New European Commentary


About | PDFs | Mobile formats | Word formats | Other languages | Contact Us | What is the Gospel? | Support the work | Carelinks Ministries | | The Real Christ | The Real Devil | "Bible Companion" Daily Bible reading plan

Deeper Commentary

Exo 17:1 All the congregation of the children of Israel travelled from the wilderness of Sin, by their journeys, according to Yahweh’s commandment, and encamped in Rephidim; but there was no water for the people to drink-
The events of Ex. 17 are the basis for Ps. 95. This is largely a Psalm of praise for what God did for Israel in the wilderness, whilst also commenting on the way they tragically put God to the test, and complained about His care for them. Now the words of Ps. 95:7- 11 are directly quoted in Heb. 3:7- 11 concerning the experience of the new Israel. The simple conclusion from this is that we are really intended to see the events of Ex. 17 as directly relevant for us.  

At this time, Israel were faithless and complaining. But this first movement of Israel from the Red Sea towards Sinai was seen quite differently by God, years later. He saw their very small love for Him, despite their idol worship, as wonderful: "I remember the devotion of your youth, your love as a bride, How you followed me in the wilderness in a land not sown" (Jer. 2:2). This for all the world sounds like the man madly in love with a faithless woman, who over eagerly sees every slight movement of her towards him as a sign of her love. God's love for Israel at this time was huge, and He saw their travelling towards Sinai as a requite to that love.

Exo 17:2 Therefore the people quarrelled with Moses, and said, Give us water to drink. Moses said to them, Why do you quarrel with me? Why do you test Yahweh?-
Stephen in Acts 7 stresses the way in which Moses was rejected by Israel as a type of Christ. At age 40, Moses was "thrust away" by one of the Hebrews; and on the wilderness journey the Jews “thrust him from them, and in their hearts turned back again into Egypt" (Acts 7:27,35,39). This suggests that there was far more antagonism between Moses and Israel than we gather from the Old Testament record- after the pattern of Israel's treatment of Jesus. It would seem from Acts 7:39 that after the golden calf incident, the majority of Israel cold shouldered Moses. Once the point sank in that they were not going to enter the land, this feelings must have turned into bitter resentment. They were probably unaware of how Moses had been willing to offer his eternal destiny for their salvation; they would not have entered into the intensity of Moses' prayers for their salvation. The record seems to place Moses and "the people" in juxtaposition around 100 times (e.g. Ex. 15:24; 17:2,3; 32:1 NIV; Num. 16:41 NIV; 20:2,3; 21:5). They accused Moses of being a cruel cult leader, bent on leading them out into the desert to kill them and steal their wealth from them (Num. 16:13,14)- when in fact Moses was delivering them from the house of bondage, and was willing to lay down his own salvation for theirs. The way Moses submerged his own pain is superb; both of their rejection of him and of God's rejection of him from entering the Kingdom. The style of Moses' writing in Num. 20:12-14 reveals this submerging of his own pain. He speaks of himself in the third person, omitting any personal reflection on his own feelings: "The Lord spake unto Moses... Because you believed me not... you shall not bring the congregation into the land... and Moses sent messengers from Kadesh unto the King of Edom...". Likewise all the references to “the Lord spake unto Moses” (Lev. 1:1). Moses submerged his own personality in writing his books. 

Exo 17:3 The people were thirsty for water there; and the people murmured against Moses, and said, Why have you brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us, our children, and our livestock with thirst?-
Israel continually "murmured" against Moses (Ex. 15:24; 16:2,7,8; 17:3; Num. 14:2,27,29 cp. Dt. 1:27; Ps. 106:25; 1 Cor. 10:10). Nearly all these murmurings were related to Israel's disbelief that Moses really could bring them into the land. Likewise Israel disbelieved that eating Christ's words (Jn. 6:63) really could lead them to salvation; and their temptation to murmur in this way is ours too, especially in the last days (1 Cor. 10:10-12). The Hebrew for "murmur" is the word for "stop", and is usually translated in that way. The idea is that they didn't want to go further on the journey; they wanted to return to Egypt. Despite the wonder of the Red Sea deliverance. Their hearts truly were in Egypt. This sense of not wanting to go onwards towards the Kingdom, to put a brake on God's saving process, is the same temptation which in essence afflicts all God's people who have started the journey with Him.

Moses had been weak and discouraged in the same way, accusing God of wanting to do them evil rather than save them (Ex. 5:23). And now this was what the people concluded in the desert, when they complained Yahweh had brought them into the desert to slay them. Moses would have found patience with them, because he would have realized that this same desperate conclusion, in the heat of desperation, was what he too had been guilty of. It is awareness of our own failures which provides the basis for others in theirs. God is without that aspect; His patience with human sin is therefore the more wonderful than ours.

The test as to "What shall we drink?" was a repeat of that in Ex. 15 and Num. 20. The same basic test, although in regard to "What shall we eat?", was repeated in Ex. 16. Exodus explains their journey up to Sinai, and Numbers ["In the wilderness", in Hebrew] their journeys afterwards. The Lord alludes to this when warning us not to ask what we shall eat or drink but to live life trusting in God's provision. And this is how life goes- tests repeat, in essence, and we are intended to learn from how God provides and acts in earlier tests in our lives. And also from how He has provided historically, in the Biblical record. It's the same with how God had carefully instructed Moses how to use his rod, and therefore his failure with his rod was seen as so culpable.

They counted Moses as responsible for their coming out of Egypt and lack of water. Clearly God had receded from their thinking. They related to Moses as if he were God. Just as people don't separate church from God, and just as they only see His representatives, rather than looking through them to the God behind them. The Jews likewise told the Lord that Moses gave them manna. The Lord replied that it was God and not Moses who gave them manna. 

God allowed the people to hunger and thirst, and had them squeal for help, before He met those needs. Seeing food and water are obvious needs for a wilderness journey, we enquire why God didn't tell then ahead of time that these needs would be provided. Surely it is an example of how God leads us to know our needs before He fulfils them. He wants us to see what our core heart desires are.  We think of asking the blind man what he wanted, appearing to walk past the disciples, appearing to be asleep in the boat. He does the same with us. 

Exo 17:4 Moses cried to Yahweh, saying, What shall I do with these people? They are almost ready to stone me-
As at the crossing of the Red Sea, Moses responds to the people in a very confident manner, when his own cries to God indicate the depth of his distress. Death by stoning was a punishment for religious apostacy; perhaps this reflected their commitment to the gods of Egypt which they then worshipped (Ez. 20:8). 

Exo 17:5 Yahweh said to Moses, Walk on before the people, and take the elders of Israel with you, and take the rod in your hand with which you struck the Nile, and go-
Again, unbelieving Israel are made parallel to Pharaoh and his Egyptian courtiers. For the miracle was to persuade Israel and bring them to repentance, just as had been intended with the Egyptians through the miracle performed with water through striking with the rod.

It was Aaron who struck the river, so we can see that someone's representative can be spoken of as them without being them. This explains the relationship between God and Jesus.  

We need to imagine the feelings of God as He provided food and drink for them:

He fed and watered them as a doting parent does a young child. Consider: "In the wilderness, you saw how the LORD your God carried you, just as one carries a child, all the way that you traveled until you reached this place (Dt. 1.29–31). Or Hos. 11:1-4:
"When Israel was a child, I loved him,
and out of Egypt I called my son.
The more I called them,
the more they went from me;
they kept sacrificing to the Baals,
and offering incense to idols.
Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk,
I took them up in my arms,
but they did not know that I healed them.
I led them with cords of human kindness,
with bands of love.
I was to them like those who lift infants to their cheeks,
I bent down to them and fed them"

Note that last line: "I was to them like those who lift infants to their cheeks, I bent down to them and fed them". That was the spirit of love behind His feeding of them. And yet they demanded food and water like an ungrateful person assumes that the royal "they" must provide for me... and worshipped their idols more and more instead of being grateful. You could weep for God. Israel's desire for food and drink was not a simple request of a child to the parent for sustenance. "They had a wanton craving in the wilderness, and put God to the test in the desert” (Ps. 106:14). “You have been rebellious against the Lord as long as he has known you” (Dt. 9:24).

And yet God saw their very small love for Him, despite their idol worship, as wonderful: "I remember the devotion of your youth, your love as a bride, How you followed me in the wilderness in a land not sown" (Jer. 2:2). "Therefore, I will now allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak tenderly to her. From there I will give her her vineyards, and make the Valley of Achor a door of hope. There she shall respond to me as in the days of her youth, as at the time when she came out of the land of Egypt" (Hos. 2:14,15). This all sounds like the lover almost over eager to wildly over interpret any sign of love for him or even interest in his approaches. And we... love God. We thereby touch His heart, given His tragic experience with Israel. We at least can say "Father I am ashamed for how my people treated you. I am not much of a lover, not much of a partner for You, but I swear with all my little heart, I will be loyal to You, I love You".

Exo 17:6 Behold, I will stand before you there on the rock in Horeb-
God through the Angel stood upon a rock in Sinai with Moses next to Him (Ex. 17:6). Later, Yahweh asks Moses to stand upon a rock in Sinai next to Him (Ex. 33:21 s.w.). We see how God gently and progressively leads His people closer to Him, using every experience He gives us to prepare for the next one, on an ever more intimate level with Him.  

The LXX suggests the text means that I, Yahweh in the Angel, will be standing there before [you get there], understanding "before" in terms of time rather than space. So often we find this in our crises- that God is already there. We think of the women worrying as to who would roll away the stone, to find it already rolled away by Angels.

You shall strike the rock, and water will come out of it, that the people may drink. Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel-
Moses was asked to throw down wood into the waters (Ex. 15:25). His staff, also made of wood, had to be lifted up in order to open the Red Sea. He was being taught careful obedience to commandment about wood, and yet he failed to learn- for the sin which excluded him from entering Canaan was that of not obeying commandment about his rod / the wood. He was told to take the rod in his hand but not use it. This may explain the apparent harshness of God's condemnation of him over this incident.

The first time Moses struck the rock, he was standing in the presence of the Angel- "Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock" (Ex. 17:6), but it would seem that the second time Moses took the rod "from before the LORD (the Angel)" (Num. 20:9) and went alone to the rock; this lack of Angelic presence perhaps accounts for his rashness at this time.

Paul in 1 Cor. 10:4 alludes to a Jewish tradition that the rock followed Israel through the wilderness, always giving water. Some traditions suggest Miriam carried it; the supposed “Rock of Moses” is a piece of rock which could have been carried. Paul emphasizes that the point of his allusion is that the water which they drank of represented “Christ”, the strength which comes from Him as the smitten rock; he alludes to the tradition just as he quotes pagan poets and makes a point out of their words (Acts 17:28). The Bible often features this kind of thing; and God isn’t so paranoiac and apologetic that He as it were has to footnote such things with a comment that “of course, this isn’t true”.

It should be evident enough that the rock which Moses smote in the desert was simply a rock; it wasn't Christ personally. The Jewish book of Wisdom claimed that "the rock was Wisdom" (Wisdom 11). Paul, as he so often does, is picking up this phrase and saying that more essentially, the rock represented Jesus personally, and not 'Wisdom' in the Jewish misunderstanding of this figure. It "was" Him in the sense that it represented Him. Likewise He said about the communion wine: "This is my blood". It wasn't literally His blood; it was and is His blood only in that it represents His blood. Paul is describing the experience of Israel in the wilderness because he saw in it some similarities with the walk of the Corinthian believers towards God's kingdom. The whole of 1 Cor. 10 is full of such reference. And this is why he should speak about the rock which Moses smote as a symbol of Christ. The Israelites had been baptized into Moses, just as Corinth had been baptized into Christ; and both Israel and Corinth ate "the same spiritual food; and did all drink the same spiritual drink". "Spiritual food... spiritual drink" shows that Paul saw the manna they ate and the water they drank as spiritually symbolic- just as He saw the rock as symbolic. Paul goes on in 1 Cor. 10:16,17 to write of how Corinth also ate and drank of Christ in the breaking of bread, and in chapter 11 he brings home the point: like Israel, we can eat and drink those symbols, "the same spiritual meat... the same spiritual drink", having been baptized into Christ as they were into Moses, and think that thereby we are justified to do as we like in our private lives. This is the point and power of all this allusion. The picture of their carcasses rotting in the wilderness is exhortation enough. Baptism and observing the 'breaking of bread' weren't enough to save Israel.

The Lord Jesus Himself had explained in John 6 how the manna represented His words and His sacrifice. He spoke of how out of Him would come "living water", not still well water, but bubbling water fresh from a fountain (Jn. 4:11; 7:38). And He invites His people to drink of it. It was this kind of water that bubbled out of the smitten rock. Ps. 78:15,16,20; 105:41; Is. 48:21 describe it with a variety of words: gushing, bursting, water running down like a high mountain stream, "flowed abundantly" if the fountains of deep hidden water had burst to the surface ("as out of the great depths", Ps. 78:15). So the Lord was saying that He was the rock, and we like Israel drinking of what came out of Him. All this speaks of the gift of the Spirit which was given as a result of the Lord's death. He there becomes the source of endless inspiration and spirituality; which is why we regularly focus upon Him there, not least through the breaking of bread.

The Law of Moses included several rituals which depended upon what is called "the running water"(Lev. 14:5,6,50-52; 15:18; Num. 19:17). "Running" translates a Hebrew word normally translated "living". This living water was what came out of the smitten rock. The Lord taught that the water that would come out of Him would only come after His glorification (Jn. 7:38)- an idea He seems to link with His death rather than His ascension (Jn. 12:28,41; 13:32; 17:1,5 cp. 21:19; Heb. 2:9). When He was glorified on the cross, then the water literally flowed from His side on His death. The rock was "smitten", and the water then came out. The Hebrew word used here is usually translated to slay, slaughter, murder. It occurs in two clearly Messianic passages: "...they talk to the hurt of him [Christ] whom thou hast smitten"(Ps. 69:26); "we esteemed him [as He hung on the cross] smitten of God"(Is. 53:4).

It was in a sense God who "clave the rock" so that the waters gushed out (Ps. 78:15; Is. 48:21). "Clave" implies that the rock was literally broken open; and in this we see a dim foreshadowing of the gaping hole in the Lord's side after the spear thrust, as well as a more figurative image of how His life and mind were broken apart in His final sacrifice. Yahweh, presumably represented by an Angel, stood upon [or 'above'] the rock when Moses, on Yahweh's behalf, struck the rock. Here we see a glimpse into the nature of the Father's relationship with the Son on the cross. He was both with the Son, identified with Him just as the Angel stood on the rock or hovered above it as Moses struck it... and yet He also was the one who clave that rock, which was Christ. As Abraham with Isaac was a symbol of both the Father and also the slayer, so in our far smaller experience, the Father gives us the trials which He stands squarely with us through. And within the wonder of His self-revelation, Yahweh repeatedly reveals Himself as "the rock"- especially in Deuteronomy. And yet that smitten rock "was [a symbol of] Christ". On the cross, "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself". There He was the most intensely manifested in His beloved Son. There God was spat upon, His love rejected. There we see the utter humility and self-abnegation of the Father. And we His children must follow the same path, for the salvation of others.

The rock "followed [better, 'accompanied'] them" (1 Cor. 10:4). We must understand this as a metonymy, whereby "the rock" is put for what came out of it, i.e. the fountain of living water. It seems that this stream went with them on their journey. The statement that "they drank" of the rock is in the imperfect tense, denoting continuous action- they kept on drinking of that water, it wasn't a one time event, it continued throughout the wilderness journey. A careful reading of Ex. 17:5,6 reveals that at Rephidim, Moses was told to "Go on before the people", to Horeb. There he struck the rock, and yet the people drank the water in Rephidim. The water flowed a long way that day, and there is no reason to think that it didn't flow with them all the time. The records make it clear enough that the miraculous provision of water was in the same context as God's constant provision of food and protection to the people (Dt. 8:15,16). The rock gave water throughout the wilderness journey (Is. 48:21). This would surely necessitate that the giving of water at Horeb was not a one-off solution to a crisis. There is a word play in the Hebrew text of Is. 48:21: "He led them through the Horebs [AV 'desert places']" by making water flow from the rock. The Horeb experience was repeated for 40 years; as if the rock went on being smitten. Somehow the water from that smitten rock went with them, fresh and bubbling as it was the first moment the rock was smitten, right through the wilderness. It was living, spring water- not lying around in puddles. The water that came from that one rock tasted as if God had opened up fresh springs and torrents in the desert (Ps. 74:15 NAS). It always tasted as if it was just gushing out of the spring; and this wonder is commented upon by both David and Isaiah (Ps. 78:15,16,20; 105:41; Is. 48:21). It was as if the rock had just been struck, and the water was flowing out fresh for the first time.

In this miracle, God clave the rock and there came out rivers (Hab. 3:9; Ps. 78:16,20; Is. 43:20). Each part of Israel's encampment had the water as it were brought to their door. And so it is in our experience of Christ, and the blessing enabled by His sacrifice. The blessings that come to us are deeply personal, and directed to us individually. He died once, long ago, and yet the effect of His sacrifice is ever new. In our experience, it's as if He has died and risen for us every time we obtain forgiveness, or any other grace to help in our times of need. We live in newness of life. The cross is in that sense ongoing; He dies and lives again for every one who comes to Him. And yet at the end of their wilderness journey, Moses reflected that Israel had forgotten the rock that had given them birth. The water had become such a regular feature of their lives that they forgot the rock in Horeb that it flowed from. They forgot that 'Horeb' means 'a desolate place', and yet they had thankfully drunk of the water the first time in Rephidim, 'the place of comfort'.

Exo 17:7 He called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because the children of Israel quarrelled, and because they put Yahweh to the test, saying, Is Yahweh among us, or not?-
The continual presence of the stream of water amongst them (see on :6) was evidence that He was among them. The Angel was visibly dwelling amongst them in the pillar of fire and cloud; and yet faith is clearly enough not based upon that which is seen. The visible evidence was clearly not enough to convict them; for as Heb. 11:1,2 explains, faith is not based upon that which is visible.

Clearly Israel did far more than simply cry out to their Heavenly Father for water. Dt. 6:16 warns them never again to put Yahweh their God to the test as they did at Massah. This reveals that their motives were not simply the need for water, but to test whether Yahweh was really amongst them- despite the pillar of cloud and fire with them and the daily gift of manna. Nobody gets angry with a thirsty child who begs for water. But what they did was a kind of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.  Again we see that the daily presence of miracles does not of itself convict anyone of faith in God; for "faith" really means "trust". And they had none of that. And yet despite this lack of faith and cynicism of God, He still gave them water. This grace was to humble them- and humility is an intended outcome of grace: "He [God] made water flow for you from flint rock [at Massah and Meribah], and fed you in the wilderness with manna that your ancestors did not know, to humble you and test you, and in the end to do you good" (Dt. 8:15,16). And yet God was working on another level too. Dt. 33:8-11 seems to say that Yahweh tested Moses and Aaron through this incident, and they came through that test: "Of Levi [the Levite descendant Moses] he said, Your Thummim and your Urim are with your holy one whom You proved at Massah, with whom You strove at the waters of Meribah; who said of his father and of his mother, ‘I have not seen him’. Neither did he acknowledge his brothers, nor did he know his own children; for they have observed Your word and keep Your covenant". The LXX there speaks of "the holy man whom they put to the test by testing. They reviled him (Moses) at the water of testing", referring to Moses.

We learn from Dt. 33:8-11 that in some way at this time, some of the tribe of Levi showed themselves faithful to God, whilst others didn't, and the faithful Levites opposed the unfaithful ones- although this isn't here recorded. This kind of faithfulness was shown again at the time of the golden calf, and therefore the system of the firstborn being priests was changed so that the tribe of Levi became the source of the priests. Priesthood was therefore given on the basis of qualification, and Levi's behaviour at this point was one of those qualifications: "Of Levi he said, Your Thummim and your Urim are with your holy one [the faithful Levites] whom You proved at Massah, with whom You strove [the unfaithful Levites] at the waters of Meribah; who said of his father and of his mother, ‘I have not seen him’. Neither did he acknowledge his brothers, nor did he know his own children; for they have observed Your word and keep Your covenant.
They shall teach Jacob Your ordinances, and Israel Your law. They shall put incense before You and whole burnt offering on Your altar".

Exo 17:8 Then Amalek came and fought with Israel in Rephidim-
Dt. 25:18 fills us in with some more details: "(Amalek) smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary". God's special hatred of Amalek was perhaps reflective of how He so hates an abuse of power and picking upon the weak, in whatever way. So Israel were "faint and weary", some of them had fallen by the wayside, others were being picked off almost daily by the bands of aggressive Amalekites. Israel were living through the aftermath of their rebellion against Moses; they had been chronically thirsty, and perhaps their spiritual tiredness was matched by the mental and physical faintness of clinical dehydration. The effects of this can last quite some time after liquid is received. So they were at low ebb.

After Israel's blasphemy of the Holy Spirit discussed on :7, the attack of Amalek could be seen as Divine judgment upon them. Amalek would have destroyed them, despite Israel's huge numerical superiority. Israel were only saved by the intensity of Moses' intercesesion; for when he let down his hands, Amalek prevailed against Israel. So Moses saved Israel from destruction, preparing him for how he would do so after the golden calf incident.

Dt. 25:18 says that Amalek attacked Israel whilst they were thirsty, weak and feeble. So the attack happened whilst they were thirsty and demanding water. They were also spiritually feeble and weak. But God so loved Israel that He was angry with those who punished them in their weakness, just as He was to be with the Babylonians and Assyrians. His special hatred of Amalek was maybe because they picked on the weak. God is so sensitive to abuse of the weak, especially the spiritually weak.

Exo 17:9 Moses said to Joshua, Choose men for us, and go out, fight with Amalek. Tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill with God’s rod in my hand-
Despite his youth, Joshua's love of the word, and subsequent spiritual insight, led him to be chosen to accompany Moses, to witness the mighty theophany in the mount. In his relative youth, soon after leaving Egypt, Joshua was made the leader of the Israelite army which fought Amalek. He was told to compose that army of men of his personal choice (Ex. 17:9). One wonders if the condemned generation had much heart for a fight. Can we not imagine him choosing the zealous young reformers of Egypt, along with the warrior-priests? 

The attack by Amalek can be read as a punishment for the sense they had that Yahweh was not among them. We could go so far as to say that it was intended to destroy them, but they were saved by the intense intercession of Moses. Remember that although Amalek were outnumbered, surely, by Israel- they were winning whenever Moses let down his hands. All this was to prepare Moses for his finest moments when later be intercedes for 40 days and changes God's intention to destroy Israel. At this point he had Aaron and Hur to encourage him, but up the mountain he would be alone. God leads us likewise- doing something with human encouragement, and then, giving us a greater opportunity for service but alone. 

Moses was asked to throw down wood into the waters (Ex. 15:25). His staff, also made of wood, had to be lifted up in order to open the Red Sea and in order to get victory over Amalek (Ex. 17:9). He was being taught careful obedience to commandment about wood, and yet he failed to learn- for the sin which excluded him from entering Canaan was that of not obeying commandment about his rod / the wood. He was told to take the rod in his hand but not use it. This may explain the apparent harshness of God's condemnation of him over this incident.


Exo 17:10 So Joshua did as Moses had told him, and fought with Amalek; and Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill-
The battle which swayed to and fro between Israel and Amalek clearly points forward to our battle with the flesh. Moses/Jesus is away above us, earnestly praying for our victory. Yet in the same way as Israel had Joshua actually with them in the field, so Joshua- Jesus is not only some remote Heavenly helper. He is with us, leading us in the practical business of fighting this war. The personal effort which the Israelites had to make to follow Joshua is surely implied by the fact the victory was no walk-over. The weak among Israel were killed by the Amalekites (Dt. 25:17,18); despite the incredible level of Christ's mediation for us, such is the power of sin and the apathy of human nature that we can still lose the battle.

Given the similarities with the battle against Amalek, were Joshua's arms held up in fervent prayer in Josh. 8:26 ["Joshua didn’t draw back his hand with which he stretched out the javelin, until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai."]? This is a common association with upholden arms. Moses held his hand up, and Joshua led the army into battle, succeeding because Moses had his hands held up in prayer (Ex. 17:10). Now, Joshua is the one holding his hands up in prayer, whilst Israel are in battle. Lesson: We go through experiences which later repeat; and we are in the position of those who had before prayed for us, and are expected to replicate their examples.

Exo 17:11 It happened, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed; and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed-
Uplifted hands are something consistently- and frequently associated with intense prayer, often for the forgiveness of God's people Israel (Lam. 2:19; 2 Chron. 6:12,13; Ezra 9:5; Ps. 28:2; 141:2; 1 Tim. 2:8). The only time we read of Moses lifting up his hands elsewhere is in Ex. 9:28,29, where his spreading out of his hands is made parallel with his entreating of God to lift the plagues on Egypt. It must be significant that uplifted hands is also related to a confirmation of God's covenant (see especially Ez. 20:5,6,15,23,28.42; 36:7; 47:14); for this is exactly what Christ did on the cross. And in a sense, this is what was happening in Ex.17; Israel had sinned, God had forgiven them, and was reconfirming the covenant through Moses (notice that one of the terms of the covenant was that God would save Israel from their enemies, e.g. Amalek).  See on Jn. 19:18; Gen. 49:22.

As the Lord Jesus prayed on the cross, so we should arm ourselves with the same attitude of mind in prayer (1 Pet. 4:1).. We are to have the mind that was in Him there (Phil. 2). Heb. 12:12 alludes here: "Lift up the hands which hang down, and the feeble knees". This is an allusion back to feeble-kneed Moses, with his hanging-down hands being held up. And the apostle says: 'You are the one with feeble knees and hands, represented by Moses in Ex. 17!' - although Moses is also representing Christ praying for us on the cross. So the Spirit is teaching us that with the intensity that Moses prayed for Israel's salvation on that hill in Ex. 17, with the intensity that Christ prayed on the hill of Golgotha - so we should be praying for each other's salvation, and our own.

Typically a leader would be on the top of a hill holding up the national or tribal flag to inspire the troops. But Moses subverted this by holding up his rod, the symbol of his workaday life in God's power. Holding a mere piece of word whilst in intense prayer... naturally suggests a type of the Lord's intercession for us on the piece of word now known as "the cross", with a man on each side of him until sunset. Afterwards he speaks of Yehovah Nissi, Yahweh (as opposed to any flag) is my banner. It was the principle of prayer, of God working through a man's working ordinary life, that was the real basis for victory. Hence :16 GNB "He said, "Hold high the banner of the LORD! The LORD will continue to fight against the Amalekites forever!"". The banner was invisible, it was "Yahweh", His salvation of His people by grace. The rod in the hand of a shepherd may as well have been a paint brush or roller in the hand of a house painter. It was the symbol of how Yahweh's salvation works through the ordinary and obscure.

Exo 17:12 But Moses’ hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat on it. Aaron and Hur held up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side. His hands were steady until sunset-
A righteous man, Moses the superb and detailed type of Christ, with his hands above his head in prayer, fellowshipping Israel's sufferings, battling with intense spiritual, mental and physical weariness, praying intensely, with a man either side of him, until sundown. Of course this is pointing forward to our Lord's crucifixion- on account of which our weariness can really be overcome, we really can find the victory over sin which we fain would have.  

 Moses began to pray standing up, with his hands above his head, with the blazing midday sun beating down upon him (so is implied by the fact that he kept his hands steady until the sun went down. The battle would surely have lasted a few hours; perhaps eight, from morning to sunset, which was the length of time the Lord hung on the cross. But he just couldn't maintain this intensity of mental and spiritual concentration; he let down his hands. But from his high viewpoint, he could see (and hear?) the panic of Israel as they started to flee before their enemies. So he returned to his mental battle. No doubt when he let down his hands, he continued praying, but not so intensely. Yet he came to realize, perhaps after a few cycles of Israel starting to flee before Amalek, that his prayer was absolutely essential for Israel's survival and victory. But he knew that he just couldn't physically go on. His knees were weak, he was going to have to abandon his favourite prayer posture of standing (cp. the earlier records of his prayers in Exodus). His mind must have desperately raced as to how he could go on. At the back of his mind, he would have thrown his predicament upon the Lord. And a way was made. "They took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands" (v.12). Note how Moses did not waste his energy in getting the stone for himself; we get the picture of total mental devotion to Israel's cause, a man all consumed with his prayer, being humanly helped by lesser men. Israel's salvation depended on his totally voluntary intercession. The type is powerful. Peter reasons that Christ's attitude in prayer should be ours (1 Pet. 4:1). His prayers then, and ours now, were a struggle, after the pattern of Jacob. 

John’s Gospel has many references to Moses. When John records the death of the Lord with two men either side of Him, he seems to do so with his mind on the record of Moses praying with Aaron and Hur on each side of him (Ex. 17:12). John’s account in English reads: “They crucified him, and with him two others, on either side one” (Jn. 19:18). Karl Delitzsch translated the Greek New Testament into Hebrew, and the Hebrew phrase he chose to use here is identical with that in Ex. 17:12. Perhaps this explains why John alone of the Gospel writers doesn’t mention that the two men on either side of the Lord were in fact criminals- he calls them “two others” (Jn. 19:18) and “…the legs of the first and of the other” (Jn. 19:32). Thus John may’ve chosen to highlight simply how there were two men on either side of the Lord, in order to bring out the connection with the Moses scene.

Gen. 49:22 speaks of the Messianic descendant of Joseph as a fruitful vine, with branches. The Lord Jesus seems to have quarried His description of Himself as a vine with branches from this very passage (Jn. 15:5). Verse 23 continues: "The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, and hated him: but his bow abode in strength, and the arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob; from thence is the shepherd, the stone (more Messianic allusions here) of Israel". The upholding of Moses' arms is being unmistakably prophesied here; in a Messianic prophecy. The "God of Jacob" in Gen. 48:15,16 refers to God manifest in Angels; Jacob there defines his God as "the Angel that redeemed me". There are plenty of other reasons for thinking that "the God of Jacob" is Angelic language. So Messiah's arms were to be upheld with Angelic strength. But we have seen that Christ's uplifted hands on the cross refer to the way in which he was intensely praying at the time. The hymn writer put two and two together and came to the right conclusion: '...and Angels there / sustained the Son of God in prayer'. This was one of the ways in which "God was in Christ" in his sufferings; He gave Him special Angelic encouragement to keep on praying, to keep on asking for help, without forcing Christ in any way to be righteous. Surely in this we get some light on the mystery of the atonement; the mystery of the degree to which the Father helped the Son to overcome without in any way affecting Christ's freewill. It is perhaps significant that there were two men (Aaron and Hur) upholding Moses' arms, in enacted prophecy of how the Angels would strengthen Christ in prayer. Does this point forward to the two Angels especially associated with Christ, Gabriel and Michael? Physically, of course, it was the nails which kept Christ's hands uplifted above his head; yet are we to infer that the Angels even overruled that for a purpose?

Exo 17:13 Joshua defeated Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword-
"Amalek" appears to be a title like "Pharaoh". We note how little is recorded of the ebb and flow of the battle. No acts of heroism are recorded, the strategy and battle plans are insignificant in the story. But the spotlight is very much on the details regarding Moses- the stone brought for him to sit on, his weariness, his rod, his arms, the men upholding his arms etc. And so it is with us- it is the Lord's intercession which is all important, and which is the ultimate issue in our victory, rather than the ebb and flow of our own efforts.

Exo 17:14 Yahweh said to Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: that I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under the sky-
This points forward to God's purpose to obliterate the memory of the "former things" - i.e. Amalek, the things of our moral weakness (Rev. 21:4); note how the "former things" in several Old Testament passages refer to the things of Israel's sad spiritual past. The forgetting of the former things therefore refers to the lack of awareness of the things with which we battled in this life. In the same way as God can 'forget' our sins, so one of the Kingdom joys will be the lack of memory of anything sinful.

Yahweh's Name, by contrast, was to be an eternal memory (Ex. 3:15). He was to be remembered for how He had articulated His Name in how He had historically acted in saving the patriarchs, and He would be remembered for how He was going to act to save His people from Egypt. What was to be memorialized was therefore His actions, rather than simply the letters YHWH. It was His wonderful works which were to be remembered [Ps. 111:4, s.w. "My memorial"]. By contrast, the sinful works and persons of the wicked would not be remembered / memorialized, be they Amalek (s.w. Ex. 17:14; Dt. 25:19), or God's apostate people (s.w. Dt. 32:26). 

The intended fulfilment of this was at the hand of Saul in 1 Sam. 15. But he didn't fulfil it totally, he was told to "utterly destroy Amalek" but he didn't. We see here how the fulfilment of Bible prophecy can depend upon human freewill obedience. We have here a window onto the flexible nature of the outworking of God's purpose. "I will blot out the rememberance of Amalek" depended upon whether Israel as God's instrument would do this- for Dt. 25:19 is clear: "You shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heavens.
You shall not forget". But Israel did not fully blot out Amalek, and so in that sense  God allowed Himself to be limited by man. Had Saul eliminated Amalek, there would have been no Haman the Agagite, the Amalekite.

Exo 17:15 Moses built an altar, and called its name Yahweh our Banner-
That memorial was physically symbolized by the building of the altar called Jehovah- Nissi. This literally means 'Jehovah is my pole'; this is a word used indirectly in prophecies about the cross of Christ. “There is no God else beside; a just God and a Saviour (Jesus)... look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth” (Is. 45:21,22) is evident allusion to the snake on the pole to which all Israel were bidden look and be saved. And yet that saving symbol of the crucified Jesus is in fact God Himself held up to all men. The other reading "YHWH is my banner" suggests that the raised staff was as a flagpole, but Moses wanted to show that the victory was in Yahweh and not in the rod of itself.

Exo 17:16 He said, Yah has sworn: ‘Yahweh will have war with Amalek from generation to generation’-
The work of Moses led to the declaration that God will be perpetually at war with Amalek; in prospect, Amalek was destroyed when the sun went down. The same happened with our sinfulness on the cross. In a sense Amalek was destroyed for good, in another sense a long warfare was started; "the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation". Within our natures, as well as in our dealings with the world, we are experiencing this warfare. There is no respite from it. Yet we have this marvellous assurance: God is at war with sin, He is truly on our side in these struggles, these wrestlings with our very natures, which we all go through. This is the comfort as we strive onwards.

Some manuscripts have: "Because a hand was lifted up upon the throne of Yahweh...". Amalek had put his hand upon God's throne, which was Israel.  He did dwell in their midst, although they doubted this. And yet Amalek did this as punishment for their not wanting to be Yahweh's throne. We conclude that by grace God accepted Israel as His throne even though they were so rebellious against Him, and punished those who sought to lay hands upon them.