# commentaries

text:
<em>The Angel who has ever redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads, and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac- </em>See on <em><a href='B:20 23:27'>Exo 23:27</a></em>. It is so easy to under-estimate the amount of work the Angels are doing in our lives; Jacob recognized that his Angel physically fed / shepherded him all his days, and that it was not just at the crises in his life that the Angel had been present; he describes the Angel as "ever redeeming me" (Heb.), as if the whole process of life is one continual redeeming process by the Angel, as He designs trials for us which will perfect us in order to gain redemption, as well as physically redeeming us more times than we realize. Subsequent generations were to take comfort in the fact that God had redeemed Jacob / Israel; Isaiah is full of this idea, encouraging the Jews of the restoration, and all of us, that the same God who redeemed Jacob is our God, to no lesser an extent. Jacob had primarily in view his deliverance from Esau and Laban by the Angel with whom he wrestled; but he realized that those incidents were but examples of an ongoing redemption which was ongoing even as he spoke.<p style='margin-left:1em'>At the end, Jacob spoke of God as his redeemer, which is the first Biblical reference to the concept of redemption. Joseph was the one who had redeemed Jacob from all evil, but Jacob realizes that it was ultimately God working through this great seed of Abraham, and thereby he looks ahead to the Messianic seed, who was the ultimate redeemer (<em><a href='B:550 3:11'>Gal 3:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 2:14'>Tit 2:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:18'>1Pe 1:18</a></em>). This was not the only area in which Jacob was a paradigm breaker (consider how he coined the word <em>abiyr</em> to describe God's mightiness). The Hebrew for "redeem" is taken from the idea of the nearest kinsman. Jacob at the end of his days is surely saying that now he saw God as closer than his family. We really have a lot to learn here. God comes before family- although increasingly this isn't appreciated by Anglo-Saxon believers. The new convert who sacrifices family ties for allegiance to Christ realizes this full well. But in my observation, second and third generation believers aren't so committed. The majority of the divisions and bitterness which plague the body of Christ are largely a result of believers wanting to stay with their family, rather than follow Divine principles. Time and again brethren and sisters change fellowships, with all the disruption this causes, simply because of family, not for any genuine Biblical conviction. Effectively they will throw others out of fellowship, throw new converts into turmoil and disillusion, just to stick with a dogmatic family member, even though they may not share his or her convictions. And so God's Truth becomes a social and family affair rather than a candlestick burning with the fire of the Spirit. Christians tend to follow parental expectation and the norms of their social network rather than God's word.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth</em>- The "land" in view was that promised to Abraham. Jacob's dying wish was that his children would hurry up and return to Canaan as originally intended and made potentially possible at the end of the famine (see on <em><a href='B:10 45:7'>Gen 45:7</a></em>); and <em>there</em> and not in Egypt would they become a multitude, in fulfilment of the promises given to Abraham and Jacob. </p>


text:
<em>When Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand on the head of Ephraim, it displeased him. He held up his father’s hand, to remove it from Ephraim’s head to Manasseh’s head</em>- As noted on :13, Joseph ought to have learnt from history, that this whole angst about the blessing of the firstborn was irrelevant. It is true that Genesis has repeatedly recorded how the second born or younger was more blessed than the older: Abel, Seth, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph; and the Old Testament history continues the theme, with Moses over Aaron, David over his brothers etc. But that blessing was not by human device, but by Divine blessing and the operation of His Spirit in human life.


text:
<em>Joseph said to his father, Not so, my father; for this is the firstborn; put your right hand on his head</em>- See on <em><a href='B:10 17:18'>Gen 17:18</a></em>. Joseph was wrong to have so much angst about who got the blessing of the firstborn; see on :13 and :17.


text:
<em>His father refused, and said, I know, my son, I know. He also will become a people, and he also will be great. However, his younger brother will be greater than he, and his seed will become a multitude of nations</em>- Although Jacob maybe favoured Judah on a human level, he certainly favoured Joseph spiritually. It seems that he made up his mind that Messiah would come from Joseph (when in fact Christ came through Judah). He said that Ephraim's seed would become a multitude of nations (48:19)- he was applying the Messianic promise to Ephraim. Likewise he stated that from Joseph (Ephraim's father) would come the Shepherd / Stone / Messiah (see on <em><a href='B:10 49:24'>Gen 49:24</a></em>); presumably, Jacob thought, through Ephraim. Yet Jacob was wrong in this. Thus whilst Jacob showed his spiritual maturity by an enthusiasm for the Lord Jesus Christ, even right at the very end of his life, he still had an old flaw: a desire to fulfill God's promises in the way <em>he</em> wanted them fulfilled, a desire to turn God's word round to fit in with <em>his</em> preferred way of thinking (in this case, that Messiah would come through Joseph / Ephraim). The way the prophets continually describe sinful Israel as "Ephraim" is perhaps God's way of showing that Jacob's way was not His way. <p style='margin-left:1em'>And yet despite these wrong perceptions by Jacob, it is true that at the first census in the wilderness, Ephraim numbered 40,500 and Manasseh only 32,000; and later, when in the land, Ephraim became the most numerous tribe in the ten tribe kingdom, to the point that it was often called "Ephraim" just as the two tribe kingdom was called "Judah". Jacob was almost repeating the prophetic word spoken about himself (<em><a href='B:10 25:23'>Gen 25:23</a></em>). It is natural to want our own experience to be replicated in others, especially our offspring. But although Jacob was not completely mature in his reasoning about this whole blessing of the firstborn, God still worked through it. He had removed Reuben from being firstborn (<em><a href='B:130 5:1'>1Ch 5:1</a></em>), replaced him with Joseph, and then when he disappeared, he decided that Benjamin should be the firstborn, renaming him "Son of my right hand", another title of the firstborn; again wanting the youngest to be as the eldest. And now Joseph is back on the scene, he seems to want to change things around so that Ephraim and Manasseh become his adopted sons, and out of them, Ephraim (the youngest) is as it were his firstborn; the very youngest of his 'sons' treated as the eldest. But all this chopping and changing about the firstborn had no ultimate meaning in Israel's subsequent history. </p>


text:
<em>He blessed them that day, saying, In you will Israel bless, saying, ‘God make you as Ephraim and as Manasseh’. He set Ephraim before Manasseh</em>- "Bless" is literally 'to bow the knee'. "In you" is you singular, and refers to Joseph. Jacob is accepting what at the time he had refused to- that the dreams of Joseph would indeed come true, and his brothers ("Israel") would bless or bow to him.


text:
<em>Israel said to Joseph, Behold, I am dying, but God will be with you, and bring you again to the land of your fathers</em>- As explained on <em><a href='B:10 45:7'>Gen 45:7</a></em> and elsewhere, the people were supposed to return to Canaan once the famine finished; see on :16. Jacob wished they had done that whilst he was still alive; but he knew that God would work in their experiences so that He would bring them back to the land. They should have returned there themselves; but God would "bring" them there, just as Abraham ought to have left Ur for Canaan and broken with his family immediately, but he didn't, and so God brought him there and made him separate from his father's house (see on <em><a href='B:10 20:13'>Gen 20:13</a></em>). Jacob sensed an analogous situation was going to happen to get them out of Egypt; and the same was to occur centuries later in getting them to leave Babylon. In our days too, we don't make the moves we are supposed to make, or to the extent intended; and God's Spirit works to bring about those moves. This is His saving grace. And Joseph quotes these words of his father on his own deathbed (<em><a href='B:10 50:25'>Gen 50:25</a></em>), as he too retained the perspective that Israel out to leave Egypt and return to Canaan, but he believed that if they didn't, then God would structure situations to ensure that they did- by His grace.


text:
<em>Moreover I have given to you Shechem, one portion above your brothers, which I took out of the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow</em>- This indicates that Jacob's old self-reliance was still not totally gone; his sense that through his own effort he could bring about the fulfillment of God's promises for him. He appears to be referring to some unrecorded military conflict in which he captured Shechem; perhaps he refers specifically to the burial ground which Abraham had bought in the area, which perhaps he had had to forcibly recapture (<em><a href='B:10 33:19'>Gen 33:19</a></em>). And he wanted the family tomb to specifically be Joseph's inheritance, as he more than any appreciated the significance of resurrection to fulfil the Abrahamic covenant. But the reference to having taken it by how own strength shows that the weakness of Jacob remained, in thinking that his own strength was so significant. These very words are alluded to in <em><a href='B:60 24:12'>Jos 24:12</a></em> and <em><a href='B:230 44:1-6'>Psa 44:1-6</a></em>, where the Spirit says that the land was given to Israel <em>not</em> on account of their bow and sword. The more closely we analyze the Bible heroes, the more apparent it is that they were shot through with weakness; and some of those weaknesses it seems they unsuccessfully battled with until the day of their death. Jacob, right at the end of his life, still hadn't completely overcome that besetting weakness of self-reliance. This is, of course, a dangerous road to go down. In no way can we be complacent about our urgent need for spiritual growth. But on the other hand, we will never reach the stature of Christ without righteousness being imputed to us. In this sense, true Christian believers aren't good people, but people who know and believe in God's grace.<p style='margin-left:1em'>However it could be that just as "I have given" is a prophetic perfect, speaking of the future (he means 'I will give') as if it has happened because of his faith, so he speaks of taking Shechem as already having been achieved by him when it was yet future. Yet another alternative is that Jacob is again showing weakness by recalling the massacre at Shechem and proudly claiming that this was his victory, and he wanted Shechem to be Joseph's.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Jacob called to his sons, and said: Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which will happen to you in the days to come</em>- This follows right on from the blessing of Joseph, in which Jacob had attempted to give the blessing of the firstborn to Ephraim as his son. I commented throughout Genesis 48 that he might have better learnt from his earlier handing back of Isaac's paternal blessing (see on <em><a href='B:10 33:11'>Gen 33:11</a></em>). On the acme of spiritual perception, he confessed that paternal blessings are not worth anything compared to the blessings of God's grace. But now Jacob is still thinking in human terms, concerned about final blessings of children, when he should have realized that these are meaningless. And so we find that as many of the paternal blessings uttered by his father never came particularly true, so not everything he says here to his sons had fulfilment. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Assemble yourselves, and hear, you sons of Jacob. Listen to Israel, your father</em>- He parallels his old and new names, in order to demonstrate that he has accepted God's grace in changing his name. The gathering of his sons may point forward to the last judgment.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, and the beginning of my strength; excelling in dignity, and excelling in power</em>- The way Jacob rebukes and effectively rejects Reuben, Simeon and Levi, the sons who had flaunted their natural strength and prowess, reflects the right perspectives which Jacob attained at the end. The language here sounds as if Jacob associated his natural strength with Reuben, and yet now he rejected it. Doubtless these men gathered round their father expecting to hear some sweet fatherly blessing mixed with a few gentle reproofs for past behaviour. The whole process of Israel's sons being "gathered" to him and receiving their blessing and judgment is typical of the final judgment, showing how Jacob was a type of Christ at this time. The surprise of the sons we are left to imagine, but it would point forward quite accurately to the surprise which will be a feature of the rejected (<em><a href='B:470 25:44'>Mat 25:44</a></em>). &nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Boiling over as water, you shall not excel; because you went up to your father’s bed, then defiled it. He went up to my couch</em>- The evident problem the Abraham family had with women s emphasized in the record. One man, one woman was the declared standard of God at this time. Adam, Noah, Noah's sons, Aaron, Moses were all one man: one woman cases. The patriarchs having more than one wife at a time sticks out. Abraham's apparently casual relationship with Hagar, Judah's use of a harlot (apparently the sort of thing he often did), Esau's many carnal wives, Dinah's love affair, Reuben's incest... all this creates a certain impression of weakness in this area. Joseph's evil report regarding his brothers may well have featured news of their playboy escapades while far away from usual family life (<em><a href='B:10 37:2'>Gen 37:2</a></em> = <em><a href='B:90 2:23-24'>1Sa 2:23-24</a></em>). The repeated way in which they lied about their wives also indicates that they didn't take their marital responsibilities as they should have (<em><a href='B:10 12:13'>Gen 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 20:3'>Gen 20:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 20:13'>Gen 20:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 26:7'>Gen 26:7</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Reuben's incest, twice lamented, meant that he was stripped of the title of firstborn (<em><a href='B:130 5:1-2'>1Ch 5:1-2</a></em>). I suggested on <em><a href='B:10 35:22'>Gen 35:22</a></em> that the incest may not have been due to simple lust, but rather anger. So the statement that he had boiled over like water would refer to his anger problem rather than sexual lust. He 'went up' to his father's bed and bedroom, perhaps suggesting that he wanted to become the head of the family in place of Jacob. He had 'excelled in dignity' (:4), but now he did not 'excel'. The two words are related in Hebrew as they are in English. And yet despite all this, Reuben is presented as having more genuine concern for Joseph and Jacob than most of the other brothers. But clearly even on his deathbed, Jacob couldn't forgive Reuben for what he had done. He offers no blessing, only a statement that he remembers Reuben's sin and abiding shame. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Simeon and Levi are brothers. Their swords are weapons of violence</em>- The reference is to their massacre of the Shechemites. Jacob seems to speak as if this is not forgiven, for he says that their swords <em>are</em>, not "were", weapons used to do violence to others. Jacob again offers them no blessing, but just wants them to know he remembers what they did and retains his sense of separation from them. In Christian terms, of forgiveness and grace, Jacob seems remarkably lacking, despite all the grace shown to him. He died not quite 'getting it'; and yet will be saved.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>My soul, don’t come into their council. My glory, don’t be united to their multitude; for in their anger they killed men. In their self-will they hamstrung cattle</em>- Although Jacob’s seed had become a "multitude" as promised, he says that he refuses to unite himself with the "multitude" of Simeon and Levi, as if he now saw this physical fulfilment of the promises in his lifetime as worth little. His appreciation of the promises absolutely fills his thinking at the end. The promised Kingdom was "the pride of Jacob" (<em><a href='B:230 47:4'>Psa 47:4</a></em> NIV; <em><a href='B:370 6:8'>Amo 6:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:410 2:2'>Nah 2:2</a></em>), his chiefest joy. There are aspects of Jacob's blessings of his sons which evidently have not been fulfilled. Presumably they will be fulfilled in the Kingdom, which shows how Jacob's mind was not dwelling on his children receiving physical blessings from God in the short term (cp. how Isaac blessed his sons), but rather the promised eternal blessings of the Kingdom. It is quite likely that the sons, in their humanity, expected blessings of a more immediate sort, such as a dying father of those times would have shared out between his sons. But instead, Jacob's talk is not of the things of this brief life, but of the Kingdom. And yet Jacob does come over as bitter, refusing to associate his honour ("glory") with their extended families, their "council" (group) or "multitude" or AV "assembly", their community. It is really a deathbed disassociation from his own sons, when he himself had many sins which had been dealt with by grace alone. &nbsp; </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Jacob's reflection on Joseph's sufferings gave him a clearer picture of those of the future Messiah. His complaint that they "hamstrung cattle" can be understood as prophetic of the murder of God's son. It can be translated in the singular, as if referring to one individual, namely Joseph: "houghing the ox" (RV), or bullock (Concordant Version), i.e. the Lord Jesus Christ (<em><a href='B:50 33:17'>Deu 33:17</a></em> RV), the bullock of the sin offering (<em><a href='B:650 13:11-13'>Heb 13:11-13</a></em>). <em><a href='B:10 49:6'>Gen 49:6</a></em> can also be rendered 'murdering the prince' (Adam Clarke's Translation), referring initially to the murder of Shechem but looking ahead to that of the Lord Jesus. The Roman historian Hippolytus says that "From Simeon came the Scribes, and from Levi the priests"; it was these groups who murdered the Lord, and Jacob seems to have foreseen this, through his reflection on their hatred of Joseph. He may mean that they took counsel against Joseph, as the scribes and priests would do against Christ (<em><a href='B:230 2:2'>Psa 2:2</a></em>). &nbsp; </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel. I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel</em>- Several times at the very end of his life (<em><a href='B:10 49:2'>Gen 49:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 49:7'>Gen 49:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 49:24'>Gen 49:24</a></em>) Jacob mentions his old and new names ('Jacob' and 'Israel') together, as if to show that now he finally accepted and believed the wondrous change that God had wrought in him. First of all, he doesn't seem to have accepted his name change, and needed God to remind him of it again (<em><a href='B:10 32:28'>Gen 32:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 35:10'>Gen 35:10</a></em>). To accept, really accept, the Name we called upon ourselves at baptism (<em><a href='B:510 2:21'>Act 2:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 9:14'>Act 9:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 22:16'>Act 22:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 10:12-14'>Rom 10:12-14</a></em>) is difficult. To believe that God really does see us as His people, bearing His Name, with all the moral glory this implies... it took Jacob no less than 50 years to realize the implications of Jacob's name change (Jacob's name was changed when he was 97, and he only uses it freely of himself just before his death at 147). It's unusual for a man to repeatedly mention his own name when talking to others; and yet this is exactly what Jacob did in <em><a href='B:10 48:20'>Gen 48:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 49:2'>Gen 49:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 49:7'>Gen 49:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 49:24'>Gen 49:24</a></em>; it was as if he was playing with a new toy, reflecting his grasp of that basic, wondrous truth he had been taught 50 years ago; that in <em>God's</em> eyes, his name had changed. In God's eyes, he was not the Jacob, the liar, the supplanter, the deceiver; but Israel, the prince with God. But it took 50 years for the wonder of it all to come home to him. &nbsp;</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>And yet the immediate meaning of his words here are to call his sons for the expected deathbed blessing, and then curse them. When Jacob himself closed his eyes covered by grace for many failures in his life; his repeated recollection of their massacre of the Shechemites decades previously is perhaps because it did him shame, and he could never quite live it down.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Jacob's desire to "divide" them uses a word which can mean to divide out a portion with others; it is thus used in :27, and frequently about the dividing up of spoil or the promised land. The idea could be that their part of the inheritance Jacob wished to be taken by others, or divided up between the other sons. His idea of 'scattering' them in Israel can too easily be applied to the scattering of the Levites throughout Israel; but this is uttered as a curse, and it was intended to affect both Simeon and Levi.&nbsp; Scattering throughout the <em>eretz</em> is the language of judgment upon the Babel builders (<em><a href='B:10 11:9'>Gen 11:9</a></em> s.w.) and Israel's scattering among the nations is associated with God disinheriting them of their land (<em><a href='B:50 28:64'>Deu 28:64</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 9:16'>Jer 9:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 18:17'>Jer 18:17</a></em> s.w.). It may be that this is what Jacob intended; that they would be scattered amongst the other tribes and their share of the inheritance was to be divided amongst them. There is no record of this happening; and God turned the curse into a blessing in that the scattering of the Levites around Israel was to be a blessing for all. And in a strange way, the curse upon Simeon had at least some fulfilment. Simeon became the smallest of the twelve tribes (<em><a href='B:40 26:14'>Num 26:14</a></em>); it is given no blessing by Moses in Deuteronomy 33; and is given no independent territory in Canaan, just a few cities&nbsp; within the borders of Judah (<em><a href='B:60 19:1-9'>Jos 19:1-9</a></em>); and eventually Simeon was absorbed into Judah. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Judah, your brothers will praise you. Your hand will be on the neck of your enemies. Your father’s sons will bow down before you</em>- see on <em><a href='B:10 37:10'>Gen 37:10</a></em>. Joseph's dreams had clearly stated that all the brothers would bow to him. And Jacob had come to see that and accept it, despite his initial dislike of the idea. But now his very last words seem an attempt to make those dreams apply to Judah and not Joseph. "Judah" was so named in order that others would "Praise Yah"; but Jacob turns this around to Judah himself being praised. It seems to indicate that Jacob died somewhat bitter and without having grasped that the grace shown to him ought to have been reflected by him to others. And yet he shall be saved, as with so many believers who end their days likewise. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Judah is a lion’s cub- </em>Jacob saw himself as the lion, and Judah as his cub. But likening himself to a lion hardly seems appropriate humility in a man who had been forgiven so much and who was now facing his grave planks. But still he will be saved, by grace.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>From the prey, my son, you have gone up- </em>This could be a reference to some unrecorded military conflict Judah had been involved in; there may be another reference to such a conflict in <em><a href='B:10 48:22'>Gen 48:22</a></em>.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He stooped down, he crouched as a lion, as a lioness. Who will rouse him up?</em>- Jacob may be using the prophetic perfect here, talking about future things as if they have happened, and having in mind a great Messianic descendant of Judah, the Lord Jesus. Jacob twice describes this Messianic descendant as devouring the prey in the morning of the second coming (49:9, 27); he foresaw an aggressive tension between Messiah and other beasts, i.e. the nations of the surrounding world, which would end in the glorious victory of Christ's coming in glory. This image of devouring the prey after the battle against the world in this life is the basis of other latter day prophecies (<em><a href='B:330 39:18-20'>Eze 39:18-20</a></em>; <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:19:17-20'>Rev 19:17-20</a></em>). The faithful will eat the carcass of the beast at Christ's coming (<em><a href='B:470 24:28'>Mat 24:28</a></em> cp. <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:19:17-20'>Rev 19:17-20</a></em>), sharing in the victory of the lion of Judah who has slain his prey and now devours it. This was all foreseen by Jacob, although he would have seen the beasts which the Messiah / lion devoured as the nations surrounding his people (<em><a href='B:300 15:3'>Jer 15:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 28:14'>Jer 28:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 5:17'>Eze 5:17</a></em> and many others). &nbsp; </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The sceptre will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs. To him will the obedience of the peoples be</em>- This could be a reference to Judah's great Messianic descendant, the one to whom the Kingdom belongs, and that is how these words are alluded to in <em><a href='B:330 21:25-27'>Eze 21:25-27</a></em>. The alternative reading, "until Shiloh comes", would then name Messiah as "Shiloh", 'the sent one (cp. <em><a href='B:290 8:6'>Isa 8:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 9:7'>Joh 9:7</a></em>). The nations would be obedient to this figure, as Egypt and the neighbouring peoples had been to Joseph. The preaching of the Gospel is a gathering together of God's people to Christ (<em><a href='B:10 49:10'>Gen 49:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 12:30'>Mat 12:30</a></em>). We are now being gathered together, and yet the final gathering together will be at the day of judgment; therefore our response to the calling together of the Gospel now, is a foretaste of the gathering unto the day of judgment (<em><a href='B:470 3:12'>Mat 3:12</a></em> cp. 13:30).&nbsp; </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But Jacob envisaged Judah as having an unbroken line of descendants ("from between his feet", an idiom for childbirth) who would be the kingly rulers (with sceptre and staff) until the Messiah figure came. But this didn't come true. And <em><a href='B:330 21:25-27'>Eze 21:25-27</a></em> clearly alludes to this passage and adjusts it, saying that the kingly dynasty of Judah had been overthrown and would remain so "until he comes whose right it is". It could be that Jacob was uttering a conditional prophecy, what could have been true, but Judah's later failure precluded it. Or maybe whilst the inspired record of these last words is accurate, the fact that Jacob's predictions didn't come true (as <em><a href='B:330 21:25-27'>Eze 21:25-27</a></em> seems to emphasize) is in demonstration of the fact that he had failed to learn the lesson that paternal blessings and cursings were not that important. Rather should the emphasis be upon God's blessing and cursing, which is all anyway about grace (see on <em><a href='B:10 33:11'>Gen 33:11</a></em>). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The alternative rendering "Until Shiloh come", or "Until he come to Shiloh" could connect with the Divine intention that Israel leave Egypt and return to Canaan, to establish His Kingdom. I have explained this idea on <em><a href='B:10 45:7'>Gen 45:7</a></em>. In this case we would have here a prophecy of what could potentially have happened; Judah was to be the kingly ruler, until he led Israel out of Egypt to Canaan and they arrived at Shiloh, where the tabernacle was later established. There a king in the line of Judah would be established, and the Gentiles would be obedient to him.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Binding his foal to the vine, his donkey’s colt to the choice vine- </em>Literally, "the vine of Sorek", a valley in Canaan (<em><a href='B:70 6:4'>Jdg 6:4</a></em>). Jacob's thoughts were back in Canaan, envisaging an ideal situation of peace being enjoyed in the land once Judah had led Israel back there from Goshen.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He has washed his garments in wine, his robes in the blood of grapes</em>- He saw Judah's great Messianic descendant as being associated with the ass, the Hebrew for which essentially means 'patience'; he foresaw the Lord's patient endurance in the struggle, and even foresaw his garments as dipped in blood (cp. <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:14:18'>Rev 14:18</a></em>), eyes bloodshot with the struggle, and yet with teeth white as milk from a true assimilation of God's teaching (49:12 cp. <em><a href='B:290 55:1'>Isa 55:1</a></em>); through his personal experience and extensive reflection on the basic need of man and the promised blessing of forgiveness, Jacob really went deeply and accurately into a personal knowledge of the future Christ. Blind as he was (<em><a href='B:10 48:10'>Gen 48:10</a></em>), Jacob meditated upon the Lord Jesus. His mind was filled with him. He perhaps contrasted his own dim eyes with the burning, bloodshot eyes of his zealous Lord, visualizing the suffering&nbsp; which he knew He would endure for his sake. The blessings of Genesis 49 are in well planned poetic form; it may be that Jacob composed these poems about the Lord Jesus as the crystallization of his extended reflection on the Lord. Would that we would rise up to the Messianic perception of the blind poet Jacob. Likewise David foresaw the Lord Jesus always before his face, and therefore his heart was never ruffled. Jacob evidently saw in Joseph's experience a type of Christ's future sufferings and resurrection (49:11,23).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord’s death is described as His washing “his garments in wine, and his vesture in the blood of grapes" (<em><a href='B:10 49:11'>Gen 49:11</a></em> RV). Treading out the grapes is a Hebraism for judgment, and yet it is used here and in <em><a href='B:290 63:1-3'>Isa 63:1-3</a></em> regarding the Lord’s treading of the winepress alone in His death. Indeed, the Isaiah passage is clearly applicable to both the crucifixion and the final judgment of the Lord Jesus. The reason being, that in His death was the judgment of this world. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But despite all these cryptic references to the future Messiah, we must remember that Jacob spoke these words to Judah. Judah had deceived Jacob by washing Joseph's clothes in blood to make it appear that he had been slain by a wild animal. But now, in allusion to that, Jacob graciously projects this image as part of a Messianic prophecy of Judah's final greatness. But Jacob is far less gracious to some of his other sons, whose sins he remembers with bitterness and curses them concerning them. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>His eyes will be red with wine, his teeth white with milk</em>- See on :11. Whilst this blessing can be understood as prophetic of Messiah, the Lord Jesus, we must remember that it was also in its first instance the blessing of the man Judah who stood in front of Jacob at this time. Isaac had blessed his firstborn, as he thought, with "plenty of corn and wine" (<em><a href='B:10 27:28'>Gen 27:28</a></em>), as well as dominance over his brother. Jacob messed up his life by desperately trying to win this paternal blessing; when he got it, it never really came true for him, and he handed it back to Esau because he then considered that the blessing of God's grace was all sufficient (see on <em><a href='B:10 33:11'>Gen 33:11</a></em>). But now Jacob seems to have taken a step backwards, and is expressing this blessing in the same kind of terms, to Judah- who was not the firstborn, but the favourite of a moment, it seems. He has just tried to declare Ephraim as his firstborn, the son of his right hand, in Genesis 48. "Eyes... red with wine" seems a crude way of wishing Judah much wine, for this is the language of drunkenness (GNB "His eyes are bloodshot from drinking wine"); the whole feeling of these last words of Jacob is that he was not at his spiritual best, and much of what he said never really came true. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea seems to be that good wine makes eyes go red, and milk gives you white teeth. Milk doesn't make teeth white; but as with the language of demons in the New Testament, we have here an example of where wrong ideas are recorded as true, with no footnote pointing this out; because the Bible is written for people at their time, and some issues God doesn't see necessary to correct at the time.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Zebulun will dwell at the haven of the sea. He will be for a haven of ships. His border will be on Sidon</em>- If we insist that Jacob's words all were to come true, then this appears an unreconciled expositional problem. Zebulun was to dwell along the sea coast (LXX), where ships unload (a "haven"), "beside the sea" (GNB), until Sidon. But this wasn't the case. The canton of Zebulun even in Ezekiel's prophecy of the restored Kingdom was to be nowhere near Sidon, and Zebulun never had a border unto Sidon. According to Josephus (Ant. 19:10,16), Zebulun was never even bounded by the sea, being cut off by Asher. Could it be that at times Jacob's enthusiasm carried him away, and what he said was more his own wishing than the direct revelation of God? Until a satisfactory explanation can be come up with, it seems this is what we must accept. In this case, we see that even in this flurry of faith in the future Kingdom and Messiah, Jacob's interest in the physical aspect of the promises still remained with him, and carried him away in a way which God refused to work with. Perhaps this is why his old name "Jacob" and his new name "Israel" are used together so much at the time of his death, because he was still not totally transformed; and yet shall be saved, by grace. David's spiritual enthusiasm for Solomon needs to be read in a similar light; he makes statements concerning him which reflect a Messianic zeal, but also a desire to see his physical son more blessed than he was worthy of.&nbsp; </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Issachar is a strong donkey, lying down between the saddlebags</em>- "Issachar has desired that which is good; (i.e.) resting between the inheritance. And having seen the resting place that it was good... he subjected his shoulder to labour" (49:14 LXX). The Apostle alludes to this Greek text in <em><a href='B:650 4:1'>Heb 4:1</a></em>: "Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest". Jacob imputed righteousness to his son Issachar at the end. Imputing righteousness to others, seeing the good and the potential in them, was something Jacob only reached at the end; he saw Issachar as seeing the future Kingdom, and devoting himself to labour now to attain that future rest. And the writer to the Hebrews bids us follow that man's example. Jacob's judgment of his Issachar was with regard to how keenly he perceived the future rest of the Kingdom, and laboured now to attain it. For this reason, Jacob commended him; he judged Issachar according to how keenly he desired the Kingdom.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Jacob's achievement of a true humility is evident in his last words. The way he blessed his sons in Genesis 49 indicates this; note how he saw Issachar's greatness in the fact he was a humble servant (49:14). He learnt the lesson of that night of wrestling; his natural strength was not to be gloried in, neither was this to be his true greatness. And yet in Jacob's words to some of his other sons at this time, and in <em><a href='B:10 48:22'>Gen 48:22</a></em>, he is back to his old pride and trust in human strength. This is why the old name "Jacob" is juxtaposed with "Israel" at this time. And yet he died in faith and hope of salvation.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>And again, we can read these words to Issachar more negatively; because to compare someone to a donkey was an insult and not seen as a compliment. Hence GNB: "Issachar is no better than a donkey". And it was a lazy donkey, who collapsed under its load. This fits with the generally terse and negative attitude which Jacob has to several of his sons. It's so sad that a man who had been shown such grace, and realized it, could not show it to others by the end of his life.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He saw a resting place, that it was good, the land, that it was pleasant. He bows his shoulder to the burden, and becomes a servant doing forced labour</em>- Jacob may have particularly remembered Issachar's donkeys loaded with the good things of Egypt, coming in to the pleasant land of Goshen. But Jacob was prophetically aware that Issachar, along with all Israel, would end up "doing forced labour" in that pleasant land, which is what happened after new Pharaohs arose.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Dan will judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel</em>- The idea may be that Dan would be independent of the other tribes, and would judge / lead his own tribe. Or the idea could be that Dan would be the judge of all Israel- but this never happened.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Dan will be a serpent in the way, an adder in the path, That bites the horse’s heels, so that his rider falls backward</em>- This is to be connected with <em><a href='B:450 10:5'>Zec 10:5</a></em>, which speaks of how in the last days, the invaders of Israel will be toppled from their horses by the men of Israel / Jacob. Again, Jacob's mind was on the far distant glory of his sons in the day of the Kingdom. There is also reference here to <em><a href='B:10 3:15'>Gen 3:15</a></em>, but with an unexpected twist; Dan as the snake (not the woman) would bite his enemies, and thereby subdue them. Is there a hint here that Jacob had so meditated on the Lord Jesus, the future Messiah, that he realized that he must have our sinful, snake-like, Jacob-like nature, and yet through that very fact the final victory against sin would be won? 'Jacob' meaning 'heel-catcher' associates him with the seed of the snake, who would bruise the seed of the woman in the heel. He saw how he would somehow be rescued from his own ‘Jacob-ness’, saved from himself, by the Saviour to come. It turned out that Jacob, who in some ways was the seed of the snake, became the seed of the woman. And yet his Messianic blessing of Dan indicates that he saw these two aspects in his Saviour Lord; he was the one who had the appearance of the seed of the snake (cp. how the bronze snake symbolized him), and yet was in fact the seed of the woman. I really believe that Jacob had so deeply reflected on his own life and sinfulness, on the promise in Eden, and on the promises of Abraham's saviour-seed, that he came to as fine an appreciation of the representative nature of Christ's sacrifice as any believer has today. Thus a lifetime of reflection on the promises (rather than thinking 'Yes, we know all about them') and sustained self-examination will lead to a deep grasp of the fact that Christ really represented <em>you</em>, he had exactly your nature, and thereby he is your very own saviour.&nbsp; </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I have waited for Your salvation, Yahweh</em>- Jacob's hope of Messiah was the hope of his life; "I have waited for Your salvation", 'Your Jesus', he commented, perhaps in desperation at the way his sons generally did not perceive this. This is commented upon by the Jerusalem Targum with the suggestion that Jacob was expressing a very definite Messianic expectation: "My soul waiteth not for the deliverance of Gideon, the son of Joash, for it was only temporal; nor for that of Samson, for it was but transient; but for the redemption by the Messiah, the Son of David, which in thy word thou hast promised to send to thy people, the children of Israel; for this, thy salvation, my soul waiteth"</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Yahweh is a saviour God, not just a provider of children, cattle and land for the present; and now, at long last, Jacob associates Yahweh with himself; Yahweh has become his God, as he promised 70 years before. <em><a href='B:20 6:3'>Exo 6:3</a></em> says that Jacob knew the Yahweh Name from the time God appeared to him; but it took him a lifetime to make Yahweh his very own God.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>A troop will press on Gad, but he will press on their heel</em>- Or as AV, Gad "shall overcome <em>at the last</em>", which reflects how Jacob's mind was focused on the final victory of his people, "at the last" .&nbsp;At the end of his life, Jacob had come to terms with his earlier idolatry. 'Gad' was the name of a Babylonish deity which presided over chance; Israel were condemned for believing in him in <em><a href='B:290 65:11'>Isa 65:11</a></em> AVmg. Leah using this name reflected the sentiment of 'Good fortune at the hand of the god Gad'. The way she effectively accuses Jacob’s God of treating her like a prostitute who gave her “hire” because she let her maid sleep with her husband… doesn’t indicate that she was a great believer in Yahweh. Yet when Jacob blessed Gad, he seems to change this: "Gad, a troop (Heb. <em>gedud</em>, not <em>gad</em>) shall overcome (<em>guwd</em>, related to <em>gad</em>) him: but he shall overcome". These word plays would suggest that the god Gad would be overcome, would be 'Gad-ed', by the troop of warriors that would come from the tribe of Gad. &nbsp;</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Asher’s food will be rich. He will yield royal dainties</em>- Asher "shall yield royal dainties", or 'dainties fit for a king' suggests Jacob imagining how in the Kingdom, the Lord Jesus would eat food grown in Asher? In the restored Kingdom, the tribes of Israel would each bring their royal dainties to the Messiah (<em><a href='B:330 45:16'>Eze 45:16</a></em>).&nbsp;But in the shorter term, it seems Jacob envisioned Israel as being led by a king who came from Judah; and Asher would be supportive of that king. Yet it was not God's will that His people should have a human king. So again we see how Jacob even at his end was not completely in step with the Father; and yet shall be saved. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Naphtali is a doe set free, who bears beautiful fawns</em>- Or as AV "a hind let loose: he giveth goodly (lit. 'gracious') words"; this is another Messianic hint. Psalms 22 (title) likens the Lord to a hind at the time of his death; and again, Jacob's appreciation of the quality of grace as it would be manifested in Christ comes out. The LXX says that Naphtali is "a tree trunk let loose". With all the other Messianic insights in Jacob's words, this cannot be accidental. Jacob even foresaw something of&nbsp; the physical manner of the Lord's death. The idea of being let loose has day of atonement connections (<em><a href='B:30 16:21'>Lev 16:21</a></em>). Did Jacob see that far ahead? One Chaldee text reads for this verse: “Naphtali is a swift messenger like a hind that runneth on the tops of the mountains bringing glad tidings”. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a spring. His branches run over the wall</em>- This speaks of the 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 (<em><a href='B:500 15:5'>Joh 15:5</a></em>). Joseph is only recorded as having two sons, so he was not so fruitful in his lifetime; but Jacob spoke by faith, anticipating how Ephraim would become very fruitful and the largest tribe in the ten tribe kingdom.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But the Hebrew is difficult here. The GNB offers: "Joseph is like a wild donkey by a spring, A wild colt on a hillside". The image then would be of Joseph's loneliness, separate from his brothers, silhouetted alone on a hillside. "A fruitful bough" (AV) is literally 'son of a fruit tree', thereby again elevating Jacob's own importance; he was the tree, and Joseph a branch only. When Jacob was to bow to Joseph, according to the dreams. It's rather like Jacob praising Judah as a cub- suggesting Jacob was the great lion.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The archers have severely grieved him, shot at him, and persecuted him</em>- The figure of archery seems slightly inappropriate compared to what the brothers did to Joseph. Perhaps the brothers never reached the ideal level of repentance in telling Jacob what really happened; and Joseph didn't tell Jacob because he had forgiven the brothers. The brothers' abuse of Joseph "severely grieved him", he took it very much to heart. There were likely serious incidents against Joseph before he was finally put in the pit, and Jacob may be alluding to them. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The ecclesia in the time of Amos "chant to the sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instruments of musick, like David; That drink wine in bowls, and anoint themselves with the chief ointments: but they are not grieved for the affliction of Joseph” (<em><a href='B:370 6:5-6'>Amo 6:5-6</a></em>). They drunk wine and anointed their faces with oil- rejoicing in Gods blessings. They looked back to the heritage of their spiritual ancestors (David), and on a surface level appeared to follow them. They chanted the temple songs, and yet there was no grief within them for the affliction of Gods people. The archers were to surely grieve Joseph, but they chose to ignore the terrible import of those prophecies of Messiahs suffering. There was the appearance of religion and worship, but no grief nor passion for the tragedy of Messiahs forthcoming death, no grieving for the tragedy of Gods people, who were about to be afflicted for their sins. And in this we must take our warning.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But his bow remained strong- </em>As in :23, Jacob is using the imagery of archery. But he is also handing out blessings which sound very similar to those given to him by Isaac. Those blessings were supposed to have been received because the firstborn had taken his bow and arrows and caught wild game (<em><a href='B:10 27:3'>Gen 27:3</a></em> s.w.). All this allusion to human strength, and Jacob himself boasts of how he used his bow to take Shechem (<em><a href='B:10 48:22'>Gen 48:22</a></em>), is quite inappropriate for a man made to limp so as not to trust in his own strength. And he had earlier resigned the blessing of the firstborn which he had received, awed instead by the blessing of God's grace (see on <em><a href='B:10 33:11'>Gen 33:11</a></em>). But now he returns to the scene of Isaac his father blessing him and Esau, and he starts to make conscious and unconscious allusion to it. Hence this imagery of bows and arrows.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob- </em>The archery allusion continues. The idea is that Joseph placed his hands on a bow, and God placed His hands on Joseph's hands, so that he was able to pull the string back further and take perfect aim. David uses this analogy about himself in <em><a href='B:100 22:35'>2Sa 22:35</a></em>, and it is precisely acted out in <em><a href='B:120 13:15-17'>2Ki 13:15-17</a></em>. The idea is that God would be behind whatever Joseph did. But bows and arrows also speak of children, and the thought may be that God would make Ephraim and Manasseh go far, perhaps leading up to a Messiah figure, "the shepherd".</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Jacob coins a new name for God: the <em>abiyr</em>, translated here "the mighty (God)". This word occurs only in five other places, and each time it is in the phrase "the mighty one (<em>abiyr</em>) of Jacob" (<em><a href='B:230 132:2'>Psa 132:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 132:5'>Psa 132:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 1:24'>Isa 1:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 49:26'>Isa 49:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 60:16'>Isa 60:16</a></em>). Likewise, the Lord used new titles of God in his time of ultimate spiritual maturity as he faced death (<em><a href='B:500 17:11'>Joh 17:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 17:25'>Joh 17:25</a></em>). Many of the Messianic Psalms refer to God as " my God" , and it was one of the phrases in the Lord's mind in His final, glorious maturity (<em><a href='B:470 27:46'>Mat 27:46</a></em>). Moses in his final speech of Deuteronomy often encouraged Israel that God was <em>thy </em>(singular, personal) God<em>. </em>Jacob knew God's mightiness for himself in a very special way; he knew His gentle forgiveness of all his pride and self-will, that mighty forgiveness, that mighty patience with him, that Almighty salvation of him which had been made possible. In the same way we will each be given the name of God, and yet this Name will be known only to us (<em><a class='bible' href='#b66:2:17'>Rev 2:17</a></em>; <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:3:12'>Rev 3:12</a></em>; <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:14:1'>Rev 14:1</a></em>); it will be God's Name, but in a form entirely personal to us. In dim foreshadowing of that glorious relationship with God, Jacob reached something of this even in his mortal life.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>From there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel</em>- This describes "the mighty one of <em>Jacob</em>" as the shepherd and rock of <em>Israel</em>. Again Jacob is finally acceptant of the name change. Jacob recognizes that God through His Angel had shepherded him all along (<em><a href='B:10 48:15'>Gen 48:15</a></em>), and He would do likewise to Joseph's seed. The references in Deuteronomy to God being the rock that Israel forsook therefore refer to the Angel (<em><a href='B:50 32:15'>Deu 32:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:18'>Deu 32:18</a></em>). It is worth noting that the shepherd and rock ("stone" of <em><a href='B:10 49:24'>Gen 49:24</a></em>) are both clear titles of Christ- implying that this Angel specifically represented Jesus? Hence "that rock (Angel) was Christ" (<em><a href='B:530 10:4'>1Co 10:4</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Jacob describes the future Messianic seed as "the stone of Jacob / Israel". Jacob's physical stone had been overturned, rested upon, set up and anointed (<em><a href='B:10 28:13-15'>Gen 28:13-15</a></em>); perhaps now at the end, Jacob thought back to that incident and saw in that stone a prophecy of the death and resurrection of the Lord. Perhaps he even saw that the anointing, the 'Christ-ing' of the Stone would be after its raising up; he foresaw that the Lord Jesus would be made the Christ, the anointed, in the fullest sense by the resurrection (<em><a href='B:510 2:36'>Act 2:36</a></em>). "The hope of Israel", or (see modern versions), "he for whom Israel / Jacob hopes" is another title of Christ (<em><a href='B:510 28:20'>Act 28:20</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:300 14:8'>Jer 14:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 17:13'>Jer 17:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 3:16'>Joe 3:16</a></em>); he was the one for whom Jacob / Israel hoped. And his hope is the hallmark of all the Israel of God. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Jacob's reflection on the Lord Jesus must have been deep indeed, for he reaches some quite advanced and deep conclusions concerning him. Thus he describes God as the God from whom is "the shepherd, the stone of Israel / Jacob", both evidently Messianic titles. Yet "the rock of Israel" is later understood to be a reference to the God of Jacob (<em><a href='B:100 23:3'>2Sa 23:3</a></em>). Therefore we may conclude that Jacob saw his God as manifest in the future Messiah, who would come out of the Father, i.e. be the Son of God. To understand God manifestation in Christ and the necessity for his Divine Sonship could have come from direct Divine revelation, but my sense is that it came instead from his deep appreciation of the promised blessing of forgiveness through Abraham's Messianic seed. Jacob's ever deepening appreciation of this and his progressive appreciation of God's grace led him to deeply meditate on the Lord's role. Jacob himself was a shepherd (<em><a href='B:10 46:34'>Gen 46:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:350 12:12'>Hos 12:12</a></em>), and yet he gave the Christ the title of "<em>the</em> shepherd", as if he recognized that although the Lord Jesus would come out of God, he would also be exactly like Jacob, of his nature. He saw on a completely personal level the way in which Christ truly was his very own representative. He therefore saw in himself a type of Christ, indicated by the way in which he asks his sons to gather themselves unto him, and then goes on to say that ultimately, his people will gather themselves together unto Messiah (<em><a href='B:10 49:1-2'>Gen 49:1-2</a></em> cp. 10). See on <em><a href='B:530 10:4'>1Co 10:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 48:19'>Gen 48:19</a></em>.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses' hands being upheld by the hands of others can be seen as a type of the Lord Jesus being sustained by Angelic hands on the cross, connecting with this Messianic prophecy concerning the hands of Messiah being strengthened for His mediation by the hands of God. Throughout Scripture, God's hands are associated with His creative work in the natural creation (e.g. <em><a href='B:230 8:6'>Psa 8:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 95:5'>Psa 95:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 1:10'>Heb 1:10</a></em>)- work which was and is performed through the Angels. The Lord Jesus was aware of the Angels in His final agony; He was painfully aware that they were at His command to lessen the physical torment (<em><a href='B:470 26:53'>Mat 26:53</a></em>). </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Jacob stated that from Joseph (Ephraim's father) would come the Shepherd / Stone / Messiah (49:24); presumably, Jacob thought, through Ephraim. Yet Jacob was wrong in this; indeed, he uses Messianic imagery about Judah's seed as well. Thus whilst Jacob showed his spiritual maturity by an enthusiasm for the Lord Jesus Christ, even right at the very end of his life, he still had an old flaw: a desire to fulfill God's promises in the way <em>he</em> wanted them fulfilled, a desire to turn God's word round to fit in with <em>his</em> preferred way of thinking (in this case, that Messiah would come through Joseph / Ephraim). The way the prophets continually describe sinful Israel as "Ephraim" is perhaps God's way of showing that Jacob's way was not His way. See on <em><a href='B:10 48:19'>Gen 48:19</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Even by the God of your father, who will help you; by the Almighty, who will bless you, with blessings of the sky above, blessings of the deep that lies below, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb</em>- <em>Finally</em>, at long last, Jacob got there. In this section, he says three times the same thing; God is my God, Yahweh- Messiah will be the my rock, my stone, yes, He is the God of your father Jacob, He is ALL-MIGHTY to save. That promise to make Yahweh his God, made 70 years previously in semi-belief, he had now fulfilled. He had made Yahweh his God. He was not only the&nbsp; God of his father and grandfather. The God who can do all things, not only physically but more importantly (as Jacob now realized) <em>spiritually</em>, was with his very own God. No wonder he dies repeating this three times over. And remember, he's our pattern. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The word "help" used here frequently occurs in the context of military help. Again Jacob's thoughts seem to be circling around the material and physical, when his whole life's lesson was surely that the spiritual must dominate over the material. The blessings he wishes Joseph again recall those uttered by Isaac, Jacob's father (<em><a href='B:10 27:28'>Gen 27:28</a></em>); and God had taught Jacob that His spiritual blessings are far more important than these kinds of material blessings. In a moment of spiritual desperation and perception, Jacob had grasped this, and handed them all to Esau (see on <em><a href='B:10 33:11'>Gen 33:11</a></em>); but as with us, over the years, that perspective had become eroded. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The blessings of your father have prevailed above the blessings of your ancestors, above the boundaries of the ancient hills- </em>Jacob had lamented that he had not been blessed with as long a life as his ancestors Isaac and Abraham (see on <em><a href='B:10 47:9'>Gen 47:9</a></em>). But he finally feels he has been blessed far more than them. He certainly had more children, but materially it would seem they had more. So the "blessings" he perceives are spiritual rather than material; even though, as pointed out throughout this commentary, he still had the material and the spiritual too mixed up in his perceptions.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Jacob's progression from perceiving the promises as concerning physical blessing to seeing their essential relevance to forgiveness and future salvation is made explicit here: "The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of the ancient mountains, the delight, glory or loveliness of the hills of eternity" (this rendition is supported by the LXX, Gesenius, RVmg.). Remember that in the wrestling incident, Jacob realized that the blessing of God essentially refers to His forgiveness, and he had therefore given away his material blessing because he was so thrilled with his spiritual blessing (see on <em><a href='B:10 33:11'>Gen 33:11</a></em>). This connection between blessing and forgiveness / salvation is widespread throughout Scripture: <em><a href='B:50 33:23'>Deu 33:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 5:12'>Psa 5:12</a></em>&nbsp; (blessing = grace) <em><a href='B:50 30:19'>Deu 30:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 3:8'>Psa 3:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 24:5'>Psa 24:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 28:9'>Psa 28:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 133:3'>Psa 133:3</a></em> (= salvation); <em><a href='B:20 12:32'>Exo 12:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 32:29'>Exo 32:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 24:1'>Num 24:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:100 21:3'>2Sa 21:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 67:1'>Psa 67:1</a></em> (cp. context); <em><a href='B:490 6:28'>Luk 6:28</a></em> (cp. ) <em><a href='B:510 3:26'>Act 3:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 4:7-8'>Rom 4:7-8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 10:16'>1Co 10:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 3:14'>Gal 3:14</a></em> (= forgiveness). Surrounded by his sons clamouring, one can imagine, for physical, immediate blessings, just as he did in the first half of his life, Jacob says that the spiritual blessings he had received, the grace, the forgiveness, the salvation, were infinitely higher than the blessings of rock-solid hills and mountains, things which seemed so permanent and tangible. His intangible blessings were, he finally realized,. much higher than his intangible ones.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Jacob no longer saw the promised blessings as solely referring to him personally having a prosperous time in the promised land; he joyfully looked forward to the future Kingdom. He says that he now realizes that his blessings (of forgiveness and the subsequent hope of the Kingdom) are greater than the blessings of the everlasting mountains (49:26 RV mg.); he saw the spiritual side of his blessings as more significant than the material aspect. Despite the fact that the promises were primarily fulfilled in the peace and prosperity he and his seed enjoyed at the end (<em><a href='B:10 48:4'>Gen 48:4</a></em> "multitude" s.w. 47:27; 35:11; 28:3), Jacob doesn't emphasize this fact as he could have done; instead, he looks to the future, ultimate fulfilments. He looked back on his life as a "pilgrimage", a series of temporary abodes on the way to something permanent, i.e. the future Kingdom (<em><a href='B:10 47:9'>Gen 47:9</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They will be on the head of Joseph, on the crown of the head of him who was separated from his brothers</em>- This may not simply be a statement to the effect that Joseph was separate from his brothers. He was literally 'Nazirited', consecrated, from among his brothers; this could be a reference to how he was the family priest, wearing the coat of many colours; and how he was clearly consecrated by God as well to be the family's saviour.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Benjamin is a ravenous wolf. In the morning he will devour the prey. At evening he will divide the spoil</em>- "In the morning he shall devour the prey" (49:27) connects with the promises that Messiah's second coming would be the true morning (<em><a href='B:290 60:1'>Isa 60:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:460 4:1-2'>Mal 4:1-2</a></em>); this was the day when Benjamin would have his true blessing.&nbsp;Many of Jacob's blessings of his sons contain some reference to Christ's future work, e.g. "he shall divide the spoil" (49:27); "he whom thy brethren shall praise" (49:8 = <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:5:5'>Rev 5:5</a></em>). Jacob describes Judah's Messianic descendant as "my son"; he eagerly looked ahead to the Lord Jesus as fulfilment of the promised Messianic seed. He perhaps saw that the multitudinous seed he had been promised was in fact an intensive plural, referring to the one great Messianic seed.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Or perhaps Jacob was angry with Benjamin, the 'son of my right hand' who had become firstborn after Joseph disappeared. The GNB translates more bluntly: "Benjamin is like a vicious wolf. Morning and evening he kills and devours". Maybe this is some reference to an unrecorded military encounter (as in :9 and <em><a href='B:10 48:22'>Gen 48:22</a></em>) where Benjamin, although young, had acted with great brutality. Jacob would be raising this issue as a reason for not now seeing him as the firstborn.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>All these are the twelve tribes of Israel, and this is what their father spoke to them and blessed them. He blessed everyone according to his blessing</em>- GNB has it about right: "These are the twelve tribes of Israel, and this is what their father said as he spoke a suitable word of farewell to each son". And yet only Judah and Joseph got any real blessing; Jacob's attitude with most of the other sons was to raise issues from the past and curse them because of them, being quite insolent to some of them, e.g. "Issachar is no better than a donkey". And he tells Simeon and Levi that he is nothing to do with them. What was intended to be a time of blessing, he turned into cursing. When God had graciously turned his cursings into blessings for him, and Jacob himself realizes that he has been so amazingly blessed himself. It was a sad end, and yet Jacob still shall be saved, and God is still the God of Jacob. None of us will attain moral perfection by the time we die, and so in essence we are like Jacob, dying in hope of grace, in immaturity, not having got as far as we ought to have done. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He instructed them, and said to them, I am to be gathered to my people. Bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite</em>- Although the rather rambling, bitter and bizarre statements so far in this chapter could give us the impression that Jacob had dementia, he speaks of his funeral and the location of the burial cave with great accuracy. His heart was truly on the things of the Kingdom and the promises. We note that he saw his fathers as lying in the grave; if he had believed in an immortal soul, surely he would have spoken otherwise.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>In the cave that is in the field of Machpelah, which is before Mamre, in the land of Canaan, which Abraham bought with the field from Ephron the Hittite as a burial place</em>- That this spot was bought, when it was their eternal inheritance, is cited as an example of the faith of the patriarchs (<em><a href='B:510 7:5'>Act 7:5</a></em>). They had not inherited the land eternally, yet God keeps His promises- and therefore they were forced to look ahead in faith to the day of resurrection and eternal inheritance. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>There they buried Abraham and Sarah, his wife. There they buried Isaac and Rebekah, his wife, and there I buried Leah</em>- In his penultimate sentence, Jacob makes the perhaps strange comment that "they buried Isaac" (his father; 49:31). The "they" meant him and Esau (<em><a href='B:10 35:29'>Gen 35:29</a></em>), but perhaps Jacob wanted to show his separation from Esau by describing the funeral in this way. Separation from the world is thus an aspect of spiritual maturity, and also a result of sustained appreciation of the covenant promises. &nbsp; </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It seems that Jacob came to see his beloved parents in spiritual, not emotional terms, at the end. Consider the pronouns he uses: "There they buried Abraham and Sarah his wife; there they (i.e. he and his brother, <em><a href='B:10 35:29'>Gen 35:29</a></em>) buried Isaac and Rebekah his wife; and there I buried Leah" (49:3 AV1). He doesn't talk in the first person about "my father" or "I" buried. He sees himself as their friend in faith, more than their son. These words were said in Jacob's last breath. It shows to me how at last he had won this battle, he had shed the crutch of his father's faith, he stood alone before <em>his</em> God, at the very end he wasn't leaning on his parents spiritually any more, all the scaffolding had been removed, and he stood alone, on his own deep foundation. His final words are full of conscious and unconscious reference to the fathers and the promises. See on <em><a href='B:10 47:9'>Gen 47:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 48:15'>Gen 48:15</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The field and the cave that is therein, which was purchased from the children of Heth</em>- Jacob’s final words reflect his resentment against the children of Heth; he saw that they were the world, the children of this world which now possess the land of promise, covenanted to be God's Kingdom, not theirs. He realized that the time was not yet ripe, and his very last words were a reminder of this. His mind was centred on the promises and the future ownership of the land, and on his connection with Abraham and Isaac; the fact that the land was not inherited during the patriarch's lifetimes (the land had to be bought from the children of Heth) is seen by the Spirit as an indication that the Kingdom had not yet come, but surely would do (<em><a href='B:510 7:5'>Act 7:5</a></em>). And Jacob died with exactly the same perception. In doing so, he was reflecting the view of his dear mother, who detested the ways of the Godless children of Heth (<em><a href='B:10 27:46'>Gen 27:46</a></em>). So in his time of dying, Jacob was not divided from the spiritual views of his parents. Their Hope was his Hope, but he had made it his own. He was not just living out their expectations of him. The way he got there in the end&nbsp; is just marvellous to behold.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Jacob made an end of charging his sons, he gathered up his feet into the bed, and yielded up the spirit, and was gathered to his people</em>- At the very end, Jacob gathered himself up into his bed to die, and then God gathered him up (this comes out very clearly in the Hebrew text). That desire of God for mutuality with His servant Jacob had always been there. See on <em><a href='B:10 48:8'>Gen 48:8</a></em>.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idiom of Jacob being “gathered to his people” is used, despite the fact that many Bible readers will misunderstand this as meaning that he therefore joined them in some disembodied existence. The idiom is used but not corrected. God is not so primitive as to keep on as it were tripping over Himself to defend and define what He has said and the way He has chosen to say it. He speaks to us in our language, and at various times over history has dealt with men in terms they can cope with. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph fell on his father’s face, wept on him, and kissed him</em>- As noted through Genesis 49, Jacob cursed rather than blessed many of his sons. It is Joseph who comes over as the most affectionate for Jacob, and is in charge of his burial; see on :10. To fall on the face was a sign of inferiority; Joseph did so knowing that the next time he would see Jacob, in the resurrection, Jacob and Rachel would fall before him. So he did this realizing that it was in the flesh, as part of this fallen state. The same phrase "wept on and kissed" is used of what Jacob did to his brothers, to assure them that all was forgiven (<em><a href='B:10 45:15'>Gen 45:15</a></em>). We wonder if Joseph felt he had things to forgive Jacob for; Jacob's favouritism towards Joseph had been the root of so many problems for Joseph. And perhaps the way Jacob had removed Joseph from being the firstborn and effectively given it to Benjamin, then Ephraim and then Judah... all felt like it was something he had to forgive, as he finally accepted that all this talk about the paternal blessing was really nothing. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph commanded his servants, the physicians, to embalm his father; and the physicians embalmed Israel</em>- The Hebrew for "physicians" is literally the healers, those who make whole. It was not the job of physicians to embalm. But Joseph makes them do it, perhaps to teach them that all their Egyptian myths about prolonging life were incorrect. They had not kept his father alive, and so he made them embalm him, dealing personally with the body which they had failed to cure or keep alive. This fits in with a wider theme in the Joseph story- that the ways of the true God demonstrated the errors of Egyptian thinking. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Forty days were fulfilled for him, for that is how many the days it takes to embalm. The Egyptians wept for him for seventy days</em>- Jacob's sons wept for a shorter period (:10), perhaps again demonstrating (as noted on :2) that the Egyptian ways were inferior to those of the Hebrews; for such lengthy weeping was but a formalism compared to the true grief of the family. We note that Jacob was embalmed; the body was not divided into parts, perhaps in reflection of the hope of resurrection by Joseph. Hence Joseph commands the servants specifically to embalm the body. And the word translated "embalm" also means "to ripen". Death is as Paul explains, the sowing of a seed, which then ripens into the resurrection body.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When the days of weeping for him were past, Joseph spoke to the house of Pharaoh, saying, If now I have found favour in your eyes, please speak in the ears of Pharaoh, saying</em>- We wonder why Joseph did not directly speak to Pharaoh. Perhaps a new Pharaoh had arisen, and already there was a distance between Joseph and the new ruler. For the rigours of famine were now 12 years in the past. There may be far more implied in the statement "If now I have found favour in <em>your</em> eyes". </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>‘My father made me swear, saying, Behold, I am dying. Bury me in my grave which I have dug for myself in the land of Canaan. Now therefore, please let me go up and bury my father, and I will come again’</em>- The burial place was therefore not simply a cave, from where bodies could be stolen, but involved digging. This was unusual for the Egyptians, who preferred to build structures over the bodies and keep the bodies above the ground; but we can understand it given the Hebrew hope in resurrection. It is not clear when exactly Jacob had this grave "dug"; perhaps he did it when leaving Canaan, so distinct was his sense of association with the promised land. Yet Jacob himself, despite so often asking to be buried in Canaan, had never spoken of having dug a grave. We wonder if Joseph threw this in at the last moment to underline the need to do it.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh said, Go up, and bury your father, just like he made you swear</em>- Joseph now needs Pharaoh's permission to leave Egypt. This is different to the relationship he had with the Pharaoh earlier, when he could do what he wanted. And the record is pregnant with connection with how Israel were to ask a later Pharaoh to leave Egypt and were not allowed to. The winds of change were already blowing, and the tide of history was turning against Israel in Egypt.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph went up to bury his father; and with him went up all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his house, all the elders of the land of Egypt</em>- Clearly the elderly Jacob had become a senior figure in Egypt in the 17 years he lived there. These "elders" of Egypt were those to whom Joseph had taught "wisdom" (<em><a href='B:230 105:22'>Psa 105:22</a></em> s.w. "senators"). Perhaps they had come to share the hope of Israel. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>All the house of Joseph, his brothers, and his father’s house. Only their little ones, their flocks, and their herds, they left in the land of Goshen</em>- Again this points us forward to how a later Pharaoh insisted that Israel's flocks must remain in Goshen if they wanted to leave (<em><a href='B:20 10:24'>Exo 10:24</a></em>). And <em><a href='B:20 10:10'>Exo 10:10</a></em> could imply that Pharaoh had tried to bargain that Israel could temporarily leave Egypt to sacrifice in the desert, but their "little ones" must remain. We are being prepared for the Pharaohs getting more controlling and demanding of the Hebrews.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>There went up with him both chariots and horsemen. It was a very great company</em>- I explained on <em><a href='B:10 45:7'>Gen 45:7</a></em> that it was the Divine intention that Israel leave Egypt and return to Canaan once the famine ended; Jacob was intended to die in Canaan with Joseph next to him, and the blessings on the tribes in Genesis 49 would have had their primary fulfilment in the land of Canaan at that time. Israel were to become a great company in the land of Egypt during the famine, and then return to Canaan. And now indeed they were a great company, and were returning to Canaan- but temporarily. They ought to have gone permanently. We too face so many problems in our lives because we do not follow the Plan A which God intended for us. It's not that He rejects us for not following it; but the other plans involve so much suffering for us which would be otherwise needless, and so much human damage.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They came to the threshing floor of Atad, which is beyond the Jordan- </em>That they crossed the Jordan is twice mentioned (:11). We wonder why they took the more circuitous route to Mamre from Goshen; for there was a direct highway, that didn't require them to cross the Jordan river. Whatever the reason, it was perhaps to help Israel in the wilderness (the first audience of the book of Genesis) to see that their route was not in fact without precedent. And this is the whole purpose of Biblical history; to help us see that man is not alone, no situation is essentially unique, others have passed this way before. With God's grace ever with them.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And there they lamented with a very great and severe lamentation. He mourned for his father seven days</em>- We notice a separation between "they (the other sons) lamented", and Joseph's mourning ("he mourned"). The last words many of the sons had heard from their father were his ranting at them and effective cursing of them when he was supposed to be giving them a blessing. Presumably they forgave this, or humbled themselves to accept that although he was unreasonable to them in his demented state, yet indeed they had done wrong and deserved his words. For otherwise it is hard to understand how they could apparently so genuinely mourn their father's passing.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning in the floor of Atad, they said, This is a grievous mourning by the Egyptians. Therefore its name was called Abel Mizraim, which is beyond the Jordan</em>- The Hebrews appeared as Egyptians, just as Moses was later to appear as an Egyptian. We too may be perceived as the people of this world, our Egypt; we look the same, wear the same clothes, pass through the same general experiences, speak the same language. And in moments of weakness, this can lead us to think that perhaps there is really nothing of substance to our religion. But we are different; circumcision is of the heart, in the hidden, inner man, as the New Testament describes it. For the significance of them taking the route over the Jordan, see on :10.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>His sons did to him just as he commanded them</em>- This is laboured (:13). The record wishes all to see how "Israel" were centred around identity with the promises made to the patriarchs, with the patriarchs personally, and with the associated hope of the resurrection of the body. And that is just as true for the new Israel; for the new covenant was expressed in the promises made to the patriarchs. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For his sons carried him into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field, for a possession of a burial site, from Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre</em>- Again the point is repeated, that the patriarchs had to buy land in which to bury their dead, when God had promised them the land as an eternal inheritance. They had to buy a possession; whereas God had <em>given</em> them the land as an eternal possession. God keeps His promises, and thus is necessitated the resurrection of the dead and the establishment of God's eternal Kingdom in the land promised. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph returned into Egypt - he, and his brothers, and all that went up with him to bury his father - after he had buried his father</em>- As noted on :9, there is a tragedy to this. They ought to have taken their children and flocks, and remained in Canaan. But it is emphasized that not one of them remained in Canaan; they all returned to what seemed the softer life.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Joseph’s brothers saw that their father was dead, they said- </em>As always with the inspired record, this has the ring of psychological credibility. The 'seeing' or perception of another's death sinks in some time after the burial. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It may be that Joseph will hate us, and will fully pay us back for all of the evil which we did to him</em>- They recognized that the apparently single act of selling Joseph into Egypt had led to "all of the evil" which had come upon Joseph. He had clearly explained to them what had happened. And they accepted, as we should, that one bad act spawns many others for which we are responsible. The man who abuses a young child has some blame for the life of theft, drug addiction and self harm which resulted from actions which may have summed up to "just" a few hours. This is the nature of all sin- it has rolling consequences. See on :17.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The brothers still needed education in their faith in grace. The same word is used of how they had "hated" Joseph (<em><a href='B:10 49:23'>Gen 49:23</a></em>). So they proceeded to tell a lie, to show a lack of faith, on the basis of a 'What if...' logic. And it is 'What if...?' which drives so much of our lack of faith. It drives the need to undermine others, to pursue ever more wealth, to be untruthful. God does at times pay back evil- the same words are used of Him doing this elsewhere (<em><a href='B:70 9:56-57'>Jdg 9:56-57</a></em>; <em><a href='B:90 25:39'>1Sa 25:39</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 54:5'>Psa 54:5</a></em> etc.). Joseph does not just gloss over their evil; he agrees with them that they had done evil (:20), but he tells them that he is not God (:19). It will not be for him to have any part in any possible repayment of them for the evil done. He doesn't rule out the possibility of God doing so; but it is for him to show grace and to only repay evil with good. This is a profound lesson which Christians have struggled to learn over the centuries. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They sent a message to Joseph, saying, Your father commanded before he died, saying- </em>As noted on :15, this was a lie, told on the basis of fear of possible futures. It is those same fears which lead us to so much poor behaviour. The Hebrew word for "message" can mean either a message or a messenger- hence <em><a href='B:10 50:16'>Gen 50:16</a></em> AV "messenger", RV "message". In the Divine thinking which is so often reflected in the Hebrew language, the man is his message, the messenger is the message. “What the Soviet cosmonaut wanted when he looked for God in the dark void outside his spacecraft window is... the hungering desire of our age. We want proof, evidence, a personal appearance, so that the God we have heard about becomes the God we see” (Philip Yancey, <em>Disappointment With God</em> (Zondervan, 1997) p. 46). And the only evidence is in you and me. People are interested, they are hungering and searching for Him; and the evidence they seek is in our radically transformed lives. They won’t get a voice out of a whirlwind or sight of a Heavenly form; they just get a glimpse of you and me. In this sense the (human) medium <em>is</em> the (Divine) message.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>‘You shall tell Joseph, Now please forgive the disobedience of your brothers, and their sin, because they did evil to you’. Now, please forgive the disobedience of the servants of the God of your father- </em>We wonder why the emphasis upon "disobedience". The sin of selling Joseph into Egypt was the summation of much "disobedience"; and they recognized that this apparently single act of selling Joseph ("their sin") had much more to it (see on :15). They did it because they were disobedient to Joseph as the family priest, and were disobedient to the implications of his dreams. We note that they like their father Jacob are still talking about the God of their father, rather than their personal God.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph wept when they spoke to him</em>- He wept as God must weep, at the slowness of men to believe His wonderful grace. The good news of the Gospel is disbelieved so often because it is in fact too good news. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Joseph's brothers had slink away from him, and he had had to encourage them: "Come near to me, I pray you" (<em><a href='B:10 45:4'>Gen 45:4</a></em>). They absolutely knew that they ought to be punished and killed by him, and they obviously thought he would do it. And now even years later, Joseph <em>wept</em> in frustration at their lack of full acceptance of his total forgiveness. These scenes are so evidently typical of the future judgment seat of Joseph / Jesus. There is even the suggestion in <em><a class='bible' href='#b66:7:15'>Rev 7:15</a></em> that after the judgment process, the Lord will come down off His throne and mix with us, after the pattern of Joseph.&nbsp;See on <em><a href='B:10 45:4'>Gen 45:4</a></em>. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>His brothers also went and fell down before his face- </em>They recognized that they had been disobedient to the implication of Joseph's dreams (see on :17), and so again they fall down before him.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And they said, Behold, we are your servants</em>- In :18 they say that they are servants of God; here, that they are Joseph's servants. They perceived Joseph as God manifest, hence his comment in :19 "Am I in the place of God?". Or it could be that Joseph is encouraging them that he is indeed in the place of God (the Hebrew can be translated "I am in the place of God"); and he could therefore assure them that his grace towards them was indeed a reflection of God's grace to them. And God to this day arranges things and encounters in our lives to elicit repentance from us, and to help us perceive that others' grace to us is indeed God's grace to us reflected through them.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph said to them, Don’t be afraid, for am I in the place of God?</em>- Joseph doesn't point out their lie; he doesn't say 'I don't believe you, it makes no sense to say this, surely he would've told me himself as I am the one to do the forgiveness; see, again, you are back to your dishonest ways'. Rather he doesn't confront them but lets his own example of grace speak for itself, setting us a great example. See on <em><a href='B:10 40:8'>Gen 40:8</a></em>. He might be saying that indeed "I am in the place of God" (Heb.), not acting according to my own gut feelings; and God is full of grace and forgiveness, so they need not fear him, as he was manifesting God's saving grace to them. I noted on <em><a href='B:10 41:19'>Gen 41:19</a></em> that Joseph was an intense manifestation of God, and the vehicle through whom God was working.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But this could also be read as Joseph telling them not to fear him, because evil is repaid only by God and not himself; see on :15. ‘God manifestation’ doesn’t mean playing God. Joseph held himself back from being vindictive against his brothers by saying that he could not do so, because if he did, he would be acting ‘in God’s place’. His fear of ‘playing God’ meant that he wouldn’t presume to judge them. All too easily, a too simplistic view of ‘God manifestation’ can lead us to assume that we are to judge and condemn others, thus arrogating to ourselves what is only and rightly God’s personal prerogative. </p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring to pass, as it is this day- </em>When Paul wrote that all things work together for our "good" (<em><a href='B:520 8:28'>Rom 8:28</a></em>), he was echoing how in all the grief of Joseph's life, the rejection by his brethren, the cruel twists of fate (as they seemed at the time)... <em>God meant it for good</em>. This same wonderful process will come true in our lives- for they too are equally directed by a loving Father. </p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Joseph held no grudge against his brethren, and would not be vindictive to them, because he understood something of predestination: “You <em>meant </em>evil against me; but God <em>meant</em> it for good”. And because he understood that God’s good intentions were worked out through the evil intentions of others, Joseph was content to leave all in God’s hands, and on <em>this basis</em> he assures his brothers that given his understanding of this ‘predestination’, he wouldn’t hit back at them for what they’d done to him. This can be a helpful perspective for us in our struggles to forgive. "Meant" is literally to weave, to fabricate. Their weaving of evil plans and lies were more than matched by God's incredible weaving through the whole situation to bring about good from evil- He doesn't just walk away from evil and sin, but weaves through it. It is the word used of the "cunning work" of the tabernacle tapestry and the breastplate of judgment, where the threads of colours representing God are woven through the scarlet threads of human sin (<em><a href='B:20 26:1'>Exo 26:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 26:31'>Exo 26:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 28:15'>Exo 28:15</a></em>). The cherubim were made likewise; through all this, God's absolute glory shines (<em><a href='B:20 36:35'>Exo 36:35</a></em>).</p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The same words and ideas of good and evil are found in <em><a href='B:90 20:17'>1Sa 20:17</a></em>, where Saul does David evil, but David repays that evil with good. David was inspired by Joseph; as we should be. So often he laments that Saul and his men 'mean evil' ("devise... my hurt"), and yet God will preserve him as He did Joseph, for good (<em><a href='B:230 35:4'>Psa 35:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 41:7'>Psa 41:7</a></em> etc.). For these records are for our learning, that we too like David might slot ourselves into Joseph's place.</p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>To save many people alive-</em> God's abundant grace is revealed in the way that they devised evil against one man, and yet God through that devised good not for one man, Joseph, but to save not only him but "many people". They devised death; but through that God devised life. Paul catches this spirit when he draws up the contrasts between the death which came from the one man Adam, and the life which comes through the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now therefore don’t be afraid. I will nourish you and your little ones. He comforted them, and spoke kindly to them</em>- Joseph alludes to his words of 17 years before, when he had first promised to "nourish" his brothers and their families in Egypt (<em><a href='B:10 45:11'>Gen 45:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 47:12'>Gen 47:12</a></em> s.w.). He assures them yet again that he is a man of his word, no matter how long the consequences of that word go on for. He was in this sense manifesting God to them (see on :19). The 'comfort' he gave them was really comfort in their slowness to believe in his grace. The same words are found in the prophecy of how the Elijah ministry will speak to the heart ("comfortably", s.w.) of latter day Israel, assuring them that their sin is past and forgiven (<em><a href='B:290 40:2'>Isa 40:2</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph lived in Egypt, he, and his father’s house. Joseph lived one hundred ten years</em>- After the flood, lifespans slowly decreased. We have quite a lot of data in the Bible regarding this; my friend Dr. John Thatcher once analyzed it and found that the recorded ages decline precisely in line with the decay function of entropy.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph saw Ephraim’s children to the third generation. The children also of Machir, the son of Manasseh, were born on Joseph’s knees</em>- Ephraim and Manasseh themselves had been taken from Joseph's knees and made the sons of Jacob. But these children of Machir and thence Manasseh, the rejected firstborn, were counted to him; see on <em><a href='B:10 48:12'>Gen 48:12</a></em>. If he died at 110 he would have presumably seen many grandchildren and great grandchildren, but these of Machir are mentioned as born on his knees because they were counted as his.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph said to his brothers, I am dying, but God will surely visit you, and bring you up out of this land to the land which he swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob</em>- In his time of dying, Joseph speaks and wishes just like his father Jacob in his time of death; and he said these words in faith, seeing the future as if it is now (<em><a href='B:650 11:22'>Heb 11:22</a></em>). The implications of the promises which comprised the covenant were identical for every man, as they are for us this day. He emphasizes three times (:25 also) that Egypt, this world, is not the resting place of God's people Israel. They should have returned to Canaan of their own volition (<em><a href='B:10 45:7'>Gen 45:7</a></em>); but they did not, and so God would 'bring them up', taking the initiative to bring about the fulfilment of the Gospel's promises- by His grace, rather than just abandoning them to their own choice, which at the time was Egypt over Canaan. Earlier, the brothers had been 'brought up out of' Egypt to Canaan when Joseph had released them from the burden of their sins by his grace (<em><a href='B:10 45:25'>Gen 45:25</a></em> uses the same Hebrew phrase). And on a collective level, Israel were to be brought to the same level of desperation and repentance before they could be brought up from Egypt to Canaan. But like the brothers, it seemed they never really got to the required level of repentance; but they were saved by grace all the same.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph took an oath of the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you, and you shall carry up my bones from here</em>- Like Jacob, Joseph's heart was in the land of promise. Joseph's bones&nbsp; were 'carried up' with them when Israel left Egypt.&nbsp;The Hebrew word here is elsewhere translated 'to rise up', 'lift up', 'spring up', clearly hinting of the resurrection which will come at the Lord's return. I explained on <em><a href='B:10 45:7'>Gen 45:7</a></em> that it was God's intention that Israel leave Goshen and return to Canaan; and they had failed to do so. Joseph probably wanted to do so, but his brothers didn't. He perhaps envisaged that the generation contemporary with him would do so, as he asks them to take his bones with them. So he foresaw a special intervention of God in Israel's collective life, God 'visiting' then, so that they would leave Egypt. That could all have been avoided if they had been obedient and quit the soft life and returned to Canaan immediately.</p>


text:
<p><em>So Joseph died, being one hundred and ten years old, and they embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt</em>- To remain in power for 80 years in the cut throat politics of Egypt was a huge testament to his integrity. We note again that he was embalmed and put in a coffin; the body was kept intact in reflection of the hope of resurrection. See on :2,3. 'Embalm' also means 'to ripen'.&nbsp; Death is as Paul explains, the sowing of a seed, which then ripens into the resurrection body. </p>Duncan Heaster is open to receive your comments and questions at Carelinks. For a full list of Duncan Heaster’s books, see www.heaster.org .


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now these are the names of the sons of Israel, who came into Egypt (every man and his household came with Jacob)- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Now these are the names" is the phrase used towards the end of Genesis (<em><a href='B:10 46:8'>Gen 46:8</a></em>). Clearly the records are by the same editor / author, who is clearly Moses, according to how these writings are quoted in later scripture.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Although Reuben was demoted from being firstborn, the list here seems to be in order of birth. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Issachar, Zebulun, and Benjamin- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The sons of Leah and Rachel are listed first. The sons of the concubines come secondly, perhaps reflecting how this was not God's ideal intention. What Jacob did was not right, but still God worked through his dysfunction to build up the foundation of His people. I suggested in commentary on Genesis that God's ideal intention was that Jacob marry Leah and have his children by her. But he insisted on also marrying Rachel, and had relations with his servant girls. He didn't act in marital life as God intended, but all the same God worked through it all. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Dan and Naphtali, Gad and Asher- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Eleven sons are listed because these listed in :2-4 are those who came into Egypt; Joseph and his sons Ephraim and Manasseh were already in Egypt (:5). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>All the souls who came out of Jacob’s body were seventy souls, and Joseph was in Egypt already- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>LXX "seventy five". The Canaanite explanation of the family of the gods was that it contained a total of 70 gods – Ugaritic Tablet II AB 6:46 speaks of the “seventy sons of Asherah”. This is re-focused by the record of Genesis 10 – which speaks of 70 nations of men. Likewise <em><a href='B:10 46:27'>Gen 46:27</a></em> and <em><a href='B:20 1:5'>Exo 1:5</a></em> speak of the 70 sons of Jacob – and <em><a href='B:50 32:8'>Deu 32:8</a></em> says that the number of the Gentile nations was fixed “according to the number of the sons of God” or, “Israel” (according to some texts). The belief in the 70 gods of the Canaanite pantheon is therefore re-focused down to earth – where there were 70 sons of Jacob, 70 nations in the world around Israel, and <em><a href='B:50 32:8'>Deu 32:8</a></em> may imply that each is cared for by a guardian Angel in Heaven.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Joseph died, as did all his brothers, and all that generation- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>He lived 110 years, which was not as long as his father Jacob, although he appears to have been more spiritual than his father. Length of life was not and is not the ultimate indicator of Divine blessing. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly and multiplied, and grew exceedingly mighty; and the land was filled with them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The suffering of Israel at the time of the first Assyrian invasion of <em><a href='B:120 15:29'>2Ki 15:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 9:1'>Isa 9:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 9:3-4'>Isa 9:3-4</a></em> is spoken of in terms of their experience in Egypt, which is clearly typical of the last days: "Thou hast multiplied the nation (as God did in Egypt - <em><a href='B:20 1:7'>Exo 1:7</a></em>), and not increased the joy... thou hast broken the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder (the language of Israel in Egypt), the rod of his oppressor" (same word translated "taskmaster" in <em><a href='B:20 1:11'>Exo 1:11</a></em>). Biblical history continually interconnects, demonstrating that the same Divine hand has worked throughout history, and likewise works in our lives according to the same style. See on <em><a href='B:20 14:25'>Exo 14:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:21'>Exo 15:21</a></em>. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The situation was also a primary fulfilment of the promises to Abraham about the multiplication of the seed. Those same promises are made to us, and likewise have an element of fulfilment in this life, as well as in the Kingdom to come on earth at the last day. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who didn’t know Joseph- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Know" seems used here in the sense of respecting Joseph- who had after all saved Egypt and done so much to establish the power of Pharaoh over the nation. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said to his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more numerous and mightier than we are- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Clearly God had poured out His blessing upon Abrahams seed, until it seems there were more of them in Egypt than there were Egyptians- or at least, more than the members of the ethnic group then in power in Egypt.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Come, let us deal prudently with them, in case they multiply yet more and it happens that when any war breaks out, they also join themselves to our enemies, and fight against us, and escape out of the land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Fear of possible consequence has led men to do the most awful things. So may crimes and murders are rooted in fear. And this horrific abuse of the Hebrews arose from this too. And we are to learn from this, and through faith live without fear, and all the bad things which fear leads to.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Therefore they set taskmasters over them to afflict them with their burdens- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The taskmasters 'afflicted' Israel in their forced labour, the Hebrew meaning to browbeat/depress. These were exactly the tactics of Hitler's bully boys in the death camps. The Hebrew word translated "taskmasters" in the record of their persecutions is also used concerning Nebuchadnezzar (<em><a href='B:290 14:4'>Isa 14:4</a></em>) and peoples like Damascus, Tyre, Gaza etc. Concerning Israel's latter day deliverance from them, <em><a href='B:450 9:8'>Zec 9:8</a></em> reads, "I will encamp about mine house... because of him that passeth by (Passover language)... and no oppressor (same word "taskmaster") shall pass through them... for now have I seen" (cp. <em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em>). Like the Nazis, the Egyptians seem to have excused their abuse of Israel with a concocted ideology. Stephen says that they "dealt subtly" with Israel, using the Greek word from which "sophistry" comes. Militant Islam has already developed an equivalent to this.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They built storage cities for Pharaoh: Pithom and Raamses- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Seeing that all ultimately belongs to God, it is an utter delusion to think that we totally own anything. But the possession of wealth leads to just that illusion; because wealth is of itself a delusion. The very possession of wealth tempts us to amass more of it- it truly is potentially addictive of itself. The Hebrew word translated "treasure" is also that used for "store"- hence <em><a href='B:20 1:11'>Exo 1:11</a></em> AV "treasure cities", RV "store cities". The rich fool is a visual presentation of this fact; the more wealth is possessed, the stronger is the desire to store it, amass it- but not use it. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and the more they spread out. They were grieved because of the children of Israel- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>I will argue throughout Exodus 1-15 that God's intention was that Pharaoh and Egypt should convert to Him. Israel at this time were worshipping the idols of Egypt and were far from Yahweh. But He blessed them by grace, and the more the Egyptians cursed them, the more the Israelites prospered. This was all from God, as part of His wider appeal to the Egyptians to accept Him by perceiving how Yahweh was with His people by grace- even if His own people had effectively rejected Him at the time. The same theme recurs in <em><a href='B:20 1:20'>Exo 1:20</a></em>, where the attempt to slay the Hebrew babies results in the Hebrews growing even more. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The Egyptians ruthlessly made the children of Israel serve-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We must remember that all the criticisms and denunciations of 'Israel' are denunciations of Jacob, who <em>primarily</em> was the man Jacob, whose children shared his characteristics. Therefore in some ways we can feed back from the failures of Israel as a people and see the weakness of Jacob as a man. Thus the way Israel were made to "serve with rigour" in Egypt reflected the way Jacob served in the same way with Laban (<em><a href='B:20 1:13-14'>Exo 1:13-14</a></em>), and thereby implies that Jacob was suffering for his sins and was also idolatrous as they were at that time (<em><a href='B:330 20:8'>Eze 20:8</a></em>), while he served Laban.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and they made their lives bitter with hard service, in mortar and in brick, and in all kinds of service in the field; they ruthlessly made them serve in all their service- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Passover, as the prototype breaking of bread, featured bitter herbs to remind Israel of their bitter experience in Egypt. The breaking of bread should likewise focus our attention on the fact that return to the world is a return to bondage and bitterness, not freedom. Israel didn't learn this lesson, they forgot the bitterness of Egypt, and longed to return to it. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Slime" is the same word as "mortar" in <em><a href='B:20 1:14'>Exo 1:14</a></em>, and "mortar" in <em><a href='B:10 11:3'>Gen 11:3</a></em> is the word translated "pitch" concerning how Moses' bulrush basket was made (<em><a href='B:20 2:3'>Exo 2:3</a></em>). This conjures up the picture of Amram bringing home some mortar from the building site in order to make that ark. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives, of whom the name of the one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The plan to slay the Israelite baby boys didn't apparently get too far, because there were six hundred thousand Hebrew men who left Egypt. So these midwives may have been very local to Pharaoh, perhaps amongst his servants. The command to kill the baby boys may therefore have just been quite localized. Puah, "one who cries out", would be representative of the Israelites as they cried out to Yahweh in their affliction. "Shiphrah" is LXX Zipporah.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and he said, When you perform the duty of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them on the birth stool; if it is a son, then you shall kill him; but if it is a daughter, then she shall live- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>One Egyptologist claims that "two or three days before the expected time of delivery, the midwife conveys to the house a chair of a peculiar form, upon which the patient is to be seated during the birth". The idea that they 'did the duty to the Hebrew women' could suggest these women were Egyptians, who came to fear Israel's God. <em>&nbsp;</em><em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But the midwives feared God, and didn’t do what the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the baby boys alive- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on :19. Apparently they didn't kill a single child. This suggests that the plan to kill the babies was very localized and didn't work; see on :15. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The king of Egypt called for the midwives, and said to them, Why have you done this thing, and have saved the boys alive?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We do well to ask ourselves questions as we read the Biblical narrative. What should they have said? What could they have said? What were their options as they stood there, in fear for their lives? We sense if it were Daniel and his friends, the answer may have been a blunt statement that they feared God more than the king. But they flunked that and came out with a lie, in that what they said may have been partly true but was a lie in that it wasn't the full truth. And God blessed them for that. We see here the eagerness of God to respond to any sign of faith or movement toward Him, even if it is far less than ideal.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The midwives said to Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew women aren’t like the Egyptian women; for they are vigorous, and give birth before the midwife comes to them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It is possible that the midwives were in fact Egyptians who were told to take responsibility for the Hebrew births. But midwives were generally not used in primitive societies, as they aren't today. So these women may have been telling more or less the truth, although it was an untruth insofar as it was not the complete truth; for the women "feared God" (:17) and therefore disobeyed the king. As with the lie of Rahab being quoted in the New Testament as an act of faith, and the lies of the Gibeonites enabling them to enter the people of God, we see how morality and ethics are not all so black and white in reality. As discussed on :12,20, this statement that the Hebrew women were more vigorous than the Egyptians was another nudge of the Egyptians towards recognizing that there was something special about the Hebrews; their God was so gracious that He blessed them, even though they were patently unfaithful to them.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>God dealt well with the midwives, and the people multiplied, and grew very mighty- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This was all from God, as part of His wider appeal to the Egyptians to accept Him by perceiving how Yahweh was with His people by grace- even if His own people had effectively rejected Him at the time. The same theme recurs in <em><a href='B:20 1:12'>Exo 1:12</a></em>.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It happened, because the midwives feared God, that He made them families- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The natural reading of this would be that the midwives were barren but had children after his incident. But the Hebrew phrase "made them families" isn't usually used to mean 'to give children / conception'. If that were the intention, another phrase would have been used. This is the phrase translated "provide for my own family" (<em><a href='B:10 30:30'>Gen 30:30</a></em>), "establish a family" (<em><a href='B:90 25:28'>1Sa 25:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:100 7:11'>2Sa 7:11</a></em>). The sense is that their families were established. And yet there is no Biblical record of the families of these two women. Perhaps this potential blessing was disabled by subsequent failure within the families.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh commanded all his people, saying, You shall cast every son who is born into the river, and every daughter you shall save alive- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As noted on :15, this appears to be rather localized. For there was no "river" in Goshen where most of the Hebrews lived. We will read of how the family of Moses lived near to Pharaoh's palace, near the River Nile, to which Pharaoh and his daughter went regularly. The command was now given to all Pharaoh's people, i.e. his own ethnic group who were in power. But this too failed to stop the growth of God's people.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>A man of the house of Levi went and took a daughter of Levi as his wife- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It was God's intention that the people married within their tribes so as to keep inheritances within the tribes. Such commands had not yet been formally given, but perhaps this faithful couple perceived the truth of the principle ahead of time. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The woman conceived, and bore a son. When she saw that he was a child fair to God, she hid him three months- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Every faithful mother perceives that her child is "fair to God", so we are to surely read this as meaning that she perceived him as having some particular role in God's purpose. And yet she would have died whilst Moses was apparently lost in the court life of Pharaoh, not making any move towards saving his family nor his people. For only at the age of 40 did it "come into his mind to visit his people". She would have died very disappointed; and will arise at the last day to such a wonderful surprise, when she realizes how Moses turned to God in later life. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When she could no longer hide him, she took a papyrus basket for him, and coated it with tar and with pitch. She put the child in it, and laid it in the reeds by the river’s bank-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on 2:10. Moses is set up as example and representative of his people Israel. Israel is likened in <em><a href='B:330 16:5'>Eze 16:5</a></em> to a child rejected at birth, but miraculously found and cared for, and brought up with every pampered blessing. Just as Moses was. Stephen described the ‘putting out’ of Moses with the same word used in the LXX for what happened to Israel in Ezekiel 16 (<em><a href='B:510 7:21'>Act 7:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 2:3'>Exo 2:3</a></em> LXX). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Slime" is the same word as "mortar" in <em><a href='B:20 1:14'>Exo 1:14</a></em>, and "mortar" in <em><a href='B:10 11:3'>Gen 11:3</a></em> is the word translated "pitch" concerning how Moses' bulrush basket was made (<em><a href='B:20 2:3'>Exo 2:3</a></em>). This conjures up the picture of Amram bringing home some mortar from the building site in order to make that ark. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>His sister stood far off, to see what would be done to him- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Standing afar off is associated in the Bible with mourning. She stood afar off out of morbid fascination as to the fate of her baby brother, feeling utterly powerless to help him. It seems they placed him in the ark and placed him in the river in technical obedience to Pharaoh's command, and yet desperately prayed that God would save the child, seeing they had done all that was humanly possible. And indeed He did. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh’s daughter came down to bathe at the river. Her maids walked along by the riverside. She saw the basket among the reeds, and sent her handmaid to get it- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The account of Moses being found by Pharaoh’s daughter is a classic Bible story- but it begs many questions. Why did this young woman risk disobeying her father? Given Moses’ age, how did she manage to survive in Pharaoh’s court with an adopted child who looked like a Hebrew and ought to have been killed in babyhood? What kind of relationship did she have with her father? Did he tolerate her sympathy and “compassion” for the Hebrews?<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Where else do we read about Pharaoh’s daughter? Searching through the Bible, perhaps with the help of a concordance, we come to the references to Solomon marrying Pharaoh’s daughter. No great answers there to our questions. Sometimes in Bible study we do draw a blank. And that’s a blank. And there’s only one other reference to Pharaoh’s daughter, hidden away in the obscure genealogies of Chronicles, which we likely skip reading in our daily Bible readings. But there… is the answer. “The sons of Ezrah: Jether, Mered, Epher, and Jalon. These are the sons of Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered married; and she conceived and bore Miriam, Shammai, and Ishbah, the father of Eshtemoa” (<em><a href='B:130 4:17'>1Ch 4:17</a></em> ESV). Who was Mered? A prince of the tribe of Judah. And yes, he lived around the time of Moses. So… a daughter of Pharaoh married a Hebrew. A slave. And she was the daughter of Pharaoh. Now we’re onto something. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We eagerly look up the meaning of “Bithiah”. And we find that Bithiah means ‘daughter of Yah’- there is an intended tension therefore in the way in which she is called ‘Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh’, especially considering that Pharaoh was thought to be God in Egyptian culture. It cannot be an undersigned coincidence that Bithiah is recorded as having a daughter, whom she called Miriam. It’s not very common for the names of daughters to be recorded in the genealogies, so it seems a point is being made. Miriam was of course the name of Moses’ sister, who had first introduced Bithiah to Moses’ family. Her name in Hebrew is almost the feminine form of her father’s name, Mered. Mered had another wife who was from the tribe of Judah: “And his Judahite wife bore Jered … Heber… and Jekuthiel” (<em><a href='B:130 4:18'>1Ch 4:18</a></em> ESV). Egyptologists have various theories as to who the Pharaoh of the Exodus was. One of them is that it was Amunhotep II. His coffin decorations appear to show that he had a skin condition- perhaps the boils from the plagues? One stele that was discovered shows that two of Amunhotep II's sons have been "erased". Perhaps one of them was Moses? <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It seems likely that many Egyptians became proselytes, because many of them left Egypt with Israel. So Bithiah became attracted to God’s people, and decided to forego all she could’ve had in order to save just one Hebrew life. If nothing else we learn that to sacrifice all for the sake of the salvation of ‘just’ one person is perhaps what we are called to. The woman who could’ve been one of the most powerful women in the world sacrificed it all, to marry a Hebrew slave- who already had a wife. And presumably she changed her name. She was Yah’s daughter now, and not that of ‘god’ Pharaoh. What motivated her? Surely her experience with raising Moses. From the mouth of a child, who may well have been with his Godly parents for up to five years, she learnt more of Yahweh’s ways. And she must’ve got to know the family of origin and been impressed by Moses’ big sister Miriam… for she named her own daughter after her. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We too face choices. To take a second job, rise early and stay up late… to advance in our careers. To get more income, to dispose of upon expensive coffees, the latest gadgets. Or in the spirit of Bithiah and Moses to realize, and realize finally and once for all, that nothing else matters now. The hope of the Kingdom and fellowship of the rejected Son of God is worth so infinitely more than any of Egypt’s temporary glory. Moses rejected it for the sake of his service of God’s people- who for the most part never appreciated him, and turned their backs on “this Moses”. Bithiah likewise, gave it all up… just to be identified with God’s people. Being the second woman in Mered’s life, a Gentile compared to the other wife being a true blue blooded Judahite, couldn’t have been much fun. For all we know, Bithiah died alone and feeling rejected in the corner of a Hebrew slave camp, lamenting how Moses was apparently caught up in the good life of Pharaoh’s court which she had given up, buried in the hot sand without a grave, a far cry from the glory girl of her teens. But she did it all so as to be connected with God’s people, just as Moses chose to suffer affliction with a people of God who didn’t want him. There are brethren who set us a great example in these things. They lost their families because they married a believer and not the one expected for them. Married someone of another race or colour because of their spiritual connection with that person, thus losing the status they might have had within their own culture. They declined promotion in their career because… they wanted to get home each day in time to read Bible stories to their kids. Didn’t take out a court case but suffered the loss of so much, didn’t answer slander, left God to judge… Spent their spare time and cash going to the Post Office and mailing Bibles to people rather than… tropical beach holidays. Spent their evenings emailing or visiting old, sick, suffering, depressed, difficult or plain awkward brethren… instead of watching a screen. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>She opened it, and saw the child, and behold, the baby cried. She had compassion on him, and said, This is one of the Hebrews’ children!-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The woman presumably figured in a moment what had happened. The child had been placed in the basket in technical obedience to her father's command, and the family were just hoping and praying that their God would save him. And she wanted to be a part of that desperate hope and faith. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Then his sister said to Pharaoh’s daughter, Should I go and call a nurse for you from the Hebrew women, that she may nurse the child for you?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As with the blessing of the midwives for their telling of untruth through not telling the whole truth, so Miriam does likewise. And is blessed for it. She gives a false impression. And yet through this deception, as with the Gibeonites, life is saved and God's purpose moved forward. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh’s daughter said to her, Go. The maiden went and called the child’s mother- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The record is presented here from the perspective of Pharaoh's daughter. The girl went and called the woman mentioned, who was (as we know) the child's mother. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh’s daughter said to her, Take this child away, and nurse him for me, and I will give you your wages. The woman took the child, and nursed it- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God records Moses being found by Pharaoh’s daughter, who then (unknowingly) asks his mother to be his nurse: “The maid went and called the child’s mother. And Pharaoh’s daughter said unto her, Take this child away, and nurse it for me… and <em>the woman </em>took the child and nursed it” (<em><a href='B:20 2:8-9'>Exo 2:8-9</a></em>). Why not say<em> ‘And Moses’ mother</em> (not “the woman”) took him (not “it”) and nursed him (not “it”)’? The answer seems to be that the record adopts the incorrect and ignorant perspective of Pharaoh’s daughter– although with no explicit statement that this is so. And again, as with the midwives, we see God working through somewhat unethical dishonesty. We wonder at what point Pharaoh's daughter realized what had happened. She surely would have perceived the hand of God; in that a Hebrew mother ended up getting paid for nursing her own baby, when she was supposed to have killed the child.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The child grew, and she brought him to Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became her son. She named him Moses, and said, Because I drew him out of the water-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The very name 'Moses' meaning 'drawn out' suggests he is the prototype for every saint- a called out one. As Moses was drawn out of the Nile and saved, so he later drew Israel out of Egypt. He could exactly enter into their feelings when they emerged from the Red Sea, as the Lord Jesus exactly knows ours after baptism- better than we appreciate ourselves. Moses was saved by being surrounded by water in an "ark" (<em><a href='B:20 2:3'>Exo 2:3</a></em>)- the only other time this word is used is concerning Noah's ark, which is a type of our salvation through baptism. God even worked through Moses' weakness to make him even more representative of his people; as he drew back from the theophany of the burning bush through a bad conscience, so did Israel at the foot of Sinai; as they were excluded from the land for inattention to Yahweh's word, so was Moses. He was touched with the very feeling of their sinfulness. In a marvellous way, the Lord Jesus achieved the same, yet without sin; He really felt like a sinner in His death.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It happened in those days, when Moses had grown up, that he went out to his brothers, and looked at their burdens. He saw an Egyptian striking a Hebrew, one of his brothers-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As Moses "looked on their burdens" at age 40 (<em><a href='B:510 7:23'>Act 7:23</a></em>), so at the start of his ministry, our Lord assessed the weight of ours. His concern for our burdens in <em><a href='B:470 11:30'>Mat 11:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 23:4'>Mat 23:4</a></em> is perhaps a conscious allusion back to Moses' awareness of Israel's burdens, and his desire to deliver them, even though it cost him all that he had in this world.&nbsp; See on <em><a href='B:650 11:24'>Heb 11:24</a></em><em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses manifested / represented both God and Israel, superbly prefiguring the nature of the Lord's work and mission far later. As God "saw" the oppression of Israel (<em><a href='B:20 2:25'>Exo 2:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:9'>Exo 3:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:31'>Exo 4:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 5:19'>Exo 5:19</a></em>), so did Moses (<em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em>). He looked on God's people with the eyes / perspective of God- just as we should. Moses 'struck' the Egyptian who was persecuting the Hebrew just as God would strike Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:20 12:12-13'>Exo 12:12-13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 12:29'>Exo 12:29</a></em> etc.). See on 2:17.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>At age 40, Moses came to a crisis. He had a choice between the riches of Egypt, the pleasures of sin for a season, and choosing rather to suffer affliction with God's people and thereby fellowship the reproach of Christ (<em><a href='B:650 11:24-26'>Heb 11:24-26</a></em>). He probably had the chance to become the next Pharaoh, as the son of Pharaoh's daughter; but he consciously refused this, as a pure act of the will, as an expression of faith in the future recompense of the Kingdom. There are a number of&nbsp;passages which invite us to follow Moses' example in this. Paul was motivated in his rejection of worldly advantage by Moses'&nbsp; inspiration. And as in all things, he is our example, that we might follow Christ, who also turned down the very real possibility of temporal rulership of the world- for the sake of living the life of the cross, and thereby securing our redemption.&nbsp; The description of Moses' rejection of Egypt for the sake of Christ is shown to be our example: "Esteeming the <em>reproach of Christ</em> greater riches than the treasures (i.e. Pharaoh's treasures, which he could have had if he succeeded as Pharaoh) in Egypt... let us go forth therefore unto (Jesus) without the camp, <em>bearing his reproach</em>" (<em><a href='B:650 11:26'>Heb 11:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 13:13'>Heb 13:13</a></em>). We should be even eager to bear 'reproach for the name of Christ' as Moses did (<em><a href='B:670 4:14'>1Pe 4:14</a></em>), knowing it is a surety of our sharing his resurrection. &nbsp;For Moses, "the reproach of Christ" was his&nbsp; having "respect unto the recompense of the reward". He therefore must have understood in some detail that there would be a future Saviour, who would enable the eternal Kingdom promised to Abraham through his bearing the reproach of this world. Such was Moses' appreciation of this that it motivated him to reject Egypt. His motivation, therefore, was based upon a fine reflection upon the promises to Abraham and other oblique prophecies of the suffering Messiah contained in the book of Genesis. Moses knew he could have a share in the sufferings of the future saviour and thereby share his reward, because he saw the implication that Messiah would be our representative. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"When Moses <em>was grown</em>, he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens...when he was <em>full forty years old</em> it came into his heart to visit his brethren... by faith Moses, <em>when he was come to years</em>, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter" (<em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:23'>Act 7:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:24'>Heb 11:24</a></em>). The implication seems to be that Moses reached a certain point of maturity, of readiness, and then he went to his brethren. God looked on the sorrows of His people through the sensitivity of Moses, He <em>saw and knew</em> their struggles, their sense of being trapped, their desire to revive spiritually but their being tied down by the painful business of life and living; and He sent Moses to deliver them from this. But these very words are quoted about our deliverance through the 'coming down'&nbsp; of the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:31'>Exo 4:31</a></em> = <em><a href='B:490 1:68'>Luk 1:68</a></em>).&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no one, he killed the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This little incident is typical of how Christ was to destroy the devil, the power of sin, on the cross. The common translation of this passage can give them impression that Moses was very nervous. Yet it does not say that when he saw no man <em>was looking</em> he slew the Egyptian. There was at least one man looking- the suffering Israelite. And there must have been others looking for news to get round that Moses had killed the Egyptian. So I would suggest that Moses saw the Israelite suffering, and looked round in wonder to see if any other Israelite was going to go to his rescue. Because he saw there was no man, he himself got involved. This is an eloquent essay in the humility of Moses and the Lord he typified. This is exactly the same picture which we find in <em><a href='B:290 59:16'>Isa 59:16</a></em> concerning Christ's decision to achieve our redemption: "He saw that there was no man (quoting the words of <em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em>), and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation" (God saved Israel from Egypt by the <em>arm</em> of Moses, manifesting His arm: <em><a href='B:20 6:6'>Exo 6:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:16'>Exo 15:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:34'>Deu 4:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 63:12'>Isa 63:12</a></em>). <em><a href='B:290 63:4-6'>Isa 63:4-6</a></em> also contain allusions to Moses and the exodus (the rest of the chapter speaks explicitly about this): "The day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year (time) of my redeemed (the one I will redeem) is come. And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation". The implication of these passages is that he was surprised, he "wondered", that there was no one else to save Israel. He looked round for someone else to do it, but he found none- exactly after the pattern of Moses. This is not only an eloquent essay in our Lord's humanity, and the monstrosity of the 'trinity'; it indicates the true humility which he manifested in his work of redemption.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He went out the second day, and behold, two men of the Hebrews were fighting with each other. He said to him who did the wrong, Why do you strike your fellow?-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"He came unto his own, and his own received him not" (<em><a href='B:500 1:11'>Joh 1:11</a></em>). Moses in John's Gospel is an opening theme. "When he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren... he supposed his brethren would have understood how that God by his hand would deliver them" (<em><a href='B:510 7:23'>Act 7:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:25'>Act 7:25</a></em>). Therefore Moses in the court of Pharaoh = Jesus working in Nazareth until age 30. Was Moses' "surprise" at Israel's lack of response reflected in Christ (cp. <em><a href='B:290 50:2-7'>Isa 50:2-7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 59:16'>Isa 59:16</a></em>)? Despite his own righteousness, did Christ think too highly of the potential spirituality of Israel (<em><a href='B:490 13:9'>Luk 13:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 20:13'>Luk 20:13</a></em> cp. his high regard of others' spirituality: <em><a href='B:470 8:10'>Mat 8:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 11:11'>Mat 11:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 15:28'>Mat 15:28</a></em>)? If the Lord respected others so much- shouldn't we have deep respect for each other? The pain of Moses' rejection was Christ's; although he was rich, Moses had become poor for their sakes. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 21:22'>Exo 21:22</a></em> may have some relevance to this historical situation: "If men fight and hurt a pregnant woman so that she gives birth prematurely...". Perhaps Moses had been asked to judge (:14) a situation like this at the time of <em><a href='B:20 2:13'>Exo 2:13</a></em>. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said, Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you plan to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian? Moses was afraid, and said, Surely this thing is known-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"By faith (Moses) forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the King" (<em><a href='B:650 11:27'>Heb 11:27</a></em>). But Moses did flee Egypt, because he feared the wrath of the King (<em><a href='B:20 2:14-15'>Exo 2:14-15</a></em>). It seems that Moses had at best a mixture of motives, or motives that changed over time; yet God sees through his human fear, and discerns an element of calm faith within Moses as he left Egypt. In similar vein, at the time of the burning bush, Moses seems to have forgotten God's covenant name, he didn't immediately take off his shoes in respect as he should have done, and it seems he feared to come close to God due to a bad conscience, and he resisted God's invitation for him to go forth and do His work (<em><a href='B:20 3:5-7'>Exo 3:5-7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:10-11'>Exo 3:10-11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:1'>Exo 4:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:10-14'>Exo 4:10-14</a></em>). And yet at this very time, the New Testament says that Moses showed faith in the way he perceived God (<em><a href='B:490 20:37'>Luk 20:37</a></em>). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses didn't want Egypt to know that he was trying to save Israel; he thought he could do it secretly. Once he realized that people knew what he was trying to do, he was afraid. His fearfulness has similarities with that of spiritually weak Jacob, who fled from the face of Laban into the unknown, as Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh. Thus God encouraged him after forty years that he need no longer fear: "Return into Egypt: for all the men are dead which sought your life" (<em><a href='B:20 4:19'>Exo 4:19</a></em>). But then he rallied his faith and left Egypt, without (at the point of leaving) fearing the anger of Pharaoh. He so strongly believed, it was as if he physically saw God- as he asked (<em><a href='B:650 11:27'>Heb 11:27</a></em>).<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The loneliness of Moses as a type of Christ in showing this kind of&nbsp; love must surely represent that of our Lord. They went to a height which was generally beyond the appreciation of the men among whom they lived. The Spirit seems to highlight the loneliness of Moses by saying that at the same time as Moses <em>refused</em> to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, Israel <em>refused</em> him (the same Greek word is used; <em><a href='B:650 11:24'>Heb 11:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:35'>Act 7:35</a></em>). He was rejected by both the world and God's people: for 40 long years. As Israel envied Moses for spiritual reasons (<em><a href='B:230 106:16'>Psa 106:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:9'>Act 7:9</a></em>), so they did Christ (<em><a href='B:470 27:18'>Mat 27:18</a></em>), after the pattern of the brothers' spiritual envy of Joseph (<em><a href='B:10 37:11'>Gen 37:11</a></em>). Spiritual envy leading to persecution is quite a common feature in Biblical history (Job, Jeremiah, Paul...). And it isn't absent from the Christian experience either.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The tragedy is that Israel's rejection of Moses is typical of the rejection of Christ by those in the new Israel who turn away. The same word used about Israel <em>refusing</em> Moses as their deliverer (<em><a href='B:510 7:35'>Act 7:35</a></em>) is used about those who <em>deny</em> (same word) the Lord (Jesus) that bought them (<em><a href='B:680 2:1'>2Pe 2:1</a></em>). This latter verse is prefaced by the information that as there were those who lost their faith in the ecclesia in the wilderness, so there will be among the new Israel (<em><a href='B:680 2:1'>2Pe 2:1</a></em>). Therefore "the Lord that bought them" is an allusion back to Moses as a type of Christ. The illogicality of Israel's rejection of Moses when he first appeared to them is so apparent. They were slaves in Egypt, and then one of the most senior of Pharaoh's officials reveals that he is their brother, and has been sent by God to deliver them. Yet they preferred the life of slavery in Egypt. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses is recorded as saying “People have found out what I have done!” – surely he said this within himself (<em><a href='B:20 2:14'>Exo 2:14</a></em> GNB). Samuel’s comment about Eliab was likewise presumably to himself (<em><a href='B:90 16:6'>1Sa 16:6</a></em>); Saul’s “I’ll strike (David) to the wall” was surely said to himself (<em><a href='B:90 18:11'>1Sa 18:11</a></em>); likewise his explanation of his plan to trap David via his daughter Michael was all hatched out within his own brain (<em><a href='B:90 18:21'>1Sa 18:21</a></em>); other examples in <em><a href='B:90 27:12'>1Sa 27:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:110 12:26'>1Ki 12:26</a></em> etc. Only God knew what those men ‘said in their heart’; and yet He has recorded it in His inspired word for all generations to see. In this alone we see how ultimately, nothing remains secret; at the day of judgment, what we spoke in darkness (i.e. In our own minds) will be heard in the light of God’s Kingdom (<em><a href='B:490 12:3'>Luk 12:3</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to kill Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and lived in the land of Midian, and he sat down by a well-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 4:24'>Exo 4:24</a></em>. This happened when he was “Full forty years old” (<em><a href='B:510 7:23'>Act 7:23</a></em>). The Greek phrase could refer to Moses’ birthday, and one is tempted to speculate that it had been arranged that when Moses was 40, he would become Pharaoh. <em><a href='B:650 11:24'>Heb 11:24</a></em> says that he refused and chose- the Greek tense implying a one off choice- to suffer affliction with God’s people. It is tempting to imagine Moses at the ceremony when he should have been declared as Pharaoh, the most powerful man in his world…standing up and saying, to a suddenly hushed audience, voice cracking with shame and stress and yet some sort of proud relief that he was doing the right thing: “I, whom you know in Egyptian as Meses, am Moshe, yes, Moshe the Jew; and I decline to be Pharaoh”. Imagine his foster mother’s pain and anger. And then in the end, the wonderful honour would have been given to another man, who became Pharaoh. Perhaps he or his son was the one to whom Moses was to come, 40 years later. After a nervous breakdown, stuttering, speaking with a thick accent, clearly having forgotten Egyptian… walking through the mansions of glory, along the corridors of power, to meet that man, to whom he had given the throne 40 years earlier.&nbsp; <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses forsook the possibilities of Egypt not just for "the reproach of Christ"; he was also motivated by the fact that "he endured (Gk. was vigorous), as seeing him who is invisible" (<em><a href='B:650 11:27'>Heb 11:27</a></em>). It was <em>as if</em> he had seen the invisible God, as he later asked to. When the disciples asked to see God, Christ said that the manifestation of His character which they had seen in him was the same thing (<em><a href='B:500 14:8'>Joh 14:8</a></em>). Our experience of seeing the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, with unveiled face like Moses, ought to be a <em>wondrous</em> experience. When Moses asked to physically see God, the Angel proclaimed the characteristics of God before him. So when we read of Moses <em>as it were</em> seeing God at the time he decided to forsake Egypt, this must mean that he so appreciated God's Name and character, he so had faith in the future Kingdom which this great Name and character promise, that he left Egypt. The Lord Jesus fed for strength on the <em>majesty </em>of the Name of Yahweh (<em><a href='B:400 5:4'>Mic 5:4</a></em>). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"(Moses) refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; <em>having chosen rather</em> (Gk.) to suffer affliction with the people of God" (<em><a href='B:650 11:24-25'>Heb 11:24-25</a></em>) suggests that there was a struggle within the mind of Moses, between the reproach of Christ and the approbation of this world, and he then decisively came down on the right side. If we are truly saints, called out ones after the pattern of Moses, this struggle between present worldly advantage and the hope of the Kingdom must surely be seen in our minds. For this reason Moses is held up so highly as our example and pattern. He "forsook" Egypt uses the same word translated "leaving" when we read of a man leaving his parents to be joined to a wife, or of the shepherd leaving the 99 sheep to find the lost one.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now the priest of Midian had seven daughters. They came and drew water, and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We think of Jacob meeting his wife at a well, Isaac's servant likewise finding Isaac's wife at a well, and the Lord meeting the Samaritan woman at a well. Such connections within Biblical history become more apparent the more we read the Bible, and thus our faith is confirmed- that here, clearly, there was a higher hand at work over the centuries. Even if we cannot attach exact meaning to event, man is not alone. There are connections within our own lives, and between our lives and those of contemporary believers, as well as with Biblical characters. We through patience and comfort of the scriptures thus have hope (<em><a href='B:520 15:4'>Rom 15:4</a></em>).&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The shepherds came and drove them away; but Moses stood up and helped them, and watered their flock-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses helps and delivers (<em><a href='B:20 2:17'>Exo 2:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 2:19'>Exo 2:19</a></em>) the daughters of Jethro, just as God would help and deliver Israel (<em><a href='B:20 12:27'>Exo 12:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 14:13'>Exo 14:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 14:30'>Exo 14:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:2'>Exo 15:2</a></em>). He was being shown that his experiences were preparing him for something far greater. Note that at that time when Moses first met Jethro's daughters at the well, Moses was in depression. His plans and vision rejected by his own people, fallen from riches to rags, homeless and alone... and yet in that low moment he was chosen to be a manifestation of God! And this is the wonder of how God rejoices to work with the broken. However, Moses' desire to save others, his concern for the oppressed and helpless, shines through- he seeks to save the slave beaten by his Egyptian master; the neighbour wronged by his Hebrew brother; the unknown women deprived at the well by male nomads (<em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 2:13'>Exo 2:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 2:17'>Exo 2:17</a></em>). In all this Moses was manifesting the concern and saving help of God. And when we do likewise, we show God's face to this world. See on 2:11<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When they came to Reuel, their father, he said, How is it that you have returned so early today?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Abuse at the hand of the shepherds (:19) was a daily experience for them, just as the Israelites were daily abused- possibly at the hands of the 'shepherd kings' dynasty of Egypt. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They said, An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds, and moreover he drew water for us, and watered the flock-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses flees to Midian, where he helps some unknown shepherd women from being abused by some rough men; he did this without at first receiving any reward, and without the women wanting him to go with them; although they thought he was an Egyptian, showing that he still concealed his relationship with God. See on <em><a href='B:500 4:7-10'>Joh 4:7-10</a></em>. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The whole nature of being human means that we must live in&nbsp; this world, although we are not of it. Consider how Daniel’s friends wore turbans (<em><a href='B:340 3:21'>Dan 3:21</a></em> NIV), how Moses appeared externally to be an Egyptian (<em><a href='B:20 2:19'>Exo 2:19</a></em>), and how the Lord Himself had strongly Jewish characteristics (<em><a href='B:500 4:9'>Joh 4:9</a></em>). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel rejected Moses as their deliverer, they failed to see in that dead Egyptian the ability of Moses to save them completely from the life of slavery. And so Moses fled away from them, he came to Gentile, pagan Midian, and rescued a Gentile woman from the persecution of men, married her, and started a new life in the wilderness- to return many years later in the power of&nbsp; the Holy Spirit and redeem Israel when they were in truly desperate straits. All this naturally points ahead to the work of Jesus after Israel failed to respond to his work on the cross. The word used to describe Moses rescuing his future wife from the shepherds is the same used concerning God rescuing Israel from Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 2:19'>Exo 2:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 18:10'>Exo 18:10</a></em>). Thus Moses was manifesting the redemptive work of God when he saved his wife. But the marriage broke up, as it did between God and Israel- but was apparently restored.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said to his daughters, Where is he? Why is it that you have left the man? Call him, that he may eat bread- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>To eat bread together was a sign of acceptance. The way the Lord Jesus broke His bread with sinners was likewise a message of open acceptance to any who wished to sit at His table. He did this, He explained, in order to win sinners to Him; eating His bread was not a sign that they had cleared some moral bar He had arbitrarily insisted upon. It is a strong argument for an open table amongst God's people today. All who wish are to be welcomed. &nbsp;<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses was content to dwell with the man. He gave Moses Zipporah, his daughter-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses "was content to dwell" with the father of the women. The Hebrew for "content" comes from a root which means weakness of mind; the implication is that he easily yielded to this man. She was not one of the covenant people; she was the daughter of a pagan priest (<em><a href='B:20 18:11'>Exo 18:11</a></em> implies Jethro thought Yahweh was only one of many gods); she did not circumcise their children. Should Moses have married her? The fact Moses did not bother circumcising his son shows he was not really serious about his relationship with God; God tried to kill him because of this. God tried to kill Moses because of this; this shows how serious this was in God's eyes. Zipporah was a Midianite, a descendant of Abraham through Keturah (<em><a href='B:10 25:1-6'>Gen 25:1-6</a></em>). Circumcision was a sign of the covenant through Isaac, hence the resentment and bitterness of Zipporah over the circumcision issue; and it seems Moses capitulated to her on this. Their marriage is sure proof that fundamental spiritual differences at the start can only lead to anger and break up later on.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>She bore a son, and he named him Gershom, for he said, I have lived as a foreigner in a foreign land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Positive self-talk will enable us to maintain our basic human dignity, as well as our faith and spiritual integrity, in the face of rejection, slander and breakup of human relationships. It’s all too easy to be negative. Moses said within himself “I am a foreigner in this land” – and his self-talk led to the very public ‘word’ of naming his son ‘Gershom’ (<em><a href='B:20 2:22'>Exo 2:22</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It happened in the course of those many days, that the king of Egypt died, and the children of Israel sighed because of the abuse, and they cried, and their cry came up to God because of the abuse- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The whole description of Egypt's judgments in Ezekiel 29 is also full of links with those in store for Israel. <em>They</em> will cry unto Yahweh in their affliction (<em><a href='B:290 19:20'>Isa 19:20</a></em>), just as Israel did when Egypt persecuted them (<em><a href='B:20 2:23'>Exo 2:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 14:10'>Exo 14:10</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>God heard their groaning, and God remembered His covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel at this time were worshipping Egypt's idols, and took the tabernacles of false gods with them through the Red Sea and the wilderness (<em><a href='B:330 20:8'>Eze 20:8</a></em> etc.). But the wonder of the covenant with Abraham, which is made with all those who are baptized into the seed of Abraham (<em><a href='B:550 3:27-29'>Gal 3:27-29</a></em>), is that it is the covenant of grace. God honours it even when those within it are unrighteous and undeserving. And He pities them in their afflictions, even if they are self-inflicted.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>God saw the children of Israel, and God was concerned about them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses manifested / represented both God and Israel, superbly prefiguring the nature of the Lord's work and mission far later. As God "saw" the oppression of Israel (<em><a href='B:20 2:25'>Exo 2:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:9'>Exo 3:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:31'>Exo 4:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 5:19'>Exo 5:19</a></em>), so did Moses (<em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em>). He looked on God's people with the eyes / perspective of God- just as we should. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now Moses was keeping the flock of Jethro, his father-in-law, the priest of Midian, and he led the flock to the back of the wilderness, and came to God’s mountain, to Horeb- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This was where he would later lead God's people, as a flock. Also for 40 years. It can be shown that much of Moses life, especially his Midian years, were lived in a spirit of semi-spirituality, aware of his responsibility to God, but being slack to rise up to what it really meant, being content, year after year, to live the life of a spiritual minimalist, ever making excuses for himself. Yet somehow God overruled this, as He did the fact that Moses sinned and was excluded from entering the land. The result was that Moses was able to enter exactly into the feelings of rejected, spiritually apathetic Israel in their 40 years wilderness wanderings. For 40 years he too had wandered in the same desert as a shepherd, with the same apathy. This points forward to how the Lord Jesus can enter into the feelings of active sinners, whilst himself being sinless.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses was a shepherd for 40 years, and then for 40 years he put this into practice by leading Israel as God's shepherd for 40 years in the same wilderness (<em><a href='B:40 27:17'>Num 27:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 80:1'>Psa 80:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 63:11'>Isa 63:11</a></em>). As Moses was willing to sacrifice his eternal life for the salvation of the sheep of Israel (<em><a href='B:20 32:30-32'>Exo 32:30-32</a></em>), so Christ gave his life for us. John's Gospel normally shows the supremacy of Christ over Moses. In this connection of them both being shepherds willing to die for the flock, Moses is not framed as being inferior to Christ- in that in his desire to die for Israel, he truly reached the fullness of the spirit of Christ. "The good shepherd" was a Rabbinical title for Moses; Christ was saying "I am Moses, in his love for your salvation; not better than him, but exactly like him in this". In a sense, Moses' prayer was heard, in that he was excluded from the land for their sakes (<em><a href='B:50 1:37'>Deu 1:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 3:26'>Deu 3:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:21'>Deu 4:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 106:33'>Psa 106:33</a></em>); they entered after his death. This was to symbolize how the spirit of his love for Israel was typical of Christ's for us. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The angel of Yahweh appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>LXX "bramble bush", representing the thorns and thistles brought forth as a result of human sin. And yet within that, the flame of fire of God's manifestation burned, and did not consume that frail, highly flammable, sin cursed bramble bush. It was all a message of how God would dwell within sinful people, and not consume them. Yahweh was likewise to dwell within Israel in the pillar of fire which never consumed them, despite their sins demanding this. This connects with how Moses' hand was made leprous (symbolic of sin), and how he used that hand to catch a snake (sin) by its tail.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said, I will turn aside now, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The spiritual growth of Moses was a jagged graph. In the bigger picture of Moses' life, it's clear that God was working with him according to a pattern. His 120 years of life fall into three distinct periods of 40 years. His 40 years as a shepherd in the wilderness were to prepare him for 40 years of shepherding God's people in the same wilderness. The burning bush was to prepare him for the awesome meeting with God in the burning mountain- note how the unusual Hebrew word used for "bush", <em>seneh</em>, echoes the name of the mountain, Sinai. Everything was used by God in His personal development plan for Moses. It was likely an acacia bush, the wood of which was to be used for the construction of the tabernacle, over which the fire of God's manifestation was to burn without consuming the sinful people. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Yahweh saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses! Moses! He said, Here I am-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The double repetition "Moses, Moses" may be some kind of rebuke. "I <em>have</em>" seen the affliction of Israel could suggest that Moses felt God was not sensitive to the pain of His children; he had been living for 40 years feeling forgotten by God . Moses "wondered" at what he saw and heard at the burning bush (<em><a href='B:510 7:31'>Act 7:31</a></em>)- a Greek word which is often used in a negative sense concerning people lacking faith and insight when they should have had it.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Here I am" was to be matched by Yahweh's declaration that "(Here) I am" (:6). We see here the mutuality intended between God and man. Yahweh's manifestation was apparently predicated upon Moses ' turning aside to see' (<em><a href='B:20 3:3-4'>Exo 3:3-4</a></em>). And the same phrase is used later when God says He will 'turn aside' His hand, so that Moses may 'see' something of Him (<em><a href='B:20 33:23'>Exo 33:23</a></em>). Here again we see the mutuality between God and Moses. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said, Don’t come close. Take your sandals off from your feet, for the place you are standing on is holy ground-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God appeared to Moses in the flame of fire in the bush, but Moses had to be told to take off his shoes as a sign of respect- even though taking off shoes was understood as a token of respect and recognition of sin (see <em><a href='B:100 15:30'>2Sa 15:30</a></em>). It sounds as if Moses did not appreciate the holiness of God, and ought to have done this without being asked. Stephen will develop the thought of how a thorn bush in the desert could be made "holy ground"; and therefore the idea that the temple alone was "holy ground" was patently false. We don't need any sacred space or religious structure in order to meet God on holy ground. "Holy ground" is the same phrase translated "holy land" in <em><a href='B:450 2:12'>Zec 2:12</a></em>. The land of promise included the desert where Moses was then standing; he was being reminded that he was not in fact in exile, but was within the land of promise. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moreover he said, I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:490 20:37'>Luk 20:37</a></em>. Moses is one of the greatest types of the Lord Jesus, in whom the Father was supremely manifested. Because of this, it is fitting that we should see a very high level of God manifestation in Moses. Indeed it seems that God was manifest in Moses to a greater degree than in any other Old Testament character. God is His word (<em><a href='B:500 1:2'>Joh 1:2</a></em>). Moses is likewise spoken of as if he is his word (<em><a href='B:510 15:21'>Act 15:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 21:21'>Act 21:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:22'>Act 26:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 3:18'>2Co 3:18</a></em>), so close was his association with it. The words and commands of Moses were those of God. “In the bush God spoke unto (Moses), saying, I am the God of Abraham... Isaac and Jacob” (<em><a href='B:480 12:26'>Mar 12:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 22:31'>Mat 22:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:6'>Exo 3:6</a></em>). Yet <em><a href='B:490 20:37'>Luk 20:37</a></em> says that “that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham” etc. Yet this was what God said of Himself.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look at God-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Clearly the Angel in the bush (<em><a href='B:510 7:30'>Act 7:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:35'>Act 7:35</a></em>) was functioning as God Himself to Moses, just as the Lord Jesus can function as God without being God. And just as Moses was to be made as God to Pharaoh (<em><a href='B:20 9:1'>Exo 9:1</a></em>). We note Moses' spiritual growth; for later he wanted to see God's face.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said, I have surely seen the affliction of My people who are in Egypt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters, for I know their sorrows-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God looked on the sorrows of His people through the sensitivity of Moses, He saw and knew their struggles, their sense of being trapped, their desire to revive spiritually but their being tied down by the painful business of life and living; and He sent Moses to deliver them from this. But these very words are quoted about our deliverance through the 'coming down'&nbsp;of the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:31'>Exo 4:31</a></em> = <em><a href='B:490 1:68'>Luk 1:68</a></em>).&nbsp;Our heart can touch the heart of God. It's a priceless wonder to know and experience this. God saw Israel's depressed <em>minds</em> in Egypt and was moved to 'come down' to them in response (<em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em> - the word translated "affliction" is rendered by Strong as 'depression').<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Our guardian Angels are emotional beings, capable of changing their plans in accordance with how moved they are by our prayers, and to an extent they fellowship the sufferings they bring upon us- so the Angel in the burning bush could tell Moses "I have seen the affliction of My people (for whom I am guardian)... and have heard their cry... for I know their sorrows: and I am come down to deliver them. . and to bring them up out of that land (again, the work of the Angel)" (<em><a href='B:20 3:7-8'>Exo 3:7-8</a></em>). The purpose of God in Christ is to "bring together in one all things, which are in Heaven (Angels) and which are on earth (us their charges )", and in the day of judgement we will perhaps be united in some special spiritual sense to our Angel who has redeemed us through this life.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land to a good and large land, to a land flowing with milk and honey; to the place of the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We know an Angel was physically sent in advance of the Israelites to drive out those tribes, and so the phrase "I am come down" used by the same Angel here may therefore be taken literally- He literally, physically "came down". Although this phrase "came down" is often used to describe God manifestation, it may be that when it is used in connection with the Angels, it does have a physical, literal application. It seems that great stress is placed in Scripture on the Angels physically moving through space, both on the earth and between Heaven and earth, in order to fulfil their tasks, rather than being static in Heaven or earth and bringing things about by just willing them to happen. See on <em><a href='B:10 18:10'>Gen 18:10</a></em>. We note that "bring them up out of" Egypt to Canaan was also literally true, in that Canaan is far higher than Egypt (this is stressed- <em><a href='B:10 12:10'>Gen 12:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 13:1'>Gen 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 37:25'>Gen 37:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 39:1'>Gen 39:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 42:2'>Gen 42:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 46:3-4'>Gen 46:3-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 50:25'>Gen 50:25</a></em>). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The promised land was only 'larger' than Egypt if we accept that it was God's intention to give Israel the entire land promised to Abraham, from the Nile to the Euphrates. But in reality they lacked the faith to inherit it, and so He was willing to work with them to give them the area from around the Jordan to the Mediterranean. And they didn't even possess all that. See on :17.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now, behold, the cry of the children of Israel has come to Me. Moreover I have seen the oppression with which the Egyptians oppress them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses manifested / represented both God and Israel, superbly prefiguring the nature of the Lord's work and mission far later. As God "saw" the oppression of Israel (<em><a href='B:20 2:25'>Exo 2:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:9'>Exo 3:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:31'>Exo 4:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 5:19'>Exo 5:19</a></em>), so did Moses (<em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em>). He looked on God's people with the eyes / perspective of God- just as we should.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Come now therefore, and I will send you to Pharaoh, that you may bring My people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Isaiah realized his unworthiness: "Woe is me! For I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips". He felt he was going to be condemned. But then out of the same vision, the Angel comforted him: "Thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged". And then immediately he offered to go on a preaching mission to Israel, motivated by his own experience of forgiveness and with therefore an appropriate humility: "Here am I, send me" (<em><a href='B:290 6:5-8'>Isa 6:5-8</a></em>). This incident is full of allusion to the sending of an equally hesitant Moses. As God appears in the burning bush, so God appears to Isaiah among the seraphim, the burning ones. Moses is reluctant to bear God’s word because “I am a man of uncircumcised lips”, and Isaiah felt the same. Whom shall I send… who will go? (<em><a href='B:20 3:8-9'>Exo 3:8-9</a></em>) is matched by <em><a href='B:290 6:8-9'>Isa 6:8-9</a></em>. The willingness of Moses to go (<em><a href='B:20 3:4'>Exo 3:4</a></em>) is that of Isaiah. And it is to be our pattern, going forth in witness firstly convicted of our own utter unworthiness.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said to God, Who am I, that I should go to Pharaoh, and that I should bring the children of Israel out of Egypt?-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 4:10'>Exo 4:10</a></em>. Through Moses allowing himself to become part of God manifestation, he found a confidence to achieve that which felt impossible to him. He asks God: "Who am I...?" to do the great things God required... and the answer was "<em>I</em> will be who <em>I </em>will be" (<em><a href='B:20 3:11-13'>Exo 3:11-13</a></em>). Moses' sense of inadequacy was met by the principle of God's manifestation in him; and so will ours be, if we participate in it. "Who am I?" is answered by "I am...". <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The more we enter into the depths of the Name, the more we will seek the Father; and in this sense, the Name is an endless inspiration to know the Father better and better, closer and closer, world without end. The whole declaration of God's Name to Moses is actually part of a mutuality between God and Moses. Moses has just commented: "Who am I to bring Israel out?" (<em><a href='B:20 3:11'>Exo 3:11</a></em>). And God alludes to this in His answer, for His declaration of His Name hinges around the idea of "Who am I? I am...". The implication of the Name seems to be "I will be who I am / I am who I will be"- i.e. 'I will be God for you'. Surely the idea of the Name being declared in this way was to assure a doubting, depressed Moses that God will be God, will be true to Himself, and therefore will be God for us in all aspects, all places, situations. This is what the Name is really all about- assurance. For that was the context in which God declared it to Moses, as part of a relationship with that man<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said, Certainly I will be with you. This will be the token to you, that I have sent you: when you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God on this mountain-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:70 6:12'>Jdg 6:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 6:16'>Jdg 6:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:8'>Deu 31:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:4'>Exo 4:4</a></em>. It even seems that Moses had forgotten the significance of God's Name, even though it had been revealed to Abraham (<em><a href='B:20 3:13'>Exo 3:13</a></em>). Moses' fear to look upon God suggests a bad conscience.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Note that the promise of Moses that God would not fail nor forsake Joshua, but would be with him (<em><a href='B:50 31:8'>Deu 31:8</a></em>) was similar to the very promise given to Moses which he had earlier doubted (<em><a href='B:20 3:12'>Exo 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:12'>Exo 4:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:15'>Exo 4:15</a></em>). Such exhortation is so much the stronger from someone who has themselves doubted and then come to believe. Joshua was encouraged that "As I was with Moses, so I will be with you: I will not fail you, nor forsake you" (<em><a href='B:60 1:5'>Jos 1:5</a></em>). But these very words are quoted in <em><a href='B:650 13:5'>Heb 13:5</a></em> as the grounds of our matchless confidence that the Lord God will be with us too! As He was with Moses- not just in power, but in wondrous patience and gentleness- so He will be with us too. Not only did God encourage Joshua to see himself as in Moses' shoes; He inspired Jeremiah likewise (<em><a href='B:300 21:8'>Jer 21:8</a></em> = <em><a href='B:50 30:15'>Deu 30:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:19'>Deu 30:19</a></em>), and Ezekiel (<em><a href='B:330 2:3'>Eze 2:3</a></em> = <em><a href='B:50 31:27'>Deu 31:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:160 9:17'>Neh 9:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 17:10'>Num 17:10</a></em>); and He wishes us to also see Moses' God as our God. But if Moses' God is to be ours in truth in the daily round of life, we must rise up to the dedication of Moses; as he was a faithful steward, thoroughly dedicated to God's ecclesia (<em><a href='B:650 3:5'>Heb 3:5</a></em>), so we are invited follow his example (<em><a href='B:530 4:2'>1Co 4:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:45'>Mat 24:45</a></em>). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Gideon was bidden rise up to the example of Moses- for there were many similarities between his call by the Angel, and the Angelic calling which Moses received at the burning bush. Thus Gideon was called to follow the Angel in faith, "because Ehyeh is with you" (<em><a href='B:70 6:16'>Jdg 6:16</a></em>)- a direct quotation from the Angelic manifestation to Moses in <em><a href='B:20 3:12'>Exo 3:12</a></em>, "I will be (<em>ehyeh</em>) with you"<em>.</em> And yet he responds: "Alas! For I have seen Yahweh's envoy face to face!" (<em><a href='B:70 6:22'>Jdg 6:22</a></em>). Gideon knew full well that Moses had seen the Angel "face to face" (<em><a href='B:50 34:10'>Deu 34:10</a></em>). Gideon's fear is therefore rooted in a sense that "No! I'm simply <em>not</em> Moses!". And it's the same with us. We can read of all these reasons to believe that Moses is really our pattern, and respond that "No! This ain't me...". But there, in the record of Gideon and his success, lies our challenge to rise up to the spirit of Moses.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said to God, Behold, when I come to the children of Israel, and tell them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you;’ and they ask me, ‘What is His name?’ What should I tell them?-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>To the Semitic peoples, a name stands for the essential identity of a person; to know their name gives access to the power and authority which they have. This is why Moses is so urgent to know God's Name (<em><a href='B:20 3:13-14'>Exo 3:13-14</a></em>). Insofar as we grasp and absorb into ourselves the principles of that Name, we likewise will be empowered by the Father. The Name of God is essentially an epitome of who God is. God declared His Name to Moses when He declared His attributes to Him. This means that all that God is, we must be. Our attitudes to God are therefore related to our views about God. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>God said to Moses, I AM WHO I AM; and He said, You shall tell the children of Israel this: ‘I AM has sent me to you’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord Jesus in John’s Gospel describes Himself in terms of the “I am…” formula, alluding to the Name He carried. Each time, He was referring back to the burning bush revelation of Yahweh as the “I am”; and by implication, the Lord’s audience are thereby placed in the position of Moses, intended to rise up in response as he did.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Name speaks of the Father's desire to respond to His children. The root word <em>ehyeh</em> from which 'Yahweh' is derived occurs 50 times, mainly in the context of God's help and comfort in real situations. This is the practical nature of the things expressed in the Name. The repeated references to God’s Name in Exodus 3, 6 had a very practical context. Israel needed to summon all their faith to believe that actually, they were not in a hopeless situation there in the concentration camps of Egypt. Even when they were given no straw and told to make the same number of bricks, the comfort they are given is to remember the <em>Name</em> of their God, who had acted according to that Name in the past, and would do so in the future for them- because He is and will be who He has been. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Whenever God speaks about His Name, it is in the context of His emphasizing His huge commitment to Israel as His people, often in the face of their weakness (<em><a href='B:20 12:12'>Exo 12:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:26'>Exo 15:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 20:2'>Exo 20:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 20:5-6'>Eze 20:5-6</a></em>). The very meaning of God's Name is of itself encouraging- although it is somewhat masked in English translations. God 'is' not just in the sense that He exists, but in that He 'is' there with and for us. Von Rad puts this in more theological language when commenting upon <em><a href='B:20 3:14'>Exo 3:14</a></em>: "It is to be understand in the sense of 'being present', 'being there' and therefore precisely not in the sense of absolute, but of relative and efficacious, being- I will be there (for you)". The verb behind 'YHWH' was "originally causative", i.e. God not only 'is' but He causes things to happen. We aren't to understand Him as passive, just a stone cold Name... but rather passionately active and causative in our sometimes apparently static and repetitive lives.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>God said moreover to Moses, You shall tell the children of Israel this, ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you’. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea is that God didn't have a new Name. He was going to act according to the principles of His Name as He had acted with their fathers. Nothing had changed; and He had always been a God of salvation by grace. This was to continue; 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 (<em><a href='B:230 111:4'>Psa 111:4</a></em>, s.w. "My memorial"). By contrast, the sinful works and persons of the wicked would not be remembered / memorialized, be they Amalek (s.w. <em><a href='B:20 17:14'>Exo 17:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 25:19'>Deu 25:19</a></em>), or God's apostate people (s.w. <em><a href='B:50 32:26'>Deu 32:26</a></em>).&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and tell them, ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, has appeared to me, saying, I have surely visited you, and seen that which is done to you in Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The pronouns stress how despite Moses' separation from His people over the last 80 years, he self identified as a Hebrew and God accepted that. Yahweh appeared "to <em>me</em>", with the new that He had "visited <em>you</em>", and was aware what had been "done to <em>you</em>". Moses indeed had felt for his own people there and identified with them, and God recognized that. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The ultimate visitation of Yahweh was in His plan to save His people eternally through the Lord Jesus, the greater than Moses (<em><a href='B:490 1:68'>Luk 1:68</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 7:16'>Luk 7:16</a></em>). And we too are to look out of ourselves and visit the fatherless and widows (<em><a href='B:660 1:27'>Jas 1:27</a></em>), which is how Israel in Egypt are described in <em><a href='B:230 68:5'>Psa 68:5</a></em>.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and I have said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite, to a land flowing with milk and honey’-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note that only six nations are mentioned as living in the land, in contrast to the ten nations listed when the land was first promised (<em><a href='B:10 15:18-21'>Gen 15:18-21</a></em>). It was as if God had already started to scale back the extent of His potential operations with Israel and His grace toward them, foreseeing they would not be able to cope with it all at one time. See on :8.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They will listen to your voice- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>And yet there were various levels of possible obedience. Thus if the people don't believe the first sign, they may believe the second; if they don't believe either of them then there will be a third sign (<em><a href='B:20 4:8-9'>Exo 4:8-9</a></em>). Yet God states in <em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em> that the people will listen; and yet <em><a href='B:20 4:8-9'>Exo 4:8-9</a></em> accepts the possibility that they may not. In this we see not only the essential hopefulness of God for human response to Him, but His willingness to go along with our continued weakness and blindness in an open-ended manner. There is, therefore, the possibility of living before God on different levels. See on <em><a href='B:20 4:1'>Exo 4:1</a></em>.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And you shall come, you and the elders of Israel, to the king of Egypt, and you shall tell him, ‘Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, has met with us. Now please let us go three days’ journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to Yahweh our God’-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 6:12'>Exo 6:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:14-16'>Exo 33:14-16</a></em>. God had explained to Moses what He wished him to tell Pharaoh: "Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, hath met with us: and now let us go, we pray thee, three days journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to Yahweh our God" (<em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>). But Moses actually doesn't say those exact words. Instead he says: "Thus saith Yahweh, the God of Israel, Let my people go, that they may hold a feast unto me in the wilderness... The God of the Hebrews hath met with us: let us go, we pray thee, three days' journey into the wilderness, and sacrifice unto Yahweh our God, lest he fall upon us with pestilence, or with the sword" (<em><a href='B:20 5:1'>Exo 5:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 5:3'>Exo 5:3</a></em>). This seems perilously similar to the way in which Eve added to Yahweh's words when telling the serpent that actually, God had told Adam not to <em>even touch</em> the fruit. Moses appears to be painting Yahweh as somewhat draconian and threatening of him personally as well as Israel- as if to say 'Well sir, please do us this favour, or else our God is gonna get mad with us'. Perhaps this was actually how Moses misperceived Yahweh; or perhaps he added to Yahweh's words in order to make his appeal sound more plausible.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Thus we can as it were do the work of the Saviour Himself, if we truly live as in Him. In this spirit, <em>Moses’</em> faith in keeping the Passover led to <em>Israel’s </em>salvation, they left Egypt <em>by </em>him (<em><a href='B:650 3:16'>Heb 3:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:28'>Heb 11:28</a></em>); and when Aaron deserved death, he was redeemed by Moses’ prayer on his behalf (<em><a href='B:50 9:20'>Deu 9:20</a></em>)<em>. </em>Moses’ prayer, with uplifted hands, resulted in Israel’s victory over Amalek; without his prayer, and the intensity of it, there would have been no victory for them. However, he had to learn this lesson; for God first of all taught him that if he explained the power of God’s Name to Israel’s elders, then they would hearken unto him (<em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>). But they didn’t hearken unto Moses (5:20), because he didn’t bother expounding the Name to them. Therefore he did explain it to them (6:1-9 = 3:14-17); but then again they refused to hearken to him (6:9 cp. 3:18). He learnt that what was proclaimed by God as possible all the same depends on human effort. And this lead him on even further, to realize that through his spirituality, he could bring salvation for others.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The concepts of being God manifest and also being representative of a sinful Israel come together in Moses in a wonderful way. <em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em> is an example of this. The elders of Israel were to tell Pharaoh that "the Lord God of the Hebrews has met with us". Yet Yahweh God of Israel had only met with Moses. Yet because he was representative of Israel and also because he himself manifested Yahweh God of Israel, the elders had met Yahweh when they met Moses. In this we see a superb prefigurement of the Lord Jesus. He was the supreme, faultless manifestation of God, and yet also the total, empathetic representative of sinful man.&nbsp;<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I know that the king of Egypt won’t give you permission to go, no, not by a mighty hand- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>And yet Pharaoh had the real possibility to let the people go, and therefore <em><a href='B:20 4:23'>Exo 4:23</a></em> NRSV implies that God only therefore went ahead with the plan to kill Pharaoh's firstborn. The "mighty hand" speaks of God's huge efforts to save Pharaoh by persuading him to submit to Yahweh. God did bring them out "by a mighty hand" (<em><a href='B:20 6:1'>Exo 6:1</a></em> s.w.), so the sense may be that it would require a "mighty hand" to bring them out, because the king of Egypt would not allow them to.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will reach out My hand and strike Egypt with all My wonders which I will do in its midst, and after that he will let you go-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses "supposed his brethren would have understood how that God <em>by his hand</em> would deliver them" (<em><a href='B:510 7:25'>Act 7:25</a></em>); but God told Moses that "I will stretch out <em>my hand</em>, and smite Egypt...". Moses only slowly learned the meaning of God manifestation through men. The hand of Moses was to be that of God. But he doubted that. Hence he was given signs relating to his physical hand; it became leprous, and he used it to catch the snake which his rod had turned into. Both leprosy and snakes are associated with sin. So God is teaching him that despite his weakness, He was still able and willing to work with Him.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses was “sent forth” by God to do the work (<em><a href='B:20 3:12'>Exo 3:12</a></em> and frequently); yet the same Hebrew word is used to describe how God ‘sent out’ (“stretched forth”) the hand of God to do it (<em><a href='B:20 3:20'>Exo 3:20</a></em>). And Moses was taught this by being told to ‘stretch out’ (same Hebrew word) <em>his</em> hand (<em><a href='B:20 4:4'>Exo 4:4</a></em>).&nbsp; But Moses, for some moments at least, just didn’t want to do this. Hence God's anger when Moses comments: “Send (the same word translated “let go” or “put forth” used about Moses being asked to “put forth” &nbsp;his hand in <em><a href='B:20 4:4'>Exo 4:4</a></em>) by the hand of him whom thou wilt send” (<em><a href='B:20 4:13'>Exo 4:13</a></em>). It was Moses’ hand that God had asked to be ‘put forth’ or ‘sent’. But Moses refuses to play a part in God manifestation. He wanted God to send forth another hand, the hand of God personally perhaps; although God had asked him to put forth <em>his</em> hand. We too tend to assume that God cannot manifest Himself through <em>us</em>; but we all tend to assume someone else will do the job, when it is <em>we</em> who are called to it.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will give this people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, and it will happen that when you go, you shall not go empty-handed- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Egyptians came to fear the Israelites at the end (<em><a href='B:20 11:3'>Exo 11:3</a></em>), and therefore wished themselves to give them their wealth in the hope that this would as it were buy off the threat of death. For after the death of the firstborn, they feared that the rest of them would be slain next. The same word for "empty-handed" is used of how Jacob likewise did not return to his land from his slavery "empty-handed" but wealthy (<em><a href='B:10 31:42'>Gen 31:42</a></em>). Constantly they were bidden see how they were being dealt with as their God had previously treated their fathers. And they were to remember this by not sending any slave away from them "empty-handed" (s.w. <em><a href='B:50 15:13'>Deu 15:13</a></em>). Always they were to live life under the deep impression of how they had been redeemed themselves, and were to reflect that grace to others in every context and situation of their lives. And the new Israel likewise.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But every woman shall ask of her neighbour, and of her who visits her house, jewels of silver, jewels of gold, and clothing; and you shall put them on your sons, and on your daughters. You shall plunder the Egyptians- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We may well ask whether this is commandment or prophecy. It is both, in that so much prophecy is conditional prophecy, dependent upon human obedience to actualize it. The idea was that they would march toward their new land dressed up in the finest clothing and jewellery. And it was this which they were to then give for the work of the tabernacle (<em><a href='B:20 35:22'>Exo 35:22</a></em>).<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses answered, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor listen to my voice; for they will say, ‘Yahweh has not appeared to you’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This was a bald faced denial of the truth of God's statement in <em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em> that "They will listen to your voice". Moses' insistence that he doesn't want to partner with God is extreme, as is his disbelief. But God held on to him, and worked through him. This is the amazing encouragement from any reflection upon the life of Moses. Apart from a few flashes of devotion, it seems Moses only really came to a mature faith and commitment in the last part of his very long life.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to him, What is that in your hand? He said, A rod- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses "supposed his brethren would have understood how that God <em>by his hand</em> would deliver them" (<em><a href='B:510 7:25'>Act 7:25</a></em>); but God told Moses that "I will stretch out <em>my hand</em>, and smite Egypt..." (<em><a href='B:20 3:20'>Exo 3:20</a></em>). Moses only slowly learned the meaning of God manifestation through men. The hand of Moses was to be that of God. But he doubted that. Hence he was given signs relating to his physical hand; it became leprous, and he used it to catch the snake which his rod had turned into. Both leprosy and snakes are associated with sin. So God is teaching him that despite his weakness, He was still able and willing to work with Him.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said, Throw it on the ground. He threw it on the ground, and it became a snake; and Moses ran away from it- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Ran away" is the usual Hebrew word used for fleeing before enemies. Moses was where he was because he had fled from Pharaoh, with his snake / serpent head dress (<em><a href='B:20 2:15'>Exo 2:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:29'>Act 7:29</a></em>). He was being taught that he need not have done that. Whilst his reaction had been instinctive and natural, he was to do the counter instinctive, in faith- believing that his hand was God's hand. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Stretch out your hand, and take it by the tail. He stretched out his hand, and took hold of it, and it became a rod in his hand-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses is told to “stretch / put forth” his hand. It is the same word repeatedly translated “let go” in the context of God telling Pharaoh to let Israel go (e.g. <em><a href='B:20 4:23'>Exo 4:23</a></em>). “Caught” is the same Hebrew word frequently translated “harden” in the context of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart (e.g. <em><a href='B:20 4:21'>Exo 4:21</a></em>). As the snake hardened in Moses’ hand into a rod, so this was how God would deal with Pharaoh through Moses. Thus God is showing Moses that what Moses will do with <em>his</em> hand to the snake- a symbol of Egypt- so the hand of God will do, working through Moses’ hand. Thus Moses’ rod (s.w. <em><a href='B:20 4:2'>Exo 4:2</a></em>, about his shepherd’s crook) was a symbol of Egypt and Pharaoh. But the throwing down of the shepherd’s rod surely also indicated that Moses was to cast down the shepherd’s life he had been living, and let God’s hand take hold of him, so that his hand became the hand of God. Moses would thus have perceived some sort of parallel between himself and Pharaoh; God was working in both their lives, and it would take as much courage to grab hold of his own serpent-like life, as it would to do battle with Egypt. <em><a href='B:20 4:23-24'>Exo 4:23-24</a></em> brings out the parallel between how God told Moses that He would slay the firstborn of Pharaoh; and then seeks to slay Moses and <em>his</em> firstborn. And we can see lessons for ourselves here, surely. We throw down our worldly lives, take hold of them in faith, and they are transformed into the rod of God through which He will work wonders. Moses had to perceive the serpent-like aspects of his life and grip them; just as the parallel second sign involved his hand becoming leprous, with all its associations with sin, and then being healed and made strong to be used as the hand of God. What all this shows is that God manifestation, our hand becoming the hand of God, God working through us to deliver His people, is predicated upon our own realization of sinfulness, and grasping it firmly. Ultimately, the hand of Yahweh was revealed through the hand of Moses. Moses was “sent forth” by God to do the work (<em><a href='B:20 3:12'>Exo 3:12</a></em> and frequently); yet the same Hebrew word is used to describe how God ‘sent out’ (“stretched forth”) the hand of God to do it (<em><a href='B:20 3:20'>Exo 3:20</a></em>). And Moses was taught this by being told to ‘stretch out’ (same Hebrew word) <em>his</em> hand (<em><a href='B:20 4:4'>Exo 4:4</a></em>).&nbsp; But Moses, for some moments at least, just didn’t want to do this. Hence God's anger when Moses comments: “Send (the same word translated “let go” or “put forth” used about Moses being asked to “put forth” &nbsp;his hand in <em><a href='B:20 4:4'>Exo 4:4</a></em>) by the hand of him whom thou wilt send” (<em><a href='B:20 4:13'>Exo 4:13</a></em>). It was Moses’ hand that God had asked to be ‘put forth’ or ‘sent’. But Moses refuses to play a part in God manifestation. He wanted God to send forth another hand, the hand of God personally perhaps; although God had asked him to put forth <em>his</em> hand. We too tend to assume that God cannot manifest Himself through <em>us</em>; but we all tend to assume someone else will do the job, when it is <em>we</em> who are called to it. The rabbis hold that Moses is not being weak here, rather he is referring to the Messiah- the hand whom Moses knew God would one day send forth to save His people. He would then be saying: ‘No, I don’t want to do this, let the Christ do it’. The same thought is maybe found in <em><a href='B:20 5:22'>Exo 5:22</a></em>, when Moses asks Yahweh: “Why is it that thou hast sent (s.w. “put forth” and “let go”) <em>me</em>?”- i.e., why don’t You use Messiah, the man of Your right hand? And this, subconsciously and unexpressed, is so often our view; He must do it, not me. I’m just a shepherd, God ought to leave me alone in the comfortable monotony of my working life. But He has called us to greater things, to realize as Moses finally did that <em>we</em>, you and me, are the ones through whom God truly will work in this world. The rod of Moses (“<em>thy</em> rod”) became the rod of God (<em><a href='B:20 4:20'>Exo 4:20</a></em>); the shepherd’s crook, the symbol of an obscure workaday life, became transformed to the rod and arm of God Almighty. &nbsp; There can be no doubt from all this that God was intensely manifest in Moses. The hand of God was manifested through the hand of Moses. Moses had many deep seated spiritual weakness, and also many traits which were not appropriate to leadership, and yet because of his willingness to participate in God’s desire to be manifest through him, he was able to be changed and used by God. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>That they may believe that Yahweh, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has appeared to you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"They <em>may</em> believe" shows the conditional nature of all this. For the people didn't immediately believe Moses nor these signs. The whole narrative of the Divine- human encounter is about potentials being offered to me, which are often not perceived or realized.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said furthermore to him, Now put your hand inside your cloak. He put his hand inside his cloak, and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous, as white as snow- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Leprosy was a symbol of sin. Moses was being again shown that human sin and weakness was not going to stop God's purpose going forward. And we note that his sister Miriam was smitten suddenly with leprosy and quickly healed of it (<em><a href='B:40 12:10'>Num 12:10</a></em>). Moses would have been able to see her leprosy with the eye of faith, remembering his own experience; and Miriam likewise would have been encouraged by Moses' experience to believe that the affliction could quickly be healed. If she perceived the similarities between herself and her brother. And we likewise can take encouragement from others' experiences, insofar as we are thoughtful about life. And if we are familiar with the Biblical records and biographies of the lives of God's previous servants. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said, Put your hand inside your cloak again. He put his hand inside his cloak again, and when he took it out of his cloak, behold, it had turned again as his other flesh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The hand of Moses was to be the hand of Yahweh (see on <em><a href='B:20 4:4'>Exo 4:4</a></em>). But like all of us, Moses sensed his moral inadequacy. And so God was showing him that He indeed recognized that Moses was indeed but sinful flesh; but He could deal with that, in a moment. Although it depended upon Moses' obedience to God's plan and the simple command to use his hand as God told him. The same lesson is for us to learn. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It will happen, if they will neither believe you nor listen to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Father is ever seeking for some positive response, and is highly sensitive to it. The God who knows the end from the beginning gives the impression that He is sure they will believe- even though they didn’t. He is so seeking for faith in His creatures (cp. “surely they will reverence My son”, <em><a href='B:470 21:37'>Mat 21:37</a></em>, and <em><a href='B:20 19:21'>Exo 19:21</a></em> cp. 20:18). In this, Isaiah says, He shows His matchless grace: “For he said, Surely they are my people, children that will not lie: <em>so</em> (therefore) he was their Saviour… but they rebelled, and vexed his holy (gracious) spirit” (<em><a href='B:290 63:8'>Isa 63:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 63:10'>Isa 63:10</a></em>). Our tendency is to notice the negative in others, and let it outweigh the positive. God works quite the other way. He hopes for positive response, and even speaks as if He will get it when He knows He won’t. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It will happen, if they will not believe even these two signs, neither listen to your voice, that you shall take of the water of the river, and pour it on the dry land. The water which you take out of the river will become blood on the dry land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on :8. The Egyptians perhaps more than any believed in the waters, especially of the Nile, as the source of good and evil. And the Israelites were worshipping the gods of Egypt, so they too needed to see the gods of Egypt revealed as mythical and powerless before Yahweh. God powerfully deconstructed their ideas about the Nile by enabling Moses to turn those waters into blood – i.e. to effectively slay whatever deity was supposed to live in the Nile, and then to revert the water to how it had been. This was surely to demonstrate that whatever deities were associated with “the waters”, Yahweh was greater, and could slay and revive them at perfect ease. Later Scripture identified the Egyptians and not the sea itself as "Rahab... the dragon" (<em><a href='B:290 51:9'>Isa 51:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 89:9-10'>Psa 89:9-10</a></em>)- whereas the common view was that the sea itself was the Satan figure. Moses' stress was that the real adversaries / satans to Israel were people, and not some mythical dragon figure. Even if such a figure existed, then Yahweh had destroyed him at the Red Sea, in that He clearly could manipulate the Sea at His whim. The conflict was between Israel and Egypt, God and Pharaoh- and not God and some dragon in the Sea. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said to Yahweh, O Lord, I am not eloquent, neither before now, nor since You have spoken to Your servant; for I am slow of speech, and of a stammering tongue-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is how Moses felt he would be perceived, although actually he was previously quite fluent when in the court of Pharaoh (<em><a href='B:510 7:22'>Act 7:22</a></em>). Paul would have remembered Stephen saying how Moses was formerly full of worldly wisdom and "mighty in words". Paul felt that he too had been through Moses' experience- once mighty in words as the rising star of the Jewish world, but now like Moses he had left all that behind in order to try to save a new Israel from Judaism and paganism. As Moses consciously rejected the opportunity for leading the 'world' of Egypt, so Paul probably turned down the chance to be High Priest. God maybe confirmed both him and Moses in their desire for humility by giving them a speech impediment (perhaps part of the "thorn in the flesh" which Paul was "given", <em><a href='B:540 12:7'>2Co 12:7</a></em>). Thus Moses no longer had the eloquence he once had. Paul clearly alludes to Moses in this in his self descriptions: "His letters, say they (Paul's detractors in the new Israel) are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible... though I be rude in speech... Christ sent me... to preach the Gospel: not with wisdom of words (mg. speech)" (<em><a href='B:540 10:10'>2Co 10:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 11:6'>2Co 11:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 1:17'>1Co 1:17</a></em>). Paul says he was "taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers" by Gamaliel, receiving the highest wisdom possible in the Jewish world; but he uses the same word as Stephen in <em><a href='B:510 7:22'>Act 7:22</a></em>, describing how Moses was "learned" in all the wisdom of Egypt.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Stammering tongue" could refer to a literal stammer, in which case we marvel at how so many of God's words to His people were spoken through a mouth and tongue which stuttered. Truly God's strength is made perfect in weakness. But the term can refer to speaking with a heavy accent or in another language (<em><a href='B:330 3:5-6'>Eze 3:5-6</a></em>). Moses might be arguing that he had forgotten Egyptian and Hebrew, as he had been speaking in the language of the Bedouin for the last 40 years. For "not eloquent", LXX has 'weak voiced', and again we marvel that a man who did so much public speaking of God's word had a weak voice. And yet he was "powerful in speech" (<em><a href='B:510 7:22'>Act 7:22</a></em>). Exactly because he had a stutter and was weak voiced, God made him a powerful speaker through his message, rather than his presentation. And yet this could also be an excuse from Moses. "I am not eloquent, neither before now, nor since You have spoken to Your servant" seems to be saying that Moses considered he had never been eloquent. This is in contradiction with <em><a href='B:510 7:22'>Act 7:22</a></em>, and would therefore appear to be him making desperate excuses for refusing God's call.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Both Moses and Jeremiah reacted to their preaching commissions by saying that they weren’t the right person to do it. Moses wasn’t an eloquent speaker, nor (so he said) did he know Egyptian very well any more. His comment was: “Who am I...?” (<em><a href='B:20 3:11'>Exo 3:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:10'>Exo 4:10</a></em>). Jeremiah protested that he was simply far too young (<em><a href='B:300 1:6'>Jer 1:6</a></em>). But as Peter spoke <em>a-grammatos</em>, without grammar to an educated, erudite audience (<em><a href='B:510 4:13'>Act 4:13</a></em> Gk.), so did these men. And this was just the attitude of mind which God wanted to use as His mouthpiece. If you feel your inadequacy, then this is just when you are ready for God’s use. It’s the young sister who still fumbles for where books are in her Bible who is more likely to be the Lord’s agent for conversion, than the well versed and over-confident brother giving a Christian talk.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to him, Who made man’s mouth? Or who makes one mute, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Isn’t it I, Yahweh?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses felt so humanly inadequate, not strong enough for the task before him- and he was encouraged by God to find courage from the simple fact that God had created Moses' mouth and senses- and therefore God was able to strengthen them for what He needed to be done. The fact God created us should encourage us to feel adequate for the tasks He gives us. We note that incapacity and sickness ultimately is from God and not a personal Satan. "<em>The Lord</em> will bring upon you all the diseases of Egypt" (<em><a href='B:50 28:60'>Deu 28:60</a></em>); "an evil spirit <em>from the Lord</em> troubled (Saul)" (<em><a href='B:90 16:14'>1Sa 16:14</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now therefore go, and I will be with your mouth, and teach you what you shall speak-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:50 31:8'>Deu 31:8</a></em>. This is almost quoted in <em><a href='B:470 10:19-20'>Mat 10:19-20</a></em> and <em><a href='B:480 13:11'>Mar 13:11</a></em> concerning how we too will be taught what to say when we come before the rulers of our world. In such moments of crisis, Moses, even in weakness as he was at this time, really is our living example.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Because we're mere humans, we don't know what to ask of God as we should; and His very Name is the comfort that He will be for us as we need, with our eternal salvation in mind. God seemed to have encouraged Israel to understand this by going on to promise simply that "I shall be (<em>ehyeh</em>) present" (<em><a href='B:20 3:12'>Exo 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:12'>Exo 4:12</a></em>). He wanted them to trust that He knew best how to bring them to salvation; He didn't want them to invoke His Name in the primitive way the Egyptians did with their gods, hoping for a quick-fix miracle. God is only <em>ehyeh</em> for His people, not for others; and there came a terrible moment when He had to tell them through the prophets that "You are not my people and I am not <em>ehyeh</em> for you" (<em><a href='B:350 1:9'>Hos 1:9</a></em>). Israel lost this 'presence' of their God. And we know that we are His people by the constant sense we have of the hand of Providence in our lives, even through the unanswered prayers that reveal an altogether higher and ultimately Divine game plan in place in our lives. But like Israel before Moses, we wish for the quick fix, the waving of the wand to resolve the issues, the sense of the saving presence of God in our experiences, working out His ultimate plan of delivering us from Egypt / this world and from ourselves. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said, Oh, Lord, please send someone else- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Heb. "Send whom you will send". This appears a sarcastic allusion to Yahweh's Name, "I will be (and will do) who I will be (what I will do)". Yahweh has just alluded to His own Name as noted on :12. Moses sinks very low here. He has blasphemed the Name, hence the great anger of God against him in :14. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The anger of Yahweh was kindled against Moses- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>If God's wrath burns hot against people, it means death for them (s.w. <em><a href='B:20 22:24'>Exo 22:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 11:1'>Num 11:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 11:33'>Num 11:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 22:22'>Num 22:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 25:3'>Num 25:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 6:15'>Deu 6:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:17'>Deu 31:17</a></em>). But Moses averted this at the time of <em><a href='B:20 32:10'>Exo 32:10</a></em> by his intercession. He does so because God's wrath had burned hot against him personally (<em><a href='B:20 4:14'>Exo 4:14</a></em> s.w.), but he had been saved from death by grace. And so he reflects this in appealing for he salvation of others, against whom God's wrath burned hot (<em><a href='B:20 32:10-11'>Exo 32:10-11</a></em>). But Moses at the end of his life warns them not to make God's wrath burn hot against them again- because he will not be around to intercede for them (<em><a href='B:50 6:15'>Deu 6:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:4'>Deu 7:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:17'>Deu 11:17</a></em>).<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And He said, What about Aaron, your brother, the Levite? I know that he can speak well. Also, behold, he comes out to meet you. When he sees you, he will be glad in his heart-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"I will send you unto Pharaoh, that you may bring forth My people... And Moses said unto God, Who am I, that I should go?.... And God said... they shall hearken to your voice... And Moses answered... They will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice (he didn't seem to believe God's promise to inspire him)... I am not eloquent, neither heretofore (i.e. in the past)... I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue (although this was untrue- earlier Moses had&nbsp; been an eloquent speaker in Egypt; actually he was just the right man to do what God wanted)... and the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses". Remember that God is <em>very</em> slow to this kind of anger (<em><a href='B:20 34:6'>Exo 34:6</a></em>). Forty years earlier, Moses had understood, presumably from a direct revelation from God, that God would deliver Israel through him. But he had lost faith in that promise, and was arguing back against God. This was the outcome of many years of spiritual slipping. "Send... by the hand of him whom <em>You will</em> send" (alluding to God's Name, I will be) can be seen as indifference; perhaps Moses was saying 'As you do what you will, your name is I will be, then if you send by me, send by men, I can't resist'.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall speak to him, and put the words in his mouth. I will be with your mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what you shall do- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The promise of Moses that God would not fail nor forsake Joshua, but would be with him (<em><a href='B:50 31:8'>Deu 31:8</a></em>) was similar to the very promise given to Moses here, which he had doubted at the time (<em><a href='B:20 3:12'>Exo 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:12'>Exo 4:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:15'>Exo 4:15</a></em>). Such exhortation is so much the stronger from someone who has themselves doubted and then come to believe. Joshua was encouraged that "As I was with Moses, so I will be with you: I will not fail you, nor forsake you" (<em><a href='B:60 1:5'>Jos 1:5</a></em>). But these very words are quoted in <em><a href='B:650 13:5'>Heb 13:5</a></em> as the grounds of our matchless confidence that the Lord God will be with us too! As He was with Moses at such a point of Moses' personal weakness (see on :13,14)- not just in power, but in wondrous patience and gentleness- so He will be with us too. Not only did God encourage Joshua to see himself as in Moses' shoes; He inspired Jeremiah likewise (<em><a href='B:300 21:8'>Jer 21:8</a></em> = <em><a href='B:50 30:15'>Deu 30:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:19'>Deu 30:19</a></em>), and Ezekiel (<em><a href='B:330 2:3'>Eze 2:3</a></em> = <em><a href='B:50 31:27'>Deu 31:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:160 9:17'>Neh 9:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 17:10'>Num 17:10</a></em>); and He wishes us to also see Moses' God as our God. But if Moses' God is to be ours in truth in the daily round of life, we must rise up to the dedication of Moses; as he was a faithful steward, thoroughly dedicated to God's ecclesia (<em><a href='B:650 3:5'>Heb 3:5</a></em>), so we are invited follow his example (<em><a href='B:530 4:2'>1Co 4:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:45'>Mat 24:45</a></em>). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>In the last days, God’s faithful people will be given a mouth and wisdom which their persecutors will be unable to gainsay nor resist (<em><a href='B:490 21:15'>Luk 21:15</a></em>). This evidently alludes to how Moses before Pharaoh was given such a ‘mouth’. Moses at that time was a type of the faithful remnant of their last days although he was so weak (see on :13,14), in their witness against the world during the tribulation. Hence Revelation 11 describes their witness in terms of Moses doing miracles before Pharaoh. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He will be your spokesman to the people; and it will happen, that he will be to you a mouth, and you will be to him as God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But the plans / intentions for Aaron seem not to have worked out- for Moses ended up doing everything in reality. “It shall come to pass that he shall be to thee a mouth” (RV)- but it didn’t so come to pass. Aaron flunked it. The statement was evidently conditional. It was evidently God's plan that <em>Moses</em> should be His spokesman to Egypt. But when Moses refused, God didn't just give up; He worked with what He had available, He didn't totally reject Moses, but instead put a 'plan B' into operation by conceding to Moses' stubbornness and making Aaron the spokesman (<em><a href='B:20 4:10-17'>Exo 4:10-17</a></em>).<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall take this rod in your hand, with which you shall do the signs- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The rod was to remind Moses that this was the rod which had become a serpent (associated with sin) and changed back to a rod. Although God would work through the rod, the reminder was that He worked through human sin and weakness, of which Moses was strongly afflicted as he began his ministry at this point. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses went and returned to Jethro his father-in-law, and said to him, Please let me go and return to my brothers who are in Egypt, and see whether they are still alive. Jethro said to Moses, Go in peace-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>He seems to make the excuse to Jethro that he is homesick for his family who are still in Egypt, rather than telling him his mission. Moses asks Jethro for permission to return to Egypt to see whether his Hebrew brethren are "still alive"- yet God had just told Moses that there were indeed Hebrews still alive there who he will lead out of Egypt. Of course Moses <em>may</em> have been referring to his literal family; but it's possible that his words to Jethro imply a lack of faith in God's word, or at best an unwillingness to openly show his commitment to his new ministry from God. At the very least, he was shy to share God's word to him with Jethro. In this context it may be significant that the words God tells Moses to say to Pharaoh at this time in <em><a href='B:20 4:23'>Exo 4:23</a></em> are in fact never said by Moses throughout the dialogue with Pharaoh recorded in Exodus 11, 12.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses in Midian, Go, return into Egypt; for all the men who sought your life are dead- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses didn't want Egypt to know that he was trying to save Israel; he thought he could do it secretly. Once he realized that people knew what he was trying to do, he was afraid. His fearfulness has similarities with that of spiritually weak Jacob, who fled from the face of Laban into the unknown, as Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh. Thus God encouraged him after forty years that he need no longer fear: "Return into Egypt: for all the men are dead which sought your life" (<em><a href='B:20 4:19'>Exo 4:19</a></em>). But then he rallied his faith and left Egypt, without (at the point of leaving) fearing the anger of Pharaoh. He so strongly believed, it was as if he physically saw God- as he asked (<em><a href='B:650 11:27'>Heb 11:27</a></em>).<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>These words are clearly alluded to when the death of Herod, as of the Pharaoh, opens the way for the Lord Jesus to leave Egypt; just as Moses hereby has the way opened to return to Egypt (<em><a href='B:470 2:20'>Mat 2:20</a></em>).&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses took his wife and his sons, and set them on a donkey, and he returned to the land of Egypt. Moses took God’s rod in his hand-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The personal rod of Moses (“<em>thy</em> rod”) became the rod of God; the shepherd’s crook, the symbol of an obscure workaday life, became transformed to the rod and arm of God Almighty.&nbsp;See on 4:4.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, When you go back into Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the wonders which I have put in your hand, but I will harden his heart and he will not let the people go-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 4:4'>Exo 4:4</a></em>. The wonders were done by the Angels, so we are told in Psalms 78 and other commentaries on the Exodus in Scripture. But Moses through obeying the Word of God had control over those Angels, they were in His hand, symbolized by the rod. And so with us too.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The same Hebrew words used of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart occur in a positive context- for God also hardens or strengthens the hearts of the righteous (<em><a href='B:230 27:14'>Psa 27:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 35:4'>Isa 35:4</a></em>). Indeed, <em><a href='B:290 35:4'>Isa 35:4</a></em> speaks of how the righteous shouldn’t have a weak or (Heb.) ‘fluid’ heart, but rather a hardened one. Clearly enough, God solidifies human attitudes, one way or the other, through the work of His Spirit upon our spirit. This is a sobering thought- for He is prepared to confirm a person in their weak thinking. But on the other hand, even the weakest basic intention towards righteousness is solidified by Him too. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall tell Pharaoh, ‘Thus says Yahweh, Israel is My son, My firstborn- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It may be significant that the words God tells Moses to say to Pharaoh at this time in <em><a href='B:20 4:23'>Exo 4:23</a></em> are in fact never said by Moses throughout the dialogue with Pharaoh recorded in Exodus 11, 12. His response to Divine commandment is often incomplete. But out of such weakness he was made strong.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and I have said to you, Let My son go, that he may serve Me; and you have refused to let him go. Behold, I will kill your son, your firstborn’-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is the language used of Babylon's reason for destruction: "The children of Israel and the children of Judah were oppressed together (i.e. Jews taken out of the land of Israel plus others from the diaspora alike taken to concentration camps in Arab lands?): and all that took them captives held them fast;&nbsp; they refused to let them go" (<em><a href='B:300 50:33'>Jer 50:33</a></em>). Similarly Babylon is described as not opening "the house of the prisoners" (<em><a href='B:290 14:17'>Isa 14:17</a></em>). Biblical history continually interconnects, demonstrating that the same Divine hand has worked throughout history, and likewise works in our lives according to the same style. See on <em><a href='B:20 1:7'>Exo 1:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:21'>Exo 15:21</a></em>. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh had real possibility to let the people go, and therefore <em><a href='B:20 4:23'>Exo 4:23</a></em> NRSV implies that God only therefore went ahead with the plan to kill Pharaoh's firstborn. Likewise if the Israelites don't believe the first sign, they may believe the second; if they don't believe either of them then there will be a third sign (<em><a href='B:20 4:8-9'>Exo 4:8-9</a></em>). Yet God states in <em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em> that the people will listen; and yet <em><a href='B:20 4:8-9'>Exo 4:8-9</a></em> accepts the possibility that they may not. In all this we see not only the essential hopefulness of God for human response to Him, but His willingness to go along with our continued weakness and blindness in an open-ended manner. There is, therefore, the possibility of living before God on different levels.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>To be caught up in the downward spiral (as we all are at times) doesn't mean that there's no way out. The hearts of Pharaoh's servants were hardened (<em><a href='B:20 10:1'>Exo 10:1</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:20 9:34'>Exo 9:34</a></em>), and yet they did in fact soften when they beg Pharaoh to let Israel go (<em><a href='B:20 10:7'>Exo 10:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:8'>Exo 11:8</a></em>). Yet each refusal of Pharaoh to soften his heart made it harder for him to soften it the next time the opportunity was presented. Conditional language is always used about Pharaoh-if he were to refuse to release Israel, more plagues would happen (<em><a href='B:20 8:2'>Exo 8:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:2'>Exo 9:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:4'>Exo 10:4</a></em> cp. 8:21; 4:23 RSV). In fact God wanted Pharaoh to come to realize that there is none like Yahweh in all the earth- and that was actually why He did not immediately kill Pharaoh, but rather appealed to him through the plagues. That's how I read the enigmatic <em><a href='B:20 9:15'>Exo 9:15</a></em>: "For now I should have put forth my hand, and smitten thee... and thou hadst been cut off from the earth". Fretheim paraphrases this: "If I had not had the intention of your knowing that there is none like me in all the earth... then I should have put forth my hand and cut you off from the earth. This is what you have deserved". The hardening of Pharaoh's heart didn't mean that he was thereby bound to chose wrongly each time. Indeed, the plagues themselves were designed to warn Pharaoh and thereby appeal to him to change, in order to avoid worse plagues. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It happened on the way at a lodging place, that Yahweh met Moses and wanted to kill him-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 4:4'>Exo 4:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 34:9'>Exo 34:9</a></em>. The way the Lord "tried to kill" Moses (<em><a href='B:20 4:24'>Exo 4:24</a></em> AV) indicates how God's intentions can be changed by human actions; and it also reflects the limitation of power experienced by the Angel, who presumably was the one who 'tried' to do this but was thwarted by a woman. However in our context of Moses' weakness we need to reflect how this incident echoes how Pharaoh sought to kill Moses in <em><a href='B:20 2:15'>Exo 2:15</a></em>. Even through his weakness, Moses was being taught that his personal salvation and continuation in life was by grace. Moses was saved on this occasion by a Gentile woman, Zipporah- just as he had been saved as a baby by another Gentile woman- as well as by the quick-wittedness of his own mother and sister. As Zipporah mediated with the Angel and saved Moses by touching his son with blood, so Moses would save Israel through his mediation with God and through the Passover ritual (<em><a href='B:20 12:13'>Exo 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 12:22-23'>Exo 12:22-23</a></em>), as well as later throwing blood upon the people (<em><a href='B:20 24:8'>Exo 24:8</a></em>). What are we to make of all these echoes and connections of thought? Perhaps that Moses was indeed weak at this time, was saved by grace alone, and yet on that basis he was called to in his turn also save the weak through appealing to God's grace.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The way conditions are not stated within the actual prophecy is similar to how blanket statements are made in Scripture, and yet there are exceptions to them. Thus here the Lord sought to kill Moses. If He had done so, all His previous statements about delivering Israel by the hand of Moses would not have come true. God only didn’t kill Moses because Zipporah intervened. She did this purely of her own freewill and according to the depth of her spiritual vision. Thus the earlier prophecies about delivering Israel by the hand of Moses actually had at least one major, though unspoken, condition: If Moses himself remained faithful. “But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move his tongue” (<em><a href='B:20 11:7'>Exo 11:7</a></em>) was in fact conditional on Israel remaining indoors. But that condition isn’t then stated. Even the old covenant, which was in a sense “eternal”, was made with Israel “upon all these conditions” (<em><a href='B:20 24:8'>Exo 24:8</a></em> RVmg.). It was eternal, potentially, because it had conditions. But the conditionality of it isn’t always brought to the fore when, e.g., we read of the Sabbath as being an eternal ordinance.&nbsp; <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:370 4:12'>Amo 4:12</a></em> sums up the idea of conditional prophecy: “Therefore thus will I do unto you, O Israel: and because I will do this unto you, prepare to meet your God, O Israel”. Thus God <em>will</em> do- but therefore, repent so that it won’t happen. There is an allusion here to God in an Angel coming to meet Moses to slay him, but he repented and thereby changed the purpose / will / intention of God. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Time and again, the Jewish apocryphal literature wrongly sought to distance God from doing anything negative in human life. <em><a href='B:10 22:1'>Gen 22:1</a></em> clearly states that it was <em>God </em>who put Abraham to the test by asking him to kill his son Isaac; Jubilees retells the story with "Prince Mastema", the Satan figure, telling Abraham to do this (Jub. 17:15-18). Likewise <em><a href='B:20 4:24'>Exo 4:24</a></em> recounts how "the Lord", presumably as an Angel, met Moses and tried to kill him for not circumcising his son; but Jubilees again claims that Mastema / Satan did this (Jub. 48:1-3). The Biblical record highlights the sin of Aaron and the people; the Jewish myths excuse it by blaming it on Satan. Indeed, several times the Hebrew word <em>mastema</em> ('hostility, enmity') occurs, it is in the context of urging Israel to see that <em>they</em> and their internal desires to sin are the true <em>mastema</em>. <em><a href='B:350 9:7'>Hos 9:7</a></em> is an example: "Because your sins are so many and your hostility (<em>mastema</em>) so great".<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Then Zipporah took a flint, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet; and she said, Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses' marriage was weak. After 40 years, Zipporah's frustration boiled over: "Surely a bloody husband art thou to me... then she said (again), A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision" (AV). As a descendant of Ishmael she was angry at Isaac's choice and circumcision. This is probably the closest the Bible gets to recording the real life use of taboo language. "Because of the circumcision" suggests she despised Moses' religion. Moses&nbsp;divorced her.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>A read through the records will indicate that Moses was somewhat temperamental in his faith. For the first forty years of his life, he scarcely let his light show. Yet all the time his conscience was active, enabling him to build up towards heights of spiritual achievement few of us can achieve. At the age of 40, he had a flash of spiritual devotion; he rejected the opportunity for greatness in Egypt, possibly the opportunity to become king of Egypt (as Christ had the opportunity to become king of the world in his wilderness temptations). Yet after that, he went into 40 years of decline. In the eyes of men, he was a finished man. He had gone away from God's people, he was living in a family of idolaters, and had married one of them. His marriage went wrong, he divorced his wife, and picked up some other woman. He didn't circumcise his children, and thus he despised his covenant relationship with God. Eighty years is a long time. They were eighty years of at best mediocre commitment to the God of Israel, with only the occasional flash of spiritual brilliance. Yet this man Moses went on to become one of the greatest spiritual men there has ever been, a man who came closer to God than all others except the Lord Jesus. "There arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face" (<em><a href='B:50 34:10'>Deu 34:10</a></em>). The Lord Jesus was "like unto" Moses (<em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>)- a high enough commendation for Moses. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>So He let him alone- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Martin Buber, one of academic Judaism's finest minds, coined the term "Yahweh's demonism". He perceived in, e.g., the record of the Angel meeting Moses at night, seeking to slay him and then 'letting him go', all the language which was typically applied to demons- meeting and seeking to slay a man of God (<em><a href='B:20 4:24'>Exo 4:24</a></em>). But the point is, it is not a demon who did this, but a righteous Angel of God, to the extent that it was possible for the record to state that it was Yahweh who sought to slay Moses, and yet changed His purpose because of Moses' repentance and the intercession of a woman. Buber's point was that the text is an allusion to the local beliefs about demons, but the Biblical record deconstructs these beliefs by showing that it is Yahweh and His Angels responsible for those situations which pagans would otherwise attribute to supposed 'demons'. Other examples include how the bull cherubim were understood in the surrounding cultures as the abode or throne of a demon; but it is Yahweh who is enthroned upon the bull cherubim; or how the record of Balaam would've lead the contemporary hearers to expect him to receive inspiration from a demon- but instead the inspiration comes from Yahweh, and is <em>against </em>those who believed in demons and pagan gods. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Then she said, You are a bridegroom of blood, because of the circumcision- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It seems from this that the Angel also intended to slay Moses' son. The connection with <em><a href='B:20 4:23'>Exo 4:23</a></em> would mean that God tried to kill Moses’ son because Moses was not fully believing that God would kill Pharaoh’s firstborn. We note that Moses was saved here by a Gentile woman; just as his life had been saved in babyhood by women (his faithful mother, his sister and the Gentile princess). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Aaron, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses. He went, and met him on God’s mountain, and kissed him-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The wilderness would have been that between Egypt and Horeb, or Sinai, which was now "God's mountain" (<em><a href='B:20 3:1'>Exo 3:1</a></em>). It was quite some obedience by Aaron to escape from Egypt and travel alone in the wilderness to meet Moses, his brother whom he hardly knew and had not heard from for 40 years. Aaron's obedience should be recognized by us. He could easily have turned down this calling as bizarre.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses told Aaron all the words of Yahweh with which He had sent him, and all the signs with which He had instructed him-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Aaron's faith would have been buoyed up by actually meeting his long absent brother Moses, his faith in the apparently bizarre word of Yahweh to him would have been rewarded. And so he was the more inclined surely to believe the message Moses now shared with him. Aaron was initially more obedient to the call than Moses was; but that changed over time.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses and Aaron went and gathered together all the elders of the children of Israel- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Jews thought that as Moses hid himself and then re-emerged from obscurity, so Messiah would. Rabbi Berekiah said: “As the first deliverer (Moses) was revealed, then hidden and afterwards appeared again, so will it also be with the last deliverer (Messiah)” (Quoted in J. Klausner, <em>The Messianic Idea In Israel </em>(London: Macmillan, 1956) p. 17.). John’s record is clearly presenting the Lord as Moses in this sense. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Aaron spoke all the words which Yahweh had spoken to Moses, and did the signs in the sight of the people- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The fact Moses had to do all the signs shows that they did not believe the first and second signs. Their faith is consistently shown to be weak and superficial from the very start of their relationship with Yahweh; and later prophets will lament his from Egypt onwards, their faith was very weak indeed. Like us at times, they were saved almost against their will, by grace alone.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The people believed, and when they heard that Yahweh had visited the children of Israel, and that He had seen their affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshiped-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"When Moses <em>was grown</em>, he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens... when he was <em>full forty years old</em> it came into his heart to visit his brethren... by faith Moses, <em>when he was come to years</em>, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter" (<em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:23'>Act 7:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:24'>Heb 11:24</a></em>). The implication seems to be that Moses reached a certain point of maturity, of readiness, and then he went to his brethren. But then he stepped back from that apparent maturity, and spent 40 years building up to it again. We can have similar experiences. God looked on the sorrows of His people through the sensitivity of Moses, He <em>saw and knew</em> their struggles, their sense of being trapped, their desire to revive spiritually but their being tied down by the painful business of life and living; and He sent Moses to deliver them from this. But these very words are quoted about our deliverance through the 'coming down'&nbsp; of the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:31'>Exo 4:31</a></em> = <em><a href='B:490 1:68'>Luk 1:68</a></em>).&nbsp; <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses manifested / represented both God and Israel, superbly prefiguring the nature of the Lord's work and mission far later. As God "saw" the oppression of Israel (<em><a href='B:20 2:25'>Exo 2:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:7'>Exo 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 3:9'>Exo 3:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:31'>Exo 4:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 5:19'>Exo 5:19</a></em>), so did Moses (<em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em>). He looked on God's people with the eyes / perspective of God- just as we should.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The people asked the Lord Jesus "What sign do you show unto us?" (<em><a href='B:500 2:18'>Joh 2:18</a></em>). Cynical Israel asked exactly the same of Moses, in effect; and superficially, "the people believed" (<em><a href='B:20 4:31'>Exo 4:31</a></em>) after they saw the signs. The hollowness of Israel's 'belief' in Moses was matched by the experience of the Lord Jesus Christ. And yet they still both loved Israel.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Afterward Moses and Aaron came, and said to Pharaoh, This is what Yahweh, the God of Israel, says, ‘Let My people go, that they may hold a feast to Me in the wilderness’-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>. The commandment had been that the elders should go with them (<em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>); but it seems that only Moses and Aaron go. So this suggests that Moses was pretty much single handed in saving the people; the people and their elders were unenthusiastic and passive, as many in the body of the new Israel. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh said, Who is Yahweh, that I should listen to His voice to let Israel go? I don’t recognize Yahweh, and moreover I will not let Israel go-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Who is" could mean that Pharaoh despised Yahweh (<em><a href='B:70 9:28'>Jdg 9:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:90 17:26'>1Sa 17:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:90 25:10'>1Sa 25:10</a></em>). But it may have been a genuine request, seeing that he didn't "know" Joseph (<em><a href='B:20 1:8'>Exo 1:8</a></em>) and the people hardly evangelized their God to the Egyptians, and had largely forgotten about Him. And this would explain Yahweh's revelation of Himself to Pharaoh through the plagues, so that he might indeed "know" Yahweh.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They said, The God of the Hebrews has met with us. Please let us go three days’ journey into the wilderness, and sacrifice to Yahweh, our God, lest He fall on us with plague, or with the sword-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This last phrase is an addition to what Yahweh had told Moses to say in <em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>. Moses may be adding a human argument in the name of God's word, which wasn't what he should have done. For his idea was 'We're your workforce, we won't be much use to you if our God slays us, will we! So let us go and serve Him!'. This doesn't exactly present Moses as totally loyal to Yahweh. It also misrepresents Yahweh as capricious and likely to lash out and punish His people with death if they don't perform a certain ritual. Moses doesn't come over well here.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Perhaps God's initial intention was that Pharaoh would allow the request to go and sacrifice. And slowly come to thereby accept the religion of the Hebrews. For the request was not initially that he allow Israel to leave Egypt permanently and totally. It was ultimately the Egyptians themselves who were to beg Israel to leave immediately.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The king of Egypt said to them, Why do you, Moses and Aaron, take the people from their work? Get back to your burdens!- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>He reasons as if Moses and Aaron were also supposed to be working. Perhaps indeed Moses, like the Lord Jesus, shared in the experience of the people he had come to deliver. We wonder whether the king realized who Moses actually was. <em><a href='B:230 81:6'>Psa 81:6</a></em> uses the same word for "burdens" in saying that Yahweh "removed his shoulder from the burden: his hands were delivered from the baskets". We get the picture of the Israelites carrying the burdens on their shoulders, and carrying baskets of bricks with their hands.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh said, Behold, the people of the land are now many- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This fact was clearly dominant in his mind; and he reasoned that by stopping so many people from working, they were seriously damaging the kingdom. We note Pharaoh doesn't at all engage with the request. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And you make them rest from their burdens- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Perhaps the Lord alluded to this when saying that His burden was easy and light compared to the heavy burden of legalistic Judaism, which He thereby compared to Egyptian bondage (<em><a href='B:470 11:29-30'>Mat 11:29-30</a></em>). And His allusion presents Moses as representing Himself; although in the short term, the way to escape from that heavy burden was going to appear heavy. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The same day Pharaoh commanded the taskmasters of the people, and their officers, saying- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The taskmasters were presumably Egyptians. "Officers" is the usual word for 'scribe', the idea being that these people kept a careful record of how many bricks were made. Egyptologists have uncovered such records.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall no longer give the people straw to make brick, as before. Let them go and gather straw for themselves- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As explained on :12, this resulted in the people being scattered throughout Egypt, which was part of God's way of appealing to the entire nation.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The number of the bricks, which they made before, you are to still require from them. You shall not diminish anything of it, for they are idle; therefore they cry, saying, ‘Let us go and sacrifice to our God’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh's behaviour here is a classic case of "blame the victim", and accords exactly with the psychology of an abuser who has great power. There is a consistent psychological veracity and credibility in the records. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Let heavier work be laid on the men, that they may labour therein; and don’t let them pay any attention to lying words- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We see here Pharaoh's blasphemy against God's word, calling it "vain" (AV), or lies. "Heavier work laid on men" is the very phrase only elsewhere used in <em><a href='B:160 5:18'>Neh 5:18</a></em>, of how the people of God later abused each other. They were treating each other like the Egyptians had done. And all such laying of heavy burdens upon our brethren is making us like the Egyptians, to face a similar judgment. The Lord interpreted this as making unreasonable spiritual demands of our fellow believers (<em><a href='B:470 23:4'>Mat 23:4</a></em>).&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The taskmasters of the people went out, and their officers, and they spoke to the people, saying, This is what Pharaoh says: ‘I will not give you straw- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They "went out" the same day (:6). The immediacy and extremity of the behaviour reflects how a raw nerve had been touched within Pharaoh. He had a conscience, which God sought to work with towards his eventual conversion.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Go yourselves, get straw where you can find it, for nothing of your work shall be diminished’-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh had insisted that nothing should be "diminished" from the quota of bricks he had set (<em><a href='B:20 5:11'>Exo 5:11</a></em>), and the same word is later used of how Israel were not to "diminish" from obeying Yahweh's commandments (<em><a href='B:50 4:2'>Deu 4:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 12:32'>Deu 12:32</a></em>). They were being reminded that they had changed masters when they crossed the Red Sea, just as Paul says happens when we are baptized (Romans 6). And the Red Sea crossing represented baptism into Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>). Like us, Israel were not radically free to do as they pleased. What happened was that they changed masters; hence the appeal to Pharaoh to let God's people go, that they may serve Him rather than Pharaoh. We too will only find ultimate freedom through this servitude to God's ways, and will finally emerge into the radical liberty of the children of God in the Kingdom age (<em><a href='B:520 8:21'>Rom 8:21</a></em>).&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>So the people were scattered abroad throughout all the land of Egypt to gather stubble for straw-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This may have been a way of making a witness to the entire land of Egypt. Hebrew slaves foraging for straw, pulling up stubble... would have made all Egypt aware of the abuse of God's people, and thereby responsible to judgment. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The taskmasters were urgent saying, Fulfil your work quota daily, as when there was straw!-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 5:13'>Exo 5:13</a></em> speaks of the 'daily work quota' of Israel under Egyptian abuse. But the phrase is used of their daily work for Yahweh, in collecting manna (<em><a href='B:20 16:4'>Exo 16:4</a></em>) and serving in the tabernacle (<em><a href='B:30 23:37'>Lev 23:37</a></em>). They had changed masters, but still there was a requirement for daily service; see on :11.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The officers of the children of Israel, whom Pharaoh’s taskmasters had set over them, were beaten, and questioned: Why haven’t you fulfilled your quota both yesterday and today, in making brick as before?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Yesterday and today" could mean that this happened just two days after the command was given, and it was given the very day Moses and Aaron had asked Pharaoh to release the people. This situation would have made Sabbath observance very difficult (<em><a href='B:20 31:15'>Exo 31:15</a></em>). Those who were sensitive to God's ways would have seen that they faced death for Sabbath breaking, or death at the hands of the Egyptians. They would have been desperate for release from this situation, so that they could serve God acceptably.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Then the officers of the children of Israel came and cried to Pharaoh, saying, Why do you deal this way with your servants?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Their question of course begged the response from Pharaoh: 'Because of your desire to be loyal to your God, as this Moses is teaching you'. The whole thing was set up in order to elicit their solid commitment to Yahweh, or to turn back to accepting their lot in Egypt. They failed in this choice- but still God saved them, by grace. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>No straw is given to your servants, and they tell us, ‘Make brick!’ and behold, your servants are beaten; but the fault is in your own people- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Hebrew grammar here is apparently wrong, so we would go with LXX "and thou sinnest against thine own people". This was a protestation of loyalty to Pharaoh, asking him to remember that they were<em> his</em> people, and considered themselves like this. It is unlikely that they would have come asking a favour from Pharaoh, and then criticized his people. It was a tacit statement that they rejected the teaching of Moses, that they were Yahweh's people and therefore Yahweh was going to save them. They sinned against Him from Egypt onwards, as the prophets lament; they wanted to be Egypt's people, not His.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But he said, You are idle! You are idle! Therefore you say, ‘Let us go and sacrifice to Yahweh’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh refuses to accept their protestation of loyalty to Pharaoh as "his people" (:16 LXX). See on :16. He claims that they were loyal to Yahweh, although they have just effectively denied that, as explained on :16.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Go therefore now, and work, for no straw shall be given to you, yet you shall deliver the same number of bricks!- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>At Tell el-Maskhuta, the site of Pithom (<em><a href='B:20 1:11'>Exo 1:11</a></em>), Egyptologists have found bricks, some made with chopped straw or reed, and some without it.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The officers of the children of Israel saw that they were in trouble, when it was said, You shall not diminish anything from your daily quota of bricks!- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh had probably ordered straw not to be given to the Israelites without realizing quite what that meant in practice. As he saw men with wheal marks standing before him, the appeal to conscience would surely have been to somehow reduce his demand. But he didn't. We see here God's appeal to his conscience yet again, and how he so persistently resists it. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They met Moses and Aaron, who stood in the way, as they came out from Pharaoh-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Perhaps Moses and Aaron had gone again with the people to ask Pharaoh to reduce the brick quota. God first of all taught Moses that if he explained the power of God’s Name to Israel’s elders, then they would hearken unto him (<em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>). But they didn’t hearken unto Moses (<em><a href='B:20 5:20'>Exo 5:20</a></em>), perhaps because he didn’t bother expounding the Name to them, or perhaps because he did but they refused to believe it. Therefore he did explain it to them again (<em><a href='B:20 6:1-9'>Exo 6:1-9</a></em> = <em><a href='B:20 3:14-17'>Exo 3:14-17</a></em>); but then again they refused to hearken to him (<em><a href='B:20 6:9'>Exo 6:9</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>). He learnt that what was proclaimed by God as possible all the same depends on human effort to believe. And this lead him on even further, to realize that through his spirituality, he could bring salvation for others.&nbsp; In this spirit, <em>Moses’</em> faith in keeping the Passover led to <em>Israel’s </em>salvation, they left Egypt <em>by </em>him (<em><a href='B:650 3:16'>Heb 3:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:28'>Heb 11:28</a></em>); and when Aaron deserved death, he was redeemed by Moses’ prayer on his behalf (<em><a href='B:50 9:20'>Deu 9:20</a></em>)<em>. </em>Moses’ prayer, with uplifted hands, resulted in Israel’s victory over Amalek; without his prayer, and the intensity of it, there would have been no victory for them. However, he had to learn this lesson at this early stage. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and they said to them, May Yahweh look at you, and judge, because you have made us a stench to be abhorred in the eyes of Pharaoh, and in the eyes of his servants- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They are quoting the words of Jacob in <em><a href='B:10 34:30'>Gen 34:30</a></em>, perhaps unconsciously. Yet by grace Jacob was saved out of the position of having been made a stench to the Gentiles. If they were familiar with the Biblical text of their own history, they would have perceived this encouragement. If they weren't, then the potential encouragement wouldn't have been received. And so it is true for us. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>To put a sword in their hand to kill us- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>They were so wrong, as we are in our moments of desperation. The very opposite works out to be the case. The same phrase is used of how finally God was to put a sword into the hand of Babylon to slay Egypt (<em><a href='B:330 30:25'>Eze 30:25</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses returned to Yahweh and said- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Moses returned to the Lord"- the Angel of the bush? It sounds as if he went to a specific place to meet the Lord- i.e. the Angel.&nbsp; Moses asks why He had sent him- and it was the Angel at the bush who had sent him. Moses complained about the Angel, and so God reminded him that 'Yahweh personally will be your Elohim Angels', and that because of his questioning of the Angels he was in fact doubting God Himself personally.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Lord, why have You brought evil on this people?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note that "evil" is seen as always coming from God in the Hebrew Bible. This was a deconstruction of the popular misconception that only good comes from God, and "evil" comes from a supernatural 'Satan' being. But the Bible carefully teaches the very opposite. There is no such 'Satan' in that sense. And Yahweh is all powerful.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Why is it that You have sent me?-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>“Why is it that thou hast sent (s.w. “put forth” and “let go”) <em>me</em>?”- i.e., why don’t You use Messiah, the man of Your right hand? And this, subconsciously and unexpressed, is so often our view; He must do it, not me. I’m just a shepherd, God ought to leave me alone in the comfortable monotony of my working life. But He has called us to greater things, to realize as Moses finally did that <em>we</em>, you and me, are the ones through whom God truly will work in this world. See on <em><a href='B:20 4:4'>Exo 4:4</a></em>.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For since I came to Pharaoh to speak in Your name, he has brought trouble on this people; neither have You delivered Your people at all-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses was weak and discouraged, accusing God of wanting to do them evil rather than save them. 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.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh, for by a strong hand he shall let them go, and by a strong hand he shall drive them out of his land-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 5:22-23'>Exo 5:22-23</a></em><em>.</em> God doesn't give up with Moses' pathetic loss of faith in <em><a href='B:20 5:23'>Exo 5:23</a></em>. He assures him that His saving purpose will indeed work out. Because He is Yahweh, the saviour God, and His purpose "will" work out, because "I will be who I will be". See on :2. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>God spoke to Moses, and said to him, I am Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Name speaks of the Father's desire to respond to His children, despite their weakness of faith; see on :1. The root word <em>ehyeh</em> from which 'Yahweh' is derived occurs 50 times, mainly in the context of God's help and comfort in real situations. This is the practical nature of the things expressed in the Name. The repeated references to God’s Name in Exodus 3, 6 had a very practical context. Israel needed to summon all their faith to believe that actually, they were not in a hopeless situation there in the concentration camps of Egypt. Even when they were given no straw and told to make the same number of bricks, the comfort they are given is to remember the <em>Name</em> of their God, who had acted according to that Name in the past, and would do so in the future for them- because He is and will be who He has been. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty; but by My name Yahweh was I not known to them?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 5:22-23'>Exo 5:22-23</a></em>. At the time of the burning bush, the people knew Yahweh's Name as a word- because "By My name Yahweh was I not known?" (<em><a href='B:20 6:3'>Exo 6:3</a></em>), and clearly enough the patriarchs had been aware of the Yahweh Name. But the point was that they didn't see from His Name, just as a word, what He was really like, and what He could do for them. The Egyptians and others with whom Israel had had contact invoked their gods by pronouncing their name, and expected a miracle to happen. Presumably Israel had tried doing this with the word 'Yahweh'- and nothing happened. Moses put the problem to God in Exodus 6, and the response was "<em>Ehyeh asher ehyeh</em>". "I am that I am" isn't a purely correct translation, because the Hebrew verb used doesn't mean simply existence in an abstract sense. It refers rather to being there / present / being someone or something for someone. Martin Buber, in my judgment one of the finest of the many fine Jewish minds to have engaged with this matter of the Name, concluded: "'I am that I am' could only be understood as an avoiding of the question, as a statement which withholds any information". I would put it somewhat more gently, in saying that God was saying that He will be present with us, will be what Israel ultimately needs, without defining precisely in what sense. Because we're mere humans, we don't know what to ask of God as we should; and His very Name is the comfort that He will be for us as we need, with our eternal salvation in mind. God seemed to have encouraged Israel to understand this by going on to promise simply that "I shall be (<em>ehyeh</em>) present" (<em><a href='B:20 3:12'>Exo 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:12'>Exo 4:12</a></em>). At this point it seemed Israel were doomed to make bricks without straw, and to be worked to death literally. But through the revelation of His Name, He wanted them to trust that He knew best how to bring them to salvation; He didn't want them to invoke His Name in the primitive way the Egyptians did with their gods, hoping for a quick-fix miracle. God is only <em>ehyeh</em> for His people; and there came a terrible moment when He had to tell them through the prophets that "You are not my people and I am not <em>ehyeh</em> for you" (<em><a href='B:350 1:9'>Hos 1:9</a></em>). Israel lost this 'presence' of their God. And we know that we are His people by the constant sense we have of the hand of Providence in our lives, even through the unanswered prayers that reveal an altogether higher and ultimately Divine game plan in place in our lives. But like Israel before Moses, we wish for the quick fix, the waving of the wand to resolve the issues, the sense of the saving presence of God in our experiences, working out His ultimate plan of delivering us from Egypt / this world and from ourselves. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God had revealed Himself as Jehovah previously (thus Abraham could speak of 'Jehovah Jireh' in <em><a href='B:10 22:14'>Gen 22:14</a></em>), but the&nbsp; patriarchs conceived of God as a singular Angel- "God&nbsp; Almighty" (as Jacob: "The Angel that redeemed me from all evil"). Now Yahweh says "you shall know that I am Yahweh your Elohim which brings you out from under the burden of the Egyptians" (<em><a href='B:20 6:7'>Exo 6:7</a></em>). God is saying, 'I will be Elohim; I will be manifested not in just one Angel, but in many'.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I have also established My covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their travels, in which they lived as aliens- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"I am that I am" can equally mean 'I was who I was', and implies that He will be who He was historically. And historically, He had been their saviour God. And although with the cry of the slave drivers fresh in their ears it seemed this was all irrelevant, the point was that the God of historical salvation was going to come through for them now. Because that was what His Name was all about.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moreover I have heard the groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage, and I have remembered My covenant- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The "groaning" was that just described at the end of Exodus 5, where the Israelites groan because of having to now make bricks without straw. To try to alleviate the burden, they even plead with Pharaoh that they are his people and not Yahweh's (see on <em><a href='B:20 5:16'>Exo 5:16</a></em>). But despite that, God's grace was such that He simply felt sorry for them in their affliction. He likewise saved them at the time of the judges, not because they had repented or were suddenly faithful to Him- but simply because of His pity for them in their sufferings (<em><a href='B:70 2:18'>Jdg 2:18</a></em>).<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Therefore tell the children of Israel, ‘I am Yahweh, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm, and with great judgments- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The three "I will"s clearly allude to 'I will be who I will be / who I was and have been'. This assurance of salvation was and is part of God's most essential characteristics bound up with the very essence of His Name. Those who bear that Name should therefore be able to say that they are assured, at this moment, of final salvation. For this is so much part of God's purpose and essence.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel were brought out by "great judgments" (<em><a href='B:20 6:6'>Exo 6:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 7:4'>Exo 7:4</a></em>), i.e. by God's stretched out arm (<em><a href='B:20 6:6'>Exo 6:6</a></em>). The way He acted with His “arm” was a manifestation of His judgment principles which are part of His Name. Therefore the Red Sea deliverance is described as the judgment of God, the day of the Lord etc. because God's people exited from the world whilst judgments came upon it; the Name of God was revealed through this process (<em><a href='B:230 76:6-9'>Psa 76:6-9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 103:6-7'>Psa 103:6-7</a></em>). For "redeem" see on :7.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Yahweh "purchased" His people from Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 15:16'>Exo 15:16</a></em>) in the sense that He "redeemed" them (<em><a href='B:20 6:6'>Exo 6:6</a></em>), alluding to the idea of buying a close relative out of slavery to a Gentile. God's people were in slavery to Egypt and wished to remain like that (<em><a href='B:20 14:12'>Exo 14:12</a></em>); and had accepted their idols, rather than Yahweh (<em><a href='B:330 20:8'>Eze 20:8</a></em>). Yet God bought them out of that slavery, He redeemed them only thanks to His love and pity (s.w. <em><a href='B:290 63:9'>Isa 63:9</a></em>); so earnest was He to have them as His own. We cannot push the metaphors too far, but the price paid was perhaps represented by the blood of the Passover lamb. For this finally was the price He was willing to pay to redeem us, similarly weak as they were. For we are redeemed (s.w.) by Him from the power of sin and death (<em><a href='B:350 13:14'>Hos 13:14</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and I will take you to Me for a people, and I will be to you a God; and you shall know that I am Yahweh your God, Who brings you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Literally, 'I will take you unto Myself as a people', as in <em><a href='B:20 19:4'>Exo 19:4</a></em>. This is similar to the formulae used for adoption of children into a family. This could continue the family allusion of :6, where we read that God would redeem / act as a family redeemer, a <em>ga'al</em>, for His people. The idea may not be that they became His people at the point of the exodus, but rather that He took them to Himself "as a people", they received a collective redemption, not one of them was left behind, not even the most faithless. But the collective nature of Yahweh's salvation, in our times seen in Jesus, Yehoshua, Yah's salvation, must be responded to on an individual level.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will bring you into the land which I swore to give to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; and I will give it to you for an inheritance: I am Yahweh’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This promise was solemnly made, with uplifted hand as it were (<em><a href='B:40 14:30'>Num 14:30</a></em>), to that generation who left Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 6:8'>Exo 6:8</a></em>). But they did not enter the land, as <em><a href='B:40 14:30'>Num 14:30</a></em> makes clear. This was because Israel broke their side of the covenant, and did not in fact want to enter the land; and continued serving the idols of Egypt, which they took with them through the Red Sea (<em><a href='B:330 20:8'>Eze 20:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:43'>Act 7:43</a></em>). But that promise was guaranteed by the fact that "I will bring you into the land... I am Yahweh" (<em><a href='B:20 6:8'>Exo 6:8</a></em>). The very essence of Yahweh, that 'I will' save, as surely as 'I will be who I will be', a saviour God, was fought against by Israel's idolatry and unfaithfulness to the covenant. And because 'Yahweh' involves His character, which includes His judgment of sin and not turning a blind eye to it (<em><a href='B:20 34:4-6'>Exo 34:4-6</a></em>), human intransigence and faithlessness was allowed to as it were even counteract His most essential 'being' a saviour God for His beloved people.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses spoke so to the children of Israel, but they didn’t listen to Moses for anguish of spirit, and for cruel bondage- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This appears to be God, through the inspired narrative, being generous to them. Rather like the sleeping disciples in Gethsemane being excused because they supposedly 'slept for sorrow'. The good news of the Gospel is for those afflicted by bondage and anguish of Spirit, as the Lord makes clear in the beatitudes. But here, the weight of the bondage is used as an excuse for their disbelief and disobedience- which later the prophets were to deeply lament. We marvel at God's grace.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It seems that Yahweh now tells Moses to speak directly himself to Pharaoh; although He does take account of Moses' excuses about his stammer and poor knowledge of Egyptian. And He provides Aaron as a concession to that weakness. But His ideal intention was that Moses should speak to Pharaoh; because He loves to use the stammering, nervous tongue through which to speak His word.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Go in, speak to Pharaoh king of Egypt, that he let the children of Israel go out of his land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is no contradiction here with the requests to let them go and keep a feast to Yahweh for three days (<em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 4:23'>Exo 4:23</a></em>). For that still required the people to "go out of his land". But it could also be that once Pharaoh turned down that initial request, for the men to go and keep a feast and return, then the demands upon Pharaoh got progressively larger- not just the men, but all Israel, along with their children and animals, and not for three days but permanently. God clearly was working according to a carefully devised program with Pharaoh. Those who refuse God's requests likewise find that to avoid condemnation, the requests become larger and larger. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses spoke before Yahweh, saying, Behold, the children of Israel haven’t listened to me. How then shall Pharaoh listen to me, who am of uncircumcised lips?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>God had explained that His Name means "I will...", and Moses is effectively denying the power of the Name. God had promised Moses earlier that Israel <em>would</em> hear him (<em><a href='B:20 3:18'>Exo 3:18</a></em>). God solemnly told him to go and speak to Pharaoh, because God had told him to do so. But Moses has the nerve to say exactly the same words to God a second time. In a chapter which speaks much of Moses' reluctance, the record encourages us: "These are that Aaron and Moses... these are they which spake to Pharaoh... these are that Moses and Aaron" (<em><a href='B:20 6:26-27'>Exo 6:26-27</a></em>). They who were so weak, full of excuses, incomplete fulfilment of what they were commanded to do...<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Aaron, and gave them a command to the children of Israel, and to Pharaoh king of Egypt, to bring the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This summary statement appears to be reminding us that they were given a commandment and potential power to bring Israel out of Egypt. But Moses made every excuse not to, and railed against this command. And thus this section concludes in :26,27 that these are that Moses and Aaron. This was the extremely weak moral material which God used to save His people; and out of their weakness they were indeed made strong. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>These are the heads of their fathers’ houses. The sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel: Hanoch, and Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi; these are the families of Reuben- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hanoch (s.w. Enoch) was named after the son of Cain (<em><a href='B:10 4:17'>Gen 4:17</a></em>) and means "initiated", rather hinting at unspirituality and paganism.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The sons of Simeon: Jemuel, and Jamin, and Ohad, and Jachin, and Zohar, and Shaul the son of a Canaanite woman; these are the families of Simeon- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>But <em><a href='B:130 4:24'>1Ch 4:24</a></em> simply has "The sons of Simeon were Nemuel, Jamin... and Shaul"; but here and <em><a href='B:10 46:10'>Gen 46:10</a></em> shows that Shaul was Simeon's son by a wrong, casual relationship. Yet this is not recorded in Chronicles, even though so many other weaknesses are. Surely this is to demonstrate how if God imputes righteousness for a repented of sin, there really is no record of this kept by Him. This and other such lessons from Chronicles only come from digging under the surface. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>These are the names of the sons of Levi according to their generations: Gershon, and Kohath, and Merari; and the years of the life of Levi were one hundred thirty-seven years- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Gershon" means 'expelled', maybe meaning that like Reuben he was expelled from the role of firstborn (he is mentioned first as if he was the firstborn). This is a theme of the Genesis record. But perhaps because of these weaknesses, the line to the high priest ran through Kohath. See on :20.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The sons of Gershon: Libni and Shimei, according to their families-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note that both Moses and Aaron had sons called Gershon (<em><a href='B:20 2:22'>Exo 2:22</a></em>). Such repetition of names within families and in the same generation was quite common, and is one thing which makes the study of the genealogies difficult in places. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The sons of Kohath: Amram, and Izhar, and Hebron, and Uzziel; and the years of the life of Kohath were one hundred thirty-three years- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>We note the lack of emphasis upon the children of Moses and Miriam, the great wilderness leaders of Israel. There was to be no cult of personality nor nepotism, no riding on the name of a forefather in order to be a leader of God's people. Spiritual leadership in the Bible was intended to be based upon spiritual qualification.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The sons of Merari: Mahli and Mushi. These are the families of the Levites according to their generations- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Mahli" and "Mushi" mean 'sickly' and 'sensitive' respectively.&nbsp; This confirms the suggestion I have often made, that names were given in response to later character and life experience. Sometimes in these genealogies we read the birth names, at others, the names they were given later in life. And therefore the same person can have more than one name. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Amram took Jochebed his father’s sister to himself as wife; and she bore him Aaron and Moses: and the years of the life of Amram were a hundred and thirty-seven years- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Amram lived to the same age as Levi (:16). Numbers and ages are used in Semitic literature often in a non literal sense, in order to make some point. Perhaps the idea here is that Amram was indeed a true son of Levi; despite Israel's general apostacy in Egypt, he married within his own tribe, as if seeking to keep the spirit of the later legislation to this effect.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The sons of Izhar: Korah, and Nepheg, and Zichri- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The theme of this section, as explained on :13,26,27, is how the leaders of Israel, Moses and Aaron, were so weak. And with the benefit of our knowledge of Korah's later apostacy, we see the theme repeated here. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The sons of Uzziel: Mishael, and Elzaphan, and Sithri- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The recording of four generations is surely to prove how the prediction of <em><a href='B:10 15:16'>Gen 15:16</a></em> came true- in the fourth generation they were to return to Canaan.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Aaron took Elisheba, the daughter of Amminadab, the sister of Nahshon, as his wife; and she bore him Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The theme of this section, as explained on :13,26,27, is how the leaders of Israel, Moses and Aaron, were so weak. And with the benefit of our knowledge of Nadab and Abihu's later apostacy (<em><a href='B:30 10:1-4'>Lev 10:1-4</a></em>), we see the theme repeated here. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The sons of Korah: Assir, and Elkanah, and Abiasaph; these are the families of the Korahites- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:130 6:22-23'>1Ch 6:22-23</a></em> defines the relationships more closely; , Elkanah was the son of Assir, and only a "son of Korah" in the sense of being a descendant of him. The sons of Korah didn't perish with their father (<em><a href='B:40 16:32'>Num 16:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 26:11'>Num 26:11</a></em>), and became authors of some of the Psalms, working as gate keepers in the temple (<em><a href='B:130 9:19'>1Ch 9:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:130 26:1-19'>1Ch 26:1-19</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Eleazar Aaron’s son took one of the daughters of Putiel as his wife; and she bore him Phinehas. These are the heads of the fathers’ houses of the Levites according to their families- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Putiel isn't mentioned elsewhere, but it appears to be a common Egyptian name, “He whom God gave”. This continues the theme of spiritual weakness (see on :23)- even the mother of Phinehas was an Egyptian, whom his father ought not to have married. Although we could argue the other way- that for an Egyptian to marry one of the slave Hebrews could be a reflection of this woman's acceptance of Yahweh as her God, even though most of His people were very far from Him. Just as it seems the daughter of Pharaoh who adopted Moses married into the Israelites.&nbsp;<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>These are that Aaron and Moses, to whom Yahweh said, Bring out the children of Israel from the land of Egypt according to their armies- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This summary statement appears to be reminding us that they were given a commandment and potential power to bring Israel out of Egypt. But Moses made every excuse not to, and railed against this command. And thus this section concludes in :26,27 that these are that Moses and Aaron. This was the extremely weak moral material which God used to save His people; and out of their weakness they were indeed made strong. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>These are those who spoke to Pharaoh king of Egypt, to bring out the children of Israel from Egypt. These are that Moses and Aaron- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The point of :26 is laboured here a second time- that "these are those...", these weak ones, stubbornly not wanting to be used by God, initially little better than Pharaoh, resistant to His word of salvation... who were used, and out of their weakness they were indeed made strong. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It happened on the day when Yahweh spoke to Moses in the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is solemn emphasis in :28,29, stating the same thing twice, that Yahweh really spoke to Moses. And he had resisted this Divine calling. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>that Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, I am Yahweh. Speak to Pharaoh king of Egypt all that I speak to you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As explained on :1-4, the Yahweh Name promised that "I will..." redeem Israel, and yet Moses refused to believe that. And a comparison of what God told Moses to tell Pharaoh, and what he is recorded as telling Pharaoh, would suggest Moses was not fully obedient to this solemn calling. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said before Yahweh, Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips, and how shall Pharaoh listen to me?</em>-<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Because of his weakness, we are able to relate to Moses, and see him as our example. It is possible that Moses was not circumcised (<em><a href='B:20 6:12'>Exo 6:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 6:30'>Exo 6:30</a></em>); which would make him even closer to us. As noted on :26,27, this refusal of Moses to respond to God's word, and his making of pathetic excuses, is being laboured. For "these are those" (:27) who were used. That we might glorify God for His patience, and soften ourselves to work with Him without resistance. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Behold, I have made you as God to Pharaoh; and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>A prophet is thus defined as someone who is as a mouth for someone else (as in <em><a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a></em>). Here we have another window into the meaning of the Divine inspiration of the scriptures. His prophets were as His mouth to their audiences. And we note that Moses, a man, can function as God. And yet he was not God. There should therefore be no reason for thinking that the Lord Jesus is "God" in the misguided Trinitarian sense. Like Moses, He could bear the Name of God and function as God, without being God Himself. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall speak all that I command you; and Aaron your brother shall speak to Pharaoh, that he let the children of Israel go out of his land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>And yet throughout the record of the plagues, Aaron says nothing. This concession to Moses' weakness was not in fact required. Or it could be that God's 'plan B' didn't work out because Aaron failed to speak as required. And so Moses did the speaking, despite his concerns about his stuttering. These kinds of chops and changes between possible potential plans fill the entire Divine - human interaction which we are part of.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It is Israel who were to later be often described as of hard hearts. They ended up acting as the Egypt which they loved. And this went too for their most religiously fanatical people. The Lord Jesus grieved for the hardened hearts of the Pharisees (<em><a href='B:480 3:5'>Mar 3:5</a></em>), and we note the similarity between the Greek words <em>Pharao </em>and <em>Pharisaios</em>. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hebrew tends to reason through placing 'blocks' of ideas are put in opposition to each other, or 'dialectic', in order to come to conclusions. That's why we can read of God hardening Pharaoh's heart, and Pharaoh hardening his own heart (<em><a href='B:20 7:3'>Exo 7:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:15'>Exo 8:15</a></em>). To Greek, step-logic thinkers, that's a worrying contradiction- only because they don't pick up the way that Hebrew reasoning involves these kinds of statements being put in opposition to each other, so that through the dialectic process we come to understand what is meant. Summing up, our covenant relationship with God is a "living intercourse" as Abraham Heschel put it; it's not merely knowing a set of doctrines and information about the covenant promises, the terms of the covenant etc. In that case the covenant would be a tether or chain; but instead it is a relationship. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But Pharaoh will not listen to you, and I will lay My hand on Egypt, and bring out My armies and My people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It would appear that all the people of Israel had a guardian Angel- this seems to be implied by <em><a href='B:20 7:4'>Exo 7:4</a></em> "(I will) bring forth Mine armies (of Angels), and My people the children of Israel", implying that there were two armies leaving Egypt- one of Angels, another of their charges. Thus we read in <em><a href='B:20 12:41'>Exo 12:41</a></em> "it came to pass that <em>all</em> the hosts of the LORD (a phrase often used about the Angels- but here concerning the Israelites too) went out from the land of Egypt". In the same way as the Angels were especially Israel's guardians in guiding them out of Egypt, it may be that the Angels minister in a guardian capacity to us especially in leading us out of the world to baptism (cp. the Red Sea). <em><a href='B:650 1:14'>Heb 1:14</a></em> offers tentative support in that the Angels are said to "minister to them who shall be heirs of salvation". At baptism we become heirs of salvation (<em><a href='B:520 4:13'>Rom 4:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 3:27-29'>Gal 3:27-29</a></em>)- those who "shall be heirs" are those as yet outside the promises of salvation. Confirmation of all this is provided by a careful reading of <em><a href='B:50 33:2-3'>Deu 33:2-3</a></em>. This describes God coming "unto them" (Israel) "with ten thousands of saints"- i.e. Angels- and giving them "a fiery Law". The next verse records: "Yea, He loved the people; all His saints are in Thy Hand (Angelic language)... every one shall receive of Thy words". Here the saints appear to be the people, thus showing that God's love to Israel was shown by each of them having an Angel (thousands of saints for thousands of people), who individually taught them the word of God, albeit all at the same time. The Angels in the court of Heaven are watching us, almost with baited breath. We are made a theatre unto the Angels, as if they are in the audience as we act out our lives (<em><a href='B:530 4:9'>1Co 4:9</a></em> RVmg.).<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel were brought out by "great judgments" (<em><a href='B:20 6:6'>Exo 6:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 7:4'>Exo 7:4</a></em>), i.e. by God's stretched out arm (<em><a href='B:20 6:6'>Exo 6:6</a></em>). The way He acted with His “arm” was a manifestation of His judgment principles. Therefore the Red Sea deliverance is described as the judgment of God, the day of the Lord etc. because God's people exited from the world whilst judgments came upon it; the Name of God was revealed through this process (<em><a href='B:230 76:6-9'>Psa 76:6-9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 103:6-7'>Psa 103:6-7</a></em>).<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The Egyptians shall know that I am Yahweh, when I stretch out My hand on Egypt, and bring out the children of Israel from among them- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This could continue the theme of God's hopeful intention that Egypt would be converted to Him by the whole process of Israel's redemption from Egypt. Just as the prophetic hope was that the surrounding Gentiles would be converted by Judah's redemption from the lands of their exile. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Or we could read this as meaning that all too late, having received God's judgments, the Egyptians would know Yahweh. The rejected will not only see how they could have been in the Kingdom; judgment results in men knowing God's Name / character. When God's judgments had been poured out on Egypt, then they knew God's Name. The rejected will come to appreciate true spirituality- but tragically all too late. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses and Aaron did so. As Yahweh commanded them, so they did-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses and Aaron agreed to continue speaking to Pharaoh and Israel; they "did as the Lord commanded them, so did they". This is saying the same thing twice- stressing their obedience.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses was eighty years old, and Aaron eighty-three years old, when they spoke to Pharaoh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Aaron would have been only say seven years old at the most when Moses disappeared into the court of Pharaoh. He hardly knew Moses, so his obedience to the Divine call to make a long desert journey to meet his brother at a remote mountain was therefore the more commendable.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Aaron, saying- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The trumpets of Revelation 8-11 are clearly based upon the plagues of Exodus 7-12. Yet those plagues were each one designed to induce repentance in Egypt; there were various possible futures and outcomes related to each of them. If, e.g., after plague eight, Pharaoh had truly repented- then the other plagues wouldn't have happened. And perhaps it will be the same with the trumpets of the last days. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Pharaoh speaks to you, saying, ‘Perform a miracle!’ then you shall tell Aaron, ‘Take your rod, and cast it down before Pharaoh, that it become a serpent’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is no mention here of the serpent turning back into a rod. A man's rod was his personal possession and indicative of his power and standing; we recall Judah giving his rod as a guarantee to Tamar and being humiliated by losing it. It is significant that the rods of Pharaoh's courtiers were gobbled up by Aaron's rod / serpent- and they were left, as it were, without their symbols of power. Even if the snakes produced by the magicians were just let out of a bag, all the same, the courtiers could not then suddenly claim their rods had returned to them. They would have had to at least conceal them. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses and Aaron went in to Pharaoh, and they did so, as Yahweh had commanded: and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh and before his servants, and it became a serpent- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Despite the stress upon the impudence of Moses and his refusal to obey his Divine commission, the record now emphasizes his obedience to God's commands. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Then Pharaoh also called for the wise men and the sorcerers. They also, the magicians of Egypt, did the same thing with their enchantments- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Surely they used trickery, releasing serpents out of a bag. But it is recorded here and in :12 as if they really succeeded in doing this 'miracle' (:9). Likewise the language of demons is used in the New Testament, as if they really existed as radically evil spirits, and were responsible for sickness; when the rest of the Bible denies this.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For they each cast down their rods, and they became serpents: but Aaron’s rod swallowed up their rods- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This was to warn the perceptive Egyptians that Yahweh could easily swallow them up if He wished; and He did so at the Red Sea, to those who refused to learn this lesson (<em><a href='B:20 15:12'>Exo 15:12</a></em>). There is no record that their 'serpents' turned back into rods. They were left without their rods; and perhaps Aaron's rod / serpent literally gobbled up their rods, thus taking their symbols of power and authority away from them.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he didn’t listen to them; as Yahweh had spoken- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The same Hebrew words used of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart occur in a positive context- for God also hardens or strengthens the hearts of the righteous (<em><a href='B:230 27:14'>Psa 27:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 35:4'>Isa 35:4</a></em>). Indeed, <em><a href='B:290 35:4'>Isa 35:4</a></em> speaks of how the righteous shouldn’t have a weak or (Heb.) ‘fluid’ heart, but rather a hardened one. Clearly enough, God solidifies human attitudes, one way or the other, through the work of His Spirit upon our spirit. This is a sobering thought- for He is prepared to confirm a person in their weak thinking. But on the other hand, even the weakest basic intention towards righteousness is solidified by Him too. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Pharaoh’s heart is stubborn. He refuses to let the people go- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Stubborn" is used of how ears of hearing are dull (s.w. stubborn; <em><a href='B:290 6:10'>Isa 6:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 59:1'>Isa 59:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 7:11'>Zec 7:11</a></em>). He was consciously refusing to hear God's word.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Go to Pharaoh in the morning. Behold, he goes out to the water; and you shall stand by the river’s bank to meet him; and the rod which was turned to a serpent you shall take in your hand- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The idea was that God, the "I will be who I will be", can change things; a rod to a serpent, and now water into blood. He can and will change things on earth; that is part of the declaration of His Name and the salvation and redemption which are the lead characteristics of His Name. Pharaoh likely went to the Nile to worship the gods he believed to be there. And the changing of water into blood was therefore a&nbsp; judgment of his gods. Seeing that Pharaoh considered himself a divine figure, and related to the gods, this was therefore a judgment upon himself personally.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>You shall tell him, ‘Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, has sent me to you, saying, Let My people go, that they may serve Me in the wilderness, and behold, until now you haven’t listened-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on <em><a href='B:20 34:27'>Exo 34:27</a></em>. <em><a href='B:20 7:16'>Exo 7:16</a></em> brings out the unity between Moses and Israel by a play on words: “The LORD God of the Hebrews hath sent me (lit. ‘let me go’) unto thee, saying, Let my people go”. “Let go” translates the same Hebrew word as “sent me”. Just as Moses had been let go by Yahweh, so Israel were to be. Likewise, both the Lord Jesus and Israel are called "the elect" (<em><a href='B:290 42:1'>Isa 42:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 45:4'>Isa 45:4</a></em>); both are fulfillments of the servant songs in Isaiah.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Serve Me" could refer specifically to the initial request to keep a feast to Yahweh. But the call was for Israel to be allowed to change masters, from Pharaoh to Yahweh. They changed masters when they crossed the Red Sea, just as Paul says happens when we are baptized (Romans 6). And the Red Sea crossing represented baptism into Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>). Like us, Israel were not radically free to do as they pleased. What happened was that they changed masters; hence the appeal to Pharaoh to let God's people go, that they may serve Him rather than Pharaoh. We too will only find ultimate freedom through this servitude to God's ways, and will finally emerge into the radical liberty of the children of God in the Kingdom age (<em><a href='B:520 8:21'>Rom 8:21</a></em>).&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Thus says Yahweh, In this you shall know that I am Yahweh. Behold, I will strike with the rod that is in My hand on the waters which are in the river, and they shall be turned to blood-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The signs done by Moses before Pharaoh have evident connection with the later plagues brought upon him- they were all "that you may know" (<em><a href='B:20 7:17'>Exo 7:17</a></em> etc.). The staff, stretched out right hand, snakes, the rod "swallowing" the serpent rods of Egypt (symbols of Pharaoh- <em><a href='B:330 29:3-5'>Eze 29:3-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 32:2'>Eze 32:2</a></em>) just as the Egyptians were to be swallowed at the Red Sea (<em><a href='B:20 15:12'>Exo 15:12</a></em>), leprosy / boils, water / blood all repeat. The signs were thus both an encouragement to believe as well as a warning of judgment to come. Pharaoh was presented with the possibility of either faith, or destruction. Note in passing that God's hardening of that man's heart didn't mean that He made no effort to save him nor appeal to him. It was God's desire that he repent. I suggest the Lord Jesus had God's intentions with Pharaoh in view when He said that He was doing miracles "that you may know that the Son of Man has power to forgive sins" (<em><a href='B:480 2:10'>Mar 2:10</a></em>).&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The fish that are in the river shall die, and the river shall become foul; and the Egyptians shall loathe to drink water from the river’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Foul" has the sense of being morally obnoxious. The use of this word, with its moral overtones, is appropriate once we perceive that the god represented by the river was being targetted. The intention of the plagues was to turn the people against their own gods, and to Yahweh. The god of the Nile became odious to them, and it was seen to have failed to provide them with water. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Tell Aaron, ‘Take your rod, and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt, over their rivers, over their streams, and over their pools, and over all their ponds of water, that they may become blood; and there shall be blood throughout all the land of Egypt, both in vessels of wood and in vessels of stone’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Ponds of water" is NIV "reservoirs". The destruction of the water was a case of "Against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am Yahweh” (<em><a href='B:20 12:12'>Exo 12:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:11'>Exo 15:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 33:4'>Num 33:4</a></em>). The “gods” are spoken of for a moment as real and existing, in order to show Yahweh’s total superiority over them to the point that they didn’t exist. Note how it was the Egyptian people who were judged (<em><a href='B:10 15:14'>Gen 15:14</a></em>); their idols (“gods”) are used by metonymy to stand for those who believed in them. Likewise “demons” is sometimes put by metonymy for those who believed in them (e.g. <em><a href='B:480 1:32'>Mar 1:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 1:34'>Mar 1:34</a></em>). The judgment upon Egypt’s gods is brought out by an otherwise obscure reference in <em><a href='B:20 7:19'>Exo 7:19</a></em> to how “there shall be blood in all the land of Egypt on wood and in stone”. “Wood and stone” is a term usually used in the Bible for idols; and “the Egyptian priests used to wash the images of their gods in water every day early in the morning”. Thus the gods were shown to be effectively dead and bleeding. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses and Aaron did so, as Yahweh commanded; and he lifted up the rod, and struck the waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants; and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Blood implies death, and the idea was that the gods associated with the Nile had been effectively slain. All the plagues were intended to lea the Egyptians to ditch their faith in their gods, and accept Yahweh. There is always ultimate spiritual purpose in all God's judgments; they are never to be seen as the lashing out of an offended deity.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The fish that were in the river died; and the river became foul, and the Egyptians couldn’t drink water from the river; and the blood was throughout all the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As noted on :18, "foul" has the sense of being morally obnoxious. The use of this word, with its moral overtones, is appropriate once we perceive that the god represented by the river was being targetted. The spiritually perceptive were intended to realize that if God could manipulate the Nile as He wished, He could do so with the Red Sea. Those who charged into it pursuing the Israelites had refused to learn this obvious lesson. The drying up of waters and death of fish is the language of Babylon's destruction; Judah were asked to believe that as God had acted with Egypt in order to release God's people, so He could do so with Babylon (<em><a href='B:290 50:2'>Isa 50:2</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The magicians of Egypt did the same thing with their enchantments; and Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he didn’t listen to them; as Yahweh had spoken- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Their claims would have been almost comical; because <em>all</em> the Nile water was made blood, it was impossible for them to take some of it and turn it to blood. But the record does not record a word of this <em>explicitly</em>. Their false claims are recorded uncorrected – to bring home (to the sensitive reader) the power of Yahweh’s triumph over them. It's the same with the language of demons in the NT. And the miracle was clearly aimed at showing that the gods of the Nile had been slain by Yahweh; for the magicians to seek to replicate this was therefore driving them to as it were slay their own gods.&nbsp;<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There were so many similarities between Elijah and Moses; Dale Allison points out:<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Confronted Ahab (<em><a href='B:110 17:1'>1Ki 17:1</a></em>) = Confronted Pharaoh (<em><a href='B:20 5:1'>Exo 5:1</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Fled into the wilderness fearing for his life (<em><a href='B:110 19:3'>1Ki 19:3</a></em>) = Fled into the wilderness fearing for his life (<em><a href='B:20 2:15'>Exo 2:15</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Miraculously fed “...bread and meat in the morning and bread and meat in the evening...” (<em><a href='B:110 17:6'>1Ki 17:6</a></em>) = Miraculously fed “...meat to eat in the evening, and bread to the full in the morning...” (<em><a href='B:20 16:8'>Exo 16:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 16:12'>Exo 16:12</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Gathered all Israel to Mount Carmel (<em><a href='B:110 18:19'>1Ki 18:19</a></em>)=Gathered all Israel to Mount Sinai (<em><a href='B:20 19:17'>Exo 19:17</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Combated the prophets of Baal (<em><a href='B:110 18:20-40'>1Ki 18:20-40</a></em>) = Combated the magicians of Pharaoh (<em><a href='B:20 7:8-13'>Exo 7:8-13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 7:20-22'>Exo 7:20-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:1-7'>Exo 8:1-7</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Successful in his intercession for Israel to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel (<em><a href='B:110 18:36-39'>1Ki 18:36-39</a></em>) = Successful in his intercession for Israel to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel (<em><a href='B:20 32:11-14'>Exo 32:11-14</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Elijah took twelve stones at Carmel “...according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob...” (<em><a href='B:110 18:30-32'>1Ki 18:30-32</a></em>) = Moses had twelve pillars set up at Sinai “...corresponding to the twelve tribes of Israel...” (<em><a href='B:20 24:4'>Exo 24:4</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord accepted Elijah’s offering by sending fire from heaven and consuming it completely. The people threw themselves down on their faces. (<em><a href='B:110 18:36-39'>1Ki 18:36-39</a></em>) = The Lord accepted Moses and Aaron’s offering by sending fire from heaven and consuming it completely. The people threw themselves down on their faces. (<em><a href='B:30 9:22-24'>Lev 9:22-24</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>By Elijah’s authority 3000 idolatrous prophets were slain (<em><a href='B:110 18:40'>1Ki 18:40</a></em>) = By Moses’ authority 3000 idolaters were slain (<em><a href='B:20 32:25-29'>Exo 32:25-29</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>After killing the prophets of Baal Elijah climbed Carmel to pray. (<em><a href='B:110 18:42'>1Ki 18:42</a></em>) = After killing the idolaters Moses climbed Sinai to pray (<em><a href='B:20 32:30'>Exo 32:30</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Went without food for forty days and forty nights (<em><a href='B:110 19:8'>1Ki 19:8</a></em>) = Went without food for forty days and forty nights (<em><a href='B:20 34:28'>Exo 34:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:9'>Deu 9:9</a></em>) <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Elijah was in “the cave” on Horeb (=Sinai) when the Lord “passed by” (<em><a href='B:110 19:9-11'>1Ki 19:9-11</a></em>) = Moses was hidden “in the cleft of the rock” when the Lord passed by Sinai (<em><a href='B:20 33:21-23'>Exo 33:21-23</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Elijah saw storm, wind, an earthquake and fire upon Horeb (=Sinai). (<em><a href='B:110 19:11-12'>1Ki 19:11-12</a></em>) = Moses saw storm, wind, an earthquake and fire upon Sinai (<em><a href='B:20 19:16-20'>Exo 19:16-20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 20:18'>Exo 20:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:11'>Deu 4:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 5:22-27'>Deu 5:22-27</a></em>). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Prayed that he might die (<em><a href='B:110 19:1-4'>1Ki 19:1-4</a></em>) = Prayed that he might die. (<em><a href='B:40 11:10-15'>Num 11:10-15</a></em>).<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The Lord brought down fire from heaven upon his enemies (<em><a href='B:120 1:9-12'>2Ki 1:9-12</a></em>) = The Lord brought down fire from heaven upon those who rebelled against him (Numbers 16; cf. <em><a href='B:30 10:1-3'>Lev 10:1-3</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Elijah parted the waters of the Jordan by striking the waters with his cloak and passed over on dry ground. (<em><a href='B:120 2:8'>2Ki 2:8</a></em>) = Moses parted the waters of the Red Sea by stretching out his staff and passed over on dry ground (<em><a href='B:20 14:16'>Exo 14:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 14:21-22'>Exo 14:21-22</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>His successor was one who had served him and came to resemble him in many ways, parting the waters of the Jordan as he had ( 2 Kings 2) = His successor was one who had served him and came to resemble him in many ways, parting the waters of the Jordan as he had the Red Sea. (Joshua 3)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Was taken away in the Transjordan (<em><a href='B:120 2:9-11'>2Ki 2:9-11</a></em>) = Died in the Transjordan (<em><a href='B:50 34:5'>Deu 34:5</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Mysteriously translated (2 Kings 9-18) = Died mysteriously and buried in a valley, but his burial place was unknown. (<em><a href='B:50 34:6'>Deu 34:6</a></em>)<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The point of these similarities was that the Angel wanted Elijah to be like Moses; to pray for the peoples’ salvation, to return to the people and lead them and teach them. Moses had begged for God’s mercy for His people; but Elijah was so full of self-justification that he prayed against Israel. And so with us, we are potentially led into situations where we are to discern the similarities between us and Bible characters; we are set up with opportunities to respond in a way that reflects how we have learnt the lessons from them. The way the Lord Jesus perceived this in His wilderness temptations is a great example. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh turned and went into his house, and he didn’t even take this to heart- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Because God had hardened his heart (:22), meaning He had removed sensitivity from his conscience. His heart was turned by God, because that was the direction he himself wanted (<em><a href='B:230 105:25'>Psa 105:25</a></em>). Pharaoh's response gets increasingly better, confessing sinfulness, asking for prayer, etc. And yet we have to read this as his conscience being increasingly touched, and yet he refused to act upon it. The movement of conscience within him was overcome by the movement of hardness; and as hardness was his dominant desire, it was that which Yahweh confirmed. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>All the Egyptians dug around the river for water to drink; for they couldn’t drink of the water of the river-</em></p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh was condemned and Egypt overthrown because of his hard heart- but the very word is used to describe the hardness of Israel's heart at the time (<em><a href='B:20 32:9'>Exo 32:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:3-5'>Exo 33:3-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 34:9'>Exo 34:9</a></em>). Israel were really no better than Egypt- just as Egypt was plagued "so that they could not drink the water" (<em><a href='B:20 7:24'>Exo 7:24</a></em>), so we find Israel in the same situation right after leaving Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 15:23'>Exo 15:23</a></em>). As the Egyptians were stripped of their jewellery, so Israel stripped themselves of it before the golden calf (<em><a href='B:20 12:36'>Exo 12:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:6'>Exo 33:6</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Seven days were fulfilled, after Yahweh had struck the river- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This period was intended to allow the Egyptians to meditate upon what had been done. The language of Yahweh striking is appropriate to the striking of a person; the idea was consistently that the gods supposedly behind the Nile had been slain.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh spoke to Moses, Go in to Pharaoh, and tell him, This is what Yahweh says, ‘Let My people go, that they may serve Me- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Serve Me" could refer specifically to the initial request to keep a feast to Yahweh. But the call was for Israel to be allowed to change masters, from Pharaoh to Yahweh. They changed masters when they crossed the Red Sea, just as Paul says happens when we are baptized (Romans 6). And the Red Sea crossing represented baptism into Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>). Like us, Israel were not radically free to do as they pleased. What happened was that they changed masters; hence the appeal to Pharaoh to let God's people go, that they may serve Him rather than Pharaoh. We too will only find ultimate freedom through this servitude to God's ways, and will finally emerge into the radical liberty of the children of God in the Kingdom age (<em><a href='B:520 8:21'>Rom 8:21</a></em>).&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>If you refuse to let them go, behold, I will plague all your borders with frogs- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The land was 'smitten' in <em><a href='B:20 8:2'>Exo 8:2</a></em> as a foretaste of the 'smiting' of the Egyptian firstborn (<em><a href='B:20 12:23'>Exo 12:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 12:27'>Exo 12:27</a></em>). It was an appeal for Pharaoh's repentance, in the hope that the final smiting of the firstborn would not be necessary. It was God's intention and hope to save Pharaoh, but he would not.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and the river shall swarm with frogs, which shall go up and come into your house, and into your bedroom, and on your bed, and into the house of your servants, and on your people, and into your ovens, and into your kneading troughs- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>What God did at creation, He can do at any time. As He made the waters “swarm” in <em><a href='B:10 1:20'>Gen 1:20</a></em>, so He made the waters of the Nile “swarm” with frogs in order to save His people from a no-hope, chaotic, disordered, hopeless situation. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and the frogs shall come up both on you, and on your people, and on all your servants’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"On you" shows how the plagues were specifically aimed at Pharaoh. We marvel at God's repeated efforts to bring this man to accept Him. It is a parade example to us of how we should never give up with anyone, not even the most apparently unlikely candidate for the Kingdom. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Tell Aaron, ‘Stretch out your hand with your rod over the rivers, over the streams, and over the pools, and cause frogs to come up on the land of Egypt’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>All these water courses were part of the Nile system. Again, the gods supposed to be associated with the Nile are being targetted, as well as the god associated with the frog. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt; and the frogs came up, and covered the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The 'covering' of Egypt with frogs in <em><a href='B:20 8:6'>Exo 8:6</a></em> and locusts in <em><a href='B:20 10:5'>Exo 10:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:15'>Exo 10:15</a></em> looked ahead to the 'covering' of the Egyptians at the Red Sea (<em><a href='B:20 14:28'>Exo 14:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:5'>Exo 15:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:10'>Exo 15:10</a></em>). It was an appeal for repentance, in the hope that the final smiting would not be necessary. It was God's intention and hope to save the Egyptians, but they would not.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The magicians did the same thing with their enchantments, and brought up frogs on the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Their claims would have been almost comical; because <em>all</em> the country was full of frogs anyway. But the record does not record a word of this <em>explicitly</em>. Their false claims are recorded uncorrected – to bring home (to the sensitive reader) the power of Yahweh’s triumph over them. It's the same with the language of demons in the NT. The miracle was clearly aimed at showing that the gods of the Nile had been slain by Yahweh, and their frog god was actually turned into a curse for them; for the magicians to seek to replicate this was therefore driving them to as it were slay and disparage their own gods.&nbsp;<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Then Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron, and said, Entreat Yahweh, that He take away the frogs from me, and from my people; and I will let the people go, that they may sacrifice to Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The frogs "destroyed them" (<em><a href='B:230 78:45'>Psa 78:45</a></em>), and they even appeared in the bedroom of the king (<em><a href='B:230 105:30'>Psa 105:30</a></em>). Pharaoh had made no response to the first plague, but now he is forced to make some response. He freely uses the Yahweh Name; he was being led to "know" Him. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said to Pharaoh, I give you the honour of setting the time that I should pray for you, and for your servants, and for your people, that the frogs be destroyed from you and your houses, and remain in the river only-</em></p>&nbsp;<p style='margin-left:1em'>The record of the miracles is framed to show God commanding Moses to do certain things to bring and end the plagues, and him obedient to this. But <em><a href='B:20 8:9'>Exo 8:9</a></em> RV contains a strange sentence: “Have thou this glory over me: when shall I intreat for thee... to destroy the frogs?”. It could be that, in the words of Bro. Mark Vincent, “Moses with an excessive and sarcastic politeness, is asking, ‘And (pray tell me!) when exactly would you like the frogs to be gone?’, as though Pharaoh might miss them and fondly wish them to stay around for a couple more days”. This sarcasm on Moses' part surely doesn’t score very highly in spiritual terms; and neither does Elijah's mockery of Baal's absence as being because he was going to the toilet. And yet God worked through him. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said, Tomorrow. He said, Be it according to your word, that you may know that there is none like Yahweh our God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh naturally wanted to say "Right now!". But he was given the chance to define a time in order to coax him toward repentance, and the realization that God was in absolute control of all this.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The frogs shall depart from you, and from your houses, and from your servants, and from your people. They shall remain in the river only- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The whole situation here shows the development of Moses. He had departed from the Divine script by asking Pharaoh sarcastically when he wanted the plague removed. And Moses had given him a time. But he had to pray for this to happen (:12), and so his confident statement was made in faith. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses and Aaron went out from Pharaoh, and Moses cried to Yahweh concerning the frogs which He had brought on Pharaoh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is the language of intense prayer. The removal of the frogs was far from automatic. As noted on :11, although Moses gave way to inappropriate sarcasm and over confidence in :10, he is starting to flourish spiritually. No longer is he the unsure, unwilling participant in the coalition with Yahweh which he had felt almost railroaded into. He is taking initiative, and stating things which can only come about through his own intense prayer. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh did according to the word of Moses, and the frogs died out of the houses, out of the courts, and out of the fields- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The frogs were being slain by the word of Moses which was as it were a command to Yahweh. The Egyptians saw their frog god being slain by Yahweh, at the word of His servant Moses. And Moses in turn was being led to understand the power of prayer, how our words can become a word of command to Yahweh; such is His earnest, even humble desire to respond to the words of men to Him.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They gathered them together in heaps, and the land stank- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The smell of the death of their frog god would have been an abiding testimony to the idea that their god was totally dead- and they had buried him. "Heaps" is s.w. clay or mud. There is no record that the water turned to blood was reversed, so perhaps the land was still covered in "blood", now with heaps of putrid frogs in it. It would have been a terrible scene and experience. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But when Pharaoh saw that there was a respite, he hardened his heart, and didn’t listen to them, as Yahweh had spoken- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hebrew tends to reason through placing 'blocks' of ideas are put in opposition to each other, or 'dialectic', in order to come to conclusions. That's why we can read of God hardening Pharaoh's heart, and Pharaoh hardening his own heart (<em><a href='B:20 7:3'>Exo 7:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:15'>Exo 8:15</a></em>). To Greek, step-logic thinkers, that's a worrying contradiction- only because they don't pick up the way that Hebrew reasoning involves these kinds of statements being put in opposition to each other, so that through the dialectic process we come to understand what is meant. Summing up, our covenant relationship with God is a "living intercourse" as Abraham Heschel put it; it's not merely knowing a set of doctrines and information about the covenant promises, the terms of the covenant etc. In that case the covenant would be a tether or chain; but instead it is a relationship. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is a case of "Let favour be shewed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness" (<em><a href='B:290 26:10'>Isa 26:10</a></em>). People like this "despise the riches of God’s goodness and forbearance and long-suffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads them to repentance". And so they "treasure up to themselves wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God" (<em><a href='B:520 2:4-5'>Rom 2:4-5</a></em>). Paul surely wrote this in conscious allusion to Pharaoh, as a representative of all who will ultimately fail of God's grace. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Tell Aaron, ‘Stretch out your rod, and strike the dust of the earth, that it may become lice throughout all the land of Egypt’-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>LXX "mosquitoes". The plagues and miracles often involve a transformation of one thing to another, in this case, dust to lice. Man is made of "the dust of the ground" (<em><a href='B:10 2:7'>Gen 2:7</a></em>). God can transform man, in all his lowliness and earthiness, as He wishes. That is the simple take away.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They did so; and Aaron stretched out his hand with his rod, and struck the dust of the earth, and there were lice on man, and on animal; all the dust of the earth became lice throughout all the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"They did so" shows again the careful obedience now manifest in these men. Moses spoke to Aaron just as commanded, and Aaron did exactly what he was told. This is all a far cry from Moses' grudging struggle to be obedient when he was first commissioned.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The magicians tried with their enchantments to produce lice, but they couldn’t. There were lice on man, and on animal- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Their previous attempts to replicate the plagues had been apparently successful. But apparently something went wrong with their usual trickery, and they failed to replicate this one. And it would only have been creating yet more judgment and suffering for themselves if they had succeeded. The folly of trying to mock Yahweh was increasingly apparent.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Then the magicians said to Pharaoh, This is the finger of God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Grammatically this implies a singular God, whereas the Egyptians were polytheists. But they were being led toward monotheism; Yahweh alone could do such things, and all their gods were being systematically deconstructed. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>And Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, and he didn’t listen to them; as Yahweh had spoken- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh hardened his own heart (<em><a href='B:20 7:22'>Exo 7:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:15'>Exo 8:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:19'>Exo 8:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:32'>Exo 8:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:7'>Exo 9:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:34-35'>Exo 9:34-35</a></em>). And yet God hardened his heart (<em><a href='B:20 9:12'>Exo 9:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:1'>Exo 10:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:20'>Exo 10:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:27'>Exo 10:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:10'>Exo 11:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 14:8'>Exo 14:8</a></em>). The references to God hardening Pharaoh's heart generally occur after Pharaoh had first hardened his own heart. The fact Pharaoh hardened his heart was a sin (<em><a href='B:20 9:34'>Exo 9:34</a></em>), and yet God encouraged him in this. God offered Pharaoh a way of escape after each of the plagues; all he had to do was to agree to let Israel go. But the conditions got tougher the longer he resisted God's demand: he finally had to not only let Israel go, but also provide them with sacrifices (<em><a href='B:20 10:25'>Exo 10:25</a></em>). Likewise when Nebuchadnezzar lifted his heart up, God hardened it (<em><a href='B:340 5:20'>Dan 5:20</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Rise up early in the morning, and stand before Pharaoh; behold, he comes out to the water; and tell him, ‘This is what Yahweh says, Let My people go, that they may serve Me- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>See on :1. Pharaoh was still going to worship at the Nile, despite the effective destruction of all the gods associated with it.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is a much repeated characteristic of God's servants: that they 'rose up early in the morning' and did God's work. In each of the following passages, this phrase is clearly not an idiom; rather does it have an evidently literal meaning: Abraham (<em><a href='B:10 19:27'>Gen 19:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 21:14'>Gen 21:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 22:3'>Gen 22:3</a></em>); Jacob (<em><a href='B:10 28:18'>Gen 28:18</a></em>); Job (1:5); Moses (<em><a href='B:20 8:20'>Exo 8:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:13'>Exo 9:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 24:4'>Exo 24:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 34:4'>Exo 34:4</a></em>); Joshua (<em><a href='B:60 3:1'>Jos 3:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 6:12'>Jos 6:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 7:16'>Jos 7:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 8:10'>Jos 8:10</a></em>); Gideon (<em><a href='B:70 6:38'>Jdg 6:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 7:1'>Jdg 7:1</a></em>). This is quite an impressive list, numerically. This can be a figure for being zealous (<em><a href='B:230 127:2'>Psa 127:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 27:14'>Pro 27:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:260 7:12'>Son 7:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 5:11'>Isa 5:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:430 3:7'>Zep 3:7</a></em>). God Himself rises up early in His zeal to save and bring back His wayward people (<em><a href='B:300 7:13'>Jer 7:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 7:25'>Jer 7:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 11:7'>Jer 11:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 25:3-4'>Jer 25:3-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 26:5'>Jer 26:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 29:19'>Jer 29:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 32:33'>Jer 32:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 35:14-15'>Jer 35:14-15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 44:4'>Jer 44:4</a></em>). Yet the above examples all show that men literally rose up early in their service to God; this was an expression of their zeal for God, in response to His zeal for us. I'm not suggesting that zeal for God is reflected by rising early rather than staying up late; but it wouldn't be too much to suggest that if we are men of mission, we won't waste our hours in bed. Get up when you wake up. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Else, if you will not let My people go, behold, I will send swarms of beetles on you, and on your servants, and on your people, and into your houses: and the houses of the Egyptians shall be full of swarms of beetles, and also the ground whereon they are- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The beetle god was now to be deconstructed. This god was presented as effectively the destruction rather than the salvation of Egypt. They were to have so much of their 'god' that they came to detest him. Again, the whole exercise was to lead them to ditch their gods and accept Yahweh. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will set apart in that day the land of Goshen, in which My people dwell, that no swarms of beetles shall be there; to the end you may know that I am Yahweh in the midst of the earth- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The 'setting apart' of Israel from Egypt is a major theme (<em><a href='B:20 8:22'>Exo 8:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:4'>Exo 9:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:7'>Exo 11:7</a></em> "put a difference"). It was part of a 'sanctifying' of Israel for priestly service to Yahweh as a nation, as well as a lesson for Egypt that the only way to salvation was through separation from their own people and culture, and joining the people of God. We marvel at the multi functional way in which God works. The same word is used to describe how God "has set apart him that is Godly for Himself" (<em><a href='B:230 4:3'>Psa 4:3</a></em>); even though Israel were far from being Godly. And it is used of God's special grace, 'set apart', a grace known by no other people (<em><a href='B:230 17:7'>Psa 17:7</a></em>). The word is used in this sense in <em><a href='B:20 33:16'>Exo 33:16</a></em>, where Moses reasons that it is God's grace and the visible presence of that grace which is what sets apart Israel from all other peoples. And that is true to this day. God's grace is what is the lead and distinguishing characteristic of His way from all other religions. It is the experience of that grace which makes us distinct from all others who have not claimed it for themselves. And it all began with God 'setting apart' a sinful, idolatrous Israel from the Egyptians around them, all by grace, seeing they were largely no better than Egypt.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>I will put a division between My people and your people: by tomorrow shall this sign be’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This "division" was the setting apart of God's people for Himself, by grace; see on :23. Egypt were being led to realize that salvation was through identifying with Yahweh's people. And the fact a mixed multitude left Egypt with Israel is evidence that some did respond to this. The Hebrew for "division" is elsewhere always translated "redemption". In the exodus context, "He sent redemption unto His people" (<em><a href='B:230 111:9'>Psa 111:9</a></em>). Our redemption involves our separation from our 'Egypt'. Separation, holiness, being separated both from the world and unto the things of God, is therefore part and parcel of our redemption process. It is this which is the basis of our separation from the world. Not simply in a negative sense, of being separated from the world, but more importantly, separated unto the things of the new life and redemption.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh did so; and there came grievous swarms of beetles into the house of Pharaoh, and into his servants’ houses: and in all the land of Egypt the land was corrupted by reason of the swarms of beetles- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Corrupted" has a moral sense. The same word means both morally corrupt, and destroyed. Thus the land / earth was "corrupt" before God at the time of the flood, and was "destroyed"; the same word is used (<em><a href='B:10 6:11'>Gen 6:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 6:13'>Gen 6:13</a></em>). The religious sense of the word is relevant here- for the plague was to show that Egypt's beetle god had corrupted the land of Egypt unto destruction. Their gods were the cause of their destruction; they needed to quit those gods and accept Yahweh.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh called for Moses and for Aaron, and said, Go, sacrifice to your God within the land!- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh again has to make some concession here, but he struggles with all his might against the total capitulation to Yahweh which is required. And we do the same. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said, It isn’t appropriate to do so; for we shall sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians to Yahweh our God. Behold, shall we sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians before their eyes, and won’t they stone us?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Cows were sacred to Apsis, rams to Jupiter, goats to Bacchus, heifers to Juno. Indeed all animals were likewise thought to be sacred to various other deities. Clearly there were principles of sacrifice established for Yahweh's people well before they were codified in the Mosaic law. To sacrifice those animals to any other god apart from the deity of those animals was considered blasphemy by the Egyptians. And stoning was the punishment for religious apostacy. They considered that offering e.g. a cow to a deity other than Apsis meant a rejection of Apsis as unworthy to accept sacrifice. And that indeed was the message being taught to the Egyptians- that their gods were dead and to be rejected, and Moses is now manipulating Pharaoh to a position whereby he had to accept the blasphemous dismantling of his entire religious system.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>We will go three days’ journey into the wilderness, and sacrifice to Yahweh our God, as He shall command us-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The three days connects with the time the Lord was dead before His resurrection. The people of Israel as a body were going through the death and resurrection experience of the Lord Jesus, through the process of the Passover and Exodus through the Red Sea. Israel ate Passover (<em><a href='B:20 12:6'>Exo 12:6</a></em>) (14th Abib), as the Lord died on the cross as the Passover lambs were slain; Israel left Egypt the next day (<em><a href='B:40 33:3'>Num 33:3</a></em>) (15th Abib) and journeyed three days (<em><a href='B:20 8:27'>Exo 8:27</a></em>) (15th-17th Abib), and the Lord Jesus was three days in the tomb. Israel then came through the Red Sea (17th Abib), connecting with the Lord's being resurrected. As we come out of the baptismal water, we really are united with the resurrected Lord- a new creation. His newness of life, His deliverance and successful exodus from the world- all this becomes ours. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh said, I will let you go, that you may sacrifice to Yahweh your God in the wilderness, only you shall not go very far away. Pray for me- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh is clearly no longer in control of the situation. No longer is this the man who barked out the order that the Israelites should be given no straw for their bricks. "Pray for me" is pregnant with possible meaning. For it is not simply a request to pray that the beetles be removed. It sounds like he realizes his own moral need. The probing and prodding of his conscience was partly succeeding, but he keeps going back from where he is being led. Just as so many do. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said, Behold, I go out from you, and I will pray to Yahweh that the swarms of beetles may depart from Pharaoh, from his servants, and from his people, tomorrow; only don’t let Pharaoh deal deceitfully any more in not letting the people go to sacrifice to Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Moses emphasizes that it is his own prayers to Yahweh which are critical in saving Egypt. We note again that the beetles specifically targetted Pharaoh personally. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses went out from Pharaoh, and prayed to Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The plagues were not removed by a mere wave of a rod, or some other formalism. They required Moses to sincerely pray for them to be removed. This was both to teach Pharaoh the power of Moses' prayers; and also to teach Moses that prayer changes things, and he really had the power to change things through his prayers. He learned that lesson to its ultimate term when he successfully prayed that God would not destroy Israel as He intended. But faith in prayer is developed through experiences, and we see this happening with Moses.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh did according to the word of Moses, and He removed the swarms of beetles from Pharaoh, from his servants, and from his people. There remained not one- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"There remained not one" beetle (<em><a href='B:20 8:31'>Exo 8:31</a></em>), locust (<em><a href='B:20 10:19'>Exo 10:19</a></em>) nor Egyptian who pursued the Israelites (<em><a href='B:20 14:28'>Exo 14:28</a></em>). The same phrase is used. Again we see how both Egyptians and Israelites were intended to learn from the plagues, and how this came to full term when "not one" of their enemies was left- thanks to the prayer of Moses.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh hardened his heart this time also, and he didn’t let the people go- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Because God had hardened his heart (<em><a href='B:20 7:22'>Exo 7:22</a></em>), meaning He had removed sensitivity from his conscience. His heart was turned by God, because that was the direction he himself wanted (<em><a href='B:230 105:25'>Psa 105:25</a></em>). Pharaoh's response gets increasingly better, confessing sinfulness, asking for prayer, etc. And yet we have to read this as his conscience being increasingly touched, and yet he refused to act upon it. The movement of conscience within him was overcome by the movement of hardness; and as hardness was his dominant desire, it was that which Yahweh confirmed. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Then Yahweh said to Moses, Go in to Pharaoh, and tell him, ‘This is what Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, says: Let My people go, that they may serve Me- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Yahweh is now fully defined as the God of the Hebrews. It was His intention that Pharaoh should come to know Him, in relationship with Him. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For if you refuse to let them go, and hold them still- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 8:2'>Exo 8:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:2'>Exo 9:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:4'>Exo 10:4</a></em> emphasize the real choice before Pharaoh; he was refusing to let Israel go and "held" them. Babylon was warned that no nation could "hold them fast (and) refuse to let (Israel) go (because) their redeemer is strong" (<em><a href='B:300 50:33-34'>Jer 50:33-34</a></em>). The Hebrew for "strong" is that translated "hold". God had a stronger grip and claim on them than did Pharaoh. They were Yahweh's, not Pharaoh's. And it could be argued that Babylon-Persia did listen to this message, and allowed and encouraged the exiles to return. We too are to learn from all this historical precedent; that our hand is not stronger than God's. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>behold, the hand of Yahweh is on your livestock which are in the field, on the horses, on the donkeys, on the camels, on the herds, and on the flocks with a very grievous pestilence-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The "pestilence" which was the plague upon Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 9:3'>Exo 9:3</a></em>) was to come upon a hard hearted Israel (s.w. <em><a href='B:30 26:25'>Lev 26:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 14:12'>Num 14:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:21'>Deu 28:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 21:6'>Jer 21:6</a></em>). The plagues upon Egypt form the basis for the vials and seals of Revelation, which speak of judgment to come upon the land of Israel. It is a theme with God that His apostate people are "condemned with the world" (<em><a href='B:530 11:32'>1Co 11:32</a></em>). If their hearts are really with Egypt / the world, then they will share the judgments of this world. The time for separation is now, just as the Egyptians had to identify with Israel if they wished to escape the plagues.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh will make a distinction between the livestock of Israel and the livestock of Egypt; and nothing shall die of all that belongs to the children of Israel’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The 'setting apart' of Israel from Egypt is a major theme (<em><a href='B:20 8:22'>Exo 8:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:4'>Exo 9:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:7'>Exo 11:7</a></em> "put a difference"). It was part of a 'sanctifying' of Israel for priestly service to Yahweh as a nation, as well as a lesson for Egypt that the only way to salvation was through separation from their own people and culture, and joining the people of God. We marvel at the multi functional way in which God works. The same word is used to describe how God "has set apart him that is Godly for Himself" (<em><a href='B:230 4:3'>Psa 4:3</a></em>); even though Israel were far from being Godly. And it is used of God's special grace, 'set apart', a grace known by no other people (<em><a href='B:230 17:7'>Psa 17:7</a></em>). The word is used in this sense in <em><a href='B:20 33:16'>Exo 33:16</a></em>, where Moses reasons that it is God's grace and the visible presence of that grace which is what sets apart Israel from all other peoples. And that is true to this day. God's grace is what is the lead and distinguishing characteristic of His way from all other religions. It is the experience of that grace which makes us distinct from all others who have not claimed it for themselves. And it all began with God 'setting apart' a sinful, idolatrous Israel from the Egyptians around them, all by grace, seeing they were largely no better than Egypt.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh appointed a set time, saying, Tomorrow Yahweh shall do this thing in the land- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The plague upon cattle was clearly prophesied as going to happen at a specified time: “The Lord appointed a set time, saying, To morrow the Lord shall do this thing”; but it was conditional upon Pharaoh refusing to let Israel go (<em><a href='B:20 9:1-2'>Exo 9:1-2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:5'>Exo 9:5</a></em>). He <em>could</em> have complied, and therefore the plague wouldn’t have happened. And yet the prophecy is so specific that it would seem that this conditionality just didn’t exist. But it did. Pharaoh had a real choice whether or not to obey God’s word.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh did that thing on the next day; and all the livestock of Egypt died, but of the livestock of the children of Israel, not one died- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Clearly not all Egyptian cattle died because there were still some alive in the next plague (:19). So I suggest going with the translation of Adam Clarke: "All the cattle that did die belonged to the Egyptians".<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh sent, and, behold, there was not so much as one of the livestock of the Israelites dead. But the heart of Pharaoh was stubborn, and he didn’t let the people go- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh hardened his own heart (<em><a href='B:20 7:22'>Exo 7:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:15'>Exo 8:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:19'>Exo 8:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:32'>Exo 8:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:7'>Exo 9:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:34-35'>Exo 9:34-35</a></em>). And yet God hardened his heart (<em><a href='B:20 9:12'>Exo 9:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:1'>Exo 10:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:20'>Exo 10:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:27'>Exo 10:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:10'>Exo 11:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 14:8'>Exo 14:8</a></em>). The references to God hardening Pharaoh's heart generally occur after Pharaoh had first hardened his own heart. The fact Pharaoh hardened his heart was a sin (<em><a href='B:20 9:34'>Exo 9:34</a></em>), and yet God encouraged him in this. God offered Pharaoh a way of escape after each of the plagues; all he had to do was to agree to let Israel go. But the conditions got tougher the longer he resisted God's demand: he finally had to not only let Israel go, but also provide them with sacrifices (<em><a href='B:20 10:25'>Exo 10:25</a></em>). Likewise when Nebuchadnezzar lifted his heart up, God hardened it (<em><a href='B:340 5:20'>Dan 5:20</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses and to Aaron, Take to you handfuls of ashes of the furnace, and let Moses sprinkle it toward the sky in the sight of Pharaoh-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"The ashes of the furnace" which created the plague of boils (<em><a href='B:20 9:8'>Exo 9:8</a></em>) may have been a reference to the furnaces used for the brick kilns, where the Hebrews were made to slave away making bricks. The result of this abuse was to come down upon the Egyptians as boils (<em><a href='B:20 9:9'>Exo 9:9</a></em>). Egypt is therefore likened to a furnace of oppression to Israel (<em><a href='B:50 4:20'>Deu 4:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 11:4'>Jer 11:4</a></em>). The Lord describes condemnation as being cast into a furnace (<em><a href='B:470 13:42'>Mat 13:42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 13:50'>Mat 13:50</a></em>). He is not speaking literally, but rather using the figure of Egypt as a furnace- for the condemnation of the unworthy in God's Israel is to be sent back into Egypt / the world (<em><a href='B:350 8:13'>Hos 8:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:350 9:3'>Hos 9:3</a></em>), and share their judgments. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>It shall become small dust over all the land of Egypt, and shall be a boil breaking out with boils on man and on animal, throughout all the land of Egypt-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This affliction was so terrible that it became known as "the boil of Egypt" (<em><a href='B:50 28:27'>Deu 28:27</a></em>). Apostate Israel were to be punished with the judgments of Egypt. It is a theme with God that His apostate people are "condemned with the world" (<em><a href='B:530 11:32'>1Co 11:32</a></em>). If their hearts are really with Egypt / the world, then they will share the judgments of this world. The time for separation is now, just as the Egyptians had to identify with Israel if they wished to escape the plagues. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They took ashes of the furnace, and stood before Pharaoh; and Moses sprinkled it up toward the sky; and it became a boil breaking out with boils on man and on animal- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The plagues upon Egypt form the basis for the vials and seals of Revelation, which speak of judgment to come upon the land of Israel, and feature a furnace with ascending smoke turning into judgments upon the land. See on :9.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The magicians couldn’t stand before Moses because of the boils; for the boils were on the magicians, and on all the Egyptians- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:50 28:27'>Deu 28:27</a></em> describes this plague in more detail when we read of how it would come upon an apostate Israel, who identified with Egypt in their hearts and ways: "Yahweh will strike you with the boil of Egypt and with the tumours, the scurvy and the itch, from which you cannot be healed".<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh hardened the heart of Pharaoh, and he didn’t listen to them, as Yahweh had spoken to Moses- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The same Hebrew words used of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart occur in a positive context- for God also hardens or strengthens the hearts of the righteous (<em><a href='B:230 27:14'>Psa 27:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 35:4'>Isa 35:4</a></em>). Indeed, <em><a href='B:290 35:4'>Isa 35:4</a></em> speaks of how the righteous shouldn’t have a weak or (Heb.) ‘fluid’ heart, but rather a hardened one. Clearly enough, God solidifies human attitudes, one way or the other, through the work of His Spirit upon our spirit. This is a sobering thought- for He is prepared to confirm a person in their weak thinking. But on the other hand, even the weakest basic intention towards righteousness is solidified by Him too.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>When Paul insists that God hardened Pharaoh's heart (<em><a href='B:520 9:14-18'>Rom 9:14-18</a></em>), he is not only repeating the Biblical record (<em><a href='B:20 9:12'>Exo 9:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:16'>Exo 9:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:19'>Exo 33:19</a></em>), but he is alluding to the way that the Jewish <em>Book of Jubilees</em> claimed that Mastema (the supposed personal Satan) and not God hardened Pharaoh's heart. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Rise up early in the morning, and stand before Pharaoh, and tell him, ‘This is what Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, says: Let My people go, that they may serve Me- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Serve Me" could refer specifically to the initial request to keep a feast to Yahweh. But the call was for Israel to be allowed to change masters, from Pharaoh to Yahweh. They changed masters when they crossed the Red Sea, just as Paul says happens when we are baptized (Romans 6). And the Red Sea crossing represented baptism into Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>). Like us, Israel were not radically free to do as they pleased. What happened was that they changed masters; hence the appeal to Pharaoh to let God's people go, that they may serve Him rather than Pharaoh. We too will only find ultimate freedom through this servitude to God's ways, and will finally emerge into the radical liberty of the children of God in the Kingdom age (<em><a href='B:520 8:21'>Rom 8:21</a></em>). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is a much repeated characteristic of God's servants: that they 'rose up early in the morning' and did God's work. In each of the following passages, this phrase is clearly not an idiom; rather does it have an evidently literal meaning: Abraham (<em><a href='B:10 19:27'>Gen 19:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 21:14'>Gen 21:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 22:3'>Gen 22:3</a></em>); Jacob (<em><a href='B:10 28:18'>Gen 28:18</a></em>); Job (1:5); Moses (<em><a href='B:20 8:20'>Exo 8:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:13'>Exo 9:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 24:4'>Exo 24:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 34:4'>Exo 34:4</a></em>); Joshua (<em><a href='B:60 3:1'>Jos 3:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 6:12'>Jos 6:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 7:16'>Jos 7:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:60 8:10'>Jos 8:10</a></em>); Gideon (<em><a href='B:70 6:38'>Jdg 6:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 7:1'>Jdg 7:1</a></em>). This is quite an impressive list, numerically. This can be a figure for being zealous (<em><a href='B:230 127:2'>Psa 127:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 27:14'>Pro 27:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:260 7:12'>Son 7:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 5:11'>Isa 5:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:430 3:7'>Zep 3:7</a></em>). God Himself rises up early in His zeal to save and bring back His wayward people (<em><a href='B:300 7:13'>Jer 7:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 7:25'>Jer 7:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 11:7'>Jer 11:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 25:3-4'>Jer 25:3-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 26:5'>Jer 26:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 29:19'>Jer 29:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 32:33'>Jer 32:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 35:14-15'>Jer 35:14-15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 44:4'>Jer 44:4</a></em>). Yet the above examples all show that men literally rose up early in their service to God; this was an expression of their zeal for God, in response to His zeal for us. I'm not suggesting that zeal for God is reflected by rising early rather than staying up late; but it wouldn't be too much to suggest that if we are men of mission, we won't waste our hours in bed. Get up when you wake up. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For this time I will send all My plagues against your heart, against your officials, and against your people; that you may know that there is none like Me in all the earth-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>As Pharaoh’s heart was plagued (<em><a href='B:20 9:14'>Exo 9:14</a></em>), so was Israel’s (<em><a href='B:110 8:38'>1Ki 8:38</a></em>); as Egypt was a reed, so were Israel (<em><a href='B:110 14:15'>1Ki 14:15</a></em>). As Pharaoh-hophra was given into the hand of his enemies, so would Israel be (<em><a href='B:300 44:30'>Jer 44:30</a></em>). She would be&nbsp; “Condemned with the world...”. Time and again the prophets describe the judgments to fall upon Israel in the same terms as they speak of the condemnations of the surrounding nations. The message was clear: rejected Israel would be treated as Gentiles. Thus Joel describes the locust invasion of Israel in the language of locusts covering the face of Egypt (<em><a href='B:360 2:2'>Joe 2:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 2:20'>Joe 2:20</a></em> = <em><a href='B:20 10:14-15'>Exo 10:14-15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:19'>Exo 10:19</a></em>). Israel’s hardness of heart is explicitly likened to that of Pharaoh (<em><a href='B:90 6:6'>1Sa 6:6</a></em>); as the Egyptians were drowned, so would Israel be (<em><a href='B:370 9:5-8'>Amo 9:5-8</a></em>). <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The plagues upon Pharaoh were to bring him to repentance, although his lack of response to them led him to only harden his heart. Consider how carefully they were planned- these were not random acts of wrath from an offended Deity. They are in three cycles. First: Blood, frogs, gnats; second cycle: Flies, pest, boils; third cycle: Hail, locusts, darkness, and each cycle begins in the same way- the first plague of each cycle has Moses standing before Pharaoh in the morning, and warning him; the second plague of each cycle has Moses simply coming to Pharaoh and warning him; and the third plague in each cycle has no warning.&nbsp; My simple point is that a huge amount of thought went into the plagues, and the careful planning behind them was surely intended to appeal to Pharaoh and convict him that a God far mightier than himself or his deities was at work in his life.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For now I would have stretched out My hand, and struck you and your people with pestilence, and you would have been cut off from the earth- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This seems to imply that the only reason God had not immediately "cut off" Pharaoh was because He so wished him to repent (:14). Finally at the Red Sea, the unbaptized Egyptians were "cut off" (<em><a href='B:20 9:15'>Exo 9:15</a></em>); "all flesh" that was not baptized into the Christ-ark was "cut off" (<em><a href='B:10 9:15'>Gen 9:15</a></em>). "The uncircumcised man child... that soul shall be cut off" (<em><a href='B:10 17:14'>Gen 17:14</a></em>). The New Testament matches this by the oft repeated teaching that outside of Christ, there can be no salvation.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>To be caught up in the downward spiral (as we all are at times) doesn't mean that there's no way out. The hearts of Pharaoh's servants were hardened (<em><a href='B:20 10:1'>Exo 10:1</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:20 9:34'>Exo 9:34</a></em>), and yet they did in fact soften when they beg Pharaoh to let Israel go (<em><a href='B:20 10:7'>Exo 10:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:8'>Exo 11:8</a></em>). Yet each refusal of Pharaoh to soften his heart made it harder for him to soften it the next time the opportunity was presented. Conditional language is always used about Pharaoh-if he were to refuse to release Israel, more plagues would happen (<em><a href='B:20 8:2'>Exo 8:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:2'>Exo 9:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:4'>Exo 10:4</a></em> cp. 8:21; 4:23 RSV). In fact God wanted Pharaoh to come to realize that there is none like Yahweh in all the earth- and that was actually why He did not immediately kill Pharaoh, but rather appealed to him through the plagues. That's how I read the enigmatic <em><a href='B:20 9:15'>Exo 9:15</a></em>: "For now I should have put forth my hand, and smitten thee... and thou hadst been cut off from the earth". Fretheim paraphrases this: "If I had not had the intention of your knowing that there is none like me in all the earth... then I should have put forth my hand and cut you off from the earth. This is what you have deserved". The hardening of Pharaoh's heart didn't mean that he was thereby bound to chose wrongly each time. Indeed, the plagues themselves were designed to warn Pharaoh and thereby appeal to him to change, in order to avoid worse plagues. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>but indeed for this cause I have raised you up: to show in you My power, and that My name may be declared throughout all the earth- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"The earth" specifically refers to the land / <em>eretz </em>promised to Abraham. Abraham’s seed were brought out of Egypt in order to inherit the earth / land promised to them. Thus the Name was declared in all the earth due to the exodus- i.e. throughout the whole land promised to Abraham. Rahab etc. heard about it, but not the whole planet (<em><a href='B:60 4:23-24'>Jos 4:23-24</a></em>). They were brought into the land, but reminded in <em><a href='B:20 19:5'>Exo 19:5</a></em> that “all the earth is mine”. This may refer to the whole planet, but surely it has special reference to the land? In one sense, all nations are Yahweh’s, and yet He has also chosen Israel as His special people. And so it is with the earth / land of Israel. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>These words are cited in <em><a href='B:520 9:17'>Rom 9:17</a></em> to explain how even in the lives of those who will not ultimately be saved, there is a saving purpose- that the Name might be declared in all the earth. And that phrase is associated with descriptions of the future Kingdom of God upon earth (<em><a href='B:50 28:10'>Deu 28:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:110 8:43'>1Ki 8:43</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 66:4'>Psa 66:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 83:18'>Psa 83:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 102:15'>Psa 102:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 14:9'>Zec 14:9</a></em>). Yahweh's Name was declared to Moses in terms of a declaration of His attributes, and in a sense it was declared throughout the earth / land of Egypt through the plagues and judgments. But ultimately the condemnation of sinners will lead to this happening on a global scale. Again we learn that God's judgments are always intended to ultimately save someone, even if those experiencing the judgments will not themselves be saved (<em><a href='B:290 26:9'>Isa 26:9</a></em>).<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>as you still exalt yourself against My people, that you won’t let them go- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh was exalting himself against God, but attitudes to God's people are taken as attitudes to Him. It's why we can't claim to love God if we don't love His people. "Won't let them go" is the language used of Babylon's reason for destruction: "The children of Israel and the children of Judah were oppressed together: and all that took them captives held them fast;&nbsp; they refused to let them go" (<em><a href='B:300 50:33'>Jer 50:33</a></em>). Similarly Babylon is described as not opening "the house of the prisoners" (<em><a href='B:290 14:17'>Isa 14:17</a></em>). Biblical history continually interconnects, demonstrating that the same Divine hand has worked throughout history, and likewise works in our lives according to the same style. See on <em><a href='B:20 1:7'>Exo 1:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:21'>Exo 15:21</a></em>. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Behold, tomorrow about this time I will cause it to rain a very grievous hail, such as has not been in Egypt since the day it was founded even until now- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The specification of the time was surely in order to give Pharaoh and his courtiers a chance to repent. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now therefore command that all of your livestock and all that you have in the field be brought into shelter. Every man and animal that is found in the field, and isn’t brought home, the hail shall come down on them, and they shall die’- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>There is increasing opportunity given for response to God's word of judgment. They had time to repent (:18), and now the opportunity to show their faith in Yahweh's word. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Those who feared the word of Yahweh among the servants of Pharaoh made their servants and their livestock flee into the houses- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Fearing the word of Yahweh is associated with entering covenant with Him (<em><a href='B:50 4:10'>Deu 4:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 17:19'>Deu 17:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:58'>Deu 28:58</a></em>). The hint may be that these people then showed their commitment to the covenant by leaving Egypt with Israel. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Whoever didn’t respect the word of Yahweh left his servants and his livestock in the field-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:450 6:12'>Zec 6:12</a></em> says that later God's people hardened their hearts and didn't respect Yahweh's word (s.w.). Their apostacy is so often described in the language of Egypt. For that was where their hearts were. God's apostate people act as Egypt / the world and are judged as the world / Egypt.. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Stretch out your hand toward the sky, that there may be hail in all the land of Egypt, on man, and on animal, and on every herb of the field, throughout the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The exceeding great plague of hail was one of the plagues which lead to Israel’s Passover deliverance (<em><a href='B:20 9:22'>Exo 9:22</a></em>), and yet this is the language of the last days (<em><a class='bible' href='#b66:16:21'>Rev 16:21</a></em>)- as if there will again be a Passover deliverance for God’s people, heralded by the pouring out of plagues upon those who persecute them. The plagues of Revelation upon the land of Israel are based upon those upon Egypt. See on :21.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses stretched out his rod toward the heavens, and Yahweh sent thunder, hail, and lightning flashed down to the earth. Yahweh rained hail on the land of Egypt-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The same word for "stretched out" is used of how Yahweh would stretch forth His hand upon His land of Israel (<em><a href='B:330 14:13'>Eze 14:13</a></em>). As noted on :21,22, the language of Egypt's judgment is used about that of an apostate Israel, because they acted as Egypt and returned there in their hearts. This is why the rejected of the new Israel will simply be sent back into the world which they loved, and be "condemned with the world" (<em><a href='B:530 11:32'>1Co 11:32</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>So there was very severe hail, and lightning mixed with the hail, such as had not been in all the land of Egypt since it became a nation- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is the language of the cherubim in <em><a href='B:330 1:4'>Eze 1:4</a></em>, where the same words are used for the "great cloud, with a fire taking hold of itself". The visible sight of this would have been terrifying, and yet it was to be seen as a manifestation of the cherubim to save Israel and deliver them from captivity- which is the very context of the vision of <em><a href='B:330 1:4'>Eze 1:4</a></em> which uses identical language.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The hail struck throughout all the land of Egypt all that was in the field, both man and animal; and the hail struck every herb of the field, and broke every tree of the field- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The breaking of trees is a phrase which appears to refer to the breaking of twigs and branches, meaning there would be no fruit on them. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Only in the land of Goshen, where the children of Israel were, there was no hail- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The 'setting apart' of Israel from Egypt is a major theme (<em><a href='B:20 8:22'>Exo 8:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:4'>Exo 9:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:7'>Exo 11:7</a></em> "put a difference"). It was part of a 'sanctifying' of Israel for priestly service to Yahweh as a nation, as well as a lesson for Egypt that the only way to salvation was through separation from their own people and culture, and joining the people of God. We marvel at the multi functional way in which God works. The same word is used to describe how God "has set apart him that is Godly for Himself" (<em><a href='B:230 4:3'>Psa 4:3</a></em>); even though Israel were far from being Godly. And it is used of God's special grace, 'set apart', a grace known by no other people (<em><a href='B:230 17:7'>Psa 17:7</a></em>). The word is used in this sense in <em><a href='B:20 33:16'>Exo 33:16</a></em>, where Moses reasons that it is God's grace and the visible presence of that grace which is what sets apart Israel from all other peoples. And that is true to this day. God's grace is what is the lead and distinguishing characteristic of His way from all other religions. It is the experience of that grace which makes us distinct from all others who have not claimed it for themselves. And it all began with God 'setting apart' a sinful, idolatrous Israel from the Egyptians around them, all by grace, seeing they were largely no better than Egypt.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh sent, and called for Moses and Aaron, and said to them, I have sinned this time. Yahweh is righteous, and I and my people are wicked- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Confession of sin requires the appreciation that not only have we sinned, but that "Yahweh is righteous". Pharaoh really seems to 'get there' with these words. But he slipped back into the hardness of heart and spiritual insensitivity which was to be his condemnation. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pray to Yahweh; for there has been enough of mighty thunderings and hail. I will let you go, and you shall stay no longer-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Although Pharaoh has come to a very fine expression of repentance (:27), he still asks Moses to pray for him to Yahweh- rather than praying himself. This desire to have someone else as an interface between us and God is a major abiding theme. Israel themselves wanted Moses as an intercessor, rather than to forge an independent relationship with God.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said to him, As soon as I have gone out of the city, I will spread abroad my hands to Yahweh. The thunders shall cease, neither shall there be any more hail; that you may know that the earth is Yahweh’s- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Let's not read these records as implying that Moses simply uttered a few words to God, waved a wand- and then each of the plagues was lifted. There was an element of real fervency in Moses' prayers- which may well be lacking in ours. This is surely an example of genuinely praying for our enemies (perhaps it is the Old Testament source of Christ's words in <em><a href='B:470 5:44'>Mat 5:44</a></em>?). The intention as ever was to that Pharaoh might realize that the earth / land, specifically of Egypt, was Yahweh's- not Pharaoh's, and not the territory of the gods he worshipped.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But as for you and your servants, I know that you don’t yet fear Yahweh God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Despite his fine expression of repentance, Moses knew that this was surface level. There is apparent repentance, and real repentance. But he lived in hope of Pharaoh's repentance- "you don't <em>yet </em>fear Yahweh". Here for all time we are set an example of hopefulness in witness. If Yahweh and Moses could hope for Pharaoh's conversion, so can we towards all those we witness to.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Some time, read through the book of Deuteronomy in one or two sessions. You'll see many themes of Moses in Deuteronomy. It really shows how Moses felt towards Israel, and how the Lord Jesus feels towards us, and especially how he felt towards us just before his death. For this is what the whole book prefigures. "Love" and the idea of love occurs far more in Deuteronomy than in the other books of the Law. "Fear the Lord your God" of <em><a href='B:20 9:30'>Exo 9:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:14'>Lev 19:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 19:32'>Lev 19:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 25:17'>Lev 25:17</a></em> becomes "love the Lord your God" in Deuteronomy (<em><a href='B:50 6:5'>Deu 6:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:9'>Deu 7:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 10:12'>Deu 10:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 11:1'>Deu 11:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 19:9'>Deu 19:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:6'>Deu 30:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:16'>Deu 30:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 30:20'>Deu 30:20</a></em>). There are 23 references to not hating in Deuteronomy, compared to only 5 in Ex. - Num.; Moses saw the danger of bitterness and lack of love. He saw these things as the spiritual cancer they are, in his time of maturity he warned his beloved people against them. His mind was full of them. The LXX uses the word <em>ekklesia</em> eight times in Deuteronomy, but not once in Moses' other words (<em><a href='B:50 4:10'>Deu 4:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 9:10'>Deu 9:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 18:16'>Deu 18:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:1-3'>Deu 23:1-3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 23:8'>Deu 23:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 32:1'>Deu 32:1</a></em>). Responsibility for the whole family God had redeemed was a mark of Moses; maturity at the end of his life, at the time of Deuteronomy. It is observable that both as a community and as individuals, this will be a sign of our maturity too. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The flax and the barley were struck, for the barley was in the ear, and the flax was in bloom- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Flax was used to make the linen which was so widely used in Egyptian religious practices, and barley was used to make beer and alcoholic drinks used in those practices. So again this was a judgment upon Egypt's gods.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But the wheat and the spelt were not struck, for they had not grown up- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>These were apparently the crops grown in Goshen, where the Israelites were. See on :26. Egypt were being led to realize that salvation was through identifying with Yahweh's people. And the fact a mixed multitude left Egypt with Israel is evidence that some did respond to this.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses went out of the city from Pharaoh, and spread abroad his hands to Yahweh; and the thunders and hail ceased, and the rain was not poured on the earth- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Again we see the intensity of prayer required for the plagues to be removed. It was far from automatic. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>When Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the thunders were ceased, he sinned yet more, and hardened his heart, he and his servants- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is a case of "Let favour be shewed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness" (<em><a href='B:290 26:10'>Isa 26:10</a></em>). People like this "despise the riches of God’s goodness and forbearance and long-suffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads them to repentance". And so they "treasure up to themselves wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God" (<em><a href='B:520 2:4-5'>Rom 2:4-5</a></em>). Paul surely wrote this in conscious allusion to Pharaoh, as a representative of all who will ultimately fail of God's grace. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hebrew tends to reason through placing 'blocks' of ideas are put in opposition to each other, or 'dialectic', in order to come to conclusions. That's why we can read of God hardening Pharaoh's heart, and Pharaoh hardening his own heart (<em><a href='B:20 7:3'>Exo 7:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:15'>Exo 8:15</a></em>). To Greek, step-logic thinkers, that's a worrying contradiction- only because they don't pick up the way that Hebrew reasoning involves these kinds of statements being put in opposition to each other, so that through the dialectic process we come to understand what is meant.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The heart of Pharaoh was hardened, and he didn’t let the children of Israel go, just as Yahweh had spoken through Moses- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The phrase "let go" is often used of how God let Israel go from Egypt, overruling how the wicked Pharaoh refused to let the people go. The term is used later in the Mosaic legislation; the way Israel had been "let go" from Egypt was to determine how they "let go" others from slavery (<em><a href='B:50 15:12-13'>Deu 15:12-13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 15:18'>Deu 15:18</a></em>); their own experience of redemption was to influence how they released others. Just as ours should. The letting go of the scapegoat into the wilderness was likewise to remind them of how they had been let go from Egypt into the wilderness without being slain for their sins- all by grace (<em><a href='B:30 14:7'>Lev 14:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 14:53'>Lev 14:53</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 16:10'>Lev 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 16:21-22'>Lev 16:21-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 16:26'>Lev 16:26</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Go in to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I may show these My signs in their midst- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>To be caught up in the downward spiral (as we all are at times) doesn't mean that there's no way out. The hearts of Pharaoh's servants were hardened (<em><a href='B:20 10:1'>Exo 10:1</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:20 9:34'>Exo 9:34</a></em>), and yet they did in fact soften when they beg Pharaoh to let Israel go (<em><a href='B:20 10:7'>Exo 10:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:8'>Exo 11:8</a></em>). Yet each refusal of Pharaoh to soften his heart made it harder for him to soften it the next time the opportunity was presented. And so it is with us. Conditional language is always used about Pharaoh-if he were to refuse to release Israel, more plagues would happen (<em><a href='B:20 8:2'>Exo 8:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:2'>Exo 9:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:4'>Exo 10:4</a></em> cp. 8:21; 4:23 RSV). In fact God wanted Pharaoh to come to realize that there is none like Yahweh in all the earth- and that was actually why He did not immediately kill Pharaoh, but rather appealed to him through the plagues. That's how I read the enigmatic <em><a href='B:20 9:24'>Exo 9:24</a></em>: "For now I should have put forth my hand, and smitten thee... and thou hadst been cut off from the earth". Fretheim paraphrases this: "If I had not had the intention of your knowing that there is none like me in all the earth... then I should have put forth my hand and cut you off from the earth. This is what you have deserved". The hardening of Pharaoh's heart didn't mean that he was thereby bound to chose wrongly each time. Indeed, the plagues themselves were designed to warn Pharaoh and thereby appeal to him to change, in order to avoid worse plagues. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The same Hebrew words used of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart occur in a positive context- for God also hardens or strengthens the hearts of the righteous (<em><a href='B:230 27:14'>Psa 27:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 35:4'>Isa 35:4</a></em>). Indeed, <em><a href='B:290 35:4'>Isa 35:4</a></em> speaks of how the righteous shouldn’t have a weak or (Heb.) ‘fluid’ heart, but rather a hardened one. Clearly enough, God solidifies human attitudes, one way or the other, through the work of His Spirit upon our spirit. This is a sobering thought- for He is prepared to confirm a person in their weak thinking. But on the other hand, even the weakest basic intention towards righteousness is solidified by Him too. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and that you may tell in the hearing of your son, and of your son’s son, what things I have done to Egypt, and My signs which I have done among them; that you may know that I am Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Repeatedly God has held out hope that Pharaoh would "know that I am Yahweh". But he had refused this, and it was God's hope now that His own people would perceive the truths He had tried to teach Pharaoh, and come to the required repentance and humility. For to know Yahweh, in the Hebraic sense, is not so much to know facts about Him; but to be in relationship with Him.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses and Aaron went in to Pharaoh, and said to him, This is what Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews, says: ‘How long will you refuse to humble yourself before Me? Let My people go, that they may serve Me- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Humble yourself" is the word used for how the Egyptians had afflicted or humbled the Hebrews (<em><a href='B:20 1:11-12'>Exo 1:11-12</a></em>). The only way Pharaoh could undo that was by afflicting / humbling himself before God. What was (and is) required was not the desperate repentance of a moment, in the face of urgent personal need, but humility as a permanent characteristic.&nbsp; <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Serve Me" could refer specifically to the initial request to keep a feast to Yahweh. But the call was for Israel to be allowed to change masters, from Pharaoh to Yahweh. They changed masters when they crossed the Red Sea, just as Paul says happens when we are baptized (Romans 6). And the Red Sea crossing represented baptism into Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 10:1-2'>1Co 10:1-2</a></em>). Like us, Israel were not radically free to do as they pleased. What happened was that they changed masters; hence the appeal to Pharaoh to let God's people go, that they may serve Him rather than Pharaoh. We too will only find ultimate freedom through this servitude to God's ways, and will finally emerge into the radical liberty of the children of God in the Kingdom age (<em><a href='B:520 8:21'>Rom 8:21</a></em>).&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Or else, if you refuse to let My people go, behold, tomorrow I will bring locusts into your country- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em><a href='B:20 8:2'>Exo 8:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:2'>Exo 9:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:4'>Exo 10:4</a></em> emphasize the real choice before Pharaoh; he was refusing to let Israel go and "held" them. Babylon was warned that no nation could "hold them fast (and) refuse to let (Israel) go (because) their redeemer is strong" (<em><a href='B:300 50:33-34'>Jer 50:33-34</a></em>). The Hebrew for "strong" is that translated "hold". God had a stronger grip and claim on them than did Pharaoh. They were Yahweh's, not Pharaoh's. And it could be argued that Babylon-Persia did listen to this message, and allowed and encouraged the exiles to return. We too are to learn from all this historical precedent; that our hand is not stronger than God's. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The defining of a specific time, "tomorrow", was again in order to give Pharaoh the opportunity for repentance.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>and they shall cover the surface of the earth, so that one won’t be able to see the earth. They shall eat the residue of that which has escaped, which remains to you from the hail, and shall eat every tree which grows for you out of the field- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The 'covering' of Egypt with frogs in <em><a href='B:20 8:6'>Exo 8:6</a></em> and locusts in <em><a href='B:20 10:5'>Exo 10:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:15'>Exo 10:15</a></em> looked ahead to the 'covering' of the Egyptians at the Red Sea (<em><a href='B:20 14:28'>Exo 14:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:5'>Exo 15:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 15:10'>Exo 15:10</a></em>). It was an appeal for repentance, in the hope that the final smiting would not be necessary. It was God's intention and hope to save the Egyptians, but they would not. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Your houses shall be filled, and the houses of all your servants, and the houses of all the Egyptians; as neither your fathers nor your fathers’ fathers have seen, since the day that they were on the earth to this day’-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The language of the locust plague here is alluded to throughout Joel, where the invaders of Israel are likened to an unprecedented locust invasion. Thus the filling of houses with locusts is repeated in <em><a href='B:360 2:9'>Joe 2:9</a></em>. The idea was that an apostate Israel were to be treated as the Egyptians. It is a theme with God that His apostate people are "condemned with the world" (<em><a href='B:530 11:32'>1Co 11:32</a></em>). If their hearts are really with Egypt / the world, then they will share the judgments of this world. The time for separation is now, just as the Egyptians had to identify with Israel if they wished to escape the plagues. The Egyptians were likewise tempted to understand the locusts as symbolizing an invading army- of Israelites. They would destroy Egypt- unless they let them go. See on :26.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He turned himself about, and went out from Pharaoh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Being easily provoked was one of Moses' characteristics; consider how he turned himself and stormed out from Pharaoh (<em><a href='B:20 10:6'>Exo 10:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:8'>Exo 11:8</a></em>); how his anger waxed hot when he returned from the mount, how he went out from Pharaoh in great anger, how he first of all feared the wrath of Pharaoh and then stopped fearing it; how Moses was "very wroth" at Israel's suggestion that he was appropriating the sacrifices for himself; how he was "angry" with Eleazer (<em><a href='B:20 32:19'>Exo 32:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:8'>Exo 11:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 16:15'>Num 16:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:30 10:16-17'>Lev 10:16-17</a></em>). This temperament explains his swings of faith. Was the Lord Jesus likewise afflicted? And yet Moses went on to become the most humble of all men. It came to full term when Moses' faith slipped for a moment; because his spirit was provoked by Israel, so that he spoke unadvisedly with his lips and was therefore barred from entering the land (although maybe such an apparently temporary slip was the reflection of deeper problems?). Yet it does seem uncharacteristic, a tragic slip down the graph of ever rising spirituality. There must have almost been tears in Heaven. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh’s servants said to him, How long will this man be a snare to us? Let the men go, that they may serve Yahweh, their God. Don’t you yet know that Egypt is destroyed?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The magicians had earlier admitted "This is the finger of God" (<em><a href='B:20 8:19'>Exo 8:19</a></em>); but the courtiers had "hardened their hearts" like Pharaoh (<em><a href='B:20 9:34'>Exo 9:34</a></em>). But now they are realizing the power of Yahweh. They were the landowner class. But they had now lost their cattle and crops, and the land was ruined.&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses and Aaron were brought again to Pharaoh, and he said to them, Go, serve Yahweh your God; but who are those who will go?- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh surely originally intended to tell them to leave immediately; but his lack of total capitulation to Yahweh meant that at the last minute, he still brings in a proviso- 'Who will go?'. We have in him an example of what happens when we offer God anything less than total capitulation. Sinless perfection is not what's required- but total capitulation to Him is.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said, We will go with our young and with our old; with our sons and with our daughters, with our flocks and with our herds will we go; for we must hold a feast to Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This was an argument back against the idea that religion was just a male preserve. Yahweh's covenant was with all His people, including women and children. It was no mere hobby or external religious ritual.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He said to them, Yahweh be with you if I will let you go with your little ones! See, evil is clearly before your faces- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The greatest Egyptian god was the sun–god Ra, and the Pharaoh was seen as his manifestation on earth. It may be that Pharaoh alludes to this when he threatens Moses: “Look, for there is evil (<em>ra’a</em>) before you” (<em><a href='B:20 10:10'>Exo 10:10</a></em>). And Yahweh’s response was to darken the sun and create a darkness which could be felt (<em><a href='B:20 10:21'>Exo 10:21</a></em>). The AV brings out the strong but indirect threat: "Look to it". We wonder why Pharaoh didn't just slay Moses and Aaron out of hand. For he was so angry with them. But this is the closest he gets to threatening them personally. I suggest it was only his conscience and subconscious fear of Yahweh which stopped him from killing them as they stood before him. For that, surely, was the logical way out of all these plagues which these troublesome brothers kept bringing upon him.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Not so! Go now you who are men, and serve Yahweh; for that is what you desire! They were driven out from Pharaoh’s presence- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh clearly saw that he was going to have to allow the entire nation leave. But his rage increases as he realizes this, and desperately clings on to his petty power. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Stretch out your hand over the land of Egypt for the locusts, that they may come up on the land of Egypt, and eat every herb of the land, even all that the hail has left- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The continual destruction of what had remained from the previous plagues was a carefully calculated way of trying to bring the Egyptians progressively towards repentance.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses stretched out his rod over the land of Egypt, and Yahweh brought an east wind on the land all that day, and all the night; and when it was morning, the east wind brought the locusts- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>It was the east wind which was to open the Red Sea (<em><a href='B:20 14:21'>Exo 14:21</a></em>). The people were being taught that God could control the winds as He wished; and "wind",<em> ruach</em>, is the word also used for God's Spirit<em>-</em>Angels. But the east wind was to judge an apostate people of God (<em><a href='B:290 27:8'>Isa 27:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 18:17'>Jer 18:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 17:10'>Eze 17:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 19:12'>Eze 19:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:350 13:15'>Hos 13:15</a></em>). The idea was that an apostate Israel were to be treated as the Egyptians. It is a theme with God that His apostate people are "condemned with the world" (<em><a href='B:530 11:32'>1Co 11:32</a></em>). If their hearts are really with Egypt / the world, then they will share the judgments of this world. The time for separation is now, just as the Egyptians had to identify with Israel if they wished to escape the plagues. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>The locusts went up over all the land of Egypt, and rested in all the borders of Egypt. They were very grievous. Before them there were no such locusts as they, neither after them shall be such- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Egypt at the time was 520 miles from north to south, and about 20 miles wide apart from at the Nile delta. This was a huge number of locusts. The "locusts" appear to have been a special creation, never seen before nor afterwards.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Time and again the prophets describe the judgments to fall upon Israel in the same terms as they speak of the condemnations of the surrounding nations. The message was clear: rejected Israel would be treated as Gentiles. Thus Joel describes the locust invasion of Israel in the language of locusts covering the face of Egypt (<em><a href='B:360 2:2'>Joe 2:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 2:20'>Joe 2:20</a></em> = <em><a href='B:20 10:14-15'>Exo 10:14-15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:19'>Exo 10:19</a></em>). Israel’s hardness of heart is explicitly likened to that of Pharaoh (<em><a href='B:90 6:6'>1Sa 6:6</a></em>); as the Egyptians were drowned, so would Israel be (<em><a href='B:370 9:5-8'>Amo 9:5-8</a></em>). As Pharaoh’s heart was plagued (<em><a href='B:20 9:14'>Exo 9:14</a></em>), so was Israel’s (<em><a href='B:110 8:38'>1Ki 8:38</a></em>); as Egypt was a reed, so were Israel (<em><a href='B:110 14:15'>1Ki 14:15</a></em>). As Pharaoh-hophra was given into the hand of his enemies, so would Israel be (<em><a href='B:300 44:30'>Jer 44:30</a></em>). She would be&nbsp; “Condemned with the world...”. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>For they covered the surface of the whole earth, so that the land was darkened, and they ate every herb of the land, and all the fruit of the trees which the hail had left. There remained nothing green, either tree or herb of the field, through all the land of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The darkening of the land could refer to the locust clouds blotting out the light of the sun. But it's likely a reference to the way that their brown bodies and wings literally darkened the ground after settling (:5). The destruction described would have been felt particularly by the landowner class who surrounded Pharaoh.&nbsp;<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Then Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron in haste, and he said, I have sinned against Yahweh your God, and against you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>His previous summonings of Moses and Aaron in <em><a href='B:20 8:8'>Exo 8:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:25'>Exo 8:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:2'>Exo 9:2</a></em> had lacked this element of haste. We see a man increasingly desperate, being forced to repentance. And his repentance has greater depth to it than before in <em><a href='B:20 9:27'>Exo 9:27</a></em>; for he realizes he has sinned also against Moses and Aaron personally. The Lord puts his words in the mouth of the repentant prodigal son. He had the right form of words, and probably the right attitude of heart- at that moment. But the lesson is that repentance is not a passing realization of sin, but a permanent change of attitude and behaviour. And that is a critical lesson for all of us, for all time.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Now therefore please forgive my sin again, and pray to Yahweh your God, that He may also take away from me this death-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh asked Moses to pardon his sin, rather than asking Yahweh directly. By contrast, David asks God directly to "pardon my sin" (<em><a href='B:230 25:18'>Psa 25:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 32:5'>Psa 32:5</a></em>). Likewise Saul's mere religiosity is reflected by the way in which he asks Samuel to "pardon my sin", when he ought instead to have been asking this of God. For Yahweh is the God who delights to pardon sin (s.w. <em><a href='B:20 34:7'>Exo 34:7</a></em>). But whilst Saul uses the correct vocabulary, he misdirects it- to Samuel and not to God. And he ends up using the very phrase of Pharaoh (<em><a href='B:20 10:17'>Exo 10:17</a></em>), also without ultimate sincerity. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>He went out from Pharaoh, and prayed to Yahweh- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>What Moses prayed for isn't recorded. It is left purposefully ambiguous as to whether he simply prayed for the locusts to be removed, or for Pharaoh's forgiveness. There are many such intentional ambiguities in the Biblical narrative- to provoke our imagination and questions, so that we might enter more fully into the narrative. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh turned an exceeding strong west wind, which took up the locusts, and drove them into the Red Sea. There remained not one locust in all the borders of Egypt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The wind which blew the locusts in and then to blow them away again, until "not a single locust was left" (<em><a href='B:20 10:19'>Exo 10:19</a></em>) is just what happened to the Egyptians- the wind blew the waters to and fro, and left not a single Egyptian soldier alive (<em><a href='B:20 14:21'>Exo 14:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 14:28'>Exo 14:28</a></em>). The locust plague was an appeal for their repentance, and an encouragement for them to perceive what Yahweh could do again. The plagues began by affecting everyone, but then focus in on the Egyptians and then zoom closer in upon the personal possessions of Pharaoh. In Pharaoh's case, it would be true to say that God's hardening activities gather momentum, like a swimmer sucked closer and closer towards the waterfall. There has to come a moment when the pull is now too strong, and the plunge is inevitable. It is that moment which perhaps we need to fear more than anything else in human experience.<em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"There remained not one" beetle (<em><a href='B:20 8:31'>Exo 8:31</a></em>), locust (<em><a href='B:20 10:19'>Exo 10:19</a></em>) nor Egyptian who pursued the Israelites (<em><a href='B:20 14:28'>Exo 14:28</a></em>). The same phrase is used. Again we see how both Egyptians and Israelites were intended to learn from the plagues, and how this came to full term when "not one" of their enemies was left- thanks to the prayer of Moses.&nbsp;&nbsp; <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But Yahweh hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he didn’t let the children of Israel go- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Hebrew tends to reason through placing 'blocks' of ideas are put in opposition to each other, or 'dialectic', in order to come to conclusions. That's why we can read of God hardening Pharaoh's heart, and Pharaoh hardening his own heart (<em><a href='B:20 7:3'>Exo 7:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:15'>Exo 8:15</a></em>). To Greek, step-logic thinkers, that's a worrying contradiction- only because they don't pick up the way that Hebrew reasoning involves these kinds of statements being put in opposition to each other, so that through the dialectic process we come to understand what is meant. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>This is a case of "Let favour be shewed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness" (<em><a href='B:290 26:10'>Isa 26:10</a></em>). People like this "despise the riches of God’s goodness and forbearance and long-suffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads them to repentance". And so they "treasure up to themselves wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God" (<em><a href='B:520 2:4-5'>Rom 2:4-5</a></em>). Paul surely wrote this in conscious allusion to Pharaoh, as a representative of all who will ultimately fail of God's grace. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Yahweh said to Moses, Stretch out your hand toward the sky, that there may be darkness over the land of Egypt, even darkness which may be felt- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The rejected will be sent to a mist of darkness (<em><a href='B:680 2:17'>2Pe 2:17</a></em>). Thick darkness is associated with God's judgment (<em><a href='B:290 8:22'>Isa 8:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 2:2'>Joe 2:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:430 1:15'>Zep 1:15</a></em>)- and recall how the judgment of darkness upon Egypt was so severe that human movement required 'groping' (<em><a href='B:20 10:21'>Exo 10:21</a></em>). Perhaps there will be a literal element to this in the experience of the rejected. Be that as it may, the utter <em>pointlessness </em>of life without God will be so bitterly apparent. And yet they would not face up to it in their day of opportunity. <em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The plagues upon Egypt recorded in Exodus 7-10 are frequently alluded to in later Scripture concerning the judgments upon the apostate people of God. The judgment of darkness is a case in point. Quite simply, God's rejected people suffer the judgments of this world. All this has a powerful imperative for us. If we love the world, we will be sent back into it. The Lord will effectively tell the rejected: 'Go back and watch telly. That's what you liked doing. Go back and sail your pleasure boat, take a holiday to Spain, go back to the guys at the bar and have another drink with them... that's what you always liked, compared to the things of My people and My Kingdom'. And the last thing, the very last thing, that the rejected will want is to go back to all that. But they will have to. For in their lives, they made their answer. The pointlessness of the life of the world will then be only too apparent to them. As Adam was made to realize he was made of dust and must tend that dust and then return to it, living a pointless existence, so the rejected whom he typified will realize all too late the vanity of life in the flesh. Rejected Israel in the wilderness had their years of prolonged existence "consumed with vanity" (<em><a href='B:230 78:33'>Psa 78:33</a></em>). The faithless of the new Israel will go through the same. <em>So let us, while we have opportunity, learn the utter vanity of all else apart from the things of the Lord, His people and His Kingdom.</em><em></em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>The darkness would have been "felt" in that it may have been associated with a sandstorm which blotted out the sun's light.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses stretched out his hand toward the sky, and there was a thick darkness in all the land of Egypt three days- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Three days was the period associated with death and mourning. We think of the Lord's death for three days. They were being taught that God could bring about intense mourning and death- and they would all feel it, as they felt this darkness (:21). The death of the firstborn was therefore avoidable, and was only God's most desperate attempt, as it were, to bring about their repentance. The plague of darkness was intended to help them realize that He could slay them, and to elicit their repentance before He did. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>They didn’t see one another, neither did anyone rise from his place for three days; but all the children of Israel had light in their dwellings-</em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Israel in Egypt had light, but Egypt was in darkness. And yet later, at the time of the Exodus, it was the Angel in the pillar of cloud and fire that gave light to the Israelites and darkness to the Egyptian pursuers. One possible conclusion could be that the guardian Angel of each Israelite was physically with them at the time of the plague of darkness, giving them light and yet darkness to the Egyptians. It seems that great stress is placed in Scripture on the Angels physically moving through space, both on the earth and between Heaven and earth, in order to fulfil their tasks, rather than being static in Heaven or earth and bringing things about by just willing them to happen. See on <em><a href='B:10 18:10'>Gen 18:10</a></em><em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh called to Moses, and said, Go, serve Yahweh. Only let your flocks and your herds stay behind. Let your little ones also go with you- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Again we see Pharaoh capitulating- and then putting on the brakes, by trying to make some proviso. He agreed now that their women and children could leave- but their animals must stay behind. Most of the animals of the Egyptians had been slain, and so Pharaoh was desperate for animals. But again we see the lesson- that anything less than total capitulation to God is the same as resisting Him. <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Moses said, You must also give into our hand sacrifices and burnt offerings, that we may sacrifice to Yahweh our God- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>Pharaoh hardened his own heart (<em><a href='B:20 7:22'>Exo 7:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:15'>Exo 8:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:19'>Exo 8:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 8:32'>Exo 8:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:7'>Exo 9:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:34-35'>Exo 9:34-35</a></em>). And yet God hardened his heart (<em><a href='B:20 9:12'>Exo 9:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:1'>Exo 10:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:20'>Exo 10:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 10:27'>Exo 10:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 11:10'>Exo 11:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 14:8'>Exo 14:8</a></em>). The references to God hardening Pharaoh's heart generally occur after Pharaoh had first hardened his own heart. The fact Pharaoh hardened his heart was a sin (<em><a href='B:20 9:34'>Exo 9:34</a></em>), and yet God encouraged him in this. God offered Pharaoh a way of escape after each of the plagues; all he had to do was to agree to let Israel go. But the conditions got tougher the longer he resisted God's demand: he finally had to not only let Israel go, along with their animals, but also provide them with sacrifices (<em><a href='B:20 10:25'>Exo 10:25</a></em>). Likewise when Nebuchadnezzar lifted his heart up, God hardened it (<em><a href='B:340 5:20'>Dan 5:20</a></em>). <em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Our livestock also shall go with us. Not a hoof shall be left behind, for of it we must take to serve Yahweh our God; and we don’t know with what we must serve Yahweh, until we come there- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>"Serve" is used in the sense of sacrifice. "Left behind" is the word just used for how not a single locust "remained" in Egypt (:19). I suggested on :6 that the Egyptians saw the locust invasion as representing the swarming multitudes of Hebrews which had come into their land. And Moses goes along with this parallel; he says that just as not a single locust remained, so neither would a single Israelite animal. Just as Egypt wanted the locusts to totally leave their land, so they had to let all Israel leave.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>But Yahweh hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he wouldn’t let them go- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>When Paul insists that God hardened Pharaoh's heart (<em><a href='B:520 9:14-18'>Rom 9:14-18</a></em>), he is not only repeating the Biblical record (<em><a href='B:20 9:12'>Exo 9:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:16'>Exo 9:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:19'>Exo 33:19</a></em>), but he is alluding to the way that the Jewish <em>Book of Jubilees</em> claimed that Mastema (the supposed personal Satan) and not God hardened Pharaoh's heart. He is deconstructing this wrong idea. See on :25.<em></em></p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'><em>Pharaoh said to him, Get away from me! Be careful to see my face no more; for in the day you see my face you shall die!- </em></p><p style='margin-left:1em'>I discussed on :10 how Pharaoh could easily have apparently rid himself of these plagues by slaying Moses and Aaron. The only reason I can see for not doing so was his subconscious awareness that they were of God, and he would suffer terribly if he did so. This is the tragedy of it all- that Pharaoh had a conscience. But he refused to be led to follow it.<em></em></p>


