Exodus 2:10

2:10 When the child grew older ¹  she brought him to Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became her son. ²  She named him Moses, saying, “Because I drew him from the water.” ³ 

Exodus 7:15

7:15 Go to Pharaoh in the morning when ⁴  he goes out to the water. Position yourself ⁵  to meet him by the edge of the Nile, ⁶  and take ⁷  in your hand the staff ⁸  that was turned into a snake.

Exodus 7:21

7:21 When the fish ⁹  that were in the Nile died, the Nile began ¹⁰  to stink, so that the Egyptians could not drink water from the Nile. There was blood ¹¹  everywhere in the land of Egypt!

Exodus 8:6

8:6 So Aaron extended his hand over the waters of Egypt, and frogs ¹²  came up and covered the land of Egypt.

Exodus 12:9

12:9 Do not eat it raw ¹³  or boiled in water, but roast it over the fire with its head, its legs, and its entrails.

Exodus 14:26

14:26 The Lord said to Moses, “Extend your hand toward the sea, so that the waters may flow ¹⁴  back on the Egyptians, on their chariots, and on their horsemen!”

Exodus 14:28

14:28 The water returned and covered the chariots and the horsemen and all the army of Pharaoh that was coming after the Israelites into the sea ¹⁵  – not so much as one of them survived! ¹⁶ 

Exodus 15:22-23

The Bitter Water

15:22 ¹⁷ Then Moses led Israel to journey ¹⁸  away from the Red Sea. They went out to the Desert of Shur, walked for three days ¹⁹  into the desert, and found no water. 15:23 Then they came to Marah, ²⁰  but they were not able to drink ²¹  the waters of Marah, because ²²  they were bitter. ²³  (That is ²⁴  why its name was ²⁵  Marah.)

Exodus 17:1

Water at Massa and Meribah

17:1 ²⁶ The whole community ²⁷  of the Israelites traveled on their journey ²⁸  from the Desert of Sin according to the Lord’s instruction, and they pitched camp in Rephidim. ²⁹  Now ³⁰  there was no water for the people to drink. ³¹ 

Exodus 20:4

20:4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image ³²  or any likeness ³³  of anything ³⁴  that is in heaven above or that is on the earth beneath or that is in the water below. ³⁵ 

Exodus 30:18

30:18 “You are also to make a large bronze ³⁶  basin with a bronze stand ³⁷  for washing. You are to put it between the tent of meeting and the altar and put water in it, ³⁸ 

Exodus 30:20

30:20 When they enter ³⁹  the tent of meeting, they must wash with ⁴⁰  water so that they do not die. ⁴¹  Also, when they approach ⁴²  the altar to minister by burning incense ⁴³  as an offering made by fire ⁴⁴  to the Lord,

[2:10]  ¹ tn The verb is the preterite of גָּדַל (gadal), and so might be rendered “and he became great.” But the context suggests that it refers to when he was weaned and before he was named, perhaps indicating he was three or four years old (see Gen 21:8).

[2:10]  ² tn The idiomatic expression literally reads: “and he was to her for a son.” In this there are two prepositions lamed. The first expresses possession: “he was to her” means “she had.” The second is part of the usage of the verb: הָיָה (haya) with the lamed (ל) preposition means “to become.”

[2:10]  ³ sn The naming provides the climax and summary of the story. The name of “Moses” (מֹשֶׁה, mosheh) is explained by “I have drawn him (מְשִׁיתִהוּ, mÿshitihu) from the water.” It appears that the name is etymologically connected to the verb in the saying, which is from מָשָׁה (mashah, “to draw out”). But commentators have found it a little difficult that the explanation of the name by the daughter of Pharaoh is in Hebrew when the whole background is Egyptian (U. Cassuto, Exodus, 20). Moreover, the Hebrew spelling of the name is the form of the active participle (“the one who draws out”); to be a precise description it should have been spelled מָשׁוּי (mashuy), the passive participle (“the one drawn out”). The etymology is not precise; rather, it is a wordplay (called paronomasia). Either the narrator merely attributed words to her (which is unlikely outside of fiction), or the Hebrew account simply translated what she had said into Hebrew, finding a Hebrew verb with the same sounds as the name. Such wordplays on names (also popular etymology) are common in the Bible. Most agree that the name is an Egyptian name. Josephus attempted to connect the biblical etymology with the name in Greek, Mouses, stating that Mo is Egyptian for water, and uses means those rescued from it (Ant. 2.9.6 [2.228]; see also J. Gwyn Griffiths, “The Egyptian Derivation of the Name Moses,” JNES 12 [1953]: 225). But the solution to the name is not to be derived from the Greek rendering. Due to the estimation Egyptians had of the Nile, the princess would have thought of the child from the river as a supernatural provision. The Egyptian hieroglyphic ms can be the noun “child” or the perfective verb “be born.” This was often connected with divine elements for names: Ptah-mose, “Ptah is born.” Also the name Rameses (R’-m-sw) means “[the god] Re’ is he who has born him.” If the name Moses is Egyptian, there are some philological difficulties (see the above article for their treatment). The significance of all this is that when the child was named by the princess, an Egyptian word related to ms was used, meaning something like “child” or “born.” The name might have even been longer, perhaps having a theophoric element (divine name) with it – “child of [some god].” The name’s motivation came from the fact that she drew him from the Nile, the source of life in Egypt. But the sound of the name recalled for the Hebrews the verb “to draw out” in their own language. Translating the words of the princess into Hebrew allowed for the effective wordplay to capture the significance of the story in the sound of the name. The implication for the Israelites is something to this effect: “You called him ‘born one’ in your language and after your custom, but in our language that name means ‘drawing out’ – which is what was to become of him. You drew him out of the water, but he would draw us out of Egypt through the water.” So the circumstances of the story show Moses to be a man of destiny, and this naming episode summarizes how divine providence was at work in Israel. To the Israelites the name forever commemorated the portent of this event in the early life of the great deliverer (see Isa 63:11).

[7:15]  ⁴ tn The clause begins with הִנֵּה (hinneh); here it provides the circumstances for the instruction for Moses – he is going out to the water so go meet him. A temporal clause translation captures the connection between the clauses.

[7:15]  ⁵ tn The instruction to Moses continues with this perfect tense with vav (ו) consecutive following the imperative. The verb means “to take a stand, station oneself.” It seems that Pharaoh’s going out to the water was a regular feature of his day and that Moses could be there waiting to meet him.

[7:15]  ⁶ sn The Nile, the source of fertility for the country, was deified by the Egyptians. There were religious festivals held to the god of the Nile, especially when the Nile was flooding. The Talmud suggests that Pharaoh in this passage went out to the Nile to make observations as a magician about its level. Others suggest he went out simply to bathe or to check the water level – but that would not change the view of the Nile that was prevalent in the land.

[7:15]  ⁷ tn The verb תִּקַּח (tiqqakh), the Qal imperfect of לָקַח (laqakh), functions here as the imperfect of instruction, or injunction perhaps, given the word order of the clause.

[7:15]  ⁸ tn The final clause begins with the noun and vav disjunctive, which singles this instruction out for special attention – “now the staff…you are to take.”

[7:21]  ⁷ 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.

[7:21]  ⁸ 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.

[7:21]  ⁹ tn Heb “and there was blood.”

[8:6]  ¹⁰ tn The noun is singular, a collective. B. Jacob notes that this would be the more natural way to refer to the frogs (Exodus, 260).

[12:9]  ¹³ sn This ruling was to prevent their eating it just softened by the fire or partially roasted as differing customs might prescribe or allow.

[14:26]  ¹⁶ tn The verb, “and they will return,” is here subordinated to the imperative preceding it, showing the purpose of that act.

[14:28]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “that was coming after them into the sea.” The referent of “them” (the Israelites) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[14:28]  ²⁰ tn Heb “not was left among them as much as one.”

[15:22]  ²² sn The first event of the Israelites’ desert experience is a failure, for they murmur against Yahweh and are given a stern warning – and the provision of sweet water. The event teaches that God is able to turn bitter water into sweet water for his people, and he promises to do such things if they obey. He can provide for them in the desert – he did not bring them into the desert to let them die. But there is a deeper level to this story – the healing of the water is incidental to the healing of the people, their lack of trust. The passage is arranged in a neat chiasm, starting with a journey (A), ending with the culmination of the journey (A'); developing to bitter water (B), resolving to sweet water (B'); complaints by the people (C), leading to to the instructions for the people (C'); and the central turning point is the wonder miracle (D).

[15:22]  ²³ tn The verb form is unusual; the normal expression is with the Qal, which expresses that they journeyed. But here the Hiphil is used to underscore that Moses caused them to journey – and he is following God. So the point is that God was leading Israel to the bitter water.

[15:22]  ²⁴ sn The mention that they travelled for three days into the desert is deliberately intended to recall Moses’ demand that they go three days into the wilderness to worship. Here, three days in, they find bitter water and complain – not worship.

[15:23]  ²⁵ 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]  ²⁶ 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]  ²⁷ 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]  ²⁸ 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]  ²⁹ 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]  ³⁰ tn Heb “one called its name,” the expression can be translated as a passive verb if the subject is not expressed.

[17:1]  ²⁸ 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]  ²⁹ tn Or “congregation” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV).

[17:1]  ³⁰ 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]  ³¹ 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]  ³² tn The disjunctive vav introduces a parenthetical clause that is essential for this passage – there was no water.

[17:1]  ³³ 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).

[20:4]  ³¹ tn A פֶּסֶל (pesel) is an image that was carved out of wood or stone. The Law was concerned with a statue that would be made for the purpose of worship, an idol to be venerated, and not any ordinary statue.

[20:4]  ³² tn The word תְּמוּנָה (tÿmunah) refers to the mental pattern from which the פֶּסֶל (pesel) is constructed; it is a real or imagined resemblance. If this is to stand as a second object to the verb, then the verb itself takes a slightly different nuance here. It would convey “you shall not make an image, neither shall you conceive a form” for worship (B. Jacob, Exodus, 547). Some simply make the second word qualify the first: “you shall not make an idol in the form of…” (NIV).

[20:4]  ³³ tn Here the phrase “of anything” has been supplied.

[20:4]  ³⁴ tn Heb “under the earth” (so KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV).

[30:18]  ³⁴ sn The metal for this object was obtained from the women from their mirrors (see Exod 38:8).

[30:18]  ³⁵ tn Heb “and its stand bronze.”

[30:18]  ³⁶ tn The form is the adverb “there” with the directive qamets-he ( ָה).

[30:20]  ³⁷ tn The form is an infinitive construct with the temporal preposition bet (ב), and a suffixed subjective genitive: “in their going in,” or, whenever they enter.

[30:20]  ³⁸ tn “Water” is an adverbial accusative of means, and so is translated “with water.” Gesenius classifies this with verbs of “covering with something.” But he prefers to emend the text with a preposition (see GKC 369 §117.y, n. 1).

[30:20]  ³⁹ tn The verb is a Qal imperfect with a nuance of final imperfect. The purpose/result clause here is indicated only with the conjunction: “and they do not die.” But clearly from the context this is the intended result of their washing – it is in order that they not die.

[30:20]  ⁴⁰ tn Here, too, the infinitive is used in a temporal clause construction. The verb נָגַשׁ (nagash) is the common verb used for drawing near to the altar to make offerings – the official duties of the priest.

[30:20]  ⁴¹ tn The text uses two infinitives construct: “to minister to burn incense”; the first is the general term and expresses the purpose of the drawing near, and the second infinitive is epexegetical, explaining the first infinitive.

[30:20]  ⁴² tn The translation “as an offering made by fire” is a standard rendering of the one word in the text that appears to refer to “fire.” Milgrom and others contend that it simply means a “gift” (Leviticus 1-16, 161).