Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Exodus 2:16
Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters: and they came and drew [water], and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock.
16. the priest of Midian ] the chief priest of the tribe, or settlement, and so a person of some importance. On the duties and position of the old Arabian ‘priest,’ see on Exo 28:1.
drew water ] cf. Gen 29:9 (Rachel). To the present day, among the Bedawin of the Sin. Peninsula, ‘the men consider it beneath them to take the flocks to pasture’; it is ‘the exclusive duty of the unmarried girls,’ and those thus employed spend the whole day with the sheep (Burckhardt, Syria, 1822, p. 531, Bedouins, 1831, i. 351 f., cited by Kn.; cf. Doughty, Arabia Deserta, 1888, i. 306, 322).
the troughs ] The word rendered, not very happily, gutters in Gen 30:38; Gen 30:41. Such troughs are still found regularly in the East about wells; they are often made of stone.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The Priest of Midian – Reuel Exo 2:18. His name, and the detailed notices in Exo. 18, prove that he was a priest of the one true God who was known to the patriarchs especially under the name El. The great bulk of his tribe, certainly those who lived farther north and more closely in contact with the Hamites of Canaan, were already plunged in idolatry. The conduct of the shepherds Exo 2:17 may indicate that his person and office were lightly regarded by the idolatrous tribes in his immediate neighborhood.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Exo 2:16-22
Moses was content to dwell with the man.
The reward of a kindly action
I. The hospitality of a kind family (Exo 2:20).
1. This hospitality was much needed by Moses.
2. This hospitality was prompted by parental inquiry. A good and considerate father often turns his home into a sanctuary for the servants of God. By welcoming an heroic stranger to it, he may bring himself into harmony with great histories, and sublime providences.
II. Employment for every-day life. When a young man is thus welcomed by a kind family he must expect to share their work, as also their food. The study of Moses in Egypt had not raised him above hard work.
III. A wife (Exo 2:21). A man who will defend a woman is worthy of a wife. The greatest and most important events of our lives depend upon little deeds of kindness.
IV. Another advance in the intention of Divine providence. Moses has finished his education of the palace. He now commences that of the desert. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Moses in Midian
1. We see here, first, activity presented to us as an indispensable and effective element in education. This is the great lesson taught by Moses in Midian. Head knowledge Moses had obtained in Egypt; hand work he was to practise in Midian. He was already learned in all Egypts wisdom; he was now to be a participant in all Midians labour. The latter was needful to give the former robustness, practical force, and substantial usefulness. In Egypt he was a student, in Midian a worker; and in the combination of the two he became a man of wonderful heroism, and high executive power. Egypt could not do this for him. It could instruct him, it could polish him; it did. Remaining in Egypt he might have been a man of elegant leisure;or with his literary resources, have lived among books, and become, perhaps, puffed up with knowledge, or bewildered with speculation. Idle learning is apt to come to that. In Midian his business was to do, to turn his knowledge into skill, make it practical. We need knowledge; we cannot have too much of it, if it be genuine. But we must ground action upon it. We are to be workers, doers in some line of useful activity, if we would fulfil the end of our being. Neither the ignorant worker nor the indolent scholar is the man for this world, but the intelligent and instructed doer, whose brains prompt his hands, and whose hands second his brains.
2. Again, Moses in Midian is to us a pattern of a wise conformity. He did not stand aloof from the people among whom he lived in a proud superciliousness or an offensive singularity; nor did he waste his time in an idle regretting of the past, and an uncomfortable repining at the unpleasant change of his condition. He made the best of the state into which Gods providence had called him, and so was neither odious nor unhappy in it. Our Lord was much of a conformist in His time, and the Pharisees called Him a friend of publicans and sinners. He was their friend, but not in the Pharisees sense. And what He practised He recommended. He said to His disciples, When ye enter into a house, salute it, and in the same house abide, eating such things as they set before you. So, too, the great apostle, St. Paul, tells us that he was made all things unto all men, and says, To the Jews I became as a Jew that I might gain the Jews; to them that are without law as without law, that I might gain them that are without law. This is worldly wisdom, and it is religious wisdom too. We are not to rebel against our circumstances, not to dwell upon lost good.
3. Finally, we see in Moses in Midian the example of a wise patience. Forty years elapsed during which his great undertaking was in abeyance, and gave no signs of an approaching resumption. He knew that to everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven, and that it is not for us to know the times and the seasons which the Father hath put in His own power. He had nothing to do but to wait, and he did wait, and uncomplainingly. How different is this from the course of many reformers, patriots, philanthropists, of whom, like some of old, it may well be said, I have not sent them, yet they ran: I have not spoken unto them, yet they prophesied; whose haste outruns the dilatory motion of the chariot of God, and whose eagerness chides Gods delay by devices of their own, and headstrong enterprises and efforts, on which God has never promised His blessing, nor have they asked it. Good things we have purposed, good things we have hoped for, do not come as rapidly as our impetuous wishes are fain to anticipate. Tarry thou the Lords leisure; be strong, and He shall comfort thine heart; and put thou thy trust in the Lord. (R. A. Hallam, D. D.)
Discipline needed after faith
But, you will say, when once the right choice has been made, and the decisive step is taken, there was surely no necessity at least for painful disappointment. Say not so; for surely it was just in this way that the character of Moses was refined. It is quite possible that, at the first, a man may be a true believer, and remain, alas! weak, vain, proud, arrogant. Such was the case with Moses when you see him summoned to avenge the wrongs of Israel. He has firm faith in God and in His promises; his feelings and affections are no longer bound to Egypt; and there can be little doubt, or none, concerning his sincerity: but he is sadly wanting in humility. Moses is conscious of a special destiny for something great, but thinks he is the man that can the least be spared in any case. His is a merely carnal zeal to save his fellow-Israelites, as is quite evident from tim great failure that befell his first attempt; for his heart, a prey to his own folly, is the sport and plaything, now of pride and arrogance, and now of fear and cowardice. He will, he can, he shall do just as he thinks right; but God is not yet willing. God shall certainly perform His will through Moses, but not; through a Moses such as this. The darling of the whole Egyptian world still stands too high; he must descend a step or two before he can be used to serve Him who hates lofty looks, be they of friends or foes. Moses has made great progress in Egyptian wisdom; but he is as yet quite unaware that, in the wisdom of the Holy Ghost, while he is nothing, God is everything. Although his heart is right, his will is not sufficiently subdued; he still counts far too much both on his own strength and the gratitude of men; his old man yet must needs be slain, as he slew the Egyptian. Therefore the Lord Himself assails him now, and seems in this quite as unmerciful as he had been to the oppressor of his brethren. In the first Israelite to whom he showed himself as a deliverer, he must be made to see, as in a glass, the nations meanness and ingratitude, that he may learn to do all for the sake of God, but nothing for the sake of man; and that he never may presume to say, My hand hath led out Israel. Moses first action lets us see what he shall afterwards be able for, when Gods grace shall have wholly filled and purified his manly soul; just as the husbandman perceives, in the strong crop of weeds, the promise of good harvest, when the ground shall have been cleared of tares, and sown with wheat. But harrowing and ploughing, that break down the hardest clods,–such are the operations specially attended to by Him who is the heavenly Husbandman, when, in His wisdom, He proposes to lay out a field that is particularly fine; and disappointment to our dearest and legitimate, perhaps, indeed, our most praiseworthy plans, forms the deep furrow drawn across us, that the heavenly seed may afterwards be sown. Christians I do not forget that God is constantly employing such a means for cleansing these our hearts from that impurity which brings Him so much pain, and us so much disgrace. Have you formed fine ideals of the good that you will do for the promotion of your neighbours happiness? It shall not be, says God; you still rely too much on your own strength, expecting far too little from the Lord, who must do all. Have you been sketching out a golden future for yourself? God blows on your designs some time or other, right before your eyes, that, with a broken but a humble heart, you may exclaim, I know, O Lord, that the way of man is not in himself! Have you been really so foolish as, unthinking, to rely on human love and gratitude? God, in some rude and startling way, opens your eyes, that, fleeing in your terror from the falling idol, you may fall down at the feet of the true God–nay, sink into your heavenly Fathers arms! (J. J. Van Oosterzee, D. D.)
A large family
1. Of sacred station.
2. Of womanly influence.
3. Of industrious activity. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Domestic toil
1. The employment of true womanhood.
2. The test of true womanhood.
3. The glory of true womanhood. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Two classes of men are typified by the conduct of these shepherds, and Moses
The former–
1. Oppose the honest.
2. Persecute the industrious.
3. Hinder the diligent.
The latter–
1. Co-operate with the weak.
2. Sympathize with the persecuted.
3. Defend the imperilled.
4. Win the victory.
5. Receive hospitality. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Why is it that ye have left the man?
This question may be asked in reference to the worlds philanthropists, preachers, who are striving to defend the weak.
1. Is it because you do not understand him?
2. Is it because you do not believe in him?
3. Is it because you are selfish?
4. Is it because you have not been taught better?
5. Fetch him to your home as soon as possible (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
A contented resident
1. A wondrous sight–accustomed to a palace.
2. A happy sight–pastoral toil.
3. A scarce sight–men are restless.
He was content–
1. With his daily companionships.
2. With his daily occupation.
3. With the scene of his residence.
4. With his matrimonial alliance. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
A pilgrim life the best for preachers
1. Good for their health.
2. Good for their moral training.
3. Good for their moral usefulness.
4. Good for the enlargement of their social friendships. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
A friend of the oppressed commended
A young lad came from school late, and with a flushed countenance. His mother inquired into the cause. A number of thoughtless and wicked boys were teasing a child of a helpless widow, in order to provoke those bursts of imbecile passion for which she was remarkable. Contrary to expectation, the widow remained unmoved, merely hastening her footsteps and those of her little daughter. This led the boys to increase their efforts, till they inflicted positive injury on the child. John, the lad alluded to above, remonstrated, and finally fought one of the boys in defence of the widows child. He went home with the widow, and received her thanks. He then set out for home, but was doubtful how his conduct would be viewed by his mother. She had taught him to avoid all broils. He stated the case to her, and received her warm commendation for his sympathy with the oppressed, and his bravery in their defence. That commendation made him for life the generous and fearless friend and defender of the oppressed. (Wesleyan S. S. Magazine.)
An extended visit
The Countess of Huntingdon once told Mr. Topldy, the author of Rock of Ages, that when she visited Dr. Watts on one occaision he thus accosted her: Madam, your ladyship is come to see me on a very memorable day. Why so remarkable? she asked. This day thirty years, he replied, I came hither to the house of my good friend Sir Thomas Abney, intending to spend but one single week under his friendly roof; and I have extended my visit to the length of exactly thirty years. Sir, added Lady Abney, what you have termed a long thirty years visit, I consider as the shortest my family ever received.
Alone with God
Nothing can possibly make up for the lack of secret communion with God, or the training and discipline of His school. All the wisdom of the Egyptians would not have qualified Moses for his future path. He might have taken out his degree in the school of man, and yet have to learn his alphabet in the school of God. Mere human wisdom and learning, how valuable soever in themselves, can never constitute any one a servant of God, nor equip him for any department of Divine service. Such things may qualify unrenewed nature to figure before the world; but the man whom God will use most must be endowed with widely-different qualifications–such qualifications as can alone be found in the deep and hallowed retirement of the Lords presence. All Gods servants have been made to know and experience the truth of these statements. Moses at Horeb, Elijah at Cherith, Ezekiel at Chebar, Paul in Arabia, and John at Patmos, are all striking examples of the immense practical importance of being alone with God. And when we look at the Divine Servant, we find that the time He spent in private was nearly ten times as long as that which He spent in public. He, though perfect in understanding and in will, spent nearly thirty years in the obscurity of a carpenters house at Nazareth, ere He made His appearance in public. And, even when he had entered upon His public career, how oft did He retreat from the gaze of men, to enjoy the sweet and sacred retirement of the Divine presence! Now we may feel disposed to ask, how could the urgent demand for workmen ever be met, if all need such protracted training, in secret, ere they come forth to their work? This is the Masters care–not ours. He can provide the workmen, and He can train them also. That is not mans work. God alone can provide and prepare a true minister. Nor is it a question with Him as to the length of time needful for the education of such an one. We know how He could educate him in a moment, if it were His will to do so. One thing is evident, namely, that God has had all His servants very much alone with Himself, both before and after their entrance upon their public work; nor will any one ever get on without this. The absence of secret training and discipline will, necessarily, leave us barren, superficial, and theoretic. (C. H. Mackintosh.)
Solitary discipline
There was much in the solitude of his shepherd life that would stimulate him to devout meditation. Here amidst the sleep that is among the lovely hills, he communed with himself, with nature, and with God; facing for himself those obstinate questionings which continually arise when one seeks to fathom the mysteries of being. A very different university was this from that at which he studied among the worshippers of the sun at Heliopolis; yet more helpful to him even than the education which he had received in Egypt, would be his musings upon the mountain sides, as he rose from the thunder-riven peaks to Him who before the mountains were brought forth is, from everlasting to everlasting, God. Like the Scottish boy, who in the intervals of his shepherd life mapped out for himself with beads the distances of the stars, and designated himself God Almightys scholar, Moses was now under the special tuition of the Lord. His books were the silent stars and giant hills; the shrubs that grew at his feet, and the flocks that went on beside him, browsing on the grass; and often and often would he pore lovingly over the pages of mans first Bible–Nature. But most frequently, perhaps, he would look within and try to read himself; and after awhile there was to come to him the vision which would open to him as a scroll the marvel of the everlasting will. (William M. Taylor, D. D.)
A new training school
The flight of Moses from Egypt introduced him into a new training school. At Pharaohs court he had learned much that was required to fit him for his vocation, as the deliverer and leader of Israel, as the mediator of the ancient covenant and founder of the theocracy, and also as a prophet and lawgiver. But his education there had been of a very partial character. He had learned to rule, but not to serve, and the latter was as necessary, if not more so than the former. He possessed the fiery zeal of youth, but not the circumspection, the patience, or the firmness of age. A consciousness of his vocation had been aroused within him when in Egypt; but it was mixed with selfishness, pride, and ambition, with headstrong zeal, but yet with a pusillanimity which was soon daunted. He did not understand the art of being still and enduring, of waiting and listening for the direction of God, an art so indispensable for all who labour in the kingdom of God. In the school of Egyptian wisdom his mind had been enriched with all the treasures of mans wisdom, but his heart was still the rebellious unbelieving heart of the natural man, and therefore but little adapted for the reception of Divine wisdom, and by no means fitted for performing the works of God. And even the habit of sifting and selecting, of pondering and testing, acquired by a man of learning and experience, must certainly have been far from securing anything like the mature wisdom and steadfastness demanded by his vocation. All this he had yet to acquire. Persecution and affliction, want and exile, nature and solitude, were now to be his tutors, and complete his education, before he entered upon the duties of his Divine vocation. (J. H. Kurtz, D. D.)
Moses domestic life in Midian
The house of the Midianitish priest was, doubtless, a severe but salutary school of humiliation and affliction, of want and self-denial, to the spoiled foster-son of the kings daughter. We can understand this, if we merely picture to ourselves the contrast between the luxury of the court and the toil connected with a shepherds life in the desert. But we have good ground for supposing that his present situation was trying and humiliating in other respects also. His marriage does not seem to have been a happy one, and his position in the house of his father-in-law was apparently somewhat subordinate and servile. (J. H. Kurtz, D. D.)
Zipporah-character of Zipporah
Zipporah is represented as a querulous, self-willed, and passionate woman, who sets her own will in opposition to that of her husband, who will not trouble herself about his religious convictions, and, even when his life is evidently in danger, does not conceal the reluctance with which she agrees to submit, in order to save him. We might be astonished to find that a man of so much force of character as Moses possessed, could ever suffer this female government. But the circumstances in which he was placed sufficiently explain them. He had arrived there poor and helpless, as a man who was flying from pursuit. A fortunate combination of circumstances led to his receiving the Emirs daughter as his wife. It is true he could not pay the usual dowry. But the remarkable antecedents of his life, his superior mental endowments, his manly beauty, and other things, may have been regarded at first by his chosen bride and her relations as an adequate compensation for its omission. But if the character of Zipporah were such as we may conclude it to have been from Exo 4:24 sqq., we can very well imagine that she soon began to despise all these, and made her husband feel that he was only eating the bread of charity in her fathers house. Nor does he seem to have been admitted to any very intimate terms with his father-in-law; at least we might be led to this conclusion by the reserve with which he communicated to Jethro his intended departure, and the little confidence which he displayed (Exo 4:18). Thus he was, and continued to be, a foreigner among the Midianites; kept in the background and misunderstood, even by those who were related to him by the closest ties. And if this was his condition, the sorrows arising from his exile, and his homeless and forlorn condition, must have been doubly, yea trebly severe. Under circumstances such as these, his attachment to his people, and his longing to rejoin them, instead of cooling, would grow stronger and stronger. There is something very expressive in this respect in the names which he gave to the sons who were born to him during his exile (Exo 4:22; Exo 18:3-4). They enable us to look deeply into the state of his mind at that time, for (as so frequently happened) he incorporated in them the strongest feelings and desires of his heart. (J. H. Kurtz, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 16. The priest of Midian] Or prince, or both; for the original cohen has both meanings. See it explained at large, See Clarke on Ge 15:18. The transaction here very nearly resembles that mentioned Gen. xxix. concerning Jacob and Rachel; see the notes there.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The Priest of Midian; not of idols, for then Moses would not have married into his family; but of the true God; for some such were in those ancient times here and there, as appears by Melchisedek, though his manner of worshipping God might be superstitious and corrupt: or the Hebrew cohen may here signify a prince, or a potentate, as Gen 41:45. Nor doth the employment of his daughters contradict that translation, both because principalities were then many of them very small and mean, and because this employment then was esteemed noble, and worthy of great mens daughters, as appears from Gen 24:15; 29:6, &c.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
16-22. the priest of Midianor,”prince of Midian.” As the officers were usually conjoined,he was the ruler also of the people called Cushites or Ethiopians,and like many other chiefs of pastoral people in that early age, hestill retained the faith and worship of the true God.
seven daughterswereshepherdesses to whom Moses was favorably introduced by an act ofcourtesy and courage in protecting them from the rude shepherds ofsome neighboring tribe at a well. He afterwards formed a close andpermanent alliance with this family by marrying one of the daughters,Zipporah, “a little bird,” called a Cushite or Ethiopian(Nu 12:1), and whom Mosesdoubtless obtained in the manner of Jacob by service [see Ex3:1]. He had by her two sons, whose names were, according tocommon practice, commemorative of incidents in the family history[Exo 18:3; Exo 18:4].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters,…. Who being a descendant of Abraham might have retained the knowledge of the true God, and might be a priest of his, as Melchizedek was, or otherwise it may be thought improbable that Moses would have married his daughter, as he afterwards did; and so Aben Ezra says, he was a priest of God; though the word is sometimes used of a prince, ruler, and governor; and is so rendered here by the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan; and Artapanus r, an Heathen writer, expressly calls him , a “prince” of those places, that is, of Arabia; he might be both prince and priest, as Melchizedek before mentioned was, and as has been the usage of many countries:
and they came and drew water, and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock; which is no contradiction to their being daughters either of a priest or a prince, which were both high titles and characters; since it was usual in those early times, and in those countries, for the sons and daughters of considerable persons to be employed in such services; [See comments on Ge 29:9].
r Ut supra, (Apud Euseb. Praepar. Evangel. l. 9. c. 27.) p. 434.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Here Moses secured for himself a hospitable reception from a priest of Midian, and a home at his house, by doing as Jacob had formerly done (Gen 29:10), viz., helping his daughters to water their father’s sheep, and protecting them against the other shepherds. – On the form for vid., Gen 19:19; and for the masculine suffixes to and , Gen 31:9. for , as in Job 5:12, cf. Ewald, 198 a. – The flock of this priest consisted of nothing but , i.e., sheep and goats (vid., Exo 3:1). Even now there are no oxen reared upon the peninsula of Sinai, as there is not sufficient pasturage or water to be found. For the same reason there are no horses kept there, but only camels and asses (cf. Seetzen, R. iii. 100; Wellsted, R. in Arab. ii. p. 66). In Exo 2:18 the priest is called Reguel, in Exo 3:1 Jethro. This title, “the priest of Midian,” shows that he was the spiritual head of the branch of the Midianites located there, but hardly that he was the prince or temporal head as well, like Melchizedek, as the Targumists have indicated by , and as Artapanus and the poet Ezekiel distinctly affirm. The other shepherds would hardly have treated the daughters of the Emir in the manner described in Exo 2:17. The name ( Reguel, friend of God) indicates that this priest served the old Semitic God El ( ). This Reguel, who gave his daughter Zipporah to Moses, was unquestionably the same person as Jethro ( ) the of Moses and priest of Midian (Exo 3:1). Now, as Reguel’s son Chobab is called Moses’ in Num 10:29 (cf. Jdg 4:11), the Targumists and others supposed Reguel to be the grandfather of Zipporah, in which case would mean the grandfather in Exo 2:18, and the granddaughter in Exo 2:21. This hypothesis would undoubtedly be admissible, if it were probable on other grounds. But as a comparison of Num 10:29 with Ex 18 does not necessarily prove that Chobab and Jethro were the same persons, whilst Exo 18:27 seems to lead to the very opposite conclusion, and , like the Greek , may be used for both father-in-law and brother-in-law, it would probably be more correct to regard Chobab as Moses’ brother-in-law, Reguel as the proper name of his father-in-law, and Jethro, for which Jether ( praestantia) is substituted in Exo 4:18, as either a title, or the surname which showed the rank of Reguel in his tribe, like the Arabic Imam, i.e., praepositus, spec. sacrorum antistes . Ranke’s opinion, that Jethro and Chobab were both of them sons of Reguel and brothers-in-law of Moses, is obviously untenable, if only on the ground that according to the analogy of Num 10:29 the epithet “son of Reguel” would not be omitted in Exo 3:1.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The Marriage of Moses. | B. C. 1533. |
16 Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters: and they came and drew water, and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock. 17 And the shepherds came and drove them away: but Moses stood up and helped them, and watered their flock. 18 And when they came to Reuel their father, he said, How is it that ye are come so soon to day? 19 And they said, An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds, and also drew water enough for us, and watered the flock. 20 And he said unto his daughters, And where is he? why is it that ye have left the man? call him, that he may eat bread. 21 And Moses was content to dwell with the man: and he gave Moses Zipporah his daughter. 22 And she bare him a son, and he called his name Gershom: for he said, I have been a stranger in a strange land.
Moses here gains a settlement in Midian, just as his father Jacob had gained one in Syria, Gen. xxix. 2, c. And both these instances should encourage us to trust Providence, and to follow it. Events that seem inconsiderable, and purely accidental, after wards appear to have been designed by the wisdom of God for very good purposes, and of great consequence to his people. A casual transient occurrence has sometimes occasioned the greatest and happiest turns of a man’s life. Observe,
I. Concerning the seven daughters of Reuel the priest or prince of Midian. 1. They were humble, and very industrious, according as the employment of the country was: they drew water for their father’s flock, <i>v. 16. If their father was a prince, it teaches us that even those who are honourably born, and are of quality and distinction in their country, should yet apply themselves to some useful business, and what their hand finds to do do it with all their might. Idleness can be no one’s honour. If their father was a priest, it teaches us that ministers’ children should, in a special manner, be examples of humility and industry. 2. They were modest, and would not ask this strange Egyptian to come home with them (though handsome and a great courtier), till their father sent for him. Modesty is the ornament of woman.
II. Concerning Moses. He was taken for an Egyptian (v. 19); and strangers must be content to be the subjects of mistake; but it is observable, 1. How ready he was to help Reuel’s daughters to water their flocks. Though bred in learning and at court, yet he knew how to turn his hand to such an office as this when there was occasion; nor had he learned of the Egyptians to despise shepherds. Note, Those that have had a liberal education yet should not be strangers to servile work, because they know not what necessity Providence may put them in of working for themselves, or what opportunity Providence may give them of being serviceable to others. These young women, it seems, met with some opposition in their employment, more than they and their servants could conquer; the shepherds of some neighbouring prince, as some think, or some idle fellows that called themselves shepherds, drove away their flocks; but Moses, though melancholy and in distress, stood up and helped them, not only to get clear of the shepherds, but, when that was done, to water the flocks. This he did, not only in complaisance to the daughters of Reuel (though that also did very well become him), but because, wherever he was, as occasion offered itself, (1.) He loved to be doing justice, and appearing in the defence of such as he saw injured, which every man ought to do as far as it is in the power of his hand to do it. (2.) He loved to be doing good. Wherever the Providence of God casts us we should desire and endeavour to be useful; and, when we cannot do the good we would, we must be ready to do the good we can. And he that is faithful in a little shall be entrusted with more. 2. How well he was paid for his serviceableness. When the young women acquainted their father with the kindnesses they had received from this stranger, he sent to invite him to his house, and made much of him, v. 20. Thus God will recompense the kindnesses which are at any time shown to his children; they shall in no wise lose their reward. Moses soon recommended himself to the esteem and good affection of this prince of Midian, who took him into his house, and, in process of time, married one of his daughters to him (v. 21), by whom he had a son, whom he called Gershom, a stranger there (v. 22), that if ever God should give him a home of his own he might keep in remembrance the land in which he had been a stranger. Now this settlement of Moses in Midian was designed by Providence, (1.) To shelter him for the present. God will find hiding-places for his people in the day of their distress; nay, he will himself be to them a little sanctuary, and will secure them, either under heaven or in heaven. But, (2.) It was also designed to prepare him for the great services he was further designed for. His manner of life in Midian, where he kept the flock of his father-in-law (having none of his own to keep), would be of use to him, [1.] To inure him to hardship and poverty, that he might learn how to want as well as how to abound. Those whom God intends to exalt he first humbles. [2.] To inure him to contemplation and devotion. Egypt accomplished him as a scholar, a gentleman, a statesman, a soldier, all which accomplishments would be afterwards of use to him; but yet he lacked one thing, in which the court of Egypt could not befriend him. He that was to do all by divine revelation must know, by a long experience, what it was to live a life of communion with God; and in this he would be greatly furthered by the solitude and retirement of a shepherd’s life in Midian. By the former he was prepared to rule in Jeshurun, but by the latter he was prepared to converse with God in Mount Horeb, near which mount he had spent much of his time. Those that know what it is to be alone with God in holy exercises are acquainted with better delights than ever Moses tasted in the court of Pharaoh.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Verses 16-22:
When Moses arrived in the “land of Midian,” he “sat down” or took up residence in the region of the principal well in that area. How long he remained here is unknown.
“The priest of Midian” was named Reuel, or Raguel (Nu 10:20). This name means “friend of Elohim.”
The daughters of Reuel drew water for his flocks, a common practice for the time (see Ge 29:9). But when they had drawn water for their own flocks, the shepherds rudely pushed them aside and used the water for their own flocks. This was apparently a regular practice of these men. On this occasion, however, there was a difference.
Moses was near the well. He was quick to come to the aid of the weak against the strong. He was one man, but he intimidated the shepherds, and forced them to allow the sheep of the women to drink. He even helped draw water for them.
Moses’ dress was that of Egypt. From this, the women deduced he was an Egyptian.
When Reuel learned what had taken place, he scolded his daughters for their lack of hospitality. He sent for Moses to partake of his hospitality. Moses consented to stay with Reuel. Later, he was accepted into the family, and Reuel gave his daughter Zipporah to him in marriage. To this union was born a son whom Moses named Gershom, which means “I was a stranger,” denoting Moses’ status as a stranger in that land.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
16. Now the priest of Midian. The profane would attribute this meeting to good fortune, whereas God affords us in it a striking picture of his providence, in thus with an outstretched hand directing the steps of his servant. Those damsels were in the habit of coming daily to the well; and Moses sat down to ask for hospitality at the waterside, whither in a dry country the inhabitants were likely to flock in the evening. But it was by no means due to chance that he came so opportunely to render assistance to the damsels, and that Jethro so hospitably invited him; but God was the guide of his wandering servant’s way, not only to obtain for him a resting-place for a day, but a comfortable habitation even to the close of his exile. For Jethro (whose title shews that he was of some dignity amongst his people) not only engaged his services, but chose him for his son-in-law. Although the occupation of a shepherd was a humble one, yet there was no little consolation in this high connection. All are not agreed about the word כהן, cohen (29) The Chaldee paraphrast badly translates it “Prince,” because it does not accord with the fact that the shepherds of the country were at variance with his daughters. Nor is it more probable that a rich and chief man would have been without servants, so as to be obliged to expose his daughters daily to the insults and quarrels of the shepherds. I think, then, that he was a priest ( sacrificum,) which is the opinion most generally received. But the question is, whether he worshipped false gods, or the one true God? and certainly many probable reasons lead us to conclude, that he did not sacrifice to idols; because Moses could scarcely have been persuaded, not merely to live in a house which was defiled by foul unrighteousness, but even to marry into it. Besides, hereafter, many indications of piety will appear in the language of Jethro. Although, as almost the whole world had then fallen into many corrupt practices, it seems likely to me that his priesthood was in some measure corrupted. In the time of Abraham, Melehizedek was the only priest of the living God. Abraham himself was extricated from a deep abyss of idolatry into which his family was plunged. It was, then, hardly possible that the Midianites should have retained the pure worship; and indeed it is plain from other passages, that they were joined to idols. After duly weighing all these points, nothing occurs to me as more probable, than that under the priesthood of Jethro the true God was worshipped, according as tradition had revealed Him, but not purely; because religion was at that time everywhere contaminated by diverse superstitions. But there is some difference between idolatry and the impure worship of God, corrupted in some respects. I say, then, that they were worshippers of the true God, because they had not entirely departed from the principles of His religion, although they had contracted some defilement from the stinking puddles of error which had gradually crept in. There is also another question among interpreters as to the name “Jethro.” Those who think Bethuel (30) was a different person from Jethro, are easily refuted; for it is quite evident, that Moses in the next chapter speaks of the same person, though under another name. Nor would it agree with the mention of his marriage, that the name of the father should be altogether omitted; and it is a forced construction to suppose, that in such immediate connection two persons should be spoken of as in the same degree of relationship. Again, if Jethro was the son of Bethuel, living in the same house, he would have been a member of the family, but not its head, and therefore Moses would not be said to have fed his flock. Besides, it is probable that Hobab (who will be afterwards called the son of Bethuel, Num 10:29) was the brother-in-law of Moses, i e. , the brother of his wife; from whence we collect, that Jethro, as is not unusual, had two names. For it is absurd to think that it is Hobab whom Moses here calls Jethro, and an unreasonable invention. We shall hereafter see that Jethro came into the Desert to congratulate Moses; but it is related in the same place that he “let him depart;” and certainly it would not have been kind to press a man bowed down by age to accompany him on his long journey. For if he was older than Moses, he was scarcely less than ninety; and what sense would there have been in promising a decrepit old man the reward of his labor, after they should reach the land of Canaan?
But the whole controversy is put an end to in one word; because Moses writes that Jethro returned home, but that Hobab was persuaded to listen to his earnest requests, and to remain with him. Nothing can be more probable than that the old man Bethuel, who was unequal to bear the fatigue of a long journey, returned straight home, having left his son behind with Moses, to be to him “instead of eyes,” and to guide them on their way.
(29) כהן. This verb does not occur in Hebrew in its primary conjugation (kal), but is found in Arabic, where it signifies to draw nigh. Hence the noun, being of the form of the present participle, means in strictness one who draws nigh; and in usage a priest who draws nigh to God; a prince who draws nigh to the sovereign; or, sometimes the sovereign’s guards, ministers, or near kinsmen.
(30) See note on ver. 18. In the French version he is always called Raguel.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES.
Exo. 2:18. Reuel] It is common to say that R. is = Gods friend (Ges. Dav.); but the theory of Frst that the giving of these E1- names (and others) was a sort of worshipful recognition of Divine Providence. leads him to modify the rendering of the combined roots to El is friendship. We have paid some little attention to this theory in its results on the meaning of Bible names, and deem it well worthy of further consideration.
Exo. 2:21. Zipporah] Here we come upon a pleasant touch of human nature. This name sigs little bird (cf. Scottish birdie.) Pronounced with the sharp hissing sound of the Heb. initial letter (= tz, ts, ss), we may hear the chirping of the little bird in the name. The Bible is full of human as well as divine beauties. For a suggested relief of M.s married life from the gloom allowed to gather round it, see C. N. ch. Exo. 4:24-26. Between the well and the mountain we have years of domestic history spanned over with two or three hints. At least, let us make the best of these.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Exo. 2:16-22
THE REWARD OF A KINDLY ACTION
Moses had defended the daughters of the Priest of Midian from the attack of hostile shepherds. In these verses we see the reward of a kindly action.
I. The hospitality of a kind family. (Exo. 2:20.)
1. This hospitality was much needed by Moses. He was an outcast. He had excited the anger of a tyrant king. Therefore, the provision and protection of a quiet home, the sympathy of tender hearts, would be most welcome to him. Nor was this generosity unmerited on his part. He had protected a family in a time of perilhe had therefore shown himself worthy of helpthat he was of good characterof sympathetic and heroic natureby defending the weak. Such men have a right to the best hospitality of societythey should be welcomed to our homes. See what a refuge of peacewhat resources of joyone little act of kindness may open up to a man.
2. This hospitality was prompted by Parental inquiry. (Exo. 2:20.) Parents should always teach their children hospitality, especially in return for any kindness shown them. We should never leave any man who has benefitted us, in the enterprises of life, sitting by a well. This is often the way of the worldit is ungratefulunthoughtfulreprehensible. A good and considerate father often turns his home into a sanctuary for the servants of God. By welcoming a heroic stranger to it, he may bring himself into harmony with great histories, and sublime providences.
II. Employment for every day life. It would seem that Moses entered into the occupation of the family whose hospitality he had been called to receive (Exo. 3:1). When a young man is thus welcomed by a kind family he must expect to share their work, as also their foodtheir perils, as also their reposetheir anxieties, as also their hopes. The study of Moses in Egypt had not raised him above hard work.
III. A wife. (Exo. 2:21.) A man who will defend a woman is worthy of a wife. The greatest and most important events of our lives depend upon little deeds of kindness.
IV. Another advance in the intention of Divine Providence. Moses has finished his education in the Palace. He now commences that of the desert. Providence has changed his academy. And men, by shewing a kindness to their fellows, advance themselves in the great destiny of their lives.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Exo. 2:16. A large family
1. Of sacred station.
2. Of womanly influence.
3. Of industrious activity. It is often the joy of priests to receive those whom tyrant kings reject and seek to slay.
Providence employs varied agencies.
1. Princess.
2. Priest.
Providence orders the coming of help to the place where the good are waiting for it
1. The kings daughter to the river.
2. The priests daughter to the well.
Domestic toil.
1. The employment of true womanhood.
2. The test of true womanhood.
3. The glory of true womanhood.
What a contrast between the young ladies of to-day, and the industrious daughters of this primitive family.
Exo. 2:17. Wherever the providence of God casts us, we should endeavour to be useful. Even honest and industrious labourers sometimes meet with opposition.
There is a great tendency in society for the strong to oppress the weak.
Two classes of men are typified by the conduct of these shepherds, and Moses. The former
1. Oppose the honest.
2. Persecute the industrious.
3. Hinder the diligent. The latter
1. Cooperate with the weak.
2. Sympathise with the persecuted.
3. Defend the imperilled.
4. Win the Victory.
5. Receive hospitality.
Exo. 2:18. Fathers houses are just habitations for children doing their commands.
Honest, labouring creatures, are carried out, and returned home safely, under Providence.
Gods providence may make speedier returns in mercy to his children than they expect.
Unexpected returns of common mercies may justly raise wonder in the hearts of men.
The providence of God orders means to speed mercies unto creatures at His will.
The hand of strangers is made sometimes a deliverer from the hands of oppressing neighbours. God takes the weak sometimes out of the hand of the strong.
Exo. 2:20. Men of kindly soul, and heroic deed are sure to be inquired after.
Good men would not have the man who has done them a kindness forgotten.
Why is it that ye have left the man. This question may be asked in reference to the worlds philanthropists, preachers, who are striving to defend the weak.
1. Is it because you do not understand him?
2. Is it because you do not believe in him?
3. Is it because you are selfish.
4. Is it because you have not been taught better.
5. Fetch him to your home as soon as possible.
Exo. 2:21. A contented resident.
1. A wondrous sightaccustomed to a palace.
2. A happy sightpastoral toil.
3. A scarce sightmen are restless.
He was content
1. With his daily companionships.
2. With his daily occupation.
3. With the scene of his residence,
4. With his matrimonial alliance.
A good man can be content anywhere the providence of God may place him.
Honest work is perfectly consistent with the dignity of those who are to be pioneers of the Church.
Providence may change a servant to a son, and a master to a father.
It is the fathers right to bestow his children in marriage.
Exo. 2:22. Sons born in the time of affliction, are often memorials of help and mercy.
It is the fathers right to name his child.
The best and grandest men reckon themselves but strangers in this world.
A pilgrim life the best for preachers.
1. Good for their health.
2. Good for their moral training.
3. Good for their moral usefulness.
4. Good for the enlargement of their social friendships.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(16) The priest of Midian.Reuel may have been both priest and prince, like Melchizedek (Gen. 14:18); but there is no reason to doubt that he is here called priest. In Exo. 18:12, Jethro is represented as exercising priestly functions. The Midianites, descendants of Abraham by Keturah, worshipped the true God, and seem to have been at this time a religious people. The name Reuel, or Raguel, means friend of God. Jethros sacrifices were for God, and Aaron and the elders eat bread with him before God.
They came and drew water.Comp. Gen. 29:9. According to Oriental ideas, there is nothing derogatory in the daughters of a chief so acting.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
16, 17. Moses’s quick sense of right, and promptness to help the weak, are seen in the desert as well as in the brick-field, and he secures the hospitality of Reuel as Jacob did that of Laban. The priest’s flock consisted of sheep and goats, though he probably had also camels and asses; but for these there may not have been water and pasturage in the desert of Sinai. It is not likely that Reuel was a “prince,” as written in the margin.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Moses in the Land of Midian
v. 16. Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters; and they came and drew water, and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock. v. 17. And the shepherds came and drove them away, v. 18. And when they came to Reuel, their father, he said, How is it that ye are come so soon today? v. 19. And they said, An Egyptian, v. 20. And he said unto his daughters, And where is he? Why is it that ye have left the man? Call him that he may eat bread. v. 21. And Moses was content to dwell with the man, v. 22. And she bare him a son, and he called his name Gershom
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION.
Exo 2:16-22
LIFE OF MOSES IN MIDIAN
Fugitives from Egypt generally took the northern route from Pelusium or Migdol to Gaza, and so to Syria, or the regions beyond. But in this quarter they were liable to be arrested and sent back to the Egyptian monarch. Rameses II: put a special clause to this effect into his treaty with the contemporary Hittite king. It was, perhaps, the fear of extradition which made Moses turn his steps southeastward, and proceed along the route, or at any rate in the direction, which he afterwards took with his nation. Though Egypt had possessions in the Sinaitic peninsula, it was not difficult to avoid them; and before Sinai was reached the fugitive would be in complete safety, for the Egyptians seem never to have penetrated to the southern or eastern parts of the great triangle. “The well,” by which Moses took up his abode, is placed with some probability in the neighbourhood of Sherm, about ten miles north-east of Ras Mahommed, the southern cape of the peninsula
Exo 2:16.
The priest of Midian. Cohen is certainly “priest” here, and not “prince,” since the father-in-law of Moses exercises priestly functions in Exo 18:12. His seven daughters drew water for his flock, in accordance with Eastern custom. So Rachel “kept the sheep” of her father Laban, and watered them (Gen 29:9). Such a practice agrees well with the simplicity of primitive times and peoples; nor would it even at the present day be regarded as strange in Arabia.
Exo 2:17
The shepherds came and drove them away. There is not much “natural politeness” among primitive peoples. The right of the stronger prevails, and women go to the wall. Even the daughters of their priest were not respected by these rude sons of the desert, who would not wait their turn, but used the water which Reners daughters had drawn. The context shows that this was not an accidental or occasional circumstance, but the regular practice of the shepherds, who thus day after day saved themselves the trouble of drawing. (See the next verse.) Moses stood up and helped them. Ever ready to assist the weak against the strong (supra, Exo 2:12-13), Moses “stood up” sprang to his feet and, though only one man against a dozen or a score, by his determined air intimidated the crowd of wrong-doers, and forced them to let the maidens’ sheep drink at the troughs. His dress was probably that of an Egyptian of rank; and they might reasonably conclude from his boldness that he had attendants within call.
Exo 2:18
Reuel their father. Reuel is called “Raguel” in Num 10:29, but the Hebrew spelling is the same in both places. The word means “friend of God,” and implies monotheisim. Compare Exo 18:9-12.
Exo 2:19
An Egyptian. Reuel’s daughters judged by the outward appearance. Moses wore the garb and probably spoke the language of Egypt. He had had no occasion to reveal to them his real nationality. Drew water enough for us. The shepherds had consumed some of the water drawn by the maidens, before Moses could drive them off. He supplied the deficiency by drawing more for them an act of polite attention.
Exo 2:20
Where is he? Reuel reproaches his daughters with a want of politeness even of gratitude. Why have they “left the man”? Why have they not invited him in? They must themselves remedy the omission they must go and “call him” that he “may eat bread,” or take his evening meal with them.
Exo 2:21
Moses was content to dwell with the man. Moses had fled from Egypt without any definite plan, simply to save his life, and had now to determine how he would obtain a subsistence. Received into Reuel’s house, or tent, pleased with the man and with his family, he consented to stay with him, probably entered into his service, as Jacob into Laban’s (Gen 29:15-20), kept his sheep, or otherwise made himself useful (see Exo 3:1); and in course of time Reuel gave Moses his daughter, accepted him for his son-in-law, so that he became not merely a member of his household, but of his family, was adopted probably into the tribe, so that he could not quit it without permission (Exo 4:18), and, so far as his own intention went, cast in his lot with the Midianites, with whom he meant henceforth to live and die. Such vague ideas as he may previously have entertained of his “mission” had passed away; he had been “disillusioned” by his ill-success, and now looked forward to nothing but a life of peaceful obscurity.
Exo 2:22.
Gershom. An Egyptian etymology has been assigned to this name; but Moses in the text clearly indicates that his own intention was to give his child a name significant in Hebrew. “He called his name Gershom, for he said, a stranger (ger) have I been,” etc. The only question is, what the second element of the name, shom, means. This appears to be correctly explained by Kalisch and others as equivalent to sham “there ” so that the entire word would mean “(I was) a stranger there” i.e. in the country where this son was born to me.
HOMILETICS.
Exo 2:16-19.
1. Moses a second time the champion of the oppressed.
His championship of an oppressed Hebrew, indiscreetly and wrongfully asserted, had driven Moses from the country of his birth. No sooner does he set foot in the land where he seeks a refuge, than his championship is again called forth. On the first occasion it was a weaker race oppressed by one more powerful that made appeal to his feelings; now it is the weaker sex, oppressed by the stronger, that rouses him. His Egyptian civilisation may have helped to intensify his aversion to this form of oppression, since among the Egyptians of his time women held a high place, and were treated with consideration. He springs forward therefore to maintain the rights of Reuel’s daughters; but he has learnt wisdom so far that he restrains himself kills no one, strikes no one merely “helps” the victims, and has their wrong redressed. The circumstances of life give continual occasion for such interference as this; and each man is bound, so far as he can, to check oppression, and “see that they who are in need and necessity have right.” If Moses is a warning to us in respect of his mode of action on the former occasion, he is an example here. The protection of women, whensoever and wheresoever they are wronged and ill-used, is a high Christian duty.
Exo 2:21-22
2. Moses as husband and father.
The Midianites were descendants of Abraham (Gen 25:24); and marriage with them was permitted, even under the Law (Num 31:18). Moses, in wedding Zipporah, obeyed the primeval command, “Be fruitful and multiply” (Gen 1:28), while at the same time he gave himself the solace so much needed by an exile, of tender and loving lifelong companionship. That Reuel was willing to give him one of his daughters indicates that he had approved himself as a faithful servant in the good priest’s household, and was felt to deserve a reward. That Zipporah accepted him was perhaps mere filial obedience, for which she was rewarded when the fugitive and exile became the first man in a considerable nation. God blessed the marriage with male issue, a blessing fondly desired by each true Israelite, and certainly not least by Moses, who knew so well that in some descendant of Abraham “all the families of the earth should be blessed.” A shade of sadness shows itself, however, in the name which he gave his firstborn Gershom, “a stranger there.” He himself had been for years, and, for aught that he could tell. his son might always be “a stranger in a strange land” far from his true home, far from his own people, a refugee among foreigners, who could not be expected to love him as one of themselves, or treat him otherwise than with coldness. Depression like this often assails us at moments of great joy, the good obtained making us feel all the more sensibly that other goods have been lost. Such depression, however, after a time, passes away, and the desponding cry of “Gershom” is followed (Exo 18:3-4) by that of” Eliezer,” or “my God helps.”
HOMILIES BY J. ORR
Exo 2:15-23
The long exile.Moses took with him into Midian all the best elements of his character; he left some of the faulty ones behind. He may be assumed to have left much of his self-confidence, and to have been cured in part of his natural rashness. His after growth in meekness would almost imply that he had come to see the need of curbing his hot passions, and had, like David, purposed in his heart that he would not transgress (Psa 17:3; Psa 32:1). But he carried with him all his nobleness, all his magnanimity and courtesy. This comes beautifully out in his defence of the women at the well (Exo 2:16-17).
I. AN INSTANCE OF CHIVALRY.
We have in the incident 1. The weak pushed aside by the strong. Rude, ill-mannered fellows thrust aside the daughters of the priest of Midian from the sheep-troughs, and shamelessly appropriate the water with which they had diligently filled them.2. Brave championship of the weak. Moses takes their part, stands up to help them, and compels the shepherds to give way. Not content with this, he gives the maidens what assistance he is able. The two dispositions stand in fine contrast: the one all that is unmanly and contemptible, the other all that is chivalrous and noble. The instance teaches 1. That the chivalrous disposition is also helpful. The one grace sets off the other. But the bully is a churl, helping nobody, and filching from the weak.2. That the bully is to boot a coward. He will insult a woman, but cringes in the presence of her vindicator. No true man need be afraid to beard him.3. That acts of kindness to the defenceless are often repaid in unexpected ways. They are indeed their own reward. It revives one’s spirit to maintain the cause of the needy. Moses, like Jesus, sat by the well; but this little act of kindness, like the Saviour’s conversation with the woman of Samaria, did more to refresh his spirit than the sweetest draught he could have taken from it. It was good for him, defeated in resisting tyranny in Egypt, and discouraged by the reception he had met with from his brethren, to have this opportunity of reasserting his crushed manhood, and of feeling that he was still useful. It taught him, and it teaches us (1) Not to despair of doing good. Tyranny has many phases, and when it cannot be resisted in one form, it may in another. And it taught him(2) Not to despair of human nature. Gratitude had not vanished from the earth, because his brethren had proved ungrateful. Hearts were still to be found, sensitive to the magic touch of kindness; capable of responding to it; ready to repay it by love. For the little deed of chivalry led to unexpected and welcome results. It prepared the way for the hospitable reception of Moses by Reuel; found for him a home in Midian; gave him a wife; provided him with suitable occupation.
II. THE RESIDENCE IN MIDIAN.
Notice on this 1. The place of it. In or near the Peninsula of Sinai. Solitude and grandeur. Fit place for education of thought and heart. Much alone with God with Nature in her more awful aspects with his own thoughts.2. The society of it. He had probably few companions beyond his immediate circle: his wife; her father, sheikh and priest, pious, hospitable, kindly-natured; the sisters. His life simple and unartificial, a wholesome corrective to the luxury of Egypt.3. The occupation of it. He kept flocks (Exo 3:1). The shepherd’s life, besides giving him a valuable knowledge of the topography of the desert, was very suitable for developing qualities important in a leader watchfulness, skill, caution, self-reliance, bravery, tenderness, etc. So David was taken “from the sheepcote, from following the sheep,” to be ruler over God’s people, over Israel (2Sa 7:8). It lets in light on Moses’ character that he was willing to stoop to, and did not spurn, this lowly toil. He that could so humble himself was fit to be exalted. By faithfulnesss in that which was least, he served an apprenticeship for being faithful also in much (Luk 16:10).4. The duration of it. Forty years was a long time, but not too long for the training God was giving him. The richest characters are slowest in coming to maturity, and Moses was all this while developing in humility, and in knowledge of God, of man, and, of his own heart.
The whole subject teaches us valuable lessons. Learn
1. God’s dealings with his servants are often mysterious. Moses in Midian seems an instance of the highest gifts thrown uselessly away. Is this, we ask in surprise, the only use God can find for a man so richly gifted, so remarkably preserved, and on whom have been lavished all the treasures of Egypt’s wisdom? Any ordinary man might be a shepherd, but how few could do the work of a Moses? Moses himself, in the meditations of these forty years, must often have wondered at the strange irony of his life. Yet how clear it was all made to him at last! Trust God to know better what is good for you than you do yourself.2. How little a man has, after all, to do with the shaping of his own history! In one sense he has much, yea everything, to do with it. Had Moses, e.g., not so rashly slain the Egyptian, his whole future would doubtless have borne a different complexion. Man is responsible for his acts, but once he has done them, they are taken in spite of himself out of his hands, and shaped in their consequences by overruling Providence. He who sent the princess to the river, sent also the priest’s daughters to the well.3. It is man’s wisdom to study contentment with his lot. It may be humble, and not the lot we like, or had counted on. It may be a lot to which we never expected to be reduced. We may feel as if our gifts and powers were being wasted in it. Yet if it is our lot the one meanwhile providentialiy marked out for us our wisdom is cheerfully to accept of it, and make the best of the tasks which belong to it, J.O.
Exo 2:22
Gershom.1. The good man in this world is often lonely at heart.(1) When violence reigns unchecked. (2) When God’s cause is in a depressed condition. (3) When repulsed in efforts to do good. (4) When severed from scenes of former labour. (5) When his outward lot is uncongenial. (6) When deprived of suitable companionships, and when he can find few to sympathise with him.2. God sends to the good man alleviations of his loneliness. We may hope that Zipporah, if not without faults, formed a kind and helpful wife to Moses. Then, sons were born to him the first, the Gershom of this text.
These were consolations. A wife’s affection, the prattle and innocence of children have sweetened the lot of many all exile. Bunyan and his blind daughter. J.O.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
Exo 2:15-22. Moses in Midian.Moses had to flee. The hard, unworthy reproach, humiliating as he must have felt it to be, nevertheless gave him a timely warning. His flight seems to have been instantaneous; perhaps not even the opportunity to bid farewell to his friends. An utter rupture, a complete separation was his only safety. Consider
I. WHAT HE LEFT BEHIND HIM.
1. Possibly Pharaoh’s daughter was still alive. If so, we can imagine her sorrow and utter perplexity over the son of her adoption, and the reproaches she might have to bear from her own kindred. How often she may have heard that common expression which adds insult to bitter disappointment, “I told you so.” We may be tolerably sure as to one result of the long sojourn of Moses in Midian, viz., that when he returned, she would be vanished from the scene, spared from beholding the son of her adoption the agent of such dreadful visitations to her own people. Yet even with this mitigation, the agony may have been more than she could boar. She had sheltered Moses, watched over him, and “nourished him for her own son,” giving him the opportunity to become learned m all the wisdom of the Egyptians; only to find at last that a sword had pierced through her own soul (Luk 2:35; Act 7:21-22).2. He left his brethren in servitude. Any expectation they may have had, from his present eminence and possibly greater eminence in the future, was now completely crushed. It is well to effect a timely crushing of false hopes, even if great severity has to be used.3. He left behind all difficulties that came from his connexion with the court. Had he gone on staying in Egypt he would have had to make his election, sooner or later, between the Egyptians and his own people. But now he is spared having to decide for himself. We have to thank God that he sometimes takes painful and difficult decisions out of our hands, so that we have no longer to blame ourselves either for haste or procrastination; for rashness and imprudence, or cowardice and sloth. God in his providence does things for us, which we might find it very hard to do for ourselves.
II. WHAT HE FOUND BEFORE HIM.
He went out, hardly knowing whither he went. The safest place was the best for him, and that safest place might not immediately appear. Yet how plain it is that God was guiding him, as really as he guided Abraham, though Moses was not conscious of the guiding. He fled because he had slain a fellow-man, yet he was not going forth as a Cain. Under the wrath of Pharaoh, he was not under that wrath of God which rests upon murderers. He Was going to a new school, that was all having learned all that could be learned in the old one. He probably asked himself as he fled, “Where can I go? Who will receive me? What story can I tell?” He would feel, now the homicide was known, that it was impossible to say how far the news had reached. Onward he sped perhaps, like most fugitives of the sort, hiding by day and travelling by night until at last he reached the land of Midian. Here he concluded to dwells although it may have been in his mind only a temporary stage to a distant and safer abode. And now observe that with this fresh mention of what happened to him after his flight, there is an immediate and still further revelation of his character, all in the way of showing his natural fitness for the great work of his life. He has made an awful mistake in his manner of showing sympathy with Israel, and in consequence has exposed himself to a humiliating rebuff; but all this does not make him one whit less willing to champion the weak when the occasion comes. He was a man always ready for opportunities of service; and wherever he went there seemed to be something for him to do. He had fled from a land where the strong oppressed the weak, and come into another land where he found the same thing prevailing, and in one of its most offensive forms; for the tyranny was that of man over woman. The people of Midian had a priest who seems to have been himself a hospitable man and a judicious and prudent one (ch. 18.); but there was so little reality of religion among the people, so little respect for the priest’s office, that these shepherds drove his daughters away from the well whom rather they should have gladly helped. It was not an occasional misadventure to the daughters, but a regular experience (Exo 2:18). None of these shepherds perhaps had ever killed a man, but for all that they were a pack of savage boors. Moses, on the other hand, even though he has slain a man, is not a mere bravo, one who puts little value on human life. One might have said of him as Chaucer says of one of his pilgrims in the ‘Canterbury Tales,'”He was a veray parfit gentil knight.”Then, when Moses had helped the women, his difficulties and doubts were soon brought to an end. He had helped them, though they were utter strangers, because he felt it his duty so to do. He was not looking to them for a release from his difficulties, for how could a few weak women help him, those who had just been the objects of his own pity? But as women had been the means of protecting him in infancy, so they were the means of providing for him now. He did not seek Reuel; Reuel sought him. He needed no certificate of character, these daughters themselves were an epistle of commendation to their father. He might safely tell all his story now, for even the darkest chapter of it would be viewed in the light of his recent generous action. Y.
Exo 2:15
Sitting by the well: a suggestive comparison.The very expression, “He sat down by a well,” inevitably suggests that conversation beside the well at Sychar, in which Jesus took so important a part. Note the following points of resemblance, and then say if they can be considered as purely accidental. Are they not rather involved in the profound designs of him who presided over the construction of the Scriptures?1. As we see Moses fleeing from the face of Pharaoh, so we see Jesus making a prudent departure from Judaea into Galilee, on account of the Pharisees.2. Both Moses and Jesus are found sitting by a well.3. As Moses comes in contact with seven women of a different nation, so Jesus with the woman of Samaria. And just as the daughters of Reuel made the difference seem greater still by calling Moses an Egyptian, which though a name partly appropriate, was yet particularly inappropriate at a time when he was the object of Pharaoh’s bitterest hatred so the woman of Samaria laid emphasis on the fact that Jesus was a Jew, being altogether ignorant how small a part was that of the truth concerning him.4. The very difference in number is significant. Moses could help a number in the service that he rendered, because it was a mere external service. But Jesus needed to have the woman of Samaria alone, that he might deal effectually with her peculiar, individual need. There is a great difference in respect of the things to be said and done, according as we are dealing with one person or more than one.5. The meeting of Moses with the daughters of Reuel led on to his becoming acquainted with Reuel himself; gaining his confidence and becoming his helper. So Jesus serving the woman of Samaria was led on to serve, not one only, but many of those connected with her.6. Moses soon entered into a nearer relation still with Reuel, and Jesus in the course of his conversation with the woman asserted principles which were to break down the barriers between Sew and Samaritan, and every wall of partition separating those who should be united. Lastly, he who helped these women became a shepherd; and his dying thought was of a shepherd’s work, as he prayed God to give him a successor who should be a true shepherd to Israel. And as to Jesus, we all know how he delighted to set himself before his disciples as the Good Shepherd, deeply concerned for the nourishment and security of his flock, and concerned most of all to seek and to save that which was lost (Mat 18:11-13; Luk 15:4; Luk 19:10). Y.
HOMILIES BY H.T. ROBJOHNS
Exo 2:22
Life and its moods.”He called his name Gershom,” etc. (Exo 2:22), compared with “And the name of the other was Eliezer,” etc. (Exo 18:4). Note the isolation and misery of the earlier time, and the mercy of the later each begetting its own tone and mood of mind; and further, the desirability of living above the mood of the passing day. Rev. O. Kingsley says (‘Life,’ 1:82): “Let us watch against tones. They are unsafe things. The tone of a man or woman’s mind ought to be that of thoughtful reverence and love; but neither joy or sorrow, or activity or passiveness, or any other animal tone, ought to be habitual,” etc. R.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Exo 2:16. Now the priest of Midian Or, now a prince of Midian. See Gen 41:45. The original word signifies either priest or prince. Jethro, probably, was both, as was usual in those days. He appears to have been a priest of the true GOD, from ch. Exo 18:11-12. The event here recorded respecting his daughters, is very similar to that mentioned, Genesis 29 to which, and to the notes upon it, we refer. This is a fresh instance of the pastoral simplicity of ancient times, when the care of flocks was not thought beneath the dignity of princes or their daughters.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
It is probable that this Reuel was a priest of the true God among the Midianites, as Melchizedec was among the Canaanites. See Gen 14:18 . But how afterwards his name is changed to Hobab we know not. See Num 10:29 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Exo 2:16 Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters: and they came and drew [water], and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock.
Ver. 16. Now the priest. ] Or, Prince. The old Egyptians chose their kings from among the priests. Samuel was both a priest and a judge in Israel. The Emperor of Rome had for one of his titles Pontifex Maximus, the high priest. Among the Turks, the judges at this day are ever ecclesiastical persons, whereby both orders joined give reputation to one another, and maintenance. a
And they came and drew water.
a Blunt’s Voyage, p. 89.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
priest: or chieftain exercising priestly functions, as Job and Melchizedec. Jethro (Exo 3:1) is called Reuel (Exo 2:18).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
the priest: or, prince, Exo 3:1, Gen 14:18, Gen 41:45, *marg.
they came: Gen 24:11, Gen 24:14-20, Gen 29:6-10, 1Sa 9:11
Reciprocal: Gen 21:25 – servants Gen 24:13 – daughters Gen 24:15 – pitcher Gen 25:2 – Midian Gen 29:2 – a well Gen 29:9 – Rachel Gen 37:28 – Midianites Exo 18:1 – Jethro Num 12:1 – Ethiopian Num 31:2 – the Midianites 2Sa 20:26 – chief ruler 1Ch 1:32 – Midian Pro 31:13 – worketh
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
5. Moses’ life in Midian 2:16-25
This section introduces some of the secondary characters in Exodus and sets the stage for Moses’ call. Its purpose is primarily transitional.
Moses provided water for Jethro’s daughters and their sheep in the wilderness (Exo 2:16-17). Later he provided water for God’s people and their flocks in the wilderness (cf. Exo 17:6; Num 20:7-11). This was the third time Moses sought to deliver others from harm (Exo 2:17; cf. Exo 2:12-13).
As "the priest of Midian" (Exo 2:16) Reuel ("friend of God," Exo 2:18) was the spiritual head of his branch of the Midianites. Moses’ father-in-law had at least two names: Reuel (or Raguel, Exo 2:18; Num 10:29) and Jethro (or Jether, Exo 3:1; Exo 4:18; Exo 18:1-2; Exo 18:5-6; Exo 18:9-10; Exo 18:12). He appears to have been a worshipper of the true God (cf. Exo 18:12-23). At this time he may simply have been a God-fearing Semite.
Moses’ years in Midian were years of bitter humiliation. He gave expression to his feelings by naming his first son Gershom (Exo 2:22), meaning "banishment."
"The pride and self-will with which he had offered himself in Egypt as the deliverer and judge of his oppressed brethren, had been broken down by the feeling of exile." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, 1:435.]
Moses lived in Midian "many days" (Exo 2:23) before Pharaoh (Thutmose III) died. Stephen said it was a period of 40 years (Act 7:30).
". . . Moses is at home in the author’s view because he has come at last to a people who worship the God of his fathers. The Moses-Midian connection is theological. Suggested deftly in this climactic section of the narrative of chap. 2, that connection will be affirmed in chaps. 3-4 and 18." [Note: Durham, p. 22.]
The prayers of the Israelites in their bondage touched God’s heart, and He began anew to act for them (cf. Exo 3:7-9). This is another of the many references in Scripture that indicate that prayer affects some of God’s actions. Remembering His covenant with the patriarchs, God acted for the Israelites by commissioning Moses.
God graciously and sovereignly used Moses’ sin (evidently manslaughter, Exo 2:12) to bring ultimate blessing for His chosen people (cf. Rom 5:20). This is important to observe as we seek to understand God’s ways.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
MOSES IN MIDIAN.
Exo 2:16-22
The interference of Moses on behalf of the daughters of the priest of Midian is a pleasant trait, courteous, and expressive of a refined nature. With this remark, and reflecting that, like many courtesies, it brought its reward, we are often content to pass it by. And yet it deserves a closer examination.
1. For it expresses great energy of character. He might well have been in a state of collapse. He had smitten the Egyptian for Israel’s sake: he had appealed to his own people to make common cause, like brethren, against the common foe; and he had offered himself to them as their destined leader in the struggle. But they had refused him the command, and he was rudely awakened to the consciousness that his life was in danger through the garrulous ingratitude of the man he rescued. Now he was a ruined man and an exile, marked for destruction by the greatest of earthly monarchs, with the habits and tastes of a great noble, but homeless among wild races.
It was no common nature which was alert and energetic at such a time. The greatest men have known a period of prostration in calamity: it was enough for honour that they should rally and re-collect their forces. Thinking of Frederick, after Kunersdorf, resigning the command (“I have no resources more, and will not survive the destruction of my country”), and of his subsequent despatch, “I am now recovered from my illness”; and of Napoleon, trembling and weeping on the road to Elba, one turns with fresh admiration to the fallen prince, the baffled liberator, sitting exhausted by the well, but as keen on behalf of liberty as when Pharaoh trampled Israel, though now the oppressors are a group of rude herdsmen, and the oppressed are Midianite women, driven from the troughs which they have toiled to fill. One remembers Another, sitting also exhausted by the well, defying social usage on behalf of a despised woman, and thereby inspired and invigorated as with meat to eat which His followers knew not of.
2. Moreover there is disinterested bravery in the act, since he hazards the opposition of the men of the land, among whom he seeks refuge, on behalf of a group from which he can have expected nothing. And here it is worth while to notice the characteristic variations in three stories which have certain points of contact. The servant of Abraham, servant-like, was well content that Rebekah should draw for all his camels, while he stood still. The prudent Jacob, anxious to introduce himself to his cousin, rolled away the stone and watered her camels. Moses sat by the well, but did not interfere while the troughs were being filled: it was only the overt wrong which kindled him. But as in great things, so it is in small: our actions never stand alone; having once befriended them, he will do it thoroughly, “and moreover he drew water for us, and watered the flock.” Such details could hardly have been thought out by a fabricator; a legend would not have allowed Moses to be slower in courtesy than Jacob;[5] but the story fits the case exactly: his eyes were with his heart, and that was far away, until the injustice of the shepherds roused him.
And why was Moses thus energetic, fearless, and chivalrous? Because he was sustained by the presence of the Unseen: he endured as seeing Him who is invisible; and having, despite of panic, by faith forsaken Egypt, he was free from the absorbing anxieties which prevent men from caring for their fellows, free also from the cynical misgivings which suspect that violence is more than justice, that to be righteous over-much is to destroy oneself, and that perhaps, after all, one may see a good deal of wrong without being called upon to interfere. It would be a different world today, if all who claim to be “the salt of the earth” were as eager to repress injustice in its smaller and meaner forms as to make money or influential friends. If all petty and cowardly oppression were sternly trodden down, we should soon have a state of public opinion in which gross and large tyranny would be almost impossible. And it is very doubtful whether the flagrant wrongs, which must be comparatively rare, cause as much real mental suffering as the frequent small ones. Does mankind suffer more from wild beasts than from insects? But how few that aspire to emancipate oppressed nations would be content, in the hour of their overthrow, to assert the rights of a handful of women against a trifling fraud, to which indeed they were so well accustomed that its omission surprised their father!
Is it only because we are reading a history, and not a biography, that we find no touch of tenderness, like the love of Jacob for Rachel, in the domestic relations of Moses?
Joseph also married in a strange land, yet he called the name of his first son Manasseh, because God had made him to forget his sorrows: but Moses remembered his. Neither wife nor child could charm away his home sickness; he called his firstborn Gershom, because he was a sojourner in a strange land. In truth, his whole life seems to have been a lonely one. Miriam is called “the sister of Aaron” even when joining in the song of Moses (xv. 20), and with Aaron she made common cause against their greater brother (Num 12:1-2). Zipporah endangered his life rather than obey the covenant of circumcision; she complied at last with a taunt (Exo 4:24-26), and did not again join him until his victory over Amalek raised his position to the utmost height (Exo 18:2).
His children are of no account, and his grandson is the founder of a dangerous and enduring schism (Jdg 18:30, R.V.).
There is much reason to see here the earliest example of the sad rule that a prophet is not without honour save in his own house; that the law of compensations reaches farther into life than men suppose; and high position and great powers are too often counterbalanced by the isolation of the heart.
FOOTNOTES:
[5] Nor would it have made the women call their deliverer “an Egyptian,” for the Hebrew cast of features is very dissimilar. But Moses wore Egyptian dress, and the Egyptians worked mines in the peninsula, so that he was naturally taken for one of them.