The purposes of this section are three at least.
1. These verses introduce the Israelites who are the focus of attention in Exodus.
2. They also tie the Israelites back to Jacob and explain their presence in Egypt.
3. They account for the numerical growth of the Israelites during the 360 years that elapsed between Genesis and Exodus following Joseph's death and preceding Moses' birth.
Moses used the round number 70 for the number of Jacob's descendants when the patriarch entered Egypt (v. 5; cf. Gen. 46:27).10The writer's purpose was to contrast the small number of Israelites that entered Egypt with the large number that existed at the time Exodus begins (vv. 8ff.), about two million individuals (cf. 12:37; 38:26; Num. 1:45-47).11
The fruitfulness of the Israelites in Goshen was due to God's blessing as He fulfilled His promises to the patriarchs (v. 7).
This pericope serves a double purpose. It introduces the rigorous conditions under which the Egyptians forced the Israelites to live, and it sets the stage for the birth of Moses.
1:8-14 The new king (v. 8) was perhaps Ahmose (Greek Amosis) who founded the eighteenth dynasty and the New Kingdom and ruled from 1570 to 1546 B.C. He was probably one of Ahmose's immediate successors, Amenhotep I or probably Thutmose I. The Egyptian capital at this time was Zoan (Tanis). Ahmose was the first native Egyptian Pharaoh for many years. Preceding him was a series of Hyksos rulers.12The name Hyksos probably means "rulers of foreign lands."13They were a Semitic people from the northern part of the fertile crescent who had invaded Egypt about 1670 B.C. and ruled until Ahmose expelled them. The New Kingdom (ca. 1570-1085 B.C.) that Ahmose inaugurated was the period of greatest imperial might in Egypt's long history.
"In the Late Bronze Age [ca. 1500-1200 B.C.], Egypt entered her period of Empire, during which she was unquestionably the dominant nation of the world. Architects of the Empire were the Pharaohs of the Eighteenth Dynasty, a house that was founded as the Hyksos were expelled from Egypt and that retained power for some two hundred and fifty years (ca. 1570-1310), bringing to Egypt a strength and a prestige unequaled in all her long history."14
The title "Pharaoh"means "great house."It originally designated the Egyptian king's residence and household. It became a title for the king himself for the first time in the eighteenth dynasty.15
The implication of the statement that Pharaoh "did not know Joseph"in the Hebrew text is that he did not want to know about him. It seems that the early kings of the eighteenth dynasty wanted to solidify control of Egypt in the hands of native Egyptians. After a long period of control by foreigners, they did not want to acknowledge the greatness of Joseph who was, of course, also a foreigner and a Semite.
"Forgetfulness of Joseph brought the favour shown to the Israelites by the kings of Egypt to a close."16
Identifications of Significant Pharaohs after Joseph and in Exodus17
SECOND INTERMEDIATE PERIOD (dynasties 15-16; ca. 1674-1567 B.C.). Capital: Avaris (Raamses). Period of Hyksos rule.
NEW KINGDOM (dynasties 17-20; ca. 1570-1085 B.C.). Capital: Tanis (Zoan). Period of imperial supremacy.
Ahmose(Amosis; 1570-1546 B.C.; 1st Pharaoh of 18th dynasty) expelled the Hyksos and re-established native Egyptian rule.
Thutmose I(Thutmosis I; 1525-ca. 1512 B.C.; 3rd Pharaoh of 18th dynasty) practiced genocide on Hebrew male babies (Exod. 1:15-22).
Hatshepsut(1503-1482 B.C.; 5th Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty) was the daughter of Pharaoh Thutmose I who drew Moses out of the Nile and later ruled as Queen (Exod. 2:5).
Thutmose III(1504-1450 B.C.; 6th Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty) the Pharaoh of the oppression who tried to kill Moses and from whom Moses fled into Midian (Exod. 2:15).
Amenhotep II(1450-1425 B.C.; 7th Pharaoh of the 18th dynasty) was the Pharaoh of the plagues and the Exodus (Exod. 3:10-15:19).
Pharaoh launched three successive plans to reduce the threat of the sizable Hebrew population that then was larger and stronger than the Egyptian ruling class (v. 9).18
The first plan (plan A) was to make the Hebrews toil hard in manual labor. Normally a population grows more slowly under oppression than in prosperous times. However the opposite took place in the case of the Israelites (v. 12). Physical oppression also tends to crush the spirit, and in this objective the Egyptians were somewhat successful (2:23-24).
Verse 10 should read as follows. "Let us (the entire Egyptian ruling class) deal wisely with them (the Israelites) lest they . . . in the event of war (with enemies, the Hyksos, or any other) . . . join themselves to those who hate us and fight against us and depart from the land."19
This plan remained in effect for some time. It probably took years to build the cities of Pithom and Raamses (Ramses), which the Egyptians used to store goods (cf. 1 Kings 9:19; 2 Chron. 8:6; 17:12). Pithom may be Tell er-Retabeh or Heliopolis, and Raameses may have been Qantir.20
"The name Rameses' for one of the store cities seems to point unquestionably to Rameses II [ca. 1300-1234 B.C.]. But it is probable that this city, which already existed under the Hyksos (the foreigners who ruled Egypt several centuries before the nineteenth dynasty), was rebuilt by Rameses II and that 1:11 refers to the city by its later name . . . ."21
"The brick was the staple of Egyptian architecture, as only the temples and palaces were constructed of stone."22
This plan failed to reduce the threat that the Israelites posed to Pharaoh, so the Egyptians adopted a second approach.
1:15-22 Plan B consisted of ordering the Hebrew midwives to kill all the male Hebrew babies at birth.23
"They were to kill them, of course, secretly, in such a way that the parents and relatives would be unaware of the crime, and would think that the infant had died of natural causes either before or during birth."24
"Infanticide was commonly practiced by the nations of antiquity."25
As I mentioned, plan A (vv. 9-14) may have taken several years. Because of the chronology of Moses' life many evangelical commentators felt that the Pharaoh the writer referred to in verses 15-22 was Ahmose's successor, Amenhotep I (1546-1526 B.C.). More likely he was the man who followed him, Thutmose I (1525-ca. 1512 B.C.).
"Although the biblical term Hebrew' [v. 15] is probably cognate to the similar word apiru(found in Egyptian, Babylonian, and Canaanite texts), the latter was applied to a population element that was ethnically diverse and that had in common only a generally inferior social status. The word Hebrew' is almost always used by Gentiles to distinguish Israelites ethnically from other peoples and apparently denotes descent from Eber (Gen. 10:24-25; 11:14-17), whose ancestor was Noah's son Shem (Gen. 10:21)."26
The two midwives mentioned by name (v. 15) were undoubtedly the chief midwives who were responsible for others under them.27
Ancient Near Easterners preserved national identity through the males, and it is for this reason that Pharaoh ordered their deaths.28One writer suggested that Pharaoh spared the girls, "perhaps to serve later as harem girls."29
The midwives' fear of God (vv. 17, 21) led them to disobey Pharaoh's command to practice genocide. They chose to obey God rather than man since Pharaoh's order contradicted a fundamental divine command (cf. Gen. 1:28; 9:1, 7). All life belongs to God, and consequently He is the only person who has the right to take it or to command when others should take it. The midwives' fear of God resulted in their having reverence for human life. Their explanation of their actions (v. 19) may have been truthful or it may not have been entirely truthful.
"Even though these women lied to Pharaoh (which the Bible, as is often the case, does not stop to specifically condemn at this point), they are praised for their outright refusal to take infant lives."30
God blessed these women with families of their own (v. 21) in spite of their deceit, if they practiced it, because they feared God.
This second plan "miscarried"too. (Pardon the pun!)
The intent of plan C was also to do away with the male Hebrew babies (v. 22). However instead of relying on the Hebrew midwives Pharaoh called on all his subjects to throw every Hebrew boy that was born into the Nile River. Since the Egyptians regarded the Nile as a manifestation of deity perhaps Pharaoh was making obedience to his edict an act of worship for the Egyptians. This plan evidently failed too. The Egyptians do not appear to have cooperated with Pharaoh. Even Pharaoh's daughter did not obey this command (2:6-8). This plan, too, may very well have continued in effect for many years.
The Pharaoh Moses referred to in verse 22 was probably Thutmose I.31
"The central idea [in this pericope] is that God faithfully fulfills His covenant promises in spite of severe and life-threatening opposition. Even Pharaoh, the most powerful man on earth could do nothing to thwart God's purpose. In fact, God actually used Pharaoh's opposition as a means of carrying out His promises."32
"It is interesting to note that the author has placed two quite similar narratives on either side of his lengthy treatment of the Exodus and wilderness wanderings. The two narratives are Exodus 1-2, the Egyptian king's attempt to suppress Israel, and Numbers 22-24, the Moabite king's attempt to suppress Israel. Both narratives focus on the futility of the nations' attempts to thwart God's plan to bless the seed of Abraham . . ."33
"Whilst Pharaoh was urging forward the extermination of the Israelites, God was preparing their emancipator."34
". . . among other things, the Pentateuch is an attempt to contrast the lives of two individuals, Abraham and Moses. Abraham, who lived before the law (ante legem), is portrayed as one who kept the law [Gen. 26:5], whereas Moses, who lived under the law (sub lege), is portrayed as one who died in the wilderness because he did not believe [Num. 20:12]."35
2:1-5 The names of Moses' parents were Amram and Jochebed (6:20).
"At this point Scripture's aim is to inform us that from an ordinary man, . . . and from an ordinary woman, . . . whose names there was no need to mention, God raised up a redeemer unto his people."36
It is not clear from the text if Moses was an unusually beautiful child physically or if he was distinctive in some other respect (v. 2). One commentator translated "beautiful"as "healthy."37The phrase used to describe him in Hebrews 11:23 as well as the Hebrew word used here can have a broader significance than physical beauty. Josephus claimed that God had revealed to Amram in a dream that Moses would humble the Egyptians.38There is no scriptural support for this tradition; it may or may not be true.
Jochebed and Amram hid Moses because they trusted God (v. 3; Heb. 11:23-26). The same Hebrew word translated "wicker basket"in this verse (tehvah) reads "ark"in English translations of Genesis 6:14. As Noah's ark was God's instrument for preserving one savior of the human race, Moses' ark proved to be His means of preserving another savior of the Israelites. Moses' parents obeyed Pharaoh and put Moses in the river (1:22), but they also trusted God who delivered their baby.
"Ironically Jochebed, putting her son into the Nile, was in one sense obeying the Pharaoh's edict to throw' baby boys into the river! (Ex. 1:22)"39
"There is abundant warrant, afforded by this narrative, for Christian parents to cast their children upon God."40
Moses' older sister was probably Miriam. She is the only other sister of Moses mentioned in Scripture (v. 4; Num. 26:59).
The daughter of Pharaoh (Thutmose I) was probably Hatshepsut who was a very significant person in Egyptian history (v. 5). She later assumed co-regency with Thutmose III and ruled as the fifth Pharaoh of the eighteenth dynasty (1503-1482 B.C.). The ruling class in Egypt was male dominated, and it took a very forceful woman to rise and rule. Queen Hatshepsut adopted certain male mannerisms to minimize objections to her rule including the wearing of a false beard that appears on some Egyptian pictures of her.41
It was not uncommon for Pharaohs and other Egyptians to bathe ceremonially in the sacred Nile River, as many Indians do today in the Ganges River. The Egyptians believed that the waters of the Nile possessed the ability to impart fruitfulness and to prolong life.
Several women were involved in the events surrounding Moses' birth: the midwives, Pharaoh's daughter, her maid, Moses' sister, and Jochebed. How ironic it was that women, whom Egyptian and Israelite men looked down on as less significant than themselves, should have been responsible for saving Israel's savior.42Truly the hand of God is evident.
2:6-10 As the adopted son of Pharaoh's daughter, Moses enjoyed the highest privileges in his education. In commenting on Moses' training Stephen said that he became, "a man of power in words and deeds"(Acts 7:21-22). Josephus wrote that Moses was a general in the Egyptian army that defeated the Ethiopians and that he married the daughter of the king of Ethiopia.43We cannot prove the accuracy of this statement, but it suggests that Moses may have risen high in Egyptian society before he fled Egypt.
Moses' name was probably Egyptian, but it became a popular Hebrew name. It relates obviously to the names of other great Egyptians of that period (e.g., Ahmose, Thutmose, et al.). The "mose"part of the name means "one born of"and "mo"means "water."
"The phrase drew him out' (v. 10) is a Hebrew pun on the name, emphasizing the baby's rescue from the waters of the Nile."44
This name became even more appropriate as Moses' great life work of drawing the Israelites out of Egypt took shape.45In this sense his name proved prophetic. Moses' name may have been longer and may have had some connection with the name of an Egyptian god as the other "mose"compound names referred to above did. If this was the case, "in refusing to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter' Moses was actually refusing reference to an Egyptian deity."46
The fact that Moses later chose to identify with the Israelites rather than the Egyptians is remarkable in view of his Egyptian privileges and background. His parents must have had a strong influence on him beginning very early in his life (cf. Joseph). We should never underestimate the power of parental influence even early in life. Note too that the faith of a child can grow stronger when tested by an ungodly environment.
Moses was "approaching the age of 40"(Acts 7:23) when he took his stand for his Hebrew brethren (v. 11).
The reference to the Hebrew man as "one of his brethren"suggests that Moses' motivation in acting as he did was love that sprang from faith in God's promises to the patriarchs. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews stated this motivation explicitly in Hebrews 11:24-26.
Moses' desire to help his brethren was admirable, but his methods were deplorable (v. 12; cf. Acts 7:23-29). He trusted in his own ability to liberate the Israelites and sought to bring this about by natural means. He even resorted to sinful means and seized authority rather than waiting for God to bestow this on him.
". . . there is in the [Hebrew] text no suggestion that Moses meant to kill the Egyptian, any more than that the Egyptian or the Hebrew man was attempting to kill his adversary."47
"You can never redress a nation's wrongs by offering brute force to brute force, or by a number of rash, violent acts."48
God had to teach Moses that he must not trust in his own ability but rely on God's strategy and strength and obey His commands. God drove Moses out of Egypt to the desert of Midian where He proceeded to teach His servant these lessons. He made him "a prince"and "a judge"(v. 14) eventually. Here Moses rescued an Israelite from an Egyptian who was beating him, but later he rescued all the Israelites from the Egyptians who were oppressing them (3:10).
The Pharaoh referred to here was probably Thutmose III (v. 15; 1504-1450 B.C.) whose reign included a period of 21 years as co-regent with Hatshepsut. Pharaoh probably tried to kill Moses by having him brought to justice through normal legal channels.
The land of Midian lay to the east of the Sinai Peninsula and probably flanked the Gulf of Aqabah on both sides.49Moses ran a long way. The Midianites were descendants of Abraham through Keturah (Gen. 25:1-2).
"Midianites were employed in the copper mines of the Sinai Peninsula by Egyptian kings since the very first dynasties."50
Moses' faith is obvious in his desire to identify with God and His people. He probably struggled in his younger years with whether he could do more for the Israelites by working for them within the Egyptian hierarchy or without. He chose to identify with the faithful and relied on the power of God to a limited extent rather than on the power of Pharaoh to accomplish his goals. It was Moses' faith in God that led him to give up Egypt (Heb. 11:24-26).
God commands all who trust Him to separate from the world system that opposes and excludes Him (Rom. 12:2; et al.). This may or may not involve physical separation depending on God's will. For Moses it involved physical separation, but for Joseph and Daniel it did not. The will of God is not the same for everyone in this respect.
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 (vv. 16-17). Later he provided water for God's people and their flocks in the wilderness (cf. 17:6; Num. 20:7-11). This was the third time that Moses sought to deliver others from harm (v. 17; cf. vv. 12-13).
As "the priest of Midian"(v. 16) Reuel (v. 18) was the spiritual head of his branch of the Midianites.51He appears to have been a worshipper of the true God (cf. 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 (v. 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."52
Moses lived in Midian "many days"(v. 23) before Pharaoh (Thutmose III) died. Stephen said it was a period of 40 years (Acts 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."53
The prayers of the Israelites in their bondage touched God's heart, and He began anew to work for them (cf. 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, v. 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.
3:1-12 Horeb is another name for Sinai (v. 1). It probably indicates a range of mountains rather than a particular mountain peak. The writer called it "the mountain of God"because it was the place where God later gave the Mosaic Law to Israel.54
Here the Angel of the Lord is clearly God (Yahweh, v. 2; cf. vv. 4, 6, 7). He was not an angelic messenger but God Himself.
A burning thorn-bush was and is not uncommon in the Sinai desert.55These bushes sometimes burst into flame spontaneously. This bush was unusual, however, because even though it burned it did not burn up (v. 3). Jewish and Christian interpreters have long seen the bush in this incident as a symbol of the nation of Israel ignoble in relation to other nations (cf. Judg. 9:15). The fire probably symbolized the affliction of Egyptian bondage (cf. Deut. 4:20). The Israelites suffered as a result of this hostility, but God did not allow them to suffer extinction as a people from it. Because Israel has frequently been in the furnace of affliction throughout history, though not consumed, Jews have identified the burning bush as a symbol of their race. This symbol often appears on the walls of synagogues or in other prominent places not only in modern Israel but also in settlements of Jews around the world. The fire also probably symbolized the presence of God dwelling among His people (cf. Gen. 15:17; Exod. 19:18; 40:38). God was with His people in their affliction (cf. Deut. 31:6; Josh. 1:5; Dan. 3:25; Heb. 13:5).
This was the first time God had revealed Himself to Moses, or anyone else as far as Scripture records, for over 430 years (v. 4). Later in history God broke another 400-year long period of prophetic silence when John the Baptist and Jesus appeared to lead an even more significant exodus.
The custom of removing one's shoes out of respect is very old (v. 5). It was common at this time in the ancient world and is still common today.56For example, when one enters a Moslem mosque he must remove his shoes.
"God begins his discourse with Moses by warning him not to come near to him because he is holy (v. 5). As we will later see, the idea of God's holiness is a central theme in the remainder of the book. Indeed, the whole structure of Israel's worship of God at the tabernacle is based on a view of God as the absolutely Holy One who has come to dwell in their midst. We should not lose sight of the fact, however, that at the same time that God warns Moses to stand at a distance, he also speaks to him face to face' (cf. Nu 12:8). The fact that God is a holy God should not be understood to mean that he is an impersonal force--God is holy yet intensely personal. This is a central theme in the narratives of the Sinai covenant that follow."57
God proceeded to explain the reason for His revelation (vv. 7-10). The suffering of His people touched His heart. He had heard their cries and seen their affliction. Now He purposed to deliver them. The compassion of God stands out in these verses.
"The anthropomorphisms (i.e., the descriptions of God's actions and attributes in words usually associated with mankind) in vv. 7-8 of God's seeing,' hearing,' knowing' (= be concerned about'), and coming down' became graphic ways to describe divine realities for which no description existed except for partially analogous situations in the human realm. But these do not imply that God has corporeal and spatial limitations; rather, he is a living person who can and does follow the stream of human events and who can and does at times directly intervene in human affairs."58
"Is there no discrepancy between these two announcements ["I have come down to deliver,"v. 8, and "I will send you,"v. 10]? If God has Himself come down to do the work of redemption, what need of Moses? Would not a word from those almighty lips be enough? Why summon a shepherd, a lonely and unbefriended man, a man who has already failed once, and from whom the passing years have stolen his manhood's prime, to work out with painful elaboration, and through a series of bewildering disappointments, the purposed emancipation? But this is not an isolated case. Throughout the entire scheme of Divine government, we meet with the principle of mediation. God ever speaks to men, and works for them, through the instrumentality of men. Chosen agents are called into the inner circle, to catch the Divine thought and mirror the Divine character, and then sent back to their fellows, to cause them to partake."59
The description of Canaan as a land "flowing with milk and honey"(vv. 8, 17) is a common biblical one. It pictures an abundance of grass, fruit trees, and flowers where cows, goats, and bees thrive and where the best drink and food abound.
"This formula was at first coined by the nomadic shepherds to denote a land blessed with pastures for cattle producing milk and with trees whose boughs afforded man, without the necessity for hard toil, food as nourishing and as sweet as bees' honey. In the course of time the signification of the phrase was extended to include also land that yielded rich harvests as a result of human labour."60
Normally Moses listed seven tribes as possessing Canaan (e.g., Deut. 7:1), but he also named six (v. 8), 10 (Gen. 15:19-21), and 12 (Gen. 10:15-18) as the inhabitants in various Scripture passages.
The Pharaoh to whom Moses referred here (v. 10) was very likely Amenhotep II who succeeded Thutmose III and ruled from 1450 to 1425 B.C. He ruled during the very zenith of Egypt's power, prestige, and glory as a world government.
Moses had become genuinely humble during his years as a mere shepherd in Midian (v. 11). Earlier an Israelite had asked Moses, "Who made you a prince or a judge over us?"(2:14). Now Moses asked the same thing of God: "Who am I that I should . . . bring the sons of Israel out of Egypt?"
"Some time before he had offered himself of his own accord as a deliverer and judge; but now he had learned humility in the school of Midian, and was filled in consequence with distrust of his own power and fitness. The son of Pharaoh's daughter had become a shepherd, and felt himself too weak to go to Pharaoh."61
"In these verses [11-12], the presentation of the tetragrammaton is only introduced. Moses objected, . . . Who am I, . . . that I . . . that I. . . ?' and God answers, . . . the point is IAM with you.' Who Moses is is not the question; it is rather, who is withMoses?"62
"As long as a man holds that he is easily able to do some great deed of heroism and faith, he is probably incompetent for it, but when he protests his inability, and puts away the earliest proposals, though made by the Almighty Himself, he gives the first unmistakable sign that he has been rightly designated."63
God gave Moses a sign to inspire his courage and confidence that God would make his mission a success (v. 12; cf. Gen. 37:5-11). It was evidently the burning bush. He also gave Moses a promise that he would return with the Israelites to the very mountain where he stood then. This promise required faith on Moses' part, but it was an encouragement to him. As surely as God had revealed Himself to Moses there once, He promised to bring Moses back to Horeb to worship Him a second time with the Israelites.64
". . . the experience of Moses in 3:1-12 is an exact foreshadowing of the experience of Israel, first in Egypt, then in the deprivation of the wilderness, and finally at Sinai."65
3:13-22 Moses' fear that the Israelite elders would not accept him is understandable (v. 13). God had not revealed Himself to His people for over 400 years. When Moses asked how he should answer the Israelites' question, "What is His name?"he was asking how he could demonstrate to them that their God had sent him.
"According to the conception prevailing in the ancient East, the designation of an entity was to be equated, as it were, with its existence: whatever is without an appellation does not exist, but whatever has a denomination has existence."66
"The question contains both a request for information and an explanation of its significance. There are two aspects of the one question. Clearly the people want to knew more about God's intention. By requesting his name, they seek to learn his new relationship to them. Formerly he related to them as the God of the Fathers. What will he be to Israel now?"67
"What Moses asks, then, has to do with whether God can accomplish what he is promising. What is there in his reputation (see Num 6:27; Deut 12:5, 11; 16:2-6; Pss 8:1, 74:7; Amos 5:8, 9:5-6; Jer 33:2) that lends credibility to the claim in his call? How, suddenly, can he be expected to deal with a host of powerful Egyptian deities against whom, across so many years, he has apparently won no victory for his people?"68
God's name expressed His nature and actions (vv. 14-15). The Israelites would ask for proof that the God of their fathers was with Moses. God explained the name by which He made Himself known to Abraham (Gen. 15:7).
"The repetition of the same word [I am] suggests the idea of uninterrupted continuance and boundless duration."69
Yet it means more than this.
"To the Hebrew to be' does not just mean to exist as all other beings and things do as well--but to be active, to express oneself in active being, The God who acts.' I am what in creative activity and everywhere I turn out to be,' or I am (the God) that really acts.'"70
"I am that I am"means "God will reveal Himself in His actions through history."71
Another writer paraphrased God's answer, "It is I who am with you."72In other words, the one who had promised to be with the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had sent Moses to them.
"The answer Moses receives is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a name. It is an assertion of authority, a confession of an essential reality, and thus an entirely appropriate response to the question Moses poses."73
This is the first reference to the elders of Israel (v. 16).74
God told Moses to request Pharaoh's permission for the Israelites to leave Egypt (v. 18).
"The sequel shows that there was no element of deceit in the request for a three days' journey into the wilderness,' i.e., right out of contact with the Egyptian frontier guards. Pharaoh knew perfectly well that this implied no return; indeed, since Israel was a tolerated alien people, he would have no claim on their return, once they had left his territory."75
"Moses' demand for complete freedom, though couched in polite words, is there from the start."76
The signs God proceeded to give Moses would demonstrate to the Israelites that their God was again actively working for them (v. 20; cf. 4:2-9). God told Moses that the Israelites would believe him (v. 18).
Probably there were several reasons the Israelites were to ask their Egyptian neighbors for jewelry and clothing (v. 22). By doing so, they would humiliate the Egyptians further. They would also obtain articles needed for the wilderness march and the construction of the tabernacle. Moreover they would receive partial payment for the labor the Egyptians had stolen from them during their years of slavery (cf. Deut. 15:12-15).
The writer statedGod's sovereignty over Pharaoh in verses 14-22. God demonstratedit in the plagues that followed (chs. 5-11).77
"With the name Yahweh' revealed and explained and with the proof of this explanation illustrated, at least in prospect, Moses can have no further question about God'sauthority. The narrative deals next with Moses' own authority, and how that is to be made clear."78
4:1-9 God gave Moses three miracles to convince the Israelites that the God of their fathers had appeared to him. They also served to bolster Moses' faith. Moses had left Egypt and the Israelites with a clouded reputation under the sentence of death, and he had been away for a long time. He needed to prove to his brethren that they could trust and believe him. Not only were these miracles strong proofs of God's power, but they appear to have had special significance for the Israelites aswell (cf. v. 8).
God probably intended the first miracle of the staff and serpent (vv. 2-5) to assure Moses and the Israelites that He was placing the satanic power of Egypt under his authoritative control. This was the power before which Moses had previously fled. Moses' shepherd staff became a symbol of authority in his hand. The serpent represented the deadly power of Egypt that sought to kill the Israelites and Moses in particular. The Pharaohs wore a metal cobra around their heads. It was a common symbol of the nation of Egypt. However the serpent also stood for the great enemy of man behind that power, Satan, who had been the foe of the seed of the woman since the Fall (Gen. 3:15). Moses' ability to turn the serpent into his rod by seizing its tail would have encouraged the Israelites. They should have believed that God had enabled him to overcome the cunning and might of Egypt and to exercise authority over its fearful power. This was a sign that God would bless Moses' leadership.
The second miracle of the leprous hand (vv. 6-7) evidently assured Moses that God would bring him and the Israelites out of their defiling environment and heal them. Presently they were unclean because of their confinement in wicked Egypt. Moses' hand was the instrument of his strength. As such it was a good symbol of Moses, himself the instrument of God's strength in delivering the Israelites, and Israel, God's instrument for blessing the world.79It would also have told Pharaoh that Yahweh could afflict or deliver through His representative at will. The wholeness of Moses' hand may have attested to God's delegation of divine power to him.
The third miracle of the water turned into blood (v. 9) provided assurance that God would humiliate the Egyptians by spoiling what they regarded as a divine source of life. The Egyptians identified the Nile with the Egyptian god Osiris and credited it with all good and prosperity in their national life. Blood was and is a symbol of life poured out in death (cf. Lev. 17:11). Moses possessed the power to change the life-giving water of the Nile into blood. The Israelites would have concluded that he also had power to destroy the gods of Egypt and punish the land with death (cf. 7:14-24).
"Like Abel's blood that cried out from the ground, so would the infants' whose lives had been demanded by Pharaoh (1:22)."80
Each of these signs attested Yahweh's creative power. Normally at least two witnesses were necessary to establish credibility under the Mosaic Law (Deut. 19:15; et al.). A third witness further strengthened the veracity of the testimony. Here God gave Moses three witnesses to confirm His prophet's divine calling and enablement. God entrusted Moses with His powerful word and endowed him with His mighty power. He was the first prophet with the power to work miracles.
4:10-17 Rather than inspiring confidence in Moses God's commission frightened him (vv. 10-12). Moses' claim to be slow of speech (not handicapped, but lacking in eloquence) was a thinly veiled excuse by which Moses hoped to escape his calling. Stephen said Moses was eloquent (Acts 7:22). Apparently Moses felt he did not have sufficient oratorical ability to persuade the Israelite elders or Pharaoh. God assured Moses that He would enable Him to communicate effectively. Again God reminded Moses that He was the creator.
"This claim of inadequacy is a recurring one in OT passages having to do with God's call and commission (cf., e.g., Judg 6:14-15; 1 Sam 10:20-24; 1 Kgs 3:5-9; Isa 6:5-8; Jer 1:4-10; see also Habel, ["The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives,"] Z[eitschrift für die] A[lttestamentliche] W[issenschaft]77 [1965] 316-23). Whatever its connection to prophetic and royal traditions of the word and the messenger, its more important rootage is in the OT pattern of the weak become strong, the least become great, the mean become mighty, the last become first (cf., e.g, Judg 6:11-24; 1 Sam 16:1-13; 17:19-54; Amos 7:14-15; Isa 6:1-13; Jer 1:4-19; and even Isa 52:13-53:12). This pattern is a metaphor of theological assertion in the Bible, and everywhere it occurs, its fundamental message is the same: God's word, God's rule, God's teaching, God's deliverance come not from man, no matter who that man may be, but from God. Even the election of Israel makes this point. Indeed that election is probably the most convincing of all the occurrences of the pattern."81
"Cherish the lowliest thought you choose of yourself, but unite it with the loftiest conception of God's All-Sufficiency. Self-depreciation may lead to the marring of a useful life. We must think soberly of ourselves, not too lowly, as not too extravagantly. The one talent must not be buried in the earth."82
Unable to excuse himself Moses finally admitted that he did not want to obey God (vv. 13-16). God became angry with Moses because he refused to obey. However the sovereign Lord would not let His reluctant servant go (cf. Jonah). Instead He provided a mouthpiece for Moses in his older brother by three years, Aaron (cf. 7:7). This act was both an aid to Moses and a discipline for his disobedience. On the one hand Aaron was an encouragement to Moses, but on the other he proved to be a source of frustration as a mediator (e.g., ch. 32).
"The mouth of Moses may well be heavy and clumsy, slow and halting in speech. It would not matter if it were dumb altogether, and Aaron's mouth, as well. Yahweh will be there, and Yahweh will take responsibility for both the message and the messengers. The staff in the hands of Moses and Aaron is a symbol of this powerful Presence."83
4:18 Moses' pessimism concerning the welfare of the Israelites comes out in his request that Jethro (Reuel of 2:18; cf. 3:1) let him return to Egypt. Moses apparently concluded even after his experience at the burning bush that there was no hope for the Israelites.
This section makes it possible for us to gain great insight into Moses' feelings about God's promises to his forefathers and about his own life. Moses had become thoroughly disillusioned. He regarded himself as a failure, the objects of his ministry as hopeless, and God as unfaithful, uncaring, and unable to deliver His people. He had learned his own inability to deliver Israel, but he did not yet believe in God's ability to do so. Even the miraculous revelation of God at the burning bush and the miracles that God enabled Moses to perform did not convince him of God's purpose and power.
One supernatural revelation, even one involving miracles, does not usually change convictions that a person has built up over years of experience. We not only need to believe in our own inability to produce supernatural change, as Moses did, but we also need to believe in God's ability to produce it. Moses had not yet learned the second lesson, which God proceeded to teach him.
4:19-23 Moses did not return immediately to Egypt when he arrived back in Midian following his encounter with God at Horeb (v. 19). God spoke to him again in Midian and sent him back to Egypt assuring His servant that everyone who had sought his life earlier had died.
Verse 20 describes what Moses did after God's full revelation to him in Midian that continues in verses 21-23. In chronological order verse 20 follows verse 23.
God gave Moses a preview of all that would take place in his dealings with Pharaoh (vv. 21-23).
When God said He would harden Pharaoh's heart (v. 21), He was not saying that Pharaoh would be unable to choose whether he would release the Israelites. God made Pharaoh's heart progressively harder as the king chose to disobey God's will (cf. Lev. 26:23-24).
"The hardening of Pharaohis ascribed to God, not only in the passages just quoted [14:4, 17; 7:3; and 10:1], but also in 9:12; 10:20, 27; 11:10; 14:8; that is to say, ten times in all; and that not merely as foreknown by Jehovah, but as caused and effected by Him. In the last five passages it is invariably stated that Jehovah hardened . . . Pharaoh's heart.' But it is also stated just as often, viz. ten times, that Pharaoh hardened his own heart, or made it heavy or firm; e.g., in 7:13, 22; 8:15; 9:35; . . . 7:14; . . . 9:7; . . . 8:11, 28; 9:34; . . . 13:15. . . .
"According to this, the hardening of Pharaoh was quite as much his own act as the decree of God. But if, in order to determine the precise relation of the divine to the human causality, we look more carefully at the two classes of expressions, we shall find that not only in connection with the first sign, by which Moses and Aaron were to show their credentials as the messengers of Jehovah, sent with the demand that he would let the people of Israel go (7:13-14), but after the first five penal miracles, the hardening is invariably represented as his own. . . . It is not till after the sixth plague that it is stated that Jehovah made the heart of Pharaoh firm (9:12). . . . Looked at from this side, the hardening was a fruit of sin, a consequence of self-will, high-mindedness, and pride which flowed from sin, and a continuous and ever increasing abuse of that freedom of the will which is innate in man, and which involves the possibility of obstinate resistance to the word and chastisement of God even until death. . . .
". . . God not only permits a man to harden himself; He also produced obduracy, and suspends this sentence over the impenitent. Not as though God took pleasure in the death of the wicked! No; God desires that the wicked should repent of his evil way and live (Ezek. 33:11); and He desires this most earnestly, for He will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth' (1 Tim. 2:4; cf. 2 Pet. 3:9). As God causes His earthly sun to rise upon the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust (Matt. 5:45), so He causes His sun of grace to shine upon all sinners, to lead them to life and salvation.
"The sun, by the force of its heat, moistens the wax and dries the clay, softening the one and hardening the other; and as this produces opposite effects by the same power, so, through the long-suffering of God, which reaches to all, some receive good and others evil, some are softened and others hardened' (Theodoret).
"It is the curse of sin, that it renders the hard heart harder, and less susceptible to the gracious manifestations of divine love, long-suffering, and patience. In this twofold manner God produces hardness, not only permissivebut effective; i.e., not only by giving time and space for the manifestation of human opposition, even to the utmost limits of creaturely freedom, but still more by those continued manifestations of His will which drive the hard heart to such utter obduracy that it is no longer capable of returning, and so giving over the hardened sinner to the judgment of damnation. This is what we find in the case of Pharaoh."84
Even though God's hardening of Pharaoh's heart was only the complement of Pharaoh's hardening his own heart, God revealed only the former action in verse 21. God's purpose in this revelation was to prepare Moses for the opposition he would face. He also intended to strengthen his faith by obviating any questions that might arise in Moses' mind concerning God's omniscience as his conflict with Pharaoh intensified.85
"Egyptians believed that when a person died his heart was weighed in the hall of judgment. If one's heart was heavy' with sin, that person was judged. A stone beetle scarab was placed on the heart of the deceased person to suppress his natural tendency to confess sin which would subject himself to judgment. This hardening of the heart' by the scarab would result in salvation for the deceased.
"However, God reversed this process in Pharaoh's case. Instead of his heart being suppressed so that he was silent about his sin and thus delivered, his heart became hardened, he confessed his sin (Ex. 9:27, 34; 10:16-17), and his sinfully heavy heart resulted in judgment. For the Egyptians hardening of the heart' resulted in silence (absence of confession of sin) and therefore salvation. But God's hardening of Pharaoh's heart resulted in acknowledgment of sin and in judgment."86
The real question that God's dealings with Pharaoh raises is, Does man have a free will? Man has limited freedom, not absolute freedom. We have many examples of this fact in analogous relationships. A child has limited freedom under his or her parent. An adult has limited freedom under his or her human government. Likewise individuals have limited freedom under divine government. God is sovereign, but we are responsible for the decisions God allows us to make (cf. John 1:12; 3:16, 36; 5:24; 6:47; 20:31; Rom. 9:14-21; Jer. 18:1-6).87
"Childs suggests that the matter of causality in the heart-hardening is a side-track; that those critics, for example, who have seen here a theological dimension of predestination and freewill, have been wrong. I would say, No, they have been right (at least in principle) to sense such a dimension, but wrong to see the question of divine determination in human affairs arising onlyin connection with Pharaoh's heart-hardening. For the wholestory may be seen in these terms--Moses and the people, as well as Pharaoh, exist and act within a framework of divine causality.' With them, too, the question arises, Are they independent agents? Are they manipulated by God? (Have they freewill? Are they pre-destined?') The story is about freedom; but freedom turns out to involve varieties of servitude.
"Thus Isbell's observation bears repeating: the story is above all one about masters, especially God. No one in the story entirely escapes God's control or its repercussions, whether directly or indirectly. Moses who sits removed in Midian finds himself forced by Yahweh into a direct servitude but is nevertheless allowed to develop a measure of freedom. Pharaoh (Egypt) exalts his own mastery and is cast into a total and mortal servitude. The people of Egypt and Israel are buffeted this way and that in varying indirect roles of servitude. . . .
"God himself is depicted as risking insecurity, because that is the price of allowing his servants a dimension of freedom. An exodus story that saw no murmuring, no rebellion (or potential for rebellion) by Moses and by Israel, would indeed be a fairy tale, a piece of soft romance. But to talk of God and insecurity' in the same breath is also to see that the gift of human freedom' (to some if not to others) itself creates external pressures on God which in turn circumscribe his own action. Egypt/Pharaoh must be made an example of, spectacularly, so that Israel, the whole world, may freelycome to recognize that Yahweh is indeed master, one who remembers his obligations as well as one who demands service' (labour!). In short, in his relations with humankind, God's freedom is circumscribed by humankind just as the freedom of humankind is circumscribed by God."88
Verses 22-23 summarize Moses' future messages to Pharaoh on several different occasions.
Israel was God's first-born son in the sense that it was the nation among all others on which God had chosen to place His special blessing. It was first in rank and preeminence by virtue of God's sovereign choice to bless Abraham's seed.
The essence of the conflict between Pharaoh and Yahweh was the issue of sovereignty. Were Egypt's gods or Israel's God sovereign? This issue stands out clearly in the following verses.
"The Egyptian state was not a man-made alternative to other forms of political organization [from the Egyptian point of view]. It was god-given, established when the world was created; and it continued to form part of the universal order. In the person of Pharaoh a superhuman being had taken charge of the affairs of man. . . . The monarch then was as old as the world, for the creator himself had assumed kingly office on the day of creation. Pharaoh was his descendant and his successor."89
Pharaoh would not release Yahweh's metaphorical son, Israel. Therefore Yahweh would take Pharaoh's metaphorical son, namely, the Egyptians as a people, and his physical son, thus proving His sovereignty.
4:24-26 This brief account raises several questions.
Evidently God afflicted Moses because Moses had not been obedient to God. He failed to circumcise at least one of his two sons, perhaps the younger, Eliezer (18:3-4).90God's sentence for this sin of omission was death ("cut off from his people,"cf. Gen. 17:14). God was ready to carry out this sentence on Moses for his failure (cf. 1 John 5:16). In doing this God was making Moses face his own incomplete obedience that reflected his lack of faith in God. God afflicted Moses, but whether He did so naturally or supernaturally is unclear and unimportant. In this incident God was bringing Moses to the place he brought Jacob when He wrestled with him at the Jabbok (Gen. 32). He was getting him to acknowledge His sovereignty.91
Zipporah ("little bird") performed the operation at her husband's insistence. It is obvious that she did not approve of it. Most scholars believe that Zipporah cut off the foreskin and threw it at Moses' feet.92Perhaps because of her resistance to do the will of God Moses sent her and his sons back to her father at this time. Moses may have sent her back during or before the plagues when his life might have been in danger from the Egyptians. We have no record of when Moses' household returned to Midian, but we read of them rejoining Moses later at Sinai (18:2).
The "bridegroom of blood"figure (v. 26) evidently means as follows. Apparently Zipporah regarded her act of circumcising her son as what removed God's hand of judgment from Moses and restored him to life and to her again. It was as though God had given Moses a second chance and he had begun life as her husband over as a bridegroom (cf. Jonah).93She had accepted Yahweh's authority and demands and was now viewing Moses in the light of God's commission. She abandoned her claim to Moses and made him available to Yahweh's service.94
"Moses has been chosen and commissioned by God, but he has shown himself far from enthusiastic about confronting the Pharaoh and threatening him with the death of his son. YHWH sets about showing Moses that although he is safe from other men (Ex. iv 19) he faces a much greater danger to his life in the wrath of the God whom he is so reluctant to serve (iv 14). Like Jacob before him, Moses must undergo a night struggle with his mysterious God before he can become a worthy instrument of YHWH and can enjoy a completely satisfactory relationship with his brother. In all this, Moses, like Jacob, is not only an historical person, but also a paradigm. The Israelite people, the people whom YHWH has encountered and whom he will slay with pestilence and sword if they go not out into the wilderness to serve him (v. 3), must ponder this story with fear and trembling.
"If Israel is to survive the wrath of YHWH, it must, our text implies, be by virtue of the spilling of atoning blood . . . Gershom's blood saves Moses, just as the blood of the Passover lamb will save the Israelites. Since for the sin of the Pharaoh his son's blood will be shed, it is appropriate that the blood which saves Moses should not be his own, but that of his son. It is also fitting that this blood should be blood shed during the rite of circumcision. Since before the Passover lamb is eaten the participants must all be circumcised, it is right that the neglect of Gershom's circumcision (though this omission is not the cause of the attack) should be repaired. The boy cannot be circumcised by his father, who is otherwise engaged, so Zipporah takes it upon herself, acting on behalf of her absent father, Jethro (hence the words to Moses You are my son-in-law by virtue of blood, the blood of circumcision'), to perform the rite, thus showing herself to be a worthy member of the elite class typified by Rahab the Canaanite harlot and Ruth the Moabitess--the foreign woman who puts Israelites to shame and earns the right to be held up as a model for imitation. Why does she touch Moses' raglayim["feet"] with the severed foreskin? Although, as I have argued, Moses is to be thought of as already circumcised, this action of his wife is, I have suggested, to be construed as a symbolic act of re-circumcision: Moses as representative of the people as a whole is thus symbolically prepared for the imminent Passover celebration. The vocation of the Israelite is a matter of high moment. One's reluctance to serve YHWH wholeheartedly has to be broken down in a fearsome lone struggle in the darkness, and even then before one can meet YHWH there must be a twofold shedding of blood, the blood of circumcision and that of the Passover lamb. Furthermore, the pride of the male Israelite in his high vocation must needs be qualified, by reflecting that in his mysterious strategies for the world YHWH often employs in major roles those who are neither male nor even Israelite."95
These few verses underscore a very important principle. Normally before God will use a person publicly he or she must first be obedient to God at home (cf. 1 Tim. 3:4-5).
"This story of Moses shows that God would rather have us die than take up His work with unconsecrated hearts and unsurrendered wills."96
4:27-31 Aaron was probably in Egypt when God told him to meet Moses and directed him to Horeb (v. 27). Moses was apparently on his way from Midian back to Egypt when Aaron met him.97
The Israelites believed what Moses and Aaron told them and what their miracles confirmed. They believed that the God of their fathers had appeared to Moses and had sent him to lead them out of Egypt and into the Promised Land (v. 31; cf. 3:6-4:9).
The relationship of faith and worship is clear in verse 31. Worship is an expression of faith.98
