Exodus 1:22

1:22 Then Pharaoh commanded all his people, “All sons ¹  that are born you must throw ²  into the river, but all daughters you may let live.” ³ 

Exodus 7:19-25

7:19 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Tell Aaron, ‘Take your staff and stretch out your hand over Egypt’s waters – over their rivers, over their canals, ⁴  over their ponds, and over all their reservoirs ⁵  – so that it becomes ⁶  blood.’ There will be blood everywhere in ⁷  the land of Egypt, even in wooden and stone containers.” 7:20 Moses and Aaron did so, ⁸  just as the Lord had commanded. Moses raised ⁹  the staff ¹⁰  and struck the water that was in the Nile right before the eyes ¹¹  of Pharaoh and his servants, ¹²  and all the water that was in the Nile was turned to blood. ¹³  7:21 When the fish ¹⁴  that were in the Nile died, the Nile began ¹⁵  to stink, so that the Egyptians could not drink water from the Nile. There was blood ¹⁶  everywhere in the land of Egypt! 7:22 But the magicians of Egypt did the same ¹⁷  by their secret arts, and so ¹⁸  Pharaoh’s heart remained hard, ¹⁹  and he refused to listen to Moses and Aaron ²⁰  – just as the Lord had predicted. 7:23 And Pharaoh turned and went into his house. He did not pay any attention to this. ²¹  7:24 All the Egyptians dug around the Nile for water to drink, ²²  because they could not drink the water of the Nile.

The Second Blow: Frogs

7:25 ²³ Seven full days passed ²⁴  after the Lord struck ²⁵  the Nile.

Matthew 7:2

7:2 For by the standard you judge you will be judged, and the measure you use will be the measure you receive. ²⁶ 

¹ tn The substantive כֹּל (kol) followed by the article stresses the entirety – “all sons” or “all daughters” – even though the nouns are singular in Hebrew (see GKC 411 §127.b).

² tn The form includes a pronominal suffix that reiterates the object of the verb: “every son…you will throw it.”

³ tn The first imperfect has the force of a definite order, but the second, concerning the girls, could also have the nuance of permission, which may fit better. Pharaoh is simply allowing the girls to live.

⁴ tn Or “irrigation rivers” of the Nile.

⁵ sn The Hebrew term means “gathering,” i.e., wherever they gathered or collected waters, notably cisterns and reservoirs. This would naturally lead to the inclusion of both wooden and stone vessels – down to the smallest gatherings.

⁶ tn The imperfect tense with vav (ו) after the imperative indicates the purpose or result: “in order that they [the waters] be[come] blood.”

⁷ tn Or “in all.”

⁸ sn Both Moses and Aaron had tasks to perform. Moses, being the “god” to Pharaoh, dealt directly with him and the Nile. He would strike the Nile. But Aaron, “his prophet,” would stretch out the staff over the rest of the waters of Egypt.

⁹ tn Heb “And he raised”; the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

¹⁰ tn Gesenius calls the preposition on “staff” the בְּ (bet) instrumenti, used to introduce the object (GKC 380-81 §119.q). This construction provides a greater emphasis than an accusative.

¹¹ tn The text could be rendered “in the sight of,” or simply “before,” but the literal idea of “before the eyes of” may stress how obvious the event was and how personally they were witnesses of it.

¹² sn U. Cassuto (Exodus, 98) notes that the striking of the water was not a magical act. It signified two things: (1) the beginning of the sign, which was in accordance with God’s will, as Moses had previously announced, and (2) to symbolize actual “striking,” wherewith the Lord strikes Egypt and its gods (see v. 25).

¹³ sn There have been various attempts to explain the details of this plague or blow. One possible suggestion is that the plague turned the Nile into “blood,” but that it gradually turned back to its normal color and substance. However, the effects of the “blood” polluted the water so that dead fish and other contamination left it undrinkable. This would explain how the magicians could also do it – they would not have tried if all water was already turned to blood. It also explains why Pharaoh did not ask for the water to be turned back. This view was put forward by B. Schor; it is summarized by B. Jacob (Exodus, 258), who prefers the view of Rashi that the blow affected only water in use.

¹⁴ tn The first clause in this verse begins with a vav disjunctive, introducing a circumstantial clause to the statement that the water stank. The vav (ו) consecutive on the next verb shows that the smell was the result of the dead fish in the contaminated water. The result is then expressed with the vav beginning the clause that states that they could not drink it.

¹⁵ tn The preterite could be given a simple definite past translation, but an ingressive past would be more likely, as the smell would get worse and worse with the dead fish.

¹⁶ tn Heb “and there was blood.”

¹⁷ tn Heb “thus, so.”

¹⁸ tn The vav consecutive on the preterite introduces the outcome or result of the matter – Pharaoh was hardened.

¹⁹ tn Heb “and the heart of Pharaoh became hard.” This phrase translates the Hebrew word חָזַק (khazaq; see S. R. Driver, Exodus, 53). In context this represents the continuation of a prior condition.

²⁰ tn Heb “to them”; the referents (Moses and Aaron) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

²¹ tn The text has וְלֹא־שָׁת לִבּוֹ גַּם־לָזֹאת (vÿlo’-shat libbo gam-lazo’t), which literally says, “and he did not set his heart also to this.” To “set the heart” to something would mean “to consider it.” This Hebrew idiom means that he did not pay attention to it, or take it to heart (cf. 2 Sam 13:20; Ps 48:13; 62:10; Prov 22:17; 24:32). Since Pharaoh had not been affected by this, he did not consider it or its implications further.

²² sn The text stresses that the water in the Nile, and Nile water that had been diverted or collected for use, was polluted and undrinkable. Water underground also was from the Nile, but it had not been contaminated, certainly not with dead fish, and so would be drinkable.

²³ sn An attempt to connect this plague with the natural phenomena of Egypt proposes that because of the polluted water due to the high Nile, the frogs abandoned their normal watery homes (seven days after the first plague) and sought cover from the sun in homes wherever there was moisture. Since they had already been exposed to the poisonous water, they died very suddenly. The miracle was in the announcement and the timing, i.e., that Moses would predict this blow, and in the magnitude of it all, which was not natural (Greta Hort, “The Plagues of Egypt,” ZAW 69 [1957]: 95-98). It is also important to note that in parts of Egypt there was a fear of these creatures as embodying spirits capable of great evil. People developed the mentality of bowing to incredibly horrible idols to drive away the bad spirits. Evil spirits are represented in the book of Revelation in the forms of frogs (Rev 16:13). The frogs that the magicians produced could very well have been in the realm of evil spirits. Exactly how the Egyptians thought about this plague is hard to determine, but there is enough evidence to say that the plague would have made them spiritually as well as physically uncomfortable, and that the death of the frogs would have been a “sign” from God about their superstitions and related beliefs. The frog is associated with the god Hapi, and a frog-headed goddess named Heqet was supposed to assist women at childbirth. The plague would have been evidence that Yahweh was controlling their environment and upsetting their beliefs for his own purpose.

²⁴ tn The text literally has “and seven days were filled.” Seven days gave Pharaoh enough time to repent and release Israel. When the week passed, God’s second blow came.

²⁵ tn This is a temporal clause made up of the preposition, the Hiphil infinitive construct of נָכָה (nakhah), הַכּוֹת (hakkot), followed by the subjective genitive YHWH. Here the verb is applied to the true meaning of the plague: Moses struck the water, but the plague was a blow struck by God.

²⁶ tn Grk “by [the measure] with which you measure it will be measured to you.”