A verse by verse commentary on Exodus 4 dealing with a series of miracle signs God gives to Moses. Moses then returns to Egypt.

1. EXODUS 4 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
I TRODUCTIO
COFFMA , "This great chapter gives a prophetic summary of the deliverance of
Israel before the events actually happened. In Exodus 3, God dealt with two of
Moses' objections: (1) Who am I? and (2) What is thy name? And here, three other
objections are encountered and dealt with: (3) "They will not believe" (Exodus 4:1);
(4) "I am not eloquent" (Exodus 4:10); and (5) "Send ... by the hand of whom thou
wilt send" (Exodus 4:13). These latter three objections are topic sentences of the
sections where they occur. All objections having been disposed of, Moses asked and
received Jethro's permission to return to Egypt; he was assured by the Lord that the
enemies who sought his life were dead; he began the journey, taking along his wife
Zipporah and their two sons Gershom and Eliezer, the latter of which Moses had
neglected to circumcise (Exodus 4:18-23). On the way to Egypt, God taught Moses
that His law was not merely for the people, but for their leaders also, smiting him
with some kind of a fatal malady, which both Zipporah and Moses recognized as
punishment for failure to circumcise Eliezer, whereupon Zipporah circumcised him
at once; and God permitted the resumption of the journey (Exodus 4:24-26).
However, at this point, Moses decided to send Zipporah and the children back to
Midian, and continued the journey alone. God instructed Aaron to go and meet
Moses, where Moses gave him a full account of all that had happened; and, together,
they went before the elders of Israel, who believed them, and thus the stage was set
for the great series of miracles that would result in the deliverance of Israel from
Egyptian slavery (Exodus 4:27-31).
Signs for Moses
1 Moses answered, “What if they do not believe
me or listen to me and say, ‘The Lord did not
appear to you’?”
BAR ES, "With this chapter begins the series of miracles which resulted in the

2. deliverance of Israel. The first miracle was performed to remove the first obstacle,
namely, the reluctance of Moses, conscious of his own weakness, and of the enormous
power with which he would have to contend.
CLARKE, "They will not believe me - As if he had said, Unless I be enabled to
work miracles, and give them proofs by extraordinary works as well as by words, they
will not believe that thou hast sent me.
GILL, "And Moses answered and said,.... In reference to what Jehovah had
declared to him in the latter end of the preceding chapter:
but, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken to my voice; this seems to
contradict what God had said to him, Exo_3:18 that they would hearken to his voice; but
it can hardly be thought, that so good a man, and so great a prophet as Moses was,
would directly fly in the face of God, and expressly contradict what he had said. To
reconcile this it may be observed, that what the Lord says respects only the elders of
Israel, this all the people; or Jehovah's meaning may be, and so this of Moses, that
neither the one nor the other would regard his bare word, without some sign or miracle
being wrought; for as his call was extraordinary, so it required something extraordinary
to be done that it might be credited:
for they will say, the Lord hath not appeared unto me: in the bush, as he would
affirm he did, and might do it with the greatest assurance; yet the thing being so
marvellous, and they not eyewitnesses of it, might distrust the truth of it, or be backward
to receive it on his bare word; and this Moses might rather fear would be the case, from
the experience he had had of them forty years ago, when it was more likely for him to
have been a deliverer of them.
HE RY, "It was a very great honour that Moses was called to when God
commissioned him to bring Israel out of Egypt; yet he is with difficulty persuaded to
accept the commission, and does it at last with great reluctance, which we should rather
impute to a humble diffidence of himself and his own sufficiency than to any unbelieving
distrust of God and his word and power. Note, Those whom God designs for preferment
he clothes with humility; the most fit for service are the least forward.
I. Moses objects that in all probability the people would not hearken to his voice
(Exo_4:1), that is, they would not take his bare word, unless he showed them some sign,
which he had not been yet instructed to do. This objection cannot be justified, because it
contradicts what God had said (Exo_3:18), They shall hearken to thy voice. If God says,
They will, does it become Moses to say, They will not? Surely he means, “Perhaps they
will not at first, or some of them will not.” If there should be some gainsayers among
them who would question his commission, how should he deal with them? And what
course should he take to convince them? He remembered how they had once rejected
him, and feared it would be so again. Note, 1. Present discouragements often arise from
former disappointments. 2. Wise and good men have sometimes a worse opinion of
people than they deserve. Moses sad (Exo_4:1), They will not believe me; and yet he was
happily mistaken, for it is said (Exo_4:31), The people believed; but then the signs which
God appointed in answer to this objection were first wrought in their sight.

3. JAMISO , "Exo_4:1-31. Miraculous change of the rod, etc.
But, behold — Hebrew, “If,” “perhaps,” “they will not believe me.” - What evidence
can I produce of my divine mission? There was still a want of full confidence, not in the
character and divine power of his employer, but in His presence and power always
accompanying him. He insinuated that his communication might be rejected and he
himself treated as an impostor.
K&D, "Moses now started a fresh difficulty: the Israelites would not believe that
Jehovah had appeared to him. There was so far a reason for this difficulty, that from the
time of Jacob-an interval, therefore, of 430 years - God had never appeared to any
Israelite. God therefore removed it by giving him three signs by which he might attest
his divine mission to his people. These three signs were intended indeed for the
Israelites, to convince them of the reality of the appearance of Jehovah to Moses; at the
same time, as even Ephraem Syrus observed, they also served to strengthen Moses'
faith, and dissipate his fears as to the result of his mission. For it was apparent enough
that Moses did not possess true and entire confidence in God, from the fact that he still
raised this difficulty, and distrusted the divine assurance, “They will hearken to thy
voice,” Exo_3:18). And finally, these signs were intended for Pharaoh, as is stated in
Exo_4:21; and to him the ‫ּות‬‫ת‬ּ‫א‬ (σηµεሏα) were to become ‫ים‬ ִ‫ת‬ ְ‫ּפ‬‫מ‬ (τέρατα). By these signs
Moses was installed as the servant of Jehovah (Exo_14:31), and furnished with divine
power, with which he could and was to appear before the children of Israel and Pharaoh
as the messenger of Jehovah. The character of the three signs corresponded to this
intention.
CALVI , "1.And Moses answered. Moses relates in this chapter how hesitatingly he
obeyed God, not from stubbornness, but from timidity, for he does not shake off the
yoke, as unruly beasts do, but shrinks away from it, that it may not be placed upon
him. (50) And hence we may better perceive under what infirmity he labored, so
that his faith was almost stifled. On the one side, he was willing and ready to obey;
but when the arduous difficulties of his task presented themselves, he could not
escape from this conflict until he had exhausted all efforts to escape. or indeed can
we greatly wonder that he resisted for a time, since he could see scarcely any
advantage in his undertaking. I admit that he ought to have proceeded according to
God’s command, even with his eyes shut, since on His will alone all believers are
bound to depend; he ought not to have judged of a thing (in itself) incredible, from
his own reasoning, but from the voice of God. or, in point of fact, did he either
refuse to credit God’s words, or wish to reject the burden imposed upon him; but
when, on the other hand, he beheld dangers from which he could not disentangle
himself, his mind was thus a prey to distracting feelings. either is there any
believer who is not often drawn into such harassing discussions, whenever his mind
is darkened by the perception of obstacles. There was, therefore, in the mind of
Moses, willingness and zeal, though alacrity and firmness were wanting; because
through his weakness he was compelled to hold back by the hinderances which
presented themselves. We must carefully distinguish between the timidity which
delays our progress and the bold refusal which is allied to contempt. Many, in flying
from trouble, are so withheld from duty, that they grow hardened in their

4. inactivity; while those who desire to act rightly, although through anxiety and fear
they apparently recoil, still aspire to ulterior progress, and, in a word, do not so far
alternate as to withdraw themselves altogether from the command of God. Moses
seems, indeed, to murmur, and to enter into altercation with God; but whether this
were audacity or simplicity, there was more of modesty in it, than as if he had
hidden himself in silence, as we have said that many do, who by their silence only
strengthen themselves in the liberty to disobey. This was clearly his object, that he
might afterwards be more fitted to proceed. The holy man was very anxious,
because he knew from experience that his countrymen were depraved, and almost
intractable; disburdening himself, then, of this anxiety into the bosom of God, he
desires to be confirmed by a fresh promise, so that he may be freed from this
impediment, and proceed with alacrity.
ELLICOTT, "(1) Behold.—Some render the word here used by “perhaps” (LXX.,
Aben-Ezra, Saadia, &c); but it does not appear to have anywhere this meaning.
Moses meant to express a positive conviction that he would not be listened to. His
faith was weak.
They will say, The Lord hath not appeared.—It is very probable that the people
would have said this if Moses had not had any credentials to produce. It is even
possible that they did say it. There had been no appearance of Jehovah to any one
for above four hundred years, and they might well think that the age of miracles
was past. Miracles cluster around certain crises in God’s dealings with man, ceasing
alto gether between one crisis and another. They were suspended for above 500
years between the time of Daniel and the appearance of the angel to Zacharias.
TRAPP, "Exodus 4:1 And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not
believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The LORD hath not
appeared unto thee.
Ver. 1. They will not believe me.] They had formerly refused him, "and thrust him
away." [Exodus 2:14 Acts 7:27] And so they might again, if he had not somewhat to
show for his extraordinary calling. (a) In the year 434, the Jews of Crete were
shamefully seduced by a pseudo-Moses, who promised to divide the sea for them to
bring them back to their own country. (b) Those that will not receive the love of the
truth, are justly given up to the efficacy of error. [2 Thessalonians 2:10-11]
COFFMA , ""And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me,
nor hearken to my voice; for they will say, Jehovah hath not appeared unto thee."
Moses, in these verses, records his sins and weakness with the same fullness and
impartiality seen in all that he wrote. That Moses was clearly at fault here lies in the
fact that God had already assured him that the people would believe him (Exodus
3:18). In respect to the natural weakness of the flesh, God was not displeased with
him, but gave three signs, which however discernible in later wonders, were here
specifically for the purpose of establishing Moses' faith and removing his objections.

5. The three were: (1) the rod-serpent; (2) the leprosy, and (3) the water changed to
blood.
"They will not believe me ..." This is quite a human thing that Moses did here.
When looked at purely from the human standpoint, what God was requiring of
Moses was absolutely impossible. Only one man, without money, without troops,
without military experience, or without anything else that men would have
considered necessary, Moses had been commissioned to deliver 2,000,000 slaves
from bondage, thus depriving their earthy lords of fantastic benefits and profits! As
Ellison pointed out, however, ministers of God today are often inclined to shirk their
own duties by blaming what they consider to be the shortcomings and faithlessness
of the church members, "and think that this absolves (them) from their
responsibilities."[1] Sure, Moses displayed a weakness of faith here, but, as Fields
pointed out, "Moses finally obeyed, and because he is called a man of faith
(Hebrews 11:24-29), we are reluctant to say he lacked faith."[2] "This weakness of
Moses magnified the power of God, making GOD, not Moses, the Hero and Mover
in the Book of Exodus."[3]
COKE, "Exodus 4:1. Moses answered—behold, they will not believe me— The plain
meaning of these words, as is evident from the miracles which God immediately
wrought, and gave Moses also power to perform, is, that his bare word would be
insufficient to convince the people, without some extraordinary signs to confirm the
truth of his mission: "the people will say, the LORD hath not appeared unto thee: if
he had, he would certainly have enabled thee to give some sign: shew us therefore
such a sign, or we will not believe or regard thy voice." This is so natural an
interpretation of the passage, that, I think, it renders useless Bishop Warburton's
conjecture, that the backwardness of Moses proceeded from his thinking the
recovery of the Israelites, from Egyptian superstition, altogether deliberate.
CO STABLE 1-5, "God gave Moses three miracles to convince the Israelites that
the God of their fathers had appeared to him. They also served to bolster Moses"
faith. Moses had left Egypt and the Israelites with a clouded reputation under the
sentence of death, and he had been away for a long time. He needed to prove to his
brethren that they could trust and believe him. ot only were these miracles strong
proofs of God"s power, but they appear to have had special significance for the
Israelites as well (cf. Exodus 4:8). [ ote: See Johnson, p55; et al.]
God probably intended the first miracle, of the staff and serpent ( Exodus 4:2-5), to
assure Moses and the Israelites that He was placing the satanic power of Egypt
under his authoritative control. This was the power before which Moses had
previously fled. Moses" shepherd staff became a symbol of authority in his hand, a
virtual scepter. The serpent represented the deadly power of Egypt that sought to
kill the Israelites, and Moses in particular. The Pharaohs wore a metal cobra
around their heads. It was a common symbol of the nation of Egypt. However the
serpent also stood for the great enemy of man behind that power, Satan, who had
been the foe of the seed of the woman since the Fall ( Genesis 3:15). Moses" ability
to turn the serpent into his rod by seizing its tail would have encouraged the

6. Israelites. They should have believed that God had enabled him to overcome the
cunning and might of Egypt and to exercise authority over its fearful power. This
was a sign that God would bless Moses" leadership.
PULPIT, "The reluctance of Moses to undertake the part of leader, indicated by his
first reply at his first calling, "Who am I that I should go?" etc. (Exodus 3:11), was
not yet overcome. God had promised that he would succeed; but he did not see how
he could succeed, either with the people or with Pharaoh. It was not enough for him
that God had declared, "They (the people) shall hearken unto thy voice" (Exodus
3:18); he does not, cannot believe this, and replies: "Behold, they will not believe,
neither hearken unto my voice" (Exodus 4:1). This was plain want of faith; but not
unnatural, and not, in God's sight, inexcusable. God therefore condescended to the
human weakness of his servant, and proceeded to show him how he intended that he
should persuade the people of his mission. He should persuade them by producing
the credentials of miracles (Exodus 4:2-9). But the laggard heart finds yet a further
objection. Moses feels that he labours under a personal defect, which (he thinks) is
an absolute disqualification. He is "slow of speech and of a slow tongue" (Exodus
4:10), has always been wanting in eloquence, and does not find himself any the more
eloquent since God has been speaking with him. In vain does Jehovah promise to
"be with his mouth" (Exodus 4:12); Moses' last word indicates all the old feeling of
self-distrust. "Send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send" (Exodus
4:13). Then at last the anger of the Lord is kindled against Moses, and God inflicts
on him a sort of punishment—degrades him; as it were—deposes him from the
position of sole leader, and associates Aaron with him in such sort that Aaron must
have appeared, both to the Israelites and to the Pharaoh, as the chief leader rather
than Moses. (See Exodus 4:30; Exodus 7:2, Exodus 7:10, Exodus 7:19; Exodus 8:6,
Exodus 8:17, etc.)
At this point the interview between Moses and Jehovah ends, and the action of the
Exodus commences. Moses obtains leave to quit Midian, and quits it—retires to
Egypt, after escaping from a dangerous sickness on the way (Exodus 4:24-26), is met
by Aaron and takes him into his counsels, summons the elders and exhibits before
them his miraculous powers, persuades them, and is finally accepted as having, with
Aaron, a mission from God, both by the elders and the people.
Exodus 4:1
Behold, they will not believe. Attempts have been made to soften down this
contradiction of God's words in Exodus 3:18, and to represent Moses as merely
saying, "What if the people will not hearken, etc. What shall I do then?" (So the
LXX; Geddes, Boothroyd, and others.) But the phrase is really emphatic and
peremptory. As Rosenmuller says: "Vox est negantis et detrac-tantis officium." The
Lord hath not appeared to thee. It is quite probable that the Israelites would have so
spoken, if Moses had had no sign to show. There had been no appearance of
Jehovah to anyone for above four hundred years. And the Israelites, who had not
seen Moses for forty years, would not know whether he was a veracious person or
not.

7. EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMME TARY, "MOSES HESITATES.
Exodus 4:1-17.
Holy Scripture is impartial, even towards its heroes. The sin of David is recorded,
and the failure of Peter. And so is the reluctance of Moses to accept his commission,
even after a miracle had been vouchsafed to him for encouragement. The absolute
sinlessness of Jesus is the more significant because it is found in the records of a
creed which knows of no idealised humanity.
In Josephus, the refusal of Moses is softened down. Even the modest words, "Lord, I
am still in doubt how I, a private man and of no abilities, should persuade my
countrymen or Pharaoh," are not spoken after the sign is given. or is there any
mention of the transfer to Aaron of a part of his commission, nor of their joint
offence at Meribah, nor of its penalty, which in Scripture is bewailed so often. And
Josephus is equally tender about the misdeeds of the nation. We hear nothing of
their murmurs against Moses and Aaron when their burdens are increased, or of
their making the golden calf. Whereas it is remarkable and natural that the fear of
Moses is less anxious about his reception by the tyrant than by his own people:
"Behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice; for they will say, The
Lord hath not appeared unto thee." This is very unlike the invention of a later
period, glorifying the beginnings of the nation; but it is absolutely true to life. Great
men do not fear the wrath of enemies if they can be secured against the indifference
and contempt of friends; and Moses in particular was at last persuaded to
undertake his mission by the promise of the support of Aaron. His hesitation is
therefore the earliest example of what has been so often since observed--the
discouragement of heroes, reformers and messengers from God, less by fear of the
attacks of the world than of the contemptuous scepticism of the people of God. We
often sigh for the appearing, in our degenerate days, of
"A man with heart, head, hand, Like some of the simple great ones gone."
Yet who shall say that the want of them is not our own fault? The critical apathy
and incredulity, not of the world but of the Church, is what freezes the fountains of
Christian daring and the warmth of Christian zeal.
For the help of the faith of his people, Moses is commissioned to work two miracles;
and he is caused to rehearse them, for his own.
Strange tales were told among the later Jews about his wonder-working rod. It was
cut by Adam before leaving Paradise, was brought by oah into the ark, passed into
Egypt with Joseph, and was recovered by Moses while he enjoyed the favour of the
court. These legends arose from downright moral inability to receive the true lesson
of the incident, which is the confronting of the sceptre of Egypt with the simple staff
of the shepherd, the choosing of the weak things of earth to confound the strong, the
power of God to work His miracles by the most puny and inadequate means.

8. Anything was more credible than that He who led His people like sheep did indeed
guide them with a common shepherd's crook. And yet this was precisely the lesson
meant for us to learn--the glorification of poor resources in the grasp of faith.
Both miracles were of a menacing kind. First the rod became a serpent, to declare
that at God's bidding enemies would rise up against the oppressor, even where all
seemed innocuous, as in truth the waters of the river and the dust of the furnace and
the winds of heaven conspired against him. Then, in the grasp of Moses, the serpent
from which he fled became a rod again, to intimate that these avenging forces were
subject to the servant of Jehovah.
Again, his hand became leprous in his bosom, and was presently restored to health
again--a declaration that he carried with him the power of death, in its most
dreadful form; and perhaps a still more solemn admonition to those who remember
what leprosy betokens, and how every approach of God to man brings first the
knowledge of sin, to be followed by the assurance that He has cleansed it.(7)
If the people would not hearken to the voice of the first sign, they should believe the
second; but at the worst, and if they were still unconvinced, they would believe when
they saw the water of the ile, the pride and glory of their oppressors, turned into
blood before their eyes. That was an omen which needs no interpretation. What
follows is curious. Moses objects that he has not hitherto been eloquent, nor does he
experience any improvement "since Thou hast spoken unto Thy servant" (a graphic
touch!), and he seems to suppose that the popular choice between liberty and slavery
would depend less upon the evidence of a Divine power than upon sleight of tongue,
as if he were in modern England.
But let it be observed that the self-consciousness which wears the mask of humility
while refusing to submit its judgment to that of God, is a form of selfishness--self-
absorption blinding one to other considerations beyond himself--as real, though not
as hateful, as greed and avarice and lust.
How can Moses call himself slow of speech and of a slow tongue, when Stephen
distinctly declares that he was mighty in word as well as deed? (Acts 7:22). Perhaps
it is enough to answer that many years of solitude in a strange land had robbed him
of his fluency. Perhaps Stephen had in mind the words of the Book of Wisdom, that
"Wisdom entered into the soul of the servant of the Lord, and withstood dreadful
kings in wonders and signs.... For Wisdom opened the mouth of the dumb, and
made the tongues of them that cannot speak eloquent" (Wisdom of Solomon 10:16;
Wisdom of Solomon 10:21).
To his scruple the answer was returned, "Who hath made man's mouth?... Have not
I the Lord? ow therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what
thou shalt say." The same encouragement belongs to every one who truly executes a
mandate from above: "Lo, I am with you alway." For surely this encouragement is
the same. Surely Jesus did not mean to offer His own presence as a substitute for
that of God, but as being in very truth Divine, when He bade His disciples, in

9. reliance upon Him, to go forth and convert the world.
And this is the true test which divides faith from presumption, and unbelief from
prudence: do we go because God is with us in Christ, or because we ourselves are
strong and wise? Do we hold back because we are not sure of His commission, or
only because we distrust ourselves? "Humility without faith is too timorous; faith
without humility is too hasty." The phrase explains the conduct of Moses both now
and forty years before.
Moses, however, still entreats that any one may be chosen rather than himself:
"Send, I pray Thee, by the hand of him whom Thou wilt send."
And thereupon the anger of the Lord was kindled against him, although at the
moment his only visible punishment was the partial granting of his prayer--the
association with him in his commission of Aaron, who could speak well, the
forfeiting of a certain part of his vocation, and with it of a certain part of its reward.
The words, "Is not Aaron thy brother the Levite?" have been used to insinuate that
the tribal arrangement was not perfected when they were written, and so to
discredit the narrative. But when so interpreted they yield no adequate sense, they
do not reinforce the argument; while they are perfectly intelligible as implying that
Aaron is already the leader of his tribe, and therefore sure to obtain the hearing of
which Moses despaired. But the arrangement involved grave consequences sure to
be developed in due time: among others, the reliance of Israel upon a feebler will,
which could be forced by their clamour to make them a calf of gold. Moses was yet
to learn that lesson which our century knows nothing of,--that a speaker and a
leader of nations are not the same. When he cried to Aaron, in the bitterness of his
soul, "What did this people to thee, that thou hast brought so great a sin upon
them?" did he remember by whose unfaithfulness Aaron had been thrust into the
office, the responsibilities of which he had betrayed?
ow, it is the duty of every man, to whom a special vocation presents itself, to set
opposite each other two considerations. Dare I undertake this task? is a solemn
question, but so is this: Dare I let this task go past me? Am I prepared for the
responsibility of allowing it to drift into weaker hands? These are days when the
Church of Christ is calling for the help of every one capable of aiding her, and we
ought to hear it said more often that one is afraid not to teach in Sunday School, and
another dares not refuse a proffered district, and a third fears to leave charitable
tasks undone. To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin; and
we hear too much about the terrible responsibility of working for God, but too little
about the still graver responsibility of refusing to work for Him when called.
Moses indeed attained so much that we are scarcely conscious that he might have
been greater still. He had once presumed to go unsent, and brought upon himself the
exile of half a lifetime. Again he presumed almost to say, I go not, and well-nigh to
incur the guilt of Jonah when sent to ineveh, and in so doing he forfeited the
fulness of his vocation. But who reaches the level of his possibilities? Who is not
haunted by faces, "each one a murdered self," a nobler self, that might have been,

10. and is now impossible for ever? Only Jesus could say "I have finished the work
which Thou gavest Me to do." And it is notable that while Jesus deals, in the
parable of the labourers, with the problem of equal faithfulness during longer and
shorter periods of employment; and in the parable of the pounds with that of equal
endowment variously improved; and yet again, in the parable of the talents, with the
problem of various endowments all doubled alike, He always draws a veil over the
treatment of five talents which earn but two or three besides.
A more cheerful reflection suggested by this narrative is the strange power of
human fellowship. Moses knew and was persuaded that God, Whose presence was
even then miraculously apparent in the bush, and Who had invested him with
superhuman powers, would go with him. There is no trace of incredulity in his
behaviour, but only of failure to rely, to cast his shrinking and reluctant will upon
the truth he recognised and the God Whose presence he confessed. He held back, as
many a one does, who is honest when he repeats the Creed in church, yet fails to
submit his life to the easy yoke of Jesus. or is it from physical peril that he recoils:
at the bidding of God he has just grasped the serpent from which he fled; and in
confronting a tyrant with armies at his back, he could hope for small assistance
from his brother. But highly strung spirits, in every great crisis, are aware of vague
indefinite apprehensions that are not cowardly but imaginative. Thus C ύsar, when
defying the hosts of Pompey, is said to have been disturbed by an apparition. It is
vain to put these apprehensions into logical form, and argue them down: the
slowness of speech of Moses was surely refuted by the presence of God, Who makes
the mouth and inspires the utterance; but such fears lie deeper than the reasons they
assign, and when argument fails, will yet stubbornly repeat their cry: "Send, I pray
Thee, by the hand of him whom Thou wilt send." ow this shrinking, which is not
craven, is dispelled by nothing so effectually as by the touch of a human hand. It is
like the voice of a friend to one beset by ghostly terrors: he does not expect his
comrade to exorcise a spirit, and yet his apprehensions are dispelled. Thus Moses
cannot summon up courage from the protection of God, but when assured of the
companionship of his brother he will not only venture to return to Egypt, but will
bring with him his wife and children. Thus, also, He Who knew what was in men's
hearts sent forth His missionaries, both the Twelve and the Seventy (as we have yet
to learn the true economy of sending ours), "by two and two" (Mark 6:7; Luke
10:1).
This is the principle which underlies the institution of the Church of Christ, and the
conception that Christians are brothers, among whom the strong must help the
weak. Such help from their fellow-mortals would perhaps decide the choice of many
hesitating souls, upon the verge of the divine life, recoiling from its unknown and
dread experiences, but longing for a sympathising comrade. Alas for the unkindly
and unsympathetic religion of men whose faith has never warmed a human heart,
and of congregations in which emotion is a misdemeanour!
There is no stronger force, among all that make for the abuses of priestcraft, than
this same yearning for human help becomes when robbed of its proper
nourishment, which is the communion of saints, and the pastoral care of souls. Has

11. it no further nourishment than these? This instinctive craving for a Brother to help
as well as a Father to direct and govern,--this social instinct, which banished the
fears of Moses and made him set out for Egypt long before Aaron came in sight,
content when assured of Aaron's co-operation,--is there nothing in God Himself to
respond to it? He Who is not ashamed to call us brethren has profoundly modified
the Church's conception of Jehovah, the Eternal, Absolute and Unconditioned. It is
because He can be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, that we are bidden to
draw near with boldness unto the Throne of Grace. There is no heart so lonely that
it cannot commune with the lofty and kind humanity of Jesus.
There is a homelier lesson to be learned. Moses was not only solaced by human
fellowship, but nerved and animated by the thought of his brother, and the mention
of his tribe. "Is not Aaron thy brother the Levite?" They had not met for forty
years. Vague rumours of deadly persecution were doubtless all that had reached the
fugitive, whose heart had burned, in solitary communion with ature in her sternest
forms, as he brooded over the wrongs of his family, of Aaron, and perhaps of
Miriam.
And now his brother lived. The call which Moses would have put from him was for
the emancipation of his own flesh and blood, and for their greatness. In that great
hour, domestic affection did much to turn the scale wherein the destinies of
humanity were trembling. And his was affection well returned. It might easily have
been otherwise, for Aaron had seen his younger brother called to a dazzling
elevation, living in enviable magnificence, and earning fame by "word and deed";
and then, after a momentary fusion of sympathy and of condition, forty years had
poured between them a torrent of cares and joys estranging because unshared. But
it was promised that Aaron, when he saw him, should be glad at heart; and the
words throw a beam of exquisite light into the depths of the mighty soul which God
inspired to emancipate Israel and to found His Church, by thoughts of his brother's
joy on meeting him.
Let no man dream of attaining real greatness by stifling his affections. The heart is
more important than the intellect; and the brief story of the Exodus has room for
the yearning of Jochebed over her infant "when she saw him that he was a goodly
child," for the bold inspiration of the young poetess, who "stood afar off to know
what should be done to him," and now for the love of Aaron. So the Virgin, in the
dread hour of her reproach, went in haste to her cousin Elizabeth. So Andrew
"findeth first his own brother Simon." And so the Divine Sufferer, forsaken of God,
did not forsake His mother.
The Bible is full of domestic life. It is the theme of the greater part of Genesis, which
makes the family the seed-plot of the Church. It is wisely recognised again at the
moment when the larger pulse of the nation begins to beat. For the life-blood in the
heart of a nation must be the blood in the hearts of men.
Verses 18-31
MOSES OBEYS.

12. Exodus 4:18-31.
Moses is now commissioned: he is to go to Egypt, and Aaron is coming thence to
meet him. Yet he first returns to Midian, to Jethro, who is both his employer and the
head of the family, and prays him to sanction his visit to his own people.
There are duties which no family resistance can possibly cancel, and the direct
command of God made it plain that this was one of them. But there are two ways of
performing even the most imperative obligation, and religious people have done
irreparable mischief before now, by rudeness, disregard to natural feeling and the
rights of their fellow-men, under the impression that they showed their allegiance to
God by outraging other ties. It is a theory for which no sanction can be found either
in Holy Scripture or in common sense.
When he asks permission to visit "his brethren" we cannot say whether he ever had
brothers besides Aaron, or uses the word in the same larger national sense as when
we read that, forty years before, he went out unto his brethren and saw their
burdens. What is to be observed is that he is reticent with respect to his vast
expectations and designs.
He does not argue that, because a Divine promise must needs be fulfilled, he need
not be discreet, wary and taciturn, any more than St. Paul supposed, because the
lives of his shipmates were promised to him, that it mattered nothing whether the
sailors remained on board.
The decrees of God have sometimes been used to justify the recklessness of man, but
never by His chosen followers. They have worked out their own salvation the more
earnestly because God worked in them. And every good cause calls aloud for human
energy and wisdom, all the more because its consummation is the will of God, and
sooner or later is assured. Moses has unlearned his rashness.
When the Lord said unto Moses in Midian, "Go, return unto Egypt, for all the men
are dead which sought thy life," there is an almost verbal resemblance to the words
in which the infant Jesus is recalled from exile. We shall have to consider the typical
aspect of the whole narrative, when a convenient stage is reached for pausing to
survey it in its completeness. But resemblances like this have been treated with so
much scorn, they have been so freely perverted into evidence of the mythical nature
of the later story, that some passing allusion appears desirable. We must beware
equally of both extremes. The Old Testament is tortured, and genuine prophecies
are made no better than coincidences, when coincidences are exalted to all the
dignity of express predictions. One can scarcely venture to speak of the death of
Herod when Jesus was to return from Egypt, as being deliberately typified in the
death of those who sought the life of Moses. But it is quite clear that the words in St.
Matthew do intentionally point the reader back to this narrative. For, indeed, under
both, there are to be recognised the same principles: that God does not thrust His
servants into needless or excessive peril; and that when the life of a tyrant has really

13. become not only a trial but a barrier, it will be removed by the King of kings. God is
prudent for His heroes.
Moreover, we must recognise the lofty fitness of what is very visible in the Gospels--
the coming to a head in Christ of the various experiences of the people of God; and
at the recurrence, in His story, of events already known elsewhere, we need not be
disquieted, as if the suspicion of a myth were now become difficult to refute; rather
should we recognise the fulness of the supreme life, and its points of contact with all
lives, which are but portions of its vast completeness. Who does not feel that in the
world's greatest events a certain harmony and correspondence are as charming as
they are in music? There is a sort of counterpoint in history. And to this answering
of deep unto deep, this responsiveness of the story of Jesus to all history, our
attention is silently beckoned by St. Matthew, when, without asserting any closer
link between the incidents, he borrows this phrase so aptly.
A much deeper meaning underlies the profound expression which God now
commands Moses to employ; and although it must await consideration at a future
time, the progressive education of Moses himself is meantime to be observed. At first
he is taught that the Lord is the God of their fathers, in whose descendants He is
therefore interested. Then the present Israel is His people, and valued for its own
sake. ow he hears, and is bidden to repeat to Pharaoh, the amazing phrase, "Israel
is My son, even My firstborn: let My son go that he may serve Me; and if thou
refuse to let him go, behold I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn." Thus it is that
infant faith is led from height to height. And assuredly there never was an utterance
better fitted than this to prepare human minds, in the fulness of time, for a still
clearer revelation of the nearness of God to man, and for the possibility of an
absolute union between the Creator and His creature.
It was on his way into Egypt, with his wife and children, that a mysterious
interposition forced Zipporah reluctantly and tardily to circumcise her son.
The meaning of this strange episode lies perhaps below the surface, but very near it.
Danger in some form, probably that of sickness, pressed Moses hard, and he
recognised in it the displeasure of his God. The form of the narrative leads us to
suppose that he had no previous consciousness of guilt, and had now to infer the
nature of his offence without any explicit announcement, just as we infer it from
what follows.
If so, he discerned his transgression when trouble awoke his conscience; and so did
his wife Zipporah. Yet her resistance to the circumcision of their younger son was so
tenacious, with such difficulty was it overcome by her husband's peril or by his
command, that her tardy performance of the rite was accompanied by an insulting
action and a bitter taunt. As she submitted, the Lord "let him go"; but we may
perhaps conclude that the grievance continued to rankle, from the repetition of her
gibe, "So she said, A bridegroom of blood art thou because of the circumcision."
The words mean, "We are betrothed again in blood," and might of themselves
admit a gentler, and even a tender significance; as if, in the sacrifice of a strong

14. prejudice for her husband's sake, she felt a revival of "the kindness of her youth,
the love of her espousals." For nothing removes the film from the surface of a true
affection, and makes the heart aware how bright it is, so well as a great sacrifice,
frankly offered for the sake of love.
But such a rendering is excluded by the action which went with her words, and they
must be explained as meaning, This is the kind of husband I have wedded: these are
our espousals. With such an utterance she fades almost entirely out of the story: it
does not even tell how she drew back to her father; and thenceforth all we know of
her is that she rejoined Moses only when the fame of his victory over Amalek had
gone abroad.
Their union seems to have been an ill-assorted or at least an unprosperous one. In
the tender hour when their firstborn was to be named, the bitter sense of loneliness
had continued to be nearer to the heart of Moses than the glad new consciousness of
paternity, and he said, "I am a stranger in a strange land." Different indeed had
been the experience of Joseph, who called his "firstborn Manasseh, for God, said he,
hath made me forget all my toil, and all my father's house" (Genesis 41:51). The
home-life of Moses had not made him forget that he was an exile. Even the removal
of imminent death from her husband could not hush these selfish complaints of
Zipporah, not because he was a father of blood to her little one, but because he was
a bridegroom of blood to her own shrinking sensibilities. It is Miriam the sister, not
Zipporah the wife, who gives lyrical and passionate voice to his triumph, and is
mourned by the nation when she dies. Both what we read of her and what we do not
read goes far to explain the insignificance of their children in history, and the more
startling fact that the grandson of Moses became the venal instrument of the Danites
in their schismatic worship ( 18:30, R.V.).
Domestic unhappiness is a palliation, but not a justification, for an unserviceable
life. It is a great advantage to come into action with the dew and freshness of
affection upon the soul. Yet it is not once nor twice that men have carried the
message of God back from the barren desert and the lonely ways of their
unhappiness to the not too happy race of man.
ow, who can fail to discern real history in all this? Is it in such a way that myth or
legend would have dealt with the wife of the great deliverer? Still less conceivable is
it that these should have treated Moses himself as the narrative hitherto has
consistently done. At every step he is made to stumble. His first attempt was
homicidal, and brought upon him forty years of exile. When the Divine commission
came he drew back wilfully, as he had formerly pressed forward unsent. There is
not even any suggestion offered us of Stephen's apology for his violent deed--
namely, that he supposed his brethren understood how that God by his hand was
giving them deliverance (Acts 7:25). There is nothing that resembles the eulogium of
the Epistle to the Hebrews upon the faith which glorified his precipitancy, like the
rainbow in a torrent, because that rash blow committed him to share the affliction
of the people of God, and renounced the rank of a grand son of the Pharaoh
(Hebrews 11:24-25). All this is very natural, if Moses himself be in any degree

15. responsible for the narrative. It is incredible, if the narrative were put together after
the Captivity, to claim the sanction of so great a name for a newly forged
hierarchical system. Such a theory could scarcely be refuted more completely, if the
narrative before us were invented with the deliberate aim to overthrow it.
But in truth the failures of the good and great are written for our admonition,
teaching us how inconsistent are even the best of mortals, and how weak the most
resolute. Rather than forfeit his own place among the chosen people, Moses had
forsaken a palace and become a proscribed fugitive; yet he had neglected to claim
for his child its rightful share in the covenant, its recognition among the sons of
Abraham. Perhaps procrastination, perhaps domestic opposition, more potent than
a king's wrath to shake his purpose, perhaps the insidious notion that one who had
sacrificed so much might be at ease about slight negligences,--some such influence
had left the commandment unobserved. And now, when the dream of his life was
being realised at last, and he found himself the chosen instrument of God for the
rebuke of one nation and the making of another, how pardonable it must have
seemed to leave an unpleasant small domestic duty over until a more convenient
season! How natural it still seems to merge the petty task in the high vocation, to
excuse small lapses in pursuit of lofty aims! But this was the very time when God,
hitherto forbearing, took him sternly to task for his neglect, because men who are
especially honoured should be more obedient and reverential than their fellows. Let
young men who dream of a vast career, and meanwhile indulge themselves in small
obliquities, let all who cast out demons in the name of Christ, and yet work iniquity,
reflect upon this chosen and long-trained, self-sacrificing and ardent servant of the
Lord, whom Jehovah seeks to kill because he wilfully disobeys even a purely
ceremonial precept.
Moses was not only religious, but "a man of destiny," one upon whom vast interests
depended. ow, such men have often reckoned themselves exempt from the
ordinary laws of conduct.(8)
It is not a light thing, therefore, to find God's indignant protest against the faintest
shadow of a doctrine so insidious and so deadly, set in the forefront of sacred
history, at the very point where national concerns and those of religion begin to
touch. If our politics are to be kept pure and clean, we must learn to exact a higher
fidelity, and not a relaxed morality, from those who propose to sway the destinies of
nations.
And now the brothers meet, embrace, and exchange confidences. As Andrew, the
first disciple who brought another to Jesus, found first his own brother Simon, so
was Aaron the earliest convert to the mission of Moses. And that happened which so
often puts our faithlessness to shame. It had seemed very hard to break his strange
tidings to the people: it was in fact very easy to address one whose love had not
grown cold during their severance, who probably retained faith in the Divine
purpose for which the beautiful child of the family had been so strangely preserved,
and who had passed through trial and discipline unknown to us in the stern
intervening years.

16. And when they told their marvellous story to the elders of the people, and displayed
the signs, they believed; and when they heard that God had visited them in their
affliction, then they bowed their heads and worshipped.
This was their preparation for the wonders that should follow: it resembled Christ's
appeal, "Believest thou that I am able to do this?" or Peter's word to the impotent
man, "Look on us."
For the moment the announcement had the desired effect, although too soon the
early promise was succeeded by faithlessness and discontent. In this, again, the
teaching of the earliest political movement on record is as fresh as if it were a tale of
yesterday. The offer of emancipation stirs all hearts; the romance of liberty is
beautiful beside the ile as in the streets of Paris; but the cost has to be gradually
learned; the losses displace the gains in the popular attention; the labour, the self-
denial and the self-control grow wearisome, and Israel murmurs for the flesh-pots
of Egypt, much as the modern revolution reverts to a despotism. It is one thing to
admire abstract freedom, but a very different thing to accept the austere conditions
of the life of genuine freemen. And surely the same is true of the soul. The gospel
gladdens the young convert: he bows his head and worships; but he little dreams of
his long discipline, as in the forty desert years, of the solitary places through which
his soul must wander, the drought, the Amalekite, the absent leader, and the
temptations of the flesh. In mercy, the long future is concealed; it is enough that, like
the apostles, we should consent to follow; gradually we shall obtain the courage to
which the task may be revealed.
ISBET, "SLOW TO OBEY
‘And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken
unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.’
Exodus 4:1
Our duty to our Lord in this world requires that we should do somewhat more than
live a life of obedience to Him. Our obedience must be acknowledged obedience. We
must never be loth to say ‘Whose we are, and Whom we serve.’ We may read this
lesson writ large in the history of God’s sending Moses to deliver His people. Moses
went through a trial on Mount Horeb, the exact opposite of the trial of Christ.
I. Moses was tempted to decline the contest with the world altogether, to shrink
from action and from prominence, when God called him. Christ was tempted to take
the world by storm, to overwhelm it with conviction.
II. Moses was full of sympathy for the poor, full of a desire to see God’s ancient
promises realised; but when the time came, and God said, ‘ ow go,’ then, for the
first time, it flashed upon Moses that he was unfit to carry out what he had so
aspired to be trusted with. His eighty years of life had been given him that in its vast
experience he might learn that God was all, man was nothing. He had very nearly
learned it in truth; the crust or chrysalis of self was very nearly ready to drop off; it
needed just this interview with God to rid him of it entirely. He had seen the

17. miraculous powers with which he had been endowed, but he had not fully
understood them, and therefore his will was pausing still.
III. The voice of God within him and without him waxed more imperious. God
sternly pointed out that such eloquence as he longed for was but a secondary
qualification. ‘Thy brother, I know that he can speak well;’ the legislator need not
be the orator. There is not one of us who ever complained to God of insufficient
strength without finding his complaint answered either by ministration of grace or
disappearance of difficulties.
IV. What interests trembled in the balance while Moses was debating! It is not for
ourselves only that we shall be responsible if we debate till the time is gone.
—Archbishop Benson.
Illustration
(1) ‘God summons each one of us thus each new day if we could but hear.
“A door clanks loose; the gust beats by;
The chairs stand plain about;
Upon the curving mantel high
The carved heads stand out.
The maids go down to brew and bake,
And on the dark stair make
A clatter, sudden, shrill—
Lord, here am I,
Clear of the night, and ready for thy will.”
Is that our daily attitude of life?’
(2) ‘He who would right what is wrong must expect not only the hostility of open
foes but the thanklessness of the men and women whose champion he is.
So Oliver Cromwell and John Milton found in England. They thought they saw a
noble and puissant nation rousing herself, like a strong man after sleep, and shaking
her invincible locks—renewing her mighty youth at the fountain itself of heavenly
radiance. But the one was tormented with fears of assassination, and the other lived,
in darkness and neglect, to bewail the riot and godlessness of the Restoration.
Let me not be deterred from doing God’s work and man’s by the knowledge that
probably I shall reap the ingratitude of the very souls I am eager to benefit. Let me
confirm myself by the thought that I am treading the road heroes and confessors
have trodden before me.’
BI, "But, behold, they will not believe me.
Moses’ temptation to shrink from, the contest
Our duty to our Lord in this world requires that we should do somewhat more than live a

18. life of obedience to Him. Our obedience must be acknowledged obedience. We must
never be loth to say, “Whose we are, and Whom we serve.” We may read this lesson writ
large in the history of God’s sending Moses to deliver His people. Moses went through a
trial on Mount Horeb, the exact opposite of the trial of Christ.
I. Moses was tempted to decline the contest with the world altogether, to shrink from
action and from prominence, when God called him. Christ was tempted to take the world
by storm, to overwhelm it with conviction.
II. Moses was full of sympathy for the poor, full of a desire to see God’s ancient promises
realized; but when the time came, and God said, “Now go,” then, for the first time, it
flashed upon Moses that he was unfit to carry out what he had so aspired to be trusted
with. His eighty years of life had been given him that in its vast experience he might
learn that God was all, man was nothing. He had very nearly learned it in truth; the crust
or chrysalis of self was very nearly ready to drop off; it needed just this interview with
God to rid him of it entirely. He had seen the miraculous powers with which he had been
endowed, but he had not fully understood them, and therefore his will was pausing still.
III. The voice of God within him and without him waxed more imperious. God sternly
pointed out that such eloquence as he longed for was but a secondary qualification. “Thy
brother, I know that he can speak well”; the legislator need not be the orator. There is
not one of us who ever complained to God of insufficient strength without finding his
complaint answered either by ministration of grace or disappearance of difficulties.
IV. What interests trembled in the balance while Moses was debating! It is not for
ourselves only that we shall be responsible if we debate till the time is gone, (Archbishop
Benson.)
God’s call and man’s duty
I. God proposes great things to men. In proportion as any call in life is great, let the
heart pause and consider whether its very greatness is not a proof of its divinity.
II. We are not to look at what we are, but at what God is. When He calls, He qualifies for
the work
III. What is right in itself may be perverted and abused. Timidity is right in itself; but
when pushed into cowardice, it is wrong. Self-distrust is right in itself; but if it
degenerates into atheism, then it is the plague and destruction of the soul.
IV. God’s call to faith is the greatest call to his universe. Our duty is to go forward to the
unknown and the invisible, and live by faith. (J. Parker, D. D.)
The mission of Moses
I. The nature of the mission.
1. Its difficulty and danger.
2. It was divinely appointed.
II. Moses was trained specially for it.
1. The school of providence.

19. 2. Our need of discipline.
III. Moses was sufficiently equipped. The rod.
1. The use of little things.
2. The use of present means. Use “what is in thy hand.”
IV. Moses shrank from his mission. Modesty and self-distrust generally go with true
greatness and exalted virtue. (P. S. Henson, D. D.)
The lament of the pulpit
I. The preacher has frequently to lament the scepticism of his congregation. Practical
unbelief.
II. The preacher has frequently to lament the inattention of his congregation. Nothing
worse than disobedience to the messages of God.
III. the preacher has frequently to lament the querulous spirit of his congregation. They
question inspiration, preparation, qualification of teacher. And often in unkind, factious
spirit. Should rather welcome him as from God, sent to achieve their moral freedom.
IV. That this conduct on the part of congregations has a most depressing influence on
the minds of ministers. He needs the attention, sympathy, prayers, help of those whom
he seeks to free from the tyranny of sin. He has enough to contend with external
hindrances, with the opposition of Pharaoh, without having added to it that of the slave
whose fetter he seeks to break. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Why did Moses imagine that the Israelites would not believe him
1. Because he knew that they were a stiff-necked people.
2. Because he considered himself of insufficient authority to command their respect.
3. Because the power and tyranny of Pharaoh would deter them from believing him.
4. Because they would think it unlikely that God, who had never been seen by man,
should appear to him. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
Human distrust
Human distrust is a difficulty which every preacher, teacher, and holy labourer has to
encounter. All great movements are carried by consent of parties. God Himself cannot
re-establish moral order without the concurrence of the powers that have rebelled
against His rule. After all, the spiritual labourer has less to do with the unbelief of his
hearers than with the instruction and authority of God. We have to ascertain what God
the Lord would have us to say, and then to speak it simply and lovingly, whether men
will hear or whether they will forbear. The preacher must prepare himself for having
doubts thrown upon his authority; and he must take care that his answer to such doubts
be as complete as the authority itself. God alone can give the true answer to human
doubt. We are not to encounter scepticism with merely ingenious replies and clever
arguments, but in the power and grace of the living God. (J. Parker, D. D.)

20. Ministerial duty in spite of discouragement
Dr. Stevens narrates how an eminent minister was very much depressed by the unbelief
of his congregation, and how his spirit of depression was shaken off. He dreamed that he
was working with a pick-axe on the top of a basaltic rock, which remained non-riven in
spite of repeated strokes of his arm of muscle. When about to give up in despair, a
stranger of solemn and dignified demeanour appeared on the scene, who reminded him
that as a servant he was bound to go on whether the rock yielded or not. “Work is your
duty; leave the results to God,” were the last words of his strange visitor. The result was
that the discouraged pastor resumed his work, and was abundantly rewarded by “the
shattering of the rock of unbelief and indifference” among his flock.
Frailty invested with divinity
If we pause for a moment and consider the almost insurmountable difficulties which
stood in the way of Israel’s redemption from Egypt, we can readily appreciate the
hesitation on the part of Moses before undertaking this herculean task. Egypt at that
time was one of the most powerful of nations. It was not that Egypt desired simply to
hold Israel in subjection, that such a strict and powerful sovereignty was exercised; hut
the Israelites had become the servants, the slaves of the Egyptians, and as such were
almost necessary to the vigour of the nation. Besides, four centuries of oppression had
left their deep and degrading mark upon the children of Israel. They had become in a
measure satisfied with their condition. Hope had taken to itself wings. Ambition had
died within them. There native fire and energy had wasted away. To redeem a people
who do not care to be redeemed, to set free a nation which is content with captivity, is a
work well-nigh impossible. And then, to add to the difficulty of the case, supposing even
that they were free, where will they go? Their own land, the land promised to their father
Abraham, is already occupied. Warlike tribes have come down from the north and
strongly entrenched themselves within its borders. “Who and what am I,” said Moses,
“that I should go upon this great mission? What proofs can I bring to assure the people
that I am come from God? They will not believe my word, and they will ask, Where is the
God of our fathers and what is His name? What sign have I to convince them? What
power have I to display”? At length God answers, What is that in thy hand? And he said a
rod. He was told to cast it upon the ground, when all at once it became a writhing
serpent. You will notice all through the Scriptures in the dealings of God with His
people, that in almost every instance He proceeds upon the principle contained in our
text. When any great work is to be done, when any special mission is to be undertaken,
God does not bring down to the accomplishment of His purpose strange or wonderful
agencies, but He rather takes the simple things that lie about common life, and makes
them achieve the Divine will. God seems to take the most exquisite pleasure in clothing
human frailty with Divine strength and beauty, and imparting to the most ordinary and
trivial things, heavenly meaning and significance. Indeed, God’s constant purpose seems
to have been to unite this world with another one, to blend this life with a life infinitely
higher and grander. Life is robbed of all its harmony, all its grace, all its impressiveness
if we ever allow it to become separated from the Divine and the eternal, and the little
boat which is unswung from the davits and carried off by a huge billow from its place on
the ocean steamer, is no more helpless as it rolls in the trough of the sea, and is no more
pitiable in its desolation, than the life which is adrift from God out upon the great waters
of human experience and distress. To many life is a weary drudgery all the way from the
cradle to the grave. It is nothing but work and eat and sleep. Once in a great while there

21. is a little change, but not often. The great bulk of life is a sad monotony, and millions
look forward to the quiet and rest of the grave. And why are these people in this dismal
plight? Simply because their life is not connected with the Divine life, because this world
is not made a part of the heavenly world, and like a car which has become detached from
the swift express and flung out upon a siding, it stands helpless and forsaken in the dark
and dismal night. Suppose that here are three plates of common glass a foot square, an
eighth or a quarter of an inch in thickness, and suppose that they are given to three men
to dispose of them as they please. One takes his and he covers it with black enamel, and
on the ebonized surface he paints a human face, or some lovely flowers. Another takes
his and he spreads upon it a solution of quicksilver and it becomes a mirror throwing
back to the beholder his own face and expression. But the third takes his to the best
room in his house, he inserts it in the window which has the most commanding view,
and then carefully removing all the dust and finger-marks, he looks through its open
substance and sees the skies in their morning beauty, the fields in living green or
glistening white, and thus brings heaven and earth within the circle of that room. Now
these are the ways in which most of us live. We take our life and we enamel or ebonize it.
We make it opaque. We cannot see through it to anything that lies beyond; and though
we paint it, and try to adorn it, yet we in no wise remove the mystery; the darkness in the
sad background which even the flowers will not hide away. Some use the coating of
mercury, and make their life nothing but a mirror which reflects themselves. Self is the
image ever rising before their eyes. But the wise man makes this life simply a
transparency through which he can see the life of God. There are three forms of power
by which the machinery of clocks is kept in motion. The first and the one of the oldest
date is that of the weight suspended upon a chain or rope. The bulk and heaviness of the
weight was always in proportion to the size of the clock, and the wheels were literally
driven by the sheer force of the big weights as they slowly descended. The second is that
of the spring, the band of steel coiled within its cylinder spending its strength in
expansion, and forcing the wheels to revolve in its great desire to get free. The third is
that of electricity, where the current is carried along the wire from the central battery.
Silently, but almost irresistibly, the mysterious force operates upon the machinery,
ensuring an accuracy and faithfulness which can be gained in no other way. And in these
we have illustrations of how human life is carried on. Many of us go by weight. We are
dragged down by heaviness and toil, and compelled by the demands of circumstances to
go our weary round. Others go through by the sheer force of their own energy. They have
power and strength in themselves to propel them around the dial-plate of common
existence, and in this way they fulfil the measure of their days. But some have an electric
current. The wires of their thought are in connection with the great battery of God. Life
to them is not a mere drag. Life to them is not merely an expenditure of vital force. Life
to them means heavenly communion, Divine fellowship, holy enjoyment, and the days of
their pilgrimage are accomplished in simple dependence upon the Almighty will. Now,
what seems to be the very plain, the very obvious meaning of this rod? Is it not this: that
the most common things within our possession, and under our control, can be so
wrought upon by Divine influence, and so charged with Divine power, as to accomplish
the most strange and glorious results? St. Paul tells us in the Epistle to the Corinthians
that God has a strange choice in the selection of His instrumentalities: “Not many wise
men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called: but God hath chosen
the foolish things of the world to confound the wise.” And if you will go down the lines of
history you will see that God has carried out this principle in its integrity. And this ought
not to strike us as either strange or remarkable, because we do just the same ourselves.
We take the most common things that we can find, and we unite them with other things
until we finally develop the most potential forces of our time. A few gallons of water, a

22. few pieces of coal are enough to send the mad steam hissing through the pipes, eager to
turn yon giant engine, or send the train of cars thundering along the line. A few drops of
vitriol, a few pieces of prepared zinc, a single thread of wire, and lo, the electric force
flashes as light around our world. A few grains of charcoal and sulphur mixed with nitre
are sufficient to give us the dreadful gunpowder which sends iron giants swinging in the
air that beat into ruin walls and parapets of stone. We take the most common rods that
Nature has in her hand, and we breathe upon them, and they become instinct with life;
we give them of our genius and our strength; we lift them up out of their low estate. We
take the iron and the coal from the mines, we dig out the metals that are in the hills, we
dignify them and ennoble them until at length they become our most valued agents and
servants. But we must always remember that the rod of itself will be valueless unless it
have with it the presence and favour of God. Of what worth was the mere rod which
Moses held in his hand that day as he stood before the burning bush? In all probability it
was only the shepherd’s crook which he used while attending the flocks of Jethro. The
rod itself was almost of no value whatever. And so exactly with our life. Before we can be
really useful, before we can accomplish any great work, before we can live up to the
measure of our power, we must first of all meet with God. We must stand before the
burning bush; we must listen to the Divine voice; we must receive the heavenly
commission; we must accept the Divine command. Until this is done our life is nothing
but a rod—a rod without any special use or intrinsic value, and which will one day break
in our hands, and be cast into the fire and be destroyed. Look how this is illustrated:
What is that in thy hand? “A sling,” said David. “It is enough; go up against the giant”;
and the great Goliath fell before the shepherd-boy. What is that in thy hand? “A sword,”
answered Jonathan. “It is enough,” and the brave youth, followed by his armour-bearer,
goes up against an army, and the Philistines are defeated by these twain. What is that in
thy hand? “A piece of parchment,” answered Luther. It is enough, and he proceeds to
nail his famous protest upon the doors of the Roman Church and the era of the
Reformation broke upon darkened Europe. What is that in thy hand? “A pen,” said
Bunyan, as he spoke from under the arches of Bedford jail. It is enough, and he wrote the
story of the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” which will live while the world endures. Men and
women, with common, simple things about them, have heard the voice of God, and
doing just what their hand found to do, they made their life memorable in the history of
the Church and accomplished the Divine will. What is that in your hand? “Only a rod,”
answers the mother from beside the cradle, the workman standing at the bench, the
clerk behind the counter, the man of business at his desk. Only a rod, and is that all? Oh,
there is something of far greater value than you now suppose. Ask that honest farmer in
a few weeks from now standing in the open furrows, what is that in his hand, and he will
answer, only a few grains of seed. But is that all? Far from it. Those grains of seed
contain the germs of the great harvest which will fill our lands with plenty, and crowd
the threshing-floors with abundance. Then say not “Only a rod.” There is no such word
as “only” about human life. Every part of it is invested with mysterious grandeur and
possibility. We cannot tell how far the most simple thing will reach. A word dropped
from our lips, a hand clasped within ours, something apparently trifling done and then
forgotten, will go on long after we have passed away, and a life which throws its shadows
all down eternity cannot have anything but which is of value. (J. W. Johnston.)

23. 2 Then the Lord said to him, “What is that in
your hand?”
“A staff,” he replied.
BAR ES, "A rod - The word seems to denote the long staff which on Egyptian
monuments is borne by men in positions of authority. It was usually made of acacia
wood.
CLARKE, "A rod - ‫מתה‬ matteh, a staff, probably his shepherd’s crook; see Lev_
27:32. As it was made the instrument of working many miracles, it was afterwards called
the rod of God; see Exo_4:20.
GILL, "And the Lord said unto him,.... Not reproving him for contradicting him, or
showing any diffidence of what he had said; but rather as approving the hint he gave of
having some sign or miracle wrought, to command from the Israelites an assent unto
him, as commissioned of God to deliver them:
what is that in thine hand? which question is put, not as being ignorant of what it
was, but to lead on to what he had further to say, and to the working of the miracle:
and he said, a rod; or staff, such as shepherds use in the management of their flocks,
for Moses was now feeding the flock of his father-in-law; but Aben Ezra seems rather to
think it was a walking staff, such as ancient men lean upon, since Moses did not go to
Pharaoh after the manner of a shepherd; yea, it may be added, he went with the
authority of a prince or ruler of Israel, and even with the authority of the ambassador of
the King of kings.
HE RY 2-4, "God empowers him to work miracles, directs him to three particularly,
two of which were now immediately wrought for his own satisfaction. Note, True
miracles are the most convincing external proofs of a divine mission attested by them.
Therefore our Saviour often appealed to his works (as Joh_5:36), and Nicodemus owns
himself convinced by them, Joh_3:2. And here Moses, having a special commission
given him as a judge and lawgiver to Israel, has this seal affixed to his commission, and
comes supported by these credentials.
1. The rod in his hand is made the subject of a miracle, a double miracle: it is but
thrown out of his hand and it becomes a serpent; he resumes it and it becomes a rod
again, Exo_4:2-4. Now, (1.) Here was a divine power manifested in the change itself,
that a dry stick should be turned into a living serpent, a lively one, so formidable a one

24. that Moses himself, on whom, it should seem, it turned in some threatening manner,
fled from before it, though we may suppose, in that desert, serpents were no strange
things to him; but what was produced miraculously was always the best and strongest of
the kind, as the water turned to wine: and, then, that this living serpent should be turned
into a dry stick again, this was the Lord's doing. (2.) Here was an honour put upon
Moses, that this change was wrought upon his throwing it down and taking it up,
without any spell, or charm, or incantation: his being empowered thus to act under God,
out of the common course of nature and providence, was a demonstration of his
authority, under God, to settle a new dispensation of the kingdom of grace. We cannot
imagine that the God of truth would delegate such a power as this to an impostor. (3.)
There was a significancy in the miracle itself. Pharaoh had turned the rod of Israel into a
serpent, representing them as dangerous (Exo_1:10), causing their belly to cleave to the
dust, and seeking their ruin; but now they should be turned into a rod again: or, thus
Pharaoh had turned the rod of government into the serpent of oppression, from which
Moses had himself fled into Midian; but by the agency of Moses the scene was altered
again. (4.) There was a direct tendency in it to convince the children of Israel that Moses
was indeed sent of God to do what he did, Exo_4:5. Miracles were for signs to those that
believed not, 1Co_14:22.
JAMISO , "the Lord said, ... What is that in thine hand? — The question was
put not to elicit information which God required, but to draw the particular attention of
Moses.
A rod — probably the shepherd’s crook - among the Arabs, a long staff, with a curved
head, varying from three to six feet in length.
K&D, "Exo_4:2-5
The First Sign. - The turning of Moses' staff into a serpent, which became a staff again
when Moses took it by the tail, had reference to the calling of Moses. The staff in his
hand was his shepherd's crook (‫ה‬ֶ ַ‫מ‬ Exo_4:2, for ‫ה‬ֶ‫ה־ז‬ ַ‫,מ‬ in this place alone), and
represented his calling as a shepherd. At the bidding of God he threw it upon the
ground, and the staff became a serpent, before which Moses fled. The giving up of his
shepherd-life would expose him to dangers, from which he would desire to escape. At
the same time, there was more implied in the figure of a serpent than danger which
merely threatened his life. The serpent had been the constant enemy of the seed of the
woman (Gen 3), and represented the power of the wicked one which prevailed in Egypt.
The explanation in Pirke Elieser, c. 40, points to this: ideo Deum hoc signum Mosi
ostendisse, quia sicut serpens mordet et morte afficit homines, ita quoque Pharao et
Aegyptii mordebant et necabant Israelitas. But at the bidding of God, Moses seized the
serpent by the tail, and received his staff again as “the rod of God,” with which he smote
Egypt with great plagues. From this sign the people of Israel would necessarily perceive,
that Jehovah had not only called Moses to be the leader of Israel, but had endowed him
with the power to overcome the serpent-like cunning and the might of Egypt; in other
words, they would “believe that Jehovah, the God of the fathers, had appeared to him.”
(On the special meaning of this sign for Pharaoh, see Exo_7:10.)
CALVI , "2.What is that in thine hand? In accordance with the idiom of the
Hebrew language, Moses now explains more fully, and more distinctly pursues,

25. what he had before only generally alluded to respecting the signs. In the three signs
which he refers to we must consider their respective meanings The pastoral crook,
which he carried in his hand, is flung on the ground, and becomes a serpent; again it
is taken back into his hand, and recovers its original nature. I doubt not but that
God wished to shew him, that although his condition was abject and despicable, still
he would be formidable to the king of Egypt. For his rod was the symbol of a
shepherd; and what would be more contemptible than for a keeper of sheep to come
up from the desert, and to oppose to the scepter of a most powerful king that crook,
by which he could scarcely protect himself and his flock from wild beasts? But God
assures him, that although deprived of earthly splendor, wealth, or power, he would
still be terrible to Pharaoh; as much as to say, that he need not fear lest Pharaoh
should despise him, or take no account of him as a mere rustic, because his rod,
turned into a serpent, would inspire more terror than a thousand swords. As to
what Moses says, that he himself fled from it in alarm, unquestionably God intended
to affright his servant, that he might the better estimate from his own feelings what
would be the power of God to terrify that proud king. This, then, was the object of
the miracle, that there was no occasion for mighty armies, since Pharaoh would
tremble at the sight of the simple rod; and that the rod need not be wielded and
violently agitated, because it would inspire sufficient terror by its own movement
and agitation. The one part of the miracle, where the rod returned to its former
shape, was intended to shew Moses, that what was to be hostile and injurious to his
enemy, would be an assistance and safeguard to himself. Therefore, the same rod
which encouraged and emboldened Moses, depressed and overwhelmed his foe. But
that he dares, in immediate obedience to the voice of God, to lay hold of the serpent,
is a proof of his remarkable faith; and this appears more manifestly from his
sudden change, that he fears not to provoke a poisonous and noxious animal, by
taking hold of its tail, when he had so lately fled from its very sight in consternation.
His timid mind, then, was capable of great courage, and his timidity and piety
brought forth their fruit alternately. And this is especially worthy of remark, that
Moses was strengthened by the presence of God; but that he was weakened when he
turned his eyes to the untameable minds of his own race, and to the proud tyranny
of Egypt. The question now arises, whether the change of the rod into a serpent was
real, and actual, or whether the outward form only was changed? Although I should
be unwilling to contend pertinaciously for a thing of little consequence, I embrace
that opinion which is more probable, that not merely an image or vision appeared,
but that God, who created all things out of nothing, gave a new nature to the rod,
and again made a rod out of the serpent, which was in no degree more difficult than
to change Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt. (Genesis 19:26.) Since this was easy to
God’s power, it does not appear likely to me that He had recourse to the illusion of
visions. As to the imitation of the magicians, we will speak of their sorceries in their
proper place.
ELLICOTT, "(2) A rod.—Most commentators regard the “rod” of Moses as his
shepherd’s crook, and this is certainly possible; but the etymology of the word
employed seems rather to point to an ordinary staff, or walking-stick. Egyptians of
rank usually carried long batons; and one suggestion is, that the rod of Moses was

26. “that which he had been accustomed to carry as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter.”
But even if this was still in his possession after forty years of exile, he is not likely to
have taken it with him when he went a-shepherding. Probably the “rod” was a
common staff, such as a shepherd of eighty years old might need for a support.
TRAPP, "Exodus 4:3 And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the
ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it.
Ver. 3. And it became a serpent.] So doth the word to those that cast away the care
of it; it stings them with unquestionable conviction and horror. With this rod Moses
should guide the Israelites, sting the Egyptians. [Isaiah 14:29 Jeremiah 8:17]
And Moses fled from before it,] First fly from sin as from a serpent, saith one. But if
thou hast taken this serpent into thy hand, rest not, till, like Moses’s serpent, it be
turned into a rod again to scourge thy soul. Be either innocent or penitent.
PULPIT, "A rod. Or "a staff." Some suppose the ordinary shepherd's staff, or
crook, to be meant; but it is objected that this would have been an unfit object to
have brought into the presence of Pharaoh (Kalisch), being unsuitable for a court,
and emblematic of an occupation which the Egyptians loathed (Genesis 46:34); and
the suggestion is therefore made, that it was the baton or long stick commonly
carried by Egyptians of good position and especially by persons in authority. But
Moses in Midian, forty years after he quitted Egypt, is not likely to have possessed
such an article; nor, if he had possessed it, would he have taken it with him when
shepherding. Probably a simple staff, the natural support of a man of advanced
years, is meant.
EXPOSITOR'S DICTIO ARY "The Rod That Is in Thine Hand
Exodus 4:2; Exodus 4:17
I. God often does His greatest works by the humblest means. The great forces of
nature are not in the earthquake which tumbles cities into ruins. This power passes
in a moment; the soft silent light, the warm summer rain, the stars whose voice is
not heard—these are the majestic mighty forces which fill the earth with riches, and
control the worlds which constitute the wide universe of God.
II. So in Providence. The founders of Christianity were fishermen. Christ Himself
the Carpenter, the azarene, despised and crucified, was the wisdom and the power
of God. For did He not say—"I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto Me"? So in
the text, "What is that in thine hand? A rod"—the emblem, the tool of his daily
work. With this Moses was to do mighty deeds. Rabbinical tradition has it that
Moses was an excellent shepherd. He followed a lamb across the wilderness, plucked
it with his rod from a precipice amid the rocks, carried it in his bosom, whereupon

27. God said—"Let us make this Moses the shepherd of Israel". He a stranger, a
fugitive, a humble shepherd, becomes the lawgiver, the leader, the deliverer of his
people.
III. The lesson of the text is plain. God still meets every man and asks the old
question—"What is that in thine hand?" Is it the tool of an ordinary trade? With
that God will be served. The artisan where he Isaiah , in his humble workshop, by
using the "rod which is in his hand," the merchant in his business, are in the place
where they are now; all are called upon to do service. Few have rank, or wealth, or
power, or eloquence. Let those illustrious few use their ten talents, but let us, the
obscure millions, use the simple duties of life—"the rod that is in our hand". ot
extraordinary works, but ordinary works well done, were demanded by the Master.
—J. Cameron Lees, British Weekly Pulpit, vol. II. p509.
COFFMA , "Verses 2-4
"And Jehovah said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod. And
he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a
serpent; and Moses fled from before it. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Put forth thy
hand, and take it by the tail (and he put forth his hand, and laid hold of it, and it
became a rod in his hand)."
This is the very first in that tremendous series of miracles that would precede and
precipitate the exodus of 2,000,000 slaves from the tyranny of Egypt, and which
would never cease until they had crossed the waters of the Jordan into the Promised
Land. This first miracle was for the purpose of removing the first obstacle, namely,
the reluctance of Moses.
"A rod ..." Some have supposed that this was some special kind of staff, such as that
seen in the hands of Egyptian royalty on monuments, but, inasmuch as Moses
already had it, it could hardly have been anything else except the usual shepherd's
crook distinguished as the invariable instrument of shepherds. How appropriate
was such a choice on God's part! The Egyptians despised shepherds; and now, it
was to be a shepherd's staff that would humble and overthrow the all powerful
enemies of God's people. The might and glory of Egypt would be humbled and
destroyed by it, yet it was merely an instrument in the hands of an instrument
(Moses) of God!
"Take it by the tail ..." This was a test of Moses' faith. "Snake charmers usually
take snakes by the neck to prevent their biting."[4] The almost certain way to be
bitten by a serpent is to take it by the tail! As to what kind of a snake this was, we
are not told, however, implicit in Moses' fear of it is the near certainty that it was a
poisonous serpent. Many have supposed that it was the cobra, of the type depicted
on the headdress of Egyptian kings.[5] Here again, the symbolism is most important,
showing God's power as infinitely superior to the serpent-crowned rulers of Egypt.
Although some have disallowed it, we believe that Keil was correct in seeing this also

28. as a reminder that, "The serpent had been a constant enemy of the Seed of Woman
(Genesis 3:15) and represented the power of the evil one which prevailed in
Egypt."[6] Certainly the mission of Moses then beginning was a key factor in the
bringing in of that Visitor from on High who would crush the serpent's head.
COKE, "Exodus 4:2. And the Lord said—What is that? &c.— This is a proof,
among many others, that questions are frequently asked in the sacred Scripture, not
merely for the purpose of information: the Lord could not be ignorant what Moses
had in his hand. This remark may be useful for the rightly understanding of many
texts of Scripture. The rod which Moses held, was, most probably, his shepherd's
crook. See Micah 7:14. The word, rendered serpent, signifies all kinds of serpents.
Lightfoot conjectures it to have been a crocodile. It is probable, from the terror of
Moses, that it was an animal of a very fearful kind. Exodus 4:5 as well as Exodus
4:8-9 evince the truth of the interpretation which we have given of the first verse.
LA GE, "Exodus 4:2-5. The casting down of the shepherd’s rod may signify the
giving up of his previous pastoral occupation. As a seemingly impotent shepherd’s
rod he becomes a serpent, he excites all the hostile craft and power of the Egyptians.
Pharaoh especially appears in the whole process also as a serpent-like liar. But as to
the serpent, it is enough to understand by it the dark, hostile power of the Egyptians
which now at first frightened him. It is true, the enemy of the woman’s seed, the old
serpent, constitutes the background of the Egyptian hostility; but here the symbol of
the Egyptian snake kind is sufficient. When Moses, however, seizes the serpent by
the tail, by its weaponless natural part, as is illustrated in the Egyptian plagues, it
becomes a rod again, and now a divine rod of the shepherd of the people.
BI 2-5, "What is that in thine hand?
A trivial possession
I. God frequently makes inquiry about the most trivial possessions of men.
1. Have they been honourably gained?
2. Are they being put to their proper use?
3. Are they in a line with Divine power?
II. God frequently makes the most trivial possessions of men teach great truths.
1. This shows the Divine adaptability to the circumstances of men.
2. This shows the Divine wisdom in making insignificant things teach Divine truth.
3. This shows the Divine simplicity of the plans and purposes of Heaven.
III. That the most trivial possessions are useful to others as well as those to whom they
belong.
IV. That the most trivial possessions of men prove, after all, the most useful, and ought
therefore to awaken human gratitude. (J. W. Johnston.)

29. A rod
1. The subject of Divine inquiry.
2. The token of a shepherd’s office.
3. The symbol of a leader’s power.
4. The prophecy of a nation’s freedom. (J. W. Johnston.)
The rod
When God installed Moses into his great trust, He gave him a wand or staff of office as
its badge. But it was not the baton of a general nor the sceptre of a king. It was only the
shepherd’s rod. In Moses’ hand it became what no jewelled crosier ever has been or will
be. This stick was to be not only the ensign of his power, but its instrument. And in this
simplicity, indeed, lay its special fitness for its office; because all men who looked upon it
could see that its power was not in itself, not inherent; not in the rod, but effectual only
by a self-imposed law of God’s action, and conditioned in its success upon His fidelity to
His own rule. In this, as afterwards of the yet humbler symbol of the cross,—in this, the
symbol of his simplicity, of his exile, of his lowliness, the world was to be conquered.
1. I remark in regard to this rod, that it had no natural aptitude for its work. There
was nothing in its natural qualities to distinguish it from any other rod, and its
appointment to be Moses’ staff of office and instrument of miracle wrought in it no
physical change whatever. It was still mere wood. Sufficient force would break it. A
sharp tool would cut it. And it was according to the analogy of His ways: and so St.
Paul broadly states it. “Base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath
God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are.” It is
God’s way to do great things by weak means. That is the Divine philosophy of action,
the opposite of man’s.
2. Notice, again, that God in doing His great works does not need any instruments,
but uses them simply of His own sovereign will; and this appears in their obvious
inadequacy in themselves to the results which they, nevertheless, produce. Moses
was not indispensable to God, nor his rod to Moses, but by God’s determination. If
we look at our Lord’s miracles when He was upon earth, we shall see this truth
strikingly illustrated. In the variety of their methods they are so exhibited as at once
to show His independence of all means, and His sovereign power in appointing and
employing them. So this wonder-working rod of Moses answered simply the purpose
of forming a visible link between the Divine will and the effect that was produced.
The rod did not do the miracle, but a Power that worked by it; and that showed itself
able to dispense with it by employing in its work an instrument so manifestly
incapable of contributing anything to the proposed result. A word brings Lazarus
from the grave; a touch of the bier awakens the widow’s son. And thus we come to
the philosophy of means in the system of grace. They are visible signs of God’s
working, such signs as cannot work except as God works in them; and to us they are
tests of obedience and trials of faith. There is nothing quite so irrational as
rationalism. To obey God is the most rational of things. And to stand arguing and
questioning about a thing, debating its propriety and efficacy when God has told us
to do it, is eminently irrational. Moses might have stood and said, This wooden stick
cannot divide the waters, or turn the dust to flies, or make the heavens dark, or draw
water out of a rock; and he would have said nothing but the truth. And yet, if Moses

30. had thrown away his rod, he could never have invented anything else that would
have done these things, and the things would have remained undone. There is a
supernatural working in the world that the world does not take knowledge of. And it
works by a class of instrument talities that the world regards as childish and
impotent. The reliance some people place upon them it counts superstition, and
derides as futile and delusive. To expect any benefit from them they consider
irrational. The measure of their belief is their reason. So they eliminate all miracle
from the Scriptures, and all that is supernatural from the Church of God; and out of
the poor residue they construct what they call rational Christianity, and a very mean
Christianity it is. And so they illustrate very well the apostle’s saying, “Professing
themselves wise, they became fools.” And there are too many Christians who,
without going such lengths, are quite too ready to criticise God’s appointments, and
either hold them of light obligation, or greatly underrate their value and efficacy. But
there is a supernatural element in the Church of Christ, and God in it works invisibly
by means. “Water,” say they, “cannot cleanse the soul, nor bread and wine nourish it.
The touch of a prelate can have no power to convey the influences of the Spirit to
ministers in Ordination, or to lay people in Confirmation.” Men may see that the ten
commandments are right and salutary, and may observe them on that account. Their
reason pronounces them proper, and therefore they regard them. They would regard
them if they had found them in the Koran, or the Books of Confucius. There is much
of this sort of virtue, and it is respectable and useful to its possessor and to society.
But it is not obedience, it is not religion. Faith does not underlie it. The love of God is
not its life. Moses took his rod in his hand and with it he did wonders. He believed in
it, because he believed in God, and in God’s assignment of it to him as an instrument
of power. And then it was an instrument of power, a wonder staff, before which
impediments vanished and foes fled away. (R. A. Hallam, D. D.)
A talk with children-“What is that in thine hand?”
This was a question which astonished Moses. It was a surprising thing to him that God
should think anything of a shepherd’s crook. It would not have astonished him to hear
God speak about sceptres, but that He should call special attention to an old rod that he
had carried as a shepherd a thousand times was more than he could have ever expected.
But God now began to show Moses that he could turn that rod to higher use than he had
ever done hitherto. There are many things put into the hands of little children the full
use of which they do not yet know.
1. For instance, when at first you are taught to write a pen is placed in your hand.
What an amount of trouble you have before you learn even how to hold that pen! For
a long time you do not exactly know how to hold the gift that is given you; and for a
still longer time you little know what use you may yet make of it. When the apostle
Paul was a boy in school, and had to learn how to use the stylus, or pen, he little
knew what use he would be able to make of his pen in writing his Epistles. So with
regard to the apostle John. So also with reference to John Bunyan. When he was at
school, a poor boy, he was not taught much, since he was only to be a tinker. But a
pen was put into his hand, and it is wonderful what use he made of it in later years in
writing the “Pilgrim’s Progress.” Who knows? perhaps there is a child here to-day
who has only just learnt how to use the pen, and yet thousands may yet thank God
for what he will write.
2. Again, some of you have recently been on a journey by train. Had you looked at

31. the engine before you started you might have seen a man laying hold of a handle, or
lever. You might well have asked him, “What is that in thine hand?” Had you done
so, he would have replied, “This is the lever by which I have power over the engine
and make it to go fast or slow, or by which I stop it.” Thus, by holding just that little
piece of iron, the engine-driver is perfect master of theft huge and powerful engine.
3. Again, you go with your father to a telegraph office. He wants to send a message to
America. The clerk looks at the message and lays hold of a small handle by which he
sends those words along the cable through the depths of the Atlantic Ocean, and they
are read in a few seconds in New York.
4. Again, in times of war, when ships draw near a port, you may find a man in a
small room, or shed, who watches until a ship comes to a certain point. He then
touches a little button and the ship is blown up in an instant. There is a connection
between that little button and a mine of explosives which is hidden in the water
beneath the ship; and although that mine may be many miles away from that little
telegraph office, a touch of the button by a man’s hand at once explodes the mine and
works terrible destruction. When an Arab baby-boy is born, his parents put a little
ant into his right hand, and closing the hand upon it say, “May the child be as busy
and clever as the little ant.” That is the best wish they can utter for their children. But
we would put something better than an ant in your little hands. We would have you
hold firmly the Bible, and remember all that it tells you of the Saviour’s love. We
would have you study prayerfully that Book, and live according to its teaching. (D.
Davies.)
Work for all
The subject that I desire to bring before your attention is that of appointed
instrumentality. God accomplishes the purposes of His grace by instrumentality. Blessed
are they who are enabled to give themselves up with all that they have and all that they
are to be employed in the Lord’s service. We are not employed to be writers of God’s
revealed will, nor to be leaders of God’s people, nor to be in other respects what Moses
was. But he was a pattern to believers in Christ, as far as instrumentality went, in the
work to which he was called.
I. Now consider preparation for usefulness. In the case of Moses we see very remarkably
a course of preparation going forward for many years, both as respects the dealing of
God’s providence with him, and also as respects the blessing of God’s grace bestowed
upon him.
II. But this brings me now to the second particular, namely, encouragement in God’s
service as his instruments, You will observe our text brings Moses before us, after all this
lengthened preparation and when God was calling him to begin his work, as one who
was making excuses and objections. As if he had said, ‘“Well, but what good can I do?
There is no use in my going on this errand; I am not fit for it.” If you read the remaining
part of this chapter, you will see that this conviction of his mind was expressed again and
again. And here we may observe, by the way, that there is such a thing as false humility.
Humility, when it is genuine, the work of God’s Spirit, cannot be overprized. But there
may be what looks like humility, that is not the fruit of God’s Spirit. If God calls me or
you to any particular service, and we think that we are very humble and say, “No, I
cannot attempt that service, I am not fit for it,” this is false humility, because God never
gives work without giving strength and wisdom to do it. God never brings a trial upon us