Exodus 16 commentary

EXODUS 16 COMME TARY
EDITED BY GLE PEASE
Manna and Quail
1 The whole Israelite community set out from
Elim and came to the Desert of Sin, which is
between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of
the second month after they had come out of
Egypt.
BAR ES,"The the wilderness of Sin - The desert tract, called Debbet er Ramleh,
extend nearly across the peninsula from the Wady Nasb in a south-easterly direction,
between the limestone district of Et Tih and the granite of Sinai. The journey from the
station at Elim, or even from that on the Red Sea, could be performed in a day: at that
time the route was kept in good condition by the Egyptians.
CLARKE, "The wilderness of Sin - This desert lies between Elim and Sinai, and
from Elim, Dr. Shaw says, Mount Sinai can be seen distinctly. Mr. Ainsworth supposes
that this wilderness had its name from a strong city of Egypt called Sin, near which it lay.
See Eze_30:15, Eze_30:16. Before they came to the wilderness of Sin, they had a
previous encampment by the Red Sea after they left Elim, of which Moses makes distinct
mention Num_33:10, Num_33:11.
The fifteenth day of the second month - This was afterwards called Ijar, and they
had now left Egypt one month, during which It is probable they lived on the provisions
they brought with them from Rameses, though it is possible they might have had a
supply from the seacoast. Concerning Mount Sinai, See Clarke’s note on Exo_19:1.
GILL, "And they took their journey from Elim,.... And came again to the Red sea,
as appears from Num_33:10 perhaps to some bay or creek of it, which ran up from it,
and lay in their way, and where for a short time they encamped to look at it, and recollect
what had been done for them in bringing them through it; but as their stay here was
short, and nothing of any importance or consequence happened, it is here omitted, and

their next station is only observed:
and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness
of Sin, which still bears the same name, as a late traveller (a) informs us, who passed
through it, and says, we traversed these plains in nine hours, being all the way diverted
with the sight of a variety of lizards and vipers, that are here in great numbers; and
elsewhere (b) he says, that vipers, especially in the wilderness of Sin which might very
properly be called "the inheritance of dragons", were very dangerous and troublesome,
not only our camels, but the Arabs who attended them, running every moment the risk
of being bitten. The Red sea, or the bay of it, they came to from Elim, according to
Bunting (c) was six miles, and from thence to the wilderness of Sin, sixteen more. This is
a different wilderness from that of Zin, which is written with a different letter, Num_
20:1 and was on the other side of Mount Sinai, as this was the way to it, as follows:
which is between Elim and Sinai according to the above writer (d), it was twenty
miles from Elim the Israelites travelled, and forty more ere they came to Sinai. Dr. Shaw
(e) says, after traversing the plains in nine hours, we were near twelve hours in passing
the many windings and difficult ways which lie beteen those deserts and these of Sinai;
the latter consists of a beautiful plain more than a league in breadth, and nearly three in
length:
on the fifteenth day of the second month, after their departing out of the
land of Egypt; the month Ijar, as the Targum of Jonathan, which answers to part of
April and part of May, and has its name from the beauty of the flowers, which appear at
this time of the year: the Israelites were now come from thence a month or thirty days;
for they came out the fifteenth of Abib or Nisan, and now it was the fifteenth of Ijar; and
as the first day of this month, as Jarchi says, was on the first day of the week, this day
must be so likewise; and yet sometimes the Jews say (f) this was a sabbath day.
HE RY 1-3, "The host of Israel, it seems, took along with them out of Egypt, when
they came thence on the fifteenth day of the first month, a month's provisions, which, by
the fifteenth day of the second month, was all spent; and here we have,
I. Their discontent and murmuring upon that occasion, Exo_16:2, Exo_16:3. The
whole congregation, the greatest part of them, joined in this mutiny; it was not
immediately against God that they murmured, but (which was equivalent) against Moses
and Aaron, God's viceregents among them. 1. They count upon being killed in the
wilderness - nothing less, at the first appearance of disaster. If the Lord had been
pleased to kill them, he could easily have done that in the Red Sea; but then he preserved
them, and now could as easily provide for them. It argues great distrust of God, and of
his power and goodness, in every distress and appearance of danger to despair of life,
and to talk of nothing but being speedily killed. 2. They invidiously charge Moses with a
design to starve them when he brought them out of Egypt; whereas what he had done
was both by order from God and with a design to promote their welfare. Note, It is no
new thing for the greatest kindnesses to be misinterpreted and basely represented as the
greatest injuries. The worst colours are sometimes put upon the best actions. Nay, 3.
They so far undervalue their deliverance that they wish they had died in Egypt, nay, and
died by the hand of the Lord too, that is, by some of the plagues which cut off the
Egyptians, as if it were not the hand of the Lord, but of Moses only, that brought them
into this hungry wilderness. It is common for people to say of that pain, or sickness, or
sore, of which they see not the second causes, “It is what pleases God,” as if that were not

so likewise which comes by the hand of man, or some visible accident. Prodigious
madness! They would rather die by the fleshpots of Egypt, where they found themselves
with provision, than live under the guidance of the heavenly pillar in a wilderness and be
provided for by the hand of God! they pronounce it better to have fallen in the
destruction of God's enemies than to bear the fatherly discipline of his children! We
cannot suppose that they had any great plenty in Egypt, how largely soever they now talk
of the flesh-pots; nor could they fear dying for want in the wilderness, while they had
their flocks and herds with them. But discontent magnifies what is past, and vilifies what
is present, without regard to truth or reason. None talk more absurdly than murmurers.
Their impatience, ingratitude, and distrust of God, were so much the worse in that they
had lately received such miraculous favours, and convincing proofs both that God could
help them in the greatest exigencies and that really he had mercy in store for them. See
how soon they forgot his works, and provoked him at the sea, even at the Red Sea, Psa_
106:7-13. Note, Experiences of God's mercies greatly aggravate our distrusts and
murmurings.
JAMISO , "Exo_16:1-36. Murmurs for want of bread.
they took their journey from Elim — where they had remained several days.
came unto the wilderness of Sin — It appears from Num_32:1-42, that several
stations are omitted in this historical notice of the journey. This passage represents the
Israelites as advanced into the great plain, which, beginning near El-Murkah, extends
with a greater or less breadth to almost the extremity of the peninsula. In its broadest
part northward of Tur it is called El-Kaa, which is probably the desert of Sin [Robinson].
K&D, "Quails and Manna in the Desert of Sin. - Exo_16:1. From Elim the
congregation of Israel proceeded into the desert of Sin. According to Num_33:10, they
encamped at the Red Sea between Elim and the desert of Sin; but this is passed over
here, as nothing of importance happened there. Judging from the nature of the ground,
the place of encampment at the Red Sea is to be found at the mouth of the Wady
Taiyibeh. For the direct road from the W. Gharandel to Sinai, and the only practicable
one for caravans, goes over the tableland between this wady and the Wady Useit to the
upper end of the W. Taiyibeh, a beautiful valley, covered with tamarisks and shrubs,
where good water may be found by digging, and which winds about between steep rocks,
and opens to the sea at Ras Zelimeh. To the north of this the hills and rocks come close
to the sea, but to the south they recede, and leave a sandy plain with numerous shrubs,
which is bounded on the east by wild and rugged rocky formations, and stretches for
three miles along the shore, furnishing quite space enough therefore for the Israelitish
camp. It is about eight hours' journey from Wady Gharandel, so that by a forced march
the Israelites might have accomplished it in one day. From this point they went “to the
desert of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai.” The place of encampment here is
doubtful. There are two roads that lead from W. Taiyibeh to Sinai: the lower, which
enters the desert plain by the sea at the Murkha or Morcha well, not far from the mouth
of the Wady eth Thafary, and from which you can either go as far as Tûr by the sea-
coast, and then proceed in a north-easterly direction to Sinai, or take a more direct road
through Wady Shellâl and Badireh into Wady Mukatteb and Feirân, and so on to the
mountains of Horeb; and the upper road, first pointed out by Burckhardt and Robinson,
which lies in a S.E. direction from W. Taiyibeh through W. Shubeikeh, across en elevated
plain, then through Wady Humr to the broad sandy plain of el Debbe or Debbet en Nasb,

thence through Wady Nasb to the plain of Debbet er Ramleh, which stretches far away
to the east, and so on across the Wadys Chamile and Seich in almost a straight line to
Horeb. One of these two roads the Israelites must have taken. The majority of modern
writers have decided in favour of the lower road, and place the desert of Sin in the broad
desert plain, which commences at the foot of the mountain that bounds the Wady
Taiyibeh towards the south, and stretches along the sea-coast to Ras Muhammed, the
southernmost point of the peninsula, the southern part of which is now called el Kâa.
The encampment of the Israelites in the desert of Sin is then supposed to have been in
the northern part of this desert plain, where the well Murkha still furnishes a resting-
place plentifully supplied with drinkable water. Ewald has thus represented the
Israelites as following the desert of el Kâa to the neighbourhood of Tûr, and then going
in a north-easterly direction to Sinai. But apart from the fact that the distance is too
great for the three places of encampment mentioned in Num_33:12-14, and a whole
nation could not possibly reach Rephidim in three stages by this route, it does not tally
with the statement in Num_33:12, that the Israelites left the desert of Sin and went to
Dofkah; so that Dofkah and the places that follow were not in the desert of Sin at all.
For these and other reasons, De Laborde, v. Raumer, and others suppose the
Israelites to have gone from the fountain of Murkha to Sinai by the road which enters
the mountains not far from this fountain through Wady Shellâl, and so continues
through Wady Mukatteb to Wady Ferân (Robinson, i. p. 105). But this view is hardly
reconcilable with the encampment of the Israelites “in the desert of Sin, which is
between Elim and Sinai.” For instance, the direct road from W. Gharandel (Elim) to
Sinai does not touch the desert plain of el Kâa at all, but turns away from it towards the
north-east, so that it is difficult to understand how this desert could be said to lie
between Elim and Sinai. For this reason, even Kurtz does not regard the clause “which is
between Elim and Sinai” as pointing out the situation of the desert itself, but (contrary to
the natural sense of the words) as a more exact definition of that part or point of the
desert of Sin at which the road from Elim to Sinai crosses it. But nothing is gained by
this explanation. There is no road from the place of encampment by the Red Sea in the
Wady Taiyibeh by which a whole nation could pass along the coast to the upper end of
this desert, so as to allow the Israelites to cross the desert on the way from Taiyibeh to
the W. Shellâl. As the mountains to the south of the W. Taiyibeh come so close to the sea
again, that it is only at low water that a narrow passage is left (Burckhardt, p. 985), the
Israelites would have been obliged to turn eastwards from the encampment by the Red
Sea, to which they had no doubt gone for the sake of the water, and to go all round the
mountain to get to the Murkha spring. This spring (according to Burckhardt, p. 983), “a
small lake in the sandstone rock, close at the foot of the mountain”) is “the principal
station on this road,” next to Ayun Musa and Gharandel; but the water is “of the worst
description, partly from the moss, the bog, and the dirt with which the well is filled, but
chiefly no doubt from the salt of the soil by which it is surrounded,” and men can hardly
drink it; whereas in the Wady Thafary, a mile (? five English miles) to the north-east of
Murkha, there is a spring that “yields the only sweet water between Tor and Suez” (p.
982). Now, even if we were to assume that the Israelites pitched their camp, not by this,
the only sweet water in the neighbourhood, but by the bad water of Murkha, the Murkah
spring is not situated in the desert of el Kâa, but only on the eastern border of it; so that
if they proceeded thence into the Wady Shellâl, and so on to the Wady Feirân, they
would not have crossed the desert at all. In addition to this, although the lower road
through the valley of Mukatteb is described by Burckhardt as “much easier and more
frequented,” and by Robinson as “easier” than the upper road across Nasseb (Nasb),
there are two places in which it runs through very narrow defiles, by which a large body
of people like the Israelites could not possibly have forced their way through to Sinai.

From the Murkha spring, the way into the valley of Mukatteb is through “a wild
mountain road,” which is shut out from the eyes of the wanderer by precipitous rocks.
“We got off our dromedaries,” says Dieterici, ii. p. 27, “and left them to their own instinct
and sure tread to climb the dangerous pass. We looked back once more at the desolate
road which we had threaded between the rocks, and saw our dromedaries, the only signs
of life, following a serpentine path, and so climbing the pass in this rocky theatre Nakb el
Butera.” Strauss speaks of this road in the following terms: “We went eastwards through
a large plain, overgrown with shrubs of all kinds, and reached a narrow pass, only broad
enough for one camel to go through, so that our caravan emerged in a very pictorial
serpentine fashion. The wild rocks frowned terribly on every side.” Moreover, it is only
through a “terribly wild pass” that you can descend from the valley Mukatteb into the
glorious valley of Feiran (Strauss, p. 128).
(Note: This pass is also mentioned by Graul (Reise ii. p. 226) as “a wild romantic
mountain pass,” and he writes respecting it, “For five minutes the road down was so
narrow and steep, that the camels stept in fear, and we ourselves preferred to follow
on foot. If the Israelites came up here on their way from the sea at Ras Zelime, the
immense procession must certainly have taken a long time to get through the narrow
gateway.” To this we may add, that if Moses had led the people to Sinai through one
of these narrow passes, they could not possibly have reached Sinai in a month from
the desert of Sin, to say nothing of eight days, which was all that was left for them, if,
as is generally supposed, and as Kurtz maintains, their stay at the place of
encampment in the desert of Sin, where they arrived on the 15th day of the second
month (Exo_16:1), lasted full seven days, and their arrival at Sinai took place on the
first day of the third month. For if a pass is so narrow that only one camel can pass,
not more than three men could walk abreast. Now if the people of Israel, consisting
of two millions of men, had gone through such a pass, it would have taken at least
twenty days for them all to pass through, as an army of 100,000 men, arranged three
abreast, would reach 27 English miles; so that, supposing the pass to be not more
than five minutes walk long, 100,000 Israelites would hardly go through in a day, to
say nothing at all about their flocks and herds.)
For these reasons we must adopt Knobel's conclusions, and seek the desert of Sin in
the upper road which leads from Gharandel to Sinai, viz., in the broad sandy table-land
el Debbe or Debbet er Ramle, which stretches from the Tih mountains over almost the
whole of the peninsula from N.W. to S.E. (vid., Robinson, i. 112), and in its south-eastern
part touches the northern walls of the Horeb or Sinai range, which helps to explain the
connection between the names Sin and Sinai, though the meaning “thorn-covered” is
not established, but is merely founded upon the idea that ‫ין‬ ִ‫ס‬ has the same meaning as ‫ה‬ֶ‫נ‬ ְ‫ס‬
. This desert table-land, which is essentially distinguished from the limestone formations
of the Tih mountains, and the granite mass of Horeb, by its soil of sand and sandstone,
stretches as far as Jebel Humr to the north-west, and the Wady Khamile and Barak to
the south-west (vid., Robinson, i. p. 101, 102). Now, if this sandy table-land is to be
regarded as the desert of Sin, we must look for the place of Israel's encampment
somewhere in this desert, most probably in the north-western portion, in a straight line
between Elim (Gharandel) and Sinai, possibly in Wady Nasb, where there is a well
surrounded by palm-trees about six miles to the north-west of Sarbut el Khadim, with a
plentiful supply of excellent water, which Robinson says was better than he had found
anywhere since leaving the Nile (i. 110). The distance from W. Taiyibeh to this spot is not
greater than that from Gharandel to Taiyibeh, and might therefore be accomplished in a
hard day's march.

CALVI , "1.And they took their journey. Moses relates, that, when after a month
the people came to the wilderness of Sin near Mount Sinai, and when their provision
failed, they rebelled against God and Moses, and manna, a new and unusual kind of
food, was given them from heaven. It is uncertain with what foods they were
sustained in the meantime. Some conjecture that they brought sufficient flour from
Egypt for their supply; but to me it seems probable that other kinds of food were
used in addition; for the barrenness of the country through which they passed was
not so great but that it produced at least fruits and herbs. Besides, we may readily
suppose, from the battle, in which it will soon be related that they conquered the
Amalekites, that they were not far from an habitable territory. But, when they were
carried away farther into the desert, all their provision began to fail, because they
had no more commerce with the inhabitants. Hence their sedition was increased,
because hunger pressed upon them more than usual. For, although we shall
afterwards be able to gather from the context that there was some previous
disturbance in the camp, still famine, which now began to affect them more, because
in these uncultivated and miserable regions the barrenness on all sides alarmed
them, gave strength to their murmurs and impatience.
COKE, ". Came unto the wilderness of Sin— The children of Israel continued some
time at Elim, according to the account given in this verse, compared with the note on
Exodus 16:27 of the former chapter. It was now just a month since they had left
Egypt. "We have a distinct view of Mount Sinai from Elim," says Dr. Shaw; "the
wilderness, as it is called, of Sin, lying betwixt them. We traversed these plains in
nine hours; being all the way diverted with the sight of lizards and vipers, which are
here in great numbers. We were afterwards near twelve hours in passing the many
windings and difficult ways which lie betwixt these deserts and those of Sinai. The
latter consist of a beautiful plain, more than a league in breadth, and nearly three in
length, lying open towards the north-east, where we enter it; but it is closed up to
the southward by some of the lower eminences of Mount Sinai.
In this direction, likewise, the higher parts of this mountain make such
encroachments upon the plain, that they divide it into two, each of them capacious
enough to receive the whole encampment of the Israelites. That which lies to the
eastward may be the desert of Sinai, properly so called, where Moses saw the angel
of the Lord in the burning bush, while he was guarding the flocks of Jethro, ch.
Exodus 3:2. A convent, called the convent of St. Catherine, is built over the place of
this divine appearance. It is near three hundred feet square, and more than forty in
height, being built partly of stone, partly with mud and mortar mixed together.
[That which is supposed to have been] the more immediate place of the Shechinah is
honoured with a little chapel, which the old fraternity of St. Basil has in such esteem
and veneration, that, in imitation of Moses, they put off the shoes from off their feet
whenever they enter it."
BE SO , ". Came into the wilderness of Sin — ot immediately, for there is
another stage of their journey by the Red sea, mentioned umbers 33:10, (in which

chapter, it appears, Moses designedly set down all their stations,) but omitted here,
because nothing remarkable happened in it.
This was a great wilderness between the Red sea and mount Sinai, different and far
distant from that Zin mentioned umbers 20:1, which was near the land of Edom.
ELLICOTT, "THE JOUR EY FROM ELIM.—THE MA A GIVE .
(1) They took their journey from Elim. The stay at Elim was probably for some
days. “Sin” was reached exactly one month after the departure from Egypt, yet
there had been only five camping-places between Sin and Rameses, and one journey
of three days through a wilderness (Exodus 15:22). Long rests are thus clearly
indicated, and probably occurred at Ayun Musa, at Marah, and at Elim. The places
named were the head-quarters of the camp on each occasion, but the entire host
must have always covered a vast tract, and the flocks and herds must have been
driven into all the neighbouring valleys where there was pasture. Wadys Useit,
Ethal, and Tayibeh are likely to have been occupied at the same time with Wady
Ghurundel.
All the congregation . . . came unto the wilderness of Sin.—“All the congregation”
could only be united in certain favourable positions, where there happened to be a
large open space. Such an open space is offered by the tract now called El Markha,
which extends from north to south a distance of twenty miles, and is from three to
four miles wide in its more northern half. To reach this tract, the Israelites must
have descended by Wady Useit or Wady Tayibeh to the coast near Ras Abu
Zenimeh, and have then continued along the coast until they crossed the twenty-
ninth parallel. This line of march is indicated in umbers 33:10-11, where we are
told that “they removed from Elim, and encamped by the Red Sea; and they
removed from the Red Sea, and encamped in the wilderness of Sin.”
COFFMA , "Introduction
Here we have the third instance of the murmuring of Israel (Exodus 16:1-3), the
promise of God to give them bread from heaven (Exodus 16:4-12), God's promise
fulfilled (Exodus 16:13-20), the events surrounding the very first mention of
"sabbath" in the word of God (Exodus 16:21-30), the manna named and
memorialized (Exodus 16:31-36).
This chapter is the nemesis of Biblical critics, as confessed by Harford, "This
chapter is a crux for critics ... the dispute turns on the question of whether J or E is
present, and how much of either, and if more or less of P!"[1] Harford declined to
give any analysis based upon the alleged sources of the Pentateuch. Our own
analysis finds Moses in every line of it with perhaps a single addition by the inspired
Joshua.
Of course, one of the most important questions arising from this chapter regards the
institution of the sabbath. See notes below.

Verses 1-3
"And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of
Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, the
fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt. And
the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and
against Aaron in the wilderness: and the children of Israel said unto them, Would
that we had died by the hand of Jehovah in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the
flesh-pots, when we did eat bread to the full; for ye have brought us forth into this
wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with hunger."
"The congregation of Israel (Exodus 16:1) ... this whole assembly (Exodus 16:3) ..."
The use of two different words here for the entire body of Israel is by no stretch of
imagination a sign of different sources, as some critics claim, for example, this: "The
use of the word `congregation' reflects basic terminology of the later Israelite
period."[2] Back of such a comment, of course, is the allegation of various sources,
but as Allis observed, the use of various words to describe a single entity may not be
regarded as "a suspicious feature suggesting diversity of authorship, that idea being
a fundamental error."[3] We may only marvel at the naivete that supposes Moses
could not have known both words - assembly and congregation. Again from Allis,
"There is no warranty for such hair-splitting analysis."[4]
"The wilderness of Sin ..." Despite Israel's sin being a principle feature of the
narrative here, it has nothing to do with the name of this wilderness. "The name Sin
has no connection with the English word sin. The names Sin and Sinai are very
similar, but the meaning of these names is uncertain."[5] The similarity of names
leads some to identify this wilderness as lying in the vicinity of Sinai.
"The fifteenth day of the second month after ..." indicates the passage of about six
weeks after the departure from Egypt.
"The whole congregation murmured against Moses and against Aaron ..." This is
the third instance of Israel's murmuring, the others being at Pi-hahiroth (Exodus
14:10-12), and at Marah (Exodus 15:24). Upon this occasion of their murmuring,
God heard their cry and sent bread from heaven.
"Would we had died by the hand of Jehovah in the land of Egypt ... This cry puts on
the garb of piety, and names the name of Jehovah, but indicates a lack of faith in
Him, His power, and His promises."[6] We cannot be too harsh, however, in our
judgment of Israel. It was a real hardship they endured. They were suffering from
hunger. Whatever supplies they had brought out of Egypt were exhausted, and they
were tasting the bitter truth that freedom exacts a price of those who would attain it.
"When we sat by the flesh-pots ... eat bread to the full ..." Later on, they also
remembered "the cucumbers ... melons ... leeks ... onions ... and garlic" ( umbers
11:4,5). These passages indicate that Pharaoh did indeed feed his slaves, and
presumably his livestock, well, but we may not suppose that all was as well with
Israel in Egypt as these hungry Israelites romantically remembered it. "The good

old days" were never actually that good! It was an inescapable burden of their
freedom that they should have encountered many dangers and hardships, but this
they seemed incapable of realizing at the time.
CO STABLE, "Verses 1-3
The wilderness of Sin evidently lay in the southwestern part of the Sinai peninsula (
Exodus 16:1). Its name relates to Sinai, the name of the mountain range located on
its eastern edge. Aharoni believed that Paran was the original name of the entire
Sinai Peninsula. [ ote: Y. Aharoni, "Kadesh-Barnea and Mount Sinai," in God"s
Wilderness: Discoveries in Sinai, pp165-70.]
This was Israel"s third occasion of grumbling ( Exodus 16:2; cf. Exodus 14:11-12;
Exodus 15:24). The reason this time was not fear of the Egyptian army or lack of
water but lack of food ( Exodus 16:3).
"A pattern is thus established here that continues throughout the narratives of
Israel"s sojourn in the wilderness. As the people"s trust in the Lord and in Moses
waned in the wilderness, the need grew for stricter lessons." [ ote: Sailhamer, The
Pentateuch . . ., p273.]
PETT, "Introduction
Chapter 16 God Provides Manna and Quails for His People - The Sign of the
Seventh Day (Exodus 16:2-36).
In this chapter God provides both meat and ‘bread’ for His people. The passage
continues to reveal chiastic patterns, a pattern which also appears in Leviticus and
predominates in the book of umbers (see our commentary). The chapter can be
divided into two. Up to Exodus 16:15 it deals specifically with the promise of bread
from heaven and the provision of the manna and the quails, and the remainder
deals with various provisions and especially the institution of the Sabbath. This is
then concluded in the final few verses by describing the storing up of the manna as a
memorial.
Verse 1
‘And they took their journey from Elim and all the congregation of the children of
Israel came into the Wilderness of Sin which is between Elim and Sinai, on the
fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt.’
The analysis suggest that this verse closes the passage just completed. After a short
stay they continued their journey. They had now been travelling for a full moon
period. ‘The second month.’ Their year was now determined from the time of their
release (Exodus 12:2).
“All the congregation of the children of Israel.” Since leaving Egypt the group has
been called ‘Israel’ (Exodus 14:30-31; Exodus 15:22) and ‘the people’ (Exodus
15:24) although reference is made to ‘the children of Israel’ at worship in Exodus
15:1. (Exodus 15:19 refers back to prior to the final deliverance). This is now
defined here as ‘all the congregation of the children of Israel’, a new term found

only here in Exodus (Exodus 16:2; Exodus 16:9-10; Exodus 17:1) and in Exodus
35:1; Exodus 35:4; Exodus 35:20, but consider ‘the congregation of Israel’ (Exodus
12:3; Exodus 12:6; Exodus 12:19; Exodus 12:47). It is found in Leviticus 16:5
(without ‘all’); Exodus 19:2 and more regularly in umbers. It has here no direct
connection with cult worship and is therefore not yet a technical cult term. Rather it
defines the constituency of the new Israel, all those who have joined the gathered
people, including the mixed multitude, and emphasises the oneness of the whole (it is
always in Exodus prefaced by ‘all’). They have become ‘children of Israel’ which is
now used as an equivalent term (Exodus 16:3; Exodus 16:6).
It is probable that they had to travel in smaller groups until they were able again all
to meet up in the wilderness of Sin on the way to Sinai, and this would be a pattern
on their journeys. We must not necessarily see the Israelites as always moving in one
large group. The pattern became more organised when leaving Sinai in umbers 1-
4. Different sections would take slightly different routes, and in such places as they
had just left they would spread out making good use of all the facilities. The flocks
and herds having fed well at Elim and the surrounding area would be able to
endure without water for a goodly period. The people too would be learning to
survive on little water, especially under the guidance of Moses the experienced
wilderness dweller, and sometimes they would find water by digging, for the water
table is not far below the ground in certain parts of the Sinai peninsula ( umbers
21:16-18), or would survive on milk from their domestic animals.
ote for Christians.
This incident at Marah reminds us that on our spiritual journey we must expect to
come across bitter wells as well as sweet ones, but when we do we can be confident
that our Lord can make the bitter sweet. And in His goodness He has provided for
us a Law which is sweet to the taste (Psalms 19:10; Psalms 119:103). From the
incident we are also to learn that one of the secrets of blessing is obedience. For as
we continue in obedience we will discover that we are brought eventually to a place
of springs and palm trees.
PULPIT, "Verses 1-3
EXPOSITIO
THE FIRST MURMURI G FOR FOOD. From Elim, or the fertile tract extending
from Wady Ghurnndel to Wady Tayibeh, the Israelites, after a time, removed, and
ca-camped (as we learn from umbers 33:10) by the Red Sea, probably along the
narrow coast tract extending from the mouth of Tayibeh to the entrance upon the
broad plain of El Markha. Hence they entered upon "the wilderness of Sin, which is
between Elim and Sinai"—a tract identified by some with the coast plain, El
Markha, by others with the inland undulating region known at the present day as
the Debbet-er-Ramleh It is difficult to decide between these two views. In favour of
El Markha are:

1. The fact that the Egyptian settlements in the Sinaitic peninsula would thus be
avoided, as they seem to have been, since no contest with Egyptians is recorded;
2. The descent of the quails, who, wearied with a long flight over the Red Sea, would
naturally settle as soon as they reached the shore;
3. The greater openness and facility of the El Markha and Wady Feiran route,
which is admitted by all; and
4. The suitability of the latter to the particulars of the narrative in Exodus 18:1-27.
In favour of the route by the Debbet-er-Ramleh are,
1. The fact that it is better watered at present than the other;
2. Its being somewhat less removed from the direct line between Wady Ghurundel
and Sinai than El Markha; and
3. A certain correspondency of sound or meaning between some of the present
geographical names along this route and those of the Mosaic narrative. In "the
wilderness of Sin" the Israelites for the first time found themselves in want of
sufficient nourishment. They hall consumed the grain which they had brought with
them out of Egypt; and though no doubt they had still considerable flocks and
herds, yet they were unaccustomed to a mere milk and flesh diet, having in Egypt
lived principally upon bread (Exodus 18:3), fish ( umbers 11:5), and vegetables
(ibid.). They therefore "murmured," and accused Moses and Aaron of an intention
to starve them. It is quite possible that many of the poorer sorts having brought with
them no cattle, or lost their cattle by the way, and not being helped by their
brethren, were in actual danger of starvation. Hence God was not angry, but "heard
their murmurings" (Exodus 18:9) patiently, and relieved them.
Exodus 16:1
They journeyed from Elim, and all the congregation came. It has been noted (Cook)
that the form of expression seems to imply that the Israelites proceeded in
detachments from Elim, and were first assembled as a complete host when they
reached the wilderness of Sin." This accords well with their numbers and with the
character of the localities. They could only assemble all together when they reached
some considerable plain. Between Elim and Sinai. This expression must be regarded
as vague to some extent. On the direct line, as the crow flies, there is no
"wilderness" (midbar) between Wady Ghurundel and Sinai. All is mountain and
valley. All that the writer means is that "the wilderness of Sin" lay upon the
ordinary, or at any rate an ordinary route between Elim and the great mountain.
This is equally true of El Markha and the Debbet-er-Ramleh. On the fifteenth day
of the second month—i.e; on the 15th of Zif, exactly one month after their departure
from Egypt. As only seven camping places are mentioned ( umbers 33:5-11), and

one journey of three days through a wilderness (Exodus 15:22), it is evident that
there must either have been long stays in several places, or that they must have often
encamped in places which had no name. Viewed as an itinerary, the record is
manifestly incomplete.
BI 1-12, "Verses 1-12
Exodus 16:1-12
The wilderness of Sin.
Moses in the wilderness of Sin
People may be strong and hopeful at the beginning of a project, and most effusively
and devoutly thankful at its close, but the difficulty is to go manfully through the
process.
I. Processes try men’s temper. See how the temper of Israel was tried in the
wilderness! o bread, no water, no rest! How do processes try men’s temper?
1. They are often tedious.
2. They, are often uncontrollable.
3. They often seem to be made worse by the incompetency of others.
II. The trials of processes are to be met, not all at once, but a day at a time. Daily
hunger was met by daily bread. This daffy display of Divine care teaches--
1. That physical as well as spiritual gifts are God’s.
2. That one of God’s gifts is the pledge of another. “ ot as the world giveth, give I
unto you.” Why am I to be easy about to-morrow? Because God is good to-day! “He
is the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever.”
III. Processes show the different dispositions of men. Though the people were told in
the distinctest manner that there would be no manna on the seventh day, yet they
went out to gather it just as if they had never been warned! Such men are the
vexation of the world. They plague every community of which they are a portion.
1. We have the means of life at our disposal: the manna lies at our tent-door!
2. We are distinctly assured that such means are given under law: there is a set time
for the duration of the opportunity: the night cometh!
IV. All the processes of life should be hallowed by religious exercises. There was a
Sabbath even in the wilderness.
1. The Sabbath is more than a mere law; it is an expression of mercy.
2. o man ever loses anything by keeping the Sabbath: “The Lord giveth you on the
sixth day the bread of two days.”
3. He is the loser who has no day of rest.

V. Processes should leave some tender and hope-inspiring memories behind them.
“Fill an omer of it to be kept,” etc.
VI. The process will end. Are you ready? (J. Parker, D. D.)
The pilgrimage of life
In the anecdote books of our boyhood we used to be told the story of an Indian
faquir who entered an Eastern palace and spread his bed in one of its antechambers,
pretending that he had mistaken the building for a caravanserai or inn. The prince,
amused by the oddity of the circumstance, ordered--so ran the tale--the man to be
brought before him, and asked him how he came to make such a mistake. “What is
an inn?” the faquir asked. “A place,” was the reply, “where travellers rest a little
while before proceeding on their journey.” “Who dwelt here before you?” again
asked the faquir. “My father,” was the prince’s reply. “And did he remain here?”
“ o,” was the answer; “He died and went away.” “And who dwelt here before
him?” “His ancestors.” “And did they remain here?” “ o; they also died and went
away.” “Then,” rejoined the faquir, “I have made no mistake, for your palace is but
an inn after all.” The faquir was right, Our houses are but inns, and the whole
world a caravanserai. (Clerical Library.)
Bread, the supreme question
During the French Revolution hundreds of market-women, attended by an armed
mob of men, went to Versailles to demand bread of the ational Assembly, there
being great destitution in Paris. They entered the hall. There was a discussion upon
the criminal laws going on. A fishwoman cried out, “Stop that babbler! That is not
the question; the question is about bread.” (Little’s “Historical Lights.”)
Murmuring, the result of forgetfulness
What unbelief and sad forgetfulness of God betrayed itself in these words! They
quite forgot the bitter bondage of Egypt under which they had sighed and groaned
so long. They now thought only of its “flesh-pots” and “its bread.” They altogether
overlooked the mercy and the grace which had spared them when the firstborn of
the Egyptians were slain. The miracles of love at the Red Sea and at Marah, so great
and so recent, had passed away from their memories. They thought nothing of the
promise of the land flowing with milk and honey. The argument, so evident and so
comforting, “Can the faithful God who has brought us out of bondage mean to let us
perish in the wilderness?” did not withhold them from the impatient conclusion,
“Ye have brought us forth into the wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with
hunger.” And if you watch your own hearts, you will find that there is always this
forgetfulness in a murmuring and discontented spirit. We forget, first, that we
deserve nothing but punishment at God’s hands; and, secondly, we forget all the
mercy and love which He has shown us in His acts and promises. (G. Wagner.)
Grumbling, an added burden
If I grumble because life is so arranged that I tear my clothes, and get many a

scratch in the upward journey, my grumble is only an added burden. The difference
between a soul that is soured by unbelief and a soul that honestly struggles and
strives as the gymnast does, who tries to lift the heavy weight, knowing that,
whether he succeeds or fails, the muscular development, which is the end sought, is
still attained, is incalculable. To trudge along the moor after nightfall, then now
knee deep, with the feeling that you are going nowhere, is indeed discouraging; but
to do the same thing with the feeling that you are going home to the fireside of the
loved and expectant, is to keep both feet and hands warm through our power of
anticipating the heat and the welcome under the roof tree not far off. Rude,
discourteous experience has taught us that an evil which is all an evil is a double
evil, and that an evil with a joy behind it or beyond it is the healthy and invigorating
toil by means of which a man may acquire a lasting good.
Ingratitude of the public
Daniel Webster, after his wonderful career, and in the close of his life, writes: “If I
were to live my life over again, with my present experiences, I would under no
considerations allow myself to enter public life. The public are ungrateful. The man
who serves the public most faithfully receives no adequate reward. In my own
history those acts which have been, before God, most disinterested and the least
stained by selfish considerations, have been precisely those for which I have been
most freely abused. o, no; have nothing to do with politics. Sell your iron, eat the
bread of independence, support your family with the rewards of honest toil, do your
duty as a private citizen to your country, but let politics alone. It is a hard life, a
thankless life. I have had in the course of my political life, which is not a short one,
my full share of ingratitude, but the ‘unkindest cut of all,’ the shaft that has sunk
the deepest in my heart, has been the refusal of this administration to grant my
request for an office of small pecuniary consideration for my only son.” (T. De Witt
Talmage.)
Ingratitude of grumbling
I heard a good man say once, as we passed the home of a millionaire: “It doesn’t
seem right that such a man as he is should be rolling in wealth, while I have to work
hard for my daily bread.” I made no reply. But when we reached the home of the
grumbler, and a troop of rosy children ran out to meet us, I caught one in my arms,
and, holding him up, said: “John, how much will you take for this boy?” And he
answered, while the moisture gathered in his eyes: “That boy, my namesake! I
wouldn’t sell him for his weight in gold.” “Why, John, he weighs forty pounds at
least, and forty pounds of gold would make you many times a millionaire. And you
would probably ask as much for each of the others. So, according to your own
admission, you are immensely rich. Yes, a great deal richer than that cold, selfish,
childless millionaire whom you were envying as we came along. othing would
tempt you to change places with him. Then you ought to be grateful instead of
grumbling. You are the favourite of fortune, or, rather, of Providence, and not he.”
(H. W. Beecher.)

2 In the desert the whole community grumbled
against Moses and Aaron.
BAR ES,"Murmured - The want of food was first felt after six weeks from the time
of the departure from Egypt, see Exo_16:1 : we have no notice previously of any
deficiency of bread.
CLARKE, "The whole congregation - murmured - This is an additional proof
of the degraded state of the minds of this people; See Clarke’s note on Exo_13:17. And
this very circumstance affords a convincing argument that a people so stupidly carnal
could not have been induced to leave Egypt had they not been persuaded so to do by the
most evident and striking miracles. Human nature can never be reduced to a more abject
state in this world than that in which the body is enthralled by political slavery, and the
soul debased by the influence of sin. These poor Hebrews were both slaves and sinners,
and were therefore capable of the meanest and most disgraceful acts.
GILL, "And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured,....
For want of bread; for the Targum of Jonathan says, that day the dough ceased they
brought of Egypt, on which, and the unleavened cakes they had lived thirty days; and for
a longer space of time it was not sufficient, as Josephus (g) and other Jewish writers (h)
observe; and now it was all spent, and they were in the utmost distress for bread, and fall
a murmuring as they were used to do, when in any distress, even the whole congregation
of them, at least the far greater part; some few might be excepted, as Caleb and Joshua,
and some others: and they
murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness; in the wilderness of Sin,
where they were, and where no corn was to be had to make bread of; and their
murmuring was not only against Moses, as before when they wanted water, but against
Aaron also, who were jointly concerned in bringing them out of Egypt. It is a common
case, when things do not go so well as to be wished for in church or state, for people to
murmur against their governors, ecclesiastic or civil, and lay all the blame to them.
JAMISO , "the whole congregation ... murmured against Moses and
Aaron — Modern travellers through the desert of Sinai are accustomed to take as much
as is sufficient for the sustenance of men and beasts during forty days. The Israelites
having been rather more than a month on their journey, their store of corn or other
provisions was altogether or nearly exhausted; and there being no prospect of procuring
any means of subsistence in the desert, except some wild olives and wild honey (Deu_
32:13), loud complaints were made against the leaders.

K&D 2-8, "Here, in this arid sandy waste, the whole congregation murmured against
Moses and Aaron on account of the want of food. What they brought with them from
Egypt had been consumed in the 30 days that had elapsed since they came out (Exo_
16:1). In their vexation the people expressed the wish that they had died in Egypt by the
flesh-pot, in the midst of plenty, “by the hand of Jehovah,” i.e., by the last plague which
Jehovah sent upon Egypt, rather than here in the desert of slow starvation. The form
‫ּינוּ‬ ִ ַ‫ו‬ is a Hiphil according to the consonants, and should be pointed ‫ינוּ‬ ִ ַ‫,י‬ from ‫ין‬ ִ ִ‫ה‬ for ‫ין‬ ִ‫ל‬ ֵ‫ה‬
(see Ges. §72, Anm. 9, and Ewald, §114c.). As the want really existed, Jehovah promised
them help (Exo_16:4). He would rain bread from heaven, which the Israelites should
gather every day for their daily need, to try the people, whether they would walk in His
law or not. In what the trial was to consist, is briefly indicated in Exo_16:5 : “And it will
come to pass on the sixth day (of the week), that they will prepare what they have
brought, and it will be double what they gather daily.” The meaning is, that what they
gathered and brought into their tents on the sixth day of the week, and made ready for
eating, would be twice as much as what they gathered on every other day; not that
Jehovah would miraculously double what was brought home on the sixth day, as Knobel
interprets the words in order to make out a discrepancy between Exo_16:5 and Exo_
16:22. ‫ין‬ ִ‫כ‬ ֵ‫,ה‬ to prepare, is to be understood as applying partly to the measuring of what
had been gathered (Exo_16:18), and partly to the pounding and grinding of the grains of
manna into meal (Num_11:8). In what respect this was a test for the people, is pointed
out in Exo_16:16. Here, in Exo_16:4 and Exo_16:5, the promise of God is only briefly
noticed, and its leading points referred to; it is described in detail afterwards, in the
communications which Moses and Aaron make to the people. In Exo_16:6, Exo_16:7,
they first tell the people, “At even, then shall ye know that Jehovah hath brought you
out of Egypt; and in the morning, then shall ye see the glory of the Lord.” Bearing in
mind the parallelism of the clauses, we obtain this meaning, that in the evening and in
the morning the Israelites would perceive the glory of the Lord, who had brought them
out of Egypt. “Seeing” is synonymous with “knowing.” Seeing the glory of Jehovah did
not consist in the sight of the glory of the Lord which appeared in the cloud, as
mentioned in Exo_16:10, but in their perception or experience of that glory in the
miraculous gift of flesh and bread (Exo_16:8, cf. Num_14:22). “By His hearing” (‫ּו‬‫ע‬ ְ‫מ‬ ָ‫שׁ‬ ְ ),
i.e., because He has heard, “your murmuring against Jehovah (“Against Him” in Exo_
16:8, as in Gen_19:24); for what are we, that ye murmur against us?” The murmuring
of the people against Moses and Aaron as their leaders really affected Jehovah as the
actual guide, and not Moses and Aaron, who had only executed His will. Jehovah would
therefore manifest His glory to the people, to prove to them that He had heard their
murmuring. The announcement of this manifestation of God is more fully explained to
the people by Moses in Exo_16:8, and the explanation is linked on to the leading clause
in Exo_16:7 by the words, “when He giveth,” etc. Ye shall see the glory of Jehovah, when
Jehovah shall give you, etc.
CALVI , "2.And the whole congregation. Moses says not that some of the people
only murmured, but that they were all gathered into mobs as in a conspiracy, or, at
any rate, as they were arranged by hundreds and thousands, that they murmured
with one consent. Yet the universal term admits of exception; nor need we suppose
that all to a man were comprehended in this impious rebellion. The best remedy for
their hunger would have been to pray to God, whom they had found to be in all

respects a bountiful Father, and whom they had heard to have wonderfully
provided for their parents, when the Egyptians and inhabitants of Canaan were
wasting with hunger in such rich and fertile places. If they had only been persuaded
that the earth is made fertile by God’s blessing, it would at the same time have
occurred to them, that it is His peculiar office to feed the hungry, and immediately
they would have directed their prayers to Him; now, their unbelief betrays itself in
their turbulent clamor. It is indeed astonishing that wretched men, whom their
necessity should have humiliated, rose insolently against God, and that their hunger,
so far from bending their hearts to gentleness, was the very incentive of their
arrogance. But this is too common with the wicked, (because they do not trust that
God is reconciled to them,) to neglect prayer, and to cry out in confusion, to utter
their curses, and to rush, like mad dogs, furiously here and there. This was the case
of the Israelites in the wilderness of Sin. The want of all things, which presents itself
to them, is an invitation to them from God, that they may feel His power, by which
He created the world out of nothing, to be independent of all foreign assistance for
the maintenance of mankind. But despair seizes upon their faithless minds, so that
they reject His aid and beneficence. And not only so, but their malignity and
ingratitude instigates them to quarrel with Moses; and this is the sum of their
complaint, that they were dragged away from abundance of bread and meat, that
they might perish in the desert of hunger. Therefore they call Moses and Aaron, by
whose hand and means they had been delivered, their murderers.
COKE, "Exodus 16:2. The whole congregation of the children of Israel
murmured— The whole congregation seems to denote a more universal murmur,
than the words the people imply in Exodus 16:24 of the last chapter. The vice grew
contagious; and this strangely ungrateful people not only exaggerate, in a shameful
manner, their present difficulties, but even revile their Deliverer, for the undeserved
preservation which he had vouchsafed to them amid the destruction of the first-born
in Egypt. Would to God we had died, &c. Exodus 16:3. othing can more strongly
mark their abject and servile temper. Is this thy gratitude to GOD, O Israel! for his
wonderful mercies towards thee? Thy goodness is as a morning-cloud, and as the
early dew it passeth away. Hosea 6:4.
BE SO , "Exodus 16:2. The whole congregation murmured — For want of bread,
having consumed all the dough or flour which they had brought out of Egypt. A
month’s provision, it seems, the host of Israel took with them out of Egypt, when
they came thence on the 15th day of the first month, which by the 15th of the second
month was all spent. Against Moses and Aaron — God’s vicegerents among them.
How weak and perverse is human nature! They had just seen the bitter waters
instantaneously made sweet to assuage their thirst, and a little while before had
been miraculously delivered at the Red sea, when there seemed to be no possible
way for their escape; and yet so far were they from learning to trust in that divine,
almighty Providence, that had so wonderfully and so evidently wrought for them,
that on the very first difficulty and distress they break out into the most desponding
murmurings!
ELLICOTT, "(2) The whole congregration . . . murmured.—This is the third

“murmuring.” The first was at Pi-hahiroth, on the appearance of the host of
Pharaoh (Exodus 14:11-12); the second was at Marah, when the water proved
undrinkable (Exodus 15:24); the third, in the wilderness of Sin, was brought about
by no special occurrence—unless it were the exhaustion of the supplies of grain
which had been brought out of Egypt—but seems to have resulted from a general
dissatisfaction with the conditions of life in the wilderness, and with the prospects
which lay before them.
EXPOSITOR'S DICTIO ARY, "It is "worthy of remark," Milton indignantly
observes in his Second Defence, "that those who are the most unworthy of liberty
are wont to behave most ungratefully towards their deliverers".
Compare the further application of this passage by Milton in his tract on "The
Ready and Easy Way to Establish a Free Commonwealth, and the Excellence
thereof, compared with the Inconveniences and Dangers of Readmitting Kingship in
this ation". Towards the close of his remonstrance, he writes thus: "If the people
be so affected as to prostitute religion and liberty to the vain and groundless
apprehension that nothing but kingship can restore trade... and that therefore we
must forego and set to sale religion, liberty, honour, safety, all concernments Divine
or human, to keep up trading: if, lastly, after all this light among us, the same
reason shall pass for current, to put our necks again under kingship, as was made
use of by the Jews to return back to Egypt and to the worship of their idol queen,
because they falsely imagined that they then lived in more plenty and prosperity;
our condition is not sound, but rotten, both in religion and all civil prudence.... But I
trust I shall have spoken persuasion to abundance of sensible and ingenuous men; to
some, perhaps, whom God may raise from these stones to become children of
reviving liberty; and may reclaim, though they seem now choosing them a captain
back for Egypt, to bethink themselves a little, and consider whence they are
rushing; to exhort this torrent also of the people, not to be so impetuous, but to keep
their one channel." Contrast the character of the Duke of Wellington, as Coleridge
in his Table-Talk (4July, 1830) draws it: "He seems to be unaccustomed to, and to
despise, the inconsistencies, the weaknesses, the bursts of heroism followed by
prostration and cowardice, which invariably characterize all popular efforts. He
forgets that, after all, it is from such efforts that all the great and noble institutions
of the world have come."
PETT, "Verses 2-15
Chapter 16 God Provides Manna and Quails for His People - The Sign of the
Seventh Day (Exodus 16:2-36).
In this chapter God provides both meat and ‘bread’ for His people. The passage
continues to reveal chiastic patterns, a pattern which also appears in Leviticus and
predominates in the book of umbers (see our commentary). The chapter can be
divided into two. Up to Exodus 16:15 it deals specifically with the promise of bread
from heaven and the provision of the manna and the quails, and the remainder
deals with various provisions and especially the institution of the Sabbath. This is
then concluded in the final few verses by describing the storing up of the manna as a

memorial.
The Promise of Bread From Heaven and the Provision of the Manna and the Quails
(Exodus 16:2-15).
a The people murmur and wish that they had died in Egypt where they had
flesh and bread, rather than being brought into the wilderness to be killed with
hunger (Exodus 16:2-3)
b Yahweh promises food from heaven which the people can gather every day
(Exodus 16:4-5).
c They will know that Yahweh has brought them out of the land of Egypt
(Exodus 16:6).
d They will see the glory of Yahweh for He has heard their murmuring, He will
give them flesh and bread (Exodus 16:7-8 a).
e Yahweh has heard their murmurings (Exodus 16:8 b).
e Yahweh has heard their murmurings (Exodus 16:9).
d They look towards the wilderness and see the glory of Yahweh Who has
heard their murmurings and will give them flesh and bread (Exodus 16:10-12 a).
c They will know that He is Yahweh their God (Exodus 16:12 b).
b Food comes from heaven in the form of quails and manna (Exodus 16:13-15
a).
a They are told that it is the food which Yahweh has given them to eat (Exodus
16:15 b).
The point behind the chiasmus is to stress how what Yahweh has promised He
fulfils In ‘a’ they began by fearing that they would be killed with hunger and in the
parallel finished up with a the food that Yahweh has given them to eat. In ‘b’ they
were promised food from heaven, and in the parallel they receive food from heaven.
In ‘c’ they will know that Yahweh has brought them out of the land of Egypt, and in
the parallel they will know that He is Yahweh their God. In ‘d’ they were promised
that they would see the glory of Yahweh and they did see the glory of Yahweh for
He has heard their murmuring, and in the parallel they look towards the wilderness
and see the glory of Yahweh Who has heard their murmurings. In ‘e’ we are simply
informed that Yahweh has heard their murmurings.
Exodus 16:2
‘And all the congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and
against Aaron in the wilderness.’
On arrival in the wilderness of Sin the children of Israel again murmur against
Moses and Aaron (compare Exodus 15:24; Exodus 17:3; umbers 14:2; umbers
14:36; umbers 16:11; umbers 16:41; umbers 17:5; umbers 17:10;
Deuteronomy 1:27), this time because of lack of food. Their murmuring is
prominent in the passage (Exodus 16:8-9; Exodus 16:12). It was an indication of
hearts that were inward looking and servile, and had no confidence in God, and was
a continuing problem. This is in stark contrast to the continual revelation of God’s
power and provision. The one thing that is made clear is that they deserved nothing
at His hand, and yet He continually provided for them. He was like a father

watching over a petulant child (compare Deuteronomy 1:31). Murmuring is an
indication of poverty of spirit.
PULPIT, "The whole congregation … murmured, It has been observed above, that
only the poorer sort could have been as yet in any peril of actual starvation; but it
may well have been that the rest, once launched into the wilderness, and becoming
practically acquainted with its unproductiveness, foresaw that ultimately starvation
must come upon them too, when all the cattle were eaten up, or had died through
insufficient nourishment othing is more clear than that, without the miracle of the
manna, it would have been impossible for a population of two millions to have
supported themselves for forty years, or even for two years, in such a region as the
Sinaitic peninsula, even though it had been in ancient times three or four times as
productive as at present. The cattle brought out of Egypt must have rapidly
diminished (Exodus 17:3); and though the Israelites had brought with them also
great wealth in the precious metals, yet it must have been some time before they
could establish commercial relations with the neighbouring nations so as to obtain
such supplies as they needed. Thus we can well understand that at the expiration of
a month the people generally should have recognized that their situation was one of
great danger, and should have vented their discontent upon their leaders.
3 The Israelites said to them, “If only we had died
by the Lord’s hand in Egypt! There we sat around
pots of meat and ate all the food we wanted, but
you have brought us out into this desert to starve
this entire assembly to death.”
BAR ES,"By the hand of the Lord - This evidently refers to the plagues,
especially the last, in Egypt: the death which befell the Egyptians appeared to the people
preferable to the sufferings of famine.
Flesh pots, and ... bread - These expressions prove that the servile labors to which
they had been subjected did not involve privations: they were fed abundantly, either by
the officials of Pharaoh, or more probably by the produce of their own fertile district.

CLARKE, "The flesh pots - As the Hebrews were in a state of slavery in Egypt, they
were doubtless fed in various companies by their task masters in particular places,
where large pots or boilers were fixed for the purpose of cooking their victuals. To these
there may be a reference in this place, and the whole speech only goes to prove that they
preferred their bondage in Egypt to their present state in the wilderness; for they could
not have been in a state of absolute want, as they had brought an abundance of flocks
and herds with them out of Egypt.
GILL, "And the children of Israel said unto them,.... They not only inwardly
murmured, and privately complained among themselves, but they spoke out their
complaints, and that in a very extravagant manner:
would to God we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt; by one
of the plagues, or some such like plague as were inflicted on the Egyptians, which killed
many of them, and particularly the hailstorm and plague on the firstborn; suggesting
that death, even by the hand of the Lord, whether in an ordinary or extraordinary way,
was more eligible than their present circumstances: when we sat by the fleshpots, and
when we did eat bread to the full; which is an exaggeration of their former
circumstances, and the happiness of them, in order to aggravate the misery of their
present ones; for it can hardly be thought strictly true, that while they were in hard
bondage in Egypt, they had often flesh in their pots, and leisure time to sit and attend
them, either the boiling of it in them, or the eating of it when served up in dishes at the
table; which they seem to boast of, as if they had several dishes of meat at table, and sat
in great splendour, and took a great deal of time to regale themselves, and when they
indulged themselves to satiety, having fulness of bread and all provisions:
for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness, to kill this whole assembly
with hunger: but there was no danger of that at present, since they had so many flocks
and herds with them; though indeed so large a number would soon have ate them up,
and which could not so comfortably be fed upon without bread; and, besides, these they
did not choose to slay, unless under great necessity, which they reserved for sacrifice,
and for an increase.
JAMISO , "Would to God we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land
of Egypt — How unreasonable and absurd the charge against Moses and Aaron! how
ungrateful and impious against God! After all their experience of the divine wisdom,
goodness, and power, we pause and wonder over the sacred narrative of their hardness
and unbelief. But the expression of feeling is contagious in so vast a multitude, and there
is a feeling of solitude and despondency in the desert which numbers cannot dispel; and
besides, we must remember that they were men engrossed with the present - that the
Comforter was not then given - and that they were destitute of all visible means of
sustenance and cut off from every visible comfort, with only the promises of an unseen
God to look to as the ground of their hope. And though we may lament they should
tempt God in the wilderness and freely admit their sin in so doing, we can be at no loss
for a reason why those who had all their lives been accustomed to walk by sight should,
in circumstances of unparalleled difficulty and perplexity, find it hard to walk by faith.
Do not even we find it difficult to walk by faith through the wilderness of this world,
though in the light of a clearer revelation, and under a nobler leader than Moses? [Fisk].
(See 1Co_10:11, 1Co_10:12).

BE SO , "Exodus 16:3. Would to God we had died — They so undervalue their
deliverance, that they wish they had died in Egypt; nay, and died by the hand of the
Lord too. That is, by some of the plagues which cut off the Egyptians; as if it were
not the hand of the Lord, but of Moses only, that brought them into this wilderness!
It is common for people to say of that pain or sickness of which they see not the
second causes, It is what pleaseth God, as if that were not so likewise which comes
by the hand of man, or some visible accident. We cannot suppose they had any great
plenty in Egypt, how largely soever they now talk of the flesh-pots, nor could they
fear dying for want in the wilderness while they had their flocks and herds with
them; but discontent magnifies what is past, and vilifies what is present, without
regard to truth or reason. one talk more absurdly than murmurers.
ELLICOTT, "(3) Would to God we had died.—Heb., Would that we had died.
There is no mention of “God.”
By the hand of the Lord.—There is, perhaps, an allusion to the last of the plagues,
“Would that we had not been spared, but had been smitten, as the Egyptians were!
A sudden death would have been far better than a long and lingering one.” (Comp,
Lamentations 4:9.)
When we did eat bread to the full.—The Israelites had been well fed in Egypt. They
had been nourished upon flesh, fish, bread, and abundant vegetables, especially
cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlick ( umbers 11:5). It was the habit of
the Egyptians to feed well those whom they employed in forced labours (Herod. ii.
125), just as slave-owners commonly do their slaves. The remembrance of the past
abundance intensified the pain felt at the present want.
To kill this whole assembly with hunger.—It is difficult to imagine that there could
have been as yet any real danger of starvation. The cattle may have suffered
considerably in the passage through the wilderness of Shur, but the bulk of it
survived (Exodus 17:3), and there were lambs enough for the whole nation to
observe a Passover a few months later at Sinai ( umbers 9:1-5). But it may well be
that a considerable number of the Israelites had had no cattle; others may have lost
what they had, or have consumed them. Want may have stared some in the face, and
the nation generally may have come to see that the prospect before them was a
dismal one. Even supposing that the desert was anciently four or five times as
productive as it is now, it could not possibly have afforded sufficient pasturage to
maintain such flocks and herds as would have been requisite to support on their
milk and flesh a population of two millions. It may have been brought home to the
people that their flocks and herds were rapidly diminishing, and they may have
realised the danger that impended of ultimate starvation after the cattle was all
gone.
PARKER, "Moses In the Wilderness of Sin
Exodus 16:3

People may be strong and hopeful at the beginning of a project, and most effusively
and devoutly thankful at its close, but the difficulty is to go manfully through the
process. Israel was in the desert, and never were spoiled children more peevish,
suspicious, and altogether ill-behaved. If they could have stepped out of Egypt into
Canaan at once, probably they would have been as pious as most of us; but there
was the weary interval, the inhospitable wilderness! It is so in our life. Accept it as a
solemn and instructive fact that life is a process. It is more than a beginning and an
ending: more than a cradle and a grave. The child may be good, and the old man
may be tranquil, but what of the petulant, self-willed, and prayerless being between
these extremes?
The history leads us to dwell on Processes. See how far the historical teaching
represents our own experience.
First. Processes try men"s temper. See how the temper of Israel was tried in the
wilderness! o bread, no water, no rest! How do processes try men"s temper? (1)
They are often tedious; (2) they are often uncontrollable; (3) they often seem to be
made worse by the incompetency of others.
We must not drive life. ature is not to be whipped and spurred by impatient
riders. God"s administration is calm. The wheels of his chariot are not bespattered
by the mud of blustering and reckless haste. On the other hand, we are not to find in
this reflection an excuse for the indolence and incapacity of men. There are stones
which we can roll away. There are turbid little streams which we can bridge. There
are gates which weaker men than Samson can carry away. There is the profoundest
difference between the indolence of men and the eternal calm of God. "Whatsoever
thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might." "I must work while it is called day."
Second. The trials of processes are to be met not all at once, but a day at a time. "I
will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a
certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or
no." See the law by which the manna was given. There was not a large store sent
down. Daily hunger was met by daily bread. We are not allowed to live two days at
once. In the parable the pendulum was told that it had to give but one tick at a time.
The heart beats in the same way. Upon how little sleep it lives!
This daily display of Divine care teaches (1) that physical as well as spiritual gifts
are God"s; (2) that one of God"s gifts is the pledge of another. " ot as the world
giveth, give I unto you." Why am I to be easy about tomorrow? Because God is good
to-day! "He is the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever.
Third. Processes show the different dispositions of men. ot their tempers only, but
the deeper realities and aspects of their character. They were told not to leave any of
the manna until the morning of the following day, but some of them did leave it.
You cannot convince some men, nor can you bind them by authority, nor can you
bring them under a common discipline. o. Provision must be made for madmen.
Every society out of heaven is probably disturbed by some kind of eccentricity.

Though the people were told in the distinctest manner that there would be no
manna on the seventh day, yet they went out to gather it just as if they had never
been warned! Such men are the vexation of the world. They plague every
community of which they are a portion. You tell them that tickets cannot be had
after a certain day, but they give you the lie, as far as they can, by coming for them
two days after. There are such wise men everywhere, but happily they are now and
then effectually checked and humbled. What a humiliation awaits them in the long
run!
The history, at this point, urges the most direct application of its truths upon our
spiritual nature, (1) We have the means of life at our disposal: the manna lies at our
tent-door! (2) We are distinctly assured that such means are given under law: there
is a set time for the duration of the opportunity: the night cometh!
Some men will set themselves against God in these matters. They will persistently
work contrariwise. They will defy the law: they will challenge the sword: they will
tell you that the night has no darkness for them, and that when God has shut the
door the key of their importunity will open it! Beware of such men. They will fail
you at last; and when you smite them with your reproaches, you can add no pain to
the torment of their damnation.
Fourth. All the processes of life should be hallowed by religious exercises. There was
a Sabbath even in the wilderness. The Sabbath is amongst the very oldest
institutions. God rested on the seventh day, and blessed it. Before the law was given
from Sinai God gave the Sabbath to Israel. Man must have rest, and all true rest is
associated with religious ideas and aspirations. The animal rest is but typical: the
soul must have its hours of quietness; the spirit must pause in the presence of God to
recover its strength.
(1) The Sabbath is more than a mere law; it is an expression of mercy. (2) o man
ever loses anything by keeping the Sabbath: "The Lord giveth you on the sixth day
the bread of two days." (3) He is the loser who has no day of rest.
Fifth. Processes should leave some tender and hope-inspiring memories behind
them. "Fill an omer of it to be kept for your generations; that they may see the
bread wherewith I have fed you in the wilderness, when I brought you forth from
the land of Egypt." The way to enrich life is to keep a retentive memory in the heart.
Look over a period of twenty years, and see the all-covering and ever-shining mercy
of God! How many special providences have you observed? How many narrow
escapes have you experienced? How many difficulties have you surmounted? How
often have you found a pool in unexpected places? We should lay up some memory
of the Divine triumphs which have gladdened our lives, and fall back upon it for
inspiration and courage in the dark and cloudy day. Go into your yesterdays to find
God! Search for him in the paths along which you have come, and if you dare,
under the teaching of your own memories, deny his goodness, then betake
yourselves to the infamous luxury of distrust and reproach!

Sixth. The process will end. Though the wheels move slowly, yet will they reach the
goal! You are not the men you were twenty years ago! The most of the desert-road is
now behind some of you. Your future on earth is narrowing itself to a point. How is
it with your souls? Your feet are sore with the long journey; are your wings ready
for flight into the kingdom of the crystal river and the unsetting sun?
ote on Manna
"It may have been derived from the manna rams known in various countries. There
is an edible lichen which sometimes falls in showers several inches deep, the wind
having blown it from the spots where it grew, and carried it onwards. In1824and
in1828 , it fell in Persia and Asiatic Turkey in great quantities. In1829 , during the
war between Persia and Russia, there was a great famine at Oroomiah, south-west
of the Caspian Sea. One day, during a violent wind, the surface of the country was
covered with what the people called "bread from heaven," which fell in thick
showers. Sheep fed on it greedily, and the people who had never seen it before,
induced by this, gathered it, and having reduced it to flour, made bread of it, which
they found palatable and nourishing. In some places it lay on the ground five or six
inches deep. In the spring of1841 , an amazing quantity of this substance fell in the
same region, covering the ground, here and there, to the depth of from three to four
inches. Many of the particles were as large as hail-stones. It was grey, and sweet to
the taste, and made excellent bread. In1846 , a great manna rain, which occurred at
Jenischehr, during a famine, attracted great notice. It lasted several days, and pieces
as large as a hazel-nut fell in quantities. When ground and baked it made as good
bread, in the opinion of the people, as that from grain. In1846 another rain of
manna occurred in the government of Wilna, and formed a layer upon the ground,
three or four inches deep. It was of a greyish-white colour, rather hard, irregular in
form, without smell, and insipid. Pallas, the Russian naturalist, observed it on the
arid mountains and limestone tracts of the Great Desert of Tartary. In1828 ,
Parroth brought some from Mount Ararat, and it proved to be a lichen known as
Parmelia Esculenta, which grows on chalky and stony soil, like that of the Kirghese
Steppes of Central Asia. Eversmann described several kinds of it, last century, as
found east of the Caspian, and widely spread over Persia and Middle Asia. It is
round, and at times as large as a walnut, varying from that to the size of a pin"s
head, and does not fix itself in the soil in which it grows, but lies free and loose,
drinking in nourishment from the surface, and easily carried off by the wind, which
sweeps it away in vast quantities in the storms of spring, and thus causes the
"manna rains" in the districts over which the wind travels." —Geikie"s "Hours
with the Bible."
PETT, "Exodus 16:3
‘And the children of Israel said to them, “Would that we had died by the hand of
Yahweh in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots, when we ate bread to
the full. For you have brought us out into this wilderness to kill this whole assembly
with hunger.” ’
After leaving Elim they had moved along the coast of the Gulf of Sinai and again

found the going tough. They found this wilderness life not to their liking. The land
was barren, and shortage of pleasant food, having to preserve their supplies,
shortage of water, and the constant trudging, not knowing what lay ahead, was
more than they had expected. And when they arrived in the Wilderness of Sin things
were no better. So they vented their feelings on Moses and his mouthpiece Aaron.
They looked back with longing to what they thought of as the good and plentiful
food of Egypt. It would have been better to have died there than to die here. It is
easy in such circumstances to remember and exaggerate the best things and forget
the worst.
Moses here suffers the common lot of leaders of large caravans who tend to be
blamed for any shortcomings on the journey. It did not bode well for the future. But
we must remember in mitigation that they had been slaves for many years and had
lost any sense of enterprise or initiative.
“By the hand of Yahweh.” This may suggest that they were thinking of the
judgment that would have come on them if they had disobeyed Him. But it may
simply be a contrast between dying naturally in Egypt and being ‘killed’ (by
starvation) by Moses in the wilderness. This is an exaggeration as they had their
herds and flocks with them. They could survive if necessary, it was the little luxuries
that they missed. We may be puzzled at the situation as we note that they had
plentiful supplies of cattle and sheep. But they would not want to eat too many of
their beasts. They had the future to think of. It does, however, bring home the fact
that they were not really at the last extremity, and that their murmuring was
therefore not excusable.
“Flesh pots.” Meat containers.
PULPIT, "Would to God we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of
Egypt—i.e; "Would that God had smitten us with a painless death, as he did the
first-born of the Egyptians! Then we should have avoided the painful and lingering
death from starvation which we now see before us." The cry puts on the garb of
piety, and names the name of Jehovah, but indicates a want of faith in him, his
power, and his promises (Exodus 4:8, Exodus 4:17; Exodus 6:8; Exodus 12:25;
Exodus 13:5, Exodus 13:11), which was sinful, and, after the miracles that they had
seen, barely excusable. When we sat by the flesh-pots of Egypt. Compare umbers
11:5. Both passages make it clear that, whatever the sufferings of the Israelites in
Egypt from the cruelty of the taskmasters and the hard tasks set them, at any rate
their sustenance was well cared for—they had abundance of agreeable food. Did eat
bread. It has been said that "bread" here means "food in general" (Kalisch); and no
doubt the word has sometimes that sense. But it was probably actual bread, rather
than anything else, for which the Israelites were longing. See the Introduction to the
chapter.

4 Then the Lord said to Moses, “I will rain down
bread from heaven for you. The people are to go
out each day and gather enough for that day. In
this way I will test them and see whether they will
follow my instructions.
BAR ES,"That I may prove them - The trial consisted in the restriction to the
supply of their daily wants.
CLARKE, "I will rain bread - Therefore this substance was not a production of the
desert: nor was the dew that was the instrument of producing it common there, else they
must have had this bread for a month before.
GILL, "Then said the Lord unto Moses,.... Who no doubt had been praying to him,
as was his usual manner, when the people were in distress and complained, and was
heard and answered by him: behold:
I will rain bread from heaven for you; though they were a murmuring, rebellious,
and ungrateful people, the Lord dealt kindly and bountifully with them; he did not rain
fire and brimstone upon them, as on Sodom and Gomorrah, nor snares and an horrible
tempest, as on the wicked; but what was desirable by them, and suitable to their present
circumstances, even bread, which was what they wanted, and this ready prepared; for
though they did dress it in different ways, yet it might be eaten without any preparation
at all; and this it was promised should be rained down upon them, there should be great
plenty of it; it should come as thick and as fast as a shower of rain, and lie around their
camp ready at hand to take up; and this should not spring out of the earth as bread corn
does, but come down from heaven; and being such a wonderful thing, a "behold" is
prefixed unto it, denoting the marvellousness of it, as well as exciting attention to what
was said: our Lord may seem to contradict this, when he says, Moses gave you not that
bread from heaven, Joh_6:32, but the reconciliation is easy; for not to observe that it
was God, and not Moses, that gave this bread, so though it came from the airy heavens,
and along with the dew of it, where it was prepared perhaps by the ministry of angels,
and therefore called the corn of heaven, and angels' bread, Psa_78:24, yet it came not
from the heaven of heavens, the third heaven, from whence the true bread, the antitype
of this, came, even our Lord Jesus Christ himself:
and the people shall go out, and gather a certain rate of it every day; or "the

thing of the day in its day" (i), the bread day by day; to which our Lord may be thought
to allude, when he directs his disciples to pray, give us this day our daily bread; as this
would be rained every morning, the people were to go out of the camp, and gather it up
for their daily use, and which was to be done every day:
that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or no; by this single
instance of their obedience to his will in going out every morning to gather their bread,
that should be rained for them, he proposed to try and prove their obedience to his law
in all other respects; what regard would be had to it when it should be given, and what
might be expected from them, and likewise whether they would depend upon his
providence in this case also.
HE RY, " The care God graciously took for their supply. Justly he might have said,
“I will rain fire and brimstone upon these murmurers, and consume them;” but, quite
contrary, he promises to rain bread upon them. Observe,
1. How God makes known to Moses his kind intentions, that he might not be uneasy at
their murmurings, nor be tempted to wish he had let them alone in Egypt. (1.) He takes
notice of the people's complaints: I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel,
Exo_16:12. As a God of pity, he took cognizance of their necessity, which was the
occasion of their murmuring; as a just and holy God, he took cognizance of their base
and unworthy reflections upon his servant Moses, and was much displeased with them.
Note, When we begin to fret and be uneasy, we ought to consider that God hears all our
murmurings, though silent, and only the murmurings of the heart. Princes, parents,
masters, do not hear all the murmurs of their inferiors against them, and it is well they
do not, for perhaps they could not bear it; but God hears, and yet bears. We must not
think, because God does not immediately take vengeance on men for their sins, that
therefore he does not take notice of them; no, he hears the murmurings of Israel, and is
grieved with this generation, and yet continues his care of them, as the tender parent of
the froward child. (2.) He promises them a speedy, sufficient, and constant supply, Exo_
16:4. Man being made out of the earth, his Maker has wisely ordered him food out of the
earth, Psa_104:14. But the people of Israel, typifying the church of the first-born that are
written in heaven, and born from above, and being themselves immediately under the
direction and government of heaven, receiving their charters, laws, and commissions,
from heaven, from heaven also received their food: their law being given by the
disposition of angels, they did also eat angels' food. See what God designed in making
this provision for them: That I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or
no. [1.] Thus he tried whether they would trust him, and walk in the law of faith or no,
whether they could live from hand to mouth, and (though now uneasy because their
provisions were spent) could rest satisfied with the bread of the day in its day, and
depend upon God for fresh supplies tomorrow. [2.] Thus he tried whether they would
serve him, and be always faithful to so good a Master, that provided so well for his
servants; and hereby he made it appear to all the world, in the issue, what an ungrateful
people they were, whom nothing could affect with a sense of obligation. Let favour be
shown to them, yet will they not learn righteousness, Isa_26:10.
JAMISO , "Then said the Lord unto Moses — Though the outbreak was
immediately against the human leaders, it was indirectly against God: yet mark His
patience, and how graciously He promised to redress the grievance.
I will rain bread from heaven — Israel, a type of the Church which is from above,
and being under the conduct, government, and laws of heaven, received their food from

heaven also (Psa_78:24).
that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no — The grand
object of their being led into the wilderness was that they might receive a religious
training directly under the eye of God; and the first lesson taught them was a constant
dependence on God for their daily nourishment.
CALVI , "4.Then said the Lord unto Moses. It is probable that Moses passes over
much in silence, because it is not consistent that the insolence of the people was left
without even a single word of chastisement. For, although God in His extraordinary
kindness gave food to these depraved and wicked men, who were unworthy of the
sunlight and the common air, still He was without doubt unwilling to foster their sin
by His silence, and, whilst He pardoned their ingratitude, sharply reproved their
forwardness. But Moses, passing over this, proceeds to a history especially worthy of
narration, how God fed this wretched people with bread from heaven, when He
made the manna to fall from the clouds like dew. I call it “the bread of heaven,”
with the Prophet, (Psalms 78:24,) who honors it with this magnificent title, and
extols God’s bounty towards His people, as if they had been admitted to the tables of
angels. For St. Paul calls the manna “spiritual meat,” (1 Corinthians 10:3,) in
another sense, viz., because it was a type of the flesh of Christ, which feeds our
minds unto the hope of eternal life. The Prophet, however, makes no allusion to that
mystery, but alleges in this circumstance an accusation against the people, because
they not only despised the food which springs from the earth, but also were
disgusted with that bread, for which they saw the heavens in a manner opened. But
on this point somewhat must be hereafter repeated. God now declares that He will
give them daily their allowance, as it were, that in this way He may prove the
obedience of His people. Though on this latter head interpreters are not agreed; for
some understand it as if God, by kindly providing food for the Israelites, would bind
them to obedience by His bounty; as though He should say, “I will try whether they
are altogether intractable or submissive; for nothing shall be wanting to retain them
in the way of duty.” But others confine the meaning of the word to “their daily
food;” for that this was the proof of their fear and reverence, that they should not
desire more than was given them, but that they should he contented with their daily
provision, and thus depend on the providence of God. The former sense pleases me
best, and I have endeavored to explain it more clearly than it can be understood
from others. There is no occasion to enter into controversy about the word “Law,”
(171) for (as we shall soon see) it is used to express the measure or rule of a pious
and just life. Therefore, He says, that He will know whether they are disposed to
honor Him, and to submit themselves to His command. But if any one prefer to
embrace the other sense, I leave him to enjoy his own opinion.
COKE, "Exodus 16:4. Then said the Lord unto Moses— This was, no doubt, in
answer to Moses's application by prayer to the Lord on account of these
murmurings; when Jehovah was graciously pleased to promise them bread from
heaven, sent down in daily showers, to keep the people in perpetual dependence
upon him; and to prove whether, under this daily admonition from heaven, they
would walk in his law, or not. We are taught to maintain this dependence upon God
by praying to him for our daily bread.

BE SO , "Exodus 16:4. Man being made out of the earth, his Maker has wisely
ordered him food out of the earth, <19A414>Psalms 104:14. But the people of Israel
typifying the church of the firstborn that are written in heaven, receiving their
charters, laws, and commissions from heaven; from heaven also they received their
food. See what God designed in making this provision for them; that I may prove
them, whether they will walk in my law or no — Whether they would trust and
serve him, and be ever faithful to so good a master.
ELLICOTT, "(4) I will rain bread from heaven for you.—This first announcement
at once suggests that the supply is to be supernatural. “Bread from heaven” was not
simply “food out of the air” (Rosenmüller), but a celestial, that is, a Divine supply of
their daily needs.
A certain rate every day.—Heb., a day’s meal each day—sufficient, that is, for the
wants of himself and family for a day.
That I may prove them.—Human life is a probation. God proves and tries those
most whom He takes to Himself for His “peculiar people,” and the trial is often by
means of positive precepts, which are especially
Calculated to test the presence or absence of a spirit of humble and unquestioning
obedience. Our first parents were tested by a positive precept in Paradise; the
family of Abraham were tested by a positive precept—circumcision on the eighth
day; the Israelites were tested, both in the wilderness and afterwards throughout
their career as a nation, by a number of positive precepts, whereof this concerning
the manna was one. Christians are tested by positive precepts with respect to
common worship, prayer, and sacraments—the object being in all cases to see
whether men “will walk in God’s law or no.” Men are very apt to prefer their own
inventions to the simple rule of following at once the letter and the spirit of God’s
commandments.
COFFMA , "Verses 4-8
"Then said Jehovah unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and
the people shall go out and gather a day's portion every day, that I may prove them,
whether they will walk in my law, or not. And it shall come to pass on the sixth day,
that they shall prepare that which they bring in, and it shall be twice as much as
they gather daily. And Moses and Aaron said unto all the children of Israel, At even,
then ye shall know that Jehovah hath brought you out from the land of Egypt; and
in the morning, then ye shall see the glory of Jehovah; for that he heareth your
murmuring against Jehovah: and what are we, that ye murmur against us? And
Moses said, This shall be, when Jehovah shall give you in the evening flesh to eat,
and in the morning bread to the full; for that Jehovah heareth your murmuring
which ye murmur against him: and what are we? your murmurings are not against
us, but against Jehovah."
"Bread from heaven for you ..." Our Lord Jesus Christ utilized this passage in his

magnificent announcement that, "I am the bread of life" (John 6:35), and in his
words that, "I am the bread that came down from heaven" (John 6:41). How is
Jesus the Bread of Life?
He came from heaven, like the manna.
He gives life (spiritually) as the manna did physically.
He is the only hope of eternal life; manna was the only hope for Israel in the
wilderness.
He is for ALL people, as the manna was for all Israel.
He was not recognized by Israel; neither did they know the manna.
He was a test for ALL people; this manna was a test for Israel.
"Know that Jehovah hath brought you out from the land of Egypt ..." (Exodus
16:6). This contrasts with the complaint of Israel to Moses and Aaron that, "Ye have
brought us forth into this wilderness" (Exodus 16:3).
"At even ... and in the morning ... ye shall see the glory of Jehovah ..." Some
understand this as reference to a visible display of some glory, as of fire, standing
over the wilderness, or seen in the cloud. There was such a glory mentioned in
Exodus 16:10. In his comment on that Dummelow said, "Here a special radiance is
meant ... as with an appearance of fire."[7] It appears that Keil's view on the glory
here is correct:
Here, seeing the glory of Jehovah did not consist in the sight of the glory of the Lord
which appeared in the cloud, as mentioned in Exodus 16:10, but in their perception
or experience of that glory in the miraculous gift of flesh and bread.[8]
The Jewish understanding of this place is like that of Keil's. "In Exodus 16:7, the
[~kabowd] (glory) manifested itself by the miraculous gift of manna."[9]
"Gather a day's portion every day ..." (Exodus 16:4). it is believed by some that this
is the O.T. root of that line in the Lord's Prayer, "Give us this day our daily
bread."[10] By providing only one day's rations at a time, God would prove, or test,
Israel to find out if they would really trust in God and walk according to his rules.
Here also is the first of a number of rules concerning the manna which were to be
faithfully observed by Israel:
A. THE LAW AS TO QUA TITY. Only one day's portion to be gathered at a time.
The same amount for each person.
B. THE LAW AS TO TIME. To be gathered only in the mornings. one to be

gathered on the seventh day.
C. THE LAW AS TO USE. one of it to be left until the next day. A lesson against
hoarding.
It would be wonderful if it could be reported that Israel observed these rules
regarding the manna, but the truth is:
They failed at each point. They tried to hoard (Exodus 16:20).
They went out to gather on the Sabbath (Exodus 16:27). They showed both
disobedience and unbelief, for it had been distinctly said of the seventh day, "in it
there shall be none" (Exodus 16:26) ... God had miraculously supplied their wants,
yet so little sensible were they of his goodness, that they declined to obey even the
few simple rules which God had laid down for the reception and use of his benefits.
[11]
In these observations, of course, there appears the manna as a type of the Gospel of
Christ, which is: (1) from heaven, not from earth; (2) which must be gathered early,
heeded early in life; (3) which must be gathered daily (one cannot store up enough
gospel to last for the future); (4) if hoarded (not shared with others) it becomes foul;
and (5) it must be eaten (Revelation 10:1-11). (We cannot observe communion for a
month, or a year, on one particular Sunday).
"On the sixth day ..." "The sixth day here probably means the sixth day after the
appearance of the manna,"[12] and it has no connection with a certain day of the
week, nor with a sabbath, the latter having nowhere been mentioned at this point in
the entire O.T.
"Ye murmur against him (Jehovah) ..." (Exodus 16:8). Here is established a
principle which holds throughout all dispensations of the grace of God, including
our own. Murmuring against those men whom God has called to teach his Word is
actually murmuring against God. An apostle has warned us, " either murmur ye,
as some of them murmured and perished by the destroyer" (1 Corinthians 10:10).
EXPOSITOR'S DICTIO ARY, "St. John of the Cross notes on this text that the
manna was not given to the Israelites until the corn they had brought from Egypt
failed. "This teaches us that we must first renounce all things, for this manna of the
angels neither belongs nor is given to the palate which still relishes the food of men."
He quotes the words of umbers 11:4, "Who shall give us flesh to eat?" "They
would not content themselves with that so simple manna, but desired and begged for
manna of flesh. And our Lord was displeased because they wished to mix so low and
coarse a food with one so high and pure:—a manna which, simple as it was, contains
within itself the savour of all foods."
—Obras, vol1. p19.

Exodus 16 commentary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Exodus 16 commentary

Similar to Exodus 16 commentary (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Exodus 16 commentary