Download to read offline
![enriched with God's law and tabernacle. This book gives us, I. The accomplishment of the
promises made before to Abraham (ch. 1–19), and then, II. The establishment of the
ordinances which were afterwards observed by Israel (ch. 20–40). Moses, in this book,
begins, like Caesar, to write his own Commentaries; nay, a greater, a far greater, than
Caesar is here. But henceforward the penman is himself the hero, and gives us the history
of those things of which he was himself an eye and ear-witness, et quorum pars magna
fuit—and in which he bore a conspicuous part. There are more types of Christ in this
book than perhaps in any other book of the Old Testament; for Moses wrote of him, Jn.
5:46. The way of man's reconciliation to God, and coming into covenant and communion
with him by a Mediator, is here variously represented; and it is of great use to us for the
illustration of the New Testament, now that we have that to assist us in the explication of
the Old.
EVERETT, "HISTORICAL SETTING
"We dare not divorce our study from understanding the historical setting of every
passage of Scripture
if we are going to come to grips with the truth and message of the Bible."
(J. Hampton Keathley) 2]
2] J. Hampton Keathley, III, "Introduction and Historical Setting for Elijah,"
(Bible.org) [on-line]; accessed 23May 2012; available from
http://bible.org/seriespage/introduction-and-historical-setting-elijah; Internet.
Each book of the Holy Scriptures is cloaked within a unique historical setting. An
examination of this setting is useful in the interpretation of the book because it
provides the context of the passage of Scripture under examination. The section on
the historical setting of the book of Exodus will provide a discussion on its title,
historical background, authorship, date and place of writing, recipients, and
occasion. This discussion supports the Jewish tradition that Moses was the author of
the book of Exodus , writing during the period of Israel's wilderness journey.
I. The Title
There are a number of ancient titles associated with the book of Exodus.
A. The Ancient Jewish Title "These Are the Names" - Henry Swete says ancient
Jews titled the five books of the Pentateuch, Proverbs , and Lamentations by
identifying a key word in the opening verses. 3] The Hebrew title for Exodus was
"Welesmoth" ( ), which comes from the opening word of this book, meaning "and
these are the names." Origen (c 185 - c 254) testifies to the use of this title by the
Jews in his day. 4] Jerome (A.D 342to 420) was familiar with this title as well. 5] The](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-4-320.jpg)
![titles ( ) and ( ) can be found in the standard work Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. 6]
3] Henry B. Swete, An Introduction to Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge:
University Press, 1902), 214.
4] Eusebius, the early Church historian, writes, " Exodus , Welesmoth, that Isaiah ,
‘These are the names';" Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6251-2, trans. Arthur C.
McGiffert under the title The Church History of Eusebius, in A Select Library of
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, A New Series, vol 1, eds.
Henry Wace and Philip Schaff (Oxford: Parker and Company, c 1890, 1905), 272-3.
5] Jerome says, "The second, Elle Smoth, which bears the name Exodus;" See
Jerome, "Prefaces to the Books of the Vulgate Version of the Old Testament: The
Books of Samuel and Kings," trans. W. H. Freemantle, in A Select Library of Nicene
and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series, vol 6, eds. Henry
Wace and Philip Schaff (New York: The Christian Literature Company, 1893), 489-
90.
6] Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, eds. A. Alt, O. Eifelt, P. Kahle, and R. Kittle
(Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelstiftung, c 1967-77); Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: With
Westminster Hebrew Morphology, electronic ed, (Stuttgart; Glenside PA: German
Bible Society; Westminster Seminary, 1996, c 1925; morphology c 1991), in in
Libronix Digital Library System, v 21c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix
Corp, 2000-2004).
B. The Modern English Title "Exodus" - Today, English bibles use the title " Exodus
," which finds it origin in the Greek title used in the LXX " έξοδυς ," which means
"going out, away" in the Hebrew text (Gesenius). Henry Swete suggests this title
came from Exodus 19:1, "… τ ς ξόδου τ ν υ ν ισραηλ κ γ ς α γύπτου…" 7]ῆ ἐ ῶ ἱῶ ἐ ῆ ἰ
Philo (20 B.C - A.D 50) called the book by its Greek name έξοδυς. 8] This Greek title
was known by Melito, bishop of Sardis (d. c 190). 9] The Vulgate uses the Latin title
"Exodus (liber)," 10] from which the English title is derived. There are some
variations to this title. For example, the Codex Alexandrinus uses the longer title
έξοδυς αίγύπτου. 11] Since the title "Exodus" is used as far back as the LXX, Henry
Swete and George Gray believe this title is "of Alexandrian and pre-Christian
origin." 12] The Greek/English title reflects the contents of the book, which deals
with Israel's exodus from Egypt.
7] Henry B. Swete, An Introduction to Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge:
University Press, 1902), 215.
8] Herbert E. Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture (London: Macmillan and Company,
1895), xxii.
9] Eusbius writes, "‘I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send
them to thee as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books:](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-5-320.jpg)
![Genesis ,, Exodus ,, Numbers ,, Leviticus , Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges , Ruth;
of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalm of David; the Proverbs of Song
of Solomon , Wisdom also, Ecclesiastes ,, Song of Solomon , Job; of Prophets,
Isaiah , Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book; Daniel ,, Ezekiel , Esdras. From
which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books.' Such are the
words of Melito." See Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 42614, trans. Arthur C.
McGiffert under the title The Church History of Eusebius, in A Select Library of
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, A New Series, vol 1, eds.
Henry Wace and Philip Schaff, (Oxford: Parker and Company, c 1890, 1905), 206.
10] Biblia Sacra Juxta Vulgatam Clementinam, ed. electronica (Bellingham, WA:
Logos Research Systems, Inc, 2005), in Libronix Digital Library System, v 21c [CD-
ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp, 2000-2004).
11] Henry B. Swete, An Introduction to Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge:
University Press, 1902), 202.
12] Henry B. Swete, An Introduction to Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge:
University Press, 1902), 215; George B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on Numbers , in The International Critical Commentary on the Holy
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, editors Charles A. Briggs, Samuel R.
Driver, and Alfred Plummer (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1903), xxi.
II. Historical Background
In the historical background, we will take a look at (A) the chronological dates of
historical events in the nation of Israel, (B) Moses, the main character of Exodus
through Deuteronomy , and (C) the construction of the Tabernacle.
A. Chronological Dates of Historical Events in the Nation of Israel - It is possible to
add up the years of some historical events in the nation of Israel, and thus estimate
chronological dates for these events. In the book of Genesis , we are told that
Abraham leaves Haran at age of seventy-five ( Genesis 12:4); and Isaac is born
when Abraham was one hundred years old ( Genesis 17:21; Genesis 21:5); and
Jacob is born when his grandfather Abraham was one hundred sixty years old, and
his father Isaac was sixty years old ( Genesis 25:26). We are told that the seventy
souls of Israel went into Egypt when Jacob was one hundred thirty (130) years old
( Genesis 47:9). Thus, Israel and his sons went into Egypt two hundred and sixty
(260) years after Abraham left Haran. We are told that the children of Israel spent
either four hundred (400) years in Egypt ( Genesis 15:15, Acts 7:6), or four hundred
thirty (430) years ( Exodus 12:40, Galatians 3:17). Thus, the Exodus from Egypt
took place at least six hundred ninety (690) years after Abraham left Haran. We
know that the Israelites spend forty years in the wilderness, and that the conquest of
Canaan under Joshua took five years ( Joshua 14:10). We are told that from the
time of the conquest of Canaan to Samuel is four hundred fifty (450) years ( Acts
13:20), which appears to be an estimate. We are told that King Saul reigned forty](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-6-320.jpg)
![when God first told him he would make of him a great nation, to the deliverance of his
seed out of Egypt, it was 430 years, during the first 215 of which they were increased but
to seventy, but, in the latter half, those seventy multiplied to 600,000 fighting men.
Note, [1.] Sometimes God's providences may seem for a great while to thwart his
promises, and to go counter to them, that his people's faith may be tried, and his own
power the more magnified. [2.] Though the performance of God's promises is sometimes
slow, yet it is always sure; at the end it shall speak, and not lie, Hab_2:3.
JAMISON, "Exo_1:1-22. Increase of the Israelites.
Now these are the names — (See Gen_46:8-26).
K&D 1-5, "
To place the multiplication of the children of Israel into a strong nation in its true
light, as the commencement of the realization of the promises of God, the number of the
souls that went down with Jacob to Egypt is repeated from Gen_46:27 (on the number
70, in which Jacob is included, see the notes on this passage); and the repetition of the
names of the twelve sons of Jacob serves to give to the history which follows a character
of completeness within itself. “With Jacob they came, every one and his house,” i.e., his
sons, together with their families, their wives, and their children. The sons are arranged
according to their mothers, as in Gen_35:23-26, and the sons of the two maid-servants
stand last. Joseph, indeed, is not placed in the list, but brought into special prominence
by the words, “for Joseph was in Egypt” (Exo_1:5), since he did not go down to Egypt
along with the house of Jacob, and occupied an exalted position in relation to them
there.
CALVIN, "1.These are the names It is the intention of Moses to describe the
miraculous deliverance of the people, (from whence the Greeks gave the name to the
book;) but, before he comes to that, he briefly reminds us that the promise given to
Abraham was not ineffectual, that his seed should be multiplied
“as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea-shore.” (Genesis
22:17.)
This, then, is the commencement of the book, — that although their going down
from the land of Canaan into Egypt might have seemed at the time as it were the
end and abolition of God’s covenant, yet in his own time he abundantly
accomplished what he had promised to his servant as to the increase of his
descendants. However, he only mentions by name the twelve patriarchs who went
down with their father Jacob, and then sums up the whole number of persons, as in
two other passages. (Genesis 46:27, and Deuteronomy 10:22.) The calculation is
perfectly accurate, if Jacob is counted among the thirty and six souls in the first
catalogue. For it is a far-fetched addition of the Rabbins (6) to count in Jochebed the
mother of Moses, to complete the number; and it is not probable that a woman, who
was afterwards born in Egypt, should be reckoned among the men whom Jacob
brought with him. If any object that the seventy are said to have “come out of the](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-17-320.jpg)
![Joseph commanded his servants the physicians to embalm his father: and the
physicians embalmed Israel. And forty days were fulfilled for him; for so are
fulfilled the days of embalming: and the Egyptians wept for him three score and ten
days."
Although none of the other brothers are mentioned as displaying such emotion over
Jacob's death, we should not believe that only Joseph did this. The probable reason
for these actions of Joseph being mentioned was the promise which God made to
Joseph in Genesis 46:4. It was therefore most fitting that the sacred text should have
made it clear that Joseph indeed was present for the death of his father Jacob.
"His servants the physicians ..." "No doubt the eminence of Joseph's position called
for a very great retinue; even a special detail of physicians was commissioned to
watch over his health."[1] These were skilled in the science of embalming, probably
even more than the professional embalmers. The reason for Jacob's being embalmed
lay in the fact that a long period of mourning was scheduled, and also in the
necessity to transport the body over a great distance to the land of Canaan.
Regarding the process of embalming, Dummelow had this:
"The brain and intestines were removed, and the stomach cleansed and filled with
spices. The body was then steeped in a mixture of salt and soda (called natron), for
forty or more days, to preserve from decay. Next, it was bound up in strips of linen
smeared with a sort of gum; and finally it was placed in a wooden case, shaped like
the human body, and deposited in a sepulchral chamber."[2]
"Egyptian mummies preserved for centuries bear silent witness to the remarkable
efficiency of these embalmers."[3] This method of preparing bodies for burial was
followed for generations by the Jews, as evidenced in the burial of Jesus himself
(John 19:40).
The two time periods mentioned here, the forty days for embalming and the seventy
days of mourning probably ran concurrently, since they would hardly have waited
until the embalming was completed to begin mourning. This long period of public
mourning indicates that the Egyptians gave Jacob "a royal funeral, since it was
customary to bewail a Pharaoh's death for seventy-two days."[4] This honor was
very similar to that conferred by the United States when a "nineteen gun salute" is
accorded a prime minister, contrasted with a "twenty-one gun salute" for the head
of a state.
ELLICOTT, "Verse 1
THE MULTIPLICATION OF THE ISRAELITES IN EGYPT, AND THEIR
OPPRESSION BY A NEW KING.
(1) Now these are the names.—The divisions between the “books “of the Pentateuch
are not arbitrary. Genesis ends naturally and Exodus begins at the point where the](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-19-320.jpg)
![history of the individuals who founded the Israelite nation ceases and that of the
nation itself is entered on. That history commences properly with Exodus 1:7.
Exodus 1:1-6 form the connecting link between the two books, and would not have
been needed unless Exodus had been introduced as a distinct work, since they are
little more than a recapitulation of what had been already stated and stated more
fully in Genesis. Compare Exodus 1:1-5 with Genesis 46:8-27, and Exodus 1:6 with
Genesis 1:26.
Every man and his household.—“A household,” in the language of the East, includes
not only children and grand-children, but retainers also—“servants born in the
house”—like those of Abraham (Genesis 14:14). The number of each “household”
may thus have been very considerable.
PETT, "Exodus 1:1
‘Now these are the names of the sons of Israel who came into Egypt, every man and
his household came with Jacob.’
This verse continues on the narrative of Genesis. It takes up where Genesis left off,
summarising what has gone before in a few verses. Those who entered Egypt with
Jacob were his eleven sons (excluding Joseph who was already in Egypt) and their
‘households’. The households would include servants and retainers. Thus they may
well have numbered in all a few thousand. We can compare how Abraham’s
household contained 318 fighting men (Genesis 14:14). All would be seen as
‘children of Israel’.
Jacob had come back from Paddan Aram with considerable resources and probably
many servants, and these had been joined with the family tribe of Abraham and
Isaac. Thus they were at some stage fairly numerous. On the other hand famine may
have reduced their numbers somewhat. But they would nevertheless be a strong
group, not just a few semi-nomads.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:1 Now these [are] the names of the children of Israel, which
came into Egypt; every man and his household came with Jacob.
Ver. 1. Now these are.] Heb., And these are, &c. For this book is a continuation of
the former history, and this verse a repetition of what was before recorded in
Genesis 46:8, The whole law, say the Schoolmen, is but one copulative. The whole
Scripture but Cor et anima Dei, saith a father, (a) the heart and soul of God, uttered
"by the mouth of the holy prophets, which have been since the world began." [Luke
1:70]
PULPIT, "Exodus 1:1
Now these are the names. Literally, "And these are the names." Compare Genesis
46:8, where the phrase used is the same. We have here the first example of that
almost universal practice of fife writers of the Historical Scriptures to connect book](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-20-320.jpg)
![into Egypt with Jacob.
4 Dan and Naphtali; Gad and Asher.
GILL, "Dan, and Naphtali, Gad, and Asher. Who are last mentioned, being
sons of the concubine wives.
COFFMAN, "Verses 4-6
"And when the days of weeping for him were past, Joseph spake unto the house of
Pharaoh, saying, If now I have found favor in your eyes, speak, I pray you, in the
ears of Pharaoh, saying, My father made me swear, saying, Lo, I die: in my grave
which I have digged for me in the land of Canaan, there shalt thou bury me. Now
therefore let me go up, I pray thee, and bury my father, and I will come again. And
Pharaoh said, Go up, and bury thy father, according as he made thee swear."
The question that arises here is why Joseph approached Pharaoh through
messengers, rather than personally; and the question may not be answered
dogmatically. Among the suggestions made are: "He approached Pharaoh through
the priests who were principals in the house of Pharaoh, and since the burial of the
dead was closely connected with their religious rites."[5] Peake thought it might
have been that, "Joseph was a mourner, therefore unclean."[6] "Unshaven and
unadorned, because of deep mourning," he could not see Pharaoh personally (see
Genesis 41:14)."[7] "Another Pharaoh, not so friendly to Joseph, had ascended the
throne."[8] Kline mentioned "diplomatic considerations,"[9] which is not
unreasonable since Joseph's leaving Egypt was involved. It appears to us that
Kline's suggestion is the most likely.
"My grave which I have digged for me in the land of Canaan ..." This is another
instance of additional information being supplied in subsequent references to an
event already mentioned. Certainly there is no need for finding here some evidence
of "another document"! Abraham had indeed purchased Machpelah; but, probably,
upon the occasion of Leah's burial there, Jacob also prepared for himself a grave
within the cave. "There is no reason to object to the idea that Jacob went into the
cave and digged from the rock his own grave."[10]
5 The descendants of Jacob numbered seventy[a] in all; Joseph was already in
Egypt.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-38-320.jpg)
![(Numbers 1:46.) came out of Egypt; and, in this view, it will be deemed no hyperbole
to say, that the land was filled with them. Calculators have shewn, that from seventy
persons, within two hundred and fifteen years, such a number as the Mosaic history
relates, separate from any thing miraculous, might very easily have been produced.
COFFMAN, "Verses 7-11
"And Joseph went up to bury his father; and with him went up all the servants of
Pharaoh, the elders of his house, and all the elders of the land of Egypt, and all the
house of Joseph and his brethren, and his father's house: only their little ones, and
their flocks, and their herds, they left in the land of Goshen. And there went up with
him both chariots and horsemen: and it was a very great company. And they came
to the threshing floor of Atad, which is beyond the Jordan, and there they lamented
with a very great and sore lamentation: and he made a mourning for his father
seven days. And when the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning
in the floor of Atad, they said, This is a grievous mourning to the Egyptians:
wherefore the name of it was called Abel-mizraim, which is beyond the Jordan."
The sheer size of this great pageant was most impressive. The houses of Jacob, and
the brothers, especially that of Joseph, and of all of Pharaoh's principal ministers
and officers constituted in the aggregate an immense company. It is most apparent
in this that Pharaoh did not grudgingly consent for Joseph to leave the capital and
go to the land of Canaan to bury Jacob, but on the other hand supported the
mission approvingly. Josephus tells us that all of this was done "at great
expense."[11]
In the Old Testament, the perspective "beyond" practically always means "west of";
and therefore it must be understood here as an indication that the funeral cortege
entered the land of Canaan from the eastward. We are not told why this circuitous
route was taken, but it is certain that good reasons dictated this. "There may have
been some political complications had this company taken the usual well-traveled
route to Canaan."[12] Keil did not accept the conclusion received here, namely that
the floor of Atad was west of the Jordan, basing his objection on the fact that
Genesis 50:12 states that Jacob's sons "carried him into the land of Canaan," but
what Keil overlooked is the fact that in all probability Jacob's sons (who carried
their father throughout the journey) had already done this, the thing meant in
Genesis 50:12 being that they carried him further into the land of Canaan to the
cave of Machpelah. This slight misplacement of such a detail as this is absolutely in
keeping with the Biblical style throughout. In fact, Genesis 50:12 and Genesis 50:13
are a summary of what was done.
ELLICOTT, "(7) The children of Israel were fruitful.—A great multiplication is
evidently intended. Egypt was a particularly healthy country, and both men and
animals were abnormally prolific there. Grain was so plentiful that want, which is
the ordinary check on population, was almost unknown. The Egyptian kings for
many years would look favourably on the growth of the Hebrew people, which
strengthened their eastern frontier, the quarter on which they were most open to](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-55-320.jpg)
![fulfilment of the prophecy.
We see here the two sides of God’s sovereignty. On the one hand the quiet call to
them based on His promises to Abraham was to trust God and go home, on the other
was the fact that God had already prophesied that they would not do so (Genesis
15:13-14). The whole history of salvation is cluttered with similar failures of God’s
people to obey Him, and His merciful and final triumph over their disobedience as
He patiently brings about His will. It is all a part of His sovereign working. His
people are foolish and disobedient and He regularly has to drag them kicking and
screaming into salvation.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:7 And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased
abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled
with them.
Ver. 7. Increased abundantly.] Heb., Spawned, and bred swiftly, as fishes. Trogus
author a firmat in Aegypto septenos uno utero simul gigni. Egypt is a fruitful
country: it is ordinary there, saith Trogus, to have seven children at a birth. Solinus
gives the reason, quod faetifero potu Nilus, non tantum terrarum, sed etiam
hominum faecundat arva; - the river Nile, whereof they drink, makes men as well as
fields fruitful. But this increase of the Israelites was also by the extraordinary
blessing of God, that they might "become a mighty and populous nation."
[Deuteronomy 26:5]
MCGEE, "Seventy souls of Jacob entered Egypt (Genesis 46:27). It is conservatively
estimated that 2,100,000 left Egypt at the time of the Exodus.
Although we cannot be certain of dating during this early period, it
would seem that Joseph entered Egypt under the Hyksos or shepherd
kings. This was the 15th to 17th dynasty. They were Semitic conquerors
from Mesopotamia, Bedouin princes from the desert. They
were related to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Actually, the Israelites
were their only friends, as they were hated by Egyptians. Amasis, military
leader of Egypt, led a rebellion against the Hyksos kings,
deposed them, and was made Pharaoh. It was Ramses II in this line
who was the Pharaoh of the oppression and the one “who knew not
Joseph.”
Moses’ life is divided into three 40-year periods:
1. 40 years in Pharaoh’s palace in Egypt,
2. 40 years in the desert in Midian,
3. 40 years in the wilderness as leader of Israel.
DEFFINBAUGH, "Most importantly, this portion of the introduction to the Book of
Exodus (Exod. 1:1-6) links the existence and rapid growth of Israel as a nation to the
covenant which God made with Abraham (Gen. 12:1-3; 15:12ff.), and which He
reiterated to the patriarchs (Isaac: Gen. 26:2-5, 24; Jacob: Gen. 28:13-15). The sons of](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-57-320.jpg)
![The Hyksos, or ‘rulers of foreign lands’, were Semites who gained prominence in
lower Egypt and then suddenly or gradually took over the kingship of Egypt by the
use of horses and iron studded chariots, and the Asiatic bow. Their period of rule
was from about 1720 BC to 1550 BC. They only ever ruled the lower part although
at times possibly exacting tribute from upper Egypt. They thus ruled in Northern
Egypt for over a hundred years. They established their capital at Avaris in the East
Delta and assumed the full rank and style of traditional royalty, taking over the
Egyptian state administration and gradually introducing people of their own
appointment, including the famed chancellor Hur. But in fact Semites could rise to
high office in Egypt in any number of dynasties, as archaeology clearly reveals, so
that this is no pointer to when Joseph lived, especially as his position was said to be
due to unusual circumstances.
Whatever the relationship of Joseph to them it will be quite apparent that once the
Hyksos were expelled, all Semites, especially large groupings of them living together,
would be looked on with suspicion. Having experienced Semite subjection Egyptians
would be looking for any possibility of another such threat. The kings responsible
for the defeat of the Hyksos were King Kamose and his successor King Ahmose I.
The former defeated the Hyksos and confined them to the East Delta, the latter
expelled them and their Semite and Egyptian supporters, and defeated them
comprehensively in Palestine. Yet they may not be the king referred to here, for the
children of Israel seemed to have remained loyal and not to have taken part in the
fighting. So it may well have been a later king who enslaved them because he had
particular plans in view for building projects for which he could utilise them.
Building was a favourite hobby of many Pharaohs as they sought to immortalise
their names, and archaeology bears witness to many of such projects. And as far as
he was concerned all the people (apart from the priests) were his slaves. This was the
custom in Egypt after what the great famine had brought about (Genesis 47:19-22).
When he was strong enough he could do with them what he would.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:8 Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not
Joseph.
Ver. 8. A new king.] Called Busiris, a most savage tyrant, as heathen histories report
him.
Who knew not.] Nothing sooner perisheth than the remembrance of a good turn.
The Egyptians are renowned in histories for a thankful people; but it ill appeared in
their dealing here with Joseph; who, had he now been alive, might well have said to
them, as Themistocles once did to his Athenians, Are ye weary of receiving so many
benefits by one man? (a) But herein was fulfilled that of the wise man, Ecclesiastes
9:15.
DEFFINBAUGH
A New King and a New Policy](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-110-320.jpg)
![(1:8-14)
When Joseph brought his family to be with him in Egypt, they came to the “best of the
land” (Gen. 47:6,11). Even at this time there was an underlying prejudice against the
Israelites as Hebrews (Gen. 43:32) and as shepherds (Gen. 46:34). There is considerable
disagreement among the scholars as to the identity of this “new king, who did not know
about Joseph” (Exod. 1:8). Much of the problem hinges on the date of the Exodus, a
matter which we shall not discuss here in detail.
12
Keeping with an early date for the
Exodus, it is most likely that the king referred to here was new in a very significant sense.
He represented not only a new person, but also very likely a new dynasty.
An Asiatic people of Semitic origin (thus, related to the Hebrews) began to migrate into
Egypt, eventually gaining control of the government at a time of weakness and confusion
during the Second Intermediate Period. The Hyksos
13
ruled for about 150 years during
the time of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt, from about 1700 to 1550 B.C. The Hyksos kings
were “Egyptianized,” assuming the title of Pharaoh,
14
and adopting the gods of Egypt.
The Hyksos capital was very close to Goshen where the Israelites had settled in Egypt. It
would seem that the “new king” of Exodus 1:8 was a Hyksos king, and he would thus
truly be “new” as Moses has indicated, especially if he succeeded an Egyptian king. Note
also that he is not called an Egyptian. In the light of these considerations, Davis suggests
the following rendering of verse 10: “Come on, let us [Hyksos] deal wisely with them
[Israelites], lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when war occurs, they join also
unto our enemies [the Egyptians], and fight against us [Hyksos], and so get them up out
of the land.”
15
If indeed a small minority of Hyksos had gained control over Egypt, it is not a surprise
that these “foreigners” would have had no knowledge of Joseph. In fact, there would very
likely be a tendency to try to blot out the past and to create a new allegiance to the
Hyksos dynasty. It would also explain the fear of the Hyksos king that the Israelites might
join with their enemies (the Egyptians) to overthrow their (foreign) rule.
The fears of the Pharaoh (be he a Hyksos or an Egyptian) are of interest: “Look,” he said
to his people, “the Israelites have become much too numerous for us. Come, we must
deal shrewdly with them or they will become even more numerous and, if war breaks out,
will join our enemies, fight against us and leave the country” (Exod. 1:9-10).
He feared the numerical strength of the Israelites, and sought to diminish them. He feared
that they would become allies with the enemy against their rule, and would overcome
them and leave Egypt. Interestingly, everything Pharaoh feared came to pass, in spite of
his diligent efforts to prevent it. The reason is, of course, that the Pharaoh’s plans were
contrary to the purposes and promises of God with regard to His people.
Pharaoh’s plan, which was readily adopted by the people, was to enslave the Israelites,
and to tighten their control over them. A substantial part of this plan seems to be that of
intimidation and oppression, so demoralizing and frightening the Israelites that they
would not dare to resist their masters. In addition, their value as slave labor would be
utilized to strengthen the nation both economically and militarily. The storage cities of](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-111-320.jpg)
![a completely different king, one of a new dynasty or a new family, not bound by
precedent, but free to adopt and likely to adopt quite new principles of government? The
latter seems the more probable supposition; but it is probable only, not certain. Assuming
it to be what is really meant, we have to ask, What changes of dynasty fall within the
probable period of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt, and to which of them is it most likely
that allusion is here made? Some writers (as Kalisch) have supposed the Hyksos dynasty
to be meant, and the "new king" to be Set, or Salatis, the first of the Hyksos rulers. But
the date of Salatis appears to us too early. If Joseph was, as we suppose, the minister of
Apophis, the last Hyksos king, two changes of dynasty only can come into consideration
—that which took place about b.c. 1700, when the Hyksos were expelled; and that which
followed about three centuries later, when the eighteenth dynasty was superseded by the
nineteenth. To us it seems that the former of these occasions, though in many respects
suitable, is
(a) too near the going down into Egypt to allow time for the multiplication which
evidently took place before this king arose (see Exodus 1:7), and
(b) unsuitable from the circumstance that the first king of this dynasty was not a builder
of new cities (see Exodus 1:11), but only a repairer of temples. We therefore conclude
that the "new king" was either Rameses I; the founder of the nineteenth dynasty, or Seti I;
his son, who within little more than a year succeeded him. It is evident that this view
receives much confirmation from the name of one of the cities built for the king by the
Hebrews, which was Raamses, or Rameses, a name now appearing for the first time in
the Egyptian dynastic lists.
Who knew not Joseph. Who not only had no personal know]edge of Joseph, but was
wholly ignorant of his history. At the distance of from two to three centuries the benefits
conferred by Joseph upon Egypt, more especially as they were conferred under a foreign
and hated dynasty, were forgotten.
9 “Look,” he said to his people, “the Israelites have become far too numerous for us.
CLARKE, "He said unto his people - He probably summoned a council of
his nobles and elders to consider the subject; and the result was to persecute and
destroy them, as is afterwards stated.
GILL, "And he said unto his people,.... His princes, nobles, and courtiers
about him, his principal ministers of state:](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-113-320.jpg)
![[Osburn].
CALVIN, "9.And he said unto his people. That is to say, in a public assembly, such
as kings are wont to hold for consultation on public affairs. As if Moses had said that
this point was proposed by the king for deliberation by his estates; viz., that because
it was to be apprehended that the Israelites, trusting in their multitude and strength,
might rise in rebellion, or might take advantage of any public disturbance to shake
off the yoke and to leave Egypt, they should be anticipated, and afflicted with heavy
burdens, to prevent their making any such attempt. This Pharaoh calls (13) “dealing
wisely with them;” for though the word , chakam, is often taken, in a bad sense, to
mean “to overreach with cunning,” still in this case he concealed under an honest
pretext the injury which he proposed to do them, alleging that prudent advice
should be taken lest the Egyptians might suffer great loss through their carelessness
and delay. This was common with heathen nations, to profess in their counsels, that
what was right should be preferred to what was profitable; but, when it comes to the
point, covetousness generally so blinds everybody, that they lose their respect for
what is right, and are hurried away headlong to their own advantage. They make
out too that what is advantageous is necessary; and so persuade themselves that
whatever they are compelled to do is right. For that specious yet fallacious pretext
readily occurs, and easily deceives, that, when any danger is apprehended, it ought
to be met. By the tragic poets, indeed, that detestable sentiment, occupandum esse
scelus, “that we should be beforehand in crime,” is attributed to wicked and
desperate characters; because our nature convinces us that it is unjust and absurd;
and yet is it commonly considered the best mode of precaution, so that only those
are accounted provident who consult for their own security by injuring others, if
occasion requires it. From this source almost all wars proceed; because, whilst every
prince fears his neighbor, this fear so fills him with apprehension, that he does not
hesitate to cover the earth with human blood. Hence, too, amongst private
individuals, arises the license for deceit, murder, rapine, and lying, because they
think that injuries would be repelled too late, unless they respectively anticipated
them. But this is a wicked kind of cunning, (however it may be varnished over with
the specious name of foresight,) unjustly to molest others for our own security. I fear
this or that person, because he both has the means of injuring me, and I am
uncertain of his disposition towards me; therefore, in order that I may be safe from
harm, I will endeavor by every possible means to oppress him. In this way the most
contemptible, and imbecile, if he be inclined to mischief, will be armed for our hurt,
and so we shall stand in doubt of the greater part of mankind. If thus every one
should indulge his own distrust, while each will be devising to do some injury to his
possible enemies, there will be no end to iniquities. Wherefore we must oppose the
providence of God to these immoderate cares and anxieties which withdraw us from
the course of justice. Reposing on this, no fear of danger will ever impel us to unjust
deeds or crooked counsels. In the words of Pharaoh, all is otherwise; for, having
given warning that the Israelites might, if they would, be injurious, he advises that
their strength should in some way or other be broken. For, when we have once
determined to provide for our own advantage, or quiet, or safety, we ask not the
question whether we are doing right or wrong.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-115-320.jpg)
![endeavoured both to hinder and to recover them. Immigration was encouraged,
emigration sternly checked. The loss of the entire nation of the Hebrews could not
be contemplated without extreme alarm.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:10 Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and
it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies,
and fight against us, and [so] get them up out of the land.
Ver. 10. Come on, let us deal wisely.] So as the world’s wizards use to do: but God
taketh - δρασσομενος - these foxes in their own craft. [1 Corinthians 3:19] Your
labouring men have the most and lustiest children. Every "oppressor" is a fool.
[Proverbs 28:16]
Lest, when there falleth out any war.] It may seem - by 1 Chronicles 7:21-22,
compared with Psalms 77:9 - that the Ephraimites, weary of the Egyptian bondage,
and too hasty to enjoy the Promised Land, invaded the Philistines and plundered
them; but were pursued and slain by the men of Gath, to the great grief of their
father Ephraim, and to the further exasperating of the Egyptians against all the
children of Israel; which might occasion also this cruel edict and proceeding against
them. It is a singular skill to bear bondage or any other burden wisely and
moderately. They that break prison before God’s time, get nothing but more irons
laid upon them.
EXPOSITOR'S DICTIONARY, "Exodus 1:10
Crimes and criminals are swept away by time, nature finds an antidote for their
poisons, and they and their ill consequences alike are blotted out and perish. If we
do not forgive the villain at least we cease to hate him, as it grows more clear to us
that he injures none so deeply as himself. But the θηρι δης κακ α, the enormousώ ί
wickedness by which humanity itself has been outraged and disgraced, we cannot
forgive; we cannot cease to hate that; the years roll away, but the tints of it remain
on the page of history, deep and horrible as the day on which they were entered
there.
—Froude, Short Studies, I. pp468-469.
Reference.—I:10-12.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvii. No997.
PULPIT, "Exodus 1:10
Come on. The "Come then" of Kalisch is better. Let us deal wisely. "The children of
this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light." Severe grinding
labour has often been used as a means of keeping down the aspirations of a people,
if not of actually diminishing their numbers, and has been found to answer. Aristotle
(Pol. 5.9) ascribes to this motive the building of the Pyramids and the great works of](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-123-320.jpg)
![difficulties, that new government, in pursuance of its oppressive policy, degraded
them to the condition of serfs - employing them exactly as the laboring people are
in the present day (driven in companies or bands), in rearing the public works,
with taskmasters, who anciently had sticks - now whips - to punish the indolent,
or spur on the too languid. All public or royal buildings, in ancient Egypt, were
built by captives; and on some of them was placed an inscription that no free
citizen had been engaged in this servile employment.
they built for Pharaoh treasure cities — These two store-places were in
the land of Goshen; and being situated near a border liable to invasion, they were
fortified cities (compare 2 Chronicles 11:1-12:16). Pithom (Greek, Patumos), lay on
the eastern Pelusiac branch of the Nile, about twelve Roman miles from
Heliopolis; and Raamses, called by the Septuagint Heroopolis, lay between the
same branch of the Nile and the Bitter Lakes. These two fortified cities were
situated, therefore, in the same valley; and the fortifications, which Pharaoh
commanded to be built around both, had probably the same common object, of
obstructing the entrance into Egypt, which this valley furnished the enemy from
Asia [Hengstenberg].
CALVIN, "11.Therefore they did set over them. The Egyptians devised this remedy
for gradually diminishing the children of Israel. Since they are subjects, they may
afflict them with burdens, to depress them; and this slavery will weaken and
decrease them. But their power over them as subjects should not have been carried
so far as to impose upon inoffensive persons, to whom they had granted free
permission to reside among them, these new tributes; for they ought first to have
considered upon what conditions they had been admitted. The exaction, then, by
which Pharaoh broke faith with them, was in itself unjust; but the crime to which he
proceeded was still greater, because he did not simply seek for pecuniary advantage,
but desired to afflict the wretched people by the heaviness of their burdens. For the
Israelites were not only compelled to pay tribute, but were put to servile labor, as
Moses immediately adds. As to the two cities, it is doubtful in what sense they were
called miscenoth (15) This word is sometimes taken for cellars and granaries, or
repositories of all things necessary as provision; but, as it sometimes signifies
“fortresses,” it will not be an unsuitable meaning, that they were commanded to
build with their own hands the prisons, which might prevent them from departing.
For it is clear from many passages (Genesis 47:11; Exodus 12:37; Numbers 33:3)
that Rhameses was situated in that part of the country, and we shall presently see
that the children of Israel went out from Rhameses.
COKE, "Exodus 1:11. Task-masters— The original words signify, properly, tax-
gatherers: so that the result of this counsel was, to exact a tribute to lessen their
wealth, and to lay heavy burdens on them to weaken their bodies, and thereby
prevent their populating and increasing. Philo tells us, that they were made to carry
burdens above their strength, and to work night and day; that they were forced to
be workers and servers; that they were employed in brick-making, digging, and
building; and that if any of them dropped dead under their burdens, their friends
were not permitted to bury them. Josephus tells us, moreover, that they were made](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-128-320.jpg)
![name for Tanis, or for a suburb of Tanis, which overshadowed the old city. Rameses
II. claims to have built the greater part of it; but it was probably commenced by his
father, Seti, who made the defence of the north-eastern frontier one of his main
cares. The name must be considered as a mere variant rendering of the Egyptian
Ramessu or Ramesu. The site is marked by the mounds at San.
LANGE, "Exodus 1:11. Taskmasters.—The organs of oppression and enslavement.
“That foreigners were employed in these labors, is illustrated by a sepulchral
monument, discovered in the ruins of Thebes, and copied in the Egyptological works
of Rosellini and Wilkinson, which represents laborers, who are not Egyptians, as
employed in making brick, and by them two Egyptians with rods, as overseers; even
though these laborers may not be designed to represent Israelites, as their Jewish
features would indicate” (Keil). See also Keil’s reference to Aristotle and Livy,
(p422)[FN5] on the despotic method of enfeebling a people physically and mentally
by enforced labor. Store-cities.—For the harvests. See Keil (p422) on Pithom (Gr.
Πάτουμος, Egypt. Thou, Thoum), situated on the canal which connects the Nile with
the Arabian gulf. Raemses, the same as Heroopolis.
PETT, "Exodus 1:11
‘Therefore they set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens, and
they built for Pharaoh store cities, Pithom and Raamses.’
From a human point of view we have here the nub of the matter. A supply of
building labourers was required and Pharaoh was looking around for potential
slaves for use in his building projects. They would include many other than the
children of Israel, but the children of Israel would form a major source of supply in
that area. Thus their prospects completely changed and they became slave labourers
for Pharaoh. One moment they were living their lives pleasantly as they had always
lived them, watching over their herds and flocks, (even though it may have been
getting more difficult), the next the soldiers of Pharaoh arrived and they found
themselves enslaved and recruited into forced labour of an extreme kind. It was not
unusual for kings to call on people for forced labour when the need arose (compare
1 Kings 5:13-14; 1 Kings 9:15; 1 Kings 9:21). It was a pressing into an unwelcome
service which was common through the ages. But it was naturally hated, and
especially when it became as severe and extended as this period in Egypt, for here
there was a further purpose in mind, the humiliation and crushing of a people into
complete subservience.
We have here the same motif as in Genesis 3. The sinfulness and disobedience of
those who were His now resulted in their being driven to hard labour. The sentence
of Genesis 3 is again applied. If man disobeys God it would only be to his detriment.
“Store cities.” The purpose of these, among others, was to act as places where grain,
oil, wines and so on, obtained from taxation, could be stored. They also probably
stored weapons and armaments for maintaining frontier and defence forces. The
cities were fairly close to the border.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-130-320.jpg)
![“Store cities, Pithom and Raamses.” Around 1300 BC Sethos I began large building
programmes in the North East Delta and had a residence there. It may be that it was
he who founded the Delta capital largely built by his son Rameses II. who named it
Pi-Ramesse, ‘the house of Rameses’. Rameses II extended his building programmes
throughout the whole of Egypt. Thus he may have been the Pharaoh in question
which would date the Exodus in 13th century BC.
The sites of these cities are possibly known. However, their identification is by no
means certain. Rameses has been identified with Avaris (Tanis), the previous Hyksos
capital, which was destroyed and left waste after their expulsion and rebuilt by
Sethos and Rameses. But this identification has been questioned. Another possibility
is a site near Qantir. Rameses became Rameses II’s main residence. Pithom
(‘dwelling of Tum’) has been identified with Tel er-Retaba or Tel el-Maskhuta in the
Wadi Tumilat (Tel el-Maskhuta is often identified as Succoth). Thus whether these
were ‘new’ cities, or refurbishing of older ones, is also not certain. But if the
majority view on the sites is accepted there had been no building projects there
prior to these ones since the time of the Hyksos, which would leave a choice between
the two periods for the ‘Pharaoh who knew not Joseph’.
In Genesis 4:17; Genesis 11:1-9 the building of cities was connected with man’s
rebellion against God. The same motif is found here. If His people would not listen
to Him and would not seek to establish themselves as the people of God within the
land promised to their forefathers, and establish His worship there, they would be
compelled to build cities in a strange land. Compare how Cain departed from the
land of his father to build a ‘city’ (possibly a gathering of dwellings, such as caves or
tents) in a strange land (Genesis 4), as did the builder of cities in Genesis 10:11;
Genesis 11:1-9. Israel also were now in a strange land, and had chosen to remain
there. Thus they became involved in doing what was contrary to God’s will for
them. They began to build cities.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:11 Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them
with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses.
Ver. 11. To afflict them.] Because they would not "serve God with gladness of heart."
[Deuteronomy 28:47-48] For now they began to go awhoring after the idols of
Egypt. [Ezekiel 23:8; Ezekiel 20:5; Ezekiel 20:7-8]
And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities.] They built also those famous pyramids,
as some think, (a) of which it is reported, that for the great height of them, a man
cannot shoot an arrow so high as the midst of the lower tower, whereon the spire
stands. (b)
PULPIT, "Exodus 1:11](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-131-320.jpg)
![given.
BENSON, "Exodus 1:12. The more they multiplied — To the grief and vexation of
the Egyptians. The original expression, rendered grew, is very emphatical, jiphrots.
They broke forth and expanded themselves with impetuosity, like a river swollen
with the rains, whose waters increase and gain strength by being confined, Here we
see how vain and fruitless the devices of men are against the designs of God: and
how easily he, in his providence, can turn their counsels against themselves, and
cause the very means which they employ to oppress his people, to become the
greatest helps and advantages to them. Times of persecution and affliction have
often been the church’s growing times: Christianity spread most when it was most
persecuted.
COKE, "Exodus 1:12. The more they afflicted them, &c.— The expression in the
original is more energetic than any of the preceding in Exodus 1:7. iprotz, rendered
grew, signifies, properly, to break forth, and expand itself with impetuosity, like a
rapid river, which swells and gathers force by being confined. Vain are the counsels
of men against the providence of God! His blessing can turn the means they employ
to oppress into the greatest advantages. There are many devices in a man's heart;
nevertheless, the counsel of the Lord, that shall stand. Proverbs 19:21.
COFFMAN, "Verse 12-13
"And his sons did unto him according as he commanded them: for his sons carried
him into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of Machpelah, which
Abraham bought with the field, for a possession of a burying-place, of Ephron the
Hittite, before Mamre."
These two verses are clearly a summary of the whole event, as the words "as he
commanded them" indicate. There is no evidence whatever here that the floor of
Atad was east of the Jordan, despite the preponderance of scholarly opinion to the
contrary. John Skinner stated that "practically all commentators" agree that the
words for east of in Genesis are "in front of," not "beyond,"[13] as was noted
earlier in our studies of Genesis 2:14. Therefore, if the text here was saying that
Atad was east of Jordan, the words would have been "in front of," not, "beyond."
Of course, the location of the place is unknown, and some have eliminated the
difficulty by translating "near Jordan," instead of "beyond Jordan,"[14] but
receiving these verses as a summary of the whole event makes such a device totally
unnecessary. Since the whole party admittedly entered Canaan from the east, it is
just as reasonable that they stopped on the west bank for the seven days of
mourning as to suppose that they stopped on the east bank. Certainly, it was on the
way to Machpelah, and perhaps near there. It appears that the great company of the
Egyptians, at this point, returned to Egypt and permitted Joseph and his brothers to
inter Jacob's body in the cave with some degree of privacy that they no doubt](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-134-320.jpg)
![desired; or, that if they did not do that, might merely have remained in camp until
the brothers returned from Machpelah. And then all returned to Egypt together, as
seems to be indicated in Genesis 50:14. Such a conjecture is not required by the text,
but Genesis 50:14 does not deny the possibility of it, for Genesis 50:14 is also a
summary of the entire return of the whole company to Egypt.
ELLICOTT, "(12) The more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew.
—This result was not natural. It can only be ascribed to God’s superintending
Providence, whereby “the fierceness of man” was made to “turn to his praise.”
Naturally, severe and constant labour exhausts a nation, and causes its numbers to
diminish.
They were grieved.—This is scarcely strong enough. Translate, “They were sore
distressed.”
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:12 But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied
and grew. And they were grieved because of the children of Israel.
Ver. 12. The more they multiplied.] As the ground is most fruitful that is most
harrowed; and as the walnut tree bears best when most beaten. Fish thrive better in
cold and salt waters, than in warm and fresh.
And they were grieved.] Or, irked, as Moab likewise was because of Israel: they did
fret and vex at them. [Numbers 22:3-4] Yet they wero allied, and passed by them in
peace: no other reason but the old enmity, Genesis 3:15, and that utter antipathy,
Proverbs 29:27.
NISBET, "GROWTH UNDER THE KNIFE
‘The more they multiplied and grew.’
Exodus 1:12
I. The intention of issuing new orders and decrees from time to time was that the
spirit of the Israelites might be broken.—But how shortsighted the policy! If they
had desired to create a unity of hatred to themselves on the part of Israel, what
policy could have been adopted more conducive thereto? Evil often outwits itself.
Man plans as he will, but as to the results, how often is it true, ‘He meaneth not so!’
II. Centuries afterwards, the martyr Stephen referred to this cruel edict.—‘They
dealt subtilly with our kindred, and evil-entreated our fathers, so that they should
cast out their babes to the end they might not live’ (Acts 7:19). Israel never forgot
the anguish of that hour. But on Pharaoh’s side what a stroke of policy! To deal with
the babes was to go to the very springs of national life, and ultimately to affect the
entire nation.
III. There is nothing which so closely and instantly touches the national existence as](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-135-320.jpg)
![identity as a people, and their ‘tribal’ organisation and worship, even if not as
purely as they should have.
The result was that the Egyptians really did become alarmed. They wanted to keep
this supply of slaves but they were concerned at the way their numbers were
growing. Something had to be done about it.
13 and worked them ruthlessly.
Egypt is the land of endless labor. The Nile has to be watched lest it destroy the
embankments, and then when it flows there is endless labor the rest of the year with
crops. Building of temples and pyramids was also endless. Twenty thousand out of
150 thousand men who built the Alexandrian cannel died. The Egyptians thought
this was free labor, but they wasted the vast human potential of the Hebrews. They
lost their glory by their folly. The choice to use forced labor lead to great plagues
and the loss of the Hebrews. Pharaoh destroyed his economy by enslaving a free
people.
CLARKE, "To serve with rigour - bepharech, with cruelty, great
oppression; being ferocious with them. The word fierce is supposed by some to be
derived from the Hebrew, as well as the Latin ferox, from which we more
immediately bring our English term. This kind of cruelty to slaves, and
ferociousness, unfeelingness, and hard-heartedness, were particularly forbidden
to the children of Israel. See Lev_25:43, Lev_25:46, where the same word is
used: Thou shalt not rule over him with Rigor, but shalt fear thy God.
GILL, "And the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with
rigour. Or with breach (c), with what might tend to break their strength; they
laid heavier burdens upon them, obliged them to harder service, used them more
cruelly and with greater fierceness, adding to their hard service ill words, and
perhaps blows.
JAMISON, "The Egyptians ... made their lives bitter with hard
bondage, in mortar, and in brick — Ruins of great brick buildings are found
in all parts of Egypt. The use of crude brick, baked in the sun, was universal in
upper and lower Egypt, both for public and private buildings; all but the temples
themselves were of crude brick. It is worthy of remark that more bricks bearing
the name of Thothmes III, who is supposed to have been the king of Egypt at the
time of the Exodus, have been discovered than of any other period [Wilkinson].
Parties of these brickmakers are seen depicted on the ancient monuments with
“taskmasters,” some standing, others in a sitting posture beside the laborers, with](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-137-320.jpg)
![their children, and prospered them in all they did. Note, The services done for
God's Israel are often repaid in kind. The midwives kept up the Israelites' houses,
and, in recompence for it, God made them houses. Observe, The recompence has
relation to the principle upon which they went: Because they feared God, he
made them houses. Note, Religion and piety are good friends to outward
prosperity: the fear of God in a house will help to build it up and establish it. Dr.
Lightfoot's notion of it is, That, for their piety, they were married to Israelites,
and Hebrew families were built up by them.
JAMISON, "the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives — Two
only were spoken to - either they were the heads of a large corporation [Laborde],
or, by tampering with these two, the king designed to terrify the rest into secret
compliance with his wishes [Calvin].
K&D 15-16, "As the first plan miscarried, the king proceeded to try a second,
and that a bloody act of cruel despotism. He commanded the midwives to destroy
the male children in the birth and to leave only the girls alive. The midwives
named in Exo_1:15, who are not Egyptian but Hebrew women, were no doubt the
heads of the whole profession, and were expected to communicate their
instructions to their associates. in Exo_1:16 resumes the address introduced by
in Exo_1:15. The expression , of which such various renderings have been given,
is used in Jer_18:3 to denote the revolving table of a potter, i.e., the two round
discs between which a potter forms his earthenware vessels by turning, and
appears to be transferred here to the vagina out of which the child twists itself, as
it were like the vessel about to be formed out of the potter's discs. Knobel has at
length decided in favour of this explanation, at which the Targumists hint with
their . When the midwives were called in to assist at a birth, they were to look
carefully at the vagina; and if the child were a boy, they were to destroy it as it
came out of the womb. for rof from , see Gen_3:22. The w takes kametz before
the major pause, as in Gen_44:9 (cf. Ewald, §243a).
CALVIN, "15.And the king of Egypt spake. The tyrant now descends from the open
violence and cruelty which had availed nothing, to secret plots and deceit. He desires
the infants to be killed at their birth; and commands the midwives to be the
instruments of this dreadful barbarity. We read of no such detestable example of
inhumanity since the world began. I admit it has occasionally happened, that, upon
the capture of a city, the conquerors have not spared even children and infants; that
is to say, either in the heat of battle, or because the defense had been too obstinate,
and they had lost many of their men, whose death they would avenge. It has
happened, too, that an uncle, or brother, or guardian, has been impelled by the
ambition of reigning to put children to death. It has happened, again, that in the
detestation of a tyrant, and to destroy the very memory of his family, his whole](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-146-320.jpg)
![that public schools were kept for that purpose.
COFFMAN, "Verses 15-22
"And when Joseph's brothers saw their father was dead, they said, It may be that
Joseph will hate us, and will fully requite us all the evil which we did unto him. And
they sent a message unto Joseph, saying, Thy father did command before he died,
saying, So shall ye say unto Joseph, Forgive, I pray thee now, the transgressions of
thy brethren, and their sin, for that they did unto thee evil. And now, we pray thee,
forgive the transgression of the servants of the God of thy father. And Joseph wept
when they spake unto him. And his brethren also went and fell down before his face;
and they said, Behold, we are thy servants. And Joseph said, unto them, Fear not;
for am I in the place of God? And as for you, ye meant evil against me; but God
meant it for good, to bring to pass, as in this day, to save much people alive. Now
therefore, fear ye not: I will nourish you, and your little ones. And he comforted
them, and spake kindly unto them."
The Biblical narrative does not always give the exact chronological sequence of
events related; and we probably have another instance of it here. It seems to us that
the logical time for the brothers of Joseph to have pleaded for the full forgiveness of
Joseph would have been before they had returned to Egypt, where, of course, they
were completely in his power. Josephus, in fact, states this as the case:
Now at the first his brethren were unwilling to return back with him, because they
were afraid lest, now their father was dead, he should punish them; since he was
now gone, for whose sake Joseph had been so gracious to them. But he persuaded
them to fear no harm ... so he brought them along with him, and gave them great
possessions, and never left off his particular concern for them.[15]
Despite such a statement, we do not know that that is the way it happened. In any
case, Joseph reassured his brothers, whose guilty consciences had so sharply accused
them, making them feel, no doubt, that they deserved the worst that Joseph was able
to do them. It appears here that we have the very first confession of the brothers of
their sin against Joseph. Perhaps the social distance between them had prevented an
earlier expression of their sorrow over what they had done.
Another question that naturally rises in this situation regards the commandment
which the brothers allege Jacob had sent to Joseph through them. Many respected
scholars see nothing unreasonable in such an allegation, but to us it simply does not
ring true. If Jacob had wanted to give Joseph a message about forgiving his
brothers, he, it seems to us, would have given such a message to Joseph himself,
rather than leaving it for the brothers to tell it. On this account, we feel strong
agreement with Willis who wrote:
"All this looks suspicious, and it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Joseph's
brothers invented this story in a desperate effort to assure their own safety."[16]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-148-320.jpg)
![Such a view is no reflection upon the veracity of the Scriptures, because the
Scriptures do not say that Jacob said what the brothers reported, but that they said
he did. It should be remembered that they are also the ones who dipped the coat in
blood and told Jacob they had "found it."
In any event, Joseph magnanimously forgave his brothers, probably long before the
event related here, and he even wept at the knowledge that they still held him to be
capable of taking revenge against them.
"Am I in God's place ... ?" Willis stated the meaning of this to be, "Is it my
prerogative to judge men and to punish them for their injustice to others?"[17]
Jacob asked the same question of Rachel who had complained about not having a
child; and there, it meant, "Do I have the power to enable you to conceive and bear
a child?" As Willis said, "The answer, in both cases, of course, is no."[18]
"Ye meant evil against me, but God meant it for good ..." Francisco's comment on
this is:
There has never been a more vivid picture of the providence of God than in these
words of Joseph to his brothers. He was not saying that God caused them to think
evil against him, for they were responsible for their own thoughts. But God, in his
wisdom and power used their evil purpose to achieve his will.[19]
ELLICOTT, "(15) The Hebrew midwives.—Or the midwives of the Hebrew women
( τα ς μαίαις τ ν έβραίων, LXX.). The Hebrew construction admits of eitherῖ ῶ
rendering. In favour of the midwives being Egyptians is the consideration that the
Pharaoh would scarcely have expected Hebrew women to help him in the
extirpation of the Hebrew race (Kalisch); against it is the Semitic character of the
names—Shiphrah, “beautiful;” Puah, “one who cries out;” and also the likelihood
that a numerous and peculiar people, like the Hebrews, would have accoucheurs of
their own race.
LANGE, "Exodus 1:15-18. Second measure. Resort to brutal violence, but still
concealed under demoniacal artifice. Probably there was an organized order of
midwives, and the two midwives mentioned were at their head.—He said unto them.
—And again: he said. He tried to persuade them, and at last the devilish command
came out—probably secret instructions like those of Herod, to kill the children in
Bethlehem.—Over the bathing-tub. [So Lange.—Tr.]. Knobel and Keil assume a
figurative designation of the vagina in the phrase , referring to Jeremiah 18:3. Since
the child is generally born head first, there is only a moment from the time when the
sex can be recognized to the use of the bathing-tub. On the various interpretations,
comp. the lexicons and the Studien und Kritiken, 1834, S 81 ff,[FN6]etc. A
heathenish way, all over the world, of killing the males and forcing the women and
girls to accommodate themselves to the mode of life of the murderers.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-149-320.jpg)
![PETT, "Exodus 1:15
‘And the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives, of which the name of one
was Shiphrah and the name of the other Puah.’
“The king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives.” The king spoke, of course,
through his representatives. His representatives spoke on his authority. All that
happened in Egypt was described as done by the king, for his people were his slaves.
The words spoken were to those midwives who had responsibility for ‘the Hebrews’.
The named midwives may have been the ones who had overall charge of midwifery,
not the only midwives. There would also be many experienced women who were not
officially midwives but who fulfilled the task when necessary. The actual names are
testified to among the North-western Semites of the 2nd millennium BC, one
attested in the 18th century BC, the other in the 14th and are clearly genuine.
When giving birth a woman would crouch, possibly on a pile of stones (see Exodus
1:16). Comparatively modern comparisons demonstrate how easily a slave worker
could give birth behind a bush and then continue working. The midwives would first
assist in the actual birth, and then by cutting the umbilical cord, washing the baby
in water, and salting and wrapping it (compare Ezekiel 16:4).
Note here the silence as to the king’s name, in contrast with the midwives. We may
spend hours trying to work out who the king was, but we know instantly the names
of the midwives, the servants of God, for their names are written before God. This
emphasis on the recording of the names of His people continues on throughout
Scripture. Each one who faithfully serves Him is known to Him by name.
It is all the more noteworthy here, and clearly deliberate in that apart from Moses
everyone else is anonymous, even Moses’ parents, although their descent is
mentioned in order to demonstrate that they were suitable parents for God’s chosen
one. The emphasis is on the fact that God was at work and only His special
instruments are named, because they were instruments of God. The remainder were
simply a part of the great tapestry of His will.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:15 And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives, of
which the name of the one [was] Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah:
Ver. 15. To the Hebrew midwives.] In Egypt and Greece the midwives of old had
their schools; and some of them were great writers. I know not whether the priests
were then so officious to them as many are now among the Papists; who say they
therefore study Albertus Magnus de secrelis mulierum, that they may advise the
midwives: but I doubt it is for a worse purpose; to gratify and greaten those
abominable lusts wherewith they are scalded. {εξεκαυθησαν, Romans 1:27}
PULPIT, "Exodus 1:15-22](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-150-320.jpg)
![small pile. ‘Two’ can mean ‘a few’ (compare 1 Kings 17:12). They would sit or squat
on them in such a way as to aid the birth.
“The women feared God.” The contest has already begun between the king of
Egypt, acknowledged in Egypt as one of the gods of Egypt, and God. These women
feared God and obeyed Him, rather than obeying Pharaoh.
“God.” We note here that in the first two chapters of Exodus there is no mention of
Yahweh. In a foreign land, and voluntarily away from the covenant land the
description is in terms of God (Exodus 1:20-21; Exodus 2:22-25). Note how this was
also true for their adventures in Egypt in the final chapters of Genesis (Genesis 40-
50 with the exception of Genesis 49:18 which is probably a standard worship
saying). In Egypt they no longer ‘knew Yahweh’. For while they no doubt continued
to worship Him as such (Moses’ mother or ancestor is called Yo-chebed’) it was
outside the covenant situation, and they could not look for His covenant help in that
land. They lost the realisation of Who and What He was. Indeed some worshipped
Him alongside other gods. It is only once He begins His preparations for their return
that the name Yahweh is again brought into mention (Exodus 3:2; Exodus 3:4;
Exodus 3:7; Exodus 3:15-16), and equated with God (Exodus 3:4). For He on His
part has remembered His covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Exodus 2:24)
and has ‘come down’. The case was different for Joseph in his captivity (Genesis 39).
Then Yahweh was with him for he was there within Yahweh’s purpose for His
covenant people. But to a people dwelling without much thought in Egypt with no
thought of returning to the covenant land, He could only be ‘God’. He had not
forgotten them, as what happens demonstrates, but His actions in the land of Egypt
were by Him as their God and not as Yahweh, the name which links with covenant
activity.
“They are lively.” Those who live as the slaves do find birth easier and quicker than
those who are more pampered. There was thus some truth in this statement, and as
the phenomenon could no doubt be testified to, their explanation was seemingly
accepted.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:16 And he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the
Hebrew women, and see [them] upon the stools; if it [be] a son, then ye shall kill
him: but if it [be] a daughter, then she shall live.
Ver. 16. Then ye shall kill him.] No greater argument of an ill cause than a bloody
persecution. George Tankerfield, the martyr, was in King Edward’s days a very
Papist, till the time Queen Mary came in; and then, perceiving the great cruelty
used on the Pope’s side, was brought into a misdoubt of their doing, and began, as
he said, in his heart to abhor them. (a) So did Julius Palmer, a martyr in Queen
Mary’s days, who had been a stiff Papist all King Edward VI’s days, and was
therefore expelled out of Magdalen College, whereof he had been Fellow; till
beholding the martyrdom of the three bishops burnt in Oxford, he said to his
friends, "Oh, raging cruelty! Oh, tyranny tragical, and more than barbarous!" and](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-157-320.jpg)
![uphold our minds from wavering in seasons of danger. Now, they not only dreaded
this crime as being cruel and inhuman; but because purer religion and piety
flourished in their hearts; for they knew that the seed of Abraham was chosen of
God, and had themselves experienced that it was blessed; and hence it was natural
to feel, that it would be an act of very gross impiety to extinguish in it the grace of
God. We must also observe the antithesis between the fear of God and the dread of
punishment, which might have deterred them from doing right. Although tyrants do
not easily allow their commands to be despised, and death was before their eyes,
they still keep their hands pure from evil. Thus, sustained and supported by
reverential fear of God, they boldly despised the command and the threatenings of
Pharaoh. Wherefore those, whom the fear of men withdraws from the right course,
betray by their cowardice an inexcusable contempt of God, in preferring the favor
of men to his solemn commands. But this doctrine extends still more widely; for
many would be (19) more than preposterously wise, whilst, under pretext of due
submission, they obey the wicked will of kings in opposition to justice and right,
being in some cases the ministers of avarice and rapacity, in others of cruelty; yea,
to gratify the transitory kings of earth, they take no account of God; and thus,
which is worst of all, they designedly oppose pure religion with fire and sword. It
only makes their effrontery more detestable, that whilst they knowingly and
willingly crucify Christ in his members, they plead the frivolous excuse, that they
obey their princes according to the word of God; as if he, in ordaining princes, had
resigned his rights to them; and as if every earthly power, which exalts itself against
heaven, ought not rather most justly to be made to give way. But since they only
seek to escape the reprobation of men for their criminal obedience, let them not be
argued with by long discussions, but rather referred to the judgment of women; for
the example of these midwives is abundantly sufficient for their condemnation;
especially when the Holy Spirit himself commends them, as not having obeyed the
king, because they feared God.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:17 But the midwives feared God, and did not as the king of
Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive.
Ver. 17. And did not as the king, &c.] Wherein they did no more, though out of a
better principle, than nature itself dictateth. Antigona saith thus in Sophocles, Magis
obtemperandum est Diis apud quos diutius manendum erit, quam hominibus
quibuscum admodum brevi tempore vivendum est. {See Trapp on "Acts 4:19"} "We
must rather obey God than men."
Norm Beckett
WOMEN WHO DID WHAT WAS RIGHT
“But the midwives were God-fearing women: they disobeyed the command of the king of
Egypt and let the boys live” (Exodus 1: 17).
The scene is set for us, “…there came to power in Egypt a new king who knew nothing](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-159-320.jpg)
![with partial sin. But we need not wonder that God in his mercy should pardon such
defects, which would otherwise defile almost every virtuous deed; and should honor
with reward those works which are unworthy of praise, or even favor. Thus, though
these women were too pusillanimous and timid in their answers, yet because they
had acted in reality with heartiness and courage, God endured in them the sin which
he would have deservedly condemned. This doctrine gives us alacrity in our desire
to do rightly, since God so graciously pardons our infirmities; and, at the same time,
it warns us most carefully to be on our guard, lest, when we are desirous of doing
well, some sin should creep in to obscure, and thus to contaminate our good work;
since it not unfrequently happens that those whose aim is right, halt or stumble or
wander in the way to it. In fine, whosoever honestly examines himself, will find some
defect even in his best endeavors. Moreover, by the rewards of God, let us be
encouraged to the confidence of thus obtaining good success, lest we should faint at
the dangers we incur by the faithful performance of our duty; and assuredly no
danger will alarm us, if this thought be deeply impressed upon our hearts, that
whatever ill-will our good deeds may beget in this world, still God sits in heaven to
reward them.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:18 And the king of Egypt called for the midwives, and said unto
them, Why have ye done this thing, and have saved the men children alive?
Ver. 18. Why have ye done this thing?] They might well have answered, as she did in
Euripides, Obediemus Atridis honesta mandantibus: Sin vero inhonesta mandabut,
non obediemus. If you command things honest we will obey you; not else. Or as that
brave woman upon the rack, Non ideo negare vole, ne peream: sed ideo mentiri
nolo, ne peccem. (a)
19 The midwives answered Pharaoh, “Hebrew women are not like Egyptian women;
they are vigorous and give birth before the midwives arrive.”
The word Hebrew is used here for the first time.
Here are two women undermining the government policy of the strongest nation on
earth. All evil plans call for cooperation and individual can spoil evil plots by just
saying no. Pharaoh could not go and deliver all the babies and secretly kill them.
He had to work through the system. All leaders need others to carry out their plans
and this is where beaurocracy can be a blessing for they can prevent such plans
from happening.
These women said we obey God and not man. They could not make plans for their](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-164-320.jpg)
!["Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women ..." Although the entire testimony
of these midwives must be considered false, because the primary purpose of it was to
deceive Pharaoh, it is also evident that essential elements of fact were included in
their reply. It was true that the Hebrew women were unlike the Egyptian women, as
attested by pictures excavated from the ancient tombs and dated about 1400 B.C.,
showing that the Egyptian women were more delicate and essentially smaller in
stature. The big-boned Hebrew female slaves are depicted wearing heavy garments
and obviously possessing much more vigor than the Egyptians. It was false, of
course, that the Hebrew women were delivered before the midwives could assist
them.
"And God dealt well with the midwives ..." It is amazing that some students find it
hard to understand how God could have rewarded such liars! However, we find no
difficulty with such a question. God rewarded those midwives, not for their
falsehood to Pharaoh, but for their fear of God and for their aiding his purpose of
multiplying the Israelites. In this first encounter between God and Pharaoh, God
was gloriously victorious, just as would be the case in all subsequent phases of the
conflict. Langley thought that the midwives made a fool of the king:
"Don't miss the humor in this passage. The midwives made clever use of wit and
excuse. Pharaoh comes off as a ludicrous fathead. The joke is on the king, and
everybody knows it but him! So, while they laugh the king right out of his court,
God wins another round and moves victoriously on."[16]
"Because the midwives feared God, he made them households ..." The meaning of
this is that, "He blessed them with marriage and many descendants."[17] Exactly
this same phrase is used with reference to David's house (2 Samuel 7:11).[18]
"Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river ..." The commandment, in
context, means merely that all of the Hebrew males are thus to be destroyed.
Nevertheless, interpreters have struggled with the passage. The Hebrew rabbis
explained the general nature of the order thus:
"Pharaoh purposely stated the order in general terms, for it would have been
improper for so highly civilized a nation to discriminate so openly against the
Hebrews, but the officials had been told in confidence that it was applicable to
Hebrew infants only."[19]
"Ye shall cast into the river ..." Some have inferred from this that the order to
exterminate Hebrew males applied only to that portion of the Hebrew population
living near the king's residence and in that vicinity along the Nile. Josephus relates
an interesting tale in connection with this event, and, while unprovable, there
appears to be merit in it. We include Jamieson's comment on it:
"Josephus tells how Pharaoh had been forewarned by one of his magi, that a
Hebrew boy about to born would inflict a fatal blow upon the glory of Egypt and
raise his own race to liberty and independence. It is quite possible that the
apprehension of such a danger might have originated the cruel edict."[20]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-168-320.jpg)
![Josephus was not very likely to have been influenced by the N.T. record of Herod's
slaughter of the innocents, so it is evident that this tale of Pharaoh's motivation for
slaughter of innocents could be authentic. That it so nearly parallels what happened
in Matthew 2 is amazing to say the least of it. Robert Jamieson was impressed by
this, stating that:
"Thus, by the conduct of Pharaoh, the ancient church (Hebrew) in its infancy was
opposed by persecution and peril precisely similar to that which, at the
commencement of the N.T. church, was directed by Herod against the children in
Bethlehem (Matthew 2:16)."[21]
The most astounding thing about this event is that the very action which Pharaoh
took in his purpose of destroying Israel was exactly the thing that placed a Hebrew
man-child in the very bosom of the king's family, making him, at last, the heir to
Pharaoh's throne! How past finding out are the ways of God! Where in the
literature of any nation, or of all nations, is there anything to approach the inspired
drama of what leaps up before us in Exodus?
COKE, "Exodus 1:19. And the midwives said unto Pharaoh— Fully satisfied that it
was better to obey GOD than man, the midwives disobeyed this unjust command;
and vindicated themselves to Pharaoh, when accused by him, for so doing. I see no
sufficient reason to suppose, that there was the least prevarication in the midwives:
for is it not natural to believe, that the same Divine Providence which so
miraculously interposed for the multiplication of Israel, might grant an easy
deliverance to the Hebrew women, and cause them to dispense with the assistance of
midwives? So that, upon this supposition, the midwives not only delivered the truth,
but delivered it with great magnanimity, avowing the protection which God gave to
their nation: and accordingly we find their proceeding approved and rewarded; for
God dealt well with them, Exodus 1:20.
ELLICOTT, "(19) The Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women.—This was
probably true; but it was not the whole truth. Though the midwives had the courage
to disobey the king, they had not “the courage of their convictions,” and were afraid
to confess their real motive. So they took refuge in a half truth, and pretended that
what really occurred in some cases only was a general occurrence. It is a fact, that in
the East parturition is often so short a process that the attendance of a midwife is
dispensed with.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:19 And the midwives said unto Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew
women [are] not as the Egyptian women; for they [are] lively, and are delivered ere
the midwives come in unto them.
Ver. 19. For they are lively.] By that "voice of the Lord which maketh the hinds to
calve." [Psalms 29:9] Lady Faith was their midwife: and she hath delivered the
graves of their dead; [Hebrews 11:35] how much more wombs of their quick
children! But we need the less wonder at the matter here reported, if that were true
which Varro writeth of the Illyrian women; who, being at harvest work in the field,](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-169-320.jpg)
![make life easy for His people even when He prospers them. Whom the Lord loves,
He chastens for their good. Sometimes we may not understand what is happening,
but if we saw things as He does we would realise what purpose He has in it.
Indeed we are challenged here about our own way of life. Is our prime purpose to
serve God and do His will, or do we concentrate our efforts on ‘building cities’? We
must ask ourselves, which is most important to us?
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:20 Therefore God dealt well with the midwives: and the people
multiplied, and waxed very mighty.
Ver. 20. Dealt well with the midwives.] God is a liberal paymaster: and his
retributions are more than bountiful. "Be ye therefore steadfast and unmoveable,
always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour
is not in vain in the Lord." [1 Corinthians 15:58]
And the people multiplied.] Sic divinum consilium dum devitatur, impletur: humana
sapientia, dum reluctatur, comprehenditur, as Gregory hath it. (a) "There are many
devices in the heart of a man: but the counsel of the Lord, that shall stand."
[Proverbs 19:21] Among the Romans, the more children any man had, the more he
was freed from public burdens. And of Adrian the Emperor it is storied, that when
those that had many children were accused of any crime, he mitigated their
punishment according to the number of their children. (b) But these poor Israelites
were otherwise used.
21 And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own.
BARNES, "Made them houses - i. e. they married Hebrews and became
mothers in Israel. The expression is proverbial. See the margin reference.
CLARKE, "He made them houses - Dr. Shuckford thinks that there is
something wrong both in the punctuation and translation of this place, and reads
the passage thus, adding the 21st to the 20th verse: “And they multiplied and
waxed mighty; and this happened ( vayehi) because the midwives feared God;
and he (Pharaoh) made ( lahem, masc.). them (the Israelites) houses; and
commanded all his people, saying, Every son that is born, etc.” The doctor
supposes that previously to this time the Israelites had no fixed dwellings, but
lived in tents, and therefore had a better opportunity of concealing their children;](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-172-320.jpg)
![COKE, "Exodus 1:21. He made them houses— He made them families, i.e. in the
obvious sense of the words, he recompensed their piety, virtue, and courage, by
making them prosperous, and their families considerable in Israel. In which sense,
all the versions we have met with understand the passage: and as this is the case,
and as the expression is truly scriptural, there surely can be no need to look out for
other and forced interpretations. See Deuteronomy 25:9. Ruth 4:11. 1 Samuel 2:35;
1 Samuel 25:28. 2 Samuel 7:27. Psalms 127:1.
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:21 And it came to pass, because the midwives feared God, that
he made them houses.
Ver. 21. Because the midwives feared God.] There is no necessity of granting that the
midwives told the king a lie. {see Exodus 1:19} But if they did, St Austin saith well,
Non remunerata fuit iis fallacia, sed benevolentia; benignitas mentis, non iniquitas
mentientis. Their lie was not rewarded, but their kind heartedness.
That he made them houses,] i.e., He gave them posterity. Thus he built David a
house. [2 Samuel 7:18-19] And thus Rachel and Leah are said to have "built the
house of Israel." [Ruth 4:11] The parents are, as it were, the foundation of the
house; the children as so many lively stones in the building. Hence the Hebrews call
a son Ben, of Banah to build, quid sit edificium et structura parentum, quoad
generationem et educationem.
22 Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: “Every Hebrew boy that is born
you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live.”
BARNES, "The extreme cruelty of the measure does not involve improbability.
Hatred of strangers was always a characteristic of the Egyptians (see Gen_43:32),
and was likely to be stronger than ever after the expulsion of an alien race.
CLARKE, "Ye shall cast into the river - As the Nile, which is here
intended, was a sacred river among the Egyptians, it is not unlikely that Pharaoh
intended the young Hebrews as an offering to his god, having two objects in view:
1. To increase the fertility of the country by thus procuring, as he might
suppose, a proper and sufficient annual inundation; and
2. To prevent an increase of population among the Israelites, and in process of](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-175-320.jpg)
![Ye shall cast into the river.—Infanticide, so shocking to Christians, has prevailed
widely at different times and places, and been regarded as a trivial matter. In
Sparta, the State decided which children should live and which should die. At
Athens a law of Solon left the decision to the parent. At Rome, the rule was that
infants were made away with, unless the father interposed, and declared it to be his
wish that a particular child should be brought up. The Syrians offered unwelcome
children in sacrifice to Moloch; the Carthaginians to Melkarth. In China infanticide
is said to be a common practice at the present day. Heathen nations do not generally
regard human life as sacred. On the contrary, they hold that considerations of
expediency justify the sweeping away of any life that inconveniences the State.
Hence infanticide is introduced by Plato into his model republic (Rep. v. 9). Almost
all ancient nations viewed the massacre of prisoners taken in war as allowable. The
Spartan crypteia was a system of licensed murder. The condemnation to death of all
male Hebrew children by Pharaoh is thus in no respect improbable. On the other
hand, the mode of the death presents difficulties. For, first, the Nile was viewed as a
god; and to fill it with corpses would, one might have supposed, have been regarded
as a pollution. Secondly, the Nile water was the only water drunk; and sanitary
considerations might thus have been expected to have prevented the edict. Perhaps,
however, the children were viewed as offerings to the Nile, or to Savak, the crocodile
headed god, of whom each crocodile was an emblem. At any rate, as the Nile
swarmed with crocodiles throughout its whole course, the bodies were tolerably sure
to be devoured before they became putrescent.
EXPOSITOR'S DICTIONARY, "Exodus 1:22
By the decree of Pharaoh, Moses is dead as soon as he is born; by the decree of God,
Moses is brought up in Pharaoh"s house. In spite of his own decree Pharaoh nurses,
feeds, educates Moses; and Moses, on behalf of God, uses against Pharaoh all that
he derives from Pharaoh. God is wiser than Pharaoh. The devil is old, but God is
older. The devil is God"s lowest drudge, and servant of servants, who knows not the
wonderful fabric which will result from his cross-working.
—Dr. Pulsford, Quiet Hours, p18.
LANGE, "Exodus 1:22. Now at last open brutality follows the failure of the scheme
intervening between artifice and violence. On similar occurrences in profane history,
see Keil.[FN7] Probably also this command was paralyzed, and the deliverance of
Moses by the daughter of Pharaoh might well have had the effect of nullifying the
king’s command; for even the worst of the heathen were often terrified by
unexpected divine manifestations.
PETT, "Exodus 1:22
‘And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, “Every son who is born you shall cast
into the Nile and every daughter you shall save alive.”
The surreptitious method having failed all pretence was laid aside. The order goes](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-180-320.jpg)
![out from Pharaoh to all Egyptians that all Hebrew new born sons are to be thrown
into the Nile, probably under the pretext of offering them to the gods. They were to
be sacrificed to the Nile god. The daughters, however, were to be protected. They
would cause no trouble and would have their uses. This served a twofold purpose. It
demonstrated their loyalty to the Nile god, and it would in time limit the strength of
Israel.
It is noteworthy that open murder was not the option. The killing was first to be
hidden as due to childbirth and then to be seen as a religious act, as an offering to
the Nile god. By this means they preserved their consciences. How easily men can
make their religion a pretext for what they want to do, even when it is patently
wrong. (Irreligious people find some other pretext).
TRAPP, "Exodus 1:22 And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is
born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive.
Ver. 22. And Pharaoh charged.] Imperio non tam duro quam diro. This was a most
bloody edict: therefore, when God came to make inquisition for blood, he gave them
blood again to drink, for they were worthy. The like he did to Nero - qui orientem
fidem primus Romae cruentavit - to (a) Julian, Valens, Valerian, Attilas,
Girzerichus, Charles IX of France, and many other bloody persecutors. {See Trapp
on "Revelation 16:6"}
PULPIT, "Every son that is born. The words are universal, and might seem to apply
to the Egyptian, no less than the Hebrew, male children. But they are really limited
by the context, which shows that there had never been any question as to taking the
life of any Egyptian. With respect to the objection sometimes raised, that no
Egyptian monarch would possibly have commanded such wholesale cold-blooded
destruction of poor innocent harmless children, it is to be observed, first, that
Egyptian monarchs had very little regard indeed for the lives of any persons who
were not of their own nation. They constantly massacred prisoners taken in war—
they put to death or enslaved persons cast upon their coasts (Diod. Sic. 1.67)—they
cemented with the blood of their captives, as Lenormant says, each stone of their
edifices. The sacredness of human life was not a principle with them. Secondly, that
tender and compassionate regard for children which seems to us Englishmen of the
present day a universal instinct is in truth the fruit of Christianity, and was almost
unknown in the ancient world. Children who were "not wanted" were constantly
exposed to be devoured by wild beasts, or otherwise made away with; and such
exposition was defended by philosophers. In Syria and Carthage they were
constantly offered to idols. At Rome, unless the father interposed to save it, every
child was killed. It would probably not have cost an Egyptian Pharaoh a single pang
to condemn to death a number of children, any more than a number of puppies. And
the rule "Salus publica suprema lex," which, if not formulated, still practically
prevailed, would have been held to justify anything. The river. Though, in the Delta,
where the scene is laid throughout the early part of Exodus, there were many
branches of the Nile, yet we hear constantly of "the river" (Exodus 2:3, Exodus 2:5;](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/exodus1commentary-160828025837/85/Exodus-1-commentary-181-320.jpg)
Uploaded byGLENN PEASE
Exodus 1 commentary
The document is a commentary on the book of Exodus, emphasizing its key theme of redemption and its doctrinal significance. It draws parallels between the historical account of Israel's deliverance from Egypt and the redemptive work of Christ, suggesting various typologies throughout the narrative. The author encourages a deeper understanding of Exodus as a spiritual and prophetic text, rich with lessons for contemporary readers.
More Related Content
![Study of Romans [Week 2]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/jan12intro-1romans-130113185212-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Similar to Exodus 1 commentary
More from GLENN PEASE
Exodus 1 commentary
- 1. EXODUS 1 COMMENTARY EDITEDBY GLENN PEASE INTRODUCTION Pink, “Historically, the book of Exodus treats of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt; but viewed doctrinally, it deals with redemption. Just as the first book of the Bible teaches that God elects unto salvation, so the second instructs us how God saves, namely, by redemption. Redemption, then, is the dominant subject of Exodus. Following this, we are shown what we are redeemed for—worship, and this characterizes Leviticus, where we learn of the holy requirements of God and the gracious provisions He has made to meet these. First, we see the need for redemption—pictured by a people enslaved: chapters to 6. Second, we are shown the might of the Redeemer—displayed in the plagues on Egypt: chapters 7 to 11. Third, we behold the character of redemption—purchased by blood, emancipated by power: chapters 12 to 18. Fourth, we are taught the duty of the redeemed—obedience to the Lord: chapters 19 to 24. Fifth, we have revealed the provisions made for the failures of the redeemed—seen in the tabernacle and its services: chapters 25 to 40. In proof of what we have just said we would refer the reader to Exodus 15:13, which we regard as the key verse to the book, "Thou in Thy mercy hast led forth the people which Thou hast redeemed: Thou hast guided them in Thy strength unto Thy holy habitation." Note that here we have the need for redemption implied—God’s "mercy"; the power of the Redeemer is referred to— His "strength"; the character of redemption is described—"led forth the people"; the responsibilities of the redeemed and their privileges are signified in a reference to the tabernacle—"unto Thy holy habitation." Pink continues, “The central doctrine of the book of Exodus is redemption, but this is not formally expounded, rather is it strikingly illustrated, in earliest times, God, it would seem, did not communicate to His people an explicit and systematic form of doctrine; instead, He instructed them, mainly, through His providential dealings and by means of types and symbols. Once this is clearly grasped by us it gives new interest to the Old Testament scriptures. The opening books of the Bible contain very much more than an inspired history of events that happened thousands of years ago: they are filled with adumbrations and illustrations of the great doctrines of our faith which are set forth categorically in the New Testament epistles. Thus "whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning" (Rom. 15:4), and we lose much if we neglect to study the historical portions of the Old Testament with this fact before us. The deliverance of Israel from Egypt furnishes a remarkably full and accurate typification of our redemption by Christ. The details of this will come before us, God
- 2. willing, in ourlater studies. Here, we can only call attention to the broad outlines of the picture. Israel in Egypt illustrates the place we were in before Divine grace saved us. Egypt symbolizes the world, according to the course of which we all walked in time past. Pharaoh, who knew not the Lord, who defied Him, who was the inveterate enemy of God’s people, but who at the end was overthrown by God, shadows forth the great adversary, the Devil. The cruel bondage of the enslaved Hebrews pictures the tyrannical dominion of sin over its captives. The groaning of the Israelites under their burdens speaks of the painful exercises of conscience and heart when convicted of our lost condition. The deliverer raised up by God in the person of Moses, points to the greater Deliverer, even our Lord Jesus Christ. The Passover-night tells of the security of the believer beneath the sheltering blood of God’s Lamb. The exodus from Egypt announces our deliverance from the yoke of bondage and our judicial separation from the world. The crossing of the Red Sea depicts our union with Christ in His death and resurrection. The journey through the wilderness—its trials and testings, with God’s provision to meet every need— represent the experiences of our pilgrim course. The giving of the law to Israel teaches us the obedient submission which we owe to our new Master. The tabernacle with its beautiful fittings and furnishings, shows us the varied excellencies and glories of Christ. Thus it will be found that almost everything in this second book of the Bible has a spiritual message and application to us. It is also to be remarked that there is much in the hook of Exodus that looks forward to and anticipates the future. The historical portions of this second book of Scripture have a dispensational as well as doctrinal value, a prophetic as well as a moral and spiritual signification. There is not a little in it that will minister instruction and comfort to the people of God in a coming day, as well as to us now. History repeats itself, and what is recorded in Exodus will be found to foreshadow a later chapter in the vicissitudes of Abraham’s descendants. The lot of Israel in the Tribulation period will be even worse than it was in the days of Moses. A greater tyrant than Pharaoh will yet be "raised up" by God to chastise them. A more determined effort than that of old will be made to cut them off from being a nation. Groanings and cryings more intense and piteous will yet ascend to heaven. Plagues even more fearful than those sent upon the land of Pharaoh will yet be poured out upon the world from the vials of God’s wrath. God shall again send forth two witnesses, empowered by Him to show forth mighty signs and wonders, but their testimony shall be rejected as was that of Moses and Aaron of old. Emissaries of Satan, supernaturally endowed, will perform greater prodigies than did the magicians of Egypt. A remnant of Israel shall again be found in the wilderness, there to be sustained by God. And at the end shall come forth the great Deliverer, who will vanquish the enemies of His people by a sorer judgment than that which overtook the Egyptians at the Red Sea. Finally, there shall yet be an even greater exodus than that from Egypt, when the Lord shall gather to Palestine the outcasts of Israel from "the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven." In addition to the illustrations of the various parts and aspects of the doctrine of redemption and the prophetic forecast of Israel’s lot in the day to come, there are in
- 3. the book ofExodus quite a number of precious types of the person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ. In many respects there is a remarkable correspondency between Moses and Christ, and if the Lord permits us to complete this series of articles, we shall, at the close, systematize these correspondencies, and show them to be as numerous and striking as those which engaged our attention when Joseph was before us. In addition to the personal type of Moses we shall consider how the burning bush, the Passover lamb, the crossing of the Red Sea, the manna, the smitten rock, the tabernacle as a whole, and everything in it, looked at separately, each and all tell forth in symbolic but unmistakable language the manifold glories of Christ. A rich feast is before us; may God the Holy Spirit sharpen our appetites so that we may feed upon them in faith, and be so nourished thereby that we shall grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. As the title of these papers intimates, we shall not attempt a complete verse by verse exposition of the book of Exodus, rather shall we continue the course followed by us in our articles on Genesis. Our endeavor will be to stimulate the people of God to a more careful and systematic study of the Old Testament scriptures, by calling attention to some of the hidden wonders which escape the notice of the careless reader, but which cause the reverent student to say with one of old, "I rejoice at Thy word as one that findeth great spoil" (Ps. 119:162). While we shall not ignore the practical application of the message to our own lives, and shall seek to profit from the many salutary lessons to be found for us in Exodus, nevertheless, our chief concern will be the study of those typical pictures which meet us at every turn. The next article will be devoted to Exodus 1, and in the meantime we would urge the interested reader to make a careful study of its contents. May the God of all grace anoint our eyes, and may the Spirit of Truth constantly guide our thoughts as we pass from chapter to chapter. HENRY, "Moses (the servant of the Lord in writing for him as well as in acting for him —with the pen of God as well as with the rod of God in his hand) having, in the first book of his history, preserved and transmitted the records of the church, while it existed in private families, comes, in this second book, to give us an account of its growth into a great nation; and, as the former furnishes us with the best economics, so this with the best politics. The beginning of the former book shows us how God formed the world for himself; the beginning of this shows us how he formed Israel for himself, and both show forth his praise, Isa. 43:21. There we have the creation of the world in history, here the redemption of the world in type. The Greek translators called this book Exodus (which signifies a departure or going out) because it begins with the story of the going out of the children of Israel from Egypt. Some allude to the names of this and the foregoing book, and observe that immediately after Genesis, which signifies the beginning or original, follows Exodus, which signifies a departure; for a time to be born is immediately succeeded by a time to die. No sooner have we made our entrance into the world than we must think of making our exit, and going out of the world. When we begin to live we begin to die. The forming of Israel into a people was a new creation. As the earth was, in the beginning, first fetched from under water, and then beautified and replenished, so Israel was first by an almighty power made to emerge out of Egyptian slavery, and then
- 4. enriched with God'slaw and tabernacle. This book gives us, I. The accomplishment of the promises made before to Abraham (ch. 1–19), and then, II. The establishment of the ordinances which were afterwards observed by Israel (ch. 20–40). Moses, in this book, begins, like Caesar, to write his own Commentaries; nay, a greater, a far greater, than Caesar is here. But henceforward the penman is himself the hero, and gives us the history of those things of which he was himself an eye and ear-witness, et quorum pars magna fuit—and in which he bore a conspicuous part. There are more types of Christ in this book than perhaps in any other book of the Old Testament; for Moses wrote of him, Jn. 5:46. The way of man's reconciliation to God, and coming into covenant and communion with him by a Mediator, is here variously represented; and it is of great use to us for the illustration of the New Testament, now that we have that to assist us in the explication of the Old. EVERETT, "HISTORICAL SETTING "We dare not divorce our study from understanding the historical setting of every passage of Scripture if we are going to come to grips with the truth and message of the Bible." (J. Hampton Keathley) 2] 2] J. Hampton Keathley, III, "Introduction and Historical Setting for Elijah," (Bible.org) [on-line]; accessed 23May 2012; available from http://bible.org/seriespage/introduction-and-historical-setting-elijah; Internet. Each book of the Holy Scriptures is cloaked within a unique historical setting. An examination of this setting is useful in the interpretation of the book because it provides the context of the passage of Scripture under examination. The section on the historical setting of the book of Exodus will provide a discussion on its title, historical background, authorship, date and place of writing, recipients, and occasion. This discussion supports the Jewish tradition that Moses was the author of the book of Exodus , writing during the period of Israel's wilderness journey. I. The Title There are a number of ancient titles associated with the book of Exodus. A. The Ancient Jewish Title "These Are the Names" - Henry Swete says ancient Jews titled the five books of the Pentateuch, Proverbs , and Lamentations by identifying a key word in the opening verses. 3] The Hebrew title for Exodus was "Welesmoth" ( ), which comes from the opening word of this book, meaning "and these are the names." Origen (c 185 - c 254) testifies to the use of this title by the Jews in his day. 4] Jerome (A.D 342to 420) was familiar with this title as well. 5] The
- 5. titles ( )and ( ) can be found in the standard work Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. 6] 3] Henry B. Swete, An Introduction to Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge: University Press, 1902), 214. 4] Eusebius, the early Church historian, writes, " Exodus , Welesmoth, that Isaiah , ‘These are the names';" Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6251-2, trans. Arthur C. McGiffert under the title The Church History of Eusebius, in A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, A New Series, vol 1, eds. Henry Wace and Philip Schaff (Oxford: Parker and Company, c 1890, 1905), 272-3. 5] Jerome says, "The second, Elle Smoth, which bears the name Exodus;" See Jerome, "Prefaces to the Books of the Vulgate Version of the Old Testament: The Books of Samuel and Kings," trans. W. H. Freemantle, in A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series, vol 6, eds. Henry Wace and Philip Schaff (New York: The Christian Literature Company, 1893), 489- 90. 6] Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, eds. A. Alt, O. Eifelt, P. Kahle, and R. Kittle (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelstiftung, c 1967-77); Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: With Westminster Hebrew Morphology, electronic ed, (Stuttgart; Glenside PA: German Bible Society; Westminster Seminary, 1996, c 1925; morphology c 1991), in in Libronix Digital Library System, v 21c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp, 2000-2004). B. The Modern English Title "Exodus" - Today, English bibles use the title " Exodus ," which finds it origin in the Greek title used in the LXX " έξοδυς ," which means "going out, away" in the Hebrew text (Gesenius). Henry Swete suggests this title came from Exodus 19:1, "… τ ς ξόδου τ ν υ ν ισραηλ κ γ ς α γύπτου…" 7]ῆ ἐ ῶ ἱῶ ἐ ῆ ἰ Philo (20 B.C - A.D 50) called the book by its Greek name έξοδυς. 8] This Greek title was known by Melito, bishop of Sardis (d. c 190). 9] The Vulgate uses the Latin title "Exodus (liber)," 10] from which the English title is derived. There are some variations to this title. For example, the Codex Alexandrinus uses the longer title έξοδυς αίγύπτου. 11] Since the title "Exodus" is used as far back as the LXX, Henry Swete and George Gray believe this title is "of Alexandrian and pre-Christian origin." 12] The Greek/English title reflects the contents of the book, which deals with Israel's exodus from Egypt. 7] Henry B. Swete, An Introduction to Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge: University Press, 1902), 215. 8] Herbert E. Ryle, Philo and Holy Scripture (London: Macmillan and Company, 1895), xxii. 9] Eusbius writes, "‘I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send them to thee as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books:
- 6. Genesis ,, Exodus,, Numbers ,, Leviticus , Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges , Ruth; of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalm of David; the Proverbs of Song of Solomon , Wisdom also, Ecclesiastes ,, Song of Solomon , Job; of Prophets, Isaiah , Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book; Daniel ,, Ezekiel , Esdras. From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books.' Such are the words of Melito." See Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 42614, trans. Arthur C. McGiffert under the title The Church History of Eusebius, in A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, A New Series, vol 1, eds. Henry Wace and Philip Schaff, (Oxford: Parker and Company, c 1890, 1905), 206. 10] Biblia Sacra Juxta Vulgatam Clementinam, ed. electronica (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc, 2005), in Libronix Digital Library System, v 21c [CD- ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp, 2000-2004). 11] Henry B. Swete, An Introduction to Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge: University Press, 1902), 202. 12] Henry B. Swete, An Introduction to Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge: University Press, 1902), 215; George B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Numbers , in The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, editors Charles A. Briggs, Samuel R. Driver, and Alfred Plummer (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1903), xxi. II. Historical Background In the historical background, we will take a look at (A) the chronological dates of historical events in the nation of Israel, (B) Moses, the main character of Exodus through Deuteronomy , and (C) the construction of the Tabernacle. A. Chronological Dates of Historical Events in the Nation of Israel - It is possible to add up the years of some historical events in the nation of Israel, and thus estimate chronological dates for these events. In the book of Genesis , we are told that Abraham leaves Haran at age of seventy-five ( Genesis 12:4); and Isaac is born when Abraham was one hundred years old ( Genesis 17:21; Genesis 21:5); and Jacob is born when his grandfather Abraham was one hundred sixty years old, and his father Isaac was sixty years old ( Genesis 25:26). We are told that the seventy souls of Israel went into Egypt when Jacob was one hundred thirty (130) years old ( Genesis 47:9). Thus, Israel and his sons went into Egypt two hundred and sixty (260) years after Abraham left Haran. We are told that the children of Israel spent either four hundred (400) years in Egypt ( Genesis 15:15, Acts 7:6), or four hundred thirty (430) years ( Exodus 12:40, Galatians 3:17). Thus, the Exodus from Egypt took place at least six hundred ninety (690) years after Abraham left Haran. We know that the Israelites spend forty years in the wilderness, and that the conquest of Canaan under Joshua took five years ( Joshua 14:10). We are told that from the time of the conquest of Canaan to Samuel is four hundred fifty (450) years ( Acts 13:20), which appears to be an estimate. We are told that King Saul reigned forty
- 7. years ( Acts13:21). King David reigned forty years ( 2 Samuel 5:4). King Solomon reigned forty years ( 1 Kings 11:42, 2 Chronicles 9:30). We are told that Solomon built the Temple four hundred and eighty (480) years after the Exodus , in the fourth year of his reign ( 1 Kings 6:1). In working through these dates, there appears to be a discrepancy between the dates given in Acts 13:20, which says the period of the judges was 450 years, and 1 Kings 6:1, which says there were 480 years from the wilderness journey to King Solomon. The simplest way to reconcile these verses is to understand that the authors were giving estimated time periods. Genesis 12:4, "So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran." Genesis 17:21, "But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year." Genesis 21:5, "And Abraham was an hundred years old, when his son Isaac was born unto him." Genesis 25:26, "And after that came his brother out, and his hand took hold on Esau"s heel; and his name was called Jacob: and Isaac was threescore years old when she bare them." Genesis 47:9, "And Jacob said unto Pharaoh, The days of the years of my pilgrimage are an hundred and thirty years: few and evil have the days of the years of my life been, and have not attained unto the days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their pilgrimage." Genesis 15:13, "And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;" Acts 7:6, "And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and entreat them evil four hundred years." Exodus 12:40, "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years." Galatians 3:17, "And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect." Joshua 14:10, "And now, behold, the LORD hath kept me alive, as he said, these
- 8. forty and fiveyears, even since the LORD spake this word unto Moses, while the children of Israel wandered in the wilderness: and now, lo, I am this day fourscore and five years old." Acts 13:20, "And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet." Acts 13:21, "And afterward they desired a king: and God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years." 2 Samuel 5:4, "David was thirty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned forty years." 1 Kings 11:42, "And the time that Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel was forty years." 2 Chronicles 9:30, "And Solomon reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel forty years." 1 Kings 6:1, "And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon"s reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD." B. Moses, the Main Character of Exodus Through Deuteronomy - The prophet Moses will be the main character in the books of Exodus through Deuteronomy. There are many references to Moses in the New Testament 1. Hebrews 3:2-5 - Moses was faithful to all of God's houses, as a servant. Hebrews 3:2-5, "Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house. For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God. And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after." 2. Hebrews 11:24-29 By faith he suffered with the children of Israel. By faith he left Egypt. By faith he kept the Passover. By faith he passed through the Red Sea.
- 9. Hebrews 11:24, "Byfaith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh"s daughter; Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward. By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible. Through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them. By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned." 3. Acts 7:20-44 - Summary of Moses in Stephen"s sermon. C. The Construction of the Tabernacle- The first lengthy description of the building of the Tabernacle is found in Exodus 24thru 31. This description is being given to Moses on the mount. He goes on top of the mount in chapter 24and he comes down from the mount in chapter 32. Then in chapters 35 thru 40, the Israelites are building the Tabernacle. Outline of Book Note the proposed outline for the book of Exodus: I. Introduction: The Seventy Souls— Exodus 1:1-7 II. Israel's Justification (The Passover & Exodus)— Exodus 1:8 to Exodus 18:27— A. The Birth of Moses— Exodus 1:8 to Exodus 2:10 B. Moses' Flight to Egypt— Exodus 2:11-22 C. Moses' Divine Commission— Exodus 2:23 to Exodus 4:17 E. Moses Leads Israel Out of Bondage— Exodus 4:18 to Exodus 13:16 1. Moses Returns to Egypt— Exodus 4:18-31 2. Moses' First Encounter with Pharaoh— Exodus 5:1 to Exodus 6:1 3. Aaron Become Moses' Spokesman— Exodus 6:2 to Exodus 7:13 4. The Ten Plagues— Exodus 7:14 to Exodus 11:10 a) The 1st Plague of Blood— Exodus 7:14-25
- 10. b) The 2ndPlague of Frogs— Exodus 8:1-15 c) The 3rd Plague of Lice— Exodus 8:16-19 d) The 4th Plague of Flies— Exodus 8:20-32 e) The 5th Plague of Diseased Livestock— Exodus 9:1-6 f) The 6th Plague of Boils— Exodus 9:7-12 g) The 7th Plague of Hail— Exodus 9:13-35 h) The 8th Plague of Locusts— Exodus 10:1-20 i) The 9th Plague of Darkness— Exodus 10:21-29 j) The 10th Plague of Death of Firstborn— Exodus 11:1 to Exodus 12:30 i) The Announcement of the Plague— Exodus 11:1-10 ii) The Institution of the Passover — Exodus 12:1-28 iii) The 10th Plague Instituted— Exodus 12:29-30 5. The Exodus Event— Exodus 12:31 to Exodus 13:16 6. The Escape Thru the Red Sea— Exodus 13:17 to Exodus 15:21 a) Israel Journeys Through the Wilderness— Exodus 13:17-22 b) Israel Crosses the Red Sea— Exodus 14:1-31 c) The Songs of Moses & Miriam— Exodus 15:1-21 7. The Journey to Mount Sinai— Exodus 15:22 to Exodus 18:27 a) Israel Encamps at Marah & Elim— Exodus 15:22-27 b) Israel Encamps in the Wilderness of Sin— Exodus 16:1-36 c) Israel Encamps at Rephidim— Exodus 17:1-16 i) The Water from the Rock— Exodus 17:1-7 ii) Israel's Battle with the Amalekites— Exodus 17:8-16
- 11. iii) Moses HonoursJethro— Exodus 18:1-27 III. Israel's Indoctrination (Giving of Laws & Statutes)— Exodus 19:1 to Exodus 40:38 A. Moses on Mount Sinai— Exodus 19:1-25 B. Institution of the Decalogue (Moral Laws)— Exodus 20:1-21 C. The Primary Statutes (Civil Laws)— Exodus 20:22 to Exodus 24:8 1. Statutes Concerning Worship— Exodus 20:22-26 2. Statutes Concerning Servants— Exodus 21:1-11 3. Statutes Concerning Direct Violence— Exodus 21:12-27 4. Statutes Concerning Indirect Violence— Exodus 21:28-36 5. Statutes Concerning Loss of Property— Exodus 22:1-15 6. Statutes Concerning Moral Obligations— Exodus 22:16 to Exodus 23:9 7. Statutes Concerning the Sabbath Year— Exodus 23:10-13 8. Statutes Concerning Three Primary Feasts— Exodus 23:14-19 9. Warnings Against Serving other Gods— Exodus 23:20-33 10. Israel Enters into Covenant— Exodus 24:1-8 D. Instructions to Build Tabernacle (Ceremonial Law)— Exodus 24:9 to Exodus 31:18 1. God calls Moses up to Mount Sinai— Exodus 24:9-18 2. The Offerings for the Sanctuary— Exodus 25:1-9 3. The Furniture of the Tabernacle— Exodus 25:10-40 a) The Ark of the Covenant, Mercy Seat & Cherubim— Exodus 25:10-22 b) The Table of Shewbread & its Accessories— Exodus 25:23-30
- 12. c) The Candlestick—Exodus 25:31-39 d) Concluding Statement— Exodus 25:40 4. The Building to House the Articles of the Tabernacle— Exodus 26:1-37 5. The Altar of Burnt Offering— Exodus 27:1-8 6. The Court of the Tabernacle— Exodus 27:9-19 7. The Care of the Lampstand— Exodus 27:20-21 8. The Garments for the Priesthood— Exodus 28:1-43 a) Introduction — Exodus 28:1-4 b) The Ephod— Exodus 28:5-14 c) The Breastplate of Judgment— Exodus 28:15-30 d) The Robe, Mitre, Girdle & Linen Breeches — Exodus 28:31-42 e) Concluding Statement — Exodus 28:43 9. The Consecration of Aaron and His Sons— Exodus 29:1-35 10. The Consecration & Service of the Burnt Altar — Exodus 29:36-46 11. The Altar of Incense— Exodus 30:1-10 12. The Ransom Money— Exodus 30:11-16 13. The Bronze Laver— Exodus 30:17-21 14. The Holy Anointing Oil— Exodus 30:22-33 15. The Incense— Exodus 30:34-38 16. The Appointment of Craftsmen— Exodus 31:1-11 17. Instructions Concerning the Sabbath Day— Exodus 31:12-18 E. Israel's Idolatry: The Golden Calf— Exodus 33:1-23 F. Israel Renews Its Covenant— Exodus 34:1-35
- 13. G. The Buildingof the Tabernacle 1. The Institution of the Sabbath Rest— Exodus 35:1-3 2. Offerings Given to Build the Tabernacle— Exodus 35:4-29 3. Moses Calls Bezalel & Aholiab to Lead Construction— Exodus 35:30 to Exodus 6:1 4. Moses Hands Over the Offerings for Construction— Exodus 36:2-7 5. Construction of the Curtains— Exodus 36:8-38 6. Construction of the Ark of the Covenant— Exodus 37:1-9 7. Construction of the Table of Shewbread— Exodus 37:10-16 8. Construction of the Lampstand— Exodus 37:17-24 9. Construction of the Altar of Incense— Exodus 37:25-28 10. The Anointing Oil and Incense— Exodus 37:29 11. Construction of the Altar of Burnt Offering— Exodus 38:1-7 12. Construction of the Bronze Laver— Exodus 38:8 13. Construction of the Hangings of the Court— Exodus 38:9-20 14. Inventory of Construction Materials— Exodus 38:21-31 15. Making of Priestly Garments— Exodus 39:1 16. Making of the Priestly Ephod— Exodus 39:2-7 17. Making of the Priestly Breastplate— Exodus 39:8-21 18. Making of Priestly Robe, Tunic, Turban, & Crown— Exodus 39:22-31 19. The Tabernacle Handed Over to Moses— Exodus 39:32-43 H. The Consecration of the Tabernacle— Exodus 40:1-38 The Israelites Oppressed
- 14. 1 These arethe names of the sons of Israel who went to Egypt with Jacob, each with his family: It was called the book of names because of this beginning. Durham, “The first six words of Ex. 1:1 are in the Hebrew text and exact quotation of the 6 words of Gen. 46:8. A clear rhetorical indication of the continuity intended. Not only in the narrative, but in the underline theological assertion.” Each with his family-family life is the foundation of the nation and the people of God. The family is crucial for God’s plan, for he intends to send his Son into the world through a family, and that family must be a direct decedent of these very people. God’s greatest tool in saving the world was the family, for they kept the blood line going to the Messiah. The family was the key factor in Moses becoming the savior of his people, and that story continued right on to the birth of Jesus, and the story goes on today with God changing the course of history and eternity through families who bring new persons into the world to carry on the work of the kingdom of God. There is no plan of God without the family. The first command of God in Genesis is “Be fruitful and multiply” and this has been a basic need for God’s people all through the Bible and history beyond the Bible. Take mothers and fathers out of the picture of God’s plan and there is no picture left. And so Exodus carries on the story of Genesis, which was also all about families and their response to the will of God. It is a new beginning with new characters, but the theme stays the same-families living by the Word of God, or families living in defiance to the Word of God. Israel entered Egypt as one family, but by the time they left Egypt there were thousands of families, and that is just what God needed. God was at work even though it was a time of silence. In this situation, as in so many others, giving birth to babies is doing the work of God. This becomes all the more significant as we read ahead and see that there is a long period of nearly 4 centuries in which we have no record of what God was doing. There is no prophet or preacher or hero story at all for all these many generations in which the people of God lived in Egypt. It was as if God just left the stage of history and let men go it on their own. Why would God leave such a gap in the story of his people? The implication of this beginning of Exodus is that God only had one basic plan for these centuries, and that was for the families of Israel to be fruitful and multiply. God wanted a large number of people to take into the promised land, and that takes time. Family after family had to produce and raise children, and they in turn do the same, and generation after generation continue until the Jewish people were indeed a people. There was no other project God had in mind, and so there was no need for any other revelation. God patiently waited and did not hurry the process along by miraculously reproducing babies. He let life and history take its course and God’s people were living in obedience to his will and plan just by continuing for centuries to have healthy and happy families. Of course there were many things
- 15. happening in thosecenturies and people were worshiping and serving and doing the will of God in many ways. But the bottom line is that they were becoming a strong nation of loving families. That is the king of nation God wanted to take over the land of promise. Another reason God was biding his time and letting Israel develop into a great multitude is that God in his patience was not ready to destroy the idolatrous people of the land he wanted to give to his own people. It takes a lot of time to wear out the patience of God. They were a wicked people, but God will not give up on anyone until they are so far gone that waiting any longer is foolish. God gave them, not just a second chance, but chance after chance, and uncountable opportunities to forsake their wickedness. He was not going to take their land unjustly and without cause, and so he had to wait until they were deserving of the judgment he would bring upon them. God made all this clear in his promise to Abraham in Genesis 15:13-16 where we read God’s words to him: “Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own, and they will be enslaved and mistreated four hundred years. But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves, and afterward they will come out with great possessions. You, however, will go to your fathers in peace and be buried at a good old age. In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure” So the big delay was for Israel to get bigger and better, and for the enemies of Israel to get weak and worse. So there was a plan after all, even though God does not speak and give any details for all those many years of silence. We have a right to question God, for the prophets did it frequently, but we need to be ever searching to see the wisdom of God in all that he does, for there is always a plan even when it seems there is no good reason that is apparent to us. BARNES, "Now - Literally, “And,” indicating a close connection with the preceding narrative. In fact this chapter contains a fulfillment of the predictions recorded in Gen_46:3 and in Gen_15:13. Every man and his household - It may be inferred from various notices that the total number of dependents was considerable, a point of importance in its bearings upon the history of the Exodus (compare Gen_13:6; Gen_14:14). CLARKE, "These are the names - Though this book is a continuation or the book of Genesis, with which probably it was in former times conjoined, Moses thought it necessary to introduce it with an account of the names and number of the family of Jacob when they came to Egypt, to show that though they were then very few, yet in a short time, under the especial blessing of God, they had multiplied exceedingly; and thus the promise to Abraham had been literally fulfilled. See the notes on Genesis 46 (note). GILL, "Now these are the names of the children of Israel which came down
- 16. into Egypt,.... Ofthe twelve patriarchs, the sons of Jacob, who were heads of the twelve tribes, whose names are here given; since the historian is about to give an account of their coming out of Egypt, and that it might be observed how greatly they increased in it, and how exactly the promise to Abraham, of the multiplication of his seed, was fulfilled: or, "and these are the names" (b), &c. this book being connected with the former by the copulative "and"; and when this was wrote, it is highly probable there was no division of the books made, but the history proceeded in one continued account: every man and his household came with Jacob; into Egypt, all excepting Joseph, and along with them their families, wives, children, and servants; though wives and servants are not reckoned into the number of the seventy, only such as came out of Jacob's loins: the Targum of Jonathan is,"a man with the men of his house,''as if only male children were meant, the sons of Jacob and his grandsons; and Aben Ezra observes, that women were never reckoned in Scripture as of the household or family; but certainly Dinah, and Serah, as they came into Egypt with Jacob, are reckoned among the seventy that came with him thither, Gen_46:15. HENRY 1-7, "In these verses we have, 1. A recital of the names of the twelve patriarchs, as they are called, Act_7:8. Their names are often repeated in scripture, that they may not sound uncouth to us, as other hard names, but that, by their occurring so frequently, they may become familiar to us; and to show how precious God's spiritual Israel are to him, and how much he delights in them. The account which was kept of the number of Jacob's family, when they went down into Egypt; they were in all seventy souls (Exo_1:5). according to the computation we had, Gen_46:27. This was just the number of the nations by which the earth was peopled, according to the account given, Gen. 10. For when the Most High separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel, as Moses observes, Deu_32:8. Notice is here taken of this that their increase in Egypt might appear the more wonderful. Note, It is good for those whose latter end greatly increases often to remember how small their beginning was, Job_8:7. 3. The death of Joseph, Exo_1:6. All that generation by degrees wore off. Perhaps all Jacob's sons died much about the same time; for there was not more than seven years' difference in age between the eldest and the youngest of them, except Benjamin; and, when death comes into a family, sometimes it makes a full end in a little time. When Joseph, the stay of the family, died, the rest went off apace. Note, We must look upon ourselves and our brethren, and all we converse with, as dying and hastening out of the world. This generation passeth away, as that did which went before. 4. The strange increase of Israel in Egypt, Exo_1:7. Here are four words used to express it: They were fruitful, and increased abundantly, like fishes or insects, so that they multiplied; and, being generally healthful and strong, they waxed exceedingly mighty, so that they began almost to outnumber the natives, for the land was in all places filled with them, at least Goshen, their own allotment. Observe, (1.) Though, no doubt, they increased considerably before, yet, it should seem, it was not till after the death of Joseph that it began to be taken notice of as extraordinary. Thus, when they lost the benefit of his protection, God made their numbers their defence, and they became better able than they had been to shift for themselves. If God continue our friends and relations to us while we most need them, and remove them when they can be better spared, let us own that he is wise, and not complain that he is hard upon us. After the death of Christ, our Joseph, his gospel Israel began most remarkably to increase: and his death had an influence upon it; it was like the sowing of a corn of wheat, which, if it die, bringeth forth much fruit, Joh_12:24. (2.) This wonderful increase was the fulfillment of the promise long before made unto the fathers. From the call of Abraham,
- 17. when God firsttold him he would make of him a great nation, to the deliverance of his seed out of Egypt, it was 430 years, during the first 215 of which they were increased but to seventy, but, in the latter half, those seventy multiplied to 600,000 fighting men. Note, [1.] Sometimes God's providences may seem for a great while to thwart his promises, and to go counter to them, that his people's faith may be tried, and his own power the more magnified. [2.] Though the performance of God's promises is sometimes slow, yet it is always sure; at the end it shall speak, and not lie, Hab_2:3. JAMISON, "Exo_1:1-22. Increase of the Israelites. Now these are the names — (See Gen_46:8-26). K&D 1-5, " To place the multiplication of the children of Israel into a strong nation in its true light, as the commencement of the realization of the promises of God, the number of the souls that went down with Jacob to Egypt is repeated from Gen_46:27 (on the number 70, in which Jacob is included, see the notes on this passage); and the repetition of the names of the twelve sons of Jacob serves to give to the history which follows a character of completeness within itself. “With Jacob they came, every one and his house,” i.e., his sons, together with their families, their wives, and their children. The sons are arranged according to their mothers, as in Gen_35:23-26, and the sons of the two maid-servants stand last. Joseph, indeed, is not placed in the list, but brought into special prominence by the words, “for Joseph was in Egypt” (Exo_1:5), since he did not go down to Egypt along with the house of Jacob, and occupied an exalted position in relation to them there. CALVIN, "1.These are the names It is the intention of Moses to describe the miraculous deliverance of the people, (from whence the Greeks gave the name to the book;) but, before he comes to that, he briefly reminds us that the promise given to Abraham was not ineffectual, that his seed should be multiplied “as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea-shore.” (Genesis 22:17.) This, then, is the commencement of the book, — that although their going down from the land of Canaan into Egypt might have seemed at the time as it were the end and abolition of God’s covenant, yet in his own time he abundantly accomplished what he had promised to his servant as to the increase of his descendants. However, he only mentions by name the twelve patriarchs who went down with their father Jacob, and then sums up the whole number of persons, as in two other passages. (Genesis 46:27, and Deuteronomy 10:22.) The calculation is perfectly accurate, if Jacob is counted among the thirty and six souls in the first catalogue. For it is a far-fetched addition of the Rabbins (6) to count in Jochebed the mother of Moses, to complete the number; and it is not probable that a woman, who was afterwards born in Egypt, should be reckoned among the men whom Jacob brought with him. If any object that the seventy are said to have “come out of the
- 18. loins of Jacob,”the discrepancy is easily explained by the common scriptural use of the figure synecdoche (7) That he from whom the others sprung is not excluded, we gather from the words of Moses, (Deuteronomy 10:22,) “Thy fathers went down into Egypt with threescore and ten persons; and now the Lord thy God hath made thee as the stars of heaven for multitude.” But there is no reason to add five more, as we read in the address of Stephen recorded by Luke, (Acts 7:14;) for we cannot be surprised that in this mode of expressing numbers this error should have occurred by the introduction of a single letter. Should any objector make this an handle for controversy, we should remember that the Spirit, by the mouth of Paul, does not warn us without purpose “not to give heed to genealogies.” (1 Timothy 1:4.) BENSON, "Exodus 1:1. These are the names — This list of names is here repeated, that by comparing this small root with the multitude of branches which arose from it, we may see and acknowledge the wonderful providence of God in the fulfilment of his promises. Every man and his household — That is, his children and grand- children. COKE, "Exodus 1:1. Now these are the names— Moses begins this book with recounting to us the names of the family of Jacob, to make us attentive to the accomplishment of the promise made to Abraham in their great multiplication. It may be asked, perhaps, how it came to pass that Joseph's brethren so readily returned back into Egypt after their father's funeral in Canaan, when, the famine being long before over, they might have settled in the land of Promise, and sent for their families out of Egypt? To which Parker answers—That Joseph's brethren had hitherto received nothing but civil and kind usage from the Egyptians; and therefore could not with any propriety have withdrawn themselves in such a manner; that, upon the demise of Jacob, the eleven brethren and their families were attached to Joseph, as lord of Egypt; so that his motions were to determine theirs; that this occasional journey from Egypt to Canaan was not like that from Canaan to Egypt, their little ones and effects being left behind; nor was any preparation made for such a removal; that, considering Joseph's brethren as the peculiar people, and, in that respect, under God's immediate eye and care, they were to do nothing without his leave and direction; and that things, as yet, were by no means ripened, or approached to maturity, for the intended crisis; Moses and Aaron, whom GOD had designed to commission as instruments of their deliverance out of Egypt, were not yet born. To which let us add, that it seems to follow plainly, from this chapter, and from the whole subsequent history, that the Egyptians themselves were very loth to part with the Israelites. COFFMAN, "Verses 1-3 "And Joseph fell upon his father's face, and wept upon him, and kissed him. And
- 19. Joseph commanded hisservants the physicians to embalm his father: and the physicians embalmed Israel. And forty days were fulfilled for him; for so are fulfilled the days of embalming: and the Egyptians wept for him three score and ten days." Although none of the other brothers are mentioned as displaying such emotion over Jacob's death, we should not believe that only Joseph did this. The probable reason for these actions of Joseph being mentioned was the promise which God made to Joseph in Genesis 46:4. It was therefore most fitting that the sacred text should have made it clear that Joseph indeed was present for the death of his father Jacob. "His servants the physicians ..." "No doubt the eminence of Joseph's position called for a very great retinue; even a special detail of physicians was commissioned to watch over his health."[1] These were skilled in the science of embalming, probably even more than the professional embalmers. The reason for Jacob's being embalmed lay in the fact that a long period of mourning was scheduled, and also in the necessity to transport the body over a great distance to the land of Canaan. Regarding the process of embalming, Dummelow had this: "The brain and intestines were removed, and the stomach cleansed and filled with spices. The body was then steeped in a mixture of salt and soda (called natron), for forty or more days, to preserve from decay. Next, it was bound up in strips of linen smeared with a sort of gum; and finally it was placed in a wooden case, shaped like the human body, and deposited in a sepulchral chamber."[2] "Egyptian mummies preserved for centuries bear silent witness to the remarkable efficiency of these embalmers."[3] This method of preparing bodies for burial was followed for generations by the Jews, as evidenced in the burial of Jesus himself (John 19:40). The two time periods mentioned here, the forty days for embalming and the seventy days of mourning probably ran concurrently, since they would hardly have waited until the embalming was completed to begin mourning. This long period of public mourning indicates that the Egyptians gave Jacob "a royal funeral, since it was customary to bewail a Pharaoh's death for seventy-two days."[4] This honor was very similar to that conferred by the United States when a "nineteen gun salute" is accorded a prime minister, contrasted with a "twenty-one gun salute" for the head of a state. ELLICOTT, "Verse 1 THE MULTIPLICATION OF THE ISRAELITES IN EGYPT, AND THEIR OPPRESSION BY A NEW KING. (1) Now these are the names.—The divisions between the “books “of the Pentateuch are not arbitrary. Genesis ends naturally and Exodus begins at the point where the
- 20. history of theindividuals who founded the Israelite nation ceases and that of the nation itself is entered on. That history commences properly with Exodus 1:7. Exodus 1:1-6 form the connecting link between the two books, and would not have been needed unless Exodus had been introduced as a distinct work, since they are little more than a recapitulation of what had been already stated and stated more fully in Genesis. Compare Exodus 1:1-5 with Genesis 46:8-27, and Exodus 1:6 with Genesis 1:26. Every man and his household.—“A household,” in the language of the East, includes not only children and grand-children, but retainers also—“servants born in the house”—like those of Abraham (Genesis 14:14). The number of each “household” may thus have been very considerable. PETT, "Exodus 1:1 ‘Now these are the names of the sons of Israel who came into Egypt, every man and his household came with Jacob.’ This verse continues on the narrative of Genesis. It takes up where Genesis left off, summarising what has gone before in a few verses. Those who entered Egypt with Jacob were his eleven sons (excluding Joseph who was already in Egypt) and their ‘households’. The households would include servants and retainers. Thus they may well have numbered in all a few thousand. We can compare how Abraham’s household contained 318 fighting men (Genesis 14:14). All would be seen as ‘children of Israel’. Jacob had come back from Paddan Aram with considerable resources and probably many servants, and these had been joined with the family tribe of Abraham and Isaac. Thus they were at some stage fairly numerous. On the other hand famine may have reduced their numbers somewhat. But they would nevertheless be a strong group, not just a few semi-nomads. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:1 Now these [are] the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt; every man and his household came with Jacob. Ver. 1. Now these are.] Heb., And these are, &c. For this book is a continuation of the former history, and this verse a repetition of what was before recorded in Genesis 46:8, The whole law, say the Schoolmen, is but one copulative. The whole Scripture but Cor et anima Dei, saith a father, (a) the heart and soul of God, uttered "by the mouth of the holy prophets, which have been since the world began." [Luke 1:70] PULPIT, "Exodus 1:1 Now these are the names. Literally, "And these are the names." Compare Genesis 46:8, where the phrase used is the same. We have here the first example of that almost universal practice of fife writers of the Historical Scriptures to connect book
- 21. with book inthe closest possible way by the simple copulative "and." (Compare Joshua 1:1, 1:1, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther.) This practice, so unlike that of secular writers, can only be explained by the instinctive feeling of all, that they were contributors to a single book, each later writer a continuator of the narrative placed on record by his predecessor. In the Pentateuch, if we admit a single author, the initial vau will be less remarkable, since it will merely serve to join together the different sections of a single treatise. Which came into Egypt. The next two words of the original, "with Jacob," belong properly to this clause. The whole verse is best translated, "Now these are the names of the children of Israel which came into Egypt with Jacob: they came every man with his household." So the LXX; Pagnini, Kalisch, Geddes, Boothroyd, etc. Every man and his household. This is important in connection with the vexed question of the possible increase of the original band of so-called "Israelites" within the space of 430 years to such a number as is said to have quitted Egypt with Moses (Exodus 12:37). The "household" of Abraham comprised 318 adult males (Genesis 14:14). The "households" of Jacob, his eleven sons, and his numerous grown-up grandsons, have been with reason estimated at "several thousands." PULPIT, "Exodus 1:1-5 The patriarchal names. I. THE NAMES IN THEMSELVES. Nothing seems to the ordinary reader of Holy Scripture so dry and uninteresting as a bare catalogue of names. Objections are even made to reading them as parts of Sunday or week-day "lessons." But "ALL Scripture," rightly viewed, "is profitable" (2 Timothy 3:16). Each Hebrew name has a meaning, and was given with a purpose. What a wealth of joys and sorrows, hopes and fears, surmises, triumphs, jealousies, is hid up in the list before us! Jacob, the supplanter (Genesis 27:36); Reuben, the son of God's gracious regard (Genesis 29:32); Simeon, the proof that God hears prayers and answers them (ib. verse 33); Levi, the bond of association between wife and husband; Judah, he for whom God is praised; Issachar, the son given as a reward; Zebulon, he who will make the husband and wife dwell together; Benjamin "son of my strength," otherwise Benoni, "son of my sorrow" (Genesis 35:16); Dan, the sign that there is a God who judges us; Naphtali, "one wrestled for"; Gad, "good fortune cometh"; Asher, "the happy one"! How the private life of Jacob, how the rivalries and heats and contentions of that polygamist household, come before us, as we read the names! How again, amid all these heats and contentions, is revealed on all sides a faithful trust in God, a conviction of his overruling providence, and an acceptance of that aspect of his character which the Apostle holds up to view, when he calls him "a rewarder of them that diligently seek him" (Hebrews 11:6). Again, how strong the feeling, that, whatever cares and troubles they bring with them, children are a blessing! What a desire is shown to have children! What a pride in the possession of many children! Already "the Desire of all nations" was looked for, and each Hebrew mother hoped that in the line of descent from her might be born that Mighty One, who would "bruise the serpent's head" (Genesis 3:15), and in whom "all the nations
- 22. of the earthwould be blessed" (Genesis 12:3; Genesis 18:18). Thus this list of names, if we will consider the meaning of them and the occasion of their being given, may teach us many a lesson, and prove "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." II. THE ORDER OF THE NAMES. The order in which the names are given assigns a just advantage to legitimate and true marriage over even the most strictly legal union which falls short of true marriage. Let men beware lest they forfeit God's blessing upon their domestic life, by contracting marriage in any but the most solemn way that is open to them. There is a sanctity in the relation of husband and wife, that should lead us to surround the initial contract with every sacred association and every holy form that the piety of bygone ages has provided for us. Again, the order followed assigns a just and rightful advantage to priority of birth. Primogeniture is in a certain sense, a law of nature. The elder brother, superior in strength, in knowledge, and experience, rightfully claims respect, submission, reverence from those younger than himself. In a properly regulated family this principle will be laid down and maintained. Age, unless by misconduct it forfeits its privilege, will be assigned the superior position; younger children will be required to submit themselves to elder ones; elder children will be upheld and encouraged to exercise a certain amount of authority over their juniors. There will be a training within the domestic circle in the habits both of direction and submission, which will prepare the way for the after discipline of life in the world. III. THE NUMBER OF THE NAMES. Whatever minor lessons he may have intended to teach in this opening paragraph, the main purpose of the writer was undoubtedly to show from what small beginnings God produces the greatest, most remarkable, nay, the most astounding results. From the stock of one man and his twelve sons, with their households, God raised up, within the space of 430 years, a nation. Similarly, when "in the fulness of time" the New Dispensation succeeded the Old, from "the Twelve" and from "the Seventy" (Luke 10:1), the original "little flock" (Luke 12:32) was derived that "general assembly and church of the firstborn" (Hebrews 12:23) which is a "great multitude that no man can number" (Revelation 7:9). And the growth was even more rapid. "We are but of yesterday," says Tertullian, in the third century after our Lord's birth, "and yet we fill all places —your cities, islands, forts, towns, villages; nay, your camps, tribes, decuries—your palace, your senate, your forum." How wonderful is such increase in either case! How clearly the consequence of Divine favour and blessing! EVERETT, "Verses 1-7 Introduction: The Seventy Souls - Exodus 1:1-7 serves as an introduction to the book of Exodus. In this passage of Scripture the author tells us that the seventy souls belonging to Jacob went down to sojourn in Egypt, where they multiplied into a great nation. We find listed here the names of Jacob's eleven sons who came down
- 23. into Egypt tofind refuge during the time of famine. A complete list of names of these seventy souls is given in Genesis 46:26-27. The number seventy testifies to the fact that God divinely orchestrated the early founding of the nation of Israel. The author does not give us a time frame in which to fit this introductory material. However, it becomes apparent that this passage echoes part of the Abrahamic prophecy that Israel will go down to Egypt, multiply, and come out four hundred years later ( Genesis 15:13-16). The book of Exodus will narrate the entire fulfilment of this prophecy. Genesis 15:13-16, "And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance. And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age. But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full." God had commanded Jacob to take his family into Egypt even though he believed that he must stay and dwell in the land of Canaan under the command of his fathers Abraham and Isaac. But what is the important in Scripture regarding these seventy men with their wives and children. It is because God had worked since the day He created Adam and Eve to raise up a righteous seed that would inhabit the earth and take dominion over it. Within the loins of these seventy men dwelt the nation of Israel. Within the loins of Judah was the Messiah who would bring redemption to this fallen world and bring about many righteous seeds. Up until now, only a few individuals scattered within the genealogy of Adam have been considered a righteous seed. Now God has seventy souls who have the potential to becoming fruitful and multiplying and becoming a nation. This is the very emphasis in Exodus 1:6-7 as the family of Jacob became a nation while in Egyptian bondage. God was preserving His precious seed in order to fulfil His command to Adam to be fruitful and multiply. These seventy souls have a destiny and God will work to insure that their destiny is fulfilled. Illustration- I can see the importance of these seventy souls by watching my wife bring her family members to salvation one by one. She alone was a Christian, a righteous seed. But as she brings each loved one to faith in Christ Jesus, they become important and need to be protected and nurtured in Christ so that they can also reproduce more righteous seed within the Salcedo family. A lot of work has gone into bringing these loved ones to Christ, and this makes them precious. In the same way, God had worked throughout the history of mankind to produce a righteous family and now that He has seventy souls, God will preserve them and protect them securely. Exodus 1:1-7 — Introduction: The Seventy Souls (A Comparison to Seventy Nations in Table of Nations) - It is interesting to note that just as God called seventy nations at the tower of Babel to serve as the foundation for the nations of the earth, so did
- 24. God call seventysouls to found the nation of Israel ( Exodus 1:1-7). We know that Moses called seventy elders to establish the laws of the nation of Israel ( Exodus 24:1, Numbers 11:24-25). Jesus trained seventy disciples to carry the Gospel to the world ( Luke 10:1; Luke 10:17). Exodus 1:1 Now these are the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt; every man and his household came with Jacob. Exodus 1:1 — Word Study on "Egypt" - Gesenius tells us the Hebrew word "Egypt" ( ) (H 4714) is the dual of ( ) (H 4693), and that the dual form of this name was possibly derived as a way of identifying Upper and Lower Egypt together. Strong says it means, "fortified, defence, or besieged places". PTW says the word "Egypt" means, "land of the soul of Ptah." BDB says this name means, "land of the Copts." Exodus 1:1 — Comments - The "children of Israel: refers to the twelve sons of Jacob within the context of the introduction to the book of Exodus ( Exodus 1:1-7). The following verses ( Exodus 1:2-4) will list eleven of these sons, since Joseph already dwelt in Egypt. Verses 1-27 Israel's Justification ( Exodus 1:1 to Exodus 15:21) - The emphasis of Exodus 1:1 to Exodus 18:27 is Israel's justification before God through the sacrificial atonement of the Mosaic Law. The Passover was the time when God cut a covenant with the children of Israel, and the Exodus testifies to His response of delivering His people as a part of His covenant promise of redemption. Israel's justification was fulfilled in their deliverance from the bondages of Egypt. Hebrews 11:23-29 highlights these events in order to demonstrate the faith of Moses in fulfilling his divine commission. These events serve as an allegory of the Church's covenant through the blood of Jesus Christ and our subsequent deliverance from the bondages and sins of this world. The Exodus Out of Egypt - Exodus 1:1 to Exodus 18:27 describes God's judgment upon Egypt and Israel's exodus from bondage. In comparing the two Pharaoh's discussed in this section of the book it is important to note that the pharaoh who blessed the people of Israel during Joseph's life was himself blessed along with his nation. In stark contrast, the Pharaoh who cursed God's people was himself cursed with the death of his own first born, as well as his entire nation. God watches over His people and blesses those who bless them and He curses those who curse them ( Genesis 12:3). Genesis 12:3, "And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed."
- 25. DEFFINBAUGH Linking the Pastand the Present (1:1-7) Verses 1-7 serve to link the events of the Book of Genesis 5 and those recorded in the Book of Exodus. These two books were intended to be understood in relationship to each other. 6 Verses 1-6 sum up the history of Israel as a clan, as described more thoroughly in Genesis, chapters 12-50. These six verses remind us that all that is going to take place in this book is directly related to what has gone before as described in Genesis. 7 The curse of God in Genesis 3 included hard toil, which is surely the lot of Israel in Egypt. The salvation of mankind, as promised also in Genesis 3, was through the birth of a child. So too it was through the birth of a child (Moses, Exod. 2) that God provided a deliverer for His people. As men strove to provide themselves with security and significance by the building of a city and a tower, using bricks and mortar, so Egypt sought to secure herself by forcing the Israelites to build cities with bricks and mortar (compare Gen. 11 with Exod. 1:14; 5:1ff.). Most importantly, this portion of the introduction to the Book of Exodus (Exod. 1:1-6) links the existence and rapid growth of Israel as a nation to the covenant which God made with Abraham (Gen. 12:1-3; 15:12ff.), and which He reiterated to the patriarchs (Isaac: Gen. 26:2-5, 24; Jacob: Gen. 28:13-15). The sons of Israel and their families numbered 70 (v. 5) when they arrived in Egypt, 8 a mere clan. But when the “sons of Israel” leave Egypt, they do so as a great nation (Exod. 1:7, 12, 20; 12:37). Verse 7 fills in a nearly 400-year gap covering the period from the death of Joseph 9 to the time of the Exodus. If it were not for this verse and the remainder of chapter one, we would know little of this period of time. A moment’s reflection will cause us to remember that there are other periods in history which are likewise neglected in the biblical record. There is, for example, the 400-year period of silence between the post-exilic prophets (Malachi, for example), and the books of the New Testament. 10 There is also the period of silence from the time of the close of the New Testament canon (the Book of Revelation) to the present day. What should we conclude from those periods in time which biblical revelation seems to pass over unmentioned? Shall we say that these periods of time, the events and the people involved, are of no concern or interest to God? Certainly not. Shall we say that because God is silent about these times (at least in the Scriptures), He is not only uninterested, but also uninvolved? Personally, I conclude that there are times when God is there, but when He is silent. By this I mean that God is at work, but that He is not, at that moment in time, telling us what He is doing, nor is He publicly displaying His purposes or His power. At such times (and at other times as well) God is at work providentially. He is at work behind the scenes, and in ways that at the time are not immediately apparent. Verses 8-22 focus on the particular things which God was doing during this period of persecution which are important to the
- 26. purpose of theBook of Exodus. These verses give us a great deal of insight into those periods of time when God appears to be silent, when He is at work providentially, bringing His purposes to pass, or preparing history for another of His dramatic interventions into the affairs of men. Lest we conclude that God is altogether silent about certain periods of history, let me remind you that even though God may not record the history of a certain period in detail, He will often foretell of the events in order to prepare those who will live in such times. For example, this 400-year period of time was the subject of a divine revelation to Abraham, long before it would take place: Then the Lord said to him, “Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own, and they will be enslaved and mistreated four hundred years. But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves, and afterward they will come out with great possessions. You, however, will go to your fathers in peace and be buried at a good old age. In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure” (Gen. 15:13-16). This brief prophetic description of this dark period of time in Israel’s history is proof of the faithfulness of God with regard to the fulfillment of His promises. Abraham’s descendants did dwell in Egypt, under bondage, for 400 years. They were brought forth, and with great riches given freely by the Egyptians. They did return to the promised land, just as God had promised. So too events occurring in other periods of time concerning which the Scriptures have been silent (the 400-year inter-testamental period and the time from the close of the New Testament canon until now) have been foretold in advance by means of prophecy. Through Daniel (e.g. chapter 2) the kingdoms of the world were foretold. And through various Old and New Testament prophecies, the events of the last days and of the return of Christ are described. Thus, God has prepared men, in advance, for those periods of relative silence. As we leave verses 1-7 let us keep two words in mind which will enable us to summarize the role of this section. The two words are CONTINUITY and CONTRAST. We are reminded of the continuity of God’s program by the fact that the promises and purposes of God commenced in the Book of Genesis are continued in the Book of Exodus. We see the contrast between these two books: a small handful of men entered Egypt to dwell with Joseph, but a great multitude will leave Egypt with Moses to dwell in the promised land. It is this rapid growth of Israel, in fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham and in preparation for possessing the land, which was the result of God’s providential dealings with Israel under the cruel hand of the Egyptians. 11 Let us look then at the providential hand of God in this period of Israel’s history. EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMMENTARY, "THE PROLOGUE. Exodus 1:1-6.
- 27. "And these arethe names of the children of Israel which came into Egypt." Many books of the Old Testament begin with the conjunction And. This fact, it has been often pointed out, is a silent indication of truth, that each author was not recording certain isolated incidents, but parts of one great drama, events which joined hands with the past and future, looking before and after. Thus the Book of the Kings took up the tale from Samuel, Samuel from Judges, and Judges from Joshua, and all carried the sacred movement forward towards a goal as yet unreached. Indeed, it was impossible, remembering the first promise that the seed of the woman should bruise the head of the serpent, and the later assurance that in the seed of Abraham should be the universal blessing, for a faithful Jew to forget that all the history of his race was the evolution of some grand hope, a pilgrimage towards some goal unseen. Bearing in mind that there is now revealed to us a world-wide tendency toward the supreme consummation, the bringing all things under the headship of Christ, it is not to be denied that this hope of the ancient Jew is given to all mankind. Each new stage in universal history may be said to open with this same conjunction. It links the history of England with that of Julius Caesar and of the Red Indian; nor is the chain composed of accidents: it is forged by the hand of the God of providence. Thus, in the conjunction which binds these Old Testament narratives together, is found the germ of that instinctive and elevating phrase, the Philosophy of History. But there is nowhere in Scripture the notion which too often degrades and stiffens that Philosophy--the notion that history is urged forward by blind forces, amid which the individual man is too puny to assert himself. Without a Moses the Exodus is inconceivable, and God always achieves His purpose through the providential man. * * * * * The Books of the Pentateuch are held together in a yet stronger unity than the rest, being sections of one and the same narrative, and having been accredited with a common authorship from the earliest mention of them. Accordingly, the Book of Exodus not only begins with this conjunction (which assumes the previous narrative), but also rehearses the descent into Egypt. "And these are the names of the sons of Israel which came into Egypt,"--names blotted with many a crime, rarely suggesting any lovable or great association, yet the names of men with a marvellous heritage, as being "the sons of Israel," the Prince who prevailed with God. Moreover they are consecrated: their father's dying words had conveyed to every one of them some expectation, some mysterious import which the future should disclose. In the issue would be revealed the awful influence of the past upon the future, of the fathers upon the children even beyond the third and fourth generation--an influence which is nearer to destiny, in its stern, subtle and far-reaching strength, than any other recognised by religion. Destiny, however, it is not, or how should the name of Dan have faded out from the final list of "every tribe of the children of Israel" in the Apocalypse (Revelation 7:5-8), where Manasseh is reckoned separately from Joseph to complete the twelve?
- 28. We read thatwith the twelve came their posterity, seventy souls in direct descent from Jacob; but in this number he is himself included, according to that well-known Orientalism which Milton strove to force upon our language in the phrase-- "The fairest of her daughters Eve." Joseph is also reckoned, although he "was in Egypt already." Now, it must be observed that of these seventy, sixty-eight were males, and therefore the people of the Exodus must not be reckoned to have sprung in the interval from seventy, but (remembering polygamy) from more than twice that number, even if we refuse to make any account of the household which is mentioned as coming with every man. These households were probably smaller in each case than that of Abraham, and the famine in its early stages may have reduced the number of retainers; yet they account for much of what is pronounced incredible in the rapid expansion of the clan into a nation.(1) But when all allowance has been made, the increase continues to be, such as the narrator clearly regards it, abnormal, well-nigh preternatural, a fitting type of the expansion, amid fiercer persecutions, of the later Church of God, the true circumcision, who also sprang from the spiritual parentage of another Seventy and another Twelve. "And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation." Thus the connection with Canaan became a mere tradition, and the powerful courtier who had nursed their interests disappeared. When they remembered him, in the bitter time which lay before them, it was only to reflect that all mortal help must perish. It is thus in the spiritual world also. Paul reminds the Philippians that they can obey in his absence and not in his presence only, working out their own salvation, as no apostle can work it out on their behalf. And the reason is that the one real support is ever present. Work out your own salvation, for it is God (not any teacher) Who worketh in you. The Hebrew race was to learn its need of Him, and in Him to recover its freedom. Moreover, the influences which mould all men's characters, their surroundings and mental atmosphere, were completely changed. These wanderers for pasture were now in the presence of a compact and impressive social system, vast cities, gorgeous temples, an imposing ritual. They were infected as well as educated there, and we find the men of the Exodus not only murmuring for Egyptian comforts, but demanding visible gods to go before them. Yet, with all its drawbacks, the change was a necessary part of their development. They should return from Egypt relying upon no courtly patron, no mortal might or wisdom, aware of a name of God more profound than was spoken in the covenant of their fathers, with their narrow family interests and rivalries and their family traditions expanded into national hopes, national aspirations, a national religion. Perhaps there is another reason why Scripture has reminded us of the vigorous and
- 29. healthy stock whencecame the race that multiplied exceedingly. For no book attaches more weight to the truth, so miserably perverted that it is discredited by multitudes, but amply vindicated by modern science, that good breeding, in the strictest sense of the word, is a powerful factor in the lives of men and nations. To be well born does not of necessity require aristocratic parentage, nor does such parentage involve it: but it implies a virtuous, temperate and pious stock. In extreme cases the doctrine of race is palpable; for who can doubt that the sins of dissolute parents are visited upon their puny and short- lived children, and that the posterity of the just inherit not only honour and a welcome in the world, "an open door," but also immunity from many a physical blemish and many a perilous craving? If the Hebrew race, after eighteen centuries of calamity, retains an unrivalled vigour and tenacity, be it remembered how its iron sinew has been twisted, from what a sire it sprang, through what ages of more than "natural selection" the dross was thoroughly purged out, and (as Isaiah loves to reiterate) a chosen remnant left. Already, in Egypt, in the vigorous multiplication of the race, was visible the germ of that amazing vitality which makes it, even in its overthrow, so powerful an element in the best modern thought and action. It is a well-known saying of Goethe that the quality for which God chose Israel was probably toughness. Perhaps the saying would better be inverted: it was among the most remarkable endowments, unto which Israel was called, and called by virtue of qualities in which Goethe himself was remarkably deficient. Now, this principle is in full operation still, and ought to be solemnly pondered by the young. Self-indulgence, the sowing of wild oats, the seeing of life while one is young, the taking one's fling before one settles down, the having one's day (like "every dog," for it is to be observed that no person says, "every Christian"), these things seem natural enough. And their unsuspected issues in the next generation, dire and subtle and far-reaching, these also are more natural still, being the operation of the laws of God. On the other hand, there is no youth living in obedience alike to the higher and humbler laws of our complex nature, in purity and gentleness and healthful occupation, who may not contribute to the stock of happiness in other lives beyond his own, to the future well- being of his native land, and to the day when the sadly polluted stream of human existence shall again flow clear and glad, a pure river of water of life. MACLAREN, "FOUR SHAPING CENTURIES Exodus 1:1 - - Exodus 1:14. The four hundred years of Israel’s stay in Egypt were divided into two unequal periods, in the former and longer of which they were prosperous and favoured, while in the latter they were oppressed. Both periods had their uses and place in the shaping of the nation and its preparation for the Exodus. Both carry permanent lessons.
- 30. I. The longdays of unclouded prosperity. These extended over centuries, the whole history of which is summed up in two words: death and growth. The calm years glided on, and the shepherds in Goshen had the happiness of having no annals. All that needed to be recorded was that, one by one, the first generation died off, and that the new generations ‘were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty.’ The emphatic repetitions recall the original promises in Genesis 12:2, Genesis 17:4 - Genesis 17:5, Genesis 18:18. The preceding specification of the number of the original settlers {repeated from Genesis 46:27} brings into impressive contrast the small beginnings and the rapid increase. We may note that eloquent setting side by side of the two processes which are ever going on simultaneously, death and birth. One by one men pass out of the warmth and light into the darkness, and so gradually does the withdrawal proceed that we scarcely are aware of its going on, but at last ‘all that generation’ has vanished. The old trees are all cleared off the ground, and everywhere their place is taken by the young saplings. The web is ever being woven at one end, and run down at the other. ‘The individual withers, but the race is more and more.’ How solemn that continual play of opposing movements is, and how blind we are to its solemnity! That long period of growth may be regarded in two lights. It effected the conversion of a horde into a nation by numerical increase, and so was a link in the chain of the divine working. The great increase, of which the writer speaks so strongly, was, no doubt, due to the favourable circumstances of the life in Goshen, but was none the less regarded by him, and rightly so, as God’s doing. As the Psalmist sings, ‘He increased His people greatly.’ ‘Natural processes’ are the implements of a supernatural will. So Israel was being multiplied, and the end for which it was peacefully growing into a multitude was hidden from all but God. But there was another end, in reference to which the years of peaceful prosperity may be regarded; namely, the schooling of the people to patient trust in the long-delayed fulfilment of the promise. That hope had burned bright in Joseph when he died, and he being dead yet spake of it from his coffin to the successive generations. Delay is fitted and intended to strengthen faith and make hope more eager. But that part of the divine purpose, alas! was not effected as the former was. In the moral region every circumstance has two opposite results possible. Each condition has, as it were, two handles, and we can take it by either, and generally take it by the wrong one. Whatever is meant to better us may be so used by us as to worsen us. And the history of Israel in Egypt and in the desert shows only too plainly that ease weakened, if it did not kill, faith, and that Goshen was so pleasant that it drove the hope and the wish for Canaan out of mind. ‘While the bridegroom tarried they all slumbered and slept.’ Is not Israel in Egypt, slackening hold of the promise because it tarried, a mirror in which the Church may see itself? and do we not know the enervating influence of Goshen, making us reluctant to shoulder our packs and turn out for the pilgrimage? The desert repels more strongly than Canaan attracts. II. The shorter period of oppression. Probably the rise of a ‘new king’ means a revolution in which a native dynasty expelled foreign monarchs. The Pharaoh of the oppression was, perhaps, the great Rameses II., whose long reign of sixty-seven years gives ample room for protracted and grinding oppression of Israel. The policy adopted was characteristic of these early despotisms, in its utter disregard of humanity and of everything but making
- 31. the kingdom safe.It was not intentionally cruel, it was merely indifferent to the suffering it occasioned. ‘Let us deal wisely with them’-never mind about justice, not to say kindness. Pharaoh’s ‘politics,’ like those of some other rulers who divorce them from morality, turned out to be impolitic, and his ‘wisdom’ proved to be roundabout folly. He was afraid that the Israelites, if they were allowed to grow, might find out their strength and seek to emigrate; and so he set to work to weaken them with hard bondage, not seeing that that was sure to make them wish the very thing that he was blunderingly trying to prevent. The only way to make men glad to remain in a community is to make them at home there. The sense of injustice is the strongest disintegrating force. If there is a ‘dangerous class’ the surest way to make them more dangerous is to treat them harshly. It was a blunder to make ‘lives bitter,’ for hearts also were embittered. So the people were ripened for revolt, and Goshen became less attractive. God used Pharaoh’s foolish wisdom, as He had used natural laws, to prepare for the Exodus. The long years of ease had multiplied the nation. The period of oppression was to stir them up out of their comfortable nest, and make them willing to risk the bold dash for freedom. Is not that the explanation, too, of the similar times in our lives? It needs that we should experience life’s sorrows and burdens, and find how hard the world’s service is, and how quickly our Goshens may become places of grievous toil, in order that the weak hearts, which cling so tightly to earth, may be detached from it, and taught to reach upwards to God. ‘Blessed is the man . . .in whose heart are thy ways,’ and happy is he who so profits by his sorrows that they stir in him the pilgrim’s spirit, and make him yearn after Canaan, and not grudge to leave Goshen. Our ease and our troubles, opposite though they seem and are, are meant to further the same end,-to make us fit for the journey which leads to rest and home. We often misuse them both, letting the one sink us in earthly delights and oblivion of the great hope, and the other embitter our spirits without impelling them to seek the things that are above. Let us use the one for thankfulness, growth, and patient hope, and the other for writing deep the conviction that this is not our rest, and making firm the resolve that we will gird our loins and, staff in hand, go forth on the pilgrim road, not shrinking from the wilderness, because we see the mountains of Canaan across its sandy flats. BI 1-5, "The children of Israel which came into Egypt. Israel in Egypt I. A retrospective view. 1. These verses lead us back to the time when Jacob came with his family to Egypt. (1) . It was a time of great distress from famine in Canaan. (2) It was a crisis-time in the history of the chosen family (Gen_45:17-28; Gen_46:1-4). (3) It was a time of great encouragement from what had been disclosed in Joseph’s history.
- 32. 2. These versessummarize the history of the children of Israel from the time of Jacob’s emigration to Egypt till the bondage of the Israelites—about 115 years. (1) This was a time of great happiness and prosperity for the Israelites. (a) The entire period, from the call of Abraham to the Exodus, was 430 years. (b) Up to the descent into Egypt, a period of 215 years, the family had increased to only “seventy souls.” (c) From the going down to Egypt to the Exodus—215 years—the 70 had multiplied to 600,000 males, giving a population of nearly 2,000,000. II. The change of administration (Exo_1:8). Not merely another, but a “new” king, implying a change of dynasty. Now, probably, commenced the rule of the “shepherd kings.” 2. The phrase, “who knew not Joseph,” suggests the prestige of Joseph’s name to the former Pharaohs. A good man’s influence dies not with the death of his body. III. The change of government policy (Exo_1:9-14). 1. The nature of this change. From being a fostering government to being cruel and repressive. Unwise policy, because suicidal. 2. The reason for this change (Exo_1:10). 3. The result of this change (Exo_1:12). (1) Such a result is according to God’s law of nations. Working classes always more fruitful than others. (2) Such a result was according to God’s covenant law. Lessons: 1. God’s children in Egypt a type of God’s children in the world. 2. The policy of the new king a type of the godlessness, selfishness, and inhumanity of those who work from a worldly standpoint. 3. The frustration of this policy a type of God’s overruling power. (D. C. Hughes, M. A.) God’s knowledge of man’s domestic life I. He knows the children of the family. “Reuben, Simeon,” etc. 1. He knows the character of each. 2. He knows the friendly relations, or otherwise, existing between them, and the intentions of each.
- 33. II. He watchesthe journeying of the family—“which came,” etc. Do not journey into Egypt without an indication of the Divine will. All family changes should be under the instruction of heaven. This insures safety, protection, development— though sometimes discipline. III. He marks the death of the family (Exo_1:6). (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Israel in Egypt With Israel in Egypt begins a new era in the world’s progress. Biography becomes history Instead of individuals or a tribe, God has now a natron with which to work. He has undertaken a vast purpose. This people—united by common parentage, common faith, and common hope—He is to weld still more compactly by fellowship in disaster and deliverance into a nation which shall be the miracle of history, as intensely and persistently individual as its founder. With this nation He enters into covenant and, through its faith and experience, reveals to the world the one holy God, and brings in its Redeemer. Such a mission costs; its apostles must suffer. Yet this relief intervenes: personal blessing is not lost in national pains. The strong word covering this process is discipline: the development of character and efficiency under rigorous conditions. The first element is— I. Faith: taking as real what cannot be seen, accepting as sure what has not come to pass. Seemingly, this fruit of heaven cannot grow on earthly soil unless it be wet with tears. II. The second word of blessing is disentanglement. The hope of the ages lay in freeing Israel, not from Egypt, but from what Egypt represents. Heathenism is a bitter and bloody thing. But heathenism filled the world outside the chosen nation. Only stern guidance could lead away from it, for over its deformities were spread distortions of natural needs and blandishments of sanctioned lust. God can accomplish vast things with a soul wholly consecrated to Him; but how rarely He finds such a soul, except as He leads it through affliction to make it loose its hold on all but Him! III. With this even partially gained, comes that strong word efficiency. The nation which was Jacob the Supplanter passes its Peniel and becomes Israel the Prince of God, having power with God and men. Into its hands are put the direction of earth’s history and the hope of its redemption. The distresses of those early generations are as the straining and rending of the crust or the grinding march of glaciers, unsparing but beneficent, preparing a fertile soil on which at last men shall dwell safely, lifting thankful hands to heaven. (C. M. Southgate.) Egypt a type of the world Sodom is associated in our minds with wickedness only, though no doubt it was a great place in its day; but Egypt stands out before us as a fuller and more
- 34. adequate type ofthe world, with her glory as well as her shame. And from Israel’s relation to Egypt we may learn two great lessons: one of counsel how to use the world, the other of warning against abusing it. From God’s purpose in regard to Israel let us learn that just as Egypt was necessary as a school for His chosen people, so the world ought to be a school for us. We are not to despise its greatness. No word of contempt for Egypt’s greatness is found in the sacred records. The nation was intended to learn, and did acquire, many useful arts which were of much service to them afterwards in the Land of Promise. Moses, the chosen of God, was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was thereby qualified for the great work for which he was called. In these examples we may see how to use this world, making it a school to prepare us for our inheritance and the work the Lord may have for us there to do. On the other hand, let us beware of so yielding to the seductions of this evil world as to lose our hold of God, and His covenant, and so incur the certainty of forfeiting our eternal birthright and becoming the world’s slaves, helping perhaps to rear its mighty monuments, with the prospect possibly of having our names engraved in stone among the ruins of some buried city, but without the prospect of having them written “among the living in Jerusalem,” the eternal city of God. Earth’s great ones belong to the dead past; but heaven’s great ones have their portion in a glorious future. (J. M. Gibson, D. D.) Making history We are making history when we least think of it. That which seems a little matter to us may be a link in a chain that binds the ages. What we do to-day or to- morrow is done for all time. It cannot be undone. It and all its countless results must stand entailed to the latest generations; and we are to have honour or shame according as our part is now performed. The poor boy who drives the horse along a canal tow.path may think it makes little difference whether he does that work well or poorly. But forty years after, when he is in nomination for the presidency of a great nation, he will find that men go back to his boyhood story to learn whether he was faithful in that which was least, as proof that he would be faithful also in that which is much. There is no keeping out of history. We have got to be there. The only safe way of standing well in history is by doing well in all things. You are just now going to Boston, or to New York, or to Chicago, or to Savannah, or to London—will the record of your spirit and conduct as you go there read well ten years hence, or a hundred? That depends on what your spirit and conduct are at the present time. And if you stay at home your place in history —in God’s record of history—is just as sure as if you went to Egypt or to the Holy Land. That record is making up to-day: “Now, these are the names of the children of—, which came into—, or, which stayed at—“ If you want a record which shall redound to your honour, and of which your children’s children shall be proud, you have no time to lose in getting things straight for it. (H. C. Trumbull.)
- 35. 2 Reuben, Simeon,Levi and Judah; These 11 sons, and Joseph who was already in Egypt became the fathers of the 12 tribes of Israel. The whole of the people of God had its start with one family of 12 boys. There has never been another family in all of history like this family of Jacob. There are others in the Bible who had many children, but none of them became the source of an entire nation that God would make the center of his plan for the whole of humanity. This is literally the greatest family in history in terms of how they were used of God. Jacob and his family were to be the tool that God used to bless the entire human race in ways that no other family has even been used. Of course, the family of Abraham and Isaac were a part of this too, but Jacob’s family was the unique one that laid the foundation with these 12 sons. In Gen. 28:13-15 God spoke to Jacob and said, “"I am the LORD, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac. I will give you and your descendants the land on which you are lying. 14 Your descendants will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south. All peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring. 15 I am with you and will watch over you wherever you go, and I will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you." The following study is the best I have found on the children of Jacob. Children Of Jacob by Wayne Blank "The grandson of Abraham, and the son of Isaac, Jacob is a key individual of Bible History. God changed Jacob's name to Israel (see Stairway To Heaven), and from his sons came the Tribes of Israel - the Israelites. Israel Jacob had 2 wives, Rachel and Leah (who were sisters, and first-cousins of Jacob), and 2 concubines, Bilhah and Zilpah, an apparently common and accepted practice of the day. Rachel and Leah did not object to the other two women because it was their idea to have more children with them (Genesis 30:3,9). Rachel - Jacob's favorite wife. She died while giving birth to Benjamin and is buried at Bethlehem. Her children were Joseph and Benjamin. Joseph - 11th-born overall. Definitely his father's favorite son, from his favorite wife, it was Joseph who was sold for slavery into Egypt by his jealous brothers (see Coat Of Many Colors). There, with God's help, he rose to become the highest official of the Pharaoh, saving the nation from the famine that was prophesied. When the rest of Jacob's family moved to Egypt to escape the famine, it was Joseph who had made their survival possible (they would remain in Egypt 400 years, eventually becoming slaves until the Exodus). While there, Joseph had 2 sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, who were themselves made into individual tribes of Israel to bring the
- 36. number back to12 - the priestly tribe of Levi was not counted separately, but was absorbed among the other tribes. Ephraim - Younger than Manasseh, he was never the less ranked higher in the family structure (Genesis 48:19). His descendants were to become a great future group of nations. Manasseh - 1st-born of Joseph, he was prophesied to become a great single nation. Benjamin - The youngest of the 12 sons. Rachel died while giving him birth. The apostle Paul (see On The Road To Damascus), who wrote much of the New Testament, is descended from Benjamin. Leah - It seems that Jacob did not have a great deal of love for her, perhaps because she became his wife by deception (Genesis 29:16-30). Never the less, Leah is the mother of the greatest number of the Tribes of Israel, and is today buried with Jacob (along with Abraham, Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah) in the high-tension area of The Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron. Her children are Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, and Israel's only recorded daughter, Dinah. Reuben - 1st-born overall. He was disqualified from his position as eldest son when he committed an act of sexual immorality with Jacob's concubine Bilhah (Genesis 35:22). Simeon - 2nd-born overall. Levi - 3rd-born overall. From Levi came the Levites who were dedicated to God's service. As such, they were later not counted as a separate tribe. Moses and Aaron and John The Baptist were descended from Levi. Judah - 4th-born overall. Perhaps the most famous of Jacob's sons, it was from Judah that the Jews are descended. Jesus Christ (see also The Chosen People), and most Christians in the earliest days of the church, were descended from Judah. A vital element for understanding Bible Prophecy is that while all Jews are Israelites, not all Israelites are Jews (just the same as all Belgians are Europeans, but not all Europeans are Belgians). There are many millions of people around the world today who are Israelites, but are not Jews. Issachar - 9th-born overall. Zebulun - 10th-born overall. Dinah - Israel's only daughter. Bilhah - Rachel's maid, it was Rachel's idea that Jacob have children with her (Genesis 30:3-6). Her children were Dan and Naphtali. Dan - 5th-born overall. Naphtali - 6th-born overall. Zilpah - Leah's maid, it was Leah's idea that Jacob have children with her (Genesis 30:9). Her children were Gad and Asher. Gad - 7th-born overall. Asher - 8th-born overall." GILL, "Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah. The first sons of Jacob by Leah. PETT, "Exodus 1:2-5
- 37. ‘Reuben, Simeon, Leviand Judah, Issachar, Zebulun and Benjamin, Dan and Naphtali, Gad and Asher. And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls, and Joseph was in Egypt already.’ The names of Jacob/Israel’s sons are now listed. This statement assumes the existence of material such as we find in Genesis 46:1-27 where the ‘seventy’ is explained. We note, however, that here the sons are placed in a different order with the sons of the full wives placed before the sons of the slave wives. “All that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls.” The number seventy indicates divine completeness, being an intensification of seven (see also Deuteronomy 10:22). But here Jacob, in contrast with Genesis 46, is seemingly not included in the seventy, unless he can be seen as being in his own loins, demonstrating again that ‘the seventy’ is an artificially contrived figure intended to denote this divine completeness, as we saw on Genesis 46. It is conveying an idea, and is not intended to be seen as a mathematical calculation. The fact is that neither reader not writer were interested in how many there were. They are interested in the number in view of what it conveyed, the divine completeness of the group. It is saying that Jacob came into Egypt in divine completeness. (It is not to be seen as ‘incorrect’. It is in fact more correct to the ancient innumerate mind than a mathematical figure would be. It certified the divine perfection of the group entering Egypt). We note also that women, children and servants were mainly ignored. Everything centred on Jacob and his male seed for they were the heads of their households. This was the foundation on which Israel was to be built, but all, males, women, children and servants would be a part of ‘the children of Israel, as they had been of their ‘father’Abraham. PULPIT, "Exodus 1:2-5 The sons of the legitimate wives Leah and Rachel are placed first, in the order of their seniority (Genesis 29:32-35; Genesis 30:18-20; Genesis 35:18); then these of the secondary wives, or concubines, also in the order of their birth (Genesis 30:6-13). The order is different from that observed in Genesis 46:1-34; and seems intended to do honour to legitimate, as opposed to secondary, wedlock. The omission of Joseph follows necessarily from the exact form of the opening phrase, "These are the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt with Jacob." 3 Issachar, Zebulun and Benjamin; GILL, "Issachar, Zebulun,.... The other two sons of Jacob, by Leah: Benjamin; the youngest of all Jacob's sons is placed here, being his son by his beloved wife Rachel. Joseph is not put into the account, because he did not go
- 38. into Egypt withJacob. 4 Dan and Naphtali; Gad and Asher. GILL, "Dan, and Naphtali, Gad, and Asher. Who are last mentioned, being sons of the concubine wives. COFFMAN, "Verses 4-6 "And when the days of weeping for him were past, Joseph spake unto the house of Pharaoh, saying, If now I have found favor in your eyes, speak, I pray you, in the ears of Pharaoh, saying, My father made me swear, saying, Lo, I die: in my grave which I have digged for me in the land of Canaan, there shalt thou bury me. Now therefore let me go up, I pray thee, and bury my father, and I will come again. And Pharaoh said, Go up, and bury thy father, according as he made thee swear." The question that arises here is why Joseph approached Pharaoh through messengers, rather than personally; and the question may not be answered dogmatically. Among the suggestions made are: "He approached Pharaoh through the priests who were principals in the house of Pharaoh, and since the burial of the dead was closely connected with their religious rites."[5] Peake thought it might have been that, "Joseph was a mourner, therefore unclean."[6] "Unshaven and unadorned, because of deep mourning," he could not see Pharaoh personally (see Genesis 41:14)."[7] "Another Pharaoh, not so friendly to Joseph, had ascended the throne."[8] Kline mentioned "diplomatic considerations,"[9] which is not unreasonable since Joseph's leaving Egypt was involved. It appears to us that Kline's suggestion is the most likely. "My grave which I have digged for me in the land of Canaan ..." This is another instance of additional information being supplied in subsequent references to an event already mentioned. Certainly there is no need for finding here some evidence of "another document"! Abraham had indeed purchased Machpelah; but, probably, upon the occasion of Leah's burial there, Jacob also prepared for himself a grave within the cave. "There is no reason to object to the idea that Jacob went into the cave and digged from the rock his own grave."[10] 5 The descendants of Jacob numbered seventy[a] in all; Joseph was already in Egypt.
- 39. Seventy was thenumber of the perfect family. The Canaanites spoke of the seventy sons of the gods. In Israel there are the seventy sons of Gideon and of Ahab. In Gen. 10 there are seventy nations in the entire world. Seventy sons equal a parallel with the world says Cassuto-“A microcosm corresponding to the macrocosm.” BARNES, "Seventy - See Gen_46:27. The object of the writer in this introductory statement is to give a complete list of the heads of separate families at the time of their settlement in Egypt. See the note at Num_26:5. GILL, "And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls,.... "Souls" are put for persons; of the number seventy, and how reckoned; see Gill on Gen_46:27. This was but a small number that went down to Egypt, when compared with that which went out of it; and that it should be compared with it is the design of its being mentioned, see Exo_12:37, for Joseph was in Egypt already; and is the reason why he is not reckoned among the sons of Jacob, that came thither with him; though rather it may be better rendered, "with Joseph who was in Egypt" (c); for he must be reckoned, and indeed his two sons also, to make up the number seventy; therefore Jonathan rightly supplies it,"with Joseph and his sons who were in Egypt,''See Gill on Gen_46:27. BENSON, "Exodus 1:5. Seventy souls — Or persons, according to the computation we had, Genesis 46:27, including Joseph and his two sons. This was just the number of the nations by which the earth was peopled, (Genesis 10.,) for when “God separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel,” Deuteronomy 32:8. ELLICOTT, "(5) All the souls . . . were seventy souls. Comp. Genesis 46:8-27. The number is made up as follows:—Jacob himself, 1; his sons, 12; his daughter, Dinah, 1; his grandsons, 51; his grand-daughter Serah, 1; his great-grandsons, 4—Total, 70. His daughters, except Dinah, and his sons’ daughters, except Serah, spoken of in Genesis 46:7, are not included. If his female descendants were, at the time of his descent into Egypt, as numerous as the males, the entire number of those who “came out of his loins” must have been 132. To form a calculation of the number of persons who entered Egypt with him, we must add the wives of his sons and grandsons, and the husbands of his daughters and granddaughters. A further liberal allowance must be also made for retainers. (See the comment on Exodus 1:1.) It is not perhaps surprising that Kurtz, taking all these classes into account, should calculate that those who entered Egypt with Jacob amounted to “several thousands” (History of The Old Covenant, vol. ii. p. 149, E.T.).
- 40. PULPIT, "Exodus 1:5 Allthe souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls. This is manifestly intended as a repetition of Genesis 46:27, and throws the reader back upon the details there adduced, which make up the exact number of "seventy souls," by the inclusion of Jacob himself, of Joseph, and of Joseph's two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh. The inaccuracy by which Jacob is counted among his own descendants, is thoroughly Oriental and Hebraistic, however opposed to Western habits of thought. To stumble at it shows a narrow and carping spirit. (Compare note on Genesis 46:15.) For Joseph was in Egypt already. Joseph, i.e; has not been mentioned with the other sons of Jacob, since he did not "come into Egypt with Jacob," but was there previously. The transfer of the clause to the commencement of the verse, which is made by the LXX; is unnecessary. 6 Now Joseph and all his brothers and all that generation died, History goes on and all the actors on the stage are replaced no matter how important they are. Change is the name of the game. Death sweeps the slate clean and all is new with different characters. Joseph is in a special coffin that was carried out of Egypt in the Exodus-Ex. 13:19. All the other brothers died in Egypt also, but in Acts 7:15-16 we read this interesting detail: “15Then Jacob went down to Egypt, where he and our fathers died. 16Their bodies were brought back to Shechem and placed in the tomb that Abraham had bought from the sons of Hamor at Shechem for a certain sum of money.” Jewish writers give us this interesting information that indicates that the life span of all these brothers was between 120 to 130 years. ``Reuben lived one hundred and twenty four years, and died two years after Joseph; Simeon lived one hundred and twenty years, and died the year after Joseph; Levi lived one hundred and thirty seven years, and died twenty four years after Joseph; Judah lived one hundred and nineteen years, Issachar one hundred and twenty two, Zebulun one hundred and twenty four, and died two years after Joseph; Dan lived one hundred and twenty seven years, Asher one hundred and twenty three years, Benjamin one hundred and eleven years, and died twenty six years before Levi; Gad lived one hundred and twenty five years, and Naphtali one hundred and thirty three years;'' This greatest family on earth was no different than the least of the families of earth, for they all had to answer to the call of death. Some lived longer than others, but none continued on into this next chapter in the history of God’s people. God’s business in the world is just like any other business in that there is always turnover,
- 41. and he hasto get new people all the time to carry on the plan. God in his nature does not change, but he has to deal with change constantly just as we all do. He needs new servants and prophets in every age, for they all have to leave the stage of history by the back door of death, and he needs new ones coming in the front door all the time to replace them. Death forces God to change his leaders in every generation, and so God experiences the reality of change. Calvin points out that this family had it made at first in Egypt and they were treated kingly for a long time, but change in leadership in Egypt led to hard times. The struggle with change was hard for a people who once had one of their own in the highest place of leadership. Now that the original family heads are all gone, there is change for the worse that becomes the major issue of this book that leads to the Exodus of God’s people from Egypt. Change can be wonderful or terrible, and God’s people taste plenty of both sides of it. CLARKE, "Joseph died, and all his brethren - That is, Joseph had now been some time dead, as also all his brethren, and all the Egyptians who had known Jacob and his twelve sons; and this is a sort of reason why the important services performed by Joseph were forgotten. GILL, "And Joseph died, and all his brethren,.... It is a notion of the Jews, that Joseph died before any of his brethren; see Gill on Gen_50:26 and they gather it from these words; but it does not necessarily follow from hence, they might die some before him and some after him; and as they were all born in about seven years' time, excepting Benjamin, they might all die within a little time of each other: according to the Jewish writers (d), the dates of their death were these,"Reuben lived one hundred and twenty four years, and died two years after Joseph; Simeon lived one hundred and twenty years, and died the year after Joseph; Levi lived one hundred and thirty seven years, and died twenty four years after Joseph; Judah lived one hundred and nineteen years, Issachar one hundred and twenty two, Zebulun one hundred and twenty four, and died two years after Joseph; Dan lived one hundred and twenty seven years, Asher one hundred and twenty three years, Benjamin one hundred and eleven years, and died twenty six years before Levi; Gad lived one hundred and twenty five years, and Naphtali one hundred and thirty three years;''but though this account of the Jews, of their times, and of the times of their death, is not to be depended upon, yet it is certain they all died in Egypt, though they were not buried there; but as Stephen says, Act_7:16 they were carried over to Shechem and interred there, either quickly after their decease, or, however, were taken along with the bones of Joseph by the children of Israel, when they departed out of Egypt: and it is also evident that they all died before the affliction and oppression of the children of Israel in Egypt began; and this account seems to be given on purpose to point this out unto us, being placed in the order it is. Levi lived the longest of them all, and the affliction
- 42. did not begintill after his death; and the Jewish chronologers say (e) that from his death to the children of Israel's going out of Egypt were one hundred and sixteen years; and they further observe (f), that it could not last more than one hundred and sixteen years, and not less than eighty seven, according to the years of Miriam: and all that generation; in which Joseph and his brethren had lived. These also died, Egyptians as well as Israelites, before the oppression began. K&D 6-7, "After the death of Joseph and his brethren and the whole of the family that had first immigrated, there occurred that miraculous increase in the number of the children of Israel, by which the blessings of creation and promise were fully realised. The words (swarmed), and point back to Gen_1:28 and Gen_8:17, and to in Gen_18:18. “The land was filled with them,” i.e., the land of Egypt, particularly Goshen, where they were settled (Gen_47:11). The extra- ordinary fruitfulness of Egypt in both men and cattle is attested not only by ancient writers, but by modern travellers also (vid., Aristotelis hist. animal. vii. 4, 5; Columella de re rust. iii. 8; Plin. hist. n. vii. 3; also Rosenmüller a. und n. Morgenland i. p. 252). This blessing of nature was heightened still further in the case of the Israelites by the grace of the promise, so that the increase became extraordinarily great (see the comm. on Exo_12:37). CALVIN, "6.And Joseph died. The Rabbins ignorantly conclude from this expression that Joseph died first of his brethren, whereas it is evident that the others were passed over, and his name was expressly mentioned to do him honor, as being the only one then in authority. How long they survived their father, Moses does not say, but only marks the beginning of the change, — as much as to say, the Israelites were humanely treated for a considerable space of time; so that the condition of those who went down with Jacob was tolerable, since, free from all injustice and tyranny, they tranquilly enjoyed the hospitality accorded to them. At the same time, he gives us to understand that, when all that generation was gone, the desire and the memory of the land of Canaan, which they had never seen, might have died out of the minds of their descendants, if they had not been forcibly aroused to seek after it. And unquestionably, since that people were forgetful and careless of meditating on God’s mercies, God could not have better provided for their salvation than by allowing them to be cruelly tried and afflicted; otherwise, as though their origin had been in Egypt, they might have preferred to have remained for ever in their nest, and by that indifference the hope of the promised heritage would have been effaced from their hearts. COKE, "Exodus 1:6. And Joseph died, and all his brethren, &c.— The sacred historian means to say here, that Joseph had now been some time dead, with all his brethren, as well as all the Egyptians who had seen and known him, and were
- 43. convinced of theobligations which the whole country lay under to him. This preamble, says Calmet, refers to the reign of the new king, mentioned Exodus 1:8 the commencement of whose reign may be fixed fifty-eight years after the death of Joseph. MACLAREN, "DEATH AND GROWTH Exodus 1:6 - - Exodus 1:7. These remarkable words occur in a short section which makes the link between the Books of Genesis and of Exodus. The writer recapitulates the list of the immigrants into Egypt, in the household of Jacob, and then, as it were, having got them there, he clears the stage to prepare for a new set of actors. These few words are all that he cares to tell us about a period somewhat longer than that which separates us from the great Protestant Reformation. He notes but two processes-silent dropping away and silent growth. ‘Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.’ Plant by plant the leaves drop, and the stem rots and its place is empty. Seed by seed the tender green spikelets pierce the mould, and the field waves luxuriant in the breeze and the sunshine. ‘The children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly.’ I. Now, then, let us look at this twofold process which is always at work-silent dropping away and silent growth. It seems to me that the writer, probably unconsciously, being profoundly impressed with certain features of that dropping away, reproduces them most strikingly in the very structure of his sentence: ‘Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.’ The uniformity of the fate, and the separate times at which it befell individuals, are strongly set forth in the clauses, which sound like the threefold falls of earth on a coffin. They all died, but not all at the same time. They went one by one, one by one, till, at the end, they were all gone. The two things that appeal to our imagination, and ought to appeal to our consciences and wills, in reference to the succession of the generations of men, are given very strikingly, I think, in the language of my text-namely, the stealthy assaults of death upon the individuals, and its final complete victory. If any of you were ever out at sea, and looked over a somewhat stormy water, you will have noticed, I dare say, how strangely the white crests of the breakers disappear, as if some force, acting from beneath, had plucked them under, and over the spot where they gleamed for a moment runs the blue sea. So the waves break over the great ocean of time; I might say, like swimmers pulled under by sharks, man after man, man after man, gets twitched down, till at the end-’Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.’ There is another process going on side by side with this. In the vegetable world, spring and autumn are two different seasons: May rejoices in green leaves and opening buds, and nests with their young broods; but winter days are coming when the greenery drops and the nests are empty, and the birds flown. But the singular and impressive thing {which we should see if we were not so foolish and blind} which the writer of our text lays his finger upon is that at the same time the two opposite processes of death and renewal are going on, so that if you look at the facts from the one side it seems nothing but a charnel-house and a Golgotha that we live
- 44. in, while, seenfrom the other side, it is a scene of rejoicing, budding young life, and growth. You get these two processes in the closest juxtaposition in ordinary life. There is many a house where there is a coffin upstairs and a cradle downstairs. The churchyard is often the children’s playground. The web is being run down at the one end and woven at the other. Wherever we look- ‘Every moment dies a man, Every moment one is born.’ ‘Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation. And the children of Israel . . .multiplied . . .exceedingly.’ But there is another thought here than that of the contemporaneousness of the two processes, and that is, as it is written on John Wesley’s monument in Westminster Abbey, ‘God buries the workmen and carries on the work.’ The great Vizier who seemed to be the only protection of Israel is lying in ‘a coffin in Egypt.’And all these truculent brothers of his that had tormented him, they are gone, and the whole generation is swept away. What of that? They were the depositories of God’s purposes for a little while. Are God’s purposes dead because the instruments that in part wrought them are gone? By no means. If I might use a very vulgar proverb, ‘There are as good fish in the sea as ever came out of it,’ especially if God casts the net. So when the one generation has passed away there is the other to take up the work. Thus the text is a fitting introduction to the continuance of the history of the further unfolding of God’s plan which occupies the Book of Exodus. II. Such being the twofold process suggested by this text, let us next note the lessons which it enforces. In the first place, let us be quite sure that we give it its due weight in our thoughts and lives. Let us be quite sure that we never give an undue weight to the one half of the whole truth. There are plenty of people who are far too much, constitutionally and {perhaps by reason of a mistaken notion of religion} religiously, inclined to the contemplation of the more melancholy side of these truths; and there are a great many people who are far too exclusively disposed to the contemplation of the other. But the bulk of us never trouble our heads about either the one or the other, but go on, forgetting altogether that swift, sudden, stealthy, skinny hand that, if I might go back to my former metaphor, is put out to lay hold of the swimmer and then pull him underneath the water, and which will clasp us by the ankles one day and drag us down. Do you ever think about it? If not, surely, surely you are leaving out of sight one of what ought to be the formative elements in our lives. And then, on the other hand, when our hearts are faint, or when the pressure of human mortality-our own, that of our dear ones, or that of others-seems to weigh us down, or when it looks to us as if God’s work was failing for want of people to do it, let us remember the other side-’And the children of Israel . . .increased . . .and waxed exceeding mighty; . . .and the land was filled with them.’ So we shall keep the middle path, which is the path of safety, and so avoid the folly of extremes. But then, more particularly, let me say that this double contemplation of the two processes under which we live ought to stimulate us to service. It ought to say to us, ‘Do you cast in your lot with that work which is going to be carried on through the ages. Do you see to it that your little task is in the same line of direction as the great
- 45. purpose which Godis working out-the increasing purpose which runs through the ages.’An individual life is a mere little backwater, as it were, in the great ocean. But its minuteness does not matter, if only the great tidal wave which rolls away out there, in the depths and the distance amongst the fathomless abysses, tells also on the tiny pool far inland and yet connected with the sea by some narrow, long fiord. If my little life is part of that great ocean, then the ebb and flow will alike act on it and make it wholesome. If my work is done in and for God, I shall never have to look back and say, as we certainly shall say one day, either here or yonder, unless our lives be thus part of the divine plan, ‘What a fool I was! Seventy years of toiling and moiling and effort and sweat, and it has all come to nothing; like a long algebraic sum that covers pages of intricate calculations, and the pluses and minuses just balance each other; and the net result is a great round nought.’ So let us remember the twofold process, and let it stir us to make sure that ‘in our embers’ shall be ‘something that doth live,’ and that not ‘Nature,’ but something better- God-’remembers what was so fugitive.’ It is not fugitive if it is a part of the mighty whole. But further, let this double contemplation make us very content with doing insignificant and unfinished work. Joseph might have said, when he lay dying: ‘Well! perhaps I made a mistake after all. I should not have brought this people down here, even if I have been led hither. I do not see that I have helped them one step towards the possession of the land.’ Do you remember the old proverb about certain people who should not see half-finished work? All our work in this world has to be only what the physiologists call functional. God has a great scheme running on through ages. Joseph gives it a helping hand for a time, and then somebody else takes up the running, and carries the purpose forward a little further. A great many hands are placed on the ropes that draw the car of the Ruler of the world. And one after another they get stiffened in death; but the car goes on. We should be contented to do our little bit of the work. Never mind whether it is complete and smooth and rounded or not. Never mind whether it can be isolated from the rest and held up, and people can say, ‘He did that entire thing unaided.’ That is not the way for most of us. A great many threads go to make the piece of cloth, and a great many throws of the shuttle to weave the web. A great many bits of glass make up the mosaic pattern; and there is no reason for the red bit to pride itself on its fiery glow, or the grey bit to boast of its silvery coolness. They are all parts of the pattern, and as long as they keep their right places they complete the artist’s design. Thus, if we think of how ‘one soweth and another reapeth,’ we may be content to receive half-done works from our fathers, and to hand on unfinished tasks to them that come after us. It is not a great trial of a man’s modesty, if he lives near Jesus Christ, to be content to do but a very small bit of the Master’s work. And the last thing that I would say is, let this double process going on all round us lift our thoughts to Him who lives for ever. Moses dies; Joshua catches the torch from his hand. And the reason why he catches the torch from his hand is because God said, ‘As I was with Moses so I will be with thee.’ Therefore we have to turn away in our contemplations from the mortality that has swallowed up so much wisdom and strength, eloquence and power, which the Church or our own hearts
- 46. seem so sorelyto want: and, whilst we do, we have to look up to Jesus Christ and say, ‘He lives! He lives! No man is indispensable for public work or for private affection and solace so long at there is a living Christ for us to hold by.’ Dear brethren, we need that conviction for ourselves often. When life seems empty and hope dead, and nothing is able to fill the vacuity or still the pain, we have to look to the vision of the Lord sitting on the empty throne, high and lifted up, and yet very near the aching and void heart. Christ lives, and that is enough. So the separated workers in all the generations, who did their little bit of service, like the many generations of builders who laboured through centuries upon the completion of some great cathedral, will be united at the last; ‘and he that soweth, and he that reapeth, shall rejoice together’ in the harvest which was produced by neither the sower nor the reaper, but by Him who blessed the toils of both. ‘Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation’; but Jesus lives, and therefore His people ‘grow and multiply,’ and His servants’ work is blessed; and at the end they shall be knit together in the common joy of the great harvest, and of the day when the headstone is brought forth with shoutings of ‘Grace! grace unto it.’ PETT, "Exodus 1:6 ‘And Joseph died, and all his brothers and all that generation.’ So quickly do we pass over the lives of the children of Israel and their households in Egypt. Joseph died, his brothers died, all that generation died one by one. Time is passing. Women, children and servants are included in ‘all that generation. During that time they had no doubt as a whole prospered and enjoyed great freedoms. But they all died. We can compare this emphasis here with Genesis 5, 11, where it is continually stressed, ‘and he died’. Death is writ large in human existence in the Scriptures. It was the result of the Fall, and it still applied to all. BI, "Joseph died, and all his brethren. The death of a whole family I. It was a very large family II. It was a very diversified family. 1. They were diversified in their sympathies. 2. They were diversified in social position. III. It was a very tried family. IV. It was a very influential family. V. It was a very religiously privileged family. Lessons: 1. A rebuke to family pride. 2. A warning against seeking satisfaction in family joys. 3. A lesson as to the right use of family relationships. Live together as those who must die.
- 47. 4. Some strongreasons for expecting family meetings after death. (1) Such different characters cannot admit exactly the same fate. Extinction is either too good for the sinner, or else a strange reward for the saint. (2) Family affection seems too strong to be thus quenched. (U. R. Thomas.) The universal characteristic The succession of generations among the children of men has been, from Homer downwards, likened to that of the leaves among the trees of the forest. The foliage of one summer, withering gradually away, and strewing the earth with its wrecks, has its place supplied by the exuberance of the following spring. But there is one point in which the analogy does not hold,—there is one difference between the race of leaves and the race of men: between the leaves of successive summers an interval of desolation intervenes, and “the bare and wintry woods” emphatically mark the passage from one season to another. But there is no such pause in the succession of the generations of men. Insensibly they melt and shade into one another: an old man dies, and a child is born; daily and hourly there is a death and a birth; and imperceptibly, by slow degrees, the actors in life’s busy scene are changed. Hence the full force of this thought—“One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh”—is not ordinarily felt. The first view of this verse that occurs to us is its striking significance and force as a commentary on the history of which it so abruptly and emphatically announces the close. The previous narrative presents to us a busy scene—an animated picture; and here, as if by one single stroke, all is reduced to a blank. It is as if having gazed on ocean when it bears on its broad bosom a gallant and well-manned fleet—bending gracefully to its rising winds, and triumphantly stemming its swelling waves—you looked out again, and at the very next glance beheld the wide waste of waters reposing in dark and horrid peace over the deep-buried wrecks of the recent storm. “And all that generation”: How startling a force is there in this awful brevity, this compression and abridgment—the names and histories of millions brought within the compass of so brief a statement of a single fact concerning them—that they all died! Surely it seems as if the Lord intended by this bill of mortality for a whole race, which His own Spirit has framed, to stamp as with a character of utter mockery and insignificance the most momentous distinctions and interests of time; these all being engulfed and swallowed up in the general doom of death, which ushers in the one distinction of eternity. I. Let us ponder the announcement as it respects the individual—“Joseph died.” His trials, with their many aggravations—his triumphs, with all their glories— were alike brief and evanescent; and his eventful career ended, as the obscurest and most commonplace lifetime must end—for “Joseph died.” Joseph is at home, the idol of a fond parent. Ah I dote not, thou venerable sire, on thy fair and dutiful child. Remember how soon it may be said of him, and how certainly it must be said of him, that “Joseph died.” Joseph is in trouble—betrayed,
- 48. persecuted, distressed, aprisoner, a slave. But let him not be disquieted above measure. It is but a little while, and it shall be said of him that “Joseph died.” Joseph is exalted—he is high in wealth, in honour, and in power. But why should all his glory and his joy elate him? It will be nothing to him soon—when it comes to be said of him that “Joseph died.” Ah! there is but one of Joseph’s many distinctions, whether of character or of fortune, that does not shrivel beside this stern announcement. The simplicity of his trust in God, the steadfastness of his adherence to truth and holiness, the favour of Heaven, his charity out of a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfeigned—these will stand the shock of collision with this record of his decease. II. “And all his brethren.” They too all died, and the vicissitudes of their family history came to an end in the silent tomb. “Joseph died, and all his brethren.” Ah! how intimately should this reflection have knit them together in unity of interest, of affection, and of aim! The tie of a common origin is scarcely stronger or closer than the tie of a common doom. The friend, the beloved brother who has gone, has acquired, by his death, new value in your esteem—a new and sacred claim to your regard. Now for the first time you discover how dear he should have been, how dear he was, to your hearts—dearer far than you had ever thought. How fondly do you dwell on all his attractions and excellencies! Hew frivolous are all former causes of misunderstanding, all excuses for indifference, now seen to be I And whither are they gone? And what are their views now, and what their feelings, on the matters which formed the subject of their familiar inter-course here? Are they united in the region of blessedness above? Or is there a fearful separation, and are there some of their number on the other side of the great gulf? III. “And all that generation.” The tide of mortality rolls on in a wider stream. It sweeps into the one vast ocean of eternity all the members of a family—all the families of a race. The distinctions alike of individuals and of households are lost. Every landmark is laid low. Some are gone in tender years of childhood, unconscious of life’s sins and sufferings—some in grey-headed age, weighed down by many troubles. Some have perished by the hand of violence—some by natural decay. And another generation now fills the stage—a generation that, in all its vast circle of families, can produce not one individual to link it with the buried race on whose ashes it is treading. On a smaller scale, you have experienced something of what we now describe. In the sad season of bereavement, how have you felt your pain embittered by the contrast between death reigning in your heart and home, and bustling life going on all around! In the prospect, too, of your own departure, does not this thought form an element of the dreariness of death, that when you are gone, and laid in the silent tomb, others will arise that knew not you?—your removal will scarce occasion even a momentary interruption in the onward course and incessant hurry of affairs, and your loss will be but as that of a drop of water from the tide that rolls on in its career as mighty and as majestical as ever. But here, it is a whole generation, with all its families, that is engulfed in one unmeasured tomb! And lo! the earth is still all astir with the same activities, all gay with the same pomps and pageantries, all engrossed with the same vanities and follies, and, alas! the same sins also, that
- 49. have been beguilingand disappointing the successive races of its inhabitants since the world began! And there is another common lot—another general history —another universal characteristic: “After death, the judgment.” Joseph rises again, “and all his brethren, and all that generation.” And they all stand before the judgment-seat. There is union then. The small and the great are there; the servant and his master—all are brought together. But for what? What a solemn contrast have we here! Death unites after separation: the judgment unites in order to separation. Death, closing the drama of time, lets the ample curtain fall upon its whole scenery and all its actors. The judgment, opening the drama of eternity, discloses scenery and actors once more entire. (R. S. Candlish, D. D.) Death I. Death removes the most useful men—“Joseph.” 1. He had instructed his brethren. 2. He had enriched his father. 3. He had saved his nation. 4. He had taught the world an eternal lesson. II. Death relieves the largest families—“All his brethren.” III. Death relieves the proudest nations. 1. Pitiable. 2. Irremediable. 3. Admonitory. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Death’s disciplinary power God deprives the Church of her comfort and stay— 1. That she may gain the power of self-reliance. 2. That she may show her ability to be independent of all human instrumentalities. 3. That she may move into the exigencies of the future. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Death common to all In one of Nathaniel Hawthorne’s note-books there is a remark as to qualifying men by some common quality or circumstance that should bring together people the most unlike in other respects, and make a brotherhood and sisterhood of them. “First by their sorrows; for instance, whenever there are any, whether in fair mansion or hotel, who are mourning the loss of friends. Secondly, all who
- 50. have the samemaladies, whether they lie under damask canopies, or on straw pallets, or in the-wards of hospitals. Then proceed to generalize and classify all the world together, as none can claim other exemption from either sorrow, sin, or disease; and if they could, yet death, like a great parent, comes and sweeps them all through one darksome portal—all his children.” (H. O. Mackey.) Death admonitory There is a bird peculiar to Ireland, called the cock of the wood, remarkable for the fine flesh and folly thereof. All the difficulty to kill them, is to find them out, otherwise a mean marksman may easily despatch them. They fly in woods in flocks, and if one of them be shot, the rest remove not but to the next bough, or tree at the farthest, and there stand staring at the shooter, till the whole covey be destroyed; yet as foolish as this bird is, it is wise enough to be the emblem of the wisest man in the point of mortality. Death sweeps away one, and one, and one, here one, and there another, and all the rest remain no whir moved, or minding of it, till at last a whole generation is consumed and brought to nothing. (J. Spencer.) Death’s impartiality Death levels the highest mountains with the lowest valleys. He mows down the fairest lilies as well as the foulest thistles. The robes of illustrious princes and the rags of homely peasants are both laid aside in the wardrobe of the grave. (Archbp. Seeker.) Meditate on death There was a motto on the walls of the Delphian Temple, ascribed to Chile, one of the seven wise men of Greece—“Consider the end.” Death levels all distinctions As trees growing in the wood are known—some by difference of their trunks, and some by the properties of their branches, leaves, flowers, and fruits; but this knowledge is had of them only whilst they stand, grow, and are not consumed; for if they be committed to the fire, and are turned into ashes, they cannot be known. It is impossible that, when the ashes of divers kinds of trees are mingled together, the tall pine should be discerned from the great oak, or the mighty poplar from a low shrub, or any one tree from another; even so men, whilst they live in the wood of this world, are known—some by the stock of their ancestors, some by the flourishing leaves of their words and eloquence, some in the flowers of beauty, and some in the shrub of honesty, many by their savage ignorance, and some by their kindness; but when death doth bring them into dust, and has mixed all together, then their ashes cannot be known—then there is no difference between
- 51. the mighty princesof the world and the poor souls that are not accounted of. (Cawdray.) 7 but the Israelites were exceedingly fruitful; they multiplied greatly, increased in numbers and became so numerous that the land was filled with them. Again we see that birth is the human answer to death. All the individuals of that first generation of God’s people died, but the nation as a whole was larger than ever. Births continue all through history to outnumber deaths, so that there is always more left that those who have left. Death takes the individuals, but God’s people continue to grow, and this is the key to God’s plan to have a people on earth that are great in number as well as in quality of life. Numerical growth has always been important to God’s plan. Numbers do matter to God, and so adding to the population is an important job of those who call themselves children of God. He loves a large family, and can never have too many kids. God’s philosophy is the more the merrier and the bigger the better. Large families are the Biblical ideal, for it was with one large family of Jacob that God began his development of a people he called his own. BUT-everyone dies, yet the people grow in numbers. More are born than die. Cradles are built more often than coffins. On John Wesley’s monument in Westminister Abbey are these words, “God buries the workman and carries on the work.” The word for multiplied is usually used for the swarming multiplication of frogs and fish, or other animal life, says Durham. It is only used of humans here and in Gen. 9:1-7. Here is a teeming swarm. Jews were reproducing like a copying machine. This reveals that life was full and there was abundant food. Fertility was among them like the fertility of the Nile. Egypt was the womb in which the people of Israel developed for 400 years. Growing until ready for birth, which was the Exodus. They came out of Egypt and were from then on and independent people. The first promise of a great number of people was fulfilled and now they needed the fulfillment of the promise for a new land. They grew large because of long lives and multiple wives. Hebrew men took Egyptian wives just as Joseph did. Converts from the Egyptians were many because of their love for Joseph. In Exodus 12:37-38 we see a mixed multitude because Jews intermarried with Egyptians. BARNES, "In no province does the population increase so rapidly as in that
- 52. which was occupiedby the Israelites. See the note at Gen_47:6. At present it has more flocks and herds than any province in Egypt, and more fishermen, though many villages are deserted. Until the accession of the new king, the relations between the Egyptians and the Israelites were undoubtedly friendly. The expressions used in this verse imply the lapse of a considerable period after the death of Joseph. The land was filled with them - i. e. the district allotted to them Gen_45:10. CLARKE, "The children of Israel were fruitful - paru, a general term, signifying that they were like healthy trees, bringing forth an abundance of fruit. And increased - yishretsu, they increased like fishes, as the original word implies. See Gen_1:20 (note), and the note there. Abundantly - yirbu, they multiplied; this is a separate term, and should not have been used as an adverb by our translators. And waxed exceeding mighty - vaiyaatsmu bimod meod, and they became strong beyond measure - superlatively, superlatively - so that the land (Goshen) was filled with them. This astonishing increase was, under the providence of God, chiefly owing to two causes: 1. The Hebrew women were exceedingly fruitful, suffered very little in parturition, and probably often brought forth twins. 2. There appear to have been no premature deaths among them. Thus in about two hundred and fifteen years they were multiplied to upwards of 600,000, independently of old men, women, and children. GILL, "And the children of Israel were fruitful,.... In their offspring; became like fruitful trees, as the word signifies: and increased abundantly; like creeping things, or rather like fishes, which increase very much, see Gen_1:20. and multiplied; became very numerous, whereby the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were fulfilled: and waxed exceeding mighty; were hale, and strong, of good constitutions, able bodied men, and so more dreaded by the Egyptians: a heap of words is here used to express the vast increase of the people of Israel in Egypt: and the land was filled with them; not the whole land of Egypt, but the land of Goshen: at first they were seated in a village in that country, but now they were
- 53. spread throughout thetowns and cities in it. JAMISON, "children of Israel were fruitful — They were living in a land where, according to the testimony of an ancient author, mothers produced three and four sometimes at a birth; and a modern writer declares “the females in Egypt, as well among the human race as among animals, surpass all others in fruitfulness.” To this natural circumstance must be added the fulfilment of the promise made to Abraham. CALVIN, "7.And the children of Israel were fruitful. (8) To what an extent they increased Moses relates in the 12th chapter, viz., to the number of 600,000, besides women and children; which was certainly an incredible increase for so short a time. For, though 430 years be counted from the date of the covenant with Abraham to the departure of the people, it is clear that half of them had elapsed before Jacob went down into Egypt; so that the Israelites sojourned in that land only 200 years, or little more — say ten years more. How then could it come to pass that in so short a time a single family could have grown into so many myriads? It would have been an immense and extraordinary increase if 10,000 had sprung from every tribe; but this more than quadruples that number. Wherefore certain sceptics, perceiving that the relation of Moses surpasses the ordinary ratio of human propagation, and estimating the power of God by their own sense and experience, altogether refuse to credit it. For such is the perverseness of men, that they always seek for opportunities of despising or disallowing the works of God; such, too, is their audacity and insolence that they shamelessly apply all the acuteness they possess to detract from his glory. If their reason assures them that what is related as a miracle is possible, they attribute it to natural causes, — so is God robbed and defrauded of the praise his power deserves; if it is incomprehensible to them, they reject it as a prodigy. (9) But if they cannot bring themselves to acknowledge the interference of God except in matters by the magnitude of which they are struck with astonishment, why do they not persuade themselves of the truth of whatever common sense repudiates? They ask how this can be, as if it were reasonable that the hand of God should be so restrained as to be unable to do anything which exceeds the bounds of human comprehension. Whereas, because we are naturally so slow to profit by his ordinary operations, it is rather necessary that we should be awakened into admiration by extraordinary dealings. Let us conclude, then, that since Moses does not here speak of the natural course of human procreation, but celebrates a miracle unheard of before, by which God ratified the truth of his promise, we should judge of it perversely, and maliciously, if we measure it by our own feeble reason, instead of meditating with reverence upon what far transcends all our senses. Let us rather remember how God reproves his unbelieving people by the Prophet Isaiah. ( Isaiah 51:1) For, in order to prove that it would not be difficult for Him, in spite of the small number to which the Israelites were reduced, to produce a great multitude, He bids them look into “the hole of the pit from whence they were digged,” viz., to Abraham, and Sarah that bare them, whom he multiplied though alone, and childless. Certain Rabbins, after their
- 54. custom, imagine thatfour infants were produced at a birth; for as often as they meet with any point which perplexes them, they gratuitously invent whatever suits them, and then obtrude their imaginations as indubitable facts; and proceed foolishly, and unseasonably, to discuss that this is physically probable. There are Christians, too, who, with little consideration, have imitated them here, contending that what Moses describes is in accordance with experience, because the fecundity of certain nations has been almost as great. We indeed sometimes see confirmed by remarkable examples what the Psalmist says, ( Psalms 107:36,) that God “maketh the hungry to dwell” in the wilderness, “that they may prepare a city for habitation, and sow the fields, and plant vineyards, which may yield fruits of increase; and he blesseth them also, so that they are multiplied greatly;” as also, that “He turneth a fruitful land into barrenness,” and strips it of inhabitants; but the design of Moses is to shew, that there never was any fecundity, which was not inferior to the increase of the people of Israel. Hence his comparison between the seventy souls, and the multitude which proceeded from them, that this special blessing of God might be distinguished from ordinary cases; hence too the accumulated expressions, which undoubtedly are meant for amplification, that “they were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them.” For the repetition of the adverb, Meod, Meod, marks an unusual abundance, Nor do I reject the conjecture of some, that in the word , sharatz, there is a metaphor taken from fishes, but I know not whether it is very sound, since the word is used generally for any multiplication. BENSON, "Exodus 1:7. And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly — Like fishes or insects, as one of the words here used signifies, and being generally healthful and strong, they waxed exceeding mighty, so that the land was filled with them — At least Goshen, their own allotment. This wonderful increase was the product of the promise long before made to their fathers. From the call of Abraham, when God first told him he would make him a great nation, to the deliverance of his seed out of Egypt, were four hundred and thirty years; during the first two hundred and fifteen of which they were increased to seventy, but in the latter half, those seventy multiplied to six hundred thousand fighting men. COKE, "Exodus 1:7. The children of Israel were fruitful, &c.— A variety of terms, nearly synonimous, are used in this verse, to express the prodigious increase of the children of Israel; with whom, says the sacred writer, the land, i.e. of Goshen, was filled. Great increase of people naturally produces power; and so we read, that they not only increased abundantly, but also waxed exceeding mighty: so that the fears of the Egyptians were awakened. Moses, both here and in Deuteronomy 10:22 remarks this increase as miraculous, and owing to the providence of GOD, who made them thus fruitful amidst all the oppression and efforts of their enemies to prevent it. Population however, in Egypt, was naturally very rapid, according to the testimony of the best writers; and there was no country in the world, where children were more easily brought up, says Diodorus, both on account of the good temperature of the air, and the great abundance of all things necessary to life. Let it be remembered that upwards of six hundred thousand fighting men of the children of Israel,
- 55. (Numbers 1:46.) cameout of Egypt; and, in this view, it will be deemed no hyperbole to say, that the land was filled with them. Calculators have shewn, that from seventy persons, within two hundred and fifteen years, such a number as the Mosaic history relates, separate from any thing miraculous, might very easily have been produced. COFFMAN, "Verses 7-11 "And Joseph went up to bury his father; and with him went up all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his house, and all the elders of the land of Egypt, and all the house of Joseph and his brethren, and his father's house: only their little ones, and their flocks, and their herds, they left in the land of Goshen. And there went up with him both chariots and horsemen: and it was a very great company. And they came to the threshing floor of Atad, which is beyond the Jordan, and there they lamented with a very great and sore lamentation: and he made a mourning for his father seven days. And when the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, saw the mourning in the floor of Atad, they said, This is a grievous mourning to the Egyptians: wherefore the name of it was called Abel-mizraim, which is beyond the Jordan." The sheer size of this great pageant was most impressive. The houses of Jacob, and the brothers, especially that of Joseph, and of all of Pharaoh's principal ministers and officers constituted in the aggregate an immense company. It is most apparent in this that Pharaoh did not grudgingly consent for Joseph to leave the capital and go to the land of Canaan to bury Jacob, but on the other hand supported the mission approvingly. Josephus tells us that all of this was done "at great expense."[11] In the Old Testament, the perspective "beyond" practically always means "west of"; and therefore it must be understood here as an indication that the funeral cortege entered the land of Canaan from the eastward. We are not told why this circuitous route was taken, but it is certain that good reasons dictated this. "There may have been some political complications had this company taken the usual well-traveled route to Canaan."[12] Keil did not accept the conclusion received here, namely that the floor of Atad was west of the Jordan, basing his objection on the fact that Genesis 50:12 states that Jacob's sons "carried him into the land of Canaan," but what Keil overlooked is the fact that in all probability Jacob's sons (who carried their father throughout the journey) had already done this, the thing meant in Genesis 50:12 being that they carried him further into the land of Canaan to the cave of Machpelah. This slight misplacement of such a detail as this is absolutely in keeping with the Biblical style throughout. In fact, Genesis 50:12 and Genesis 50:13 are a summary of what was done. ELLICOTT, "(7) The children of Israel were fruitful.—A great multiplication is evidently intended. Egypt was a particularly healthy country, and both men and animals were abnormally prolific there. Grain was so plentiful that want, which is the ordinary check on population, was almost unknown. The Egyptian kings for many years would look favourably on the growth of the Hebrew people, which strengthened their eastern frontier, the quarter on which they were most open to
- 56. attack. God’s blessingwas, moreover, upon the people, which he had promised to make “as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea-shore, for multitude” (see Genesis 22:17). On the actual extent of the multiplication and the time that it occupied, see the comment on Exodus 12:37-41. The land—i.e., where they dwelt—Goshen (Genesis 47:4-6)—which seems to have been the more eastern portion of the Delta. PETT, "Exodus 1:7 ‘And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and expanded exceedingly greatly, and the land was filled with them.’ However, although death continued, God was with them and conditions were ripe for their expansion. All they required was provided for them while Joseph was alive and by the time he died they were well established and not needing favours. As a result of his wisdom they were mainly sited in the land of Goshen in the delta region where many Semites could be found who had sought shelter in Egypt. The result was their great expansion in numbers both by natural birth and by taking on further retainers and household servants. So much so that the land was ‘filled with them’. They seemed to be everywhere. God was prospering them. We can compare here the picture in Genesis 10 which was also a picture of expansion following deaths. That too is a picture of huge expansion. Life triumphed over death. God’s power counteracted the power of the grave as His purposes moved forward. “The children of Israel.” This term is now gradually crystallising to signify them as a people, but always contains within it the reminder of their ‘descent’ or close family connection with Jacob/Israel, who represented the fathers to whom the covenant promises were given. They were the ‘children’ of the covenants God had made with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But this does not indicate that they were literally all descended directly from Jacob/Israel. They were ‘children’ in that they were members of his clan, and the expression incorporated all who joined the households. Note the multiplication of words to describe their increase. It was clearly well beyond the ordinary. ‘Fruitful -- increased abundantly -- multiplied -- expanded exceedingly greatly -- the land was filled’. This being so we must ask why they did not now return to their homeland. The visit to Egypt had been in order to escape famine, and once Joseph was dead they had no reason for staying there. Certainly Joseph had expected them to return (Genesis 50:24-25). But the pleasures and ease of Egypt seemingly seemed to offer more than the land which had been promised to their forefathers, and they remained in Egypt. It was not that they were not warned. God had already pointed out that in Egypt only suffering awaited (Genesis 15:13-14), and we might therefore have expected them to take heed. But they did not do so, and thus by their dilatoriness ensured the
- 57. fulfilment of theprophecy. We see here the two sides of God’s sovereignty. On the one hand the quiet call to them based on His promises to Abraham was to trust God and go home, on the other was the fact that God had already prophesied that they would not do so (Genesis 15:13-14). The whole history of salvation is cluttered with similar failures of God’s people to obey Him, and His merciful and final triumph over their disobedience as He patiently brings about His will. It is all a part of His sovereign working. His people are foolish and disobedient and He regularly has to drag them kicking and screaming into salvation. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:7 And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them. Ver. 7. Increased abundantly.] Heb., Spawned, and bred swiftly, as fishes. Trogus author a firmat in Aegypto septenos uno utero simul gigni. Egypt is a fruitful country: it is ordinary there, saith Trogus, to have seven children at a birth. Solinus gives the reason, quod faetifero potu Nilus, non tantum terrarum, sed etiam hominum faecundat arva; - the river Nile, whereof they drink, makes men as well as fields fruitful. But this increase of the Israelites was also by the extraordinary blessing of God, that they might "become a mighty and populous nation." [Deuteronomy 26:5] MCGEE, "Seventy souls of Jacob entered Egypt (Genesis 46:27). It is conservatively estimated that 2,100,000 left Egypt at the time of the Exodus. Although we cannot be certain of dating during this early period, it would seem that Joseph entered Egypt under the Hyksos or shepherd kings. This was the 15th to 17th dynasty. They were Semitic conquerors from Mesopotamia, Bedouin princes from the desert. They were related to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Actually, the Israelites were their only friends, as they were hated by Egyptians. Amasis, military leader of Egypt, led a rebellion against the Hyksos kings, deposed them, and was made Pharaoh. It was Ramses II in this line who was the Pharaoh of the oppression and the one “who knew not Joseph.” Moses’ life is divided into three 40-year periods: 1. 40 years in Pharaoh’s palace in Egypt, 2. 40 years in the desert in Midian, 3. 40 years in the wilderness as leader of Israel. DEFFINBAUGH, "Most importantly, this portion of the introduction to the Book of Exodus (Exod. 1:1-6) links the existence and rapid growth of Israel as a nation to the covenant which God made with Abraham (Gen. 12:1-3; 15:12ff.), and which He reiterated to the patriarchs (Isaac: Gen. 26:2-5, 24; Jacob: Gen. 28:13-15). The sons of
- 58. Israel and theirfamilies numbered 70 (v. 5) when they arrived in Egypt, 8 a mere clan. But when the “sons of Israel” leave Egypt, they do so as a great nation (Exod. 1:7, 12, 20; 12:37). Verse 7 fills in a nearly 400-year gap covering the period from the death of Joseph 9 to the time of the Exodus. If it were not for this verse and the remainder of chapter one, we would know little of this period of time. A moment’s reflection will cause us to remember that there are other periods in history which are likewise neglected in the biblical record. There is, for example, the 400-year period of silence between the post-exilic prophets (Malachi, for example), and the books of the New Testament. 10 There is also the period of silence from the time of the close of the New Testament canon (the Book of Revelation) to the present day. EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMMENTARY, "GOD IN HISTORY. Exodus 1:7. With the seventh verse, the new narrative, the course of events treated in the main body of this book, begins. And we are at once conscious of this vital difference between Exodus and Genesis,-- that we have passed from the story of men and families to the history of a nation. In the first book the Canaanites and Egyptians concern us only as they affect Abraham or Joseph. In the second book, even Moses himself concerns us only for the sake of Israel. He is in some respects a more imposing and august character than any who preceded him; but what we are told is no longer the story of a soul, nor are we pointed so much to the development of his spiritual life as to the work he did, the tyrant overthrown, the nation moulded, the law and the ritual imposed on it. For Jacob it was a discovery that God was in Bethel as well as in his father's house. But now the Hebrew nation was to learn that He could plague the gods of Egypt in their stronghold, that His way was in the sea, that Horeb in Arabia was the Mount of God, that He could lead them like a horse through the wilderness. When Jacob in Peniel wrestles with God and prevails, he wins for himself a new name, expressive of the higher moral elevation which he has attained. But when Moses meets God in the bush, it is to receive a commission for the public benefit; and there is no new name for Moses, but a fresh revelation of God for the nation to learn. And in all their later history we feel that the national life which it unfolds was nourished and sustained by these glorious early experiences, the most unique as well as the most inspiriting on record. Here, then, a question of great moment is suggested. Beyond the fact that Abraham was the father of the Jewish race, can we discover any closer connection between the lives of the patriarchs and the history of Israel? Is there a truly spiritual coherence
- 59. between them, ormerely a genealogical sequence? For if the Bible can make good its claim to be vitalised throughout by the eternal Spirit of God, and leading forward steadily to His final revelation in Christ, then its parts will be symmetrical, proportionate and well designed. If it be a universal book, there must be a better reason for the space devoted to preliminary and half secular stories, which is a greater bulk than the whole of the New Testament, than that these histories chance to belong to the nation whence Christ came. If no such reason can be found, the failure may not perhaps outweigh the great evidences of the faith, but it will score for something on the side of infidelity. But if upon examination it becomes plain that all has its part in one great movement, and that none can be omitted without marring the design, and if moreover this design has become visible only since the fulness of the time is come, the discovery will go far to establish the claim of Scripture to reveal throughout a purpose truly divine, dealing with man for ages, and consummated in the gift of Christ. Now, it is to St. Paul that we turn for light upon the connection between the Old Testament and the New. And he distinctly lays down two great principles. The first is that the Old Testament is meant to educate men for the New; and especially that the sense of failure, impressed upon men's consciences by the stern demands of the Law, was necessary to make them accept the Gospel. The law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ: it entered that sin might abound. And it is worth notice that this effect was actually wrought, not only upon the gross transgressor by the menace of its broken precepts, but even more perhaps upon the high-minded and pure, by the creation in their breasts of an ideal, inaccessible in its loftiness. He who says, All these things have I kept from my youth up, is the same who feels the torturing misgiving, What good thing must I do to attain life?... What lack I yet? He who was blameless as touching the righteousness of the law, feels that such superficial innocence is worthless, that the law is spiritual and he is carnal, sold under sin. Now, this principle need by no means be restricted to the Mosaic institutions. If this were the object of the law, it would probably explain much more. And when we return to the Old Testament with this clue, we find every condition in life examined, every social and political experiment exhausted, a series of demonstrations made with scientific precision, to refute the arch-heresy which underlies all others--that in favourable circumstances man might save himself, that for the evil of our lives our evil surroundings are more to be blamed than we. Innocence in prosperous circumstances, unwarped by evil habit, untainted by corruption in the blood, uncompelled by harsh surroundings, simple innocence had its day in Paradise, a brief day with a shameful close. God made man upright, but he sought out many inventions, until the flood swept away the descendants of him who was made after the image of God. Next we have a chosen family, called out from all the perilous associations of its
- 60. home beyond theriver, to begin a new career in a new land, in special covenant with the Most High, and with every endowment for the present and every hope for the future which could help to retain its loyalty. Yet the third generation reveals the thirst of Esau for his brother's blood, the treachery of Jacob, and the distraction and guilt of his fierce and sensual family. It is when individual and family life have thus proved ineffectual amid the happiest circumstances, that the tribe and the nation essay the task. Led up from the furnace of affliction, hardened and tempered in the stern free life of the desert, impressed by every variety of fortune, by slavery and escape, by the pursuit of an irresistible foe and by a rescue visibly divine, awed finally by the sublime revelations of Sinai, the nation is ready for the covenant (which is also a challenge)--The man that doeth these things shall live by them: if thou diligently hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God ... He shall set thee on high above all nations. Such is the connection between this narrative and what went before. And the continuation of the same experiment, and the same failure, can be traced through all the subsequent history. Whether in so loose an organisation that every man does what is right in his own eyes, or under the sceptre of a hero or a sage,--whether so hard pressed that self-preservation ought to have driven them to their God, or so marvellously delivered that gratitude should have brought them to their knees,-- whether engulfed a second time in a more hopeless captivity, or restored and ruled by a hierarchy whose authority is entirely spiritual,--in every variety of circumstances the same melancholy process repeats itself; and lawlessness, luxury, idolatry and self-righteousness combine to stop every mouth, to make every man guilty before God, to prove that a greater salvation is still needed, and thus to pave the way for the Messiah. The second great principle of St. Paul is that faith in a divine help, in pardon, blessing and support, was the true spirit of the Old Testament as well as of the New. The challenge of the law was meant to produce self-despair, only that men might trust in God. Appeal was made especially to the cases of Abraham and David, the founder of the race and of the dynasty, clearly because the justification without works of the patriarch and of the king were precedents to decide the general question (Romans 4:1-8). Now, this is pre-eminently the distinction between Jewish history and all others, that in it God is everything and man is nothing. Every sceptical treatment of the story makes Moses to be the deliverer from Egypt, and shows us the Jewish nation gradually finding out God. But the nation itself believed nothing of the kind. It confessed itself to have been from the beginning vagrant and rebellious and unthankful: God had always found out Israel, never Israel God. The history is an expansion of the parable of the good shepherd. And this perfect harmony of a long record with itself and with abstract principles is both instructive and reassuring. As the history of Israel opens before us, a third principle claims attention--one which the apostle quietly assumes, but which is forced on our consideration by the unhappy state of religious thought in these degenerate days.
- 61. "They are notto be heard," says the Seventh Article rightly, "which feign that the old fathers did look only for transitory promises." But certainly they also would be unworthy of a hearing who would feign that the early Scriptures do not give a vast, a preponderating weight, to the concerns of our life on earth. Only very slowly, and as the result of long training, does the future begin to reveal its supremacy over the present. It would startle many a devout reader out of his propriety to discover the small proportion of Old Testament scriptures in which eternity and its prospects are discussed, to reckon the passages, habitually applied to spiritual thraldom and emancipation, which were spoken at first of earthly tyranny and earthly deliverance, and to observe, even in the pious aspirations of the Psalms, how much of the gratitude and joy of the righteous comes from the sense that he is made wiser than the ancient, and need not fear though a host rose up against him, and can break a bow of steel, and has a table prepared for him, and an overflowing cup. Especially is this true of the historical books. God is here seen ruling states, judging in the earth, remembering Israel in bondage, and setting him free, providing supernatural food and water, guiding him by the fiery cloud. There is not a word about regeneration, conversion, hell, or heaven. And yet there is a profound sense of God. He is real, active, the most potent factor in the daily lives of men. Now, this may teach us a lesson, highly important to us all, and especially to those who must teach others. The difference between spirituality and secularity is not the difference between the future life and the present, but between a life that is aware of God and a godless one. Perhaps, when we find our gospel a matter of indifference and weariness to men who are absorbed in the bitter monotonous and dreary struggle for existence, we ourselves are most to blame. Perhaps, if Moses had approached the Hebrew drudges as we approach men equally weary and oppressed, they would not have bowed their heads and worshipped. And perhaps we should have better success, if we took care to speak of God in this world, making life a noble struggle, charging with new significance the dull and seemingly degraded lot of all who remember Him, such a God as Jesus revealed when He cleansed the leper, and gave sight to the blind, using one and the same word for the "healing" of diseases and the "saving" of souls, and connecting faith equally with both. Exodus will have little to teach us, unless we believe in that God who knoweth that we have need of food and clothing. And the higher spiritual truths which it expresses will only be found there in dubious and questionable allegory, unless we firmly grasp the great truth, that God is not the Saviour of souls, or of bodies, but of living men in their entirety, and treats their higher and lower wants upon much the same principle, because He is the same God, dealing with the same men, through both. Moreover, He treats us as the men of other ages. Instead of dealing with Moses upon exceptional and strange lines, He made known His ways unto Moses, His characteristic and habitual ways. And it is on this account that whatsoever things were written aforetime are true admonition for us also, being not violent interruptions but impressive revelations of the steady silent methods of the judgment and the grace of God.
- 62. EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE COMMENTARY,"THE OPPRESSION. Exodus 1:7-22. At the beginning of the history of Israel we find a prosperous race. It was indeed their growing importance, and chiefly their vast numerical increase, which excited the jealousy of their rulers, at the very time when a change of dynasty removed the sense of obligation. It is a sound lesson in political as well as personal godliness that prosperity itself is dangerous, and needs special protection from on high. Is it merely by chance again that we find in this first of histories examples of the folly of relying upon political connections? As the chief butler remembered not Joseph, nor did he succeed in escaping from prison by securing influence at court, so is the influence of Joseph himself now become vain, although he was the father of Pharaoh and lord of all his house. His romantic history, his fidelity in temptation, and the services by which he had at once cemented the royal power and saved the people, could not keep his memory alive. The hollow wraith of dying fame died wholly. There arose a new king over Egypt who knew not Joseph. Such is the value of the highest and purest earthly fame, and such the gratitude of the world to its benefactors. The nation which Joseph rescued from starvation is passive in Pharaoh's hands, and persecutes Israel at his bidding. And when the actual deliverer arose, his rank and influence were only entanglements through which he had to break. Meanwhile, except among a few women, obedient to the woman's heart, we find no trace of independent action, no revolt of conscience against the absolute behest of the sovereign, until selfishness replaces virtue, and despair wrings the cry from his servants, Knowest thou not yet that Egypt is destroyed? Now, in Genesis we saw the fate of families, blessed in their father Abraham, or cursed for the offence of Ham. For a family is a real entity, and its members, like those of one body, rejoice and suffer together. But the same is true of nations, and here we have reached the national stage in the education of the world. Here is exhibited to us, therefore, a nation suffering with its monarch to the uttermost, until the cry of the maidservant behind the mill is as wild and bitter as the cry of Pharaoh upon his throne. It is indeed the eternal curse of despotism that unlimited calamity may be drawn down upon millions by the caprice of one most unhappy man, himself blinded and half maddened by adulation, by the absence of restraint, by unlimited sensual indulgence if his tendencies be low and animal, and by the pride of power if he be high-spirited and aspiring. If we assume, what seems pretty well established, that the Pharaoh from whom Moses fled was Rameses the Great, his spirit was of the nobler kind, and he exhibits
- 63. a terrible exampleof the unfitness even of conquering genius for unbridled and irresponsible power. That lesson has had to be repeated, even down to the days of the Great Napoleon. Now, if the justice of plaguing a nation for the offence of its head be questioned, let us ask first whether the nation accepts his despotism, honours him, and is content to regard him as its chief and captain. According to the principles of the Sermon on the Mount, whoever thinks a tyrant enviable, has already himself tyrannised with him in his heart. Do we ourselves, then, never sympathise with political audacity, bold and unscrupulous "resource," success that is bought at the price of strange compliances, and compromises, and wrongs to other men? The great national lesson is now to be taught to Israel that the most splendid imperial force will be brought to an account for its treatment of the humblest--that there is a God Who judges in the earth. And they were bidden to apply in their own land this experience of their own, dealing kindly with the stranger in the midst of them, "for thou wast a stranger in the land of Egypt." That lesson we have partly learned, who have broken the chain of our slaves. But how much have we left undone! The subject races were never given into our hands to supplant them, as we have supplanted the Red Indian and the New Zealander, nor to debauch, as men say we are corrupting the African and the Hindoo, but to raise, instruct and Christianise. And if the subjects of a despotism are accountable for the actions of rulers whom they tolerate, how much more are we? What ought we to infer, from this old-world history, of the profound responsibilities of all free citizens? We attain a principle which reaches far into the spiritual world, when we reflect that if evil deeds of a ruler can justly draw down vengeance upon his people, the converse also must hold good. Reverse the case before us. Let the kingdom be that of the noblest and purest virtue. Let no subject ever be coerced to enter it, nor to remain one hour longer than while his adoring loyalty consents. And shall not these subjects be the better for the virtues of the Monarch whom they love? Is it mere caprice to say that in choosing such a King they do, in a very real sense, appropriate the goodness they crown? If it be natural that Egypt be scourged for the sins of Pharaoh, is it palpably incredible that Christ is made of God unto His people wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption? The doctrine of imputation can easily be so stated as to become absurd. But the imputation of which St. Paul speaks much can only be denied when we are prepared to assail the principle on which all bodies of men are treated, families and nations as well as the Church of God. It was the jealous cruelty of Pharaoh which drew down upon his country the very perils he laboured to turn away. There was no ground for his fear of any league with foreigners against him. Prosperous and unambitious, the people would have remained well content beside the flesh-pots of Egypt, for which they sighed even when emancipated from heavy bondage and eating the bread of heaven. Or else, if they had gone forth in peace, from a land whose hospitality had not failed, to their
- 64. inheritance in Canaan,they would have become an allied nation upon the side where the heaviest blows were afterwards struck by the Asiatic powers. Cruelty and cunning could not retain them, but it could decimate a population and lose an army in the attempt. And this law prevails in the modern world, England paid twenty millions to set her bondmen free. Because America would not follow her example, she ultimately paid the more terrible ransom of civil war. For the same God was in Jamaica and in Florida as in the field of Zoan. Nor was there ever yet a crooked policy which did not recoil either upon its author, or upon his successors when he had passed away. In this case it fulfilled the plans and the prophecies of God, and the wrath of man was made to praise Him. There is independent reason for believing that at this period one-third at least of the population of Egypt was of alien blood (Brugsch, History, ii. 100). A politician might fairly be alarmed, especially if this were the time when the Hittites were threatening the eastern frontier, and had reduced Egypt to stand on the defensive, and erect barrier fortresses. And the circumstances of the country made it very easy to enslave the Hebrews. If any stain of Oriental indifference to the rights of the masses had mingled with the God-given insight of Joseph, when he made his benefactor the owner of all the soil, the Egyptian people were fully avenged upon him now. For this arrangement laid his pastoral race helpless at their oppressor's feet. Forced labour quickly degenerates into slavery, and men who find the story of their misery hard to credit should consider the state of France before the Revolution, and of the Russian serfs before their emancipation. Their wretchedness was probably as bitter as that of the Hebrews at any period but the last climax of their oppression. And they owed it to the same cause--the absolute ownership of the land by others, too remote from them to be sympathetic, to take due account of their feelings, to remember that they were their fellow-men. This was enough to slay compassion, even without the aggravation of dealing with an alien and suspected race. Now, it is instructive to observe these reappearances of wholesale crime. They warn us that the utmost achievements of human wickedness are human still; not wild and grotesque importations by a fiend, originated in the abyss, foreign to the world we live in. Satan finds the material for his master-strokes in the estrangement of class from class, in the drying up of the fountains of reciprocal human feeling, in the failure of real, fresh, natural affection in our bosom for those who differ widely from us in rank or circumstances. All cruelties are possible when a man does not seem to us really a man, nor his woes really woeful. For when the man has sunk into an animal it is only a step to his vivisection. Nor does anything tend to deepen such perilous estrangement, more than the very education, culture and refinement, in which men seek a substitute for religion and the sense of brotherhood in Christ. It is quite conceivable that the tyrant who drowned the Hebrew infants was an affectionate father, and pitied his nobles when their children died. But his sympathies could not reach beyond the barriers of a caste. Do our sympathies really overleap such barriers? Would God that even His Church believed aright in the reality of a human nature like our own, soiled,
- 65. sorrowful, shamed, despairing,drugged into that apathetical insensibility which lies even below despair, yet aching still, in ten thousand bosoms, in every great city of Christendom, every day and every night! Would to God that she understood what Jesus meant, when He called one lost creature by the tender name which she had not yet forfeited, saying, "Woman, where are thine accusers?" and when He asked Simon, who scorned such another, "Seest thou this woman!" Would God that when she prays for the Holy Spirit of Jesus she would really seek a mind like His, not only in piety and prayerfulness, but also in tender and heartfelt brotherhood with all, even the vilest of the weary and heavy-laden! Many great works of ancient architecture, the pyramids among the rest, were due to the desire of crushing, by abject toil, the spirit of a subject people. We cannot ascribe to Hebrew labour any of the more splendid piles of Egyptian masonry, but the store cities or arsenals which they built can be identified. They are composed of such crude brick as the narrative describes; and the absence of straw in the later portion of them can still be verified. Rameses was evidently named after their oppressor, and this strengthens the conviction that we are reading of events in the nineteenth dynasty, when the shepherd kings had recently been driven out, leaving the eastern frontier so weak as to demand additional fortresses, and so far depopulated as to give colour to the exaggerated assertion of Pharaoh, "the people are more and mightier than we." It is by such exaggerations and alarms that all the worst crimes of statesmen have been justified to consenting peoples. And we, when we carry what seems to us a rightful object, by inflaming the prejudice and misleading the judgment of other men, are moving on the same treacherous and slippery inclines. Probably no evil is committed without some amount of justification, which the passions exaggerate, while they ignore the prohibitions of the law. How came it to pass that the fierce Hebrew blood, which was yet to boil in the veins of the Maccabees, and to give battle, not unworthily, to the Roman conquerors of the world, failed to resent the cruelties of Pharaoh? Partly, of course, because the Jewish people was only now becoming aware of its national existence; but also because it had forsaken God. Its religion, if not supplanted, was at least adulterated by the influence of the mystic pantheism and the stately ritual which surrounded them. Joshua bade his victorious followers to "put away the gods whom your fathers served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve ye the Lord" (Joshua 24:14). And in Ezekiel the Lord Himself complains, "They rebelled against Me and would not hearken unto Me; they did not cast away the abominations of their eyes, neither did they forsake the idols of Egypt" (Ezekiel 20:8). Now, there is nothing which enfeebles the spirit and breaks the courage like religious dependence. A strong priesthood always means a feeble people, most of all when they are of different blood. And Israel was now dependent on Egypt alike for
- 66. the highest andlowest needs--grass for the cattle and religion for the soul. And when they had sunk so low, it is evident that their emancipation had to be wrought for them entirely without their help. From first to last they were passive, not only for want of spirit to help themselves, but because the glory of any exploit of theirs might have illuminated some false deity whom they adored. Standing still, they saw the salvation of God, and it was not possible to give His glory to another. For this cause also, judgment had, first of all, to be wrought upon the gods of Egypt. In the meantime, without spirit enough to resist, they saw complete destruction drawing nearer to them by successive strides. At first Pharaoh "dealt wisely with them," and they found themselves entrapped into a hard bondage almost unawares. But a strange power upheld them, and the more they were afflicted the more they multiplied and spread abroad. In this they ought to have discerned a divine support, and remembered the promise to Abraham that God would multiply his seed as the stars of heaven. It may have helped them presently to "cry unto the Lord." And the Egyptians were not merely "grieved" because of them: they felt as the Israelites afterwards felt towards that monotonous diet of which they used the same word, and said, "our soul loatheth this light bread." Here it expresses that fierce and contemptuous attitude which the Californian and Australian are now assuming toward the swarms of Chinamen whose labour is so indispensable, yet the infusion of whose blood into the population is so hateful. Then the Egyptians make their service rigorous, and their lives bitter. And at last that happens which is a part of every downward course: the veil is dropped; what men have done by stealth, and as if they would deceive themselves, they soon do consciously, avowing to their conscience what at first they could not face. Thus Pharaoh began by striving to check a dangerous population; and ended by committing wholesale murder. Thus men become drunkards through conviviality, thieves through borrowing what they mean to restore, and hypocrites through slightly overstating what they really feel. And, since there are nice gradations in evil, down to the very last, Pharaoh will not yet avow publicly the atrocity which he commands a few humble women to perpetrate; decency is with him, as it is often, the last substitute for a conscience. Among the agents of God for the shipwreck of all full-grown wrongs, the chief is the revolt of human nature, since, fallen though we know ourselves to be, the image of God is not yet effaced in us. The better instincts of humanity are irrepressible--most so perhaps among the poor. It is by refusing to trust its intuitions that men grow vile; and to the very last that refusal is never absolute, so that no villainy can reckon upon its agents, and its agents cannot always reckon upon themselves. Above all, the heart of every woman is in a plot against the wrong; and as Pharaoh was afterwards defeated by the ingenuity of a mother and the sympathy of his own daughter, so his first scheme was spoiled by the disobedience of the midwives, themselves Hebrews,
- 67. upon whom hereckoned. Let us not fear to avow that these women, whom God rewarded, lied to the king when he reproached them, since their answer, even if it were not unfounded, was palpably a misrepresentation of the facts. The reward was not for their falsehood, but for their humanity. They lived when the notion of martyrdom for an avowal so easy to evade was utterly unknown. Abraham lied to Abimelech. Both Samuel and David equivocated with Saul. We have learned better things from the King of truth, Who was born and came into the world to bear witness to the truth. We know that the martyr's bold protest against unrighteousness is the highest vocation of the Church, and is rewarded in the better country. But they knew nothing of this, and their service was acceptable according as they had, not according as they had not. As well might we blame the patriarchs for having been slave-owners, and David for having invoked mischief upon his enemies, as these women for having fallen short of the Christian ideal of veracity. Let us beware lest we come short of it ourselves. And let us remember that the way of the Church through time is the path of the just, beset with mist and vapour at the dawn, but shining more and more unto the perfect day. In the meantime, God acknowledges, and Holy Scripture celebrates, the service of these obscure and lowly heroines. Nothing done for Him goes unrewarded. To slaves it was written that "From the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: ye serve the Lord Christ" (Colossians 3:24). And what these women saved for others was what was recompensed to themselves, domestic happiness, family life and its joys. God made them houses. The king is now driven to avow himself in a public command to drown all the male infants of the Hebrews; and the people become his accomplices by obeying him. For this they were yet to experience a terrible retribution, when there was not a house in Egypt that had not one dead. The features of the king to whom these atrocities are pretty certainly brought home are still to be seen in the museum at Boulak. Seti I. is the most beautiful of all the Egyptian monarchs whose faces lie bare to the eyes of modern sightseers; and his refined features, intelligent, high-bred and cheerful, resemble wonderfully, yet surpass, those of Rameses II., his successor, from whom Moses fled. This is the builder of the vast and exquisite temple of Amon at Thebes, the grandeur of which is amazing even in its ruins; and his culture and artistic gifts are visible, after all these centuries, upon his face. It is a strange comment upon the modern doctrine that culture is to become a sufficient substitute for religion. And his own record of his exploits is enough to show that the sense of beauty is not that of pity: he is the jackal leaping through the land of his enemies, the grim lion, the powerful bull with sharpened horns, who has annihilated the peoples. There is no greater mistake than to suppose that artistic refinement can either inspire morality or replace it. Have we quite forgotten Nero, and Lucretia Borgia,
- 68. and Catherine deMedici? Many civilisations have thought little of infant life. Ancient Rome would have regarded this atrocity as lightly as modern China, as we may see by the absolute silence of its literature concerning the murder of the innocents--an event strangely parallel with this in its nature and political motives, and in the escape of one mighty Infant. Is it conceivable that the same indifference should return, if the sanctions of religion lose their power? Every one remembers the callousness of Rousseau. Strange things are being written by pessimistic unbelief about the bringing of more sufferers into the world. And a living writer in France has advocated the legalising of infanticide, and denounced St. Vincent de Paul because, "thanks to his odious precautions, this man deferred for years the death of creatures without intelligence," etc.(2) It is to the faith of Jesus, not only revealing by the light of eternity the value of every soul, but also replenishing the fountains of human tenderness that had well-nigh become exhausted, that we owe our modern love of children. In the very helplessness which the ancient masters of the world exposed to destruction without a pang, we see the type of what we must ourselves become, if we would enter heaven. But we cannot afford to forget either the source or the sanctions of the lesson. PULPIT, "Exodus 1:7-14 Here the real narrative of Exodus begins. The history of the Israelites from and after the death of Joseph is entered on. The first point touched is their rapid multiplication. The next their falling under the dominion of a new king. The third, his mode of action under the circumstances. It is remarkable that the narrative contains no notes of time. How long the increase continued before the new king arose, how long it went on before he noticed it, how long the attempt was made to cheek it by mere severity of labour, we are not told. Some considerable duration of time is implied, both for the multiplication (verse 7) and for the oppression (verse 11-14); but the narrator is so absorbed in the matters which he has to communicate that the question what time these matters occupied does not seem even to occur to him. And so it is with the sacred narrative frequently—perhaps we should say, generally. The chronological element is regarded as of slight importance; "A thousand years in the Lord's sight are but as yesterday"—"one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." Where a profane writer would have been to the last degree definite and particular, a sacred writer is constantly vague and indeterminate. We have in the Bible nothing like an exact continuous chronology. Certain general Chronological ideas may be obtained from the Bible; but in order to construct anything like a complete chronological scheme, frequent reference has to be made to profane writers and monuments, and such a scheme must be mainly dependent on these references. Archbishop Ussher's dates, inserted into the margin of so many of our Bibles, are the private speculations of an individual on the subject of mundane chronology, and must not be regarded as in any way authoritative.
- 69. Their primary basisis profane history; and, though taking into consideration all the Scriptural numbers, they do not consistently follow any single rule with respect to them. Sometimes the authority of the Septuagint, sometimes that of the Hebrew text, is preferred; and the result arrived at is in a high degree uncertain and arbitrary. Exodus 1:7 The multiplication of the Israelites in Egypt from "seventy souls" to "six hundred thousand that were men" (Genesis 12:1-20 :37)—a number which may fairly be said to imply a total of at least two millions—has been declared to be "impossible," and to stamp the whole narrative of Exodus with the character of unreality and romance. Manifestly, the soundness of this criticism depends entirely on two things —first, the length of time- during which the stay in Egypt continued; and secondly, the sense in which the original number of the children of Israel in Egypt is said to have been "seventy souls." Now, as to the first point, there are two theories—one, basing itself on the Septuagint version of Exodus 12:40, would make the duration of the Egyptian sojourn 215 years only; the other, following the clear and repeated statement of the Hebrew text (Exodus 12:40, Exodus 12:41), literally rendered in our version, would extend the time to 430 years, or exactly double it. Much may be said on both sides of this question, and the best critics are divided with respect to it. The longer period is supported' by Kalisch, Kurtz, Knobel, Winer, Ewald, Delitzsch, and Canon Cook among modems; by Koppe, Frank, Beer, Rosenmuller, Hofmann, Tiele, Reinke, Jahn, Vater, and J. D. Michaelis among earlier critics; the short period is approved by Calvin, Grotius, Buddeus, Morinus, Voss, Houbigant, Baumgarten; and among our own countrymen, by Ussher, Marsham, Geddes, and Kennicott. The point cannot be properly argued in an "exposition" like the present; but it may be remarked that both reason and authority are in favour of the simple acceptance of the words of the Hebrew text, which assign 430 years as the interval between Jacob's descent into Egypt and the deliverance under Moses. With respect to the number of those who accompanied Jacob into Egypt, and were assigned the land of Goshen for a habitation (Genesis 47:6), it is important to bear in mind, first of all, that the "seventy souls" enumerated in Genesis 46:8-27 comprised only two females, and that "Jacob's sons' wives" are expressly mentioned as not included among them (ib. Genesis 46:26). If we add the wives of 67 males, we shall have, for the actual family of Jacob, 137 persons. Further, it is to be borne in mind that each Israelite family which went down into Egypt was accompanied by its "household" (Exodus 1:1), consisting of at least some scores of dependants. If each son of Jacob had even 50 such retainers, and if Jacob himself had a household like that of Abraham (Genesis 14:14), the entire number which "went down into Egypt" would have amounted to at least 2000 persons. According to Malthus, population tends to double itself, if there be no artificial check restraining it, every twenty-five years. At this rate, 2000 persons would expand into 2,048,000 in 250 years, 1000 would reach the same amount in 275 years, and 500 in 300 years; so that, even supposing the "seventy souls" with their
- 70. "households" to havenumbered no more than 500 persons when they went down into Egypt, the people would, unless artificially checked, have exceeded two millions at the expiration of three centuries—that is to say, 130 years before the Exodus! No doubt, the artificial checks which keep down the natural tendency of population to increase began to tell upon them considerably before that time. The "land of Goshen."a broad tract of very fertile country, became tolerably thickly peopled, and the rate of increase gradually subsided. Still, as the Delta was a space of from 7000 to 8000 square miles, and the land of Goshen was probably about half of it, a population of two millions is very much what we should expect, being at the rate of from 500 to 600 persons to the square mile. It is an interesting question whether the Egyptian remains do, or do not, contain any mention of the Hebrew sojourn; and if they do, whether any light is thereby thrown on these numbers. Now it is admitted on all hands that, about the time of the Hebrew sojourn, there was in Egypt a subject race, often employed in forced labours, called Aperu or Aperiu, and it seems impossible to deny that this word is a very fair Egyptian equivalent for the Biblical , "Hebrews." We are forced, therefore, either to suppose that there were in Egypt, at one and the same time, two subject races with names almost identical, or to admit the identification of the Aperu with the descendants of Jacob. The exact numbers of the Aperu are nowhere mentioned; but it is a calculation of Dr. Brugsch that under Rameses II ; a little before the Exodus, the foreign races in Egypt, of whom the Aperu were beyond all doubt the chief, "amounted certainly to a third, and probably still more," of the whole population, which is usually reckoned at from 7,000,000 to 8,000,000, One-third of this number would be from 2,300,000 to 2,600,000. The writer of Exodus does not, however, as yet, make anything like a definite calculation. He is merely bent on having it understood that there had been a great multiplication, and that the "family" had grown into a "nation." To emphasise his statement, he uses four nearly synonymous verbs ("were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed-mighty"), adding to the last a duplicated adverb, bim'od m'od, "much, much." Clearly, an astonishing increase is intended. BI 7-22, "The children of Israel were fruitful The increase of the Church I. Notwithstanding the removal of its chief officer (Exo_1:6). Joseph dead; his influence gone; his counsel inaccessible. To-day the Church loses her chief officers, but it still grows. II. Notwithstanding the decade of the generation (Exo_1:6). So to-day men die, but the Church, by making new converts, multiplies her progeny to an almost incredible extent. III. Notwithstanding the persecution to which it was subjected (Exo_1:11). The Church can never be put down by force. The Infinite Power is on her side. This is
- 71. more than allthat can be against her. IV. Notwithstanding the artifices by which it was sought to re betrayed (Exo_1:15-22). So the Church has been in danger through the treachery of the outside world, and through the daring cruelty of meddlesome men. Still it grows. May it soon fill the world, as the Israelites did Egypt! All Church increase is from God; not from men, not from means. God has promised to multiply the Church. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Increase by God’s blessing 1. The death of fathers cannot hinder God’s increase of the Church’s children. They decrease and these increase under God. 2. God’s promises for His Church’s increase cannot fall to the ground. He doth fulfil them. 3. Fruitfulness, abundant increase, multiplication excessive, and strength, are the Church’s blessing from God. 4. God works wonderfully to fulfil His promise of increasing His people. 5. The land of enemies is made by God a nursery for the increase of His Church. 6. God’s blessing makes His Israel to fill Egypt, the Church to fill the world. (G. Hughes, B. D.) A large population, and what it led to I. A large population is of great advantage to a nation. 1. It gives an impulse to civilization. 2. It augments the force of the national prowess. 3. It invests the nation with importance in the estimation of surrounding kingdoms. II. A large population sometimes excites the suspicion and envy of neighbouring kings. 1. Pharaoh was jealous of the numerical growth of Israel. 2. He was suspicious of what might befall his country in future exigencies. III. This suspicion frequently leads kings to practise the most abject slavery. 1. It was cunning. 2. It was unjust. 3. It was painful. 4. It was apparently productive of gain.
- 72. But what wasgained in public buildings was lost in sensitiveness of conscience, force of manhood, and worth of character. Slavery involves a loss of all that is noble in human nature, and it leads to murder (Exo_1:22). IV. Slavery is an incompetent method of conquest. 1. Because it does not gain the sympathy of the people it conquers. 2. Because it arouses the indignation of those who are subject to its cruelties. 3. It does not save a ruler from the calamity he seeks to avert. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) A large population The larger the population of a nation, the greater are its capabilities of sympathy, mutual dependency, and help, and often-times the greater difficulty in its right government. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Oppression and growth I. There are three aspects in which the oppression of Israel in Egypt may be viewed. It was the fulfilment of God’s own word; it was education; it was a type. 1. The covenant with Abraham had included the prediction of four hundred years of oppression in a strange land. The fulfilment is reached through the fears and cruel policy of Pharaoh. The Bible decisively upholds the view that not in Israel alone, but everywhere, the movements of nations, as the incidents of individual lives, are directed by God. To it the most important thing about Egypt and the mighty Rameses was that he and it were the instruments for carrying out God’s designs in reference to Israel. Has not history verified the view? Who cares about anything else in that reign in comparison with its relation to the slaves in Goshen? 2. The oppression was, further, education. We can say nothing certainly as to the teaching which Israel received in science, art, letters, or religion. Some debts, no doubt, accrued in all these departments. Probably the alphabet itself was acquired by them, and some tinge of acquaintance was made by a few with other parts of the early blossoming Egyptian civilization. But the oppression taught them better things than these. Pressure consolidates. Common sorrows are wonderful quickeners of national feeling. The heavier the blows, the closer grained the produce of the forge. Not increase of numbers only, but tough knit consciousness of their unity, was needed for their future. They acquired some beginnings of that extraordinary persistency of national life which has characterized them ever since, in these bitter days. Note further, they learned endurance, without which the education of a nation, as of a man, is defective. The knowledge of God’s covenant with Abraham would in some degree be preserved, and it taught them that their affliction was part of the Divine plan for them. So they would learn—at least
- 73. the best ofthem would—to look for the better things following which the covenant held forth, and would be able to see some gleam of the dawn even in the thickest darkness. “If winter comes, can spring be far behind?” The evil foretold and accomplished is turned into prophecy of the good foretold and yet unseen. 3. The growth of Israel under its oppression. The pressure which was intended to crush only condensed. “The more they afflicted them, the more they . . . grew.” So the foiled oppressors glared at them with a mixture of awe and loathing, for both feelings are implied in the words rendered “were grieved.” It is the history of the nation in a nutshell. The same marvellous tenacity of life, the same power of baffling oppression and thriving under it, have been their dower ever since, and continue so yet. The powers that oppress them fill the world with their noise for awhile, and pass away like a dream; they abide. For every tree felled, a hundred saplings spring up. What does it mean? and how comes it? The only answer is that God preserves them for a better deliverance from a worse bondage, and as His witnesses in their humiliation, as they were His in their prosperity. The fable of the one of their race who bade Christ march on to Calvary is true concerning them. They are doomed to live and to wander till they shall recognize Him for their Messiah. That growth is a truth for God’s Church, too. The world has never crushed by persecuting. There is a wholesome obstinacy and chivalry in human nature which rallies adherents to a persecuted cause. Truth is most powerful when her back is at the wall. Times of oppression are times of growth, as a hundred examples from the apostles’ days down to the story of the gospel in Madagascar prove. The world’s favour does more harm than its enmity. Its kisses are poisonous; its blows do no hurt. (A. Maclaren, D. D.) Fruitfulness of Israelites in Egypt Some commentators resort to natural causes to account for this amazing increase. A modern writer declares that “the females in Egypt, as well among the human race as among animals, surpass all others in fruitfulness.” But we prefer to ascribe the matter to Divine intervention. The blessing of Jehovah was now signally conferred upon the people. God “increased His people greatly, and made them stronger than their enemies” (Psa_105:24). The word that after a long delay came to Israel, the third patriarch, was now fulfilled (Gen_35:11). Though the performance of God’s promises is sometimes slow, yet it is always sure. It was when the Israelites lost the benefit of the protection of Joseph that God made their numbers their defence, and they became better able than they had been to shift for themselves. If God continue our friends and relations to us while we most need them, and remove them when they can be better spared, let us own that He is wise, and not complain that He is hard upon us. (A. Nevin, D. D.) Ancestry numerically regarded
- 74. The number ofa man’s ancestors doubles in every generation as his descent is traced upward. In the first generation he reckons only two ancestors, his father and mother. In the second generation the two are converted into four, since he had two grandfathers and two grandmothers. But each of these four had two parents, and thus in the third generation there are found to be eight ancestors; that is, eight great-grandparents. In the fourth generation the number of ancestors is sixteen; in the fifth, thirty-two; in the sixth, sixty-four; in the seventh 128. In the tenth it has risen to 1,024; in the twentieth it becomes 1,048,576; in the thirtieth no fewer than 1,073,741,834. To ascend no higher than the twenty- fourth generation we reach the sum of 16,777,216, which is a great deal more than all of the inhabitants of Great Britain when that generation was in existence. For if we reckon a generation at thirty-three years, twenty-four of such will carry us back 792 years, or to A.D. 1098, when William the Conqueror had been sleeping in his grave at Caen only six years, and his son William II., surnamed Rufus, was reigning over the land. At that time the total number of the inhabitants of England could have been little more than two millions, the amount at which it is estimated during the reign of the Conqueror. It was only one-eighth of a nineteenth-century man’s ancestors if the normal ratio of progression, as just shown by a simple process of arithmetic, had received no check, and if it had not been bounded by the limits of the population of the country. Since the result of the law of progression, had there been room for its expansion, would have been eight times the actual population, by so much the more is it certain that the lines of every Englishman’s ancestry run up to every man and every woman in the reign of William I., from the king and queen downward, who left descendants in the island, and whose progeny has not died there. (Popular Science Monthly.) Successful colonists Englishmen are not the only successful colonists; and the credit, if any, of exterminating aborigines they are entitled to share with insects. Let us take the case of the Australian bee. The Australian bee is about the size of a fly, and without any sting; but the English bee has been so successfully introduced as to be now abundant in a wild state in the bush, spreading all over the Australian continent, and yielding large quantities of honey, which it deposits in the hollows of trees; the immense quantities of honey-yielding flowers afford an abundant supply of material. The foreign bee is fast driving away the aboriginal insect as the European is exterminating the black from the settled districts, so that the Australian bee is now very scarce. (Scientific Illustrations and Symbols.) A new king. Change of government 1. God’s blessing on His Church is the cause that worldly rulers consult against it.
- 75. 2. Blessings fromGod and oppositions from worldly powers usually are connected. 3. Changes of kings and governments may bring changes on the Church’s state. 4. New and strange rulers are set up, when new and strange things are to be in the Church. 5. God suffers such to rise up, and orders them to His praise. 6. All God’s goodness by His instruments to the world are apt to be committed to oblivion and ignorance. 7. Ignorance and oblivion of God’s mercies by His Church causeth wicked rulers to persecute them. (G. Hughes, B. D.) Egypt’s new king I. He was out of sympathy with the purpose and providence of God. II. He was out of sympathy with the conduct of his predecessors. III. He was envious in his disposition. Envious men generally bring on themselves the evils of which they suspect the innocent to be guilty. IV. He was cunning in his arrangements. Policy a bad basis for a throne. It invites suspicion, alienates respect, leads to ruin. V. He was cruel in his requirements. VI. He was thwarted in his project. Mere power cannot always command obedience. It is sometimes defeated by weakness. Heaven is on the side of the oppressed. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) The vicissitudes of power The vicissitudes of power— 1. Are independent of past services. 2. Are independent of moral character. 3. Are frequently dependent upon the arbitrary caprice of a despotic king. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) A bad king will make a wicked people 1. He will influence the weak by his splendour. 2. Terrify the timid by his power. 3. Gain the servile by his flattery.
- 76. 4. Gain thesimple by his cunning. 5. Sometimes gain the good by his deception. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Like ruler, like people If the mountains overflow with waters, the valleys are the better; and if the head be full of ill-burnouts, the whole body fares the worse. The actions of rulers are most commonly rules for the people’s actions, and their example passeth as current as their coin. The common people are like tempered wax, easily receiving impressions from the seals of great men’s vices; they care not to sin by prescription and damn themselves with authority. And it is the unhappy privilege of greatness to warrant, by example, others’ as well as its own sins, whilst the unadvised take up crimes on trust and perish by credit. (J. Harding.) The king that knew not Joseph It is said Joseph was not “known” by this dynasty. This is a strong expression, used to denote the perfect obscurity into which this good and great man had fallen; or rather, the contempt in which this benefactor and true patriot was held by those who were unable to appreciate him. It was not that Joseph’s character had waned in beauty; it was not that his intellect had lost its sagacity; but the new dynasty wished to pursue a course of action and conduct inconsistent with that purity, integrity, and candour which Joseph had counselled; and therefore he was cast off. Less worthy men were taken in his place. But what occurred to Joseph is just what befalls Christians still, in proportion as their Christianity ceases to be latent. We are told by an apostle that the world knoweth us not, because it knew Christ not. 1. The reason why the world does not appreciate the Christian character is that the Christian lives a higher life. He is, in proportion as he is a Christian, influenced by motives and hopes, and guided by laws and a sense of a presence, which an unconverted, worldly man, such as was the new king of Egypt who knew not Joseph, cannot at all understand. 2. Another reason why the world does not appreciate the Christian now is that it judges a Christian by itself, and thinks that he must be at heart, notwithstanding all his pretences, what it is. The world loves sin, delights in it. And when the world meets with a man who professes to have laid his ambition at the foot of the Cross, and whose thirst for power is the noble thirst of doing good, it will say, “This sounds very fine, but we do not believe it. The only difference between you and us is that we do not pretend to these things, and that you do; for behind the curtain you practise what we practise, and are exactly what we are.” Therefore the world hates the Christian, not simply for his Christianity, but because it cannot conceive such a man to be any other than a thorough hypocrite. (J. Cumming, D. D.)
- 77. A king’s ignorance I.Who was this man? 1. Exiled for many years. 2. Belonged to an alien dynasty. 3. May simply mean that he refused to know Joseph. II. Why did he reign? To carry out the promise of God. 1. God does not always use the same methods. Brought Israel into Egypt by prosperity; took them out by adversity. 2. God had to prepare the way for His work. III. What has he to do with us? 1. He shows us how human wisdom overreaches itself. His policy only brought about the very object he wished to avoid. 2. He shows us the abuse of privileges. He might have known Joseph. Ignorance is no excuse for those who ought to know. (Homilist.) Emptiness of fame The readiness with which the populace forgets its vaunted idols has ever been a favourite topic with third-rate moralists; A surviving friend of William Pitt was convinced of the emptiness of fame by seeing the greatest statesman of the age completely forgotten in ten days. Queen Elizabeth’s passage into oblivion was even more rapid, for, according to an eminent historical authority, she “was as much forgot in four days as if she had never existed.” To be sure in such cases the oblivion has been short-lived. Posterity has amply remedied the brief injustice of contemporary opinion, (Christian Journal.) Oblivion and neglect It is a memorable example, amongst many others that we have, of William the Conqueror’s successor, who being unhappily killed, as he was hunting in the New Forest, all his nobles and courtiers forsook him, only some few that remained laid his body in a collier’s cart, which being drawn with one silly lean beast through very foul and filthy way, the cart broke, and there lay the spectacle of worldly glory, both pitifully gored and all bemired. Now, if this were the portion of so mighty a prince, whom immediately before so glorious a troop attended, what then must others of meaner rank expect and look for, but only with death’s closing up of their eyes to have all their friends excluded, and no sooner gone but to be as suddenly forgotten. Hence it is that oblivion and neglect are the two handmaids of death. (J. Spencer.)
- 78. Let us dealwisely.— Wrong councils Kings ought to know better than to convene councils to oppose the intentions of God. Such conduct is— 1. Daring. 2. Reprehensible. 3. Ruinous. 4. Ineffectual. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) The end and design of the council 1. To prevent the numerical increase of Israel. 2. To enfeeble the military power of Israel. 3. To detain the Israelites in permanent bondage. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Persecution of God’s people for hypothetical offences Hypothetical offences have generally been the ground of the persecution of the people of God. It has rarely been for a crime proved, but generally for a crime possible. And this dynasty, in the exercise of what it thought a very far-reaching diplomacy, but really a very wild and foolish hallucination, determined to persecute, and gradually crush, the children of Israel. The result proved that the wisdom of man is folly with God. Whatever is undertaken that has no sanction from God, never will have any real or permanent success before men. But attempt anything, however wise it looks, or talented it appears, yet if it be not inspired by principle, it is a rope of sand—it must fall to pieces. Let us, therefore, ever feel that we never can do wisely, unless we do well, and that the highest principle is ever the purest and best policy. The dynasty that succeeded the ancient Pharaoh did not know this. They thought they could extirpate God’s people. They might as well have tried to extirpate the sun from the firmament, or the fruits and trees of the earth; for the everlasting arms are around all them that love and fear God; and they are an immortal people who are the sons and daughters of the Most High. The Egyptians found here that the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied. (J. Cumming, D. D.) A perversion of language The wisdom here proposed to be employed was the wisdom of the serpent; but
- 79. with men ofreprobate minds, governed solely by the corrupt spirit of this world, whatever measures tend to promote their own interests and circumvent their opponents, is dignified by the epithet wise, though it be found, when judged by a purer standard, to be in reality nothing less than the very policy of hell. (G. Bush.) Pharaoh’s sceptical reasoning All Pharaoh’s reasoning was that of a heart that had never learnt to take God into its calculations. He could accurately recount the various contingencies of human affairs, the multiplying of the people, the falling out of war, the joining with the enemy, their escape out of the laud, but it never once occurred to him that God could have anything whatever to do in the matter. Had he only thought of this, it would have upset his entire reasoning. Ever thus is it with the reasonings of man’s sceptical mind. God is shut out, and their truth and consistency depend upon His being kept out. The death-blow to all scepticism and infidelity is the introduction of God into the scene. Till He is seen, they may strut up and down upon the stage with an amazing show of wisdom and plausibility, but the moment the eye catches even the faintest glimpse of that blessed One whose “Hand unseen Doth turn and guide the great machine,” they are stripped of their cloak, and disclosed in all their nakedness and deformity. (A. Nevin, D. D.) Jealousy of autocrats Autocrats, whether elected or usurping, are all more or less jealous. The female autocrat is in some respects worse than the male. Two queen bees will not live together in the same hive. And indeed, as soon as a young queen-bee is about to lay her eggs, she is anxious to destroy all the royal pupae which still exist in the hive. When she has become a mother, she attacks one after the other the cells which still contain females. She may be seen to throw herself with fury upon the first cell she comes to. She tears an opening in it large enough for her to introduce her sting. When she has stung the female which it contains, she withdraws to attack another. Man is not much behind these jealous insects. Among certain tribes of Ethiopians the first care of the newly crowned chief is to put in prison all his brothers, so as to prevent wars by pretenders to the throne. And even among more civilized nations the records are numerous of the mean and petty tricks and cruelties adopted by kings and queens for disposing of any possible rivals. (Scientific Illustrations and Symbols.) The more they multiplied.— Moral growth proportionate to affliction
- 80. 1. This istrue of individual moral character. 2. This is especially true in the development of the Church. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Why does persecution and trial operate thus 1. To manifest the love of God towards His Church. 2. To manifest the power of God over His enemies. 3. To fulfil the promise of God made to the good. 4. To manifest His providence towards the Church. 5. To strike terror into the hearts of tyrants. 6. To manifest the divinity of truth, and pure moral character. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) The Egyptians were grieved 1. Because their plots were a failure. 2. Because their cruelty was unavailing. 3. Because they had exasperated an enemy they could not subdue Half the grief of the world is occasioned by the failure of wicked and cruel purposes. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Persecution fertilising “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church.” Persecuting the Church is but like casting manure upon the ground. It for a while covers the plants, and seems to destroy them; but it makes the earth more fertile, and the plants more numerous and vigorous. (J. Orton.) Strange increase How diverse were the barbarities and kinds of death inflicted on the Christian confessors! The more they were slain, the more rapidly spread the faith; in place of one sprang up a hundred. When a great multitude had been put to death one at court said to the king, “The number of them increaseth, instead of, as thou thinkest, diminishing.” “How can that be?” exclaimed the king. “But yesterday,” replied the courtier, “thou didst put such-and-such a one to death, and lo! there were converted double that number; and the people say that a man appeared to the confessors from heaven, strengthening them in their last moments.” Whereupon the king himself was converted. (The Apology of Al Kindy, a. d. 830.)
- 81. Prosperity under persecutions Whateverhas been done by enemies in rage or in recklessness, God has always met it calmly and quietly. He has shown Himself ready for every emergency. And He has not only baffled and utterly defeated all the inventions of wicked men, but He has turned their strange devices to good account, for the development of His own sovereign purposes. I. In the case of Israel, it did seem to be a deep-laid plot, very politic and crafty indeed, that as the kings of Egypt, themselves of an alien race, had subdued the Egyptians, they should prevent the other alien race, the Israelites, from conquering them. Instead of murdering them wholesale, it did seem a wise though a cruel thing to make them slaves; to divide them up and down the country; to appoint them to the most menial work in the land, that they might be crushed down and their spirits become so base that they would not dare to rebel. Thus we may suppose it was hoped that their physical strength would be so relaxed, and their circumstances so reduced, that the clan would soon be insignificant if not utterly extinct. But God met and overruled this policy in various ways. “The more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied.” The glory of God shines forth conspicuously in the use to which He turned the persecutions they endured. The severe treatment they had to bear from the enemy became to them a salutary discipline. In order to cut loose the bonds that bound them to Egypt, the sharp knife of affliction must be used; and Pharaoh, though he knew it not, was God’s instrument in weaning them from the Egyptian world, and helping them as His Church to take up their separate place in the wilderness, and receive the portion which God had appointed for them. Once more—and here you may see the wisdom of God the very means which Pharaoh devised for the effectual crushing of the people—the destruction of the male children—became the direct, nay, the Divine provision for educating a deliverer for them. II. Let us now carry the same thought a stage farther, and take a brief survey of the history of the children of God. The like means will appear in manifold operation. Men meditate mischief, but it miserably miscarries. God grants protection to the persecuted, and provides an escape from the most perilous exposure. Full often the darkest conspiracy is brought to the direst confusion. Persecution has evidently aided the increase of the Church by the scattering abroad of earnest teachers. We are very apt to get; hived—too many of us together —and our very love of one another renders it difficult to part us and scatter us about. Persecution therefore is permitted to scatter the hive of the Church into various swarms, and each of these swarms begins to make honey. We are all like the salt if we be true Christians, and the proper place for the salt is not massed in a box, but scattered by handfuls over the flesh which it is to preserve. Moreover, persecution helps to keep up the separation between the Church and the world. When I heard of a young man that, after he joined the Church, these in his workshop met him at once with loud laughter and reproached him with bitter scorn, I was thankful, because now he could not take up the same position with themselves. He was a marked man: they who knew him discovered that there was
- 82. such a thingas Christianity, and such a one as an earnest defender of it. Again, persecution in the Christian Church acts like a winnowing fan to the heaps gathered on the threshing-floor. Persecution has a further beneficial use in the Church of God, and it is this. It may be that the members of the Church want it. The Roman who professed that he would like to have a window in his bosom, that everybody might see his heart, would have wished, I should think, before long for a shutter to that window; yet it is no slight stimulus to a man’s own circumspection for him to know that he is observed by unfriendly eyes. Our life ought to be such as will bear criticism. And this persecution has a further usefulness. Often does it happen that the enmity of the world drives the Christian nearer to his God. III. And now I close this address by just very briefly hinting that this great general truth applies to all believers; but I will make a practical use of it. Are you passing through great trials? Very well then, to meet them I pray that God’s grace may give you greater faith; and if your trials increase more and more, so may your strength increase. You will be acting after God’s manner, guided by His wisdom, if you seek to get more faith out of more trial, for that trial does strengthen faith, through Divine grace, experience teaches us, and as we make full proof of the faithfulness of God, our courage, once apt to waver, is confirmed. (C. H. Spurgeon.) How to defeat the devil Always take revenge on Satan if he defeats you, by trying to do ten times more good than you did before. It is in some such way that a dear brother now preaching the gospel, whom God has blessed with a very considerable measure of success, may trace the opening of his career to a circumstance that occurred to myself. Sitting in my pulpit one evening, in a country village, where I had to preach, my text slipped from my memory, and with the text seemed ¢o go all that I had thought to speak upon it. A rare thing to happen to me; but I sat utterly confounded. I could find nothing to say. With strong crying I lifted up my soul to God to pour out again within my soul of the living water that it might gush forth from me for others; and I accompanied my prayer with a vow that if Satan’s enmity thus had brought me low, I would take so many fresh men whom I might meet with during the week, and train them for the ministry, so that with their hands and tongues I would avenge myself on the Philistines. The brother I have alluded to came to me the next morning. I accepted him at once as one whom God had sent, and I helped him, and others after him, to prepare for the service, and to go forth in the Saviour’s name to preach the gospel of the grace of God. Often when we fear we are defeated, we ought to say, “I will do all the more. Instead of dropping from this work, now will I make a general levy, and a sacred conscription upon all the powers of my soul, and I will gather up all the strength I ever had in reserve, and make from this moment a tremendous life-long effort to overcome the powers of darkness, and win for Christ fresh trophies of victory.” After this fashion you will have an easier time of it, for if you do more good the more you are tempted, Satan will not so often tempt you. When he knows that all
- 83. the more youare afflicted so much the more you multiply, very likely he will find it wiser to let you alone, or try you in some other method than that of direct and overt opposition. So whenever you have a trial, take it as a favour; whenever God holds in one hand the rod of affliction, He has a favour in the other hand; He never strikes a child of His but He has some tender blessing in store. If He visits you with unwonted affliction, you will have unusual delight; the Lord will open new windows for you, and show His beauty as He shows it not to others. According as your tribulations abound, so also shall your consolations abound in Christ Jesus. (C. H. Spurgeon.) Egypt, the house of bondage to God’s people I. The character of Egypt, and her influence on her children. 1. Egypt was distinguished as the abode of a peculiarly easy and luxurious life. In Egypt, as in the world, there was all that could lay the soul to sleep under its vine and fig-tree, and reduce it to the level of the brutes which the Egyptian worshipped as more wise and wonderful than man. This easiness of the terms of life is fatal to the noblest elements in man. Look at Naples. No heroism can be extracted from the Lazzaroni. Give the fellow a bit of bread, a slice of melon, and a drink of sour wine, and he will lie all day long on the quays, basking in the sun and the glorious air; and what cares he if empires rise or totter to their fall? Egypt was the Naples of the old world; wealth, luxury, elaborate refinement, of a kind not inconsistent with grossness; but no moral earnestness, no manhood, no life. Nature wooed man to her lap in Egypt and won him, bathing him in luxurious pleasures—Egypt was the world. 2. Moreover, Egypt was cut off very much from all the political and intellectual activity in which Babylon was compelled to share. She could “live to herself and die to herself,” as was not possible for Babylon. She could play away her strength and her life in wanton pleasures at her will. Egypt is the image of the wanton world herein. It was full of the wisdom of this world, the wisdom of the understanding, which prostitutes itself easily to the uses of a sensual and earthly life. II. The experience of God’s children there—its influence on a people conscious that they had a soul to be saved. 1. They went down to Egypt with the fairest prospect—certainty of sustenance, and promise of wealth, honour, and power. They were to settle in Goshen; better, richer land than the bare hills which would be their only home in Canaan, whose rich valleys would be mainly occupied by the native inhabitants—laud in every way suited to yield pasture to their flocks. So the world woos us. We are born in it, God placed us here, God gave us these keen senses, these imperious appetites, and the means of their fullest indulgence; and why should we tighten the rein? See you no new reason why Egypt, when the patriarchs dwelt there, was a fit and full image of “the world”? 2. They had not lived there long, before, rich and fruitful as was the land, they
- 84. began to findtheir life a bondage. Egypt was strange to them. They could not amalgamate with the inhabitants. The Egyptians came to feel it; alienation sprang up and bitterness. Egypt laid chains on them to keep them in her service, while they groaned and writhed, and sighed to be gone—to be free. And rich as the world’s pastures may be, propitious as may be its kings, the soul of man grows uneasy in its abodes. There are moments of utter heart- sickness amidst plenty and luxury, such as a sick child of the mountains knows, tossing on a purple bed of state: “Oh, for one breath of the sunny breezes, one glance at the shadows sweeping over the brown moorlands; one breath, one vision, would give me new life.” The very prosperity makes the soul conscious of its fetters. 3. The moment comes, in every experience, when the bondage becomes too grevious to be borne; when the spirit cries out and wrestles for deliverance, and the iron, blood-rusted, enters the very heart. The men became conscious of their higher vocation, and wept and pleaded more earnestly; and their tyrants yoked them more tightly, and loaded them more heavily; till, like Job, they cursed God’s light and hated life, in bitterness of soul. And the soul in its Egypt, the world, drinks deep of this experience. The moment comes when it wakes up and says, “I am a slave”; “I am a beast”; “I will shake off this yoke”; “I will be free.” Then begins a battle-agony; a strife for life and immortality— the end either a final, eternal relapse into captivity, or an exodus into the wilderness and to heaven. Let the soul fight its own battles, and the most heroic struggles shall not save it. Let it follow the Captain of Salvation, and gird on the armour of God, and death and hell shall not spoil it. (J. B. Brown, B. A.) The taskmasters of the world 1. Sin is a taskmaster. 2. The rich are often taskmasters. 3. The ambitious are often taskmasters. These taskmasters are— (1) Authoritative: “They did set over thee.” (2) Painful: “To afflict thee.” (3) Inconsiderate: “Burdens.” (J. S. Exell, M. A.) That God allowed His people thus to be enslaved and afflicted 1. A mystery. 2. A problem. 3. A punishment. 4. A discipline. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
- 85. Suffering and strength Onething experience teaches, that life brings no benediction for those who take it easily. The harvest cannot be reaped until the soil has been deeply ploughed and freely harrowed. “Learn to suffer and be strong,” says the poet; and certain it is that without suffering there can be no strength. Not, indeed, that suffering is or makes strength, but that it evokes the latent power, and rouses into action the energies that would have otherwise lain ingloriously supine. The discipline of life is a necessary prelude to the victory of life; and all that is finest, purest, and noblest in human nature is called forth by the presence of want, disappointment, pain, opposition, and injustice. Difficulties can be conquered only by decision; obstacles can be removed only by arduous effort. These test our manhood, and at the same time confirm our self-control. (W. H. D. Adams.) Life maintained by struggling You lament that your life is one constant struggle; that, having obtained what you tried hard to secure, your whole strength is now required in order to retain it; and that your necessities impose on you the further obligation of additional exertions. It is so; but do not repine. As a rule, the maintenance of life is everywhere conditional on struggling. It is not only so with men and animals. It is so even in the vegetable world. You struggle with obstacles; but the very trees have to do the same. Observe them; take heart and grow strong. M. Louis Figuier says that the manner in which roots succeed in overcoming obstacles has always been a subject of surprise to the observer. The roots of trees and shrubs, when cramped or hindered in their progress, have been observed to exhibit considerable mechanical force, throwing down walls or splitting rocks, and in other eases clinging together in bunches or spreading out their fibres over a prodigious space, in order to follow the course of a rivulet with its friendly moisture. Who has not seen with admiration how roots will adapt themselves to the special circumstances of the soil, dividing their filaments in a soil fit for them almost to infinity, elsewhere abandoning a sterile soft to seek one farther off which is favourable to them; and as the ground was wide or less hard, wet or dry, heavy or light, sandy or stony, varying their shapes accordingly? Here are wonderful energy, and illustrations of the way in which existence may be maintained by constant action. (Scientific Illustrations and Symbols.) Use of adversity The springs at the base of the Alpine Mountains are fullest and freshest when the summer sun has dried and parched the verdure in the valleys below. The heat that has burned the arid plains has melted mountain glacier and snow, and increased the volume of the mountain streams. Thus, when adversity has dried
- 86. the springs ofearthly comfort and hope, God’s great springs of salvation and love flow freshest and fullest to gladden the heart. (Irish Congregational Magazine.) Moulding influences of life The steel that has suffered most is the best steel. It has been in the furnace again and again; it has been on the anvil; it has been tight in the jaws of the vice; it has felt the teeth of the rasp; it has been ground by emery; it has been heated and hammered and filed until it does not know itself, and it comes out a splendid knife. And if men only knew it, what are called their “misfortunes” are God’s best blessings, for they are the moulding influences which give them shapeliness and edge, and durability, and power. (H. W. Beecher.) The advantage of afflictions Stars shine brightest in the darkest night; torches are better for the beating; grapes come not to the proof till they come to the press; spices smell sweetest when pounded; young trees root the faster for shaking; vines are the better for bleeding; gold looks the brighter for scouring; glow-worms glisten best in the dark; juniper smells sweetest in the fire; pomander becomes most fragrant for chafing; the palm-tree proves the better for pressing; camomile, the more you tread it, the more you spread it. Such is the condition of all God’s children, they are then most triumphant when most tempted; most glorious when most afflicted; most in the favour of God when least in man’s; as their conflicts, so their conquests; as their tribulations, so their triumphs; true salamanders, that live best in the furnace of persecution, so that heavy afflictions are the best benefactors to heavenly affections. (J. Spencer.) The university of hard knocks A great deal of useless sympathy is in this day expended upon those who start in life without social or monetary help. Those are most to be congratulated who have at the beginning a rough tussel with circumstances. John Ruskin sets it down as one of his calamities that in early life he “had nothing to endure.” A petted and dandled childhood makes a weak and insipid man. You say that the Ruskin just quoted disproves the theory. No. He is showing in a dejected, splenetic, and irritated old age the need of the early cudgelling of adversity. He seems fretting himself to death. A little experience of the hardship of life would have helped to make him gratefully happy now. No brawn of character without compulsory exertion. The men who sit strong in their social, financial, and political elevations are those who did their own climbing. Misfortune is a rough nurse, but she raises giants. Let our young people, instead of succumbing to the influences that would keep them back and down, take them as the parallel bars, and dumb-bells, and weights of a gymnasium, by which they are to get muscle for
- 87. the strife. Consentnot to beg your way to fortune, but achieve it. God is always on the side of the man who does his best. God helps the man who tries to overcome difficulties. (Dr. Talmage.) Graces multiply by affliction Graces multiply by afflictions, as the saints did by persecutions. (T. Adams.) Beneficial effects of affliction The walnut tree is most fruitful when most beaten. Fish thrive best in cold and salt waters. The most plentiful summer follows upon the hardest winter. (J. Trapp.) lnjuries overruled Though your attempt to destroy a man’s position may fail to accomplish that object, it may be productive of serious injury to him. Yet, fortunately for him, that very injury may afterwards bring forth good results. His friends may rally round him; his resources may be added to through the medium of the sympathetic; or he may be so acted on as to put forth power from within which develops new graces and fresh vigour. You injure a tree, and you will discover reparation is at work even there. The wheel of your cart, for instance, grazes the trunk, or the root of the tree is wounded by your passing ploughshare; the result is an adventitious bud comes. Wherever you see those adventitious buds which come without any order, you may recollect that their formation is frequently thus produced by the irritation caused by injury. You cut down the heads of a group of forest trees; you have not destroyed them. Like the men you have injured, they live to tell the tale. The pollarded dwarf remains to declare what the forest tree would have become but for you. Even the date of your attack can be ascertained; for the stunted group will cover themselves with branches all of the same age and strength, which will exhibit to the sky the evidence of the story: Injured these all are; yes, but not destroyed. (Scientific Illustrations and Symbols.) Affliction and growth Bunyan’s figure of Satan pouring water on the fire to extinguish it, and it all the while waxing brighter and hotter because the unseen Christ was pouring oil upon it, illustrates the prosperity of God’s people in affliction. “The more they afflicted them, the more they grew.” When a fire attains certain heat and volume, to pour water upon it is only to add fuel. The water, suddenly changed to its component gases, feeds, instead of extinguishing, the flame. So God changes the evil inflicted upon His people into an upbuilding and sanctifying power. (H. C. Trumbull.)
- 88. They made theirlives bitter with hard bondage.— The bondage of sin I. The bondage as an illustration of sin. “Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.” 1. The unnaturalness of this bondage. Men were fitted to serve God, not Satan. All their powers are perverted, misused, and reversed, when they are in courses of disobedience, and rebellion. “Right” means “straight,” and “wrong” means “wrung.” 2. The severity of this bondage. No taskmaster for men has ever been found more brutal than a brutal man. The devil has no despot out of hell more despotic than sinners to place over sinners. When villains get villains in their power, how they do persist in lashing them into further villainy and vice! 3. The injustice of this bondage. Satan never remembers favours bestowed. One may give himself, body, soul, and spirit to the devil, and no fidelity will win him the least consideration. Injustice is the rule in sin, it never in any case has exceptions. The prince of evil simply uses his devotees all the worse because of their servility and patience. 4. The destructiveness of this bondage of sin. The wanton waste of all that makes life worth a struggle by persistent courses of sin is familiar to every thoughtful observer. Wickedness never builds up; it always pulls down. Once in the heat of a public discussion some infidels challenged an immediate reply to what they called their arguments. A plain woman arose in the audience; she proceeded to relate how her husband had been dissipated and unkind; she had prayed for him, and he had become a praying man and a good father; years of comfort and of peace had they now dwelt together in the love of each other and the fear of God. “So much,” she continued, “has my religion done for me. Will you kindly state now what your religion has done for you in the same time?” Done? unbelief does not do anything, it undoes. II. And now with so sorrowful a showing as this bondage has to make, it seems surprising to find that the Israelites were counselled to “remember” it. Why should they recall such humiliation? 1. Such reminiscences promote humility. Spiritual pride is as dangerous as a vice. What have we that God’s mercy has not bestowed upon us? Why boast we over each other? Recollect that “the Lord hath taken you, and brought you forth out of the iron furnace, even out of Egypt, to be unto Him a people of inheritance, as ye are this day.” To Him we owe everything we are. 2. Such a remembrance quickens our considerate charity for others. Our disposition is to condemn and denounce the degeneracies of the times in which we live. Wherein are people worse now than we ourselves were once? How do we know what we might have been if it had not been for the arrest of our rebellion by the power of the Holy Ghost? Once, as a drunken man reeled
- 89. past his door,John Newton exclaimed: “But for the grace of God, there goes John Newton!” (C. S. Robinson, D. D.) Embittering the lives of others It is no credit to Pharaoh that God overruled his oppression of the Israelites to their advantage. For his course there is nothing but guilt and shame. He who makes another life bitter has got the bitterness of that life to answer for, whatever good may come to his victim through the blessing of God. It is a terrible thing—a shameful thing also—to make another’s life bitter. Yet there are boys and girls who are making their mothers’ lives bitter; and there are husbands who are making the lives of their wives bitter; and there are parents who are making their children’s lives bitter. Is no one’s life made bitter by your course? Is there no danger of bitterness of life to any one through your conduct—or your purposed action? Weigh well these questions; for they involve much to you. Pharaoh is dead; there is no danger of his making our lives bitter with hard bondage. But the devil is not dead; and there is danger of our being in hard bondage to him. Pharaoh’s bondage was overruled for good to those who were under it. The devil’s bondage is harder than Pharaoh’s, and no good ever comes of it to its subjects. It were better for us to have died under the hardest bondage of Pharaoh than to live on under the devil’s easiest bondage. (H. C. Trumbull.) Pharaoh’s cruel policy It is worth notice that the king holds council with his people, and evidently carries them with him in his policy. The Egyptians had more than their share of the characteristic ancient hatred and dread of foreigners, and here they are ready to second any harsh treatment of these intruders, whom three hundred years have amalgamated. Observe, too, that the cruel policy of Pharaoh is policy, and that only. No crime is alleged; no passion of hate actuates the cold-blooded proposal. It is simply a piece of state-craft, perfectly cool, and therefore indicating all the more heartlessness. Calculated cruelty is worse than impulsive cruelty. Like some drinks, it is more nauseous cold than hot. No doubt the question what to do with a powerful subject race, on a threatened frontier, who were suspected of kindred and possible alliance with the enemy on the other side of the boundary, was a difficult one. Rameses must have thought of Goshen and the Israelites much as we may fancy Prince Bismarck thinks of Alsace. He was afraid to let them become more powerful, and he was loath to lose them. Whether they stayed or went, they were equally formidable. High policy, therefore, which, in Old Egypt, and in other lands and ages nearer home, has too often meant undisguised selfishness and cynical cruelty, required that the peaceful happiness of a whole nation should be ruthlessly sacrificed; and the calm Pharaoh, whose unimpassioned, callous face we can still see on the monuments, laid his plans as unmoved as if he had been arranging for the diminution of the vermin in the palace wails. What a picture of these God-defying, man-despising, ancient
- 90. monarchies is here!What would he have thought if any of his counsellors had suggested, “Try kindness”? The idea of attaching subject peoples by common interests, and golden bonds of benefit, had to wait millenniums to be born. It is not too widely spread yet. (A. Maclaren, D. D.) The despotism of sin I. It commences by suggesting a small tribute to the sinner. It wins us by the hope of a good investment whereby we may secure wealth, prosperity, fame. A false hope; a deceptive promise. Sin is cunning; has many counsellors; many agencies. You are no match for it. II. It succeeds in getting the sinner completely within its power. 1. Sin gets the sinner under its rule. 2. Sin makes the sinner subject to its counsel. 3. Sin makes the sinner responsible to its authority. III. It ultimately imposes upon the sinner an intolerable servitude. 1. The servitude of a bitter life. Destroys friendly companionships, breaks up family comfort. 2. The servitude of hard work. Unprofitableness and folly of sin. 3. The servitude is degrading. Brings men from respect to derision—from plenty to beggary—from moral rulership to servitude. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) The spiritual bondage of men I. An entire and universal bondage. No merciful limit nor mitigation (see 2Ti_2:26; 2Pe_2:19; Joh_8:34; Rom_5:18, Rom_3:23; Gal_3:22). 1. It extends to all mankind. 2. The slavery of the individual is as complete and total, as that of the species is universal. (1) Understanding depraved. (2) Will perverted. (3) Affections depraved. II. A severe and cruel bondage. No mastery can be found more pitiless than that of the unhallowed affections and passions which rule the mind, until the Almighty Redeemer breaks the yoke, and sets the captive free from the law of sin and death. III. A helpless bondage. 1. The oppressor of the soul abounds too greatly in power and resources to
- 91. dread any resistancefrom a victim so helpless. Our strength for combat against such an enemy is perfect weakness. 2. In addition to his own power Satan has established a close alliance with every appetite and affection of our nature. Morally unable to deliver ourselves. Hope in God alone. Seek His aid through prayer. (R. P. Buddicom, M. A.) The sufferings of Israel were rendered more intense 1. As a punishment for their idolatry. 2. To inspire within them a deep hatred toward Egypt, so that through their perils in the wilderness they might not wish to return thither. 3. That the prospect of Canaan might animate and refresh their souls. 4. That after such excessive and unpaid labour they might fairly spoil the Egyptians on their departure. 5. That they might be aroused to earnest prayer for deliverance. 6. That the power and mercy of God might be more forcibly displayed in their freedom. Here is a true picture of tyranny: 1. Its rigour increases with failure. 2. It becomes more impious as it is in evident opposition to the Divine providence. 3. It discards all the claims of humanity. 4. It ends in its own defeat and overthrow. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) The bondage Situated as they were within the bounds of a foreign kingdom, at first naturally jealous, and then openly hostile towards them, it is not difficult to account for the kind of treatment inflicted on them, viewing the position they occupied merely in its worldly relations and interests. But what account can we give of it in its religious aspect—as an arrangement settled and ordained on the part of God? Why should He have ordered such a state of matters concerning His chosen seed? For the Egyptians “though their hearts thought not so”—were but instruments in His hands, to bring to pass what the Lord had long before announced to Abraham as certainly to take place (Gen_15:13). 1. Considered in this higher point of view, the first light in which it naturally presents itself is that of a doom or punishment, from which, as interested in the mercy of God, they needed redemption. For the aspect of intense suffering, which is latterly assumed, could only be regarded as an act of retribution for their past unfaithfulness and sins.
- 92. (1) It firstof all clearly demonstrated, that, apart from the covenant of God, the state and prospects of those heirs of promise were in no respect better than those of other men—in some respects it seemed to be the worse with them. They were equally far off from the inheritance, being in a state of hopeless alienation from it; they had drunk into the foul and abominable pollutions of the land of their present sojourn, which were utterly at variance with an interest in the promised blessing; and they bore upon them the yoke of a galling bondage, at once the consequence and the sign of their spiritual degradation. They differed for the better only in having a part in the covenant of God. (2) Therefore, secondly, whatever this covenant secured for them of promised good, they must have owed entirely to Divine grace. (3) Hence, finally, the promise of the inheritance could be made good in their experience only by the special kindness and interposition of God, vindicating the truth of His own faithful word, and in order to this, executing in their behalf a work of redemption. While the inheritance was sure, because the title to it stood in the mercy and faithfulness of God, they had of necessity to be redeemed before they could actually possess it. 2. It formed an essential part of the preparation which they needed for occupying the inheritance. (1) It was necessary by some means to have a desire awakened in their bosoms towards Canaan, for the pleasantness of their habitation had become a snare to them. The affliction of Israel in Egypt is a testimony to the truth, common to all times, that the kingdom of God must be entered through tribulation. The tribulation may be ever so varied in its character and circumstances; but in some form it must be experienced, in order to prevent the mind from becoming wedded to temporal enjoyments, and to kindle in it a sincere desire for the better part, which is reserved in heaven for the heirs of salvation. Hence it is so peculiarly hard for those who are living in the midst of fulness and prosperity to enter into the kingdom of God. And hence, also, must so many trying dispensations be sent even to those who have entered the kingdom, to wean them from earthly things, and constrain them to seek for their home and portion in heaven. (2) But if we look once more to the Israelites, we shall see that something besides longing desire for Canaan was needed to prepare them for what was in prospect. For that land, though presented to their hopes as a land flowing with milk and honey, was not to be by any means a region of inactive repose, where everything was to be done for them, and they had only to take their rest, and feast themselves with the abundance of peace. There was much to be done, as well as much to be enjoyed; and they could neither have fulfilled, in regard to other nations, the elevated destiny to which they were appointed, as the lamp and witness of heaven, nor reaped in their own experience the large measure of good which was laid up in store for themselves, unless they had been prepared by a peculiar training of vigorous action, and even compulsive labour, to make the proper use of
- 93. all their advantages.(P. Fairbairn, D. D.) The bondage of sin Throughout the Scriptures the circumstances of Israel in Egypt are referred to as typical of the servitude under which the sinner is held. There is more than guilt in wickedness. It would indeed be bad enough, even if that were all, but there is slavery besides. Our Lord Himself says, “Whosoever committeth sin is the slave of sin”; and there are no taskmasters so exacting as a man’s own lusts. Look at the drunkard! See how his vile appetite rules him! It makes him barter every comfort he possesses for strong drink. It lays him helpless on the snowy street in the bitter winter’s cold. It sends him headlong down the staircase, to the injury of his body and the danger of his life. If a slaveholder were to abuse a slave as the drunkard maltreats himself, humanity would hiss him from his place, and denounce him as a barbarian. And yet the inebriate does it to himself, and tries to sing the while the refrain of the song which ends, “We never, never shall be slaves.” The same thing is true of sensuality. Go search the hospitals of this city; look at the wretched victims of their own lusts who fill the wards, and then say if man’s inhumanity to himself be not, in some aspects of it, infinitely more terrible than his oppression of his neighbours. Visit our prisons, and see how avarice, fashion, frivolity, and the love of standing well with their companions, have held multitudes in their grip, forcing them—nay, I will not say forcing them, for they sin wilfully—but leading them to dishonesty day by day, until at last the inner servitude gives place to an external imprisonment. The setting of slaves to make bricks without straw is nothing to the drudgery and the danger—as of one standing on the crater’s edge—that dishonesty brings upon a man when once it has him in its power. And it is the same with every kind of sin. But this slavery need not be perpetual, for the Great Emancipator has come. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.) Egypt opposed to Israel It is no new thing for Egypt to be unkind and cruel to Israel. Israelites and Egyptians are of contrary dispositions and inclinations; the delight of one is the abomination of the other. Besides, it is the duty of Israel to depart out of Egypt. Israel is in Egypt in respect of abode, not of desire. Egypt is not Israel’s rest. If Egypt were a house of hospitality, it would more dangerously and strongly detain the Israelites, than in being a house of bondage. The thoughts of Canaan would be but slight and seldom if Egypt were pleasant. It is good that Egyptians should hate us, that so they may not hurt us. When the world is most kind, it is most corrupting; and when it smiles most, it seduces most. Were it not for the bondage in Egypt, the food and idols of Egypt would be too much beloved. Blessed be God, who will by the former wean us from the latter; and will not let us have the one without the other: far better that Egypt should oppress us than we oppose God. (W. Jenkyn.)
- 94. The bondage ofsin Vice, as it groweth in age, so it improveth in stature and strength; from a puny child it soon waxeth a lusty stripling, then riseth to be a sturdy man, and after a while becomes a massy giant whom we shall scarce dare to encounter, whom we shall be very hardly able to vanquish; especially seeing that, as it groweth taller and stouter, so we shall dwindle and become more impotent, for it feedeth upon our vitals and thriveth by our decay; it waxeth mighty by stripping us of our best forces, by enfeebling our reason, by preventing our will, by corrupting our temper, by debasing our courage, by seducing all our appetites and passions to a treacherous compliance with itself; every day our mind growing more blind, our will more restive, our spirit more faint, our appetites more fierce, our passions more headstrong and untameable. The power and empire of sin do strangely by degrees encroach, and continually get ground upon us till it has quite subdued and enthralled us. First we learn to bear it, then we come to like it; by and by we contract a friendship with it; then we dote on it; at last we become enslaved to it in a bondage which we shall hardly be able or willing to shake off. (Isaac Barrow.) Darkest before the dawn “Fear not to go down into Egypt; for I will there make of thee a great nation” (Gen_46:3). Look down, thou sainted patriarch! see what has here become of thy posterity, increased now fourteen thousand fold; nay, see, Thou God of Abraham, what has become of Thine inheritance, how they have watched and prayed in vain! “The Lord hath forsaken, the Lord hath forgotten!” And this continues, not for years, but centuries, each year of which seems in itself a century! “Verily, Thou art a God that hidest Thyself!” With such a scene of sorrow in his view, the most unfortunate among us well may cease complaint; and he who has to some extent learned to observe God’s dealings in His providence, may have himself already marked how, in the present case, an old-established law in God’s government is set before us in the form of a most touching incident: the Lord ofttimes makes everything as dark as they can possibly become, just that thereafter and thereby the light may shine more brilliantly. Ishmael must faint beneath the shrubs ere Hagar shall be told about the well. Joseph must even be left to sigh, not merely in his slavery, but in imprisonment and deep oblivion, ere he is raised to his high dignity. The host of the Assyrians must stand before Jerusalem’s gates ere they are smitten by the angel of the Lord. The prophet Jeremiah must be let sink down into the miry pit, ere he is placed upon a rock. Did not a violent persecution of the Christians precede the triumph of the gospel? In the night of mediaeval times, must not star after star set ere the Reformation dawn arose? Yes; is not Israel’s history in this respect also the history of God’s own people in succeeding times, even in the present day? They suffer persecution, are oppressed, ill-treated, and opposed through a mistaken policy;
- 95. all kinds offorce are often used for their restraint under the sacred name of liberty; yet still they stand, and take deep root, and grow, expecting better times will come in spite of these fierce hurricanes. Nay, verily, the Lord has not forgotten to be gracious, though He sometimes seems to hide His face; nor does He cease to rule the world, though He delays to interpose. The Father watches and preserves his child amidst the fiercest fires of persecution; and although the furnace of the trial through which he comes be heated seven times more than usual, every degree of heat is counted, measured, regulated by the Lord Himself. Though He permits injustice, and even lets it grow to an extraordinary height, He yet employs it for a purpose that may well command our adoration and regard— the purifying and the perfecting of those who are His own. (J. J. Van Oosterzee, D. D.) The bitter lives I. God’s blessing makes fruitful 1. The promise to Abraham (Gen_17:2-8). 2. The number of the Israelites in Egypt (verses 9, 10). II. Note the mistakes committed through prejudice. 1. The Egyptians hated and spurned the Israelites; therefore, ultimately, lost the blessing of their presence. 2. Statesmanship fails in placing policy before principle. 3. Cruelty begot enmity; kindness would have won. III. Selfishness soon forgets past favours. A new ruler disregarded the claims of Joseph’s seed. This world works for present and prospective favours. IV. Here is a type of the growth of sin. The Israelites came into the best part of Egypt; first pleasant, then doubtful, then oppressed, then finally enslaved. 1. Sin yields bitter fruit. 2. We have taskmasters in our habit. 3. Life becomes a burden: sorrows of servitude. V. Note the reason for this affliction. 1. They were becoming idolatrous (Jos_24:14; Eze_20:5-8). 2. Bitterness now would help to prevent return to Egypt. 3. We sometimes find sorrow here that we may look above. VI. God’s favour here contrasted with man’s opposition. Pharaoh failed; the Israelities multiplied. VII. Affliction helps us. 1. As afflicted, so they grew.
- 96. 2. Christ purgethus for more fruit. 3. Self-denial is the path to power. (Dr. Fowler.) The mummy of Rameses the Great After the verification by the Khedive of the outer winding-sheet of the mummy in the sight of the other illustrious personages, the initial wrapping was removed, and there was disclosed a band of stuff or strong cloth rolled all around the body; next to this was a second envelope sewed up and kept in place by narrow bands at some distance each from each; then came two thicknesses of small bandages; and then a new winding-sheet of linen, reaching from the head to the feet. Upon this a figure representing the goddess Nut, more than a yard in length, had been drawn in red and white colour, as prescribed by the ritual for the dead. Beneath this amulet there was found one more bandage; when that was removed, a piece of linen alone remained, and this was spotted with the bituminous matter used by the embalmers; so at last it was evident that Rameses the Great was close by— under his shroud. Think of the historic changes which have passed over the world since that linen cloth was put around the form of the king: Think what civilization stood facing an old era like his. A single clip of the scissors, and the king was fully disclosed. The head is long and small in proportion to the body. The top of the skull is quite bare. On the temple there are a few sparse hairs, but at the poll the hair is quite thick, forming smooth, straight locks about two inches in length. White at the time of death, they have been dyed a light yellow by the spices used in embalmment. The forehead is low and narrow; the brow-ridge prominent; the eyebrows are thick and white; the eyes are small and close together; the nose is long, thin, arched like the noses of the Bourbons; the temples are sunken; the cheek-bones very prominent; the ears round, standing, far out from the head, and pierced, like those of a woman, for the wearing of ear-rings; the jawbone is massive and strong; the chin very prominent; the mouth small but thick-lipped; the teeth worn and very brittle, but white and well preserved. The moustache and beard are thin. They seem to have been kept shaven during life, but were probably allowed to grow during the king’s last illness; or they may have grown after death. The hairs are white, like those of the head and eyebrows, but are harsh and bristly, and a tenth of an inch in length. The skin is of earthy brown, splotched with black. Finally, it may be said the face of the mummy gives a fair idea of the face of the living king. The expression is unintellectual, perhaps slightly animal; bat, even under mummification, there is plainly to be seen an air of sovereign majesty, of resolve, and of pride. The rest of the body is as well preserved as the head; but, in consequence of the reduction of the tissues, its external aspect is less life-like. He was over six feet in height. The chest is broad; the shoulders are square; the arms are crossed upon the breast; the hands are small and dyed with henna. The legs and thighs are fleshless; the feet are long, slender, somewhat flat-soled, and dyed, like the hands, with henna. The corpse is that of an old man, but of a vigorous and robust old man The man was an incarnation of selfishness. To him there was but one being in the universe for whom he needed to care one great; only a single will was to be consulted, only a
- 97. single man’s comfortwas to be sought; he himself was the sole centre of all things. Man’s strength, and woman’s honour, life, wealth, time, and ease of other men, went for his personal glorification. And now the world looks at him, and gives him his due, in the light of the charities and decencies God commands. What do we mean when we speak of “a hard man”? One of the visitors who saw that mummy unrolled, a cool, quiet German, wrote afterwards this clause of description: “The expression of the features is that of a man of decided, almost tyrannical, character.” That ought to be so. This is the despot who ordered that the tally of bricks should remain undiminished, while his slaves should have to forage for their own necessity of straw. He was “a hard man.” Is any one of us hard? Do we need to be kings in order to have that name? Can one be hard upon his clerks, his journeymen, his neighbours, in so far as he has power? So, again, does” a man of decided, almost tyrannical character” fashion and fix his character in the expression of his features? Do you recognize “a hard man” by his looks, when you set eyes upon him in ordinary life? Will one’s disposition grow on him, until it shows itself in his forehead, his lips, his chin, the poise of his proud head? As years pass, are your features growing heavier and colder? Furthermore, is it on the body alone that character makes an impression? Is it possible that, even unconsciously to ourselves, soul as well as body is becoming indurate and chilly? Is money forcing features on our inner life and being? As we rise in life, do we grow interested in others; unselfish, gentle, forbearing in our judgments, or stiff, and rigid, and violent, and impatient of others’ successes? And finally, if character thus perpetuates itself in the soul as well as on the body, is there anything disclosed to us of the world to come which will avail to change the destiny we have fashioned? On the day royal Rameses was buried, they wrapped his aged bald head in cerements, and covered him in the shadows. He comes up now after some awful centuries of silence, and he looks Just as he used to look. It is likely his soul has not grown different either. We know nothing about his future. It is ours that concerns us. What is going to change any lineament of soul in the mysterious Hereafter? (C. S. Robinson, D. D.) If it be a son, then ye shall kill him.— High social position used for the furtherance of a wicked purpose I. Sometimes high social position exerts its authority for the accomplishment of a wicked and cruel purpose. 1. The king commands the murder of the male children of the Israelites. Diabolical massacre of innocents. Abuse and degradation of regal power. 2. He seeks to accomplish this by bringing the innocent into a participation of his murderous deed. Tyrants are generally cowards. II. When high social authority is used to further a wicked design, we are justified in opposing its effort. 1. We are not to do wrong because a king commands it. To oppose murder, when advocated by a king, and when it could be accomplished unknown—or,
- 98. if known, gainapplause of nations—is— (1) heroic; (2) benevolent; (3) divinely rewardable; (4) duty of all who fear God. 2. Such opposition must embody the true principle of piety. The midwives feared God more than they feared the king. 3. Such opposition will secure for us the Divine protection. III. For such opposition we shall be divinely rewarded (verses 20, 21). (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Why were the males to be put to death?- 1. Because they were the most capable of insurrection and war. 2. Because the Israelitish women were fairer than the Egyptian, and so might be kept for the purposes of lust. 3. Because the Israelitish women were industrious in spinning and needlework, and so were kept for service. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Pharaoh’s murderous intentions His plan was a quiet one. I dread the quietness of murderers. When murderers lay their heads together, and fall into soft whispers, their whispers are more awful than the roar of cannon or the crash of thunder. The king’s plan was to murder the male child the instant it was born. The thing could easily be done. A thumb pressed on the throat would do it. A hand covering the external organs of respiration for a few moments would be sufficient. This was his simple plan of beating back the manhood of the dreaded nation. He was going to do it very simply. Oh, the simplicity of murderers is more intricate than any elaboration of complexity on the part of innocent men! There was to be no external demonstration of violence—no unsheathing of swords—no clash of arms on the field of battle; the nation was to be sapped very quietly. Sirs! Murder is murder, whether it is done quietly or with tumult and thunder. Beware of silent manslaughter! Beware of quiet murder! Nothing sublimer than butchery struck the mind of this idiot king. Thoughts of culture and kindness never flashed into the dungeon of his soul. He had no idea of the omnipotence of love. He knew not of the power of that government which is founded on the intelligence and affection of the common people. Annihilation was his fierce remedy There is a profound lesson here. If a king fears children, there must be great power in children; if the tyrant begins with the children, the good man should begin with them too. (J. Parker, D. D.)
- 99. The midwives fearedGod.— Pharaoh’s evil intention frustrated by God 1. Tyrants’ commands are sometimes crossed by God’s good hand. 2. The true fear of God, from faith in Him, will make weakest creatures abstain from sin. 3. The name of the only God is powerful to support against the word of mightiest kings. 4. God’s fear will make men disobey kings, that they may obey God. 5. The fear of God will make souls do good, though commanded by men to do evil. 6. Life preservers discover regard to God, and not bloody injurious life destroyers. 7. God makes them save life whom men appoint to destroy it. 8. The good hand of God doth keep the males or best helps of the Church’s peace, whom persecutors would kill (verse 17). (G. Hughes, B. D.) Beneficent influence of the fear of God They who fear God are superior to all other fear. When our notion of authority terminates upon the visible and temporary, we become the victims of fickle circumstances; when that notion rises to the unseen and eternal, we enjoy rest amid the tumult of all that is merely outward and therefore perishing. Take history through and through, and it will be found that the men and women who have most devoutly and honestly feared God have done most to defend and save the countries in which they lived. They have made little noise; they have got up no open-air demonstrations; they have done little or nothing in the way of banners and trumpets, and have had no skill in getting up torchlight meetings; but their influence has silently penetrated the national life, and secured for the land the loving and mighty care of God. Where the spiritual life is profound and real, the social and political influence is correspondingly vital and beneficent. All the great workers in society are not at the front. A hidden work is continually going on; the people in the shade are strengthening the social foundation. There is another history beside that which is written in the columns of the daily newspaper. Every country has heroes and heroines uncanonised. (J. Parker, D. D.) A definition of the fear of God Fear of God is that holy disposition or gracious habit formed in the soul by the Holy Spirit, whereby we are inclined to obey all God’s commands; and evidences
- 100. itself by— 1. Adread of His displeasure. 2. Desire of His favour. 3. Regard for His excellences. 4. Submission to His will. 5. Gratitude for His benefits. 6. Conscientious obedience to His commands. (C. Buck.) Civilizing influence of the fear of God A weary day had been passed in visiting a wretched neighbourhood. Its scenes were sad, sickening, repulsive. Famine, fever, want, squalid nakedness, moral and physical impurities, drunkenness, death, and the devil were all reigning there. Those only who have known the sinking of heart which the miseries of such scenes produce, especially when aggravated by a close and tainted atmosphere, can imagine the grateful surprise with which, on opening a door, we stepped into a comfortable apartment. Its whitewashed walls were hung around with prints, the household furniture shone like a looking-glass, and a bright fire was dancing merrily over a clean hearth-stone. It was an oasis in the desert. And we well remember, ere question was asked or answered, of saying to ourselves, “Surely the fear of God is in this place; this must be the house of a church-going family.” It proved to be so. Yet it was a home where abject poverty might have been expected and excused. A blind man dwelt there. (T. Guthrie, D. D.) The fear of God Learn a life-lesson from the monument to Lord Lawrence in Westminster Abbey. Of all the memorials there, you will not find one that gives a nobler thought. Simply his name, and the date of his death, and these words; “He feared man so little, because he feared God so much.” Here is one great secret of victory. Walk ever in the fear of God. Set God ever before you. Let your prayer be that of the Rugby boy, John Laing Bickersteth, found locked up in his desk after his death: “O God, give me courage that I may fear none but Thee.” (Great Thoughts.) Obedience to conscience Lord Erskine, when at the bar, was remarkable for the fearlessness with which he contended against the Bench. In a contest he had with Lord Kenyon he explained the rule and conduct at the bar in the following terms:—“It was,” said he, “the first command and counsel of my youth always to do what my conscience told me to be my duty, and leave the consequences to God. I have hitherto followed it, and have no reason to complain that any obedience to it has been even a temporal
- 101. sacrifice; I havefound it, on the contrary, the road to prosperity and wealth, and I shall point it out as such to my children.” (W. Baxendale.) Excellency of the fear of God It hath been an usual observation, that when the king’s porter stood at the gate and suffered none to come in without examination what he would have, that then the king was within; but when the porter was absent, and the gates open to receive all that came, then it was an argument of the king’s absence. So in a Christian, such is the excellency of the fear of God, that when it is present, as a porter shutting the doors of the senses, that they see not, hear not what they list, it is an argument the lord of that house, even God Himself, is within; and when this fear is away, a free entrance is given to all the most dissolute desires, so that it is an infallible demonstration of God’s removal from such a soul. (J. Spencer.) Fear of God a safeguard If we fear God, we need know no other fear. That Divine fear, like the space which the American settler burns around him as a defence against the prairie fire, clears a circle, within which we are absolutely safe. The old necromancists believed that if a man was master of himself he enjoyed complete immunity from all danger; if his will was firmly set, the powers of evil could not harm him; he could defy a host of devils raging around. Against the malice of human and infernal power, the citadel of a man’s heart that is set upon God is impregnable. (Dr. Hugh Macmillan.) The best service He who serves God, serves a good master. He who truly serves God is courageous and heroic. Here are two humble women who despise the patronage of a crown, and set a king’s edict at defiance. There is no bravery equal to the bravery that is moral. It makes the weakest a conqueror, and lifts up the lowest to pluck the palm of victory. A short-sighted policy would have said, “Please Pharaoh”; a true heart said, “Please God.” Pharaoh had much to give. He held honours in his hand. He could deal out gold and silver. He could give a name among the Egyptians. What of it I God could turn his honours into shame, and send the canker on his gold. Serve God! Well tended is that fold which God watches. Pharaoh may frown, but his frowns will be unseen and unregarded amid the light of an approving heaven! (J. Parker, D. D.) Cast into the river.— The last edict of a tyrant king
- 102. I. It waspublic in its proclamation. How men advance from one degree of sin to another. II. It was cruel in its requirements. Why should a tyrant king fear the infant sons of Israel? He knew they would be his enemies in the future if spared. Young life is the hope of the Church and the terror of despots. (J. S. Exell, M. A.) Progress in sin There is a woful gradation in sin. As mariners, setting sail, lose sight of the shore, then of the houses, then of the steeples, and then of the mountains and land; and as those who are waylaid by a consumption first lose vigour, then appetite, and then colour; thus it is that sin hath its woful gradations. None decline to the worst at first, but go from one degree of turpitude to another, until the very climax is reached. The climax of cruelty If we glance once more at the different means which Pharaoh devised for the oppression and diminution of the Hebrews, we find that they imply the following climax of severity and cruelty: he first endeavoured to break their energy by labour and hardship (verses 11-14), then to effect their diminution by killing the newborn male children through the midwives (verses 15, 16); and when neither of these plans had the desired result—the former in consequence of the unusual robustness of the Hebrew women, the latter owing to the piety and compassion of the midwives—he tried to execute his design by drowning the young children (verse 22); which last device was in two respects more audacious and impious than the second: first, because he now, laying aside all shame, showed publicly his despotism against a harmless foreign tribe, which relied on the hospitality solemnly promised to them; and, secondly, because now the whole people were let loose against the Hebrews; spying and informing was made an act of loyalty, and compassion stamped as high-treason. (M. M. Kalisch, Ph. D.) Increasing power of sin When once a man has done a wrong thing it has an awful power of attracting him and making him hunger to do it again. Every evil that I do may, indeed, for a moment create in me a revulsion of conscience, but stronger than that revulsion of conscience it exercises a fascination over me which it is hard to resist. It is a great deal easier to find a man who has never done a wrong thing than to find a man who has only done it once. If the wall of the dyke is sound it will keep the water out, but if there is the tiniest hole in it, it will all come in. So the evil that you do asserts its power over you; it has a fierce, longing desire after you, and it gets you into its clutches. Beware of the first evils, for, as sure as you are living, the first step will make the second seem to become necessary. The first drop will be followed by a bigger second, and the second, at a shorter interval, by a more copious third, until the drops become a shower, and the shower becomes a
- 103. deluge. The courseof evil is ever wider and deeper, and more tumultuous. The little sins get in at the window and open the front door for the big housebreakers. One smooths the path for the other. All sin has an awful power of perpetuating and increasing itself. As the prophet says in his awful vision of the doleful creatures that make their sport in the desolate city, “None of them shall want her mate. The wild beasts of the desert shall meet with the wild beasts of the islands.” Every sin tells upon character, and makes the repetition of itself more and more easy. “None is barren among them.” And all sin is linked together in a slimy tangle, like a field of seaweed, so that the man once caught in its oozy fingers is almost sure to drown. (A. Maclaren, D. D.). 8 Then a new king, to whom Joseph meant nothing, came to power in Egypt. To be unknown to leadership in a dictatorship is to be without power. If you don’t know history you loose your gratitude to those who are heroes. Joseph was a savior of Egypt but that was history, and so now he is forgotten and his people are seen as a problem. F. B. Meyer wrote, “Nations soon forget benefits received. Within 14 years of Salamis the Athenians banished Themistocles, and within 17 years of Waterloo the Duke of Wellington was compelled to protect the windows of Adsley House with iron shutters.” There is drastic change here, for this new pharaoh is the first of a new dynasty and has no obligation to the past. He only has the future, and when there is no past to respect the values and relationships of history loose their meaning. That is why the faith of the Bible is so rooted in history and what has been. Lose the past and you lose the salvation history by which we know who God is and what His plan is. Any leader who forgets the past cannot represent the people of God. Note-Joseph died at age 110, and so there were a good many years for this growth of the people in prosperity and peace. None of the boys had to go to war, and so the actual tough time did not last the whole 400 years. BARNES, "The expressions in this verse are special and emphatic. “A new king” is a phrase not found elsewhere. It is understood by most commentators to imply that he did not succeed his predecessor in the natural order of descent and inheritance. He “arose up over Egypt,” occupying the land, as it would seem, on different terms from the king whose place he took, either by usurpation or conquest. The fact that he knew not Joseph implies a complete separation from the traditions of Lower Egypt. At present the generality of Egyptian scholars identify this Pharaoh with Rameses II, but all the conditions of the narrative are
- 104. fulfilled in theperson of Amosis I (or, Aahmes), the head of the 18th Dynasty. He was the descendant of the old Theban sovereigns, but his family was tributary to the Dynasty of the Shepherds, the Hyksos of Manetho, then ruling in the North of Egypt. Amosis married an Ethiopian princess, and in the third year of his reign captured Avaris, or Zoan, the capital of the Hyksos, and completed the expulsion of that race. CLARKE, "There arose up a new king - Who this was it is difficult to say. It was probably Ramesses Miamun, or his son Amenophis, who succeeded him in the government of Egypt about A. M. 2400, before Christ 1604. Which knew not Joseph - The verb yada, which we translate to know, often signifies to acknowledge or approve. See Jdg_2:10; Psa_1:6; Psa_31:7; Hos_2:8; Amo_3:2. The Greek verbs ειδω and γινωσκω are used precisely in the same sense in the New Testament. See Mat_25:12, and 1Jo_3:1. We may therefore understand by the new king’s not knowing Joseph, his disapproving of that system of government which Joseph had established, as well as his haughtily refusing to acknowledge the obligations under which the whole land of Egypt was laid to this eminent prime minister of one of his predecessors. GILL, "Now there arose up a new king over Egypt,.... Stephen calls him another king, Act_7:18 one of another family, according to Josephus (g); who was not of the seed royal, as Aben Ezra; and Sir John Marsham (h) thinks this was Salatis, who, according to Manetho (i), was the first of the Hycsi or pastor kings that ruled in lower Egypt; but these kings seem to have reigned before that time; see Gill on Gen_46:34 and Bishop Usher (k) takes this king to be one of the ancient royal family, whose name was Ramesses Miamun; and gives us a succession of the Egyptian kings from the time of Joseph's going into Egypt to this king: the name of that Pharaoh that reigned when Joseph was had into Egypt, and whose dreams he interpreted, was Mephramuthosis; after him reigned Thmosis, Amenophis, and Orus; and in the reign of the last of these Joseph died, and after Orus reigned Acenehres a daughter of his, then Rathotis a brother of Acenchres, after him Acencheres a son of Rathotis, then another Acencheres, after him Armais, then Ramesses, who was succeeded by Ramesses Miamun, here called the new king, because, as the Jews (l) say, new decrees were made in his time; and this Pharaoh, under whom Moses was born, they call Talma (m), and with Artapanus (n) his name is Palmanothes: which knew not Joseph; which is not to be understood of ignorance of his person, whom he could not know; nor of the history of him, and of the benefits done by him to the Egyptian nation, though, no doubt, this was among their records, and which, one would think, he could not but know; or rather, he had no regard to the memory of Joseph; and so to his family and kindred, the whole people of Israel: he acknowledged not the favours of Joseph to his nation,
- 105. ungratefully neglected them,and showed no respect to his posterity, and those in connection with him, on his account; though, if a stranger, it is not to be wondered at. HENRY, "The land of Egypt here, at length, becomes to Israel a house of bondage, though hitherto it had been a happy shelter and settlement for them. Note, The place of our satisfaction may soon become the place of our affliction, and that may prove the greatest cross to us of which we said, This same shall comfort us. Those may prove our sworn enemies whose parents were our faithful friends; nay, the same persons that loved us may possibly turn to hate us: therefore cease from man, and say not concerning any place on this side heaven, This is my rest for ever. Observe here, I. The obligations they lay under to Israel upon Joseph's account were forgotten: There arose a new king, after several successions in Joseph's time, who knew not Joseph, Exo_1:8. All that knew him loved him, and were kind to his relations for his sake; but when he was dead he was soon forgotten, and the remembrance of the good offices he had done was either not retained or not regarded, nor had it any influence upon their councils. Note, the best and the most useful and acceptable services done to men are seldom remembered, so as to be recompensed to those that did them, in the notice taken either of their memory, or of their posterity, after their death, Ecc_9:5, Ecc_9:15. Therefore our great care should be to serve God, and please him, who is not unrighteous, whatever men are, to forget our work and labour of love, Heb_6:10. If we work for men only, our works, at furthest, will die with us; if for God, they will follow us, Rev_14:13. This king of Egypt knew not Joseph; and after him arose one that had the impudence to say, I know not the Lord, Rev_5:2. Note, Those that are unmindful of their other benefactors, it is to be feared, will forget the supreme benefactor, 1Jo_4:20. JAMISON, "Now there arose up a new king — About sixty years after the death of Joseph a revolution took place - by which the old dynasty was overthrown, and upper and lower Egypt were united into one kingdom. Assuming that the king formerly reigned in Thebes, it is probable that he would know nothing about the Hebrews; and that, as foreigners and shepherds, the new government would, from the first, regard them with dislike and scorn. K&D, "Exo_1:8-9 “There arose a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph.” signifies he came to the throne, denoting his appearance in history, as in Deu_34:10. A “new king” (lxx: ; the other ancient versions, rex novus) is a king who follows different principles of government from his predecessors. Cf. , “new gods,” in distinction from the God that their fathers had worshipped, Jdg_5:8; Deu_32:17. That this king belonged to a new dynasty, as the majority of commentators follow
- 106. Josephus (Note: Ant. ii.9, 1. .) in assuming, cannot be inferred with certainty from the predicate new; but it is very probable, as furnishing the readiest explanation of the change in the principles of government. The question itself, however, is of no direct importance in relation to theology, though it has considerable interest in connection with Egyptological researches. (Note: The want of trustworthy accounts of the history of ancient Egypt and its rulers precludes the possibility of bringing this question to a decision. It is true that attempts have been made to mix it up in various ways with the statements which Josephus has transmitted from Manetho with regard to the rule of the Hyksos in Egypt (c. Ap. i. 14 and 26), and the rising up of the “new king” has been identified sometimes with the commencement of the Hyksos rule, and at other times with the return of the native dynasty on the expulsion of the Hyksos. But just as the accounts of the ancients with regard to the Hyksos bear throughout the stamp of very distorted legends and exaggerations, so the attempts of modern inquirers to clear up the confusion of these legends, and to bring out the historical truth that lies at the foundation of them all, have led to nothing but confused and contradictory hypotheses; so that the greatest Egyptologists of our own days, - viz., Lepsius, Bunsen, and Brugsch - differ throughout, and are even diametrically opposed to one another in their views respecting the dynasties of Egypt. Not a single trace of the Hyksos dynasty is to be found either in or upon the ancient monuments. The documental proofs of the existence of a dynasty of foreign kings, which the Vicomte de Rougé thought that he had discovered in the Papyrus Sallier No. 1 of the British Museum, and which Brugsch pronounced “an Egyptian document concerning the Hyksos period,” have since then been declared untenable both by Brugsch and Lepsius, and therefore given up again. Neither Herodotus nor Diodorus Siculus heard anything at all about the Hyksos though the former made very minute inquiry of the Egyptian priests of Memphis and Heliopolis. And lastly, the notices of Egypt and its kings, which we meet with in Genesis and Exodus, do not contain the slightest intimation that there were foreign kings ruling there either in Joseph's or Moses' days, or that the genuine Egyptian spirit which pervades these notices was nothing more than the “outward adoption” of Egyptian customs and modes of thought. If we add to this the unquestionably legendary character of the Manetho accounts, there is always the greatest probability in the views of those inquirers who regard the two accounts given by Manetho concerning the Hyksos as two different forms of one and the same legend, and the historical fact upon which this legend was founded as being the 430 years' sojourn of the Israelites, which had been thoroughly distorted in the national interests of Egypt. - For a further expansion and defence of this view see Hävernick's Einleitung in d. A. T. i. 2, pp. 338ff., Ed. 2 (Introduction to the Pentateuch, pp. 235ff. English translation).) The new king did not acknowledge Joseph, i.e., his great merits in relation to Egypt. signifies here, not to perceive, or acknowledge, in the sense of not
- 107. wanting to knowanything about him, as in 1Sa_2:12, etc. In the natural course of things, the merits of Joseph might very well have been forgotten long before; for the multiplication of the Israelites into a numerous people, which had taken place in the meantime, is a sufficient proof that a very long time had elapsed since Joseph's death. At the same time such forgetfulness does not usually take place all at once, unless the account handed down has been intentionally obscured or suppressed. If the new king, therefore, did not know Joseph, the reason must simply have been, that he did not trouble himself about the past, and did not want to know anything about the measures of his predecessors and the events of their reigns. The passage is correctly paraphrased by Jonathan thus: non agnovit () Josephum nec ambulavit in statutis ejus. Forgetfulness of Joseph brought the favour shown to the Israelites by the kings of Egypt to a close. As they still continued foreigners both in religion and customs, their rapid increase excited distrust in the mind of the king, and induced him to take steps for staying their increase and reducing their strength. The statement that “the people of the children of Israel” ( lit., “nation, viz., the sons of Israel;” for with the dist. accent is not the construct state, and is in apposition, cf. Ges. §113) were “more and mightier” than the Egyptians, is no doubt an exaggeration. CALVIN, "8.Now there arose a new king. When more than one hundred years had been happily passed in freedom and repose, the condition of the elect people began to be changed. Moses relates that the commencement of their troubles proceeded from jealousy, and from the groundless fear of the Egyptians, because they conceived that danger might arise from this strange nation, unless they hastened to oppress it. But before he comes to this, he premises that the remembrance of the benefits received from Joseph had departed, because it might have in some measure mitigated their cruelty, had it still been unimpaired. It is probable that this oblivion of the gratitude due to him arose from the moderation of Joseph; for if he had demanded great privileges for his people, and immunity from tributes and burdens, the remembrances of the saving of the country by an Israelite would have been famous for many ages; but it appears that he was content with the kind hospitality afforded them, that his brethren might dwell comfortably, and without molestation in the land of Goshen, because he wished them to be sojourners there until the time of deliverance arrived. And in this way he best provided for their safety, lest being thus ensnared, they might have fallen into the nets of destruction. But in proportion as the moderation of the holy man exposed them not to jealousy and complaint, so was the ingratitude of the Egyptians less excusable in forgetting, after little more than a single century, that remarkable benefit, which should have been everywhere preserved in their public monuments, lest the name of Joseph should ever perish. Their unkindness, then, was intolerable, in refusing that his kindred and descendants should sojourn with them, since they ought to have ascribed the safety of themselves and their country, after God, to him, or rather under the hand and with the blessing of God. But this disease has always been flagrant in the world; and certainly it is good for us that evil should ever be our reward from men for our kindnesses, that we may learn in the performance of our duty to look to God alone,
- 108. since otherwise weare unduly addicted to conciliate favor and applause for ourselves, or to seek after more earthly advantages. Still it was no common return which the Israelites had liberally received during more than 100 years for Joseph’s sake, that they lived comfortably in a proud, avaricious, and cruel nation. Nevertheless, whatever happens, although we are not only defrauded of all recompense, but even although many of whom we have deserved well conspire for our destruction, let us never regret having done rightly; and, in the meantime, let us learn that nothing is more effective to restrain the desire of doing wrong, than those ties of mutual connection, by which God has bound us together. (12) But, although the favor conferred by Joseph had been forgotten by all, the shame and sin of ingratitude cleaves especially to the king; in whom it was more than base to forget by whose industry and care he received so rich a yearly revenue. For the holy Patriarch, by buying up the land, had obtained a fifth part of the produce as a yearly tribute for the king. But so are tyrants accustomed to engulf whatever is paid them, without considering by what right it is acquired. BENSON, "Exodus 1:8. There arose a new king — One of another family, according to Josephus; for it appears from ancient writers that the kingdom of Egypt often passed from one family to another. That knew not Joseph — All that knew him loved him, and were kind to his relations for his sake; but when he was dead he was soon forgotten, and the remembrance of the good offices he had done was either not retained or not regarded. If we work for men only, our works, at furthest, will die with us; if for God, they will follow us, Revelation 14:13. COKE, "Exodus 1:8. Now there arose up a new king, &c. which knew not Joseph— To know, in the sacred Scripture, signifies often, to love, to regard, approve. See Hosea 2:8. Amos 3:2 compared with Psalms 1:6; Psalms 31:7. Matthew 25:12. In Judges 2:10 it is said, There arose another generation who knew not the Lord, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel; that is evidently, who regarded not the Lord; as here it must mean a new king, who regarded not Joseph, had no grateful remembrance of the eminent services he had done to Egypt, and was utterly averse to his system of politics. The Chaldee renders it, who confirmed not the decrees of Joseph. It is probable that this new king might be of another family; for Diodorus tells us, that the ancient kings of Egypt were chosen by the people, not so much with respect to birth as merit: and some writers are of opinion (as we have had occasion before to observe, Genesis 50:22.) that Joseph supported his credit under four kings; and that this, who succeeded them, being a foreigner, had heard nothing of him, nor of his administration. But the passage will be sufficiently clear, if we understand a king, different from him who had raised Joseph, and who was regardless of what had passed in the former reigns, and inattentive to the obligations due to Joseph. This we need not wonder at after so many years, when Ahasuerus could so soon forget Mordecai, who had lately saved his life, Esther 2:21-23. Though it must be owned, that had Joseph's merit been ever so fresh in their memory, yet the conduct of a jealous and despotic prince had nothing in the present instance strange or uncommon, since it would rather have been a prodigy, if his gratitude to a man, who had been dead above fifty years, had prevented his taking some arbitrary and cruel
- 109. measures, in orderto secure his kingdom against the danger it seemed threatened with from a people who, from a single family, were become such a formidable host. The religion of the Israelites, so opposite to the Egyptian idolatry; their prosperity, their union, their valour, their riches, their strength; all these, in the eye of such a prince, would seem to justify the measures he took against them. Even in these modern times, some Christian princes, so called, have taken precautions as cruel against their own natural subjects, of whose fidelity and attachment they had the strongest proofs; and yet these persecutions have been justified, nay, canonized, while Pharaoh's have been branded with the worst of epithets. Critics vary much in their opinions concerning the name of this Egyptian king; some saying that it was Ramesses-Miamum; others Amenophis; and others Salatis; whose government, Dr. Shuckford says, was so despotic, that many families fled from under it out of Egypt; among whom, he thinks, were Cecrops, Erichthonius, and the father of Cadmus. ELLICOTT, "(8) There arose up a new king.—A king of a new dynasty might seem to be intended. Some suppose him to be Aahmes I., the founder of the eighteenth dynasty of Manetho; others suggest Rameses II., one of the greatest monarchs of the nineteenth. The present writer inclines to regard him as Seti I., the father of this Rameses, and the son of Rameses I. Seti, though not the actual founder of the nineteenth dynasty, was the originator of its greatness. (See Excursus I. “On Egyptian History, as connected with the Book of Exodus,” at the end of this Book.) Which knew not Joseph.—It seems to be implied that, for some considerable time after his death, the memory of the benefits conferred by Joseph upon Egypt had protected his kinsfolk. But, in the shifts and changes incident to politics—especially to Oriental politics—this condition of things had passed away. The “new king” felt under no obligation to him, perhaps was even ignorant of his name. He viewed the political situation apart from all personal predilections, and saw a danger in it. PETT, "Exodus 1:8 ‘Now there arose a new king over Egypt who did not know Joseph.’ Once Joseph died the influence of what he was would gradually decrease until eventually it would cease altogether. This was especially true in this turbulent period of Egyptian history. The Pharaoh of Joseph’s day was either pre-Hyksos or Hyksos, and therefore once the Hyksos arrived, and then when they were expelled over a hundred and fifty years later, new eras in Egypt’s history began. But the point is not that. The attitude of the new king was rather an explanation of why this king acted as he did in view of the previous history that has been recounted. It assumes the existence of the narrative in Genesis 37 onwards. “Did not know Joseph” might mean did not acknowledge his authority because of a change of dynasty, or simply that such time had passed that Joseph’s influence was no longer recognised. But the words assume a knowledge of the traditions in Genesis.
- 110. The Hyksos, or‘rulers of foreign lands’, were Semites who gained prominence in lower Egypt and then suddenly or gradually took over the kingship of Egypt by the use of horses and iron studded chariots, and the Asiatic bow. Their period of rule was from about 1720 BC to 1550 BC. They only ever ruled the lower part although at times possibly exacting tribute from upper Egypt. They thus ruled in Northern Egypt for over a hundred years. They established their capital at Avaris in the East Delta and assumed the full rank and style of traditional royalty, taking over the Egyptian state administration and gradually introducing people of their own appointment, including the famed chancellor Hur. But in fact Semites could rise to high office in Egypt in any number of dynasties, as archaeology clearly reveals, so that this is no pointer to when Joseph lived, especially as his position was said to be due to unusual circumstances. Whatever the relationship of Joseph to them it will be quite apparent that once the Hyksos were expelled, all Semites, especially large groupings of them living together, would be looked on with suspicion. Having experienced Semite subjection Egyptians would be looking for any possibility of another such threat. The kings responsible for the defeat of the Hyksos were King Kamose and his successor King Ahmose I. The former defeated the Hyksos and confined them to the East Delta, the latter expelled them and their Semite and Egyptian supporters, and defeated them comprehensively in Palestine. Yet they may not be the king referred to here, for the children of Israel seemed to have remained loyal and not to have taken part in the fighting. So it may well have been a later king who enslaved them because he had particular plans in view for building projects for which he could utilise them. Building was a favourite hobby of many Pharaohs as they sought to immortalise their names, and archaeology bears witness to many of such projects. And as far as he was concerned all the people (apart from the priests) were his slaves. This was the custom in Egypt after what the great famine had brought about (Genesis 47:19-22). When he was strong enough he could do with them what he would. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:8 Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. Ver. 8. A new king.] Called Busiris, a most savage tyrant, as heathen histories report him. Who knew not.] Nothing sooner perisheth than the remembrance of a good turn. The Egyptians are renowned in histories for a thankful people; but it ill appeared in their dealing here with Joseph; who, had he now been alive, might well have said to them, as Themistocles once did to his Athenians, Are ye weary of receiving so many benefits by one man? (a) But herein was fulfilled that of the wise man, Ecclesiastes 9:15. DEFFINBAUGH A New King and a New Policy
- 111. (1:8-14) When Joseph broughthis family to be with him in Egypt, they came to the “best of the land” (Gen. 47:6,11). Even at this time there was an underlying prejudice against the Israelites as Hebrews (Gen. 43:32) and as shepherds (Gen. 46:34). There is considerable disagreement among the scholars as to the identity of this “new king, who did not know about Joseph” (Exod. 1:8). Much of the problem hinges on the date of the Exodus, a matter which we shall not discuss here in detail. 12 Keeping with an early date for the Exodus, it is most likely that the king referred to here was new in a very significant sense. He represented not only a new person, but also very likely a new dynasty. An Asiatic people of Semitic origin (thus, related to the Hebrews) began to migrate into Egypt, eventually gaining control of the government at a time of weakness and confusion during the Second Intermediate Period. The Hyksos 13 ruled for about 150 years during the time of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt, from about 1700 to 1550 B.C. The Hyksos kings were “Egyptianized,” assuming the title of Pharaoh, 14 and adopting the gods of Egypt. The Hyksos capital was very close to Goshen where the Israelites had settled in Egypt. It would seem that the “new king” of Exodus 1:8 was a Hyksos king, and he would thus truly be “new” as Moses has indicated, especially if he succeeded an Egyptian king. Note also that he is not called an Egyptian. In the light of these considerations, Davis suggests the following rendering of verse 10: “Come on, let us [Hyksos] deal wisely with them [Israelites], lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when war occurs, they join also unto our enemies [the Egyptians], and fight against us [Hyksos], and so get them up out of the land.” 15 If indeed a small minority of Hyksos had gained control over Egypt, it is not a surprise that these “foreigners” would have had no knowledge of Joseph. In fact, there would very likely be a tendency to try to blot out the past and to create a new allegiance to the Hyksos dynasty. It would also explain the fear of the Hyksos king that the Israelites might join with their enemies (the Egyptians) to overthrow their (foreign) rule. The fears of the Pharaoh (be he a Hyksos or an Egyptian) are of interest: “Look,” he said to his people, “the Israelites have become much too numerous for us. Come, we must deal shrewdly with them or they will become even more numerous and, if war breaks out, will join our enemies, fight against us and leave the country” (Exod. 1:9-10). He feared the numerical strength of the Israelites, and sought to diminish them. He feared that they would become allies with the enemy against their rule, and would overcome them and leave Egypt. Interestingly, everything Pharaoh feared came to pass, in spite of his diligent efforts to prevent it. The reason is, of course, that the Pharaoh’s plans were contrary to the purposes and promises of God with regard to His people. Pharaoh’s plan, which was readily adopted by the people, was to enslave the Israelites, and to tighten their control over them. A substantial part of this plan seems to be that of intimidation and oppression, so demoralizing and frightening the Israelites that they would not dare to resist their masters. In addition, their value as slave labor would be utilized to strengthen the nation both economically and militarily. The storage cities of
- 112. Pithom and Rameses 16 werebuilt by the Israelites with brick and mortar, 17 and the fields were worked by them as well. Josephus claims that Israelite manpower was also used to dig canals. 18 Just as Israel had greatly multiplied during the time of Joseph (cf. Gen. 47:27) and after his death (Exod. 1:7), so they continued to multiply under the cruel hand of their taskmasters: But the more they were oppressed, the more they multiplied and spread; so the Egyptians 19 came to dread the Israelites and worked them ruthlessly (Exod. 1:12-13). The Egyptian response to the continued phenomenal numerical growth of the Israelites was to increase the workload and to intensify the harassment and cruelty imposed on them by their taskmasters (1:14). It is apparent that these tactics did not work, which led to an even more evil plot directed against the people of God, as outlined in verses 15-21. EGYPT used 671 times in Bible. Egyptian used 114 times. Total 785 PINK In our last chapter we intimated that the deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage foreshadowed the redemption of sinners by Christ. The land occupied by the enslaved Hebrews fitly portrays the place where the unregenerate are. Egypt symbolizes the world, the world as a system, away from God and opposed to Him. Concerning this we cannot do better than quote from the excellent comments of the late Mr. F. W. Grant: The land of Egypt is a remarkable land in this way, that it is a little strip of country along the great river which makes it what it is, and which is in perpetual conflict with the desert as to it. This desert runs on both sides, and a little strip through which the river flows alone is Egypt. The desert on each side hems it in, blowing in its sands in all directions, and the river is as constantly overflowing its banks and leaving its mud upon the sand, and renewing the soil. The Scripture name is indeed not Egypt but Mizraim; and Mizraim means "double straitness." This doubtless refers to the two strips, one on each side of the river. The land is a very remarkable one, looking at it as the scene of perpetual conflict between life and death. The mercy of God, feeding that land by the rain of a far country, no rain coming down there. It is another remarkable feature that rain seldom falls in Egypt. The rain falls far off. The people know nothing about it. It comes rolling down in the shape of a mighty river, and that perpetual stream ministers unfailing plenty to the land. They are, so to speak, independent of heaven. Of course, I do not mean really; but as to their thoughts, they are not on the clouds. They do not look up, but down. It is the very thing God points out in contrasting the land of Canaan with the land of Egypt, that Canaan, Israel’s portion, drinks in the water and rain of heaven. Canaan is a land of dependence. Egypt is a land of independence. PULPIT, "There arose up a new king. It is asked, Does this mean merely another king, or
- 113. a completely differentking, one of a new dynasty or a new family, not bound by precedent, but free to adopt and likely to adopt quite new principles of government? The latter seems the more probable supposition; but it is probable only, not certain. Assuming it to be what is really meant, we have to ask, What changes of dynasty fall within the probable period of the Israelite sojourn in Egypt, and to which of them is it most likely that allusion is here made? Some writers (as Kalisch) have supposed the Hyksos dynasty to be meant, and the "new king" to be Set, or Salatis, the first of the Hyksos rulers. But the date of Salatis appears to us too early. If Joseph was, as we suppose, the minister of Apophis, the last Hyksos king, two changes of dynasty only can come into consideration —that which took place about b.c. 1700, when the Hyksos were expelled; and that which followed about three centuries later, when the eighteenth dynasty was superseded by the nineteenth. To us it seems that the former of these occasions, though in many respects suitable, is (a) too near the going down into Egypt to allow time for the multiplication which evidently took place before this king arose (see Exodus 1:7), and (b) unsuitable from the circumstance that the first king of this dynasty was not a builder of new cities (see Exodus 1:11), but only a repairer of temples. We therefore conclude that the "new king" was either Rameses I; the founder of the nineteenth dynasty, or Seti I; his son, who within little more than a year succeeded him. It is evident that this view receives much confirmation from the name of one of the cities built for the king by the Hebrews, which was Raamses, or Rameses, a name now appearing for the first time in the Egyptian dynastic lists. Who knew not Joseph. Who not only had no personal know]edge of Joseph, but was wholly ignorant of his history. At the distance of from two to three centuries the benefits conferred by Joseph upon Egypt, more especially as they were conferred under a foreign and hated dynasty, were forgotten. 9 “Look,” he said to his people, “the Israelites have become far too numerous for us. CLARKE, "He said unto his people - He probably summoned a council of his nobles and elders to consider the subject; and the result was to persecute and destroy them, as is afterwards stated. GILL, "And he said unto his people,.... His princes, nobles, and courtiers about him, his principal ministers of state:
- 114. behold, the peopleof the children of Israel are more and mightier than we: which could not be true in fact, but is said to stir up his nobles to attend to what he was about to say, and to work upon them to take some speedy measures for the crushing of this people; for that they were more in number, and mightier in power and wealth than the Egyptians, it was impossible; and indeed it may seem strange, that the king should tell such an untruth, which might be so easily contradicted by his courtiers; though the words will bear to be otherwise rendered, as that "the children of Israel are many" (o); as they were very greatly multiplied, and became very numerous; and they might be "mightier", that is, more robust and strong, and fitter for war than the Egyptians, and therefore, were formidable, and a people to be guarded against; and it was high time to think of securing themselves from them, before they grew too mighty and powerful; or they might be more numerous and mighty in that part of the land in which they were, in Goshen, though not more and mightier than the Egyptians in general. HENRY 9-10, " Reasons of state were suggested for their dealing hardly with Israel, Exo_1:9, Exo_1:10. 1. They are represented as more and mightier than the Egyptians; certainly they were not so, but the king of Egypt, when he resolved to oppress them, would have them thought so, and looked on as a formidable body. 2. Hence it is inferred that if care were not taken to keep them under they would become dangerous to the government, and in time of war would side with their enemies and revolt from their allegiance to the crown of Egypt. Note, It has been the policy of persecutors to represent God's Israel as a dangerous people, hurtful to kings and provinces, not fit to be trusted, nay, not fit to be tolerated, that they may have some pretence for the barbarous treatment they design them, Ezr_4:12, etc.; Est_3:8. Observe, The thing they feared was lest they should get them up out of the land, probably having heard them speak of the promise made to their fathers that they should settle in Canaan. Note, The policies of the church's enemies aim to defeat the promises of the church's God, but in vain; God's counsels shall stand. 3. It is therefore proposed that a course be taken to prevent their increase: Come on, let us deal wisely with them, lest they multiply. Note, (1.) The growth of Israel is the grief of Egypt, and that against which the powers and policies of hell are levelled. (2.) When men deal wickedly, it is common for them to imagine that they deal wisely; but the folly of sin will, at last, be manifested before all men. JAMISON 9-10, "he said ... Behold, the ... children of Israel are more and mightier than we — They had risen to great prosperity - as during the lifetime of Joseph and his royal patron, they had, probably, enjoyed a free grant of the land. Their increase and prosperity were viewed with jealousy by the new government; and as Goshen lay between Egypt and Canaan, on the border of which latter country were a number of warlike tribes, it was perfectly conformable to the suggestions of worldly policy that they should enslave and maltreat them, through apprehension of their joining in any invasion by those foreign rovers. The new king, who neither knew the name nor cared for the services of Joseph, was either Amosis, or one of his immediate successors
- 115. [Osburn]. CALVIN, "9.And hesaid unto his people. That is to say, in a public assembly, such as kings are wont to hold for consultation on public affairs. As if Moses had said that this point was proposed by the king for deliberation by his estates; viz., that because it was to be apprehended that the Israelites, trusting in their multitude and strength, might rise in rebellion, or might take advantage of any public disturbance to shake off the yoke and to leave Egypt, they should be anticipated, and afflicted with heavy burdens, to prevent their making any such attempt. This Pharaoh calls (13) “dealing wisely with them;” for though the word , chakam, is often taken, in a bad sense, to mean “to overreach with cunning,” still in this case he concealed under an honest pretext the injury which he proposed to do them, alleging that prudent advice should be taken lest the Egyptians might suffer great loss through their carelessness and delay. This was common with heathen nations, to profess in their counsels, that what was right should be preferred to what was profitable; but, when it comes to the point, covetousness generally so blinds everybody, that they lose their respect for what is right, and are hurried away headlong to their own advantage. They make out too that what is advantageous is necessary; and so persuade themselves that whatever they are compelled to do is right. For that specious yet fallacious pretext readily occurs, and easily deceives, that, when any danger is apprehended, it ought to be met. By the tragic poets, indeed, that detestable sentiment, occupandum esse scelus, “that we should be beforehand in crime,” is attributed to wicked and desperate characters; because our nature convinces us that it is unjust and absurd; and yet is it commonly considered the best mode of precaution, so that only those are accounted provident who consult for their own security by injuring others, if occasion requires it. From this source almost all wars proceed; because, whilst every prince fears his neighbor, this fear so fills him with apprehension, that he does not hesitate to cover the earth with human blood. Hence, too, amongst private individuals, arises the license for deceit, murder, rapine, and lying, because they think that injuries would be repelled too late, unless they respectively anticipated them. But this is a wicked kind of cunning, (however it may be varnished over with the specious name of foresight,) unjustly to molest others for our own security. I fear this or that person, because he both has the means of injuring me, and I am uncertain of his disposition towards me; therefore, in order that I may be safe from harm, I will endeavor by every possible means to oppress him. In this way the most contemptible, and imbecile, if he be inclined to mischief, will be armed for our hurt, and so we shall stand in doubt of the greater part of mankind. If thus every one should indulge his own distrust, while each will be devising to do some injury to his possible enemies, there will be no end to iniquities. Wherefore we must oppose the providence of God to these immoderate cares and anxieties which withdraw us from the course of justice. Reposing on this, no fear of danger will ever impel us to unjust deeds or crooked counsels. In the words of Pharaoh, all is otherwise; for, having given warning that the Israelites might, if they would, be injurious, he advises that their strength should in some way or other be broken. For, when we have once determined to provide for our own advantage, or quiet, or safety, we ask not the question whether we are doing right or wrong.
- 116. Behold, the people.It not unfrequently happens that the minds of the wicked are aroused to jealousy by the mercies of God, acting like fans to light up their wrath. Nevertheless, the very least proof of his favor ought not on that account to be less agreeable to us, because it is made an occasion to the wicked of dealing more cruelly with us. In fact, God thus attempers his bounty towards us, lest we should be too much taken up with earthly prosperity. Thus the blessing on which all his happiness depended banished Jacob from the home of his father, and from his promised inheritance; but yet he assuaged his grief with this single consolation, that he knew God to be reconciled to him. So also his posterity, the more they experienced of God’s goodness towards them, the more they were exposed to the enmity of the Egyptians. But Pharaoh, to render them hated, or suspected, refers to their power, and accuses them of disaffection, whereof they had given no token. Yet he does not accuse them of rebellion, as if they would take armed possession of the kingdom, but that they would depart elsewhere; whence we may conjecture, that they made no secret of the hope which God had given them of their return. But this seemed a plausible excuse enough, that it was anything but just for those, who had of their own accord sought the protection of the king, to be freely sent away; and thus (14) Isaiah speaks of it. (Isaiah 52:4.) COKE, "Exodus 1:9. He said unto his people, &c.— i.e. to his council, composed of the principal people of his land. We must either understand the king here in an hyperbolical sense, or as uttering the language of fear, which, indeed, the word wisely, let us deal wisely, seems to insinuate; or else, as there is no verb in the Hebrew, we must supply the verb will be instead of are: The children of Israel will be more and mightier than we; therefore, come on, (Exodus 1:10.) let us do so and so. ELLICOTT, "(9) He said unto his people.—It is not intended to represent the Egyptian monarch as summoning a popular assembly, and addressing it. “His people.” Is antithetical to “the people of the children of Israel,” and simply marks that those whom he addressed were of his own nation. No doubt they were his nobles, or, at any rate, his courtiers. More and mightier than we.—Heb., great and mighty in comparison with us. The more to impress his counsellors, and gain their consent to his designs, the king exaggerates. Ancient Egypt must have had a population of seven or eight millions, which would imply nearly two millions of adult males, whereas the adult male Israelites, near a century later, were no more than six hundred thousand (Exodus 12:37). Wicked men do not scruple at misrepresentation when they have an end to gain. LANGE, "Exodus 1:9-10. “They are greater and stronger than we,” says despotic fear. “Come, let us be more prudent (more cunning) than they,” is the language of despotic craftiness and malice. Despotic policy adds, that in case of a war the people might join the enemy. A danger to the country might indeed grow out of the fact that
- 117. the Israelites didnot become Egyptianized. The power of Israelitish traditions is shown especially in the circumstance that even the descendants of Joseph, though they had an Egyptian mother, certainly became Jews. Perhaps it was dislike of Egyptian manners which led the sons of Ephraim early to migrate towards Palestine, 1 Chronicles 7:22. An honorable policy would, however, have provided means to help the Jews to secure a foreign dwelling-place. PETT, "Exodus 1:9-10 ‘And he said to his people, “See, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we. Come, let us deal wisely with them lest they multiply, and it results that when there falls out any war they also join themselves to our enemies and fight against us, and get them up out of the land.” ’ It would seem from this that the children of Israel had kept themselves apart from the actual conquests of the Hyksos, for they remained where they were and were not engaged in fighting against the Egyptians. It would appear that they had maintained their loyalty to the state. Moreover had they wished to leave Egypt they could clearly have done so under the Hyksos. Thus while we can understand the fears that the king had it would seem that they were unjustified, and at least partially arose because he saw in them a good supply of labour for any attempted projects he may have, a supply which he wanted to find an excuse to call on and that he did not want to lose. “More and mightier than we.” Clearly this meant in the area in which they dwelt. They had partly ‘taken over’ in parts of Goshen (an area whose exact boundaries we do not know, but it was quite widespread). The fear expressed is that they might join in any rebellion or invasion. But the fact that they had not previously done so in the most auspicious of circumstances rather negates the suggestion that it was a justified fear. It would, however, be sufficient to arouse the passions of many Egyptians who would have anti-Semite feelings as a result of the Hyksos activity, and who would even more importantly have an eye for the possessions of these resident aliens. “And get them up out of the land.” This is probably the real reason behind his statement, the fear that they would leave the land. Semites were always moving in and out of the land in smaller numbers, but he looked on these as permanent residents and he did not want to lose them as a valuable source of slave labour. Once they had become too strong who would be able to prevent them leaving? This serves to confirm that the children of Israel were well settled in Egypt and had at this time no intention of leaving. Although still aware of the covenant of God with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, they were neglecting the promises of that covenant, and ignoring the hints that had been given that they should eventually return to the promised land. It would have been so simple for them to leave under the Hyksos had they retained the vision to settle in God’s promised land (Genesis 12:7 and often). But they had settled down and were even philandering with false gods. This whole situation is confirmed by Joshua 24:14 where there is reference to the ‘the gods
- 118. which your fathersserved -- in Egypt’. Their faithfulness to Yahweh was in grave doubt. 10 Come, we must deal shrewdly with them or they will become even more numerous and, if war breaks out, will join our enemies, fight against us and leave the country.” Here is a leader who uses fear to motivate his people to follow his plan of oppression. This is the way most all governments get support by stimulating fear that there is an enemy. It can be real but often it is a scare tactic to get support for what is not a threat. He portrays the Hebrews as plotting the very thing he fears. One man’s neurotic fears led to both the Jews and the Egyptians suffering greatly. One bad leader can make a major difference in the lives of millions. BARNES, "Any war - The Northeastern frontier was infested by the neighboring tribes, the Shasous of Egyptian monuments, and war was waged with Egypt by the confederated nations of Western Asia under the reigns of the successors of Amosis. These incursions were repulsed with extreme difficulty. In language, features, costume, and partly also in habits, the Israelites probably resembled those enemies of Egypt. Out of the land - The Pharaohs apprehended the loss of revenue and power, which would result from the withdrawal of a peaceful and industrious race. CLARKE, "They join also unto our enemies - It has been conjectured that Pharaoh had probably his eye on the oppressions which Egypt had suffered under the shepherd-kings, who for a long series of years had, according to Manetho, governed the land with extreme cruelty. As the Israelites were of the same occupation, (viz., shepherds), the jealous, cruel king found it easy to attribute to them the same motives; taking it for granted that they were only waiting for a favorable opportunity to join the enemies of Egypt, and so overrun the whole land. GILL, "Come on,.... Which is a word of exhortation, stirring up to a quick dispatch of business, without delay, the case requiring haste, and some speedy and a matter of indifference: let us deal wisely with them; form some wise schemes, take some crafty methods to weaken and diminish them gradually; not with open force of arms,
- 119. but in amore private and secret manner, and less observed: lest they multiply; yet more and more, so that in time it may be a very difficult thing to keep them under, and many disadvantages to the kingdom may arise from them, next observed: and it come to pass, that when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies; their neighbours the Arabians, and Phoenicians, and Ethiopians: with the latter the Egyptians had wars, as they had in the times of Moses, as Josephus (p) relates, and Artapanus (q), an Heathen writer, also: Sir John Marsham (r) thinks these enemies were the old Egyptians, with whom the Israelites had lived long in a friendly manner, and so more likely to join with them, the Thebans who lived in upper Egypt, and between whom and the pastor kings that reigned in lower Egypt there were frequent wars; but these had been expelled from Egypt some time ago: and fight against us, and so get them up out of the land; take the opportunity, by joining their enemies and fighting against them, to get away from them out of Egypt into the land of Canaan, from whence they came: this, it seems, the Egyptians had some notion of, that they were meditating something of this kind, often speaking of the land of Canaan being theirs, and that they should in a short time inherit it; and though they were dreaded by the Egyptians, they did not care to part with them, being an industrious laborious people, and from whom the kingdom reaped many advantages. K&D 10-14, "Exo_1:10-14 “Let us deal wisely with them,” i.e., act craftily towards them. , sapiensem se gessit (Ecc_7:16), is used here of political craftiness, or worldly wisdom combined with craft and cunning (, lxx), and therefore is altered into in Psa_105:25 (cf. Gen_37:18). The reason assigned by the king for the measures he was about to propose, was the fear that in case of war the Israelites might make common cause with his enemies, and then remove from Egypt. It was not the conquest of his kingdom that he was afraid of, but alliance with his enemies and emigration. is used here, as in Gen_13:1, etc., to denote removal from Egypt to Canaan. He was acquainted with the home of the Israelites therefore, and cannot have been entirely ignorant of the circumstances of their settlement in Egypt. But he regarded them as his subjects, and was unwilling that they should leave the country, and therefore was anxious to prevent the possibility of their emancipating themselves in the event of war. - In the form for , according to the frequent interchange of the forms and (vid., Gen_42:4), nh is transferred from the feminine plural to the singular, to distinguish the 3rd pers. fem. from the 2nd pers., as in Jdg_5:26; Job_17:16 (vid., Ewald, §191c, and Ges. §47, 3, Anm. 3).
- 120. Consequently there isno necessity either to understand collectively as signifying soldiers, or to regard drager ot , the reading adopted by the lxx ( ), the Samaritan, Chaldee, Syriac, and Vulgate, as “certainly the original,” as Knobel has done. The first measure adopted (Exo_1:11) consisted in the appointment of taskmasters over the Israelites, to bend them down by hard labour. bailiffs over the serfs. from signifies, not feudal service, but feudal labourers, serfs (see my Commentary on 1Ki_4:6). to bend, to wear out any one's strength (Psa_102:24). By hard feudal labour ( burdens, burdensome toil) Pharaoh hoped, according to the ordinary maxims of tyrants (Aristot. polit., 5, 9; Liv. hist. i. 56, 59), to break down the physical strength of Israel and lessen its increase-since a population always grows more slowly under oppression than in the midst of prosperous circumstances-and also to crush their spirit so as to banish the very wish for liberty. - - .ytrebil r, and so Israel built (was compelled to build) provision or magazine cities vid., 2Ch_32:28, cities for the storing of the harvest), in which the produce of the land was housed, partly for purposes of trade, and partly for provisioning the army in time of war; - not fortresses, , as the lxx have rendered it. Pithom was ; it was situated, according to Herodotus (2, 158), upon the canal which commenced above Bybastus and connected the Nile with the Red Sea. This city is called Thou or Thoum in the Itiner. Anton., the Egyptian article pi being dropped, and according to Jomard (descript. t. 9, p. 368) is to be sought for on the site of the modern Abassieh in the Wady Tumilat. - Raemses (cf. Gen_47:11) was the ancient Heroopolis, and is not to be looked for on the site of the modern Belbeis. In support of the latter supposition, Stickel, who agrees with Kurtz and Knobel, adduces chiefly the statement of the Egyptian geographer Makrizi, that in the (Jews') book of the law Belbeis is called the land of Goshen, in which Jacob dwelt when he came to his son Joseph, and that the capital of the province was el Sharkiyeh. This place is a day's journey (for as others affirm, 14 hours) to the north-east of Cairo on the Syrian and Egyptian road. It served as a meeting-place in the middle ages for the caravans from Egypt to Syria and Arabia (Ritter, Erdkunde 14, p. 59). It is said to have been in existence before the Mohammedan conquest of Egypt. But the clue cannot be traced any farther back; and it is too far from the Red Sea for the Raemses of the Bible (vid., Exo_12:37). The authority of Makrizi is quite counterbalanced by the much older statement of the Septuagint, in which Jacob is made to meet his son Joseph in Heroopolis; the words of Gen_46:29, “and Joseph went up to meet Israel his father to Goshen,” being rendered thus: . Hengstenberg is not correct in saying that the later name Heroopolis is here substituted for the older name Raemses; and Gesenius, Kurtz, and Knobel are equally wrong in affirming that is supplied ex ingenio suo; but the place of meeting, which is given indefinitely as Goshen in the original, is here distinctly named. Now if this more precise definition is not an arbitrary conjecture of the Alexandrian translators, but sprang out of their acquaintance with the country, and is really correct, as Kurtz has no doubt, it follows that Heroopolis belongs to the (Gen_46:28, lxx), or was situated within it. But this
- 121. district formed thecentre of the Israelitish settlement in Goshen; for according to Gen_47:11, Joseph gave his father and brethren “a possession in the best of the land, in the land of Raemses.” Following this passage, the lxx have also rendered in Gen_46:28 by , whereas in other places the land of Goshen is simply called (Gen_45:10; Gen_46:34; Gen_47:1, etc.). But if Heroopolis belonged to the , or the province of Raemses, which formed the centre of the land of Goshen that was assigned to the Israelites, this city must have stood in the immediate neighbourhood of Raemses, or have been identical with it. Now, since the researches of the scientific men attached to the great French expedition, it has been generally admitted that Heroopolis occupied the site of the modern Abu Keisheib in the Wady Tumilat, between Thoum = Pithom and the Birket Temsah or Crocodile Lake; and according to the Itiner. p. 170, it was only 24 Roman miles to the east of Pithom, - a position that was admirably adapted not only for a magazine, but also for the gathering-place of Israel prior to their departure (Exo_12:37). But Pharaoh's first plan did not accomplish his purpose (Exo_1:12). The multiplication of Israel went on just in proportion to the amount of the oppression ( = prout, ita; as in Gen_30:30; Gen_28:14), so that the Egyptians were dismayed at the Israelites ( to feel dismay, or fear, Num_22:3). In this increase of their numbers, which surpassed all expectation, there was the manifestation of a higher, supernatural, and to them awful power. But instead of bowing before it, they still endeavoured to enslave Israel through hard servile labour. In Exo_1:13, Exo_1:14 we have not an account of any fresh oppression; but “the crushing by hard labour” is represented as enslaving the Israelites and embittering their lives. hard oppression, from the Chaldee to break or crush in pieces. “They embittered their life with hard labour in clay and bricks (making clay into bricks, and working with the bricks when made), and in all kinds of labour in the field (this was very severe in Egypt on account of the laborious process by which the ground was watered, Deu_11:10), with regard to all their labour, which they worked (i.e., performed) through them (viz., the Israelites) with severe oppression.” is also dependent upon , as a second accusative (Ewald, §277d). Bricks of clay were the building materials most commonly used in Egypt. The employment of foreigners in this kind of labour is to be seen represented in a painting, discovered in the ruins of Thebes, and given in the Egyptological works of Rosellini and Wilkinson, in which workmen who are evidently not Egyptians are occupied in making bricks, whilst two Egyptians with sticks are standing as overlookers; - even if the labourers are not intended for the Israelites, as the Jewish physiognomies would lead us to suppose. (For fuller details, see Hengstenberg's Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 80ff. English translation). BENSON, "Verse 10-11 Exodus 1:10-11. Come on, let us deal wisely with them, lest they multiply — When
- 122. men deal wickedly,it is common for them to imagine that they deal wisely, but the folly of sin will at last be manifested before all men. They set over them task- masters, to afflict them — With this very design. They not only made them serve, which was sufficient for Pharaoh’s profit, but they made them serve with rigour, so that their lives became bitter to them; intending hereby to break their spirits, and to rob them of every thing in them that was generous; to ruin their health, and shorten their days, and so diminish their numbers; to discourage them from marrying, since their children would be born to slavery; and to oblige them to desert the Hebrews, and incorporate with the Egyptians. And it is to be feared the oppression they were under did bring over many of them to join with the Egyptians in their idolatrous worship; for we read, Joshua 24:14, that they served other gods in Egypt; and we find, Ezekiel 20:8, that God had threatened to destroy them for it, even while they were in the land of Egypt. Treasure-cities — To keep the king’s money or corn, wherein a great part of the riches of Egypt consisted. COKE, "Exodus 1:10. Come on, let us, &c.— It is not to be conceived that the Egyptians could be ignorant of the Israelites' intention to return and settle in Canaan. Sensible therefore of the advantages arising to the community from such a body of people, yet fearful lest their great increase might render them too powerful, they determined, with subtle policy, to prevent that increase, and so weaken their power. Let us deal subtilely with them therefore, say they, (ne crescant amplius, observes Houbigant,) lest they should increase still more, and so, upon any occasion, join the enemies of Egypt, and assert their own liberty. ELLICOTT, "(10) Let us deal wisely.—Instead of open force, the king proposes stratagem. He thinks that he has hit upon a wise scheme—a clever plan—by which the numbers of the Israelites will be kept down, and they will cease to be formidable. The nature of the plan appears in Exodus 1:11. When there falleth out any war.—The Egyptians were in general an aggressive people—a terror to their neighbours, and seldom the object of attack. But about the beginning of the nineteenth dynasty a change took place. “A great nation grew up beyond the frontier on the north-east to an importance and power which began to endanger the Egyptian supremacy in Western Asia” (Brugsch, History of Egypt, vol. ii. p. 2). War threatened them from this quarter, and the impending danger was felt to be great. They join also.—Rather, they too join. It was not.likely that the Hebrews would have any real sympathy with the attacking nation, whether Arabs, Philistines, Syrians, or Hittites; but they might regard an invasion as affording them a good opportunity of striking a blow for freedom, and, therefore, attack the Egyptians simultaneously with their other foes. The Egyptians themselves would perhaps suppose a closer connection between them and the other Eastern races than really existed. Get them up out of the land.—The Pharaohs of the nineteenth dynasty were excessively jealous of the withdrawal from Egypt of any of their subjects, and
- 123. endeavoured both tohinder and to recover them. Immigration was encouraged, emigration sternly checked. The loss of the entire nation of the Hebrews could not be contemplated without extreme alarm. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:10 Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and [so] get them up out of the land. Ver. 10. Come on, let us deal wisely.] So as the world’s wizards use to do: but God taketh - δρασσομενος - these foxes in their own craft. [1 Corinthians 3:19] Your labouring men have the most and lustiest children. Every "oppressor" is a fool. [Proverbs 28:16] Lest, when there falleth out any war.] It may seem - by 1 Chronicles 7:21-22, compared with Psalms 77:9 - that the Ephraimites, weary of the Egyptian bondage, and too hasty to enjoy the Promised Land, invaded the Philistines and plundered them; but were pursued and slain by the men of Gath, to the great grief of their father Ephraim, and to the further exasperating of the Egyptians against all the children of Israel; which might occasion also this cruel edict and proceeding against them. It is a singular skill to bear bondage or any other burden wisely and moderately. They that break prison before God’s time, get nothing but more irons laid upon them. EXPOSITOR'S DICTIONARY, "Exodus 1:10 Crimes and criminals are swept away by time, nature finds an antidote for their poisons, and they and their ill consequences alike are blotted out and perish. If we do not forgive the villain at least we cease to hate him, as it grows more clear to us that he injures none so deeply as himself. But the θηρι δης κακ α, the enormousώ ί wickedness by which humanity itself has been outraged and disgraced, we cannot forgive; we cannot cease to hate that; the years roll away, but the tints of it remain on the page of history, deep and horrible as the day on which they were entered there. —Froude, Short Studies, I. pp468-469. Reference.—I:10-12.—Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvii. No997. PULPIT, "Exodus 1:10 Come on. The "Come then" of Kalisch is better. Let us deal wisely. "The children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light." Severe grinding labour has often been used as a means of keeping down the aspirations of a people, if not of actually diminishing their numbers, and has been found to answer. Aristotle (Pol. 5.9) ascribes to this motive the building of the Pyramids and the great works of
- 124. Polycrates of Samos,Pisistratus of Athens, and the Cypselidae of Corinth. The constructions of the last Tarquin are thought to have had the same object. Lest, when there falleth out any war, they join also to our enemies. 'At the accession of the nineteenth dynasty, though there was peace, war threatened. While the Egyptians, under the later monarchs of the eighteenth dynasty, had been quarrelling among themselves, a great nation upon their borders "had been growing up to an importance and power which began to endanger the Egyptian supremacy in Western Asia". Both Rameses I. and his son Seti had almost immediately after their accession to engage in a war, which was rather defensive the, offensive, with the Khita, or Hittites, who were the great power of Syria. At the commencement of his reign, Seti may well have feared a renewed invasion like that of the Hyksos, which would no doubt have been greatly helped by a rising of the Israelites. And so get them up out of the land. Literally, "And go up out of the land." The Pharaoh already fears that the Israelites will quit Egypt. As men of peaceful and industrious habits, and in some cases of considerable wealth (Joseph. 'Ant. Jud.' 2.9, § 1), they at once increased the strength of Egypt and the revenue of the monarch. Egypt was always ready to receive refugees, and loth to lose them. We find in a treaty made by Rameses II; the son of Seti, with the Hittites, a proviso that any Egyptian subjects who quit the country, and transfer themselves to the dominion of the Hittite king, shall be sent back to Egypt. 11 So they put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh. BARNES, "Taskmasters - The Egyptian “Chiefs of tributes.” They were men of rank, superintendents of the public works, such as are often represented on Egyptian monuments, and carefully distinguished from the subordinate overseers. The Israelites were employed in forced labor, probably in detachments, but they were not reduced to slavery, properly speaking, nor treated as captives of war. Amosis had special need of such laborers, as proved by the inscriptions. Treasure cities - “Magazines,” depots of ammunition and provisions 1Ki_9:19; 2Ch_8:4; 2Ch_32:28. Pithom and Raamses - Both cities were situated on the canal which was dug or enlarged in the 12th Dynasty. The former is known to have existed under the 18th Dynasty. Both were in existence at the beginning of the reign of Rameses II, by whom they were fortified and enlarged. The name “Pithom” means “House or temple of Tum,” the Sun God of Heliopolis (see Exo_13:20). The name of Raamses, or Rameses, is generally assumed to have been derived from Rameses II, the Sesostris of the Greeks, but it was previously known as the name of the district. See Gen_45:10; Gen_47:11.
- 125. CLARKE, "Set overthem task-masters - sarey missim, chiefs or princes of burdens, works, or tribute; επιστατας των εργων, Sept. overseers of the works. The persons who appointed them their work, and exacted the performance of it. The work itself being oppressive, and the manner in which it was exacted still more so, there is some room to think that they not only worked them unmercifully, but also obliged them to pay an exorbitant tribute at the same time. Treasure cities - arey miscenoth, store cities - public granaries. Calmet supposes this to be the name of a city, and translates the verse thus: “They built cities, viz., Miscenoth, Pithom, and Rameses.” Pithom is supposed to be that which Herodotus calls Patumos. Raamses, or rather Rameses, (for it is the same Hebrew word as in Gen_47:11, and should be written the same way here as there), is supposed to have been the capital of the land of Goshen, mentioned in the book of Genesis by anticipation; for it was probably not erected till after the days of Joseph, when the Israelites were brought under that severe oppression described in the book of Exodus. The Septuagint add here, and On, which is Heliopolis; i.e., the city of the Sun. The same reading is found also in the Coptic version. Some writers suppose that beside these cities the Israelites built the pyramids. If this conjecture be well founded, perhaps they are intended in the word miscenoth, which, from sachan, to lay up in store, might be intended to signify places where Pharaoh laid up his treasures; and from their structure they appear to have been designed for something of this kind. If the history of the pyramids be not found in the book of Exodus, it is nowhere else extant; their origin, if not alluded to here, being lost in their very remote antiquity. Diodorus Siculus, who has given the best traditions he could find relative to them, says that there was no agreement either among the inhabitants or the historians concerning the building of the pyramids - Bib. Hist., lib. 1., cap. lxiv. Josephus expressly says that one part of the oppression suffered by the Israelites in Egypt was occasioned by building pyramids. See Clarke’s note on Exo_1:14. In the book of Genesis, and in this book, the word Pharaoh frequently occurs, which, though many suppose it to be a proper name peculiar to one person, and by this supposition confound the acts of several Egyptian kings, yet is to be understood only as a name of office. It may be necessary to observe that all the Egyptian kings, whatever their own name was, took the surname of Pharaoh when they came to the throne; a name which, in its general acceptation, signified the same as king or monarch, but in its literal meaning, as Bochart has amply proved, it signifies a crocodile, which being a sacred animal among the Egyptians, the word might be added to their kings in order to procure them the greater reverence and respect.
- 126. GILL, "Therefore theydid set taskmasters over them, to afflict them with their burdens,.... This was the first scheme proposed and agreed on, and was carried into execution, to appoint taskmasters over them; or "princes", or "masters of tribute" (r), commissioners of taxes, who had power to lay heavy taxes upon them, and oblige them to pay them, which were very burdensome, and so afflictive to their minds, and tended to diminish their wealth and riches, and obliged them to harder labour in order to pay them, and so every way contributed to distress them: and they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses; these might be built with the money they collected from them by way of tribute, and so said to be built by them, since it was chiefly in husbandry, and in keeping flocks and herds, that the Israelites were employed; or they might be concerned in building these cities, some of them understanding architecture, or however the poorer or meaner sort might be made use of in the more laborious and servile part of the work; those two cities are, in the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem, called Tanis and Pelusium; but Tanis was the same with Zoan, and that was built but seven years after Hebron, an ancient city, in being long before this time, see Num_13:22. Pelusium indeed may be one of them, but then it is not that which is here called Raamses, but Pithom, as Sir John Marsham (s) and others think: Pithom is by Junius thought to be the same with the Pathumus of Herodotus (t), a town in Arabia Petraes, upon the borders of Egypt, where a ditch was dug from the Nile to the Red sea, and supposed to be the work of the Israelites: Raamses is a place different from Ramesses, Gen_47:11 and had its name from the then reigning Pharaoh, Ramesses Miamun, as Pithom is thought by some to be so called from his queen: Pliny (u) makes mention of some people called Ramisi and Patami, who probably were the inhabitants of these cities, whom he joins to the Arabians as bordering on Egypt: the Septuagint version adds a third city, "On", which is Hellopolls: and a learned writer (w) is of opinion that Raamses and Heliopolis are the same, and observes, that Raamses, in the Egyptian tongue, signifies the field of the sun, being consecrated to it, as Heliopolis is the city of the sun, the same with Bethshemesh, the house of the sun, Jer_43:13 and he thinks these cities were not properly built by the Israelites, but repaired, ornamented, and fortified, being by them banked up against the force of the Nile, that the granaries might be safe from it, as Strabo (x) writes, particularly of Heliopolis; and the Septuagint version here calls them fortified cities; and with this agrees what Benjamin of Tudela says (y), that he came to the fountain of "Al-shemesh", or the sun, which is Raamses; and there are remains of the building of our fathers (the Jew says) even towers built of bricks, and Fium, he says (z), (which was in Goshen; see Gill on Gen_47:11) is the same with Pithom; and there, he says, are to be seen some of the buildings of our fathers. Here these cities are said to be built for treasure cities, either to lay up the riches of the kings of Egypt in, or as granaries and storehouses for corn, or magazines for warlike stores, or for all of these: some think the "pyramids" were built by the Israelites, and there is a passage in Herodotus (a) which seems to favour it; he says, the kings that built them, the Egyptians, through hatred, name them not, but call them the pyramids
- 127. of the shepherdPhilitis, who at that time kept sheep in those parts; which seems to point at the Israelites, the beloved people of God, who were shepherds. HENRY 11-14, " The method they took to suppress them, and check their growth, Exo_1:11, Exo_1:13, Exo_1:14. The Israelites behaved themselves so peaceably and inoffensively that they could not find any occasion of making war upon them, and weakening them by that means: and therefore, 1. They took care to keep them poor, by charging them with heavy taxes, which, some think, is included in the burdens with which they afflicted them. 2. By this means they took an effectual course to make them slaves. The Israelites, it should seem, were much more industrious laborious people than the Egyptians, and therefore Pharaoh took care to find them work, both in building (they built him treasure- cities), and in husbandry, even all manner of service in the field: and this was exacted from them with the utmost rigour and severity. Here are many expressions used, to affect us with the condition of God's people. They had taskmasters set over them, who were directed, not only to burden them, but, as much as might be, to afflict them with their burdens, and contrive how to make them grievous. They not only made them serve, which was sufficient for Pharaoh's profit, but they made them serve with rigour, so that their lives became bitter to them, intending hereby, (1.) To break their spirits, and rob them of every thing in them that was ingenuous and generous. (2.) To ruin their health and shorten their days, and so diminish their numbers. (3.) To discourage them from marrying, since their children would be born to slavery. (4.) To oblige them to desert the Hebrews, and incorporate themselves with the Egyptians. Thus he hoped to cut off the name of Israel, that it might be no more in remembrance. And it is to be feared that the oppression they were under had this bad effect upon them, that it brought over many of them to join with the Egyptians in their idolatrous worship; for we read (Jos_24:14) that they served other gods in Egypt; and, though it is not mentioned here in this history, yet we find (Eze_20:8) that God had threatened to destroy them for it, even while they were in the land of Egypt: however, they were kept a distinct body, unmingled with the Egyptians, and by their other customs separated from them, which was the Lord's doing, and marvellous. IV. The wonderful increase of the Israelites, notwithstanding the oppressions they groaned under (Exo_1:12): The more they afflicted them the more they multiplied, sorely to the grief and vexation of the Egyptians. Note, 1. Times of affliction have often been the church's growing times, Sub pondere crescit - Being pressed, it grows. Christianity spread most when it was persecuted: the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church. 2. Those that take counsel against the Lord and his Israel do but imagine a vain thing (Psa_2:1), and create so much the greater vexation to themselves: hell and earth cannot diminish those whom Heaven will increase. JAMISON, "Therefore they did set over them taskmasters — Having first obliged them, it is thought, to pay a ruinous rent and involved them in
- 128. difficulties, that newgovernment, in pursuance of its oppressive policy, degraded them to the condition of serfs - employing them exactly as the laboring people are in the present day (driven in companies or bands), in rearing the public works, with taskmasters, who anciently had sticks - now whips - to punish the indolent, or spur on the too languid. All public or royal buildings, in ancient Egypt, were built by captives; and on some of them was placed an inscription that no free citizen had been engaged in this servile employment. they built for Pharaoh treasure cities — These two store-places were in the land of Goshen; and being situated near a border liable to invasion, they were fortified cities (compare 2 Chronicles 11:1-12:16). Pithom (Greek, Patumos), lay on the eastern Pelusiac branch of the Nile, about twelve Roman miles from Heliopolis; and Raamses, called by the Septuagint Heroopolis, lay between the same branch of the Nile and the Bitter Lakes. These two fortified cities were situated, therefore, in the same valley; and the fortifications, which Pharaoh commanded to be built around both, had probably the same common object, of obstructing the entrance into Egypt, which this valley furnished the enemy from Asia [Hengstenberg]. CALVIN, "11.Therefore they did set over them. The Egyptians devised this remedy for gradually diminishing the children of Israel. Since they are subjects, they may afflict them with burdens, to depress them; and this slavery will weaken and decrease them. But their power over them as subjects should not have been carried so far as to impose upon inoffensive persons, to whom they had granted free permission to reside among them, these new tributes; for they ought first to have considered upon what conditions they had been admitted. The exaction, then, by which Pharaoh broke faith with them, was in itself unjust; but the crime to which he proceeded was still greater, because he did not simply seek for pecuniary advantage, but desired to afflict the wretched people by the heaviness of their burdens. For the Israelites were not only compelled to pay tribute, but were put to servile labor, as Moses immediately adds. As to the two cities, it is doubtful in what sense they were called miscenoth (15) This word is sometimes taken for cellars and granaries, or repositories of all things necessary as provision; but, as it sometimes signifies “fortresses,” it will not be an unsuitable meaning, that they were commanded to build with their own hands the prisons, which might prevent them from departing. For it is clear from many passages (Genesis 47:11; Exodus 12:37; Numbers 33:3) that Rhameses was situated in that part of the country, and we shall presently see that the children of Israel went out from Rhameses. COKE, "Exodus 1:11. Task-masters— The original words signify, properly, tax- gatherers: so that the result of this counsel was, to exact a tribute to lessen their wealth, and to lay heavy burdens on them to weaken their bodies, and thereby prevent their populating and increasing. Philo tells us, that they were made to carry burdens above their strength, and to work night and day; that they were forced to be workers and servers; that they were employed in brick-making, digging, and building; and that if any of them dropped dead under their burdens, their friends were not permitted to bury them. Josephus tells us, moreover, that they were made
- 129. to dig trenchesand ditches, to drain rivers into channels, to wall whole towns, and, among other laborious works, to raise the useless and fantastical pyramids: but, without troubling ourselves further than with what Moses tells us in the subsequent verses, we shall find their work hard and bitter enough. Some observe, that the Israelites about this time began to corrupt their religion, and to worship the idols of Egypt, and were therefore, in the just judgment of God, thus oppressed and punished, as the prophet Ezekiel intimates, ch. Exodus 23:8. See also Ezekiel 20:7-8. Joshua 24:14. Treasure-cities— Store-cities, as the word is rendered, 2 Chronicles 16:4; 2 Chronicles 17:12 and in ch. Exodus 32:28. Storehouses, which Hezekiah built for the increase of corn, and wine, and oil; so that here it must mean magazines for preserving the royal stores of corn as well as treasures. The first of these, called Pithom, Marsham thinks to be the same with Pelusium, which was seated near the sea, at the mouth of one of the streams of the Nile; but Bochart and others take it for that city on the borders of Arabia, which Herodotus calls Patumos, of which opinion also is Dr. Shaw. See his Travels, p. 306. ELLICOTT, "(11) Task-masters.—Heb., chiefs of tributes. The Egyptian system of forced labour, which it was now resolved to extend to the Israelites, involved the appointment of two sets of officers—a lower class, who personally overlooked the labourers, and forced them to perform their tasks, and a higher class of superintendents, who directed the distribution of the labour, and assigned to all the tasks which they were to execute. The “task-masters” of the present passage are these high officials. To afflict them.—This was the object of the whole proceeding. It was hoped that severe labour under the lash would produce so much suffering that the number of the Israelites would be thinned, and their multiplication stopped. Humanly speaking, the scheme was a “wise” one—i.e., one likely to be successful. They built for Pharaoh treasure-cities.—By “treasure-cities” we are to understand “magazines”—i.e., strongholds, where munitions of war could be laid up for use in case of an invasion. (In 1 Kings 9:19, and 2 Chronicles 8:4, the same expression is translated “cities of store.”) The Pharaohs of the nineteenth dynasty gave great attention to the guarding of the north-eastern frontier in this way. Pithom.—This city is reasonably identified with the “Patumus” of Herodotus (ii. 158), which was in Lower Egypt, not far from Bubastis (Tel Basta). It is mentioned in the inscriptions of the nineteenth dynasty under the name of Pi-Tum (Brugsch, History of Egypt, vol. ii. p. 128). It was, as the name implies, a city of the sun-god, and was probably not very far from Heliopolis, the main seat of the sun-god’s worship. Raamses.—Pi-Ramesu, the city of Rameses, was the ordinary seat of the Court during the earlier part of the nineteenth dynasty. It appears to have been a new
- 130. name for Tanis,or for a suburb of Tanis, which overshadowed the old city. Rameses II. claims to have built the greater part of it; but it was probably commenced by his father, Seti, who made the defence of the north-eastern frontier one of his main cares. The name must be considered as a mere variant rendering of the Egyptian Ramessu or Ramesu. The site is marked by the mounds at San. LANGE, "Exodus 1:11. Taskmasters.—The organs of oppression and enslavement. “That foreigners were employed in these labors, is illustrated by a sepulchral monument, discovered in the ruins of Thebes, and copied in the Egyptological works of Rosellini and Wilkinson, which represents laborers, who are not Egyptians, as employed in making brick, and by them two Egyptians with rods, as overseers; even though these laborers may not be designed to represent Israelites, as their Jewish features would indicate” (Keil). See also Keil’s reference to Aristotle and Livy, (p422)[FN5] on the despotic method of enfeebling a people physically and mentally by enforced labor. Store-cities.—For the harvests. See Keil (p422) on Pithom (Gr. Πάτουμος, Egypt. Thou, Thoum), situated on the canal which connects the Nile with the Arabian gulf. Raemses, the same as Heroopolis. PETT, "Exodus 1:11 ‘Therefore they set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens, and they built for Pharaoh store cities, Pithom and Raamses.’ From a human point of view we have here the nub of the matter. A supply of building labourers was required and Pharaoh was looking around for potential slaves for use in his building projects. They would include many other than the children of Israel, but the children of Israel would form a major source of supply in that area. Thus their prospects completely changed and they became slave labourers for Pharaoh. One moment they were living their lives pleasantly as they had always lived them, watching over their herds and flocks, (even though it may have been getting more difficult), the next the soldiers of Pharaoh arrived and they found themselves enslaved and recruited into forced labour of an extreme kind. It was not unusual for kings to call on people for forced labour when the need arose (compare 1 Kings 5:13-14; 1 Kings 9:15; 1 Kings 9:21). It was a pressing into an unwelcome service which was common through the ages. But it was naturally hated, and especially when it became as severe and extended as this period in Egypt, for here there was a further purpose in mind, the humiliation and crushing of a people into complete subservience. We have here the same motif as in Genesis 3. The sinfulness and disobedience of those who were His now resulted in their being driven to hard labour. The sentence of Genesis 3 is again applied. If man disobeys God it would only be to his detriment. “Store cities.” The purpose of these, among others, was to act as places where grain, oil, wines and so on, obtained from taxation, could be stored. They also probably stored weapons and armaments for maintaining frontier and defence forces. The cities were fairly close to the border.
- 131. “Store cities, Pithomand Raamses.” Around 1300 BC Sethos I began large building programmes in the North East Delta and had a residence there. It may be that it was he who founded the Delta capital largely built by his son Rameses II. who named it Pi-Ramesse, ‘the house of Rameses’. Rameses II extended his building programmes throughout the whole of Egypt. Thus he may have been the Pharaoh in question which would date the Exodus in 13th century BC. The sites of these cities are possibly known. However, their identification is by no means certain. Rameses has been identified with Avaris (Tanis), the previous Hyksos capital, which was destroyed and left waste after their expulsion and rebuilt by Sethos and Rameses. But this identification has been questioned. Another possibility is a site near Qantir. Rameses became Rameses II’s main residence. Pithom (‘dwelling of Tum’) has been identified with Tel er-Retaba or Tel el-Maskhuta in the Wadi Tumilat (Tel el-Maskhuta is often identified as Succoth). Thus whether these were ‘new’ cities, or refurbishing of older ones, is also not certain. But if the majority view on the sites is accepted there had been no building projects there prior to these ones since the time of the Hyksos, which would leave a choice between the two periods for the ‘Pharaoh who knew not Joseph’. In Genesis 4:17; Genesis 11:1-9 the building of cities was connected with man’s rebellion against God. The same motif is found here. If His people would not listen to Him and would not seek to establish themselves as the people of God within the land promised to their forefathers, and establish His worship there, they would be compelled to build cities in a strange land. Compare how Cain departed from the land of his father to build a ‘city’ (possibly a gathering of dwellings, such as caves or tents) in a strange land (Genesis 4), as did the builder of cities in Genesis 10:11; Genesis 11:1-9. Israel also were now in a strange land, and had chosen to remain there. Thus they became involved in doing what was contrary to God’s will for them. They began to build cities. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:11 Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses. Ver. 11. To afflict them.] Because they would not "serve God with gladness of heart." [Deuteronomy 28:47-48] For now they began to go awhoring after the idols of Egypt. [Ezekiel 23:8; Ezekiel 20:5; Ezekiel 20:7-8] And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities.] They built also those famous pyramids, as some think, (a) of which it is reported, that for the great height of them, a man cannot shoot an arrow so high as the midst of the lower tower, whereon the spire stands. (b) PULPIT, "Exodus 1:11
- 132. They did setover them taskmasters. Literally, "lords of tribute," or "lords of service." The term used, sarey massim, is the Egyptian official title for over-lookers of forced labour. It occurs in this sense on the monument representing brick- making, which has been supposed by some to be a picture of the Hebrews at work. To afflict them with their burdens. Among the tasks set the labourers in the representation above alluded to are the carrying of huge lumps of clay and of water- jars on one shoulder, and also the conveyance of bricks from place to place by means of a yoke. They built for Pharaoh treasure-cities, Pithom and Raamses. By "treasure-cities" we are to understand "store-cities," or "cities of store," as the same word is translated in 1 Kings 9:19 and 2 Chronicles 8:4. Such cities contained depots of provisions and magazines of arms. They were generally to be found on all assailable frontiers in ancient as in modern times. (Compare 2 Chronicles 11:5, 2 Chronicles 11:12; 2 Chronicles 33:1-25 :28, etc.) Of the cities here mentioned, which the Israelites are said to have "built," or helped to build, Pithom is in all probability the Patumes of Herodotus (2:158), which was not far from Bubastis, now Tel-Basta. Its exact site is uncertain, but if identical with the Thou, or Thoum, of the ' Itinerary of An-tonine,' it must have lain north of the Canal of Necho, not south, where most maps place it. The word means "abode of the sun," or rather "of the setting sun," called by the Egyptians Tam, or Atum. Names formed on the model were very common under the nineteenth dynasty, Rameses II. having built a Pa-Ra, a Pa- Ammon, and a Pa-Phthah in Nubia. Pa-Tum itself has not been found among the cities of this period, but appears in the records of the twentieth dynasty as a place where the Setting-Sun god had a treasury. The name Rameses is probably put for Pa-Rameses (as Thoum for Pa-Tum), a city frequently mentioned in the inscriptions of the nineteenth dynasty, and particularly favoured by Rameses II; whose city it was especially called, and by whom it was greatly enlarged, if not wholly built. We incline to believe that the building was commenced by Seti, who named the place, as he did his great temple, the Rameseum, after his father. The city was, according to Brugsch, a sort of suburb of Tanis. It was a magnificent place, and under Rameses II. and his son Menephthah was the ordinary residence of the court. Hence the miracles of Moses are said to have been wrought "in the field of Zoan," i.e. the country about Tanis (Psalms 78:12, Psalms 78:43). 12 But the more they were oppressed, the more they multiplied and spread; so the Egyptians came to dread the Israelites CLARKE, "But the more they afflicted them - The margin has pretty nearly preserved the import of the original: And as they afflicted them, so they multiplied and so they grew That is, in proportion to their afflictions was their prosperity; and had their sufferings been greater, their increase would have been still more abundant.
- 133. GILL, "But themore they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew,.... Became more numerous, "and broke out" (b), as it may be rendered, like water which breaks out and spreads itself; so the Israelites, increasing in number, spread themselves still more in the land; the Egyptians thought, by putting them to hard labour in building cities, to have weakened their strength, and made them unfit for the procreation of children; but instead of that, the more hard labour they were put unto, the more healthful and the stronger they were, and begot more children, and multiplied exceedingly: and so it is that oftentimes afflictive dispensations are multiplying and growing times to the people of God, in a spiritual sense; who grow like the palm tree, which the more weight it has upon it the more it grows; when the church of God has been most violently persecuted, the number of converts have been greater, and saints under affliction grow in grace, in faith and love, in holiness, humility, patience, peace, and joy; see Act_12:1. and they were grieved because of the children of Israel; because of their multiplication and increase, and because their schemes for lessening them did not succeed; they were as thorns in their eyes, as some interpret the word, as Jarchi (c) observes. CALVIN, "12.But the more. Moses relates the contest between the mercy of God and the cruelty of the king of Egypt. When, therefore, the wretched Israelites were tyrannically afflicted, he says that God came to their aid, and so powerfully that his interference was successful. Thus was that wicked and deceitful design frustrated, which the Egyptians had set on foot for destroying the Church. Thence may we, too, conceive the hope, that whatsoever the wicked imagine against us will come to nought, because God’s hand is greater, and shall prevail. But we must bear afflictions patiently, because he would have us struggle against, and rise under the weight imposed upon us; (16) and because we know that it is the peculiar office of God to oppose himself to unjust counsels, in order that they may not succeed, let us learn to abstain from all deceit and violence, lest we wantonly provoke God. But this passage is especially intended to console the believer, that he may be prepared to take up his cross more patiently; since God is sufficient to supply the help, to which the wrath of the wicked must finally yield. What is said in the second part of the verse, that the Egyptians (17) were grieved, means, that they became more anxious, as they saw that they availed nothing, and that their unexpected increase threatened still greater danger; for, since they feared the Israelites before they had afflicted them, no wonder that they felt alarmed lest they should avenge themselves when provoked. And hence the profitable instruction may be gathered, that while the wicked proceed to horrible crimes in order to insure their safety, the Almighty visits them with the very just return, that thus their anxiety is augmented. Some render it, “the Egyptians hated the people of Israel;” and so the word , kutz, is sometimes taken, but the construction of the passage demands the rendering which I have
- 134. given. BENSON, "Exodus 1:12.The more they multiplied — To the grief and vexation of the Egyptians. The original expression, rendered grew, is very emphatical, jiphrots. They broke forth and expanded themselves with impetuosity, like a river swollen with the rains, whose waters increase and gain strength by being confined, Here we see how vain and fruitless the devices of men are against the designs of God: and how easily he, in his providence, can turn their counsels against themselves, and cause the very means which they employ to oppress his people, to become the greatest helps and advantages to them. Times of persecution and affliction have often been the church’s growing times: Christianity spread most when it was most persecuted. COKE, "Exodus 1:12. The more they afflicted them, &c.— The expression in the original is more energetic than any of the preceding in Exodus 1:7. iprotz, rendered grew, signifies, properly, to break forth, and expand itself with impetuosity, like a rapid river, which swells and gathers force by being confined. Vain are the counsels of men against the providence of God! His blessing can turn the means they employ to oppress into the greatest advantages. There are many devices in a man's heart; nevertheless, the counsel of the Lord, that shall stand. Proverbs 19:21. COFFMAN, "Verse 12-13 "And his sons did unto him according as he commanded them: for his sons carried him into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field, for a possession of a burying-place, of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre." These two verses are clearly a summary of the whole event, as the words "as he commanded them" indicate. There is no evidence whatever here that the floor of Atad was east of the Jordan, despite the preponderance of scholarly opinion to the contrary. John Skinner stated that "practically all commentators" agree that the words for east of in Genesis are "in front of," not "beyond,"[13] as was noted earlier in our studies of Genesis 2:14. Therefore, if the text here was saying that Atad was east of Jordan, the words would have been "in front of," not, "beyond." Of course, the location of the place is unknown, and some have eliminated the difficulty by translating "near Jordan," instead of "beyond Jordan,"[14] but receiving these verses as a summary of the whole event makes such a device totally unnecessary. Since the whole party admittedly entered Canaan from the east, it is just as reasonable that they stopped on the west bank for the seven days of mourning as to suppose that they stopped on the east bank. Certainly, it was on the way to Machpelah, and perhaps near there. It appears that the great company of the Egyptians, at this point, returned to Egypt and permitted Joseph and his brothers to inter Jacob's body in the cave with some degree of privacy that they no doubt
- 135. desired; or, thatif they did not do that, might merely have remained in camp until the brothers returned from Machpelah. And then all returned to Egypt together, as seems to be indicated in Genesis 50:14. Such a conjecture is not required by the text, but Genesis 50:14 does not deny the possibility of it, for Genesis 50:14 is also a summary of the entire return of the whole company to Egypt. ELLICOTT, "(12) The more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. —This result was not natural. It can only be ascribed to God’s superintending Providence, whereby “the fierceness of man” was made to “turn to his praise.” Naturally, severe and constant labour exhausts a nation, and causes its numbers to diminish. They were grieved.—This is scarcely strong enough. Translate, “They were sore distressed.” TRAPP, "Exodus 1:12 But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were grieved because of the children of Israel. Ver. 12. The more they multiplied.] As the ground is most fruitful that is most harrowed; and as the walnut tree bears best when most beaten. Fish thrive better in cold and salt waters, than in warm and fresh. And they were grieved.] Or, irked, as Moab likewise was because of Israel: they did fret and vex at them. [Numbers 22:3-4] Yet they wero allied, and passed by them in peace: no other reason but the old enmity, Genesis 3:15, and that utter antipathy, Proverbs 29:27. NISBET, "GROWTH UNDER THE KNIFE ‘The more they multiplied and grew.’ Exodus 1:12 I. The intention of issuing new orders and decrees from time to time was that the spirit of the Israelites might be broken.—But how shortsighted the policy! If they had desired to create a unity of hatred to themselves on the part of Israel, what policy could have been adopted more conducive thereto? Evil often outwits itself. Man plans as he will, but as to the results, how often is it true, ‘He meaneth not so!’ II. Centuries afterwards, the martyr Stephen referred to this cruel edict.—‘They dealt subtilly with our kindred, and evil-entreated our fathers, so that they should cast out their babes to the end they might not live’ (Acts 7:19). Israel never forgot the anguish of that hour. But on Pharaoh’s side what a stroke of policy! To deal with the babes was to go to the very springs of national life, and ultimately to affect the entire nation. III. There is nothing which so closely and instantly touches the national existence as
- 136. the treatment ofchild life.—What that is, the nation will become in thirty years. How important that every effort should be made to preserve the springs from the contaminating influence of bad parents and designing teachers! How well worth while it is for Christians to spend time and thought in the instruction of the young! The teachers of a small Sunday-school are probably touching a larger number of the coming years than the minister of a great congregation. Speaking generally, each child stands for more years than any adult in middle-life can do. Besides which the child’s mind is so much more retentive and impressionable than the adult’s. It is a wonder, indeed, that more of the best people in our churches do not join the ranks of Sunday-school teachers, and paint on this immortal canvas. Illustration (1) ‘The chronology is by no means easy. The question turns upon the length of the bondage. By “430 years” (Exodus 12:40-41; Galatians 3:17) we may understand either the whole period from the call of Abraham to the giving of the law on Sinai, or simply the period which was spent by the children of Israel in Egypt itself. The first explanation is more in harmony with other passages of Scripture; the second is more easily reconciled with the rapid increase of the people.’ Edersheim says, ‘Three centuries and a half intervened between the close of the Book of Genesis and the events with which that of Exodus opens.’ (2) ‘Persecution is not only cruel, but it is weak as well. It fails in its purpose. In the history of nations luxury has undermined oftener than hardship. In the history of character compliance has enervated while opposition has braced up. In the history of religion the years of toil and conflict have been the richest in results. In the history of the Bible the endeavour to burn or suppress it has only led to its wider circulation.’ (3) ‘Times of suffering and persecution have always been the growing days of the Church. There never were such days for the spread of the truth as when Diocletian’s persecutions swept over the followers of Jesus or the dragoons of Claverhouse the moors of Scotland. And if ever those days should come again, they would probably add a marvellous increase to the true followers of Jesus. And so it is in the case of the individual. We make our best progress, not when all our circumstances are favourable, but when they are adverse.’ PETT, "Exodus 1:12 ‘But the more they afflicted them the more they multiplied and the more they spread abroad. And they were disquieted because of the children of Israel.’ The activity did not serve to diminish the numbers of the children of Israel. Rather they seem to have continued to expand in numbers, no doubt also introducing into their numbers other Semites by marriage and assimilation, people who found comfort in joining a larger community, so that their superiority of numbers become a matter of alarm to the Egyptians. It seems clear that in all this they retained their
- 137. identity as apeople, and their ‘tribal’ organisation and worship, even if not as purely as they should have. The result was that the Egyptians really did become alarmed. They wanted to keep this supply of slaves but they were concerned at the way their numbers were growing. Something had to be done about it. 13 and worked them ruthlessly. Egypt is the land of endless labor. The Nile has to be watched lest it destroy the embankments, and then when it flows there is endless labor the rest of the year with crops. Building of temples and pyramids was also endless. Twenty thousand out of 150 thousand men who built the Alexandrian cannel died. The Egyptians thought this was free labor, but they wasted the vast human potential of the Hebrews. They lost their glory by their folly. The choice to use forced labor lead to great plagues and the loss of the Hebrews. Pharaoh destroyed his economy by enslaving a free people. CLARKE, "To serve with rigour - bepharech, with cruelty, great oppression; being ferocious with them. The word fierce is supposed by some to be derived from the Hebrew, as well as the Latin ferox, from which we more immediately bring our English term. This kind of cruelty to slaves, and ferociousness, unfeelingness, and hard-heartedness, were particularly forbidden to the children of Israel. See Lev_25:43, Lev_25:46, where the same word is used: Thou shalt not rule over him with Rigor, but shalt fear thy God. GILL, "And the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with rigour. Or with breach (c), with what might tend to break their strength; they laid heavier burdens upon them, obliged them to harder service, used them more cruelly and with greater fierceness, adding to their hard service ill words, and perhaps blows. JAMISON, "The Egyptians ... made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in mortar, and in brick — Ruins of great brick buildings are found in all parts of Egypt. The use of crude brick, baked in the sun, was universal in upper and lower Egypt, both for public and private buildings; all but the temples themselves were of crude brick. It is worthy of remark that more bricks bearing the name of Thothmes III, who is supposed to have been the king of Egypt at the time of the Exodus, have been discovered than of any other period [Wilkinson]. Parties of these brickmakers are seen depicted on the ancient monuments with “taskmasters,” some standing, others in a sitting posture beside the laborers, with
- 138. their uplifted sticksin their hands. CALVIN, "13.And the Egyptians made. Thus Moses informs us that, so far from being induced to kindness by their fears, they were rather hardened, and spurred on to greater cruelty; for the wicked do not perceive that God is against them, when their perverse strivings are unsuccessful; and if this thought ever arises, still the blind impetuosity of their folly hurries them forwards, so that they doubt not to be able in their obstinate lust to prevail even in opposition to God; as will be made clearer in the progress of this history. The cruelty of the exactions is expressed, when he says that “their lives were made bitter,” nothing being sweeter than life; therefore, it appears, that their miseries were extreme and intolerable, which made life burdensome. He confirms this in other words, and also specifies their tasks, that they were engaged “in mortar and in brick, and in all manner of (similar) services.” He twice repeats that they were treated with rigor, i e. , harshly. (18) BENSON, "Exodus 1:13. With rigour — bepareck, with cruelty, or tyranny; with hard words and cruel usage, without mercy or mitigation. This God permitted for wise and just reasons: 1st, As a punishment of the idolatry into which, it appears, many of them had fallen: 2d, To wean them from the land of Egypt, which was a plentiful, and, in many respects, a desirable land, and to quicken their desires after Canaan: 3d, To prepare the way for God’s glorious works, and Israel’s deliverance. COKE, "Exodus 1:13. And the Egyptians— The more sensibly God's blessing was discerned towards the Israelites, the more furiously was the rage of their persecutors kindled against them. Moses represents them suffering, as it were, in a furnace of fire, Deuteronomy 4:20. REFLECTIONS.—We must not promise ourselves long prosperity in this world. Where we have found the warmest love we may soon experience the bitterest hatred; so transitory is the fashion of sublunary comforts. We have here, 1. The great unkindness shewn to the Israelites in a succeeding reign; not by Pharaoh's immediate successor, but by one who, at a considerable distance of time, had forgotten the obligations which the country lay under to Joseph. Note; We shall often find men ungrateful, and unmindful of the kind offices we have done them; but what is done for God will be had in everlasting remembrance. The poor Israelites are now become obnoxious to the state; their multitude is a plea for their oppression, as if they were a dangerous people; they pretend at least to fear, lest they revolt to their enemies, or, according to the tradition which was well known, should secede into Canaan. Note; The people of God have been often misrepresented as enemies to the state, in order to countenance oppression and persecution against them. With a crafty policy they therefore harass them with taxes, burdens, buildings, to break their spirits, diminish their numbers, and perhaps with a view to enforce them to incorporate with the Egyptians, in order to avoid the afflictions of their brethren. Note; (1.) The most deep-laid schemes of the wicked, however wise in
- 139. their own eyes,will appear folly at the last. (2.) Where men attempt to defeat God's counsels, their very efforts against them shall sooner produce their accomplishment. 2. We have the great increase of the Israelites under their oppression. A persecuted church is almost always a thriving one. ELLICOTT, "(13) With rigour.—Forced labour in Egypt was of a very severe character. Those condemned to it worked from morning to night under the rod of a task-master, which was freely applied to their legs or backs, if they rested their weary limbs for a moment. (See Records of the Past, vol. viii. p. 149; Chabas, Mélanges Egyptolo-giques, vol. ii. p. 121). The heat of the sun was great; the burthens which the labourers had to carry were heavy, and the toil was incessant. Death often resulted from the, excessive work. According to Herodotus, a single monarch, Neco, destroyed in this way 120,000 of his subjects (Herod, ii. 158). PETT, "Exodus 1:13-14 ‘And the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with rigour, and they made their lives bitter with hard service, in mortar and in brick and in all manner of service in the countryside, all their service in which they made them serve with rigour.’ Note the stress on their ‘service’ or slavery. The result was that their pleasant lives had been turned upside down. ‘In mortar and in brick.’ Contemporary Egyptian texts speak of the Egyptians employing the ‘Apiru in dragging the huge stones required for the construction of temples in different parts of Egypt. These would then be set in place under the supervision of Egyptian experts. These ‘Apiru probably included the children of Israel, the ‘Hebrews’ (1:15-16; 2:11-13), whom Egyptians would see as ‘Apiru ( see article, "The Name ‘Hebrew’ in Archaeology and in Scripture"). We should note that the term ‘Hebrew’ is only ever used of Israel when seen in terms of their being foreigners (thus Genesis 14:13; Genesis 39:14; Genesis 39:17). “To serve with rigour, and they made their lives bitter with hard service.” Emphasis is laid on the hardness of their lives and the bitterness with which they looked back on better times. But their service was not limited to building, for others of them were forced to work in the countryside. This would have included the gathering of straw and stubble to make bricks and the digging of canals and irrigation channels, and the construction and use of different methods of transporting irrigation water. They had become an even more enslaved people than the Egyptians, seen as suitable for degraded work. Brickmaking by foreigners under the eye of Egyptian taskmasters is readily witnessed to in inscriptions. 14 They made their lives bitter with harsh labor in brick and mortar and with all
- 140. kinds of workin the fields; in all their harsh labor the Egyptians worked them ruthlessly. BARNES, "The use of brick, at all times common in Egypt, was especially so under the 18th Dynasty. An exact representation of the whole process of brickmaking is given in a small temple at Thebes, erected by Tothmosis III, the fourth in descent from Amosis. Immense masses of brick are found at Belbeis, the modern capital of Sharkiya, i. e. Goshen, and in the adjoining district. All manner of service in the field - Not merely agricultural labor, but probably the digging of canals and processes of irrigation which are peculiarly onerous and unhealthy. CLARKE, "They made their lives bitter - So that they became weary of life, through the severity of their servitude. With hard bondage - baabodah kashah, with grievous servitude. This was the general character of their life in Egypt; it was a life of the most painful servitude, oppressive enough in itself, but made much more so by the cruel manner of their treatment while performing their tasks. In mortar, and in brick - First, in digging the clay, kneading, and preparing it, and secondly, forming it into bricks, drying them in the sun, etc. Service in the field - Carrying these materials to the places where they were to be formed into buildings, and serving the builders while employed in those public works. Josephus says “The Egyptians contrived a variety of ways to afflict the Israelites; for they enjoined them to cut a great number of channels for the river, and to build walls for their cities and ramparts, that they might restrain the river, and hinder its waters from stagnating upon its overrunning its own banks; they set them also to build pyramids, (πυραμιδας τε ανοικοδομουντες), and wore them out, and forced them to learn all sorts of mechanic arts, and to accustom themselves to hard labor.” - Antiq., lib. ii., cap. ix., sec. 1. Philo bears nearly the same testimony, p. 86, Edit. Mangey. GILL, "And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage,.... So that they had no ease of body nor peace of mind; they had no comfort of life, their lives and mercies were embittered to them: in mortar and in brick, and in all manner of service of the field; if Pelusium was one of the cities they built, that had its name from clay, the soil about it being clayish, and where the Israelites might be employed in making brick for the building of that and other cities: Josephus (d) says, they were ordered to part the river (Nile) into many canals, to build walls about cities, and raise up mounds, lest the water overflowing the banks should stagnate; and to
- 141. build pyramids, obligingthem to learn various arts, and inure themselves to labour: so Philo the Jew says (e), some worked in the clay, forming it into bricks, and others in carrying straw: some were appointed to build private houses, others the walls of cities, and to cut ditches and canals in the river, and obliged day and night to carry burdens, so that they had no rest, nor were they suffered to refresh themselves with sleep; and some say that they were not only employed in the fields in ploughing and sowing and the like, but in carrying of dung thither, and all manner of uncleanness: of their being employed in building of pyramids and canals; see Gill on Gen_47:11. all their service wherein they made them serve was with rigour; they not only put them to hard work, but used them in a very churlish and barbarous manner, abusing them with their tongues, and beating them with their hands: Philo in the above place says, the king not only compelled them to servile works, but commanded them heavier things than they could bear, heaping labours one upon another; and if any, through weakness, withdrew himself, it was judged a capital crime, and the most merciless and cruel were set over them as taskmasters. BENSON, "Exodus 1:14. In mortar and brick — It has been supposed by many, that, besides the treasure-cities, mentioned Exodus 1:11, and other similar works, the Israelites were employed in raising those enormous piles, termed pyramids, which remain to this day, and probably will remain to the end of the world; “monuments, not so much of the greatness and wisdom, as of the folly, caprice, exorbitant power, and cruel tyranny of the monarchs who projected them. It cannot indeed be denied, that the skill wherewith they were planned equals the vastness of the labour with which they were completed; but then it is evident they never could be useful in any degree adequate to the toil and expense with which they were erected. The supposition, however, is entirely groundless; for the Israelites were employed in making brick; while it is well known the pyramids were built of hewn stone.” — Scott. “The great pyramid,” says Herodotus, “was covered with polished stones, perfectly well joined, the smallest of which was thirty feet long. It was built in the form of steps, on each of which were placed wooden machines to raise the stones from one to another.” Diodorus adds, that “the stories were of very different workmanship, and of eternal duration. It is preserved to our days (the middle of the Augustan age) without being in the least injured. The marble was brought from the quarries of Arabia.” Pliny bears the same testimony: “It is formed of stone brought from the quarries of Arabia.” — Encycl. Brit. So that, it seems evident, the Israelites, who were employed in brick and mortar, had no hand in erecting the pyramids. All manner of service in the field — In cultivating the ground, and, according to Josephus, in cutting canals and trenches, to convey to different parts of the country the waters of the Nile, to raise up mounds, lest the waters overflowing should stagnate, and in other laborious services. COFFMAN, ""And Joseph returned into Egypt, he, and his brethren, and all that went up with him to bury his father, after he had buried his father."
- 142. This magnificent royalfuneral accorded the original Israel was fully deserved by the founder of the nation which in time would deliver to mankind the blessed Messiah, and it was provided through that same Providence which marked every event in the rise of this people from such a small beginning to that eminence which they later received. ELLICOTT, "(14) In morter and in brick.—It has been questioned whether the Egyptians used brick as a material for building. No doubt temples, palaces, and pyramids were ordinarily of stone; but the employment of brick for walls, fortresses, and houses, especially in the Delta, is well attested. (See the Quarterly Statement of the Palestine Exploration Fund for July, 1880, pp. 137, 139, 143, &c.) Pyramids, too, were sometimes of brick (Herod. ii. 136). The manufacture of bricks by foreigners, employed (like the Israelites) as public slaves, is represented by the kings upon their monuments. All manner of service in the field.—Josephus speaks of their being employed to dig canals (Ant. Jud. ii. 9, § 1), and there is a trace in Deuteronomy 11:10 of other labours connected with irrigation having been devolved on them. Such labours, under the hot sun of Egypt, are exhausting and dangerous to health. And all their service . . . was with rigour. Rather, besides all their other service, which they made them serve with rigour. PULPIT, "They made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in morter and in brick. While stone was the material chiefly employed by the Egyptians for their grand edifices, temples, palaces, treasuries, and the like, brick was also made use of to a large extent for inferior buildings, for tombs, dwelling-houses, walls of towns, forts, enclosures of temples, etc. There are examples of its employment in pyramids; but only at a time long anterior to the nineteenth and even to the eighteenth dynasty. If the Pharaoh of the present passage was Seti I; the bricks made may have been destined in the main for that great wall which he commenced, but did not live to complete, between Pelusium and Heliopolis, which was to secure his eastern frontier. All manner of labour in the field. The Israelitish colony was originally employed to a large extent in tending the royal flocks and herds (Genesis 47:6). At a later date many of them were engaged in agricultural operations (Deuteronomy 11:10). These, in Egypt, are in some respects light, e.g. preparing the land and ploughing, whence the remark of Herodotus (2.14); but in other respects exceedingly heavy. There is no country where care and labour are so constantly needed during the whole of the year. The inundation necessitates extreme watchfulness, to save cattle, to prevent the houses and the farmyards from being inundated, and the embankments from being washed away. The cultivation is continuous throughout the whole of the year; and success depends upon a system of irrigation that requires constant labour and unremitting attention. If the "labour in the field" included, as Josephus supposed (1.s.c.), the cutting of canals, their lives would indeed have been "made bitter." There is no such exhausting toil as that of working under the hot Egyptian sun, with
- 143. the feet inwater, in an open cutting, where there can be no shade, and scarcely a breath of air, from sunrise to sunset, as forced labourers are generally required in do. Me-hemet Ali lost 20,000 labourers out of 150,000 in the construction of the Alexandrian Canal towards the middle of the present century. 15 The king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, whose names were Shiphrah and Puah, Shiphrah equals fair one. Puah equals fragrant one. The savage work load did not control the growth of these people, and so even more radical measures had to be taken. When this also failed it was plan C which was not secret but open murder. Here was a very sick and desperate ruler. Parker writes, “Two humble women may be more than a match for the great king of Egypt. No influence, how obscure soever, is to be treated with contempt. A child may baffle a king. A kitten has been known to alarm a bear. A fly once choked a pope.” “There is another history beside that which is written in the columns of the daily newspaper. Every country has heroes and heroines uncanonized.” Many would obligated to obey the king and follow orders. They had a higher set of orders. Little people can render ineffective the evil plans of the powerful. BARNES, "Hebrew midwifes - Or “midwives of the Hebrew women.” This measure at once attested the inefficacy of the former measures, and was the direct cause of the event which issued in the deliverance of Israel, namely, the exposure of Moses. The women bear Egyptian names, and were probably Egyptians. CLARKE, "Hebrew midwives - Shiphrah and Puah, who are here mentioned, were probably certain chiefs, under whom all the rest acted, and by whom they were instructed in the obstetric art. Aben Ezra supposes there could not have been fewer than five hundred midwives among the Hebrew women at this time, but that very few were requisite see proved on Exo_1:19 (note). GILL, "And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives,.... It is difficult to say who these midwives were, whether Egyptian or Hebrew women. Josephus is of opinion that they were Egyptians, and indeed those the king was most likely to succeed with; and it may seem improbable that he should offer
- 144. such a thingto Hebrew women, who he could never think would ever comply with it, through promises or threatenings; and the answer they afterwards gave him, that the Hebrew women were not as the Egyptian women, looks as if they were of the latter: and yet, after all, it is more likely that these midwives were Hebrew women, their names are Hebrew; and besides, they are not said to be the midwives of Hebrew women, but Hebrew midwives; nor does it seem probable that the Hebrew women should have Egyptian midwives, and not those of their own nation; and they were such as feared the Lord; and the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem are express for it, and they pretend to tell us who they were: "of which the name of the one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah"; the one, they say, was Jochebed, the wife of Amram, and mother of Moses and Aaron, and the other Miriam their sister; and this is the sense of many of the Jewish writers (f): but whatever may be said for Jochebed, it is not credible that Miriam should be a midwife, who was but a girl, or maid, at this time, about seven years of age, as the following chapter shows, and much less one of so much repute as to be spoke to by the king. It may seem strange, that only two should be spoke to on this account, when, as Aben Ezra supposes, there might be five hundred of them: to which it may be answered, that these were the most noted in their profession, and the king began with these, that if he could succeed with them, he would go on to prevail on others, or engage them to use their interest with others to do the like; or these might be the midwives of the principal ladies among the Israelites, in one of whose families, according as his magicians had told, as the Targum of Jonathan observes, should be born a son, by whom the land of Egypt would be destroyed; of which Josephus (g) also takes notice; and therefore he might be chiefly solicitous to destroy the male children of such families; but Aben Ezra thinks, that these two were the chief over the rest of the midwives, and who collected and paid to the king the tribute out of their salaries, which was laid upon them, and so he had an opportunity of conversing with them on this subject. HENRY 15-21, "The Egyptians' indignation at Israel's increase, notwithstanding the many hardships they put upon them, drove them at length to the most barbarous and inhuman methods of suppressing them, by the murder of their children. It was strange that they did not rather pick quarrels with the grown men, against whom they might perhaps find some occasion: to be thus bloody towards the infants, whom all must own to be innocents, was a sin which they had to cloak for. Note, 1. There is more cruelty in the corrupt heart of man than one would imagine, Rom_3:15, Rom_3:16. The enmity that is in the seed of the serpent against the seed of the woman divests men of humanity itself, and makes them forget all pity. One would not think it possible that ever men should be so barbarous and blood-thirsty as the persecutors of God's people have been, Rev_17:6. 2. Even confessed innocence is no defence against the old enmity. What blood so guiltless as that of a child new-born? Yet that is prodigally shed like water, and sucked with delight like milk or honey. Pharaoh and Herod sufficiently proved themselves agents for that great red dragon, who stood to devour the man-child as soon as it was born, Rev_12:3, Rev_12:4. Pilate delivered Christ to be crucified, after he had confessed that he found no fault in
- 145. him. It iswell for us that, though man can kill the body, this is all he can do. Two bloody edicts are here signed for the destruction of all the male children that were born to the Hebrews. I. The midwives were commanded to murder them. Observe, 1. The orders given them, Exo_1:15, Exo_1:16. It added much to the barbarity of the intended executions that the midwives were appointed to be the executioners; for it was to make them, not only bloody, but perfidious, and to oblige them to betray a trust, and to destroy those whom they undertook to save and help. Could he think that their sex would admit such cruelty, and their employment such base treachery? Note, Those who are themselves barbarous think to find, or make, others as barbarous. Pharaoh's project was secretly to engage the midwives to stifle the men-children as soon as they were born, and then to lay it upon the difficulty of the birth, or some mischance common in that case, Job_3:11. The two midwives he tampered with in order hereunto are here named; and perhaps, at this time, which was above eighty years before their going out of Egypt, those two might suffice for all the Hebrew women, at least so many of them as lay near the court, as it is plain by Exo_2:5, Exo_2:6, many of them did, and of them he was most jealous. They are called Hebrew midwives, probably not because they were themselves Hebrews (for surely Pharaoh could never expect they should be so barbarous to those of their own nation), but because they were generally made use of by the Hebrews; and, being Egyptians, he hoped to prevail with them. 2. Their pious disobedience to this impious command, Exo_1:17. They feared God, regarded his law, and dreaded his wrath more than Pharaoh's and therefore saved the men-children alive. Note, If men's commands be any way contrary to the commands of God, we must obey God and not man, Act_4:19; Act_5:29. No power on earth can warrant us, much less oblige us, to sin against God, our chief Lord. Again, Where the fear of God rules in the heart, it will preserve it from the snare which the inordinate fear of man brings. 3. Their justifying themselves in this disobedience, when they were charged with it as a crime, Exo_1:18. They gave a reason for it, which, it seems, God's gracious promise furnished them with - that they came too late to do it, for generally the children were born before they came, Exo_1:19. I see no reason we have to doubt the truth of this; it is plain that the Hebrews were now under an extraordinary blessing of increase, which may well be supposed to have this effect, that the women had very quick and easy labour, and, the mothers and children being both lively, they seldom needed the help of midwives: this these midwives took notice of, and, concluding it to the finger of God, were thereby emboldened to disobey the king, in favour of those whom Heaven thus favoured, and with this justified themselves before Pharaoh, when he called them to an account for it. Some of the ancient Jews expound it thus, Ere the midwife comes to them they pray to their Father in heaven, and he answereth them, and they do bring forth. Note, God is a readier help to his people in distress than any other helpers are, and often anticipates them with the blessings of his goodness; such deliverances lay them under peculiarly strong obligations. 4. The recompence God gave them for their tenderness towards his people: He dealt well with them, Exo_1:20. Note, God will be behind-hand with none for any kindness done to his people, taking it as done to himself. In particular, he made them houses (Exo_1:21), built them up into families, blessed
- 146. their children, andprospered them in all they did. Note, The services done for God's Israel are often repaid in kind. The midwives kept up the Israelites' houses, and, in recompence for it, God made them houses. Observe, The recompence has relation to the principle upon which they went: Because they feared God, he made them houses. Note, Religion and piety are good friends to outward prosperity: the fear of God in a house will help to build it up and establish it. Dr. Lightfoot's notion of it is, That, for their piety, they were married to Israelites, and Hebrew families were built up by them. JAMISON, "the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives — Two only were spoken to - either they were the heads of a large corporation [Laborde], or, by tampering with these two, the king designed to terrify the rest into secret compliance with his wishes [Calvin]. K&D 15-16, "As the first plan miscarried, the king proceeded to try a second, and that a bloody act of cruel despotism. He commanded the midwives to destroy the male children in the birth and to leave only the girls alive. The midwives named in Exo_1:15, who are not Egyptian but Hebrew women, were no doubt the heads of the whole profession, and were expected to communicate their instructions to their associates. in Exo_1:16 resumes the address introduced by in Exo_1:15. The expression , of which such various renderings have been given, is used in Jer_18:3 to denote the revolving table of a potter, i.e., the two round discs between which a potter forms his earthenware vessels by turning, and appears to be transferred here to the vagina out of which the child twists itself, as it were like the vessel about to be formed out of the potter's discs. Knobel has at length decided in favour of this explanation, at which the Targumists hint with their . When the midwives were called in to assist at a birth, they were to look carefully at the vagina; and if the child were a boy, they were to destroy it as it came out of the womb. for rof from , see Gen_3:22. The w takes kametz before the major pause, as in Gen_44:9 (cf. Ewald, §243a). CALVIN, "15.And the king of Egypt spake. The tyrant now descends from the open violence and cruelty which had availed nothing, to secret plots and deceit. He desires the infants to be killed at their birth; and commands the midwives to be the instruments of this dreadful barbarity. We read of no such detestable example of inhumanity since the world began. I admit it has occasionally happened, that, upon the capture of a city, the conquerors have not spared even children and infants; that is to say, either in the heat of battle, or because the defense had been too obstinate, and they had lost many of their men, whose death they would avenge. It has happened, too, that an uncle, or brother, or guardian, has been impelled by the ambition of reigning to put children to death. It has happened, again, that in the detestation of a tyrant, and to destroy the very memory of his family, his whole
- 147. offspring has beenslain; and some have proceeded to such cruelty against their enemies, as to tear the little ones from their mothers’ breasts. But never did any enemy, however implacable, ever so vent his wrath against a whole nation, as to command all its male offspring to be destroyed in the midst of peace. This was a trial, such as to inflict a heavy blow on men of the utmost firmness, much more to bring low a fainting people, already weary of their lives. For, at first sight, each would think it more advantageous and desirable for them to sink down into an humbler state, than that the wrath of their enemies should be thus provoked against them by the blessings of God. And it is probable, such was the prostration of their minds, that they were not only sorely smitten, but almost stupified. For nothing else remained, but that the men should die without hope of offspring, and that the name and race of Abraham should soon be cut off, and thus all God’s promises would come to nought. In these days, in which we have to bear similar insults, and are urged to despair, as if the Church would soon be utterly destroyed, let us learn to hold up this example like a strong shield: seeing that it is no new case, if immediate destruction seem to await us, until the divine aid appears suddenly and unexpectedly in our extremity. Josephus falsely conjectures that the midwives were Egyptian women, sent out as spies; whereas Moses expressly says, that they had been the assistants and attendants of the Hebrew women in their travail; and this erroneous idea is plainly refuted by the whole context, in which it especially appears that they were restrained by the fear of God from yielding to the sinful desire of the tyrant. Hence it follows, that they were previously possessed with some religious feeling. But another question arises, why two midwives only are mentioned by name, when it is probable that, in so great a population, there were many? Two replies may be given; either that the tyrant addressed himself to these two, who might spread the fear of his power amongst the others; or, that, desiring to proceed with secret malice, he made a trial of the firmness of these two, and if he had obtained their acquiescence, he hoped to have easily succeeded with the others; for shame forbade him from issuing an open and general command. BENSON, "Exodus 1:15. The king spake to the Hebrew midwives — The two chief of them. They are called Hebrew midwives, probably not because they were themselves Hebrews; for sure Pharaoh could never expect they should be so barbarous to those of their own nation; but because they were generally made use of among the Hebrews, and being Egyptians, he hoped to prevail with them. COKE, "Exodus 1:15. And the king of Egypt, &c.— Pharaoh finding, by the experience of at least ten years, that neither the hardships he laid upon the Hebrews, nor all the cruelties which his officers and people used towards them, could prevent their multiplying, he devised another more cruel scheme, and sent for two of the principal Hebrew midwives, to enjoin them the execution of it. Though, Moses mentions but two midwives, yet we must not suppose that they could suffice to such a vast number of women. It is therefore most probable that these two were the chief, who had the charge and direction of the rest. That there was such a superiority among midwives appears probable, at least, from what Plutarch tells us, that among the Grecians there were some to whom the care of this business was committed; and
- 148. that public schoolswere kept for that purpose. COFFMAN, "Verses 15-22 "And when Joseph's brothers saw their father was dead, they said, It may be that Joseph will hate us, and will fully requite us all the evil which we did unto him. And they sent a message unto Joseph, saying, Thy father did command before he died, saying, So shall ye say unto Joseph, Forgive, I pray thee now, the transgressions of thy brethren, and their sin, for that they did unto thee evil. And now, we pray thee, forgive the transgression of the servants of the God of thy father. And Joseph wept when they spake unto him. And his brethren also went and fell down before his face; and they said, Behold, we are thy servants. And Joseph said, unto them, Fear not; for am I in the place of God? And as for you, ye meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring to pass, as in this day, to save much people alive. Now therefore, fear ye not: I will nourish you, and your little ones. And he comforted them, and spake kindly unto them." The Biblical narrative does not always give the exact chronological sequence of events related; and we probably have another instance of it here. It seems to us that the logical time for the brothers of Joseph to have pleaded for the full forgiveness of Joseph would have been before they had returned to Egypt, where, of course, they were completely in his power. Josephus, in fact, states this as the case: Now at the first his brethren were unwilling to return back with him, because they were afraid lest, now their father was dead, he should punish them; since he was now gone, for whose sake Joseph had been so gracious to them. But he persuaded them to fear no harm ... so he brought them along with him, and gave them great possessions, and never left off his particular concern for them.[15] Despite such a statement, we do not know that that is the way it happened. In any case, Joseph reassured his brothers, whose guilty consciences had so sharply accused them, making them feel, no doubt, that they deserved the worst that Joseph was able to do them. It appears here that we have the very first confession of the brothers of their sin against Joseph. Perhaps the social distance between them had prevented an earlier expression of their sorrow over what they had done. Another question that naturally rises in this situation regards the commandment which the brothers allege Jacob had sent to Joseph through them. Many respected scholars see nothing unreasonable in such an allegation, but to us it simply does not ring true. If Jacob had wanted to give Joseph a message about forgiving his brothers, he, it seems to us, would have given such a message to Joseph himself, rather than leaving it for the brothers to tell it. On this account, we feel strong agreement with Willis who wrote: "All this looks suspicious, and it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Joseph's brothers invented this story in a desperate effort to assure their own safety."[16]
- 149. Such a viewis no reflection upon the veracity of the Scriptures, because the Scriptures do not say that Jacob said what the brothers reported, but that they said he did. It should be remembered that they are also the ones who dipped the coat in blood and told Jacob they had "found it." In any event, Joseph magnanimously forgave his brothers, probably long before the event related here, and he even wept at the knowledge that they still held him to be capable of taking revenge against them. "Am I in God's place ... ?" Willis stated the meaning of this to be, "Is it my prerogative to judge men and to punish them for their injustice to others?"[17] Jacob asked the same question of Rachel who had complained about not having a child; and there, it meant, "Do I have the power to enable you to conceive and bear a child?" As Willis said, "The answer, in both cases, of course, is no."[18] "Ye meant evil against me, but God meant it for good ..." Francisco's comment on this is: There has never been a more vivid picture of the providence of God than in these words of Joseph to his brothers. He was not saying that God caused them to think evil against him, for they were responsible for their own thoughts. But God, in his wisdom and power used their evil purpose to achieve his will.[19] ELLICOTT, "(15) The Hebrew midwives.—Or the midwives of the Hebrew women ( τα ς μαίαις τ ν έβραίων, LXX.). The Hebrew construction admits of eitherῖ ῶ rendering. In favour of the midwives being Egyptians is the consideration that the Pharaoh would scarcely have expected Hebrew women to help him in the extirpation of the Hebrew race (Kalisch); against it is the Semitic character of the names—Shiphrah, “beautiful;” Puah, “one who cries out;” and also the likelihood that a numerous and peculiar people, like the Hebrews, would have accoucheurs of their own race. LANGE, "Exodus 1:15-18. Second measure. Resort to brutal violence, but still concealed under demoniacal artifice. Probably there was an organized order of midwives, and the two midwives mentioned were at their head.—He said unto them. —And again: he said. He tried to persuade them, and at last the devilish command came out—probably secret instructions like those of Herod, to kill the children in Bethlehem.—Over the bathing-tub. [So Lange.—Tr.]. Knobel and Keil assume a figurative designation of the vagina in the phrase , referring to Jeremiah 18:3. Since the child is generally born head first, there is only a moment from the time when the sex can be recognized to the use of the bathing-tub. On the various interpretations, comp. the lexicons and the Studien und Kritiken, 1834, S 81 ff,[FN6]etc. A heathenish way, all over the world, of killing the males and forcing the women and girls to accommodate themselves to the mode of life of the murderers.
- 150. PETT, "Exodus 1:15 ‘Andthe king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives, of which the name of one was Shiphrah and the name of the other Puah.’ “The king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives.” The king spoke, of course, through his representatives. His representatives spoke on his authority. All that happened in Egypt was described as done by the king, for his people were his slaves. The words spoken were to those midwives who had responsibility for ‘the Hebrews’. The named midwives may have been the ones who had overall charge of midwifery, not the only midwives. There would also be many experienced women who were not officially midwives but who fulfilled the task when necessary. The actual names are testified to among the North-western Semites of the 2nd millennium BC, one attested in the 18th century BC, the other in the 14th and are clearly genuine. When giving birth a woman would crouch, possibly on a pile of stones (see Exodus 1:16). Comparatively modern comparisons demonstrate how easily a slave worker could give birth behind a bush and then continue working. The midwives would first assist in the actual birth, and then by cutting the umbilical cord, washing the baby in water, and salting and wrapping it (compare Ezekiel 16:4). Note here the silence as to the king’s name, in contrast with the midwives. We may spend hours trying to work out who the king was, but we know instantly the names of the midwives, the servants of God, for their names are written before God. This emphasis on the recording of the names of His people continues on throughout Scripture. Each one who faithfully serves Him is known to Him by name. It is all the more noteworthy here, and clearly deliberate in that apart from Moses everyone else is anonymous, even Moses’ parents, although their descent is mentioned in order to demonstrate that they were suitable parents for God’s chosen one. The emphasis is on the fact that God was at work and only His special instruments are named, because they were instruments of God. The remainder were simply a part of the great tapestry of His will. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:15 And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives, of which the name of the one [was] Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah: Ver. 15. To the Hebrew midwives.] In Egypt and Greece the midwives of old had their schools; and some of them were great writers. I know not whether the priests were then so officious to them as many are now among the Papists; who say they therefore study Albertus Magnus de secrelis mulierum, that they may advise the midwives: but I doubt it is for a worse purpose; to gratify and greaten those abominable lusts wherewith they are scalded. {εξεκαυθησαν, Romans 1:27} PULPIT, "Exodus 1:15-22
- 151. Some time—say fiveor six years—having elapsed and the Pharaoh's first plan having manifestly failed, it was necessary for him either to give up his purpose, or to devise something else. Persevering and tenacious, he preferred the latter course. He bethought himself that a stop might be put to the multiplication of the Israelites by means of infanticide on a large scale. Infanticide was no doubt a crime in Egypt, as in most countries except Rome; but the royal command would legitimate almost any action, since the king was recognised as a god; and the wrongs of a foreign and subject race would not sensibly move the Egyptian people, or be likely to provoke remonstrance. On looking about for suitable instruments to carry out his design, it struck the monarch that something, at any rate, might be done by means of the midwives who attended the Hebrew women in their confinements. It has been supposed that the two mentioned, Shiphrah and Puah, might be the only midwives employed by the Israelites (Canon Cook and others), and no doubt in the East a small number suffice for a large population: but what impression could the monarch expect to make on a population of from one to two millions of souls by engaging the services of two persons only, who could not possibly attend more than about one in fifty of the births? The midwives mentioned must therefore be regarded as "superintendents," chiefs of the guild or faculty, who were expected to give their orders to the rest. (So Kalisch, Knobel, Aben Ezra, etc.) It was no doubt well known that midwives were not always called in; but the king supposed that they were employed sufficiently often for the execution of his orders to produce an important result. And the narrative implies that he had not miscalculated. It was the disobedience of the midwives (Exodus 1:17) that frustrated the king's intention, not any inherent weakness in his plan. The midwives, while professing the intention of carrying out the orders given them, in reality killed none of the infants; and, when taxed by the Pharaoh with disobedience, made an untrue excuse (Exodus 1:19). Thus the king's second plan failed as completely as his first—"the people" still "multiplied and waxed very mighty" (Exodus 1:20). Foiled a second time, the wicked king threw off all reserve and all attempt at concealment. If the midwives will not stain their hands with murder at his secret command, he will make the order a general and public one. "All his people" shall be commanded to put their hand to the business, and to assist in the massacre of the innocents—it shall he the duty of every loyal subject to cast into the waters of the Nile any Hebrew male child of whose birth he has cognisance. The object is a national one-to secure the public safety (see Exodus 1:10): the whole nation may well be called upon to aid in carrying it out. Exodus 1:15 The Hebrew midwives. It is questioned whether the midwives were really Hebrew women, and not rather Egyptian women, whose special business it was to attend the Hebrew women in their labours. Kalisch translates, "the women who served as midwives to the Hebrews," and assumes that they were Egyptians. (So also Canon Cook.) But the names are apparently Semitic, Shiphrah being "elegant, beautiful," and Puah, "one who cries out." And the most natural rendering of the Hebrew text
- 152. is that ofA. V. DEFFINBAUGH Pharaoh and the Midwives (1:15-21) Considerable time had passed since the first stage of oppression had been initiated, as described in verses 1-11. Frustrated by the utter failure of previous administrations to curtail the rapid growth of the Israelites, concern seemed to have turned to near panic. It was one thing to outnumber the Hyksos, a mere fraction of the population of Egypt. It was quite another to threaten the Egyptians themselves. The birth rate must be dramatically changed. To bring this about, the Pharaoh turned to the Hebrew 20 midwives, 21 two of whom are mentioned specifically here, 22 either as specific examples, or as leaders. Pharaoh’s demands are incredible. First of all, this is an abominable act of violence against the innocent. Second, I am amazed that Pharaoh passes on all responsibility for the death of these Hebrew infants. He wants the midwives to solve this national dilemma of the Hebrew birth rate. The plan is virtually unworkable. How were the boy children to be “terminated”? Were the deaths to look accidental? How could Pharaoh expect any Hebrew woman to call for a midwife if it were known that all boy babies were somehow dying at their hand? I see here a poorly conceived (pardon the pun) plan, decreed by a desperate man. The midwives feared God more than Pharaoh, and so they refused to put the infant boys to death (1:17). This infuriated the Pharaoh, who summoned the midwives and demanded an explanation. They respond that the Hebrew women were in such good physical condition that their children were born too quickly, before they could even arrive to help (1:19). Whether or not this was the full explanation, 23 it ironically points to the affliction of the Israelites as a boon to child-bearing, rather than as a hindrance. The previous plan had backfired in the Pharaoh’s face. Hard work produced more Hebrew babies. For their fear of God, these midwives were rewarded in two ways. The first blessing is more immediately evident than the second. The first blessing was that of being fruitful themselves: “So God was kind to the midwives and the people increased and became even more numerous. And because the midwives feared God, He gave them families of their own” (Exod. 1:20-21). Hyatt suggests one possible reason why child-bearing may have been a special blessing to these midwives: “It is possible that barren women were regularly used as midwives; if so, their reward is that they become fertile and have families.” 24 The blessing of bearing children was not denied the Hebrew women, and neither was it denied the Hebrew midwives. There is another blessing not as apparent but very significant, I believe. If someone asked
- 153. you the namesof the midwives, what would you answer? From this text you could quickly respond, “Shiphrah and Puah.” Now if I asked you the names of any of the pharaohs mentioned in this chapter, could you respond from this text? No! Many have speculated as to the identity of the pharaohs, but this is still speculation. Think of it, the highest official in the land, old “what’s his name.” These men’s names were known and feared by millions, but we don’t even know who they were. And this in spite of such massive projects as the building of pyramids and extensive efforts as mummifying the bodies of kings. Unfortunately, some have failed to see that the omission of the names of the pharaohs is deliberate, and in contrast to the naming of the midwives. 25 What a gracious gift of God to these two God-fearing Hebrew midwives—He records their names for an example to believers throughout the centuries. God doesn’t really care that much about the name of the king, king “what’s his name,” but He is intimately concerned with Shiphrah and Puah, for they trust and obey Him. What better honor than to be known and remembered by God. As I have considered the naming of the midwives but not the Pharaoh’s, my mind turned to some interesting passages of Scripture. I am reminded of the biblical proverb which says, “The memory of the righteous will be a blessing, But the name of the wicked will rot” (Prov. 10:7), and of the psalmist who prayed: “May his descendants be cut off, their names blotted out from the next generation. … May their sins always remain before the Lord, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth” (Ps. 109:13,15). God cares not about your position or your prestige in life, my friend. He cares only if you fear Him and have trusted in His Son, Jesus Christ, for the forgiveness of your sins and eternal life. If you are His child, by faith, He knows you by name. If not, no matter what your earthly splendor or power, you are a “what’s his name” to God, and you will spend eternity away from His presence. The futility of the Pharaoh’s military conquests and building projects is typified by this poem of Shelley: Ozymandias I met a traveler from an antique land Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand, Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown, And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command, Tell that its sculptor well those passions read Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things, The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed. And on the pedestal these words appear: “My name is Ozymandias, king of kings; Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!” Nothing beside remains. Round the decay Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away. 26
- 154. Overshadowing the figureof the Pharaoh, the heroes of our chapter are Shiphrah and Puah. They feared God more than men. They applied that fear of God to the practical outworkings of their day-to-day lives. They lived their faith where God had put them. It was not such a dramatic thing to do (daring, but not dramatic), but it revealed a faith that would not disobey the living God. Would that there were more saints of this variety today —saints who would live out their faith in whatever arena God has placed them, a faith that if necessary will defy the highest power in the land. 16 “When you are helping the Hebrew women during childbirth on the delivery stool, if you see that the baby is a boy, kill him; but if it is a girl, let her live.” BARNES, "Upon the stools - Literally, “two stones.” The word denotes a special seat, such as is represented on monuments of the 18th Dynasty, and is still used by Egyptian midwives. CLARKE, "Upon the stools - al haobnayim. This is a difficult word, and occurs nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible but in Jer_18:3, where we translate it the potter’s wheels. As signifies a stone, the obnayim has been supposed to signify a stone trough, in which they received and washed the infant as soon as born. Jarchi, in his book of Hebrew roots, gives a very different interpretation of it; he derives it from ben, a son, or banim, children; his words must not be literally translated, but this is the sense: “When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and ye see that the birth is broken forth, if it be a son, then ye shall kill him.” Jonathan ben Uzziel gives us a curious reason for the command given by Pharaoh to the Egyptian women: “Pharaoh slept, and saw in his sleep a balance, and behold the whole land of Egypt stood in one scale, and a lamb in the other; and the scale in which the lamb was outweighed that in which was the land of Egypt. Immediately he sent and called all the chief magicians, and told them his dream. And Janes and Jimbres, (see 2Ti_3:8). who were chief of the magicians, opened their mouths and said to Pharaoh, ‘A child is shortly to be born in the congregation of the Israelites, whose hand shall destroy the whole land of Egypt.’ Therefore Pharaoh spake to the midwives, etc.” GILL, "And he said, when ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women,.... Deliver them of their children: and see them upon the stools; seats for women in labour to sit upon, and so contrived, that the midwives might do their office the more readily; but while
- 155. they sat there,and before the birth, they could not tell whether the child was a son or a daughter; wherefore Kimchi (h) thinks the word here used signifies the place to which the infant falls down from its mother's belly, at the time of labour, and is called the place of the breaking forth of children, and takes it to be the "uterus" itself; and says it is called "Abanim", because "Banim", the children, are there, and supposes "A" or "Aleph" to be an additional letter; and so the sense then is, not when ye see the women on the seats, but the children in the place of coming forth; but then he asks, if it be so, why does he say, "and see them" there? could they see them before they were entirely out of the womb? to which he answers, they know by this rule, if a son, its face was downwards, and if a daughter, its face was upwards; how true this is, must be left to those that know better; the Jewish masters (i) constantly and positively affirm it: he further observes, that the word is of the dual number, because of the two valves of the womb, through which the infant passes: if it be a son, then ye shall kill him; give it a private pinch as it comes forth, while under their hands, that its death might seem to be owing to the difficulty of its birth, or to something that happened in it. This was ordered, because what the king had to fear from the Israelites was only from the males, and they only could multiply their people; and because of the above information of his magicians, if there is any truth in that: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live, be kept alive, and preserved, and brought up to woman's estate; and this the king chose to have done, having nothing to fear from them, being of the feeble sex, and that they might serve to gratify the lust of the Egyptians, who might be fond of Hebrew women, being more beautiful than theirs; or that they might be married and incorporated into Egyptian families, there being no males of their own, if this scheme took place, to match with them, and so by degrees the whole Israelitish nation would be mixed with, and swallowed up in the Egyptian nation, which was what was aimed at. JAMISON, "if it be a son, then ye shall kill him — Opinions are divided, however, what was the method of destruction which the king did recommend. Some think that the “stools” were low seats on which these obstetric practitioners sat by the bedside of the Hebrew women; and that, as they might easily discover the sex, so, whenever a boy appeared, they were to strangle it, unknown to its parents; while others are of opinion that the “stools” were stone troughs, by the river side - into which, when the infants were washed, they were to be, as it were, accidentally dropped. BENSON, "Verses 16-19 Exodus 1:16-19. The stools — Seats used on that occasion. But the midwives feared God — Dreaded his wrath more than Pharaoh’s, and therefore saved the men- children alive. The Hebrew women are lively — We have no reason to doubt the truth of this; it is plain they were now under an extraordinary blessing of increase, which may well be supposed to have had this effect, that the women had quick and
- 156. easy labour, andthe mothers and children being both lively, they seldom needed the help of midwives: this these midwives took notice of, and concluding it to be the finger of God, were thereby imboldened to disobey the king, and with this justify themselves before Pharaoh when he called them to an account for it. COKE, "Exodus 1:16. See them upon the stools— The word abnim occurs only here, and Jeremiah 18:3. The LXX have not translated it. If it be a son,—ye shall kill him— The order itself was inhuman enough; but it becomes, if possible, ten times more so, by making the midwives the executioners; thus obliging them not only to be savagely bloody, but basely perfidious in the most tender trust. Josephus says, that a prophecy of a child to be born of the Hebrew race, who should greatly annoy the Egyptians, determined Pharaoh to make this decree; but the sacred writer gives no hint of any such prediction, and refers us to a more satisfactory cause, Exodus 1:10. The reasons are evident, why the daughters were to be saved; from whom no wars could be feared. ELLICOTT, "(16) Upon the stools.—Literally, upon the two stones. It has been suggested that a seat corresponding to the modern hursee elwilâdeh is meant. This is a “chair of a peculiar form,” upon which in modern Egypt the woman is seated during parturition. (See Lane, Modern Egyptians, vol. iii. p. 142.) But it does not appear that this seat is composed of “two stones;” nor is there any distinct evidence of its employment at the time of child-birth in Ancient Egypt. The emendation of Hirsch—banim for âbnaim, is very tempting. This will give the sense, “When ye look upon the children.” PETT, "Exodus 1:16-19 ‘And he said, “When you do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women and see them on the two stones, if it is a son then you shall kill him but if it is a daughter then she shall live.” But the women feared God and did not do as the king of Egypt had commanded them, but saved the men children alive. And the king of Egypt called for the midwives and said to them, “Why have you done this thing and have saved the men children alive?” And the midwives said to Pharaoh, “Because the Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women, for they are lively and are delivered before the midwife comes to them.” The order given by the authorities was clear. Male children born of Israelites must be smothered at birth. A series of ‘accidents’ must happen. The authorities wanted it done discreetly. Even they did not want to be involved in open genocide. This is a typical statement of bureaucrats who have not thought through the situation and cannot conceive that they will be disobeyed. Thus a supply of slaves will continue, while the prospectively dangerous ones will be got rid of by a cull. The girls could then be married to non-Israelites to produce further slaves, and the unity of the nation would cease to exist. “On the two stones.” This may literally refer to two stones or more probably to a
- 157. small pile. ‘Two’can mean ‘a few’ (compare 1 Kings 17:12). They would sit or squat on them in such a way as to aid the birth. “The women feared God.” The contest has already begun between the king of Egypt, acknowledged in Egypt as one of the gods of Egypt, and God. These women feared God and obeyed Him, rather than obeying Pharaoh. “God.” We note here that in the first two chapters of Exodus there is no mention of Yahweh. In a foreign land, and voluntarily away from the covenant land the description is in terms of God (Exodus 1:20-21; Exodus 2:22-25). Note how this was also true for their adventures in Egypt in the final chapters of Genesis (Genesis 40- 50 with the exception of Genesis 49:18 which is probably a standard worship saying). In Egypt they no longer ‘knew Yahweh’. For while they no doubt continued to worship Him as such (Moses’ mother or ancestor is called Yo-chebed’) it was outside the covenant situation, and they could not look for His covenant help in that land. They lost the realisation of Who and What He was. Indeed some worshipped Him alongside other gods. It is only once He begins His preparations for their return that the name Yahweh is again brought into mention (Exodus 3:2; Exodus 3:4; Exodus 3:7; Exodus 3:15-16), and equated with God (Exodus 3:4). For He on His part has remembered His covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Exodus 2:24) and has ‘come down’. The case was different for Joseph in his captivity (Genesis 39). Then Yahweh was with him for he was there within Yahweh’s purpose for His covenant people. But to a people dwelling without much thought in Egypt with no thought of returning to the covenant land, He could only be ‘God’. He had not forgotten them, as what happens demonstrates, but His actions in the land of Egypt were by Him as their God and not as Yahweh, the name which links with covenant activity. “They are lively.” Those who live as the slaves do find birth easier and quicker than those who are more pampered. There was thus some truth in this statement, and as the phenomenon could no doubt be testified to, their explanation was seemingly accepted. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:16 And he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see [them] upon the stools; if it [be] a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it [be] a daughter, then she shall live. Ver. 16. Then ye shall kill him.] No greater argument of an ill cause than a bloody persecution. George Tankerfield, the martyr, was in King Edward’s days a very Papist, till the time Queen Mary came in; and then, perceiving the great cruelty used on the Pope’s side, was brought into a misdoubt of their doing, and began, as he said, in his heart to abhor them. (a) So did Julius Palmer, a martyr in Queen Mary’s days, who had been a stiff Papist all King Edward VI’s days, and was therefore expelled out of Magdalen College, whereof he had been Fellow; till beholding the martyrdom of the three bishops burnt in Oxford, he said to his friends, "Oh, raging cruelty! Oh, tyranny tragical, and more than barbarous!" and
- 158. so became azealous Protestant. 17 The midwives, however, feared God and did not do what the king of Egypt had told them to do; they let the boys live. CLARKE, "The midwives feared God - Because they knew that God had forbidden murder of every kind; for though the law was not yet given, Exo_20:13, being Hebrews they must have known that God had from the beginning declared, Whosoever sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed, Gen_9:6. Therefore they saved the male children of all to whose assistance they were called. See Clarke’s note on Exo_1:19. GILL, "But the midwives feared God,.... And therefore durst not take away the life of an human creature, which was contrary to the express law of God, Gen_9:6, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them; knowing it was right to obey God rather than man, though ever so great, or in so exalted a station: but saved the men children alive; did not use any violence with them, by stifling them in the birth. The scheme was so barbarous and shocking, especially to the tender sex, to whom it was proposed, and so devoid of humanity, that one would think it should never enter into the heart of man. JAMISON, "But the midwives feared God — Their faith inspired them with such courage as to risk their lives, by disobeying the mandate of a cruel tyrant; but it was blended with weakness, which made them shrink from speaking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. K&D, "But the midwives feared God (ha-Elohim, the personal, true God), and did not execute the king's command. CALVIN, "17.But the midwives feared God. Moses does not mean that they were then first affected with the fear of God; but he assigns this reason why they did not obey his unjust command, viz., because reverence towards God had greater influence with them. And certainly, as all our affections are best directed by this rein, so also it is the surest shield for resisting all temptations, and a firm support to
- 159. uphold our mindsfrom wavering in seasons of danger. Now, they not only dreaded this crime as being cruel and inhuman; but because purer religion and piety flourished in their hearts; for they knew that the seed of Abraham was chosen of God, and had themselves experienced that it was blessed; and hence it was natural to feel, that it would be an act of very gross impiety to extinguish in it the grace of God. We must also observe the antithesis between the fear of God and the dread of punishment, which might have deterred them from doing right. Although tyrants do not easily allow their commands to be despised, and death was before their eyes, they still keep their hands pure from evil. Thus, sustained and supported by reverential fear of God, they boldly despised the command and the threatenings of Pharaoh. Wherefore those, whom the fear of men withdraws from the right course, betray by their cowardice an inexcusable contempt of God, in preferring the favor of men to his solemn commands. But this doctrine extends still more widely; for many would be (19) more than preposterously wise, whilst, under pretext of due submission, they obey the wicked will of kings in opposition to justice and right, being in some cases the ministers of avarice and rapacity, in others of cruelty; yea, to gratify the transitory kings of earth, they take no account of God; and thus, which is worst of all, they designedly oppose pure religion with fire and sword. It only makes their effrontery more detestable, that whilst they knowingly and willingly crucify Christ in his members, they plead the frivolous excuse, that they obey their princes according to the word of God; as if he, in ordaining princes, had resigned his rights to them; and as if every earthly power, which exalts itself against heaven, ought not rather most justly to be made to give way. But since they only seek to escape the reprobation of men for their criminal obedience, let them not be argued with by long discussions, but rather referred to the judgment of women; for the example of these midwives is abundantly sufficient for their condemnation; especially when the Holy Spirit himself commends them, as not having obeyed the king, because they feared God. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:17 But the midwives feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive. Ver. 17. And did not as the king, &c.] Wherein they did no more, though out of a better principle, than nature itself dictateth. Antigona saith thus in Sophocles, Magis obtemperandum est Diis apud quos diutius manendum erit, quam hominibus quibuscum admodum brevi tempore vivendum est. {See Trapp on "Acts 4:19"} "We must rather obey God than men." Norm Beckett WOMEN WHO DID WHAT WAS RIGHT “But the midwives were God-fearing women: they disobeyed the command of the king of Egypt and let the boys live” (Exodus 1: 17). The scene is set for us, “…there came to power in Egypt a new king who knew nothing
- 160. of Joseph” (v.8). He was a king who saw the increasing population of the Israelites in the land of Egypt and became anxious. Egypt’s national security was considered to be under threat. As a result of this perceived emergency the Hebrew people were enslaved. Oppression and cruelty were the result of a suspicious king to the point that the Hebrew slaves’ lives became unbearable. Seemingly, forced labour was not enough to rid the Egyptian king of his insecurities concerning the people of God. The Egyptian king was given to genocide! The evil Egyptian king formulated a wicked scheme. He summoned Shiphrah and Puah; the Hebrew midwives and instructed them to kill every boy that was born to a Hebrew woman. Shiphrah and Puah disobeyed the king’s command - they spared the boys (v. 18). Shiphrah and Puah are recorded in Israelite history as ‘saviours’. They were ordinary women who possessed a courage that was remarkable. Without concern for themselves they sought to preserve life rather than take life. In their actions they mirrored the very nature of God – God is the giver and sustainer of life. At this moment in time, goodness and evil were doing battle, and the women were formidable opponents. With proper respect for God, they stood their ground and were not willing accomplices. These unknown women emerge as heroines and rightly so. In a male dominated society, these women used their initiative. Moreover, they were prepared to face up to the anger of the king. And it is that determination that God blessed - the women who safeguarded the lives of infants were rewarded with families of their own (v. 21). Shiphrah and Puah are not insignificant women! The reality of life suggests that evil will raise its ugly head when we least expect it. The question then arises “When evil is present are we ready to face up to it?” These women were ready – they reverenced God (v. 21). If the evil that the Egyptian king had devised had of succeeded, God’s plan of salvation for mankind would have finished there and then. Thus, these women earn a rightful place in the unfolding salvation story. Shiphrah and Puah leave an example for us to emulate. They stood against evil. The frail resources of two women had succeeded in outdoing the power of a tyrant. The reality is a godly person has might and power beyond themselves! As quickly as they appear on the biblical stage the two disappear. And we are told of the next stage in the Egyptian king’s evil plan, to throw all baby boys into the river (v. 21). We are left to wonder whether Shiphrah and Puah fair well in the ensuing slaughter of innocents. It would have been safer for them if they had no children! However, the women had already shown their resolve, and even if they faced a ‘double jeopardy’, there is every indication that they would remain true to God. Job, a man well acquainted with
- 161. suffering uttered -“Let him kill me; I have no other hope than to justify my conduct in his eyes” (Job 13: 15). Yes, Shiphrah and Puah are courageous women! Against all odds they remained faithful. How do we measure up? To use the words of Job, “I have no other hope than to justify my conduct in his eyes.” Rev. Bruce Goettsche THEY DID WHAT WAS RIGHT NO MATTER WHAT Shiphrah and Puah are commanded to kill the Hebrew boys at birth. When they were delivering a baby they were asked to make sure the boy babies didn't live. I don't know how they were supposed to do this. Basically these women who had given their lives to bringing life into the world were now being asked to act as executioners. Can you imagine the position these women were in? They loved placing these newborns in the arms of their mothers. They didn't have children themselves so each child they delivered was chance to vicariously experience the thrill of motherhood. Every time a delivery went bad and a child died, these women felt the depth of parental pain. Shiphrah and Puah refused to play a part in the execution of these children. They kept doing what was right even though they knew they risked the wrath of Pharaoh. And when Pharaoh called them in to report on why they had been disobedient they responded, "These Hebrew women were giving birth before the midwives could get to the home to help. Were they telling the truth? No, they weren't. We are told, "because the midwives feared God, they refused to obey the king and allowed the boys to live, too." (1:17) Should the women have told Pharaoh the truth? Probably. They probably should have stood up to Pharaoh and said, "Look, what you have asked us to do is wrong and we simply won't do it." Lying isn't right. But don't let their failure to tell the truth keep you from seeing the courage these woman had. They trusted God enough to do what was right. They engaged in what we would call "civil disobedience". They refused to obey a law that was wrong even though they knew it could cost them. In the 60's there were many blacks who engaged in civil disobedience. They refused to obey laws that discriminated against them simply because of the color of their skin. Some of them were arrested and then when the were released they continued in their civil disobedience. Why? Because prejudice is wrong. It didn't matter what the laws said, the laws were wrong. Do you remember the story from Acts 5? The Apostles were ministering to the people as Jesus had told them to do. They were healing folks, casting out demons, and proclaiming the good news of the gospel. They were arrested and thrown in jail. They had a miraculous release from jail and went right back to preaching the gospel! When they are called before the Chief Priest and the Sanhedrin the Chief Priest attacked them saying, "Didn't we tell you to stop preaching about Jesus?" Peter did not deny the instructions that were given. He said simply, "We must obey God rather than men." Then Peter promptly started to present the gospel to the High Priest!
- 162. This is whatShiphrah and Puah were doing, they were obeying God rather than men. And they stand as a shining example to us. We must function by God's standards of right and wrong even if it means we take a stand against civil authority and have to pay the consequences. Let me give you some examples · the German Christians who sheltered Jews during WWII · Those who joined the blacks in demonstrating for Civil Rights · Medical personnel who refuse to take part in an abortion, infanticide or euthanasia even though it may cost them their job · Christians who meet for worship in countries where this is forbidden by law · Teachers who read from their Bible during their free time in spite of what the Administration says · Students who choose to pray at their functions even though they may get in trouble · Workers who gently share their faith at work (not allowing it to affect their work) even though some may get mad. · Those who speak up for one who is being bullied or oppressed even if it may result in them getting bullied as well. Anytime we obey God rather than a law (written or unwritten) that is unjust or wrong, we engage in civil disobedience. If we don't stand up for what is right and godly, society will never notice the wrongness of what is taking place. Someone has said, all that is needed for the a society to destroy itself is for godly men and women to do nothing. Shiphrah and Puah stood up for the truth. And they were rewarded for their efforts. These women who had given their lives to bringing families of the joy of children now were granted children of their own. They who had spent their lives holding others' baby's now held their own. God honored their obedience, and He'll honor yours. You may face worldly consequences but ultimately God will applaud and honor your faithfulness. 18 Then the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and asked them, “Why have you done this? Why have you let the boys live?” GILL, "And the king called for the midwives,.... Perceiving, by the increase of the Israelites, that they did not obey his commands: and said unto them, why have ye done this thing, and have saved the men children alive? not only did not kill them, but did everything for them that was necessary for their future preservation and health; see Eze_16:4.
- 163. K&D, "When questionedupon the matter, the explanation which they gave was, that the Hebrew women were not like the delicate women of Egypt, but were “vigorous” (had much vital energy: Abenezra), so that they gave birth to their children before the midwives arrived. They succeeded in deceiving the king with this reply, as childbirth is remarkably rapid and easy in the case of Arabian women (see Burckhardt, Beduinen, p. 78; Tischendorf, Reise i. p. 108). CALVIN, "18.And the king of Egypt called for the midwives. He was not reduced to a more moderate course by equity or mercy; but because he dared not openly expose to slaughter the wretched and harmless infants at their birth, lest such atrocity should arouse the wrath of the Israelites to vengeance, He therefore secretly sends for the midwives, and inquires why they have not executed his murderous command? I doubt not, however, that he was restrained rather by the fear of rebellion than by shame. (20) In the answer of the midwives two vices are to be observed, since they neither confessed their piety with proper ingenuity, and what is worse, escaped by falsehood. For the fabulous story which the Rabbins invent to cover their fault, must be rejected, viz., that they did not come in time to the Hebrew women, because they had warned them of the wicked design of the king; and so it came to pass that they were not present when they were delivered. What can be more tame than this invention, when Moses shews in his narrative that they were guilty of falsehood? Some assert that this kind of lie, (21) which they call “the lie officious, or serviceable,” is not reprehensible; because they think that there is no fault where no deceit for the purpose of injury is used. (22) But I hold, that whatever is opposed to the nature of God is sinful; and on this ground all dissimulation, whether in word or deed, is condemned, as I shall more largely discuss in explaining the law, if God grants me time to do so. Wherefore both points must be admitted, that the two women lied, and, since lying is displeasing to God, that they sinned. For, as in estimating the conduct of saints we should be just and humane interpreters; so also superstitious zeal must be avoided in covering their faults, since this would often infringe on the direct authority of Scripture. And, indeed, whensoever the faithful fall into sin, they desire not to be lifted out of it by false defences, for their justification consists in a simple and free demand of pardon for their sin. Nor is there any contradiction to this in the fact, that they are twice praised for their fear of God, and that God is said to have rewarded them; because in his paternal indulgence of his children he still values their good works, as if they were pure, notwithstanding they may be defiled by some mixture of impurity. In fact, there is no action so perfect as to be absolutely free from stain; though it may appear more evidently in some than in others. Rachel was influenced by faith, to transfer the right of primogeniture to her son Jacob; a desire, undoubtedly, pious in itself, and a design worthy of praise, anxiously to strive for the fulfillment of the divine promise; but yet we cannot praise the cunning and deceit, by which the whole action would have been vitiated, had not the gratuitous mercy of God interposed. Scripture is full of such instances, which shew that the most excellent actions are sometimes stained
- 164. with partial sin.But we need not wonder that God in his mercy should pardon such defects, which would otherwise defile almost every virtuous deed; and should honor with reward those works which are unworthy of praise, or even favor. Thus, though these women were too pusillanimous and timid in their answers, yet because they had acted in reality with heartiness and courage, God endured in them the sin which he would have deservedly condemned. This doctrine gives us alacrity in our desire to do rightly, since God so graciously pardons our infirmities; and, at the same time, it warns us most carefully to be on our guard, lest, when we are desirous of doing well, some sin should creep in to obscure, and thus to contaminate our good work; since it not unfrequently happens that those whose aim is right, halt or stumble or wander in the way to it. In fine, whosoever honestly examines himself, will find some defect even in his best endeavors. Moreover, by the rewards of God, let us be encouraged to the confidence of thus obtaining good success, lest we should faint at the dangers we incur by the faithful performance of our duty; and assuredly no danger will alarm us, if this thought be deeply impressed upon our hearts, that whatever ill-will our good deeds may beget in this world, still God sits in heaven to reward them. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:18 And the king of Egypt called for the midwives, and said unto them, Why have ye done this thing, and have saved the men children alive? Ver. 18. Why have ye done this thing?] They might well have answered, as she did in Euripides, Obediemus Atridis honesta mandantibus: Sin vero inhonesta mandabut, non obediemus. If you command things honest we will obey you; not else. Or as that brave woman upon the rack, Non ideo negare vole, ne peream: sed ideo mentiri nolo, ne peccem. (a) 19 The midwives answered Pharaoh, “Hebrew women are not like Egyptian women; they are vigorous and give birth before the midwives arrive.” The word Hebrew is used here for the first time. Here are two women undermining the government policy of the strongest nation on earth. All evil plans call for cooperation and individual can spoil evil plots by just saying no. Pharaoh could not go and deliver all the babies and secretly kill them. He had to work through the system. All leaders need others to carry out their plans and this is where beaurocracy can be a blessing for they can prevent such plans from happening. These women said we obey God and not man. They could not make plans for their
- 165. government, but theycould put a monkey wrench in those they knew were evil. Pharaoh was ignorant of women and birth and so he had no idea if they were telling the truth or not. They were the authorities in this area. LYING Margot Asquith said of Lady Desborough, “Ettie has told enough white lies to ice a cake.” The same thing could be said of a great many people, but the question is, is any lie ever white, and how can we distinguish them from black ones? Lying is condemned all through the Bible. It is an abomination to God who can never lie. It is a universal vice. How then can these women be honored for doing it? It is the same as the justification for breaking the law in civil disobedience. If cooperation with evil makes the evil plan succeed you have a right to deceived or hinder that plan. You do not owe evil men what is owed to others. If a lie can hinder their evil goal then a lie becomes a virtue. This becomes a case of situation ethics, which is dangerous territory, for it can be used to justify all kinds of evil behavior. But there is no escaping its validity. If you honor evil men by giving them your support you are part of the evil plan as an accomplice. Hitler’s men said I was just taking orders. Lying has been an almost universal vice. Among the Egyptians falsehood was considered disgraceful. Among the Greeks Pindar said, "I will not stain speech with a lie." Plato said, "The genuine lie is hated by all gods and men." Aristotle seems to think that the greater the reason for telling a lie the more certain the true man will be not to tell it. He says, "For the lover of truth, who is truthful when nothing is at stake, will yet more surely be truthful when there is a stake, for he will then shun the lie as shameful, since he shuns it simply because it is a lie. Among all heathen people's there were teachers who saw the lie as wrong. When is lying justified? Some say it can be an act of love to avoid hurting people unnecessarily. Gandhi tells of lying to his parents about his eating of meat. He writes, "I knew that, if my mother and father came to know of my having become a meat-eater, they would be deeply shocked. This knowledge was gnawing at my heart. Therefore I said to myself: 'Though it is essential to eat meat, and also essential to take up food reform in the country, yet deceiving and lying to one's father and mother is worse than not eating meat. In their lifetime, therefore, meat-eating must be out of the question. When they are no more and I have found my freedom, I will eat meat openly, but until that moment arrives I will abstain from it." His parents never knew that two of their sons had become meat-eaters. Gary North writes, "I have commented elsewhere at some length on the legitimacy of Jacob's lie to Issac. I have also commented on the legitimacy of Rahab's lie to the Jericho authorities. Many of the same arguments apply here. First, what else could
- 166. the Hebrew midwiveshave done to save the lives of the children, except lie? Second, did Pharaoh deserve to be told the truth?" He then refers to the Nazis who were lied to by many who were hiding Jews. He concludes, "The midwives lie directly to the Pharaoh. Given the preposterous nature of the tale, they lied badly and shamelessly to him. And the Bible is very clear concerning God's opinion of such outright lying." He comes up with the principle: "The illegitimate laws of a civil government may be illegitimately skirted when they come into direct conflict with a fundamental biblical principle." CLARKE, "The Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women - This is a simple statement of what general experience shows to be a fact, viz., that women, who during the whole of their pregnancy are accustomed to hard labor, especially in the open air, have comparatively little pain in parturition. At this time the whole Hebrew nation, men and women, were in a state of slavery, and were obliged to work in mortar and brick, and all manner of service In The Field, Exo_1:14, and this at once accounts for the ease and speediness of their travail. With the strictest truth the midwives might say, The Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women: the latter fare delicately, are not inured to labor, and are kept shut up at home, therefore they have hard, difficult, and dangerous labors; but the Hebrew women are lively, chayoth, are strong, hale, and vigorous, and therefore are delivered ere the midwives come in unto them. In such cases we may naturally conclude that the midwives were very seldom even sent for. And this is probably the reason why we find but two mentioned; as in such a state of society there could be but very little employment for persons of that profession, as a mother, an aunt, or any female acquaintance or neighbor, could readily afford all the assistance necessary in such cases. Commentators, pressed with imaginary difficulties, have sought for examples of easy parturition in Ethiopia, Persia, and India, as parallels to the case before us; but they might have spared themselves the trouble, because the case is common in all parts of the globe where the women labor hard, and especially in the open air. I have known several instances of the kind myself among the laboring poor. I shall mention one: I saw a poor woman in the open field at hard labor; she stayed away in the afternoon, but she returned the next morning to her work with her infant child, having in the interim been safely delivered! She continued at her daily work, having apparently suffered no inconvenience! I have entered more particularly into this subject because, through want of proper information, (perhaps from a worse motive), certain persons have spoken very unguardedly against this inspired record: “The Hebrew midwives told palpable lies, and God commends them for it; thus we may do evil that good may come of it, and sanctify the means by the end.” Now I contend that there was neither lie direct nor even prevarication in the case. The midwives boldly state to Pharaoh a fact, (had it not been so, he had a thousand means of ascertaining the truth), and they state it in such a way as to bring conviction to his mind on the subject of his oppressive cruelty on the one hand, and the mercy of Jehovah on
- 167. the other. Asif they had said, “The very oppression under which, through thy cruelty, the Israelites groan, their God has turned to their advantage; they are not only fruitful, but they bring forth with comparatively no trouble; we have scarcely any employment among them.” Here then is a fact, boldly announced in the face of danger; and we see that God was pleased with this frankness of the midwives, and he blessed them for it. GILL, "And the midwives said unto Pharaoh, because the Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women,.... Not so tender, weak, and feeble, nor so ignorant of midwifery, and needed not the assistance of midwives, as the Egyptian women: for they are lively; or midwives themselves, as Kimchi (k) says the word signifies; and so (l) Symmachus translates the words, "for they are midwives"; or are skilful in the art of midwifery, as Jarchi interprets it; and so the, Vulgate Latin version is, "for they have knowledge of midwifery"; and so could help themselves; or, "for they are as beasts" (m), as animals which need not, nor have the assistance of any in bringing forth their young; and so Jarchi observes, that their Rabbins (n) explain it, they are like to the beasts of the field, who have no need of a midwife; or they were so lively, hale, and strong, as our version, and others, and their infants also, through a more than common blessing of God upon them at this time, that they brought forth children as soon as they were in travail, with scarce any pain or trouble, without the help of others: nor need this seem strange, if what is reported is true, of women in Illyria, Ireland, Italy (o), and other places (p), where it is said women will go aside from their work, or from the table, and bring forth their offspring, and return to their business or meal again; and especially in the eastern and hotter countries, women generally bring forth without much difficulty, and without the use of a midwife (q): and are delivered ere the midwives come in unto them; which doubtless was true in some cases, though not in all, because it is before said, they saved the men children alive; and had it been so at all times, there would have been no proof and evidence of their fearing God, and obeying his commands, rather than the king's; and in some cases not only the strength and liveliness of the Hebrew women, and their fears also, occasioned by the orders of the king, might hasten their births before the midwives could get to them; and they might not choose to send for them, but use their own judgment, and the help of their neighbours, and do without them, knowing what the midwives were charged to do. COFFMAN, ""And the midwives said unto Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women; for they are lively, and are delivered ere the midwife come unto them. And God dealt well with the midwives: and the people multiplied, and waxed very mighty. And it came to pass, because the midwives feared God, that he made them households. And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive."
- 168. "Hebrew women arenot as the Egyptian women ..." Although the entire testimony of these midwives must be considered false, because the primary purpose of it was to deceive Pharaoh, it is also evident that essential elements of fact were included in their reply. It was true that the Hebrew women were unlike the Egyptian women, as attested by pictures excavated from the ancient tombs and dated about 1400 B.C., showing that the Egyptian women were more delicate and essentially smaller in stature. The big-boned Hebrew female slaves are depicted wearing heavy garments and obviously possessing much more vigor than the Egyptians. It was false, of course, that the Hebrew women were delivered before the midwives could assist them. "And God dealt well with the midwives ..." It is amazing that some students find it hard to understand how God could have rewarded such liars! However, we find no difficulty with such a question. God rewarded those midwives, not for their falsehood to Pharaoh, but for their fear of God and for their aiding his purpose of multiplying the Israelites. In this first encounter between God and Pharaoh, God was gloriously victorious, just as would be the case in all subsequent phases of the conflict. Langley thought that the midwives made a fool of the king: "Don't miss the humor in this passage. The midwives made clever use of wit and excuse. Pharaoh comes off as a ludicrous fathead. The joke is on the king, and everybody knows it but him! So, while they laugh the king right out of his court, God wins another round and moves victoriously on."[16] "Because the midwives feared God, he made them households ..." The meaning of this is that, "He blessed them with marriage and many descendants."[17] Exactly this same phrase is used with reference to David's house (2 Samuel 7:11).[18] "Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river ..." The commandment, in context, means merely that all of the Hebrew males are thus to be destroyed. Nevertheless, interpreters have struggled with the passage. The Hebrew rabbis explained the general nature of the order thus: "Pharaoh purposely stated the order in general terms, for it would have been improper for so highly civilized a nation to discriminate so openly against the Hebrews, but the officials had been told in confidence that it was applicable to Hebrew infants only."[19] "Ye shall cast into the river ..." Some have inferred from this that the order to exterminate Hebrew males applied only to that portion of the Hebrew population living near the king's residence and in that vicinity along the Nile. Josephus relates an interesting tale in connection with this event, and, while unprovable, there appears to be merit in it. We include Jamieson's comment on it: "Josephus tells how Pharaoh had been forewarned by one of his magi, that a Hebrew boy about to born would inflict a fatal blow upon the glory of Egypt and raise his own race to liberty and independence. It is quite possible that the apprehension of such a danger might have originated the cruel edict."[20]
- 169. Josephus was notvery likely to have been influenced by the N.T. record of Herod's slaughter of the innocents, so it is evident that this tale of Pharaoh's motivation for slaughter of innocents could be authentic. That it so nearly parallels what happened in Matthew 2 is amazing to say the least of it. Robert Jamieson was impressed by this, stating that: "Thus, by the conduct of Pharaoh, the ancient church (Hebrew) in its infancy was opposed by persecution and peril precisely similar to that which, at the commencement of the N.T. church, was directed by Herod against the children in Bethlehem (Matthew 2:16)."[21] The most astounding thing about this event is that the very action which Pharaoh took in his purpose of destroying Israel was exactly the thing that placed a Hebrew man-child in the very bosom of the king's family, making him, at last, the heir to Pharaoh's throne! How past finding out are the ways of God! Where in the literature of any nation, or of all nations, is there anything to approach the inspired drama of what leaps up before us in Exodus? COKE, "Exodus 1:19. And the midwives said unto Pharaoh— Fully satisfied that it was better to obey GOD than man, the midwives disobeyed this unjust command; and vindicated themselves to Pharaoh, when accused by him, for so doing. I see no sufficient reason to suppose, that there was the least prevarication in the midwives: for is it not natural to believe, that the same Divine Providence which so miraculously interposed for the multiplication of Israel, might grant an easy deliverance to the Hebrew women, and cause them to dispense with the assistance of midwives? So that, upon this supposition, the midwives not only delivered the truth, but delivered it with great magnanimity, avowing the protection which God gave to their nation: and accordingly we find their proceeding approved and rewarded; for God dealt well with them, Exodus 1:20. ELLICOTT, "(19) The Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women.—This was probably true; but it was not the whole truth. Though the midwives had the courage to disobey the king, they had not “the courage of their convictions,” and were afraid to confess their real motive. So they took refuge in a half truth, and pretended that what really occurred in some cases only was a general occurrence. It is a fact, that in the East parturition is often so short a process that the attendance of a midwife is dispensed with. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:19 And the midwives said unto Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew women [are] not as the Egyptian women; for they [are] lively, and are delivered ere the midwives come in unto them. Ver. 19. For they are lively.] By that "voice of the Lord which maketh the hinds to calve." [Psalms 29:9] Lady Faith was their midwife: and she hath delivered the graves of their dead; [Hebrews 11:35] how much more wombs of their quick children! But we need the less wonder at the matter here reported, if that were true which Varro writeth of the Illyrian women; who, being at harvest work in the field,
- 170. when they werenear their time, would but step aside, and return again, bringing a child with them, as if they had found it behind the hedge. (a) 20 So God was kind to the midwives and the people increased and became even more numerous. CLARKE, "Therefore God dealt well with the midwives: and the people multiplied, and waxed very mighty - This shows an especial providence and blessing of God; for though in all cases where females are kept to hard labor they have comparatively easy and safe travail, yet in a state of slavery the increase is generally very small, as the children die for want of proper nursing, the women, through their labor, being obliged to neglect their offspring; so that in the slave countries the stock is obliged to be recruited by foreign imports: yet in the case above it was not so; there was not one barren among their tribes, and even their women, though constantly obliged to perform their daily tasks, were neither rendered unfruitful by it, nor taken off by premature death through the violence and continuance of their labor, when even in the delicate situation mentioned above. GILL, "Wherefore God dealt well with the midwives,.... He approved of their conduct upon the whole, however difficult it may be to clear them from all blame in this matter; though some think that what they said was the truth, though they might not tell all the truth; yea, that they made a glorious confession of their faith in God, and plainly told the king, that it was nothing but the immediate hand of God that the Hebrew women were so lively and strong, and therefore were resolved not to oppose it, let him command what he would; so Dr. Lightfoot (r), who takes the midwives to be Egyptians: and the people multiplied, and waxed very mighty; became very numerous, and strong, and robust, being the offspring of such lively women. JAMISON 20-21, "God dealt well with the midwives — This represents God as rewarding them for telling a lie. This difficulty is wholly removed by a more correct translation. To “make” or “build up a house” in Hebrew idiom, means to have a numerous progeny. The passage then should be rendered thus: “God protected the midwives, and the people waxed very mighty; and because the midwives feared, the Hebrews grew and prospered.” K&D 20-21, "God rewarded them for their conduct, and “made them houses,”
- 171. i.e., gave themfamilies and preserved their posterity. In this sense to “make a house” in 2Sa_7:11 is interchanged with to “build a house” in 2Sa_7:27 (vid., Rth_4:11). for as in Gen_31:9, etc. Through not carrying out the ruthless command of the king, they had helped to build up the families of Israel, and their own families were therefore built up by God. Thus God rewarded them, “not, however, because they lied, but because they were merciful to the people of God; it was not their falsehood therefore that was rewarded, but their kindness (more correctly, their fear of God), their benignity of mind, not the wickedness of their lying; and for the sake of what was good, God forgave what was evil.” (Augustine, contra mendac. c. 19.) BENSON, "Verse 20-21 Exodus 1:20-21. God dealt well with the midwives — he made them houses — He blessed them in kind: for as they kept up Israel’s houses or families, so God, in recompense, built them up into families, blessed their children, and made them prosperous. But a late learned writer interprets the passage as follows: Pharaoh, resolving effectually to prevent the increase of the Israelites, built houses for them, that so they might no longer have it in their power to lodge their women in child-bed out of the way to save their children, by removing them from place to place, as they had before done when they lived in the fields in tents, which was their ancient way of living. But the other seems the true interpretation. LANGE, "Exodus 1:20-21. God built them houses—He blessed them with abundant prosperity. According to Keil, the expression is figurative: because they labored for the upbuilding of the families of Israel, their families also were built up by God. Their lie, which Augustine excuses on the ground that their fear of God outweighed the sinfulness of the falsehood, seems, like similar things in the life of Abraham, to be the wild utterance of a state of extreme moral exigency, and is here palliated by a real fact, the ease of parturition. PETT, "Exodus 1:20-21 ‘And God dealt well with the midwives, and the people multiplied and grew extensively. And it happened that, because the midwives feared God, he made them houses.’ God prospered His people because the numbers of people continued to grow and expand rapidly, and God prospered the midwives and they too were fruitful (see Psalms 128:1-3). ‘He made them houses’ probably means that they had many children so that their houses were established (compare 2 Samuel 7:11). This would probably be true of all the midwives not just the two mentioned. None would lose by obeying God. They prospered all round. They did what God desired, and God gave them what they desired. It is possible, however, that it means that they were provided with decent living accommodation. The lesson for us all from this situation is that God does not necessarily step in to
- 172. make life easyfor His people even when He prospers them. Whom the Lord loves, He chastens for their good. Sometimes we may not understand what is happening, but if we saw things as He does we would realise what purpose He has in it. Indeed we are challenged here about our own way of life. Is our prime purpose to serve God and do His will, or do we concentrate our efforts on ‘building cities’? We must ask ourselves, which is most important to us? TRAPP, "Exodus 1:20 Therefore God dealt well with the midwives: and the people multiplied, and waxed very mighty. Ver. 20. Dealt well with the midwives.] God is a liberal paymaster: and his retributions are more than bountiful. "Be ye therefore steadfast and unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord." [1 Corinthians 15:58] And the people multiplied.] Sic divinum consilium dum devitatur, impletur: humana sapientia, dum reluctatur, comprehenditur, as Gregory hath it. (a) "There are many devices in the heart of a man: but the counsel of the Lord, that shall stand." [Proverbs 19:21] Among the Romans, the more children any man had, the more he was freed from public burdens. And of Adrian the Emperor it is storied, that when those that had many children were accused of any crime, he mitigated their punishment according to the number of their children. (b) But these poor Israelites were otherwise used. 21 And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own. BARNES, "Made them houses - i. e. they married Hebrews and became mothers in Israel. The expression is proverbial. See the margin reference. CLARKE, "He made them houses - Dr. Shuckford thinks that there is something wrong both in the punctuation and translation of this place, and reads the passage thus, adding the 21st to the 20th verse: “And they multiplied and waxed mighty; and this happened ( vayehi) because the midwives feared God; and he (Pharaoh) made ( lahem, masc.). them (the Israelites) houses; and commanded all his people, saying, Every son that is born, etc.” The doctor supposes that previously to this time the Israelites had no fixed dwellings, but lived in tents, and therefore had a better opportunity of concealing their children;
- 173. but now Pharaohbuilt them houses, and obliged them to dwell in them, and caused the Egyptians to watch over them, that all the male children might be destroyed, which could not have been easily effected had the Israelites continued to live in their usual scattered manner in tents. That the houses in question were not made for the midwives, but for the Israelites in general, the Hebrew text seems pretty plainly to indicate, for the pronoun lahem, to them, is the masculine gender; had the midwives been meant, the feminine pronoun lahen would have been used. Others contend that by making them houses, not only the midwives are intended, but also that the words mark an increase of their families, and that the objection taken from the masculine pronoun is of no weight, because these pronouns are often interchanged; see 1Ki_22:17, where lahem is written, and in the parallel place, 2Ch_18:16, lahen is used. So bahem, in 1Ch_10:7, is written bahen, 1Sa_31:7, and in several other places. There is no doubt that God did bless the midwives, his approbation of their conduct is strictly marked; and there can be no doubt of his prospering the Israelites, for it is particularly said that the people multiplied and waxed very mighty. But the words most probably refer to the Israelites, whose houses or families were built up by an extraordinary in crease of children, notwithstanding the cruel policy of the Egyptian king. Vain is the counsel of man when opposed to the determinations of God! All the means used for the destruction of this people became in his hand instruments of their prosperity and increase. How true is the saying, If God be for us, who can be against us? GILL, "And it came to pass, because the midwives feared God,.... And regarded his command, and not that of the king, though they risked his displeasure, and their lives: that he made them houses; which some understand of the Israelites making houses for them, being moved to it by the Lord, to preserve them from the insults of the Egyptians; others of Pharaoh building houses for them, in which he kept them, until the Hebrew women came to their time of delivery, who were ordered to be brought to these houses, that it might be known by others, as well as the midwives, whether they brought forth sons or daughters, neither of which is likely: but rather the sense is, that God made them houses, and hid them from Pharaoh, as Kimchi interprets it, that he might not hurt them, just as he hid Jeremiah and Baruch: though it seems best of all to understand it of his building up the families of these midwives, increasing their number, especially their substance and wealth, making them and their households prosperous in all worldly good; but because the word is in the masculine gender, some choose to interpret it either of the infants themselves, the male children the midwives preserved, and of their being built up families in Israel, or by means of whom they were built up; or of the Israelites themselves, whose houses were built up by their means: and others are of opinion that material houses or buildings are
- 174. meant, built forthe Israelites, that the midwives might know where to find them and their wives, when ready to lie in, who before lived up and down in fields and tents: but the sense of God's building up the families of the midwives is to be preferred, there being an enallage or change of the gender, whic CALVIN, "21.He made them houses. (23) It is not at all my opinion that this should be expounded as referring to the women, and I am surprised that many interpreters have been grossly mistaken on so dear a point. All are agreed that the pronoun is masculine, and therefore, according to ordinary usage, should refer to males; but because the two letters and are sometimes used interchangeably, they have supposed that the two clauses of the verse must be connected, and both referred to the women. But there is no need of this, since the sentence runs very well in this way: — “The people multiplied and waxed very mighty, and it came to pass, because the midwives feared God, that God made them houses,” i e. , the Israelites; as much as to say, that through the piety of these women, they obtained an abundant offspring. And because some saw that a suitable meaning could not be elicited by this false interpretation, they have imagined that, by the inspiration of God, well- fortified houses were built them by the people, where they might be secure from the attacks of their enemies. Nothing can be more puerile than this conceit. But lest readers should puzzle themselves unnecessarily on this not very perplexing point, let us inquire what the Hebrews meant by this expression, “to make houses.” When God promises ( 1 Samuel 2:35) that he will build for Samuel “a sure house,” there is no question that he refers to a stable priesthood. Again, when he declares ( 2 Samuel 7:27) that he will build a house for David; and when a little afterwards we read in David’s prayer, (v. 27,) “thou hast revealed to thy servant, saying, I will build thee a house,” the royal dignity is clearly to be understood. It is plain, too, from the address of Abigail, that this was a common mode of speaking, where she says, ( 1 Samuel 25:28,) “the Lord will certainly make my lord a sure house.” Now, it is quite unsuitable to the female sex and name that a woman should be made head of a family. Whence it appears that the words are forcibly (24) wrested if we say that God made a house for the midwives; but it will be most applicable to the whole people, that it was multiplied by God, until it arose like a perfect building to its full height. The conclusion is, that the Israelites owed to the exertions of two women the fact, not only that they survived and were preserved, but also that they flourished more and more, in order that thus the glory of God might shine forth with greater brightness, since he so marvelously preserved his people when very near destruction by these weak instruments. But Moses puts the word “houses” in the plural number, because the people were built up by the increase of the offspring of separate families. The gloss in the Geneva Bible is, — “i. e. , God increased the families of the Israelites by their means.” Lightfoot, Harmony 2. 108, on the contrary, explains the expression, “For which, their piety, God marrieth them to Israelites, for they were Egyptian women, and builded up Israelitish families by them.” “Triplex hic difficultas, (says Poole,) 1. Quis fecit? 2. Quibus? 3. Quid?” The balance of comments appears to favor Calvin’s solution.
- 175. COKE, "Exodus 1:21.He made them houses— He made them families, i.e. in the obvious sense of the words, he recompensed their piety, virtue, and courage, by making them prosperous, and their families considerable in Israel. In which sense, all the versions we have met with understand the passage: and as this is the case, and as the expression is truly scriptural, there surely can be no need to look out for other and forced interpretations. See Deuteronomy 25:9. Ruth 4:11. 1 Samuel 2:35; 1 Samuel 25:28. 2 Samuel 7:27. Psalms 127:1. TRAPP, "Exodus 1:21 And it came to pass, because the midwives feared God, that he made them houses. Ver. 21. Because the midwives feared God.] There is no necessity of granting that the midwives told the king a lie. {see Exodus 1:19} But if they did, St Austin saith well, Non remunerata fuit iis fallacia, sed benevolentia; benignitas mentis, non iniquitas mentientis. Their lie was not rewarded, but their kind heartedness. That he made them houses,] i.e., He gave them posterity. Thus he built David a house. [2 Samuel 7:18-19] And thus Rachel and Leah are said to have "built the house of Israel." [Ruth 4:11] The parents are, as it were, the foundation of the house; the children as so many lively stones in the building. Hence the Hebrews call a son Ben, of Banah to build, quid sit edificium et structura parentum, quoad generationem et educationem. 22 Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: “Every Hebrew boy that is born you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live.” BARNES, "The extreme cruelty of the measure does not involve improbability. Hatred of strangers was always a characteristic of the Egyptians (see Gen_43:32), and was likely to be stronger than ever after the expulsion of an alien race. CLARKE, "Ye shall cast into the river - As the Nile, which is here intended, was a sacred river among the Egyptians, it is not unlikely that Pharaoh intended the young Hebrews as an offering to his god, having two objects in view: 1. To increase the fertility of the country by thus procuring, as he might suppose, a proper and sufficient annual inundation; and 2. To prevent an increase of population among the Israelites, and in process of
- 176. time procure theirentire extermination. It is conjectured, with a great show of probability, that the edict mentioned in this verse was not made till after the birth of Aaron, and that it was revoked soon after the birth of Moses; as, if it had subsisted in its rigour during the eighty-six years which elapsed between this and the deliverance of the Israelites, it is not at all likely that their males would have amounted to six hundred thousand, and those all effective men. In the general preface to this work reference has been made to Origen’s method of interpreting the Scriptures, and some specimens promised. On the plain account of a simple matter of fact, related in the preceding chapter, this very eminent man, in his 2d Homily on Exodus, imposes an interpretation of which the following is the substance. “Pharaoh, king of Egypt, represents the devil; the male and female children of the Hebrews represent the animal and rational faculties of the soul. Pharaoh, the devil, wishes to destroy all the males, i.e., the seeds of rationality and spiritual science through which the soul tends to and seeks heavenly things; but he wishes to preserve the females alive, i.e., all those animal propensities of man, through which he becomes carnal and devilish. Hence,” says he, “when you see a man living in luxury, banquetings, pleasures, and sensual gratifications, know that there the king of Egypt has slain all the males, and preserved all the females alive. The midwives represent the Old and New Testaments: the one is called Sephora, which signifies a sparrow, and means that sort of instruction by which the soul is led to soar aloft, and contemplate heavenly things; the other is called Phua, which signifies ruddy or bashful, and points out the Gospel, which is ruddy with the blood of Christ, spreading the doctrine of his passion over the earth. By these, as midwives, the souls that are born into the Church, are healed, for the reading of the Scriptures corrects and heals what is amiss in the mind. Pharaoh, the devil, wishes to corrupt those midwives, that all the males - the spiritual propensities, may be destroyed; and this he endeavors to do by bringing in heresies and corrupt opinions. But the foundation of God standeth sure. The midwives feared God, therefore he builded them houses. If this be taken literally, it has little or no meaning, and is of no importance; but it points out that the midwives - the law and the Gospel, by teaching the fear of God, build the houses of the Church, and fill the whole earth with houses of prayer. Therefore these midwives, because they feared God, and taught the fear of God, did not fulfill the command of the king of Egypt - they did not kill the males, and I dare confidently affirm that they did not preserve the females alive; for they do not teach vicious doctrines in the Church, nor preach up luxury, nor foster sin, which are what Pharaoh wishes in keeping the females alive; for by these virtue alone is cultivated and nourished. By Pharaoh’s daughter I suppose the Church to be intended, which is gathered from among the Gentiles; and although she has an impious and iniquitous father, yet the prophet says unto her, Hearken, O daughter, and consider, incline thine ear; forget also thine own people, and thy father’s house, so shall the king greatly desire thy beauty, Psa_45:10, Psa_45:11. This therefore is she who is come to the waters to bathe,
- 177. i.e., to thebaptismal font, that she may be washed from the sins which she has contracted in her father’s house. Immediately she receives bowels of commiseration, and pities the infant; that is, the Church, coming from among the Gentiles, finds Moses - the law, lying in the pool, cast out, and exposed by his own people in an ark of bulrushes, daubed over with pitch - deformed and obscured by the carnal and absurd glosses of the Jews, who are ignorant of its spiritual sense; and while it continues with them is as a helpless and destitute infant; but as soon as it enters the doors of the Christian Church it becomes strong and vigorous; and thus Moses - the law, grows up, and becomes, through means of the Christian Church, more respectable even in the eyes of the Jews themselves, according to his own prophecy: I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation, Deu_32:21. Thus taught by the Christian Church, the synagogue forsakes idolatry; for when it sees the Gentiles worshipping the true God, it is ashamed of its idols, and worships them no more. In like manner, though we have had Pharaoh for our father - though the prince of this world has begotten us by wicked works, yet when we come unto the waters of baptism we take unto us Moses - the law of God, in its true and spiritual meaning; what is low or weak in it we leave, what is strong and perfect we take and place in the royal palace of our heart. Then we have Moses grown up - we no longer consider the law as little or mean; all is magnificent, excellent, elegant, for all is spiritually understood. Let us beseech the Lord Jesus Christ that he may reveal himself to us more and more and show us how great and sublime Moses is; for he by his Holy Spirit reveals these things to whomsoever he will. To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever! Amen. Neither the praise of piety nor the merit of ingenuity can be denied to this eminent man in such interpretations as these. But who at the same time does not see that if such a mode of exposition were to be allowed, the trumpet could no longer give a certain sound? Every passage and fact might then be obliged to say something, any thing, every thing, or nothing, according to the fancy, peculiar creed, or caprice of the interpreter. I have given this large specimen from one of the ancients, merely to save the moderns, from whose works on the sacred writings I could produce many specimens equally singular and more absurd. Reader, it is possible to trifle with the testimonies of God, and all the while speak serious things; but if all be not done according to the pattern shown in the mount, much evil may be produced, and many stumbling blocks thrown in the way of others, which may turn them totally out of the way of understanding; and then what a dreadful account must such interpreters have to give to that God who has pronounced a curse, not only on those who take away from his word, but also on those who add to it. GILL, "And Pharaoh charged all his people,.... Finding he could not carry his point with the midwives, he gave a general order to all his people everywhere: saying, every son that is born ye shall cast into the river; the river Nile; not every son born in his kingdom, for this would have ruined it in time; but that
- 178. was born tothe Jews, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan; and it is added in the Septuagint version, to the Hebrews: and every daughter ye shall save alive; for the reasons given See Gill on Exo_1:16. HENRY, " When this project did not take effect, Pharaoh gave public orders to all his people to drown all the male children of the Hebrews, Exo_1:22. We may suppose it was made highly penal for any to know of the birth of a son to an Israelite, and not to give information to those who were appointed to throw him into the river. Note, The enemies of the church have been restless in their endeavours to wear out the saints of the Most High, Dan_7:25. But he that sits in heaven shall laugh at them. See Psa_2:4. K&D, "The failure of his second plan drove the king to acts of open violence. He issued commands to all his subjects to throw every Hebrew boy that was born into the river (i.e., the Nile). The fact, that this command, if carried out, would necessarily have resulted in the extermination of Israel, did not in the least concern the tyrant; and this cannot be adduced as forming any objection to the historical credibility of the narrative, since other cruelties of a similar kind are to be found recorded in the history of the world. Clericus has cited the conduct of the Spartans towards the helots. Nor can the numbers of the Israelites at the time of the exodus be adduced as a proof that no such murderous command can ever have been issued; for nothing more can be inferred from this, than that the command was neither fully executed nor long regarded, as the Egyptians were not all so hostile to the Israelites as to be very zealous in carrying it out, and the Israelites would certainly neglect no means of preventing its execution. Even Pharaoh's obstinate refusal to let the people go, though it certainly is inconsistent with the intention to destroy them, cannot shake the truth of the narrative, but may be accounted for on psychological grounds, from the very nature of pride and tyranny which often act in the most reckless manner without at all regarding the consequences, or on historical grounds, from the supposition not only that the king who refused the permission to depart was a different man from the one who issued the murderous edicts (cf. Exo_2:23), but that when the oppression had continued for some time the Egyptian government generally discovered the advantage they derived from the slave labour of the Israelites, and hoped through a continuance of that oppression so to crush and break their spirits, as to remove all ground for fearing either rebellion, or alliance with their foes. CALVIN, "22.And Pharaoh charged. If he had not been transported with wrath and struck with blindness, he would have seen that the hand of God was against him; but when the reprobate are driven to madness by God, they persevere obstinately in their crimes; and not only so, but, like the deranged (25) or frantic, they dash themselves with greater audacity against every obstacle. It is indeed commonly the
- 179. case that cruelty,having once tasted innocent blood, becomes more thirsty for it; nay, in general, wicked men, as if excited by their course, grow hotter and hotter in crime, so that there is no end nor measure to their iniquity; but here, in this very desperate rage, we must perceive the vengeance of God, when he had given up the tyrant for the devil to destroy him, whilst we also remember his design both to try the patience of his people as well as to set forth his own goodness and power. The tyrant, finding that his snares and deceit availed nothing, now shakes off fear and flies to open violence, commanding the little ones to be torn from the breasts of their mothers and to be cast into the river. Lest there should be any lack of executioners, he gives this charge to all the Egyptians, whom he knew to be more than ready for the work. He spares the daughters, that, being enslaved and allotted to the Egyptians, they might produce slaves for their masters, whilst by them the races and names could not be preserved. Here it may be worth while to meditate on a comparison with our own times. Antichrist, with all his murderous agents, leaves in peace those who by their treacherous silence deny Christ, and are prepared to embrace as slaves every kind of impiety; neither does he exercise his cruelty, insatiable though it be, where he sees no manliness to exist; and he exults and triumphs, as if his end was gained, when he perceives any who had some courage in professing their faith fallen into effeminacy and cowardice. But how much better is it for us to die an hundred times, retaining our manly firmness in death, than to redeem our life for the base service of the devil. COKE, "Exodus 1:22. Pharaoh charged all his people— This was, most probably, enjoined under severe penalties; and that, as it appears from the next chapter, not only upon the Egyptians, who were to see the order executed; but also upon the Israelites, who were to execute it themselves. The Lacedemonians, Calmet observes, used to destroy the children of their slaves, lest they should increase too much. This cruel order of the king was not published till after the birth of Aaron, and it was probably revoked soon after the birth of Moses: for if it had subsisted in its rigour, during the whole eighty-six years servitude, the number of Israelites capable of bearing arms would not have been so great as Moses mentions, Numbers 2. There would have been none but old men among them. REFLECTIONS.—1. When God's people are the objects of enmity, persecutors often divest themselves not only of pity, but humanity. 2. From the midwives' disobedience we may observe, that where we must disobey God or man, there can be no hesitation. He that fears God, as these midwives, will rather risk the loss of man's favour, nay, of life too, than of his own soul by sin. 3. From God's kindness to them we see, that none who serve his people shall do it without wages, especially in suffering seasons. 4. From the bloody edicts of the king, we may learn, (1.) That disappointed rage usually makes men more furious. (2.) That the patience of the saints must be proved by trial upon trial. ELLICOTT, "(22) Every son that is born.—The LXX. add “to the Hebrews,” but without any necessity, since the context shows that only Hebrew children are meant.
- 180. Ye shall castinto the river.—Infanticide, so shocking to Christians, has prevailed widely at different times and places, and been regarded as a trivial matter. In Sparta, the State decided which children should live and which should die. At Athens a law of Solon left the decision to the parent. At Rome, the rule was that infants were made away with, unless the father interposed, and declared it to be his wish that a particular child should be brought up. The Syrians offered unwelcome children in sacrifice to Moloch; the Carthaginians to Melkarth. In China infanticide is said to be a common practice at the present day. Heathen nations do not generally regard human life as sacred. On the contrary, they hold that considerations of expediency justify the sweeping away of any life that inconveniences the State. Hence infanticide is introduced by Plato into his model republic (Rep. v. 9). Almost all ancient nations viewed the massacre of prisoners taken in war as allowable. The Spartan crypteia was a system of licensed murder. The condemnation to death of all male Hebrew children by Pharaoh is thus in no respect improbable. On the other hand, the mode of the death presents difficulties. For, first, the Nile was viewed as a god; and to fill it with corpses would, one might have supposed, have been regarded as a pollution. Secondly, the Nile water was the only water drunk; and sanitary considerations might thus have been expected to have prevented the edict. Perhaps, however, the children were viewed as offerings to the Nile, or to Savak, the crocodile headed god, of whom each crocodile was an emblem. At any rate, as the Nile swarmed with crocodiles throughout its whole course, the bodies were tolerably sure to be devoured before they became putrescent. EXPOSITOR'S DICTIONARY, "Exodus 1:22 By the decree of Pharaoh, Moses is dead as soon as he is born; by the decree of God, Moses is brought up in Pharaoh"s house. In spite of his own decree Pharaoh nurses, feeds, educates Moses; and Moses, on behalf of God, uses against Pharaoh all that he derives from Pharaoh. God is wiser than Pharaoh. The devil is old, but God is older. The devil is God"s lowest drudge, and servant of servants, who knows not the wonderful fabric which will result from his cross-working. —Dr. Pulsford, Quiet Hours, p18. LANGE, "Exodus 1:22. Now at last open brutality follows the failure of the scheme intervening between artifice and violence. On similar occurrences in profane history, see Keil.[FN7] Probably also this command was paralyzed, and the deliverance of Moses by the daughter of Pharaoh might well have had the effect of nullifying the king’s command; for even the worst of the heathen were often terrified by unexpected divine manifestations. PETT, "Exodus 1:22 ‘And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, “Every son who is born you shall cast into the Nile and every daughter you shall save alive.” The surreptitious method having failed all pretence was laid aside. The order goes
- 181. out from Pharaohto all Egyptians that all Hebrew new born sons are to be thrown into the Nile, probably under the pretext of offering them to the gods. They were to be sacrificed to the Nile god. The daughters, however, were to be protected. They would cause no trouble and would have their uses. This served a twofold purpose. It demonstrated their loyalty to the Nile god, and it would in time limit the strength of Israel. It is noteworthy that open murder was not the option. The killing was first to be hidden as due to childbirth and then to be seen as a religious act, as an offering to the Nile god. By this means they preserved their consciences. How easily men can make their religion a pretext for what they want to do, even when it is patently wrong. (Irreligious people find some other pretext). TRAPP, "Exodus 1:22 And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive. Ver. 22. And Pharaoh charged.] Imperio non tam duro quam diro. This was a most bloody edict: therefore, when God came to make inquisition for blood, he gave them blood again to drink, for they were worthy. The like he did to Nero - qui orientem fidem primus Romae cruentavit - to (a) Julian, Valens, Valerian, Attilas, Girzerichus, Charles IX of France, and many other bloody persecutors. {See Trapp on "Revelation 16:6"} PULPIT, "Every son that is born. The words are universal, and might seem to apply to the Egyptian, no less than the Hebrew, male children. But they are really limited by the context, which shows that there had never been any question as to taking the life of any Egyptian. With respect to the objection sometimes raised, that no Egyptian monarch would possibly have commanded such wholesale cold-blooded destruction of poor innocent harmless children, it is to be observed, first, that Egyptian monarchs had very little regard indeed for the lives of any persons who were not of their own nation. They constantly massacred prisoners taken in war— they put to death or enslaved persons cast upon their coasts (Diod. Sic. 1.67)—they cemented with the blood of their captives, as Lenormant says, each stone of their edifices. The sacredness of human life was not a principle with them. Secondly, that tender and compassionate regard for children which seems to us Englishmen of the present day a universal instinct is in truth the fruit of Christianity, and was almost unknown in the ancient world. Children who were "not wanted" were constantly exposed to be devoured by wild beasts, or otherwise made away with; and such exposition was defended by philosophers. In Syria and Carthage they were constantly offered to idols. At Rome, unless the father interposed to save it, every child was killed. It would probably not have cost an Egyptian Pharaoh a single pang to condemn to death a number of children, any more than a number of puppies. And the rule "Salus publica suprema lex," which, if not formulated, still practically prevailed, would have been held to justify anything. The river. Though, in the Delta, where the scene is laid throughout the early part of Exodus, there were many branches of the Nile, yet we hear constantly of "the river" (Exodus 2:3, Exodus 2:5;
- 182. Exodus 7:20, Exodus7:21; Exodus 8:3, etc.), because one branch only, the Tanitic, was readily accessible. Tanks (Zoan) was situated on it. DEFFINBAUGH A Final Futile Effort (1:22) Pharaoh’s attempt to indirectly destroy the Israelite boy children had miserably failed. What he had attempted to do in a clandestine, underhanded fashion, Pharaoh will now demand openly: “Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: ‘Every boy that is born you must throw into the river, but let every girl live’” (Exod. 1:22). The intent of this decree is obvious. Pharaoh hopes not only to destroy the boy babies, but to enslave all the girl children, thus wiping out Israel as a distinct nation in one generation. 27 What Pharaoh failed to discern was that he was simply a pawn of Satan, who was seeking to wipe out the seed from which Messiah was to come: What Pharaoh did was, without his knowledge, a battle of the “serpent” against the “woman’s seed” (Gen. 3:15). For with the extermination of the Jews the coming of the Redeemer would have been made impossible, because, since Abraham, the promise concerning the Seed of the woman and the Treader-down of the serpent was definitely connected with this people (Gen. 12:1-3; John 4:22; Gal. 3:16). 28 The struggle between Satan and “the seed” is one that can be found throughout biblical history. Satan has sought to corrupt the seed through the Canaanites (cf. Gen. 38; Num. 25). Now, at the time of the Exodus, he seeks to annihilate the seed by murder. Later on Satan will employ the jealousy of Herod, who will attempt to overthrow the “King of the Jews” by murdering many innocent children (Matt. 2). The decree to murder the boy babies by drowning them is a part of Satan’s diabolical plan to destroy the seed which will destroy him. Once again Pharaoh puts the responsibility for killing infants on someone else, this time, the Egyptian people it would seem, or perhaps, the Hebrew parents: “Every boy that is born you must throw into the river, but let every girl live” (Exod. 1:22). It is this command which provides the backdrop for the drama of chapter 2, where the deliverer of Israel is born. The application of these verses to the present American abomination of abortion on demand should be obvious. There is a deadly sequence of events in Exodus 1 which closely parallels the origins and rise of abortion in America. It begins with a disdain for those who threaten our self-interests. The Egyptians disdained the Israelites who seemed to endanger their position of power and prestige, just as Americans disdain children as an economic liability and an unwanted burden. The killing of the Israelites began as a matter of national policy, just as the Supreme Court’s decision opened the door to the mass slaughter of the innocent unborn. The killing is subtle at first, and then much more blatant. Pharaoh seemed to want the midwives to arrange for the death of the boy babies, making murder appear to be a result of the birth process. Finally, the boy babies were
- 183. commanded to bethrown (after their birth) into the Nile. So too in our day, the abortions which once were allowed early in pregnancy now are performed very late, and children are also terminated after birth as well. Just as the murder of the babies was selective (boys only) in Egypt, so we kill babies for being of the “wrong” sex or for having a possible imperfection which may make our lives inconvenient. Let us not avoid seeing the great similarities between the murder of the infants in that day and in our own. Let us be like those midwives and have no part in such murder. PARKER, "Moses on the Nile Exodus 1:22 A very easy plan, was it not? Whom you fear, destroy; that is a brief and easy creed, surely? This was turning the river to good account. It was a ready-made grave. Pharaoh did not charge the people to cut the sod, and lay the murdered children in the ground; the sight would have been unpleasant, the reminders would have been too numerous; he said, Throw the intruders into the river: there will be but a splash, a few bubbles on the surface, and the whole thing will be over! The river will carry no marks; will tell no stories; will sustain no tomb-stones; it will roll on as if its waters had never been divided by the hand of the murderer. All bad kings have feared the rise of manhood. If Pharaoh has been afraid of children, there must be something in children worthy of the attention of those who seek to turn life into good directions. The boy who is the terror of a king may become valiant for the truth. Never neglect young life: it is the seed of the future; it is the hope of the world. Nothing better than murder occurred to the mind of this short-sighted king. He never thought of culture, of kindness, of social and political development; his one idea of power was the shallow and vulgar idea of oppression. "And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives" ( Exodus 1:15). So the king could not carry out his own command. A king can give an order, but he requires the help of other people to carry it into effect Think of the proud Pharaoh having to take two humble midwives into his confidence! The plan of murder is not so easy a plan after all. There are persons to be consulted who may turn round upon us, and on some ground deny our authority. From the king we had a right to expect protection, security, and encouragement; yet the water of the fountain was poisoned, and the worm of destruction was gnawing the very roots of power. What if the midwives set themselves against Pharaoh? Two humble women may be more than a match for the great king of Egypt. No influence, how obscure soever, is to be treated with contempt. A child may baffle a king. A kitten has been known to alarm a bear. A fly once choked a pope. What if a midwife should turn to confusion the sanguinary counsels of a cowardly king? "But the midwives feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but
- 184. saved the men-childrenalive" ( Exodus 1:17). They who fear God are superior to all other fear. When our notion of authority terminates upon the visible and temporary, we become the victims of fickle circumstances; when that notion rises to the unseen and eternal, we enjoy rest amid the tumult of all that is merely outward and therefore perishing. Take history through and through, and it will be found that the men and women who have most devoutly and honestly feared God, have done most to defend and save the countries in which they lived. They have made little noise; they have got up no open-air demonstrations; they have done little or nothing in the way of banners and trumpets, and have had no skill in getting up torchlight meetings; but their influence has silently penetrated the national life, and secured for the land the loving and mighty care of God. Where the spiritual life is profound and real, the social and political influence is correspondingly vital and beneficent. All the great workers in society are not at the front. A hidden work is continually going on; the people in the shade are strengthening the social foundation. There is another history beside that which is written in the columns of the daily newspaper. Every country has heroes and heroines uncanonised. Let this be spoken for the encouragement of many whose names are not known far beyond the threshold of their own homes. "Therefore God dealt well with the midwives.... And it came to pass, because the midwives feared God, that he made them houses" ( Exodus 1:20-21). They who serve God serve a good Master. Was God indifferent to the character and claims of the midwives who bore practical testimony for him in the time of a nation"s trial? His eye was upon them for good, and his hand was stretched out day and night for their defence. They learned still more deeply that there was another King beside Pharaoh; and in the realisation of his presence Pharaoh dwindled into a secondary power, whose breath was in his nostrils, and whose commands were the ebullitions of moral insanity. No honest man or woman can do a work for God without receiving a great reward. God made houses for the midwives! He will make houses for all who live in his fear. There are but few who have courage to set themselves against a king"s commandment; but verily those who assert the authority of God as supreme shall be delivered from the cruelty of those who have no pity. There are times when nations are called upon to say, No, even to their sovereigns. Such times are not to be sought for with a pertinacious self-assertion, whose object is to make itself very conspicuous and important; but when they do occur, conscience is to assert itself with a dignity too calm to be impatient, and too righteous to be deceived. How will these commands and purposes be received in practical life? This inquiry will be answered as we proceed to the second chapter.