Exodus 15:21

15:21 Miriam sang in response ¹  to them, “Sing to the Lord, for he has triumphed gloriously; the horse and its rider he has thrown into the sea.” ² 

Exodus 15:20

15:20 Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a hand-drum in her hand, and all the women went out after her with hand-drums and with dances. ³ 

Exodus 15:23

15:23 Then they came to Marah, ⁴  but they were not able to drink ⁵  the waters of Marah, because ⁶  they were bitter. ⁷  (That is ⁸  why its name was ⁹  Marah.)

Exodus 35:24

35:24 Everyone making an offering of silver or bronze brought it as ¹⁰  an offering to the Lord, and everyone who had acacia wood ¹¹  for any work of the service brought it. ¹² 

[15:21]  ¹ tn The verb עָנָה (’ana) normally means “to answer,” but it can be used more technically to describe antiphonal singing in Hebrew and in Ugaritic.

[15:21]  ² sn This song of the sea is, then, a great song of praise for Yahweh’s deliverance of Israel at the Sea, and his preparation to lead them to the promised land, much to the (anticipated) dread of the nations. The principle here, and elsewhere in Scripture, is that the people of God naturally respond to God in praise for his great acts of deliverance. Few will match the powerful acts that were exhibited in Egypt, but these nonetheless set the tone. The song is certainly typological of the song of the saints in heaven who praise God for delivering them from the bondage of this world by judging the world. The focus of the praise, though, still is on the person (attributes) and works of God.

[15:20]  ³ sn See J. N. Easton, “Dancing in the Old Testament,” ExpTim 86 (1975): 136-40.

[15:23]  ⁵ 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]  ⁶ 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]  ⁷ 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]  ⁸ 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]  ⁹ 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]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “one called its name,” the expression can be translated as a passive verb if the subject is not expressed.

[35:24]  ⁷ tn This translation takes “offering” as an adverbial accusative explaining the form or purpose of their bringing things. It could also be rendered as the direct object, but that would seem to repeat without much difference what had just been said.

[35:24]  ⁸ sn U. Cassuto notes that the expression “with whom was found” does not rule out the idea that these folks went out and cut down acacia trees (Exodus, 458). It is unlikely that they had much wood in their tents.

[35:24]  ⁹ tn Here “it” has been supplied.