Bible. One nation is highly civilised, another is in the lowest condition of barbarism; yet all the nations are under the government of the same gracious God. Every day the sun sees some nations worshipping the true Spirit, and others bowing down before idols; yet all people, let it be repeated, are under the government of the same Creator. This is pointed out as a mere matter of fact, and as presenting the gravest possible difficulties, whatever may be the theological or philosophical theory by which we regulate our observation of human affairs.

Second: That all individuals are not equally endowed. We are all men, and yet no two men are alike. In every history you find the great man and the little man. The poetic dreamer and the prosaic clown; the daring adventurer and the self-regarding coward; the child of genius and the creature of darkness; yet all claim to be men, and all may theoretically acknowledge the same God and Redeemer. These are facts with which we have to deal whether we open the Bible or not, whether we acknowledge a system of Divine Providence or not, whether we are atheists or saints.

Third: That Divine judgment is regulated by Divine allotment. Here we open the Bible, in which we find that to whom much is given, from him shall much be required, and that it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for nations which have enjoyed a fuller revelation of Divine purpose and requirements. The heathen are a law unto themselves. Five talents are expected to produce more than two. The Divine plan of judgment therefore is not arbitrary, but moral. If we lose hold of this principle, we shall see confusion where we might see the order of righteousness. First of all, and last of all, it must be our settled and unalterable conviction that God must do right, or he is no longer God. Everything must perish which opposes this law. We are not, however, to look at incomplete cases, and regard them as final criteria by which to test the wisdom and righteousness of the Almighty. In many cases we shall have to repress our impatience, and calmly to wait until fuller light is granted.

So much for general principles; let us now look at the particular instance before us, and in doing so we must at the outset clearly mark the limits of the ground which it occupies. The children of Israel were under the sovereign control of the king of Egypt. In some sense he had property in them. They were his bondsmen, delivered into his hands, and subject to his government. His relation to them was distinctly that of a political ruler; not based upon theological antipathies. He did not maltreat the Israelites because of their religious opinions. Pharaoh was a king, and it was strictly in his royal capacity that he dealt with the question of Israelitish bondage. Suddenly, to himself, Moses and Aaron proposed in the name of the Lord God of Israel that Pharaoh should let the people go to hold a religious feast in the wilderness. Pharaoh was of course startled. As a pagan he did not acknowledge the name or government of the God of Israel. A political petition was addressed to him, and he dealt with it on political grounds. It was not a spiritual question which was proposed to Pharaoh. It was not a question which involved his own personal salvation, or his own relation to the great future; it was purely, simply, and exclusively a political question. It was, therefore, within this sphere that the Divine action was taken, and that action is fitly described as a hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. We do not attempt to modify the words, or in any sense to gloss them over; we accept them in their plain and obvious signification. The question now arises, what the meaning of that hardening was, and what useful results accrued from a process which appears to us to be so mysterious. We have already laid down the fundamental and eternal principle that God must do right, and that, consequently, however mysterious may be the processes through which he moves, his purpose is infinitely just. The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart, as involving the development of a merely political scheme, may amount in effect to no more than this, “I will delay the process; this request shall not be granted at once; and I prolong the process in order that I may bring out lessons for Pharaoh himself, for the children of Israel, and for mankind at large: were Pharaoh to let the children of Israel escape from him at once, the result would be mischievous to themselves; therefore, in mercy, not in anger, I will harden Pharaoh’s heart.” This is eminently reasonable, and has been found to be so in our own experience. When men have snapped at their blessings, and instantly secured all their purposes, they have undervalued the advantages which have been thus realised. There is a hardening that is really merciful. “God cursed the ground for man’s sake.” Instead of the word cursed, insert the word hardened, and you will see what is meant by a hardening process taking place at the suggestion of a merciful disposition. God hardened the ground for man’s sake; God hardened Pharaoh’s heart for the sake of all parties involved: by delaying the result, he urged and exemplified lessons which could not have been successfully inculcated in any other way.

So far, the question is not a moral one, except in the degree in which all questions have more or less of a moral bearing. It has been supposed by some that in the case of this exercise of Divine sovereignty, the sum total of Pharaoh’s wickedness was increased. This, however, was by no means the case. There is the greatest possible difference between wickedness being focalised, and wickedness being increased. Let us then assume that it was altogether a moral question, and show that the sovereignty of God did in no wise add to the iniquity of Pharaoh. It is possible for a man to become virtuous in one direction, that he may concentrate his wickedness in another. Here, for example, is a man who has been notoriously indolent, intemperate, or otherwise evil-disposed; by some means that man becomes energetic, self-controlled, and apparently attentive to some discipline which has a good moral effect upon him; looked at outwardly, it is evident that a beneficial transformation has taken place upon him. What, however, is the reality of the case? The man has actually put himself under discipline, that he may prepare for a prize-fight! He has made his very virtues contribute to the purposes of his vice. Instead of his wickedness being distributed over large spaces of his life, it is gathered up and expressed in one definite act. Even, therefore, were we to suppose that the hardening of the heart of Pharaoh involved moral consequences, it would by no means follow that the sum total of his wickedness was thereby increased. It would only show that wickedness in its intensity; it would focalise the scattered energies of the bad man, and show their fierceness in one supreme act.

As the history proceeds, we see that the political situation enlarges itself into a spiritual problem. Pharaoh sees the wonders of the Lord, and feels the terribleness of his scourge Under the influence of fear, he makes a promise unto Moses and Aaron that if the Lord will withdraw his hand, he will let Israel go. Thus the question becomes moral as well as political. Pharaoh makes a promise, and therefore implicates his honour and his conscience. It is to be observed, too, that the promise was made in connection with a special request for religious supplication on the part of Moses. Thus Pharaoh said, “Entreat the Lord, that he may take away the frogs from me, and from my people; and I will let the people go, that they may do sacrifice unto the Lord.” Thus the ground is entirely changed. By some means or other the moral nature of Pharaoh has been touched, and the consequence is a pledge on his part to permit Israel to do sacrifice. But was Pharaoh faithful to his word? Was he not in reality trying to turn the moral into the political, and so to get out of an honourable pledge by an unworthy strategy? It would appear that this was really the case, for “when Pharaoh saw that there was respite, he hardened his heart, and hearkened not unto them;” “And Pharaoh sent, and called for Moses and Aaron, and said unto them, I have sinned this time: the Lord is righteous, and I and my people are wicked. Entreat the Lord (for it is enough) that there be no more mighty thunderings and hail; and I will let you go, and ye shall stay no longer.” Did Pharaoh fulfil his promise? No! “When Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the thunders were ceased, he sinned yet more, and hardened his heart, he and his servants.” Thus it is clear that Pharaoh hardened his own heart, and whatever may be the mystery of Divine sovereignty in this matter, Pharaoh himself is distinctly charged with the responsibility of his own obstinacy. There was undoubtedly a Divine action in the process; but that Divine action did not involve the spiritual destiny of Pharaoh Applying these lessons to ourselves as sinners, I have now to teach that Jesus Christ tasted death for every man, and that whosoever will may avail himself of the blessings secured by the mediation of the Saviour. If any man excuses himself on the ground that God has hardened his heart, that man is trusting to an excuse in the most solemn affairs of his being which he would not for a moment tolerate in the region of his family life or commercial relations. We must not be sensible in ordinary affairs and insane in higher concerns. Were a servant to tell her mistress that she is fated to be unclean in her habits, that mistress would instantly and justly treat her with angry contempt. Were a clerk to tell a banker that he was fated to come late every morning, and go away early every afternoon, the statement would be received as a proof of selfishness or insanity. Were a travelling companion to tell you to make no attempt to be in time for the steamboat or the train, because if you were fated to catch it there would be no fear of your losing it, you would treat his suggestion as it deserved to be treated. Yet men who can act in a common-sense manner in all such little affairs, sometimes profess that they will not make any attempt in a religious direction, because they believe in the doctrine of predestination or fatalism. Wicked and slothful servants, they shall be condemned out of their own mouth! “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” “Whosoever will, let him come.” “Him that cometh to me, I will in no wise cast out.” “How often would I have gathered you, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!” In presence of such statements as these, it must be the very consummation of blasphemy to turn round upon God and say, “I wanted to be saved, but thou didst harden my heart and condemn me to hell.”

Note

The taskmasters were Egyptian bailiffs or general managers; the officers were Hebrews, and had each the charge of a certain number, of whom, and their work, they had to keep account (hence called Shoterim or Writers ). When recently in Egypt, I saw this very system still in operation on a road which the Viceroy was constructing. A Turkish officer superintended so much of the road; under him was an Arab, generally a sheikh of an adjoining village, whose duty it was to mark out to his people what they had to do, and to keep strict account how it was done; and under him was a miscellaneous company of men, girls, and boys, working in a state of semi-nudity, under the discipline of the stick. The stick served a double purpose: laid along the road, it marked out how much was to be done within a given time; laid on the backs of the unfortunate fellaheen , it painfully reminded them, that, whether able for it or not, their full tale of task-work must be completed.

A European who has not been in the country can hardly imagine the extent to which the stick is used in Egypt. The natives seem almost to glory in it as an ancient and venerable institution. “The Moslems have a proverb that ‘the stick came down from heaven a blessing from Allah.’…. To ‘eat stick,’ as a sound thrashing is technically termed, is submitted to with a degree of sang froid quite astonishing to European nations, and is no at all degrading in the eyes of the Egyptian.” W. L. Alexander, D.D.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

V

MOSES AT THE BURNING BUSH

Exo 2:23-5:14

Our chapter commences with Exo 2:23 : “And it came to pass in the course of those many days, that the king of Egypt died [the king from whom Moses fled was Rameses II]; and the children of Israel sighed by reason of the bondage, and they cried, and their cry came up unto God by reason of the bondage. And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. And God saw the children of Israel, and God took knowledge of them.”

I quote these concluding verses to show that one of the obstacles in the way of Moses’ coming back to Egypt was removed, the death of the king that sought his life. Secondly, to show that God, seeing all the oppression perpetrated upon this race, hears their groanings; that he remembered every promise of every covenant that he ever made. How, when he saw their piteous condition and heard their prayers and groanings, he recalled the covenants that he had made with Abraham. The time was now passing rapidly and the very day was approaching that he promised to deliver them. So we have now to consider how God answers those prayers which they sent up to him. In the first place, he has to prepare an earthly deliverer, and that is Moses. Then he has to prepare the people to receive Moses. He next has to prepare Pharaoh to receive Moses. These are the three great preparations.

Our chapter has to do, first, with Moses. In certain seasons of the year the best pasturage in the Sinaitic Peninsula is to be found on the slopes of the highest mountains. So we find Moses bringing the flocks of Jethro to Mount Horeb. Horeb is a range like the Blue Ridge, and Sinai is a peak of that range. Sometimes the word Horeb is used, and sometimes Sinai. You will notice that this mountain is already called “the Mount of God.” It had that reputation before the days of Moses. Right on the supposed spot where this burning bush appeared was afterward a convent, which is still standing, and in that convent is to be found the great Sinaitic manuscript. See how things connect with that mountain. Now in that mountain God begins to prepare Moses by appealing to his sight and to his hearing and to his heart. The sight was an acacia bush on fire and yet not consumed. This was a symbol of the children of Israel in Egypt; though in the fiery furnace of affliction, they were not destroyed. This truth is set forth in Daniel, where the three Hebrew children were thrown into the fiery furnace, and God was with them and preserved them from destruction. The burning bush is one of the most comforting symbols in all the Bible to the people of God. The thought is expressed in a great hymn: “How firm a foundation, Ye saints of the Lord!” God is always with his people, in sickness, in flood, in fire. He is with them to care for them. This sight attracted Moses, and he drew near to see why that bush did not burn up with such a large fire. Then a voice came from the bush, telling him to take his sandals off; that he was standing on holy ground, and then to draw nigh, telling him who it was talking to him; that he was the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob; that he had seen the awful oppression of the Jewish people in Egypt; that he had heard all their prayers; and now he was come down to deliver them out of all those troubles, and to give them a good country, a land flowing with milk and honey. And thus winds up Exo 3:10 : “Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt.” He was to select a human deliverer: “I will send thee.”

It is an interesting study, whenever God calls people to do great things, to note the varied attitudes of these people to these calls. God appeared to Isaiah in a vision and Isaiah instantly responded: “Here am I; send me.” God appeared to Jeremiah, and he said, “O Lord God, I cannot go, I am but a little child.” He appears to Moses. Just look at the objection made by Moses: “Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring the children of Israel out of Egypt?” Moses takes a look at himself and sees nothing in himself competent to do that great work. We all do that way if we look at ourselves. What was God’s answer to that objection? “Certainly I will be with thee.” If God is with us then any objection based on our littleness of whatever kind is a poor objection. God then gives him a token which is this: that when he had brought those people out, he was to bring them right to that mountain where he was talking, where the bush was burning, right there, to worship him. God practically said, “There is a token that you can bring them out; if I am with you and you get back to this mountain with that great crowd of people assembled at the foot of it, then you will look back and say, Why did I say to God, Who am I that I should do this great deed?”

Moses raises this objection: “When I come to the children of Israel, and say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?” He is looking ahead at difficulties. “When I go back to those millions of slaves and say, The God of your fathers sent me to deliver you, they will say, What is his name? Who is the God of our fathers?” The Lord gives him an answer and takes that objection out of the way: “Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you. This is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.” Jehovah means a Covenant-God; & manifesting God; and he tells Moses what to say to them. You gather them together and tell them that Jehovah says, “I come to bring you out of Egypt and to give you a land flowing with milk and honey.” And he says, “They will hearken. Then you take the elders of Israel with you and go to the king of Egypt and make this demand of him: that you may go three days’ journey in the wilderness to make a sacrifice to Jehovah.” Now God forewarned him, saying, “I know that Pharaoh will not give his consent,” and gives him at least one explanation, viz.: “I will harden the heart of Pharaoh that he shall not let them go.” In the next chapter we take up that question of hardening. There are twenty places in this connection where the hardening is mentioned; in ten Pharaoh hardens his own heart; and in the other ten God hardens it. To this you will find some references in Romans II. It is a subject we need to study: how we harden our hearts; and how God hardens them. The reason that God tells Moses that he is going to harden Pharaoh’s heart is to prevent him from being disappointed. He says: “Don’t be discouraged, I have a hand in it myself, and am letting you know about it beforehand. I will bring you forth, and you will say to him, that if he does not let Israel, my firstborn, go, I will take his firstborn.”

Now comes the next objection of Moses: “You tell me to go, but I am nothing. You say you will go with me. When I object that the people will ask for your name you will give me the name and I will tell them what you tell me. But they will not believe, nor hearken unto my voice. They will say Jehovah hath not appeared unto me.” Now Jehovah gives three signs in answer to that objection. (1) “What is this in your hand?” “A rod, a shepherd’s staff.” “Throw it on the ground.” It became a serpent and Moses fled from it. “Take it by the tail,” and it again became a rod in his hand. That is a sign. Egypt is called Rahab; that is, a serpent. Now God is going to attack Egypt on the line of the serpent. Reference to this can be found in Job, and in several of the prophecies. The first sign, then, is the converting, at pleasure, of the rod into a serpent, and of the serpent back into a rod. (2) The second sign is for the benefit of the people: “Put your hand into your bosom.” It becomes white with leprosy. “Put it back into your bosom,” and it becomes whole again. That means that God will heal his people. (3) Now, the third sign was: “Take a little of the water of the Nile; throw it up and it will turn to blood.” That was a stroke at the gods of Egypt. These were the three signs to confirm the fact that Moses was accredited of God to the children of Israel.

Now, we will see the next objection: “Oh, Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant; for I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue” (Exo 4:10 ). That meant neither that he was a stammerer, like Demosthenes, nor that he had no ready command of language, like Oliver Cromwell and John Knox, originally, and like Senator Coke when he first started out to be a public speaker. The reply to that objection is: “Who hath made man’s mouth? or who maketh a man dumb, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? is it not I, Jehovah? Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt speak.” In other words, he says, “Your being eloquent or not being eloquent has nothing to do with it. You have to deliver a message. If you had to write a composition that would charm Pharaoh so that he would let the children of Israel go, it would be a different matter.” Moses replied: “Oh, Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send.” It is hard to understand what Moses meant by that. It has generally been supposed to mean: “Send by anybody you please, so you let me alone.” But I question whether that is the meaning.’ It seems rather to have this meaning: “I have told you my incompetency, and now I will do it if you want me to, but if this business turns out badly, remember that I knew better than you did about it and I protested.” That made the Lord angry. So far as we know he never was angry at Moses but twice; the next time he gets angry it will cost Moses the right to enter the Promised Land in the flesh. But God meets that objection by telling him about Aaron, the older brother. “He is eloquent and he cometh forth to meet thee.” God had sent Aaron to meet him right there at that very mountain. “I will give you an eloquent man, but after a while your eloquent man may introduce a golden calf to your people.”

There was another objection in the mind of Moses, though he did not state it: “I am employed by my father-in-law, having charge of his sheep, and I must close up this business before I can go into Egypt.” So he goes to Jethro and states the case: that he wants to go to Egypt and look into the condition of his people to see if they are alive. But he does not tell what God said. Jethro consents. Every year of my life I strike somebody who is not ready to do the Lord’s will on account of some business he can’t turn loose.

There is still another objection revealed in Exo 4:19 : “All the men are dead that sought thy life.” Moses has waited until God spoke to him again and reveals another objection in his mind. There is still another trouble; he starts with his wife and two children, and he has not complied with the covenant of God. He has not circumcised that last child, and God meets him by the way to slay him, and Moses knows why. His wife knows why. God puts the case before the woman this way: “You have objected to the circumcision of this child, and now if you persist in your objection you will lose your husband. He cannot go to deliver this people and be a covenant-breaker himself.” So she circumcised the child. Moses then sent back Zipporah and the two children to Jethro. When he gets back to Sinai with the children of Israel, Jethro brings them back to him.

You see how in preparing that man to do a work the difficulties, had to be gotten out of the way. When he was in Egypt he knew he was to deliver the people, and in his own way rushed out to bring it about, and met with a repulse which threw him farther off than before. He comes now prepared, and Aaron meets him at Mount Sinai. These two brothers, separated for forty years, start out across that desert to Egypt to deliver millions of people from bondage. I will read what a poet, Dr. W. G. Wilkinson, in his Epic of Moses, says about that. The Epic of Moses, Part 1, page 43, reads thus:

Those two wayfarers through the wilderness

Unconsciously upon their shoulders bore

The trembling weight of boundless destinies;

Not only did the future of their race .

Hang on them, but the future of the world.

From east to west, from north to south, nowhere

Within the round earth’s wide horizon lived

Any least hope for rescue of mankind

Entangled sliding down a fatal slope

That ended in the open-jawed abyss

Of utter ultimate despair and death

Nowhere, save with those Hebrew brethren twain. That on those two Jewish brethren rested the destinies of the world is a fine thought admirably expressed. Don’t forget this book and its value in interpretation.

Moses and Aaron get to the place and they assemble the elders of the people. That doubtless took some little time, as they were scattered. Word was sent rapidly to the heads of the different tribes. In Exo 6:14 , the sons of Simeon and then the sons of Levi are taken up. Then from the heads of the Levites it traces down to Moses and Aaron, showing that Moses and Aaron were not the heads of the tribe of Levi. They were the descendants of one of the heads of the tribe of Levi. So they have no tribal authority over those people, but have a God-given authority. When the heads of all the tribes were assembled, they fairly state the message and naturally, questionings come up: “How do we know that God sent you? What is his name? What signs do you use?” In the presence of all the elders they give all the signs; the elders accept them and report to the people; and the people believe them.

They are now prepared to go to Pharaoh. God has prepared Moses to accept the work; he has prepared the people to accept Moses in the leadership of the work; now he must send Moses and Aaron and the elders of the people to prepare Pharoah to hear them. We will take up their interview. “And afterward Moses and Aaron came, and said unto Pharaoh, Thus saith Jehovah, the God of Israel, Let my people go, that they may hold a feast unto me in the wilderness. And Pharaoh said, Who is Jehovah that I should hearken unto his voice to let Israel go? I know not Jehovah, and moreover I will not let Israel go. And they said, The God of the Hebrews hath met with us: let us go, we pray thee, three days’ journey into the wilderness, and sacrifice unto Jehovah our God, lest he fall upon us with pestilence, or with the sword. And the king of Egypt said unto them, Wherefore do ye, Moses and Aaron, loose the people from their works? get you unto your burdens. And Pharaoh said, Behold, the people of the land are now many, and ye make them rest from their burdens.”

And he commanded their taskmasters that the people should do an equal amount of work and gather the straws for themselves, and if they did not succeed their Hebrew officers were to be beaten publicly. They were beaten and they appealed unto Pharaoh, and he referred them to Moses and Aaron. They charged Moses and Aaron with having brought this extra oppression upon them. You see these people are not ready. These head men, just as soon as a little trouble came, were ready to repudiate Moses and Aaron whom they have just accepted as leaders. Moses takes the case to God in prayer; and Jehovah replies to him by telling him that he knew that Pharaoh would not let them go. Now they must go before Pharaoh and demonstrate to him that Jehovah is God, and in the next chapter we will take up this whole transaction between Moses and Pharaoh, or as Paul says, “Jannes and Jambres, the priests that withstood Moses.”

Our next chapter will consider that double hardening. Let each reader look out the twenty passages that refer to the hardening ten in which God hardens Pharoah’s heart, and ten where Pharaoh hardens his own heart. Then we will take up the ten plagues one after another.

QUESTIONS

1. Give circumstances and object of Jehovah’s meeting Moses.

2. What of the symbolism of the burning bush?

3. State in order the several objections of Moses to becoming the deliverer of Israel, and Jehovah’s reply thereto.

4. Meaning of the name: “I am that I am”?

5. Cite from the New Testament the words of Jesus claiming this name.

6. What token did Jehovah give Moses to assure him of success in delivering Israel?

7. What three attesting signs and their significance?

8. What two preachers have great sermons on “What is in thy hand?” and “Take it by the tail,” and what book has the substance of both sermons? Answer: The book is Pentecost’s Deliverance from Egypt, or Bible Readings on the First Twelve Chapters of Exodus.

9. Give and illustrate the heart of the meaning of “What is in thy hand?”

10. What part has eloquence in the salvation of men and distinguish between true and rhetorical eloquence of what says Paul of the latter? Answer: 1Co 2:1-5 .

11. What troubles later came through the “eloquent” brother of Moses?

12. Why did God meet Moses on his way to deliver Israel to kill him, and explain, applying the whole incident in Exo 4:24-26 .

13. Where is the scripture showing that after this incident Moses sent back his wife and children to the father-in-law?

14. What three scriptures seem to indicate the marriage of Moses with Zipporah was unfortunate? Answer: (1) Exo 4:24-26 , shows that his wife had no sympathy for his faith; (2) Num 12:1-2 , shows that she had no sympathy for his sister and brother, and was the occasion of their revolt; (3) Jdg 18:30 , according to the Hebrew text, has Moses, not Manasseh, as the grandfather of the Levite Jonathan, who served as priest for the Danite idolaters.

15.Num 12:1-2 , refers to Zipporah; how do you explain her being called an “Ethiopian”? Answer: The Hebrew word rendered “Ethiopian” in the Common Version is “Cushite,” and the descendants of Cush were not confined to Ethiopia in Africa. Many of them were on the Euphrates and in Arabia. Doubtless Zipporah’s mother was an Arabian Cushite certainly not a Negress.

16. In Exo 3:18 , we have God’s first message to Pharaoh, given at the bush, but give the form of the message repeated to Moses as when later he set out from Jethro’s home

17. How does a prophet, long afterward, and the New Testament still later, use this message to prove that Israel, as a nation, was a type of our Lord? Answer: See Hos 11:1 . and Mat 2:15 .

18. What infidel criticisms have been offered on the morality of “spoiling the Egyptians” as commanded by Jehovah in Exo 3:21-22 repeated in Exo 11:1-3 , and obeyed in Exo 12:33-36 ? Answer: The criticisms were based on the rendering “borrow” in the Common Version of Exo 3:21 , but ASV rendering clears the difficulty. The jewels are given freely because God had given his people favor with the Egyptians that dreadful night when the firstborn were slain. In this way Israel received compensation for years of uncompensated slave labor.

19. What much later story has Josephus about this matter? Answer: He tells that when Alexander the Great was master of Jerusalem the Egyptians presented a claim against the Jews for these borrowed jewels, and the Jews agreed to pay the claim if the Egyptians would settle their claim in offset for the years of enforced and unpaid slave labor.

20. Give an account of the meeting of Moses and Aaron, and why should Aaron come to seek Moses?

21. What great epic of Moses commended to the class and what excellency pointed out as compared with other poems on Biblical themes?

22. Cite the passage in this epic on Moses and Aaron setting forth from Sinai to deliver Israel.

23. Tell of the meeting of Moses and Aaron with the elders of Israel and the result.

24. Tell of the meeting of Moses and Aaron with Pharaoh and the result.

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Exo 4:1 And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The LORD hath not appeared unto thee.

Ver. 1. They will not believe me. ] They had formerly refused him, “and thrust him away.” Exo 2:14 Act 7:27 And so they might again, if he had not somewhat to show for his extraordinary calling. a In the year 434, the Jews of Crete were shamefully seduced by a pseudo-Moses, who promised to divide the sea for them to bring them back to their own country. b Those that will not receive the love of the truth, are justly given up to the efficacy of error. 2Th 2:10-11

a Quaeque repulsa gravis. – Hor.

b Funccius, in Comm. Chron.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

behold. Figure of speech Asterismos. App-6.

they will not = suppose they will not.

The LORD (Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 4

And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me ( Exo 4:1 ),

Now he’s not convinced. They’re gonna say, “Who sent you?” “All right”, God said, “Tell them Jehovah God, the God of your fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob”. But Moses objects, “They’ll not believe me”

nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, Oh Jehovah didn’t appear to you. The Lord said, What have you got in your hand? And he said, A rod. [A walking stick.] God said, Throw it on the ground. And he threw it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it. The Lord said to Moses, Grab it by the tail. And he put forth his hand, and caught it, and it became a rod again in his hand: [God said] That they may believe that the Lord God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee. And the Lord said furthermore unto him, Put now your hand into your bosom. So he put his hand into his bosom: and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow. And he said, Put your hand in your bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again; and he plucked it out of his bosom, and, behold, it was [white again, it had] turned again [rather] like the other flesh. So it shall come to pass, the Lord said, If they will not believe thee, nor hearken to the voice of the first sign, they will believe the voice of the latter sign. And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe these two signs, neither hearken unto your voice, that you shall take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which you take of the river shall become blood upon the dry land ( Exo 4:1-9 ).

So you want signs? All right, you think they won’t believe you? When you get there and they say, “Ah the Lord hasn’t”-you just throw your stick down. When it becomes a snake and starts chasing them, they’ll believe. If they don’t believe that, just put your hand in your side and pull it out, and it’ll be leprous, and they’ll all start to flee from you and all. Then just put it back in, and pull it out again, and it’ll be whole”.

So armed with these signs.

Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I’m not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since you have spoken unto your servant: I’m slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. [“Lord, I can’t speak, you know.”] The Lord said unto him ( Exo 4:10-11 ),

And this to me is very interesting, very interesting, God said,

Who made man’s mouth? or who makes the [Wait a minute, “who makes the”,] dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord ( Exo 4:11 )?

You mean God made blind people? God made deaf and dumb people? That’s what God is saying. He’s taking the responsibility for it. Now to me that’s quite a responsibility to take, because immediately it puts my heart at odds with God, because I don’t understand why. Why would God allow a child to be born blind or create a blind child as He declares here? Why would God create a deaf and dumb child? You see, immediately my whole concept of God is challenged. Yet God has declared that in certain cases, He has created certain physical infirmities. Notice He doesn’t even offer us an explanation why. He just declares the fact.

This becomes one of the greatest challenges of my faith. But if I can overcome this hurdle, I will have a greater faith in God; in fact, an unshakable faith in God that nothing will be able to shake. If I only believe what I can understand, that doesn’t take faith that only takes intellect. Believing what I can’t understand is that step of faith, which honors God. “Without faith it’s impossible to please God.”( Heb 11:6 )

So if I can believe that God has created a blind child, and yet believe that God is love, and that God is just, because the scripture declares to me that God is just and God is love, I am now believing something that I can’t understand. How can a loving God create a blind child? I don’t know, but I know He did. He said He did and I believe His word, and I believe in Him. Though I may not understand it or be able to put it together in my mind, yet I believe that God is a God of love. I believe that He is a fair God. Even though He has done things, which I cannot understand, it doesn’t shake my faith in His love. Because I can’t reason it out or understand it, actually I am now coming to a deeper relationship of faith in God.

God has used that blind child not to destroy my faith, but to deepen my faith in God and to take my belief in God from just sheer intellect, to a heart faith, which is so important. Now I do believe that if God has created a blind child, or a deaf child, or a child that has cystic fibrosis, or multiple sclerosis, or any of these things that there is a purpose of God in allowing that child to be that way.

Though I may not be able to understand the purpose, my intellect fails at this point, and I stumble intellectually then when I am stumbling. And intellectually is when I’ve got to grab for something else, and I grab for faith. “God I believe. God I trust You, though I don’t understand.” My faith is really deeper now then it ever was. I do believe that if God does create a child that way that He had a definite reason and purpose for creating the child that way, whether I ever know the purpose or not. I can guess, I can surmise, I can offer conjecture of why it may be. Maybe to let us know this isn’t a perfect world. Maybe to just sort of jar us from complacency.

I can remember back in the depression years about the most favorite chorus they used to sing in church went, “I’ll be so glad when day is done, I’ll be so glad when Jesus comes. There’ll be no sorrow in God’s tomorrow, I’ll be so glad when Jesus comes.” Back in the depression years they were really looking for the Lord. During the war years, popular chorus, after the war the post-war prosperity and all, the chorus died. Didn’t sing it anymore. “Lord, just wait around. I’m gonna get this new home, and this new car, and I need a swimming pool. Just wait Lord, I’ll be so glad if you’ll just wait a little while now. You know things are going pretty good. You know got a secure job and all of this.”

Now that again there are very real threats on the horizon, the energy crisis, life isn’t gonna be so comfortable anymore. You’re not gonna be able to just jump in your car and run whenever you want to. You’re not gonna be able to heat your swimming pool as high as you used to have it. You’re not gonna be able to have the air conditioning on as high as it once was. Life’s not gonna be so comfortable. “Oh, I’ll be so glad when day is done…” Of course, I predict a revival for it.

“Oh but God aren’t you a God of love?” Yes. But the church was getting soft; the church was becoming complacent. The church was settling in her leads, and God had to pour us into another vessel. To make us realize that this earth, this world is not our home. That we’re just passing through. That it isn’t God’s intent that we get all deeply involved in the possession of material things, but that our hearts be on the things of the Spirit and His eternal kingdom.

So He starts showing us, how quickly and how easily the material things can be taken away. All of a sudden I’m looking for deeper roots. I’m beginning to long for His eternal kingdom. As I look at sickness, as I look at physical impairments, in my heart I say, “Even so come quickly Lord Jesus. Hasten the day when the blind will see the glory of God, when the lame will leap for joy. When the dumb will be singing praises unto Thee. Oh Lord hasten Thy day.”

God declared, “I have made them”.

I don’t understand it. I can’t explain it truly, but it does not at all alter my faith in God, nor my belief in that He is a God of love, and that He is fair. Though I cannot in my mind explain to you how, though I cannot give you a rationale, because it hasn’t really been reduced to my intellect, and thank God it hasn’t. I must just believe His eternal word and trust in Him, thus my faith in God is greater.

Now therefore [God said] go, and I will be with your mouth, and teach you what you shall say. And he said, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom you will send ( Exo 4:12-13 ).

Literally he said, “O Lord, please send someone else.” After all of this. “Lord they’re gonna say, ‘Who sent you?'” What should I tell them?”

Lord says, “Well, just say Jehovah God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” “But Lord they’re not gonna believe me.”

“Well what have you got in your hand?”

“A rod.”

“Well use that.”

“But Lord, I can’t speak. I’m not eloquent.”

“Alright I’ll be with your mouth, I’ll give you the words to say.”

“Lord would you mind sending someone else?” Man talk about a guy that’s mellowed out.

And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not Aaron the Levite your brother? I know that he can speak well. Also, behold, he’s coming forth to meet you: and when he sees you, he’ll be glad in his heart. And thou shall speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do ( Exo 4:14-15 ).

“All right, that’s the way you want it? Well, let Aaron go with you. We’ll let him be your mouthpiece.” But that wasn’t God’s, you might say, direct will. It was permissive. You’re gonna argue. And you see, Aaron became a real stumbling block along the line. It wasn’t the best. God will lift you to the highest level that you will allow Him to lift you. Then He’ll do the best for you on that level. But so many times with Moses, we are limiting God to the level by which we will allow Him to lift us. He could’ve been lifted to a higher level. God would’ve been with him and helped him. He didn’t need Aaron. He didn’t need Aaron to get in the way later on.

“But you want it? All right, you can have it.” But you’re a step below God’s best for your life. It’s possible for you to live one, two, three rungs down the ladder when God would have you over the top and totally victorious. Your unwillingness to allow God to lift you to the highest level, limiting the work of God, restricting the work of God within your life. God is still so loving and gracious, He’ll lift you to the highest level that you will allow Him, and then He’ll do the very best for you on that level. But unfortunately we seem to always be restricting that work of God in us. Settling for compromises, alternates.

Lord says, “All right. You want Aaron? Fine, he can speak, and let him. You put the words in his mouth. But I’ll still be with your mouth and I’ll be with his mouth, too. And I will teach you what ye shall do.”

And he will be your spokesman unto the people: and he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shall be to him instead of God ( Exo 4:16 ).

In other words, “You’ll be the go-between. I’ll speak to you and give you My words, and you give My words to Aaron.” So now you’ve got a step-between. Now who was it that made the golden calf out there in the wilderness? Aaron brought a snare upon Israel. Moses is insisting that God come down to his level rather than he to arise to God’s level.

And you shall take this rod in your hand, and with it you will do signs. And Moses returned to Jethro his father in law, and said unto him, Let me go, I pray thee, and return unto my brethern which are in Egypt, and see if they’re still alive. And Jethro said to Moses, Go in peace. And the Lord said to Moses in Midian, Go, return to Egypt: for all the men are dead which sought your life. And Moses took his wife and his son [Plural, so it doesn’t tell us when the other son was born, we only know of Gershon.] and he set them upon a donkey, and he returned to the land of Egypt: and Moses took the rod of God in his hand. And the Lord said unto Moses, When you go to return into Egypt, see that you do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in your hand: and I will harden his heart, that he will not let the people go ( Exo 4:17-21 ).

Now that word “harden” there in Hebrew is a word that literally means “strengthen”. “I will make strong his heart.” Now as we read of Moses’ dealings with Pharaoh, and we’ll get into this next week, we read, “Pharaoh hardened his heart”. The word there in Hebrew is hardened. “And Pharaoh hardened his heart”. And then we read, “and the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh.” Different Hebrew word. “The Lord made firm the heart of Pharaoh”, or “the Lord strengthened the heart of Pharaoh.”

In other words, Pharaoh set his heart and God strengthened him in that set. God strengthened him in his position. He took his position; God strengthened him in that position. “You want to be stubborn? All right, I’ll strengthen you in your stubbornness so I can really bop you good.” That’s basically what it was. “You want to be stubborn? All right.” Pharaoh set his heart against the Lord, and God strengthened him in his position, made strong the heart of Pharaoh. God is declaring here, “I’m gonna make strong or strengthen his heart. He’ll not let the people go.”

And you shall say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith Jehovah, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if you refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay your son, even your firstborn ( Exo 4:22-23 ).

Now God said, “Tell Pharaoh this, Israel is my son, my firstborn, now let him go and worship me, and if you refuse to do it, God’s gonna wipe out your son, your firstborn.”

And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met Moses, and sought to kill him ( Exo 4:24 ).

Hard to understand. The Lord says, “Go to Egypt”. Moses is going to Egypt and God meets him in the inn and starts to kill him. What happened? I don’t know; maybe he had a seizure. It is interesting his wife knew exactly what was going on. I think that probably Moses and his wife had a dispute over the kids. You see, God had commanded that the Hebrew children should be circumcised on the eighth day. That circumcision was a mark of the covenant relationship of these people with God. They were to be people who were walking after the Spirit, not after the flesh, thus the cutting away of the flesh. It was a symbolic action by which these people were identified as God’s people. The mark of their covenant relationship with God.

Now when Moses went to Midian, married the daughter of Jethro the high priest that was there, Zipporah, when he had his son Gershom, he probably said, “Now we need to circumcise.”

“Oh you’re not gonna mutilate my child.” And probably resisted Moses, and Moses again was, you know, he was so broken by his failure that he just let it go. He didn’t circumcise his son. Rather than getting in a hassle with the old woman, he just said, “Well all right.” You know, a meek guy, and just let it pass. Yet she knew when God met Moses and started to kill him, and just by what method, I don’t know, the scripture doesn’t say, but she immediately knew what was going on.

Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and threw it at Moses’ feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband you are to me ( Exo 4:25 ).

In other words, she was still angry about the thing. She went in; she gave in on it but showed the bitterness that she had concerning the thing.

So the Lord let Moses go: and again she said, A bloody husband you are, because of the circumcision ( Exo 4:26 ).

So here Moses was going to lead God’s covenant people out of the land, and he had not even fulfilled that covenant mark in his own children, his own sons. Because of Moses’ failure, God was just impressing on him that He meant business. Moses’ wife suddenly realized that God meant business but she still sort of blamed Moses for it and seemed to be angry with him.

Now the Lord said to Aaron, Go into the wilderness and meet Moses. And he went, and he met him in the mount of God, and he kissed him. And Moses told Aaron all of the words of the Lord who had sent him, and all of the signs which he had commanded him. And Moses and Aaron went and gathered together all of the elders of the children of Israel: And Aaron spake all the words which the Lord had spoken to Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people. And the people believed: and when they heard that the Lord had visited the children of Israel, and that he had looked upon their affliction, they bowed their heads and worshipped ( Exo 4:27-31 ).

Here’s deliverance and they’re excited. They bowed their heads and worshiped. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

A further difficulty was now declared. The man who first doubted himself and then doubted because of his ignorance of God now doubted because of the people to whom he was to be sent. God had told him that the people would hearken, but now he questioned this. All fear of man is evidence of feeble faith in God. In the presence of such fear what we need is clearer vision of God. The story shows that God understood and answered the fear of His servant by granting him signs.

Then is revealed the strangest of all the difficulties. Moses returned to the first stated and declared his own weakness and incompetence. At the beginning it was natural, and the answer was one of grace. Now it was unwarranted and God was angry with him. The result was that Aaron was given to him as a mouthpiece. This is a strange and yet recurring experience. Faltering faith is answered by the supply of something that might have been done without, and the result is sorrow.

At last, difficulties having been dealt with, Moses commenced to walk in the path of obedience. Here we have the record of something certainly strange in the way in which it is told. Jehovah meets him on the pathway and seeks to kill him. The explanation is to be found in what follows. There can be no doubt that for some reason unrecorded Moses had failed to carry out the divine instructions concerning circumcision. The lesson is self- evident. No great consecration to service can excuse failure in what may appear to be smaller matters of conduct. Obedience completely established, everything moved forward.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

Gods Signs to Confirm Moses Words

Exo 4:1-9

This wonderful chapter tells us how Moses three misgivings were tenderly and sufficiently dealt with by his heavenly Friend. To his first misgiving God made answer by giving him three signs. Here first we meet with that rod which was so often stretched out, over the land of Egypt, over the sea, and during the sojourn in the Wilderness. Moses was but a rod, but what cannot a rod do, if handled by an Almighty hand!

Leprosy was the type of sin, and the cleansed hand suggests Gods marvelous power in cleansing, and so qualifying for service, all who yield themselves to Him. The third sign of the water turned to blood was not less significant, revealing the divine power operating through this feeble human instrument to produce wonderful effects in the world of nature. We must not live on signs, but on the Holy Spirit, though the outward sign reassures and strengthens us.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Exo 4:1

Our duty to our Lord in this world requires that we should do somewhat more than live a life of obedience to Him. Our obedience must be acknowledged obedience. We must never be loth to say, “Whose we are, and Whom we serve.” We may read this lesson writ large in the history of God’s sending Moses to deliver His people. Moses went through a trial on Mount Horeb, the exact opposite of the trial of Christ.

I. Moses was tempted to decline the contest with the world altogether, to shrink from action and from prominence, when God called him. Christ was tempted to take the world by storm, to overwhelm it with conviction.

II. Moses was full of sympathy for the poor, full of a desire to see God’s ancient promises realized; but when the time came, and God said, “Now go,” then, for the first time, it flashed upon Moses that he was unfit to carry out what he had so aspired to be trusted with. His eighty years of life had been given him that in its vast experience he might learn that God was all, man was nothing. He had very nearly learned it in truth; the crust or chrysalis of self was very nearly ready to drop off; it needed just this interview with God to rid him of it entirely. He had seen the miraculous powers with which he had been endowed, but he had not fully understood them, and therefore his will was pausing still.

III. The voice of God within him and without him waxed more imperious. God sternly pointed out that such eloquence as he longed for was but a secondary qualification. “Thy brother, I know that he can speak well;” the legislator need not be the orator. There is not one of us who ever complained to God of insufficient strength without finding his complaint answered either by ministration of grace or disappearance of difficulties.

IV. What interests trembled in the balance while Moses was debating! It is not for ourselves only that we shall be responsible if we debate till the time is gone.

Archbishop Benson, Boy Life: Sundays in Wellington College, p. 212.

References: Exo 4:2.-J. Van Oosterzee, The Year of Salvation, vol. i. p. 233; S. Cox, The Bird’s Nest, p. 179; F. Tucker, Rainbow round the Throne, p. 17.

Exo 4:10

(with Jdg 6:15, Jer 1:6, 1Sa 9:21, Luk 14:18)

I. God proposes great things to men. In proportion as any call in life is great, let the heart pause and consider whether its very greatness is not a proof of its divinity.

II. We are not to look at what we are, but at what God is. When He calls He qualifies for the work.

III. What is right in itself may be perverted and abused. Timidity is right in itself, but it may be pushed into cowardice; then it becomes wrong. Self-distrust is right in itself, but if it degenerates into atheism, then it is the plague and destruction of the soul.

IV. God’s call to faith is the greatest call to His universe. Our duty is to go forward to the unknown and the invisible, and live by faith. “We walk by faith, not by sight.”

Parker, The City Temple, vol. iii., p. 493.

References: Exo 4:11.-H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 2677. Exo 4:17.-J. Keble, Sermons for the Christian Year, Holy Week, p. 463. 4:18-7:7.-W. M. Taylor, Moses the Lawgiver, p. 61. Exo 4:20.-J. Van Oosterzee, The Year of Salvation, vol. ii., p. 388. Exo 4:21.-Parker, vol. ii., p. 44; W. Landels, Christian World Pulpit, vol. iii., p. 148. Exo 4:22, Exo 4:23.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxiv., No. 1440.

Exo 4:27

This text shows us-

I. The brotherhood and affection subsisting between the different members of God’s family. And this is twofold. God’s people stand in a twofold relation to one another, as natural and spiritual men. As being creatures of God’s hand, and common descendants of Adam, they are linked together in brotherhood. But the great brotherhood and bond of union between God’s people is their brotherhood in Christ, their affinity to one another as redeemed by the same Blood, sanctified by the same Spirit, and pursuing their pilgrimage towards the same heavenly city.

II. Notice the breaches of intercourse brought about in this world between those members of God’s family who have seen and known one another in the flesh. (1) Many interruptions of intercourse are brought about by providential arrangements. (2) All direct communication between brethren in the Lord is cut off by death.

III. Consider the need of and consequent yearning after each other’s society and assistance which, while parted, the members of God’s family experience. The need is based upon, and flows from, their spiritual constitution in one body. We are, in the design of God, constituent parts of a whole, and we are continually evincing our consciousness of this truth.

IV. Consider the blissful reunion of the sundered members of God’s family in the realms of glory. There shall be a day when all the yearnings of the Christian’s heart after the society of his brethren shall be satisfied to the full, when his joy snail receive its entire complement in his recognition of and intercommunication with those whom he has known and loved in the Lord.

E. M. Goulburn, Sermons in the Parish Church of Holywell, p. 205.

References: Exo 4:27-31.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 63. 4.-Parker, vol. ii., p. 40.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

CHAPTER 4:1-28 Moses Objections, Jehovahs Answer and the Return to Egypt

1. The first objection (Exo 4:1)

2. The two signs and Jehovahs assurance (Exo 4:2-9)

3. The second objection (Exo 4:10)

4. Jehovahs answer (Exo 4:11-12)

5. Moses request (Exo 4:13)

6. Jehovahs anger and answer (Exo 4:14-17)

7. The command to return to Egypt (Exo 4:18-23)

8. The event by the way in the inn (Exo 4:24-26)

9. The meeting of Moses and Aaron (4:27-28)

The division of chapters at this point is unwarranted. Moses objections reveal his unbelief and self-distrust. Jehovahs patience and condescending grace are blessedly manifested. Moses first expressed his doubt that the people would not believe him and his mission. Though he saw the vision of the burning bush and heard Jehovahs voice, which assured him of His presence and power, yet did he not believe. His former experience with his people, and the fact that generations had passed since Jehovah had appeared to an Israelite must have led him to express this doubt.

The Lord gave him three signs: the rod cast down, which became a serpent; the leprous hand; and the water turned into blood. The first two signs were carried out in Jehovahs presence. Moses cast his rod on the ground and it became a serpent, and he fled from it. In obedience to Jehovahs command, Moses took the serpent by the tail and it became a rod. The rod Moses held was his shepherds rod. It is the emblem of government and power. Moses cast it on the ground and out of his hand the rod became a serpent. The serpent stands for the power of Satan. Egypt (the type of the world) is under the control of Satan. The serpent was worshipped in Egypt . It was used as the emblem of the goddess Ranno and also used as a sign of royalty. The serpent, Satan, had usurped the place of government and power. But Jehovah can deal with the serpent and this is seen by Moses taking the serpent by its tail so that it became a rod. The sign was to inspire and teach confidence. The sign of the leprous hand teaches another lesson. Sin, typified by leprosy, and cleansing from sin are indicated in this sign. Israel was in a leprous condition, but the power of Jehovah could cleanse his people. When Moses came the first time to deliver his people, they treated him as an outcast; but when he put his hand in his bosom the second time to act the reproach was removed.

The third sign teaches how the blessing, the water of the Nile , is to be changed into a curse. It is the sign of judgment to come upon Egypt . Moses, in receiving these signs and the power to enact them, is a type of Christ. He will take the rod, the government, into His blessed hand, and then Satans dominion ends. He will cleanse and restore His people and smite Egypt , the world, with judgment.

Moses second objection was his slow speech and slow tongue. The same unbelief is here in evidence. Had he but believed I will be with thee, and that the I AM would be His tongue and his speech, this objection would never have come from his lips.

How gracious Jehovahs answer: Now, therefore, go, I will be with thy mouth and teach thee what thou shalt say. Every servant of the Lord, who serves under Him, can appropriate this great promise. And still Moses hesitates. What patience from the side of the Lord! He now makes another gracious provision. Aaron is to be his spokesman. This was for Moses humiliation. Then Moses objections were silenced. Grace is fully illustrated in the call of Moses and how the Lord dealt with him.

Jethro sanctions his return to Egypt . The Lord prepared his way as He always does, when He sends forth His servant. He took his wife and sons, who were still young, for he set them on an ass. This shows that his marriage to Zipporah did not take place immediately after his arrival in Midian. Then he took his rod, which is now called the rod of God, and the Lord gave him the solemn message to Pharaoh. Israel is to be nationally Gods firstborn son. Jehovahs demand is, Let my son go, that he may serve Me. Gods firstborn is to be brought out of Egypt , where service for God was impossible. Then follows the message of death and judgment for Egypt .

What comes next is closely connected with the message to Pharaoh. There was a stumbling block in Moses family. Circumcision, which stands for the sentence of death, had not been executed in the case of one of Moses sons. No doubt Zipporah made objections to this rite and kept her husband back from doing what he Knew was imperative. This failure of Moses stood in his way to carry out the divine commission. The hand of the Lord was upon Moses, and he was in danger of being cut off for his sin, for he had been disobedient and yielded to his wife. Then Zipporah is forced to do herself what she hated and the reproach was removed. The words surely a bloody husband art thou to me, were addressed to Moses. She had been forced, as it were, to purchase him again by the shedding of the blood of her beloved son. She received him back as one who had been in the realm of death and was joined to him anew. It must have been there that Moses brought the sacrifice of separation by sending Zipporah and the sons back to Jethro (chapter 18:2). What a meeting it must have been which took place between Aaron and Moses. They met in the Mount of God and kissed each other. Compare with Num 20:27-28.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

borrow The use of little things. Cf. Jdg 3:31; 1Ki 17:12-16; Joh 6:9; 1Co 1:25-31

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

Exo 4:31, Exo 2:14, Exo 3:18, Jer 1:6, Eze 3:14, Act 7:25

Reciprocal: Gen 18:1 – appeared Gen 24:14 – thereby Exo 3:12 – token Exo 4:5 – That they Exo 4:10 – eloquent Exo 4:13 – send Num 16:28 – Hereby Jdg 6:17 – show Jdg 6:36 – If thou wilt

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

SLOW TO OBEY

And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.

Exo 4:1

Our duty to our Lord in this world requires that we should do somewhat more than live a life of obedience to Him. Our obedience must be acknowledged obedience. We must never be loth to say Whose we are, and Whom we serve. We may read this lesson writ large in the history of Gods sending Moses to deliver His people. Moses went through a trial on Mount Horeb, the exact opposite of the trial of Christ.

I. Moses was tempted to decline the contest with the world altogether, to shrink from action and from prominence, when God called him. Christ was tempted to take the world by storm, to overwhelm it with conviction.

II. Moses was full of sympathy for the poor, full of a desire to see Gods ancient promises realised; but when the time came, and God said, Now go, then, for the first time, it flashed upon Moses that he was unfit to carry out what he had so aspired to be trusted with. His eighty years of life had been given him that in its vast experience he might learn that God was all, man was nothing. He had very nearly learned it in truth; the crust or chrysalis of self was very nearly ready to drop off; it needed just this interview with God to rid him of it entirely. He had seen the miraculous powers with which he had been endowed, but he had not fully understood them, and therefore his will was pausing still.

III. The voice of God within him and without him waxed more imperious. God sternly pointed out that such eloquence as he longed for was but a secondary qualification. Thy brother, I know that he can speak well; the legislator need not be the orator. There is not one of us who ever complained to God of insufficient strength without finding his complaint answered either by ministration of grace or disappearance of difficulties.

IV. What interests trembled in the balance while Moses was debating! It is not for ourselves only that we shall be responsible if we debate till the time is gone.

Archbishop Benson.

Illustration

(1) God summons each one of us thus each new day if we could but hear.

A door clanks loose; the gust beats by;

The chairs stand plain about;

Upon the curving mantel high

The carved heads stand out.

The maids go down to brew and bake,

And on the dark stair make

A clatter, sudden, shrill

Lord, here am I,

Clear of the night, and ready for thy will.

Is that our daily attitude of life?

(2) He who would right what is wrong must expect not only the hostility of open foes but the thanklessness of the men and women whose champion he is.

So Oliver Cromwell and John Milton found in England. They thought they saw a noble and puissant nation rousing herself, like a strong man after sleep, and shaking her invincible locksrenewing her mighty youth at the fountain itself of heavenly radiance. But the one was tormented with fears of assassination, and the other lived, in darkness and neglect, to bewail the riot and godlessness of the Restoration.

Let me not be deterred from doing Gods work and mans by the knowledge that probably I shall reap the ingratitude of the very souls I am eager to benefit. Let me confirm myself by the thought that I am treading the road heroes and confessors have trodden before me.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

Slow to Obey

Exo 4:1-17

INTRODUCTORY WORDS

Not for one moment would we take from Moses the honor which is his. He was a great man and a man faithful unto God. However, the Word of God in painting a picture of God’s great men, never fails to set forth their failures. Ingersoll is not the only one who wrote on the mistakes of Moses. God, Himself, did this long before the infidel was born.

1. Let us consider the misgivings of a great man. The first verse of our Scripture opens with the startling statement, “And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.”

God had given Moses a commission. He had told him to go, and He had emphatically said, “I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt.” Over against God’s command, and God’s “I will,” Moses threw his expression, “But, behold.” What right had this man to put any question marks around the positive statements of his Lord? However, we must not be harsh with Moses, lest in condemning him we condemn ourselves. Where is he who has not questioned the Divine and direct statements of the Lord?

Moses said “They will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice.” Would you call this modesty and meekness, or would you call it arrogancy? Perhaps you say we should not think of ourselves more highly than we ought to think. We merely answer that when we place a question mark around God’s Word we are setting our opinions and thoughts against God. We may excuse our unbelief under the plea of modesty or meekness. That does not excuse Moses. This mighty man was filled with misgivings. God answered every one of them patiently and completely. In addition God gave every promise and pledge of the success of Moses’ mission, God’s “I will be with thee” still rings in our ears. Against all of this, however, Moses flung his fateful word, “but.” When God speaks, there is no place for “but.”

2. Let us answer the question. Is a sense of personal weakness an excuse for disobedience? When God tells us to go, shall we go, or shall we plead our inability? Are the obstacles to be considered by us? Are the facts of our own inherent weakness and our natural shortcomings, to be considered?

The real question is, Shall we go, or shall we stay? Shall we trust, or shall we doubt? When God asks us to do anything, or to go anywhere, the responsibility of the success of our mission belongs to Him. Here is the way we voiced it recently in a little poem.

When God tells you what to do,

Start to do it;

He will surely see you through,

So, pursue it:

If to Him you’re faithful, true,

He your foes will all subdue,

Needed strength He will renew;

Why not do it?

I. A PERSONAL QUESTION (Exo 4:2)

Our verse reads this way: “And the Lord said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod.” The Lord was speaking to Moses, and seemed to be taking stock of Moses’ possessions.

1. The rod with which Moses led his sheep. Perhaps it was a crude stick. It certainly was not a matter of any dignity, or any human beauty; and God knew the purpose to which it had been given. When God saw it, He seemed to say, “That will do.”

2. The rod glorified. God took what Moses had, not what he did not have. God always does this. He wants us to bring to Him whatever we have at hand. It is the dedication of what we have that counts. Many of us would like to give God something great, something big, but why not give God what we actually have in our hand. God took Moses’ rod and glorified it by the use to which He placed it. It was the old rod in a new task.

3. A personal application. What do we have in our hand?

What did. Joshua have? A ram’s horn.

What did Gideon have? Pitchers and lamps.

What did Samson have? The jaw-bone of an ass.

What did David have? A sling and five smooth stones.

What did Peter have? “Silver and gold have I none.”

What did Dorcas have? A needle.

In each of these suggested cases God took what the person had. Stop and weigh well the accomplishments of the ram’s horn, the pitcher, the jaw-bone, the smooth stones, the nothing at all, and the needle. How marvelously did God in each instance use what each person had in his hand. God can use what you have in your hand if you will give it unreservedly into His hands.

II. SIGN NUMBER ONE: THE ROD (Exo 4:3-5)

We wish to make some inside excursions into the meaning of this rod. Perhaps you think of just a rod or stick. Perhaps you think of it as a shepherd’s crook, or the stick which Moses used to stretch forth over the sea, or with which he smote the rock, or with which he wrought miracles before Pharaoh. God did, indeed, use it in a remarkable way and it showed conclusively how the accomplishments of the Almighty do not depend upon the great and the noble. The rod shows us how God uses the humble things, the weak things, the unseemly things.

However, this rod became to Moses, and afterward to Pharaoh, a sign. When Moses cast it down, the rod became a serpent. When Moses took it again, it became a rod in his hand. What meaneth this?

1. The rod turned into a serpent demonstrates Satan as the one who would withstand Moses. The Bible tells us in Exo 4:3 that Moses fled before the serpent. What a sight! A simple rod in his hand, cast to the ground, became a serpent from which he fled in terror. We know very well that the serpent was the beast with which Satan clothed himself in the garden. From that day on, the serpent stands for Satan.

In Revelation we read of the angel who laid hold of the dragon, “that old serpent which is the Devil, and Satan.” It was this serpent that Moses was now called upon to face. Doubtless, it was the knowledge, not so much of Moses’ own inability, as of the enemy’s great power which made Moses afraid to appear before Pharaoh.

2. The serpent turned into a rod. As Moses put forth his hand and caught the serpent by the tail, it became once more a rod. This was God’s sign, not only to Israel and to Pharaoh, but to Moses himself, that he, Moses, under the power of God should conquer the devil.

III. SIGN NUMBER TWO: THE HAND (Exo 4:6-8)

Our Scripture shows us how God commanded Moses to put his hand into his bosom, and how his hand became leprous as snow. Once more he was commanded to place his hand in his bosom, and when he plucked it out, it was turned again as his other flesh.

1. Leprosy, the Bible type of sin. We remember through-out the Bible that leprosy stands for the curse of God. It begins as a small whitish pink spot upon the hand, or the brow. It grows slowly, but surely, until the body rots and falls away. It was a most loathsome disease, and it was incurable.

Sin begins in the heart of a child. It is the most vile of all moral power. It leads to death and it cannot be healed by man. It brings to mind how the human race fell under Satan’s sway from its Edenic glory, and of how Adam and Eve were driven from the garden with the sentence of death upon them.

2. The hand turned again to flesh is the type of Christ’s saving power. Jesus came to undo the works of the devil. Let us get the picture clearly in our minds. The rod turned to a serpent, and then restored to the stick stands for Satan himself. The hand covered with leprosy stands for Satan’s work; it shows his power over the human heart in its corruption. The hand turned to flesh shows the power of God in taking out the stony heart, the heart of pollution, and making it once more a heart of flesh. It all stands for redemption, restoration, purity in the new life, Christ Jesus. We see Satan cast down, and we see Christ as the One destined to undo the works of the devil. These two miracles were, to be signs unto the Children of Israel that God had appeared unto Moses. They certainly remained signs through all ages that God appeared unto His saints of old, and that He appears unto us.

IV. SIGN NUMBER THREE: THE WATER TURNED TO BLOOD (Exo 4:9)

“And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.”

Our mind immediately rushes on to Christ’s first miracle in Cana of Galilee. It was there that He turned the water into wine. After the miracle was over this statement is recorded, “This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth His glory; and His disciples believed on Him.” The word “miracle” in this Scripture, in the Greek, is “semeions” and it means “signs.” Thus we have the third sign in Exo 4:1-31, the sign of the water turned to blood. This was to be an added sign if the others mentioned were not sufficient. Let us examine its significance.

1. The sign suggests the shedding of the Blood of Christ. When He died on the. Cross His visage was more marred than any man’s, and His form more than the sons of men, His back, His thorn-crowned brow, His nail-pierced hands and feet were red with blood.

2. The sign suggests the Blood of Christ’s enemies sprinkled upon His garments. Upon the Cross the Blood stood for sacrificial death and substitutionary sacrifice. When Christ comes again, however, He will have the blood of His enemies staining His raiment, as He grinds them out in the wine press of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God against the unbeliever.

We must remember that this sign was not only to be wrought in the presence of Israel, but it was to be wrought before Pharaoh and the Egyptians. God seemed to be saying to Moses, “his shall be unto them for a sign as to how I will deliver my people through fiery judgments and plagues until Pharaoh shall let them go.”

V. MOSES STILL SLOW TO OBEY (Exo 4:10)

With what patience and forbearance had God dealt with His servant. He had answered his fear of being rejected by the people by giving Moses three signs by which he could establish his relationship to God, and his Divine authority and commission. Moses still demurred, and said unto the Lord, “O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since Thou hast spoken unto Thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.”

1. Moses withstanding the marvels of God’s revealings. We need to review a moment what had happened unto Moses. (a) By the backside of the Mount of God he had seen the bush burning, but not consumed. (b) At the same place he had heard the voice of God as He spoke to him face to face. (c) God had revealed unto Moses His Name, “I AM that I AM.” (d) God had wrought before Moses the miracle of turning his rod into the serpent, and the miracle of his hand becoming leprous as snow. In spite of all this Moses still holds back and makes his plea, “I am not eloquent.” Instead of looking at the omnipotency of God, he was looking at his own impotency.

Beloved, have we not had every reason to trust God? We have the miracles of ages before us. We have the consummation of all miracles in the resurrection of our Lord. We have the wonders of the wonderful Word. We have the definite demonstrations of the Holy Spirit and of power. Yet, with all of these upon us and before us, how often do we cry, “O my Lord, I am not eloquent.” How often do we hesitate to undertake for God!

2. God was not dependent upon Moses’ oratory. One does not have to be eloquent to be a successful preacher. Is it the powerful God, or the powerful man that assures victory?

VI. WHAT MOSES’ BACKWARDNESS REVEALED (Exo 4:11-14)

1. God’s reply. When Moses pleaded his slowness of speech, God said, “Who hath made man’s mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord? Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.”

One would have thought that this promise of the Almighty would have sufficed Moses, but Moses still pleaded, “O my Lord, send, I pray Thee, by the hand of him whom Thou wilt send.”

2. Looking to man more than to God. Moses’ eyes were evidently upon himself. When Peter sought to walk upon the waters of Galilee he was successful so long as his eyes were upon Christ. The moment, however, that he looked around and saw the wind and the waves boisterous, he began to sink. We can never accomplish anything for God if we are going to keep our eyes centered upon ourselves; whether it be upon our weakness, or upon our strength. We have no power of our own with which to war or to work. Let us run our race looking unto Christ the Author and Finisher of our faith. Let us remember that God can take a worm to thrash a mountain.

3. Losing God’s best. Why should we allow some one else to fulfill our task? Is it a small matter that we have been called into comradeship with God? Should we not the rather weigh well the privileges of this fellowship? Not only that, but should we not consider the glories to which we are called?

The Lord was leading Moses away from his father-in-law, to be sure. The Lord was calling Moses to undertake a difficult and disappointing task. However, God was leading Moses into the highest riches of eternal honor and glory. All of this Moses was about to thrust from him, pleading only his lack of eloquence.

VII. DID MOSES GAIN OR LOSE BY HIS FOLLY? (Exo 4:14-17)

1. The anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses. When a parent seeks his child’s best, and finds that his child refuses to undertake, what grief does the father-heart express. When God undertakes in behalf of one of His children, with what sorrow does He behold the uncertainty of His child. God was angry with Moses with a holy indignation. He not only wanted Moses to serve Him, but He wanted to serve Moses. Moses withdrew and would have failed God altogether, had God not dealt tenderly with him.

2. What Moses gained. God heard the voice of Moses, and yielded to his request, saying unto him, “Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee; and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart.” Then God gave unto Moses his desire, and gave him his brother as a companion.

Some one immediately says that Christ sent the seventy out two by two; that He sent the twelve out two by two; and they therefore ask, was it not right that Moses and Aaron should go to Pharaoh by two? I think it was all right, but Moses still would have gone “two by two”-it would have been Moses and God, but now it must be Moses and Aaron. We do not mean that God was not with the two, but we do mean that the eyes of Moses were diverted from God, just to the extent that they were centered upon Aaron.

3. What did Moses lose? He lost much of the power and the fruitage of his labor inasmuch as they were shared with his brother. Besides all this, we remember how the man Aaron, who went with him, was the man who, in after years, made the golden calf and led the people away from their God.

Beloved, it is pleasant to have a strong man or woman at your side-some comrade who can go forth with you to the battle, and yet, let us be very careful that this in no wise turns our faith and trust away from God.

AN ILLUSTRATION

THE GIDDY THINK THE EARTH MOVES

Let us cast away our fears.

“The earth is never the more unsettled because to giddy brains it seemeth to run round.” Even so the salvation of the saints is sure, though to their trembling hearts it may seem to be in terrible jeopardy. A passenger on crossing the Channel is none the less in safety because he himself feels ready to give up the ghost with the nausea brought on by the rolling of the vessel. Our feelings are poor judges of facts. Some who felt sure of Heaven are now in hell, and others who had almost lost hope are now glorified in Heaven. My brain may whirl and make me think all things are running round, and yet I know those very things to be steadfast as the hills, and therefore I do not believe my feelings, but trust the facts; and so, when my poor silly heart imagines that the eternal promises will fail, I must chide its folly, and fall back upon the everlasting verities.

Yes, Lord, Thou art immovable and immutable! This I know of a surety. Therefore give me grace never to doubt Thee, or to “distrust Thy faithfulness to all those who put their trust in Thee,-Chas. H. Spurgeon.

Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water

Exo 4:1. 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.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Exo 4:1. 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.

Exo 4:2. A rod. Milton has displayed his classic and poetic genius on the rod of Amrams 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 Seml, 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.

Exo 4:21. 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 hardenI will fortifyI will magnifyI will holdI will corroborateI will fixsettle or retain Pharaohs heart. Vide Poli Syn. Crit. in loc. And it is said, Exo 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, Exo 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. Jas 1:13.

Exo 4:24. 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.

REFLECTIONS.

The first object presented in this chapter is the mystic Rod, so often noticed in the sacred volume; the rod so often shook with terror against the Egyptians, and so often extended for the salvation and defence of Israel. It was undoubtedly figurative of the sceptre in the hand of Jesus Christ, by which he breaks his enemies, as a potters vessel is shivered with a rod of iron: but which he extends every moment as a pastoral crook for the safety and protection of his flock. And how happy are the people sheltered under his guardian care.

Did the Lord support and fortify Moses to enter on this arduous embassy, not only by a repetition of the promises, but by a double miracle? Then the weakest of his servants should not be afraid; he will qualify them for their work, support them in affliction, and enable them to accomplish the good pleasure of his will.

But was he still unwilling to go and address the elders of Israel, recollecting that they had rejected him forty years before? Did he still pray that another might be sent in his place? In this he greatly displeased the Lord; for it was making light of the highest honours a mortal had ever borne. Just so, when a minister is once rejected in the early progress of his work, it is very discouraging, and he can scarcely raise his spirits or face them again, when he thinks that his labours of love have been disesteemed. But let him not be too much discouraged. Many whose ministerial course has been crowned with the greatest utility and honour, have been checked with humiliating difficulties in their early efforts. But wise and holy men are most impressed with the importance of the work; and on that account are most apt to start difficulties and indulge scruples.

Moses having his scruples and fears at length removed, endeavoured to discharge his duty to God with the consent of his family. He solicited leave of Jethro to visit his brethren; a reasonable request, after an absence of forty years. Let us learn of him, so to conduct our family affairs, that religion, if possible, may not be reproached by odd and imprudent conduct.

It is remarkable however, that he said nothing of his divine call. In a mission so extraordinary, Jethro had no experience, no knowledge; and therefore could give him no counsel. On the contrary, he might have thrown many impediments in the way. Hence we learn that it is most prudent for men labouring under an impression to devote their life to the ministry, not to advise with the less enlightened believers, but with aged ministers, who have acquired experience and known the glory to which they are called.

This man having once surmounted his fears, mark how expeditiously he proceeds to execute the divine commands, by hurrying away his wife when she had been but a week confined. The Kings business requires haste; and the Lords work is to be done before our own.

Mark farther, that the Lord may for a while excuse in others, what he will not excuse in his peculiar servant. Moses, being on a journey, had omitted the ritual of circumcision on the eighth day, which was the seal of the covenant; the Lord therefore met him in a menacing attitude. It becomes the heads and chiefs of religion to be foremost in setting a good example. Above all, let every man be assured, that unless he receive the Holy Spirit, the grand seal of the new covenant, he shall be cut off from the congregation of the Lord.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Exodus 4

We are still called to linger at the foot of Mount Horeb, at “the backside of the desert;” and, truly, the air of this place is most healthful for the spiritual constitution. Man’s unbelief and God’s boundless grace are here made manifest in a striking way.

“And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.” How hard it is to overcome the unbelief of the human heart! How difficult man ever finds it to trust God! How slow he is to venture forth upon the naked promise of Jehovah. Anything, for nature, but that. The most slender reed that the human eye can see is counted more substantial, by far, as a basis for nature’s confidence, than the unseen “Rock of ages.” Nature will rush, with avidity, to any creature stream or broken cistern, rather than abide by the unseen “Fountain of living waters.

“We might suppose that Moses had seen and heard enough to set his fears entirely aside. The consuming fire in the unconsumed bush, the condescending grace, the precious, endearing, and comprehensive titles, the divine commission, the assurance of the divine presence, – all these things might have quelled every anxious thought, and imparted a settled assurance to the heart. Still, however, Moses raises questions, and still God answers them; and, as we have remarked, each successive question brings out fresh grace. “And the Lord said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod.” The Lord would just take him as he was, and use what he had in his hand. The rod with which he had tended Jethro’s sheep was about to be used to deliver the Israel of God, to chastise the land of Egypt, to make a way through the deep, for the ransomed of the Lord to pass over, and to bring forth water from the flinty rock to refresh Israel’s thirsty hosts in the desert. God takes up the weakest instruments to accomplish His mightiest ends. “A rod,” “a ram’s horn,” “a cake of barley meal,” “an earthern pitcher,” “a shepherds sling,” anything, in short, when used of God, will do the appointed work. Men imagine that splendid ends can only be reached by splendid means; but such is not God’s way. He can use a crawling worm as well as a scorching sun, a gourd as well as a vehement east wind. (See Jonah.)

But Moses had to learn a deep lesson, both as to the rod and the hand that was to use it. and the people had to be convinced. Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it. And the Lord said unto Moses, Put forth thine hand and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand: that they may believe that the Lord God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee.” This is a deeply significant sign. The rod became a serpent, so that Moses fled from it; but, being commissioned by Jehovah, he took the serpent by the tail, and it became a rod. Nothing could more aptly express the idea of Satan’s power being turned against himself. This is largely exemplified in the ways of God. Moses himself was a striking example. The serpent is entirely under the hand of Christ; and when he has reached the highest point in his mad career, he shall be hurled into the lake of fire, there to reap the fruits of his work throughout eternity’s countless ages. “That old serpent, the accuser, and the adversary,” shall be eternally crushed beneath the rod of God’s Anointed.

“Then the end – beneath His rod,

Man’s last enemy shall fall;

Hallelujah! Christ in God,

God in Christ, is all in all.”

“And the Lord said furthermore unto him, Put now thine hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom; and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow. And he said, Put thine hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again, and plucked it out of his bosom; and, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh.” The leprous hand and the cleansing thereof present to us the moral effect of sin, as also the way in which sin has been met in the perfect work of Christ. The clean hand, placed in the bosom, becomes leprous; and the leprous hand placed there becomes clean. Leprosy is the well-known type of sin; and sin came in by the first man and was put sway by the second. “By man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.” (1 Cor. 15: 21) Man brought in ruin, man brought in redemption; man brought in guilt, man brought in pardon; man brought in sin, man brought in righteousness; man filled the scene with death, man abolished death and filled the scene with life, righteousness, and glory. Thus, not only shall the serpent himself be eternally defeated and confounded, but every trace of his abominable work shall be eradicated and wiped away by the atoning sacrifice of Him who “was manifested that he might destroy the works of the devil.”

“And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land; and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.” This was a solemn and most expressive figure of the consequence of refusing to bow to the divine testimony. This sign was only to be wrought in the event of their refusing the other two. It was, first, to be a sign to Israel, and afterwards a plague upon Egypt. (Comp. Ex. 7: 17)

All this, however, fails to satisfy the heart of Moses. “And Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant; but I am slow of speech and of a slow tongue.” Terrible backwardness! Nought save Jehovah’s infinite patience could have endured it. Surely when God Himself had said, “I will be with thee,” it was an infallible security. in reference to everything which could possibly be needed. If an eloquent tongue were necessary, what had Moses to do but to set it over against “I AM?” Eloquence, wisdom, might, energy, everything was contained in that exhaustless treasury. “And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man’s mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord? Now, therefore, go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.” Profound, adorable, matchless grace! worthy of God! There is none like unto the Lord our God, whose patient grace surmounts all our difficulties, and proves itself amply sufficient for our manifold need and weakness. “I THE LORD” Ought to silence for ever the reasonings of our carnal hearts. But, alas! these reasonings are hard to be put down. Again and again they rise to the surface, to the disturbance of our peace, and the dishonour of that blessed One, who sets Himself before our souls, in all His own essential fullness, to be used according to our need.

It is well to bear in mind that when we have the Lord with us, our very deficiencies and infirmities become an occasion for the display of His all-sufficient grace and perfect patience. Had Moses remembered this, his want of eloquence need not have troubled him. The Apostle Paul learnt to say, “most gladly, therefore, will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak then am I strong.” (2 Cor. 12: 9, 10) This is, assuredly, the utterance of one who had reached an advanced form in the school of Christ. It is the experience of one who would not have been much troubled because of not possessing an eloquent tongue, inasmuch as he had found an answer to every description of need in the precious grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The knowledge of this truth ought to have delivered Moses from his diffidence and inordinate timidity. When the Lord had so graciously assured him that He would be with his mouth, it should have set his mind at rest as to the question of eloquence. The Maker of man’s mouth could fill that mouth with the most commanding eloquence, if such were needed. This, in the judgement of faith, is most simple; but, alas! the poor doubting heart would place far more confidence in an eloquent tongue than in the One who created it. This would seem most unaccountable, did we not know the materials of which the natural heart is composed. That heart cannot trust God; and hence it is that even the people of God, when they suffer themselves to be, in any measure, governed by nature; exhibit such a humiliating lack of confidence in the living God. Thus, in the scene before us, we find Moses still demurring. “And he said, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send.” This was, in reality, casting from him the high honour of being Jehovah’s sole messenger to Egypt and to Israel.

It were needless to say that divinely-wrought humility is an inestimable grace. To “be clothed with humility” is a divine precept; and humility is, unquestionably, the most becoming dress in which a worthless sinner can appear. But, it cannot be called humility to refuse to take the place which God assigns, or to tread the path which His hand marks out for us. That it was not true humility in Moses is obvious from the fact that “the anger of the Lord was kindled against him.” So far from its being humility, it had actually passed the limit of mere weakness. So long as it wore the aspect of an excessive timidity, however reprehensible, God’s boundless grace bore with it, and met it with renewed assurances; but when it assumed the character of unbelief and slowness of heart, it drew down Jehovah’s just displeasure; and Moses, instead of being the sole, is made a joint, instrument in the work of testimony and deliverance.

Nothing is more dishonouring to God or more dangerous for us than a mock humility. When we refuse to occupy a position which the grace of God assigns us, because of our not possessing certain virtues and qualifications, this is not humility, inasmuch as if we could but satisfy our own consciences in reference to such virtues and qualifications, We should then deem ourselves entitled to assume the position. If, for instance, Moses had possessed such a measure of eloquence as he deemed needful, we may suppose he would have been ready to go. Now the question is, how much eloquence would he have needed, to furnish him for his mission? The answer is, without God no amount of human eloquence would have availed; but, with God, the merest stammerer would have proved an efficient minister.

This is a real practical truth. Unbelief is not humility, but thorough pride. It refuses to believe God because it does not find, in self, a reason for believing. This is the very height of presumption. If, when God speaks, I refuse to believe, on the ground of something in myself, I make Him a liar. (1 John 5: 10) When God declares His love, and I refuse to believe because I do not deem myself a sufficiently worthy object, I make Him a liar and exhibit the inherent pride of my heart. The bare supposition that I could ever be worthy of ought save the lowest pit of hell, can only be regarded as the most profound ignorance of my own condition and of God’s requirements. And the refusal to take the place which the redeeming love of God assigns me, on the ground of the finished atonement of Christ, is to make God a liar, and cast gross dishonour upon the sacrifice of the cross. God’s love flows forth spontaneously. It is not drawn forth by my deserts, but by my misery. Nor is it a question as to the place which I deserve, but which Christ deserves. Christ took the sinner’s place, on the cross, that the sinner might take His place in the glory. Christ got what the sinner deserved, that the sinner might get what Christ deserves. Thus, self is totally set aside, and this is true humility. No one can be truly humble until he has reached heaven’s side of the cross; but there he finds divine life, divine righteousness, and divine favour. He is done with himself for ever, as regards any expectation of goodness or righteousness, and he feeds upon the princely wealth of another. He is morally prepared to join in that cry which shall echo through the spacious vault of heaven, throughout the everlasting ages, “Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto thy name give glory.” (Ps. 115: 1)

It would ill become us to dwell upon the mistakes or infirmities of so honoured a Servant as Moses, of whom we read that he “was verily faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after.” (Heb. 3: 5) But, though we should not dwell upon them, in a spirit of self-complacency, as if we would have acted differently, in his circumstances, we should, nevertheless, learn from such things those holy and seasonable lessons which they are manifestly designed to teach. We should learn to judge ourselves and to place more implicit confidence in God – to set self aside, that He might act in us, through us, and for us. This is the true secret of power.

We have remarked that Moses forfeited the dignity of being Jehovah’s sole instrument in that glorious work which He was about to accomplish. But this was not all. “The anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses; and he said, Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well: and, also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee; and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do. And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God. And thou shalt take this rod in thine hand, wherewith thou shalt do signs.” (Ex. 4: 14-17) This passage contains a mine of most precious practical instruction. We have noted the timidity and hesitation of Moses, notwithstanding the varied promises and assurances with which divine grace had furnished him. And, nom, although there was nothing gained in the way of real power, although there was no more virtue or efficacy in one mouth than in another, although it was Moses after all who was to speak unto Aaron; yet was Moses quite ready to go when assured of the presence and co-operation of a poor feeble mortal like himself; whereas he could not go when assured, again and again, that Jehovah would be with him.

Oh! my reader, does not all this hold up before us a faithful mirror in which you and I can see our hearts reflected? Truly it does. We are more ready to trust anything than the living God. We move along, with bold decision, when we possess the countenance and support of a poor frail mortal like ourselves; but we falter, hesitate, and demur, when we have the light of the Master’s countenance to cheer us, and the strength of His omnipotent arm to support us. This should humble us deeply before the Lord, and lead us to seek a fuller acquaintance with Him, so that we might trust Him with a more unmixed confidence, and walk on with a firmer step, as having Him alone for our resource and portion.

No doubt, the fellowship of a brother is most valuable – “Two are better than one” – whether in labour, rest, or conflict. The Lord Jesus, in sending forth His disciples, “sent them two by two,” – for unity is ever better than isolation – still, if our personal acquaintance with God, and our experience of His presence, be not such as to enable us, if needful, to walk alone, we shall find the presence of a brother of very little use. It is not a little remarkable, that Aaron, whose companionship seemed to satisfy Moses, was the man who afterwards made the golden calf. (Ex. 32: 21) Thus it frequently happens, that the very person whose presence we deem essential to our progress and success, afterwards proves a source of deepest sorrow to our hearts. May we ever remember this!

However, Moses, at length, consents to go; but ere he is fully equipped for his work, he must pass through another deep exercise; yea, he must have the sentence of death inscribed by the hand of God upon his very nature. He had learnt deep lessons at “the backside of the desert;” he is called to learn something deeper still, “by the way in the inn.” It is no light matter to be the Lord’s servant. No ordinary education will qualify a man for such a position. Nature must be put in the place of death and kept there. ” We had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead. (2 Cor. 1: 9) Every successful servant will need to know something of this. Moses was called to enter into it, in his own experience, ere he was morally qualified. He was about to sound in the ears of Pharaoh the following deeply-solemn message, “Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my first-born: and I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn.” Such was to be his message to Pharaoh; a message of death, a message of judgement; and, at the same time, his message to Israel was a message of life and salvation. But, be it remembered, that the man who will speak, on God’s behalf, of death and judgement, life and salvation, must, ere he does so, enter into the practical power of these things in his own soul. Thus it was with Moses. We have seen him, at the very outset, in the place of death, typically; but this was a different thing from entering into the experience of death in his own person. Hence we read, “And it came to pass, by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.” This passage lets us into a deep secret, in the personal and domestic history of Moses. It is very evident that Zipporah’s heart had, up to this point, shrunk from the application of the knife to that around which the affections of nature were entwined. She had avoided that mark which had to be set in the flesh of every member of the Israel of God. She was not aware that her relationship with Moses was one involving death to nature. She recoiled from the cross. This was natural. But Moses had yielded to her in the matter; and this explains to us the mysterious scene “in the inn.” If Zipporah refuses to circumcise her son, Jehovah will lay His hand upon her husband; and if Moses spares the feelings of his wife, Jehovah will “seek to kill him.” The sentence of death must be written on nature; and if we seek to avoid it in one way, we shall have to encounter it in another.

It has been already remarked, that Zipporah furnishes an instructive and interesting type of the Church. She was united to Moses, during the period of his rejection; and from the passage just quoted, we learn that the Church is called to know Christ, as the One related to her “by blood.” It is her privilege to drink of his cup, and be baptised with His baptism. Being crucified with Him, she is to be conformed to His death; to mortify her members which are on the earth; to take up the cross daily, and follow Him. Her relationship with Christ is founded upon blood, and the manifestation of the power of that relationship will, necessarily, involve death to nature. “And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power; in whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, mho hath raised him from the dead.” (Col. 2: 10-12)

Such is the doctrine as to the Church’s place with Christ – a doctrine replete with the richest privileges for the Church, and each member thereof. Everything, in short, is involved: the perfect remission of sin, divine righteousness, complete acceptance, everlasting security, full fellowship with Christ in all His glory. “Ye are complete in him.” This, surely, comprehends everything. What could be added to one who is “complete” Could “philosophy, “the tradition of men,” “the rudiments of the world,” “meats, drinks, holy days, new moons,” “Sabbaths” “Touch not” this, “taste not that, “handle not” the other, “the commandments and doctrines of men,” “days and months, and times, and years,” could any of these things, or all of them put together, add a single jot or tittle to one whom God has pronounced “complete?” We might just as well enquire, if man could have gone forth upon the fair creation of God, at the close of the six days’ work, to give the finishing touch to that which God had pronounced “very good?”

Nor is this completeness to be, by any means, viewed as a matter of attainment, some point which we have not yet reached, but after which we must: diligently strive, and of the possession of which we cannot be sure until we lie upon a bed of death, or stand before a throne of judgement. It is the portion of the feeblest, the most inexperienced, the most unlettered child of God. The very weakest saint is included in the apostolic “ye.” All the people of God “are complete in Christ.” The apostle does not say, “ye will be,” “ye may be,” “hope that ye may be,” “pray that ye may be:” no; he, by the Holy Ghost, states, in the most absolute and unqualified manner, that “ye are complete.” This is the true Christian starting-post: and for man to make a goal of what God makes a starting-post, is to upset everything.

But, then, some will say, “have we no sin, no failure, no imperfection?” Assuredly we have. “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1: 8) We have sin in us, but no sin on us. Moreover, our standing is not in self, but in Christ. It is “in him” we “are complete.” God says the believer in Christ, with Christ, and as Christ. This is his changeless condition, his everlasting standing. “The body of the sins of the flesh” is “put off by the circumcision of Christ.” The believer is not in the flesh, though the flesh is in him. He is united to Christ in the power of a new and an endless life, and that life is inseparably connected with divine righteousness in which the believer stands before God. The Lord Jesus has put away everything that was against the believer, and He has brought him nigh to God, in the self-same favour as that which He Himself enjoys. In a word, Christ is his righteousness. This settles every question, answers every objection, silences every doubt. “Both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified, are all of one.” (Heb. 2: 11)

The foregoing line of truth has flowed out of the deeply-interesting type presented to us in the relationship between Moses and Zipporah. We must, now, hasten to close this section, and take our leave, for the present, of “the backside of the desert,” though not of its deep lessons and holy impressions, so essential to every servant of Christ, and every messenger of the living God. All who would serve effectually, either in the important work of evangelization, or in the varied ministries of the house of God – which is the Church – will need to imbibe the precious instructions which Moses received at the foot of Mount Horeb, and “by the way in the inn.”

Were these things properly attended to, we should not have so many running unsent – so many rushing into spheres of ministry for which they were never designed. Let each one who stands up to preach, or teach, or exhort, or serve in any way, seriously enquire if, indeed, he be fitted, and taught, and sent of God. If not, his work will neither be owned of God nor blessed to men, and the sooner he ceases, the better for himself and for those upon whom he has been imposing the heavy burden of hearkening to him. Neither a humanly-appointed, nor a self-appointed ministry, will ever suit within the hallowed precincts of the Church of God. All must be divinely gifted, divinely taught, and divinely sent.

“And the Lord said to Aaron, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses. And he went and met him in the mount of God, and kissed him. And Moses told Aaron all the words of the Lord who had sent him, and all the signs which he had commanded him.” This was a fair and beauteous scene – a scene of sweet brotherly love and union – a scene which stands in marked contrast with many of those scenes which were afterwards enacted in the wilderness-career of these two men. Forty years of wilderness life are sure to make great changes in men and things. Yet it is sweet to dwell upon those early days of one’s Christian course, before the stern realities of desert life had, in any measure, checked the gush of warm and generous affections – before deceit, and corruption, and hypocrisy had well-nigh dried up the springs of the heart’s confidence, and placed the whole moral being beneath the chilling influences of a suspicious disposition.

That such results have been produced, in many cases, by years of experience, is, alas! too true. Happy is he who, though his eyes have been opened to see nature in a clearer light than that which this world supplies, can, nevertheless, Serve his generation by the energy of that grace which flows forth from the bosom of God. Who ever knew the depths and windings of the human heart as Jesus knew them? “He knew all, and needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.” (John 2: 24, 25) So well did He know man that He could not commit Himself unto him. He could not accredit man’s professions, or endorse his pretensions. And yet, who so gracious as He? Who so loving, so tender, so compassionate, so sympathising? With a heart that understood all, He could feel for all. He did not suffer His perfect knowledge of human worthlessness to keep Him aloof from human need. “He went about doing good.” Why? Was it because He imagined that all those who flocked around Him were real? No; but because God was with him.” (Acts 10: 38) This is our example. Let us follow it, though, in doing so, we shall have to trample on self and all its interests, at every step of the way.

Who would desire that wisdom, that knowledge of nature, that experience, which only lead men to ensconce themselves within the enclosures of a hard-hearted selfishness, from which they look forth with an eye of dark suspicion upon everybody? Surely such a result could never follow from ought of a heavenly or excellent nature. God gives wisdom; but it is not a wisdom which locks the heart against all the appeals of human need and misery. He gives a knowledge of nature; but it is not a knowledge which causes us to grasp with a selfish eagerness that which we, falsely, call ” our own.” He gives experience; but it is not an experience which results in suspecting everybody except myself. If I am walking in the footprints of Jesus, if I am imbibing, and therefore manifesting, His excellent spirit, if, in short, I can say, “to me to live is Christ;” then, would I walk through the world, with a knowledge of what the world is; while I come in contact with man, with a knowledge of what I am to expect from him; I am able, through grace, to manifest Christ in the midst of it all. The springs which move me, and the objects which animate me, are all above, where He is, who if “the same yesterday, and today, and for ever.” (Heb. 13: 8) It was this which sustained the heart of that beloved and honoured servant, whose history, even so far, has furnished us with such deep and solid instruction. It was this which carried him through the trying and varied scenes of his wilderness course. And we may safely assert that, at the close of all, notwithstanding the trial and exercise of forty years, Moses could embrace his brother, when he stood on Mount Hor, with the same warmth as he had when first he met him, “in the mount of God.” True, the two occasions were very different. At “the mount of God” they met, and embraced, and started together on their divinely-appointed mission. Upon “Mount Hor” they met by the commandment of Jehovah, in order that Moses might strip his brother of his priestly robes, and see him gathered to his fathers, because of an error in which he himself had participated. (How solemn! How touching!) Circumstances vary: men may turn away from one; but with God “is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” (James 1: 17)

“And Moses and Aaron went and gathered together all the elders of the children of Israel; and Aaron spake all the words which the Lord had spoken unto Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people. And the people believed; and when they heard that the Lord had visited the children of Israel and that he had looked upon their affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshipped.” (Ver. 29-31) When God works, every barrier must give way. Moses had said, “the people will not believe me.” But the question was not, as to whether they would believe him, but whether they would believe God. When a man is enabled to view himself simply as the messenger of God. he may feel quite at ease as to the reception of his message. It does not detract, in the smallest degree, from his tender and affectionate solicitude, in reference to those whom he addresses. Quite the contrary; but it preserves him from that inordinate anxiety of spirit which can only tend to unfit him for calm, elevated, steady testimony. The messenger of God should ever remember whose message he bears. When Zacharias said to the angel, “Whereby shall I know this?” was the latter perturbed by the question? Not in the least. His calm, dignified reply was, “I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to show thee: these glad tidings.” (Luke 1: 18, 19) The angel rises before the doubting mortal, with a keen and exquisite sense of the dignity of his message. It is as if he would say, “How can you doubt, when a messenger has actually been dispatched from the very Presence-chamber of the Majesty of heaven?” Thus should every messenger of God, in his measure, go forth, and, in this spirit, deliver his message.

Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch

Exo 4:1-9 J (following Exo 3:18). Mosess Third DifficultyIsraels unbelief. To overcome it, he is enabled to authenticate his mission by three signsthe rod that became a serpent and again a rod (Exo 4:2-5), the leprosy of his hand that came and went (Exo 4:6-8), and the turning of water into blood (Exo 4:9). The first is in P a sign to Pharaoh (Exo 7:8-12), and the third is in E and P the first plague (Exo 7:14-25).The rod, in J, is Mosess ordinary shepherds staff, turned to a special use; in E, it is the rod of God, given him to use as a miraculous instrument; in P, it is Aaron who uses it. All three sources must mention the rod, so firmly was it entwined in the thread of tradition (Exo 17:15 f.*). In Exo 4:9, river should be Nile.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

God’s message to Moses has been so clear that it cannot be mistaken. He has made no secret of the opposition of Pharaoh, but has declared positively that He would enable Israel to triumph over this and to gain greatly through the experience. But still apprehensive, Moses asks, “Suppose they will not believe me or listen to my voice?” (v.1). But God had told him they WOULD listen (ch.3:18). Why not believe Him’?

God compassionately responds, however, telling him to make use of what was in his hand, a rod, which he threw on the ground. Miraculously, it became a serpent of which Moses was afraid. Then God told him to take it up again by the tail (v.4). Immediately it became a rod. The serpent is typical of Satan, who has power that is dreaded by mankind. But where does he get his power? He is virtually only a rod in the hand of God. God uses him as He will. But God does give him freedom, up to a certain point, to act according to his own will, and he becomes a dangerous enemy to man. Still, God is in perfect control. As He desires He may turn the serpent into a rod as quickly as He turned the rod into a serpent. Therefore Moses should realize that however strong Satan’s opposition may be, God was in sovereign control, and could put power into the hand of Moses to overcome all the power of Satan. How clear a witness that the God of his fathers had appeared to Moses (v.5)!

To corroborate this God gives a second sign, this time to affect only Moses personally. Obeying God’s word to put his hand in his bosom, he found it totally covered with leprosy (v.6), then doing the same a second time, he found his hand fully restored (v.7). Leprosy is typical of sin, and in this way God was showing His ability to expose the sin of our own hearts by showing it in the works of our hands. But more miraculously still, God shows His healing power in a heart changed by faith in the Son of God. He has power over sin as well as over Satan.

If Israel would not believe the first sign, they ought to at least believe the second (v.8). But if they were still unbelieving, then Moses was to take water from the river and pour it on the ground, and God would turn it into blood (v.9). In water is life, but blood (outside of a body) is the sign of death. God had power also to turn Egypt’s sources of refreshment into the corruption of death. Therefore the three great enemies of man, — Satan, sin and death — are seen to be subject to the great power of God, power God was graciously giving into the hand of His servant Moses.

In spite of the miraculous signs Moses was given, he tried hard to excuse himself from a task for which he did not feel himself qualified. He protested that he was not eloquent, but was slow of speech (v.10). This does not sound convincing in view of Act 7:22, which tells us Moses “was mighty in words and deeds.” God’s answer to him was sharp and penetrating, “Who has made man’s mouth? Or who makes the mute, the deaf, the seeing or the blind? Have not I, the Lord?” God had made Moses no excuse. He tells him peremptorily, “Now therefore go, and I will be with your mouth, and teach you what you shall say” (v.12). This was a clear, absolute command of God.

But though all of Moses’ objections were answered, he still resisted. He simply does not want to obey, and pleads with the Lord to send someone else instead of him (v.13). In this he certainly went too far, and stirred the anger of the Lord against him. Could He excuse Moses? Not at all: Moses must go. Yet the Lord’s compassion is again seen in His telling Moses that Aaron his brother was already on his way to meet Moses, and would be glad for their reunion (v.14). Aaron could speak well, and God would allow Moses to speak the words of God to Aaron, so that Aaron might repeat them to the people and to Pharaoh (vs.14-16). Aaron’s mouth would be the instrument by which Moses would speak to the people, and Moses would be the instrument by which God would speak to Aaron. Moses must also take the rod by which to perform the signs God would order.

THE RETURN OF MOSES TO EGYPT

To clear the way with Jethro, Moses tells him simply that he desires to return to Egypt to contact his relatives there if they were still alive (v.18). He does not even mention God’s appearing to him with the message that he was to deliver Israel from their bondage. Certainly it was wise for him to wait to find out what would transpire. Jethro was perfectly agreeable, and also he had further word from the Lord that all those who had wanted Moses put to death had by this time died themselves, so that the Lord had opened the way for him to return to Egypt (v.19).

He took his wife and sons, using a donkey for transportation, so that he evidently did not have a large amount of provisions for the long journey. However, the Lord again speaks to him in advance of his arrival in Egypt, telling him to do all the wonders before Pharaoh that God had given him to do, but that God would harden Pharaoh’s heart in determination not to let the people go. This was a preparation Moses needed. In the face of Pharaoh’s opposition, he was to insist that the Lord has declared, “Israel is My son, My firstborn. So I say to you, let My son go that he may serve Me. But if you refuse to let him go, I will kill your son, your firstborn” (vs.22-23).

However, at a place of lodging on the way an incident took place that may seem to us unusually strange. The Lord met Moses and sought to kill him. Of course, if the Lord intended to kill Moses He could have done it without any preliminaries. Also, it is clear that He had no intention of killing him, for He had already told Moses that he would deliver Israel from Egypt. However, it is implied that the sentence of death was against Moses because he had not carried out that sentence in his own household. Zipporah may have objected to the circumcision of her son, for she realized that this must be done so as to preserve Moses from death. God had told Moses, “Israel is My son,” and Moses is to be reminded that God’s son Israel too must learn the truth of circumcision — the cutting off of the flesh — which is typical of death itself. For is no proper relationship with God apart from death to the flesh.

Zipporah’s task of performing circumcision on her son was evidently unpleasant, and she tells Moses he is a husband of blood to her. But it is never a pleasant task to press home upon our children’s hearts and consciences the lesson of death to all that is of the flesh. We may shrink from the sight of blood being shed, but we must be reminded that “without shedding of blood there is no remission” (Heb 9:22). Only when Zipporah had circumcised her son did the Lord let Moses go.

The Lord was sovereignly, yet only gradually, marshaling His forces to implement the deliverance of Israel. He tells Aaron to go to the wilderness to meet Moses (v.27). Before this time, since Moses was only a little boy, they must have had almost no contact. Now Moses was 80 years of age, and Aaron 83. This was a long journey for Aaron, both to meet Moses at the mountain of God — evidently Horeb — and to return with him to Egypt.

The meeting of Moses and Aaron was most cordial, and Moses had time to inform Aaron, on their journey toward Egypt, of all God’s words to him and of the signs commanded by the Lord (v.28). Thus they would be prepared together to speak to the people and to Pharaoh.

Arriving in Egypt, they gathered together all the elders of Israel, and Aaron spoke to them what Moses had dictated, and showed them the signs the Lord had told them to (vs.29-30). As God had told Moses, the people of Israel believed their message that the Lord was visiting His people and taking full account of their sufferings under the bondage of Egypt. They bowed their heads and worshiped. God had waited until such a time that Israel was ready to receive His messengers. It was He who opened the way.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

4:1 And Moses answered and said, {a] But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The LORD hath not appeared unto thee.

(a) God bears with Moses doubting, because he was not completely without faith.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

God gave Moses three miracles to convince the Israelites that the God of their fathers had appeared to him. They also served to bolster Moses’ faith. Moses had left Egypt and the Israelites with a clouded reputation under the sentence of death, and he had been away for a long time. He needed to prove to his brethren that they could trust and believe him. Not only were these miracles strong proofs of God’s power, but they appear to have had special significance for the Israelites as well (cf. Exo 4:8). [Note: See Johnson, p. 55; et al.]

God probably intended the first miracle, of the staff and serpent (Exo 4:2-5), to assure Moses and the Israelites that He was placing the satanic power of Egypt under his authoritative control. This was the power before which Moses had previously fled. Moses’ shepherd staff became a symbol of authority in his hand, a virtual scepter. The serpent represented the deadly power of Egypt that sought to kill the Israelites, and Moses in particular. The Pharaohs wore a metal cobra around their heads. It was a common symbol of the nation of Egypt. However the serpent also stood for the great enemy of man behind that power, Satan, who had been the foe of the seed of the woman since the Fall (Gen 3:15). Moses’ ability to turn the serpent into his rod by seizing its tail would have encouraged the Israelites. They should have believed that God had enabled him to overcome the cunning and might of Egypt and to exercise authority over its fearful power. This was a sign that God would bless Moses’ leadership.

The second miracle, of the leprous hand (Exo 4:6-7), evidently assured Moses that God would bring him and the Israelites out of their defiling environment and heal them. But first He would punish the Egyptians with crippling afflictions. Presently the Israelites were unclean because of their confinement in wicked Egypt. Moses’ hand was the instrument of his strength. As such it was a good symbol of Moses, himself the instrument of God’s strength in delivering the Israelites, and Israel, God’s instrument for blessing the world. [Note: For an explanation of the Septuagint’s omission of "leprous" from Exo 4:6, see C. Houtman, "A Note on the LXX Version of Exodus 4, 6," Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 97:2 (1983):253-54.] Moses’ hand would also have suggested to Pharaoh that Yahweh could afflict or deliver through His representative at will. The wholeness of Moses’ hand may have attested to God’s delegation of divine power to him.

The third miracle, of the water turned into blood (Exo 4:9), provided assurance that God would humiliate the Egyptians by spoiling what they regarded as a divine source of life. The Egyptians identified the Nile with the Egyptian god Osiris and credited it with all good and prosperity in their national life. Blood was and is a symbol of life poured out in death (cf. Lev 17:11). Moses possessed the power to change the life-giving water of the Nile into blood. The Israelites would have concluded that he also had power to destroy the gods of Egypt and punish the land with death (cf. Exo 7:14-24).

"Like Abel’s blood that cried out from the ground, so would the infants’ whose lives had been demanded by Pharaoh (Exo 1:22)." [Note: Kaiser, p. 326.]

Each of these signs attested Yahweh’s creative power. Normally at least two witnesses were necessary to establish credibility under the Mosaic Law (Deu 19:15; et al.). A third witness further strengthened the veracity of the testimony. Here God gave Moses three witnesses to confirm His prophet’s divine calling and enablement. God entrusted Moses with His powerful word and endowed him with His mighty power. He was the first prophet with the power to perform miracles.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

CHAPTER IV.

MOSES HESITATES.

Exo 4:1-17.

Holy Scripture is impartial, even towards its heroes. The sin of David is recorded, and the failure of Peter. And so is the reluctance of Moses to accept his commission, even after a miracle had been vouchsafed to him for encouragement. The absolute sinlessness of Jesus is the more significant because it is found in the records of a creed which knows of no idealised humanity.

In Josephus, the refusal of Moses is softened down. Even the modest words, “Lord, I am still in doubt how I, a private man and of no abilities, should persuade my countrymen or Pharaoh,” are not spoken after the sign is given. Nor is there any mention of the transfer to Aaron of a part of his commission, nor of their joint offence at Meribah, nor of its penalty, which in Scripture is bewailed so often. And Josephus is equally tender about the misdeeds of the nation. We hear nothing of their murmurs against Moses and Aaron when their burdens are increased, or of their making the golden calf. Whereas it is remarkable and natural that the fear of Moses is less anxious about his reception by the tyrant than by his own people: “Behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice; for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.” This is very unlike the invention of a later period, glorifying the beginnings of the nation; but it is absolutely true to life. Great men do not fear the wrath of enemies if they can be secured against the indifference and contempt of friends; and Moses in particular was at last persuaded to undertake his mission by the promise of the support of Aaron. His hesitation is therefore the earliest example of what has been so often since observed–the discouragement of heroes, reformers and messengers from God, less by fear of the attacks of the world than of the contemptuous scepticism of the people of God. We often sigh for the appearing, in our degenerate days, of

“A man with heart, head, hand, Like some of the simple great ones gone.”

Yet who shall say that the want of them is not our own fault? The critical apathy and incredulity, not of the world but of the Church, is what freezes the fountains of Christian daring and the warmth of Christian zeal.

For the help of the faith of his people, Moses is commissioned to work two miracles; and he is caused to rehearse them, for his own.

Strange tales were told among the later Jews about his wonder-working rod. It was cut by Adam before leaving Paradise, was brought by Noah into the ark, passed into Egypt with Joseph, and was recovered by Moses while he enjoyed the favour of the court. These legends arose from downright moral inability to receive the true lesson of the incident, which is the confronting of the sceptre of Egypt with the simple staff of the shepherd, the choosing of the weak things of earth to confound the strong, the power of God to work His miracles by the most puny and inadequate means. Anything was more credible than that He who led His people like sheep did indeed guide them with a common shepherd’s crook. And yet this was precisely the lesson meant for us to learn–the glorification of poor resources in the grasp of faith.

Both miracles were of a menacing kind. First the rod became a serpent, to declare that at God’s bidding enemies would rise up against the oppressor, even where all seemed innocuous, as in truth the waters of the river and the dust of the furnace and the winds of heaven conspired against him. Then, in the grasp of Moses, the serpent from which he fled became a rod again, to intimate that these avenging forces were subject to the servant of Jehovah.

Again, his hand became leprous in his bosom, and was presently restored to health again–a declaration that he carried with him the power of death, in its most dreadful form; and perhaps a still more solemn admonition to those who remember what leprosy betokens, and how every approach of God to man brings first the knowledge of sin, to be followed by the assurance that He has cleansed it.[7]

If the people would not hearken to the voice of the first sign, they should believe the second; but at the worst, and if they were still unconvinced, they would believe when they saw the water of the Nile, the pride and glory of their oppressors, turned into blood before their eyes. That was an omen which needs no interpretation. What follows is curious. Moses objects that he has not hitherto been eloquent, nor does he experience any improvement “since Thou hast spoken unto Thy servant” (a graphic touch!), and he seems to suppose that the popular choice between liberty and slavery would depend less upon the evidence of a Divine power than upon sleight of tongue, as if he were in modern England.

But let it be observed that the self-consciousness which wears the mask of humility while refusing to submit its judgment to that of God, is a form of selfishness–self-absorption blinding one to other considerations beyond himself–as real, though not as hateful, as greed and avarice and lust.

How can Moses call himself slow of speech and of a slow tongue, when Stephen distinctly declares that he was mighty in word as well as deed? (Act 7:22). Perhaps it is enough to answer that many years of solitude in a strange land had robbed him of his fluency. Perhaps Stephen had in mind the words of the Book of Wisdom, that “Wisdom entered into the soul of the servant of the Lord, and withstood dreadful kings in wonders and signs…. For Wisdom opened the mouth of the dumb, and made the tongues of them that cannot speak eloquent” (Wis 10:16; Wis 10:21).

To his scruple the answer was returned, “Who hath made man’s mouth?… Have not I the Lord? Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.” The same encouragement belongs to every one who truly executes a mandate from above: “Lo, I am with you alway.” For surely this encouragement is the same. Surely Jesus did not mean to offer His own presence as a substitute for that of God, but as being in very truth Divine, when He bade His disciples, in reliance upon Him, to go forth and convert the world.

And this is the true test which divides faith from presumption, and unbelief from prudence: do we go because God is with us in Christ, or because we ourselves are strong and wise? Do we hold back because we are not sure of His commission, or only because we distrust ourselves? “Humility without faith is too timorous; faith without humility is too hasty.” The phrase explains the conduct of Moses both now and forty years before.

Moses, however, still entreats that any one may be chosen rather than himself: “Send, I pray Thee, by the hand of him whom Thou wilt send.”

And thereupon the anger of the Lord was kindled against him, although at the moment his only visible punishment was the partial granting of his prayer–the association with him in his commission of Aaron, who could speak well, the forfeiting of a certain part of his vocation, and with it of a certain part of its reward. The words, “Is not Aaron thy brother the Levite?” have been used to insinuate that the tribal arrangement was not perfected when they were written, and so to discredit the narrative. But when so interpreted they yield no adequate sense, they do not reinforce the argument; while they are perfectly intelligible as implying that Aaron is already the leader of his tribe, and therefore sure to obtain the hearing of which Moses despaired. But the arrangement involved grave consequences sure to be developed in due time: among others, the reliance of Israel upon a feebler will, which could be forced by their clamour to make them a calf of gold. Moses was yet to learn that lesson which our century knows nothing of,–that a speaker and a leader of nations are not the same. When he cried to Aaron, in the bitterness of his soul, “What did this people to thee, that thou hast brought so great a sin upon them?” did he remember by whose unfaithfulness Aaron had been thrust into the office, the responsibilities of which he had betrayed?

Now, it is the duty of every man, to whom a special vocation presents itself, to set opposite each other two considerations. Dare I undertake this task? is a solemn question, but so is this: Dare I let this task go past me? Am I prepared for the responsibility of allowing it to drift into weaker hands? These are days when the Church of Christ is calling for the help of every one capable of aiding her, and we ought to hear it said more often that one is afraid not to teach in Sunday School, and another dares not refuse a proffered district, and a third fears to leave charitable tasks undone. To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin; and we hear too much about the terrible responsibility of working for God, but too little about the still graver responsibility of refusing to work for Him when called.

Moses indeed attained so much that we are scarcely conscious that he might have been greater still. He had once presumed to go unsent, and brought upon himself the exile of half a lifetime. Again he presumed almost to say, I go not, and well-nigh to incur the guilt of Jonah when sent to Nineveh, and in so doing he forfeited the fulness of his vocation. But who reaches the level of his possibilities? Who is not haunted by faces, “each one a murdered self,” a nobler self, that might have been, and is now impossible for ever? Only Jesus could say “I have finished the work which Thou gavest Me to do.” And it is notable that while Jesus deals, in the parable of the labourers, with the problem of equal faithfulness during longer and shorter periods of employment; and in the parable of the pounds with that of equal endowment variously improved; and yet again, in the parable of the talents, with the problem of various endowments all doubled alike, He always draws a veil over the treatment of five talents which earn but two or three besides.

A more cheerful reflection suggested by this narrative is the strange power of human fellowship. Moses knew and was persuaded that God, Whose presence was even then miraculously apparent in the bush, and Who had invested him with superhuman powers, would go with him. There is no trace of incredulity in his behaviour, but only of failure to rely, to cast his shrinking and reluctant will upon the truth he recognised and the God Whose presence he confessed. He held back, as many a one does, who is honest when he repeats the Creed in church, yet fails to submit his life to the easy yoke of Jesus. Nor is it from physical peril that he recoils: at the bidding of God he has just grasped the serpent from which he fled; and in confronting a tyrant with armies at his back, he could hope for small assistance from his brother. But highly strung spirits, in every great crisis, are aware of vague indefinite apprehensions that are not cowardly but imaginative. Thus Csar, when defying the hosts of Pompey, is said to have been disturbed by an apparition. It is vain to put these apprehensions into logical form, and argue them down: the slowness of speech of Moses was surely refuted by the presence of God, Who makes the mouth and inspires the utterance; but such fears lie deeper than the reasons they assign, and when argument fails, will yet stubbornly repeat their cry: “Send, I pray Thee, by the hand of him whom Thou wilt send.” Now this shrinking, which is not craven, is dispelled by nothing so effectually as by the touch of a human hand. It is like the voice of a friend to one beset by ghostly terrors: he does not expect his comrade to exorcise a spirit, and yet his apprehensions are dispelled. Thus Moses cannot summon up courage from the protection of God, but when assured of the companionship of his brother he will not only venture to return to Egypt, but will bring with him his wife and children. Thus, also, He Who knew what was in men’s hearts sent forth His missionaries, both the Twelve and the Seventy (as we have yet to learn the true economy of sending ours), “by two and two” (Mar 6:7; Luk 10:1).

This is the principle which underlies the institution of the Church of Christ, and the conception that Christians are brothers, among whom the strong must help the weak. Such help from their fellow-mortals would perhaps decide the choice of many hesitating souls, upon the verge of the divine life, recoiling from its unknown and dread experiences, but longing for a sympathising comrade. Alas for the unkindly and unsympathetic religion of men whose faith has never warmed a human heart, and of congregations in which emotion is a misdemeanour!

There is no stronger force, among all that make for the abuses of priestcraft, than this same yearning for human help becomes when robbed of its proper nourishment, which is the communion of saints, and the pastoral care of souls. Has it no further nourishment than these? This instinctive craving for a Brother to help as well as a Father to direct and govern,–this social instinct, which banished the fears of Moses and made him set out for Egypt long before Aaron came in sight, content when assured of Aaron’s co-operation,–is there nothing in God Himself to respond to it? He Who is not ashamed to call us brethren has profoundly modified the Church’s conception of Jehovah, the Eternal, Absolute and Unconditioned. It is because He can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, that we are bidden to draw near with boldness unto the Throne of Grace. There is no heart so lonely that it cannot commune with the lofty and kind humanity of Jesus.

There is a homelier lesson to be learned. Moses was not only solaced by human fellowship, but nerved and animated by the thought of his brother, and the mention of his tribe. “Is not Aaron thy brother the Levite?” They had not met for forty years. Vague rumours of deadly persecution were doubtless all that had reached the fugitive, whose heart had burned, in solitary communion with Nature in her sternest forms, as he brooded over the wrongs of his family, of Aaron, and perhaps of Miriam.

And now his brother lived. The call which Moses would have put from him was for the emancipation of his own flesh and blood, and for their greatness. In that great hour, domestic affection did much to turn the scale wherein the destinies of humanity were trembling. And his was affection well returned. It might easily have been otherwise, for Aaron had seen his younger brother called to a dazzling elevation, living in enviable magnificence, and earning fame by “word and deed”; and then, after a momentary fusion of sympathy and of condition, forty years had poured between them a torrent of cares and joys estranging because unshared. But it was promised that Aaron, when he saw him, should be glad at heart; and the words throw a beam of exquisite light into the depths of the mighty soul which God inspired to emancipate Israel and to found His Church, by thoughts of his brother’s joy on meeting him.

Let no man dream of attaining real greatness by stifling his affections. The heart is more important than the intellect; and the brief story of the Exodus has room for the yearning of Jochebed over her infant “when she saw him that he was a goodly child,” for the bold inspiration of the young poetess, who “stood afar off to know what should be done to him,” and now for the love of Aaron. So the Virgin, in the dread hour of her reproach, went in haste to her cousin Elizabeth. So Andrew “findeth first his own brother Simon.” And so the Divine Sufferer, forsaken of God, did not forsake His mother.

The Bible is full of domestic life. It is the theme of the greater part of Genesis, which makes the family the seed-plot of the Church. It is wisely recognised again at the moment when the larger pulse of the nation begins to beat. For the life-blood in the heart of a nation must be the blood in the hearts of men.

[7] Tertullian appealed to the second of these miracles to illustrate the possibility of the resurrection. “The hand of Moses is changed and becomes like that of the dead, bloodless, colourless, and stiff with cold. But on the recovery of heat and restoration of its natural colour, it is the same flesh and blood…. So will changes, conversions and reformation be needed to bring about the resurrection, yet the substance will be preserved safe.” (De Res., lv.) It is far wiser to be content with the declaration of St. Paul that the identity of the body does not depend on that of its corporeal atoms. “Thou sowest not that body that shall be, but a naked grain…. But God giveth … to every seed his own body” (1Co 15:37-38).

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles