Exodus 15:23-24

15:23 Then they came to Marah, ¹  but they were not able to drink ²  the waters of Marah, because ³  they were bitter. ⁴  (That is ⁵  why its name was ⁶  Marah.)

15:24 So the people murmured ⁷  against Moses, saying, “What can ⁸  we drink?”

Exodus 17:1-4

Water at Massa and Meribah

17:1 ⁹ The whole community ¹⁰  of the Israelites traveled on their journey ¹¹  from the Desert of Sin according to the Lord’s instruction, and they pitched camp in Rephidim. ¹²  Now ¹³  there was no water for the people to drink. ¹⁴  17:2 So the people contended ¹⁵  with Moses, and they said, “Give us water to drink!” ¹⁶  Moses said to them, “Why do you contend ¹⁷  with me? Why do you test ¹⁸  the Lord?” 17:3 But the people were very thirsty ¹⁹  there for water, and they murmured against Moses and said, “Why in the world ²⁰  did you bring us up out of Egypt – to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst?” ²¹ 

17:4 Then Moses cried out to the Lord, “What will I do with ²²  this people? – a little more ²³  and they will stone me!” ²⁴ 

[15:23]  ¹ sn The Hebrew word “Marah” means “bitter.” This motif will be repeated four times in this passage to mark the central problem. Earlier in the book the word had been used for the “bitter herbs” in the Passover, recalling the bitter labor in bondage. So there may be a double reference here – to the bitter waters and to Egypt itself – God can deliver from either.

[15:23]  ² tn The infinitive construct here provides the direct object for the verb “to be able,” answering the question of what they were not able to do.

[15:23]  ³ tn The causal clause here provides the reason for their being unable to drink the water, as well as a clear motivation for the name.

[15:23]  ⁴ sn Many scholars have attempted to explain these things with natural phenomena. Here Marah is identified with Ain Hawarah. It is said that the waters of this well are notoriously salty and brackish; Robinson said it was six to eight feet in diameter and the water about two feet deep; the water is unpleasant, salty, and somewhat bitter. As a result the Arabs say it is the worst tasting water in the area (W. C. Kaiser, Jr., “Exodus,” EBC 2:398). But that would not be a sufficient amount of water for the number of Israelites in the first place, and in the second, they could not drink it at all. But third, how did Moses change it?

[15:23]  ⁵ tn The עַל־כֵּן (’al-ken) formula in the Pentateuch serves to explain to the reader the reason for the way things were. It does not necessarily mean here that Israel named the place – but they certainly could have.

[15:23]  ⁶ tn Heb “one called its name,” the expression can be translated as a passive verb if the subject is not expressed.

[15:24]  ⁷ tn The verb וַיִּלֹנוּ (vayyillonu) from לוּן (lun) is a much stronger word than “to grumble” or “to complain.” It is used almost exclusively in the wilderness wandering stories, to describe the rebellion of the Israelites against God (see also Ps 59:14-15). They were not merely complaining – they were questioning God’s abilities and motives. The action is something like a parliamentary vote of no confidence.

[15:24]  ⁸ tn The imperfect tense here should be given a potential nuance: “What can we drink?” since the previous verse reports that they were not able to drink the water.

[17:1]  ⁹ sn This is the famous story telling how the people rebelled against Yahweh when they thirsted, saying that Moses had brought them out into the wilderness to kill them by thirst, and how Moses with the staff brought water from the rock. As a result of this the name was called Massa and Meribah because of the testing and the striving. It was a challenge to Moses’ leadership as well as a test of Yahweh’s presence. The narrative in its present form serves an important point in the argument of the book. The story turns on the gracious provision of God who can give his people water when there is none available. The narrative is structured to show how the people strove. Thus, the story intertwines God’s free flowing grace with the sad memory of Israel’s sins. The passage can be divided into three parts: the situation and the complaint (1-3), the cry and the miracle (4-6), and the commemoration by naming (7).

[17:1]  ¹⁰ tn Or “congregation” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV).

[17:1]  ¹¹ tn The text says that they journeyed “according to their journeyings.” Since the verb form (and therefore the derived noun) essentially means to pull up the tent pegs and move along, this verse would be saying that they traveled by stages, or, from place to place.

[17:1]  ¹² sn The location is a bit of a problem. Exod 19:1-2 suggests that it is near Sinai, whereas it is normally located near Kadesh in the north. Without any details provided, M. Noth concludes that two versions came together (Exodus [OTL], 138). S. R. Driver says that the writer wrote not knowing that they were 24 miles apart (Exodus, 157). Critics have long been bothered by this passage because of the two names given at the same place. If two sources had been brought together, it is not possible now to identify them. But Noth insisted that if there were two names there were two different locations. The names Massah and Meribah occur alone in Scripture (Deut 9:22, and Num 20:1 for examples), but together in Ps 95 and in Deut 33:8. But none of these passages is a clarification of the difficulty. Most critics would argue that Massah was a secondary element that was introduced into this account, because Exod 17 focuses on Meribah. From that starting point they can diverge greatly on the interpretation, usually having something to do with a water test. But although Num 20 is parallel in several ways, there are major differences: 1) it takes place 40 years later than this, 2) the name Kadesh is joined to the name Meribah there, and 3) Moses is punished there. One must conclude that if an event could occur twice in similar ways (complaint about water would be a good candidate for such), then there is no reason a similar name could not be given.

[17:1]  ¹³ tn The disjunctive vav introduces a parenthetical clause that is essential for this passage – there was no water.

[17:1]  ¹⁴ tn Here the construction uses a genitive after the infinitive construct for the subject: “there was no water for the drinking of the people” (GKC 353-54 §115.c).

[17:2]  ¹⁵ tn The verb וַיָּרֶב (vayyarev) is from the root רִיב (riv); it forms the basis of the name “Meribah.” The word means “strive, quarrel, be in contention” and even “litigation.” A translation “quarrel” does not appear to capture the magnitude of what is being done here. The people have a legal dispute – they are contending with Moses as if bringing a lawsuit.

[17:2]  ¹⁶ tn The imperfect tense with the vav (ו) follows the imperative, and so it carries the nuance of the logical sequence, showing purpose or result. This may be expressed in English as “give us water so that we may drink,” but more simply with the English infinitive, “give us water to drink.”

[17:2]  ¹⁷ tn In this case and in the next clause the imperfect tenses are to be taken as progressive imperfects – the action is in progress.

[17:2]  ¹⁸ tn The verb נָסָה (nasah) means “to test, tempt, try, prove.” It can be used of people simply trying to do something that they are not sure of (such as David trying on Saul’s armor), or of God testing people to see if they will obey (as in testing Abraham, Gen 22:1), or of people challenging others (as in the Queen of Sheba coming to test Solomon), and of the people in the desert in rebellion putting God to the test. By doubting that God was truly in their midst, and demanding that he demonstrate his presence, they tested him to see if he would act. There are times when “proving” God is correct and required, but that is done by faith (as with Gideon); when it is done out of unbelief, then it is an act of disloyalty.

[17:3]  ¹⁹ tn The verbs and the pronouns in this verse are in the singular because “the people” is singular in form.

[17:3]  ²⁰ tn The demonstrative pronoun is used as the enclitic form for special emphasis in the question; it literally says, “why is this you have brought us up?” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 24, §118).

[17:3]  ²¹ sn Their words deny God the credit for bringing them out of Egypt, impugn the integrity of Moses and God by accusing them of bringing the people out here to die, and show a lack of faith in God’s ability to provide for them.

[17:4]  ²² tn The preposition lamed (ל) is here specification, meaning “with respect to” (see R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 49, §273).

[17:4]  ²³ tn Or “they are almost ready to stone me.”

[17:4]  ²⁴ tn The perfect tense with the vav (ו) consecutive almost develops an independent force; this is true in sentences where it follows an expression of time, as here (see GKC 334 §112.x).