A. M. 2433. A. C. 1571; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 3763. A. C. 1648. EXOD. CH. i—xiii. an impostor, would be found to emblazon, and discovers | have speculated upon this subject, with so much philosoothers which any man of art and design would be glad to phical subtlety, as to build thereon many foolish fancies conceal; though even some of these passages, which at and ridiculous errors. It cannot be denied, indeed, but first sight may seem to deserve some blame, upon a that God, in giving some names that are recorded in farther inquiry, may be found to be excusable at least, Scripture, had respect to the nature and circumstances of if not to be justified. the persons to whom they belonged; and that, in imitation of him, men endeavoured, even from the beginning, to give names as expressive of the properties of the things named, as human wisdom could direct them; and therefore, without troubling ourselves with what the ancients have offered concerning the science of names, we may from hence deduce the true reason why Moses desired to be informed, at this time more especially, what the name of God was. 1 Whoever was the author of the book of Job, it is certain, that he was a writer of great antiquity, and yet he makes it a part of the character of that righteous man, that he delivered the poor, when he cried, and the fatherless, and him that had no helper ;' that he brake the jaws of the wicked, and plucked the spoil out of his teeth.' If this may be thought to relate to Job, as a public magistrate only, there is a direction in the Proverbs of Solomon, which seems to be of a more general concernment; 2 If thou forbear to deliver them that are drawn unto death, and those that are ready to be slain ; if thou sayest, Behold, we knew it not; doth not he that pondereth the heart consider it? And he that keepeth thy soul, doth not he know it? And shall not he render to every man according to his works?' If this be thought again not to affect Moses at all, as being at this time an inhabitant of Egypt; there was in Egypt likewise a law, which perhaps at this time was in force, and obligatory upon all, namely, "That whoever saw his fellow creature either killed by another, or violently assaulted, and did not either apprehend the murderer, or rescue the oppressed if he could; or if he could not, made not an information thereof to the magistrate, himself should be put to death." Now the history tells us, that when Moses went out unto his brethren, he looked on their burdens, and spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew.' So that it is but supposing, that this Egyptian was one of the taskmasters, as the burdens here mentioned seem to denote, who so barbarously treated the Hebrews, and was now going to beat one of them to death; and according to the law of the land, which seems indeed to be the law of all nations, then in being, he was obliged to interpose; and if, upon his interposition, the Egyptian turned upon him, and assaulted him briskly, which is no hard matter to imagine, he was obliged, in his own defence, to slay him. 5 To complain to the magistrate in this case, and implore the assistance of the law, was to no manner of purpose. The whole civil power was lodged in such hands as had secret instructions from court to vex and ill treat the Israelites; and when matters were come to this crisis, that oppression ruled, and the government was turned into a mere latrociny, private force upon any proper occasion, must be deemed lawful in all, but in Moses much more so, since he was either moved and animated thereunto by a divine impulse, or invested before it happened, (as "St Stephen's comment upon the place gives us reason to think he was so invested,) with the title and office of deliverer of the people of God. That the names both of persons and things were of the greatest importance to be rightly understood, in order to attain the truest knowledge that could be had of their natures, was the opinion both of Jews and heathens; and some of the earliest writers of the Christian church If we consider the small advances which philosophy had made, we cannot imagine that men at this time had a sufficient knowledge of the works of the creation, to be able thereby to demonstrate the attributes of God; nor could they by speculation form proper and just notions of his nature. Some of them, indeed, the philosophers of that age, thought themselves wise enough to attempt these subjects; but what was the success?' professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God.' After they had speculated never so long on any element, the fire, air, or water, the convex of the firmament, the circle of the stars, or the lights of heaven, not forming true notions of their natures, they were either delighted with their beauty, or astonished with their power, and so framing very high, but false estimates of them, they lost the knowledge of the work-master, and took the parts of his workmanship to be God. Moses, indeed, might be a man of excellent parts; but we carry our compliment too far, if we think him not liable to have fallen into these, or perhaps more dangerous errors, had he endeavoured to form his notions of God, either from the Egyptian, or any other learning that was then extant in the world. Faith, or a belief of what God had revealed, was the only principle upon which he could hope rightly to know God; and this was the principle which Moses here desires to go upon. For as the revelation which God had hitherto made of himself was but short and imperfect; so Moses, by desiring to know God's name, desired that he might have some revelation of his nature and attributes vouchsafed him; for that the name of God does frequently signify the divine nature and attributes, is evident from several passages in Scripture. When Moses desired to see God's glory, he obtained, that the name of the Lord should be proclaimed before him, and the proclamation was, The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin.' And in like manner, Isaiah, prophesying what the Messiah should be, declares his name to be, Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.' In both these places, and many more that might be produced to the same purpose, the name denotes the nature of God; and therefore the design of Moses, in asking God's name, was to obtain an information of the divine attributes, in order to carry a report of them to Exod. xxxiv. 6, 7. 'Rom. i. 22, 23. 9 Isa. ix 6. 3 A. M. 2433. A. C. 1571; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 3763. A. C. 1648. EXOD. CH. i-xiii. his brethren. And indeed, considering that Moses was And accordingly we may observe, that this great appellation which God is here pleased to give of himself, expresses his incomprehensible nature in such open and proper character, that St Hilary, as he tells us of himself, lighting on these words before he was a Christian, and as he was musing about God and religion, was struck with admiration, because he could think of nothing so proper and essential to God, as to be. God himself, however, chooses to express the word in the future tense, on purpose, as some imagine, to show that he is the only being that can truly say, "I shall, or will be, what I am;" forasmuch as all other beings derive their existence from him, and may be deprived of that existence whenever he pleases. 1 What knowledge the wisest of the heathen world might have of this incommunicable name of God, without the help of revelation, is a matter of great uncertainty. It it more than probable that Plato's definition of a God, namely, "a being that is always, and had no beginning," was borrowed from these words of Moses: but there is a passage in Plutarch, which mentions an inscription in the temple of Delphos, consisting of these letters EI, a contraction, as some imagine, of EIMI, I am, which (according to the opinion of a great judge in those days) was one of the most perfect names and titles of the Deity, seeing it imported, that "though our being is uncertain, precarious, temporary, and subject to change, so that no man can say of himself, in a strict and absolute sense, I am; yet we may with great propriety give the Deity this appellation, because God is independent, immutable, eternal, always and everywhere the same : for, 2 ́ I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, the first and the last, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.' But all this would not work upon Moses to undertake the office to which God called him; and yet when we come to consider his case, we cannot altogether accuse him of perverseness or obstinacy. About forty years before, he had felt some extraordinary motion in himself, and as he was then in the fervour of his youth, he took it for a certain indication that God intended to make use of him as an instrument for his people's deliverance; but then he was a far greater man than now. The princess (if alive) who had adopted him for her son, supported his interest at court; or if dead, had in all probability left him a fortune sufficient to procure himself one. But now age had made him cool and considerate. The loss of his patroness had quashed all aspiring thoughts. A long habitude had perfectly reconciled him to an obscure course of life and therefore, as one loath to be roused * Rev. i. 8, 11. 'Ammonius. He had already experimentally known the ingratitude and disingenuity of the Hebrews: When he supposed they would have understood, that God, by his hand, would have delivered them,' he voluntarily offered his service; but their rejection of him, when in the height of his power, upon so great an alteration in his circumstances, took away all hopes of success in so difficult an enterprise. So that the principal error which Moses incurred upon this occasion, was no more than a distemper incident to the generality of mankind, namely, the measuring of God by himself, and judging of events from the probabilities or improbabilities of second causes. 5 But there is another reason not to be dissembled, which might possibly deter Moses from returning into Egypt, and that was the blood of the man for which he had fled into Midian, and his certain knowledge of the laws of that land, namely, that "whoever killed another, whether he was bond or free, was not to escape with his own life." Just before God appeared to him in the bush, and had this discourse with him, we read, that the king of Egypt died, that king, to wit, in whose reign he had slain the Egyptian, and who sought to apprehend him, that he might put him to death. But as Moses kept no manner of correspondence with Egypt, the news of this king's death might not have reached his ears, or if it had, he might reasonably think, that some surviving relation of the slain man might enter a process against him for the murder. So that here he fell into a passion, which is hardly separable from human nature, namely, the love of life and dread of punishment; and which in him was the more excusable, because God as yet had not cleared his mind from the fear and suspicion it lay under. It must not be denied then, but that there were some tokens of human frailty in Moses' last refusal of the commission which was offered him; but then there is this to say in excuse, that the most excellent persons are the least forward to embrace the offers of great preferment. For if no authority (according to Plato) is designed for the benefit of him that governs, but of those that are governed, no wise and considerate man will voluntarily take upon him the government of a people, but must either be hired or compelled to it; and therefore Moses, considering the great weight of the employment, out of a due sense of his own infirmities, declined it as long as he could. And though mention is made in the Scripture of the Lord's being angry with him,' yet this anger could amount to no more than such a displeasure as a father conceives at his child, when, notwithstanding all that can be said and done to create in him a just confidence, he still continues bashful and diffident of himself. 86 the nicest and minutest circumstances. He not only acquaints him, that his people shall be delivered, but he describes to him the exact place where, after they found themselves set at liberty, they were to pay their homage to their deliverer: and this detail is the token that God gives him of the certainty of the event. To illustrate this by a parallel instance. When the armies of Sennacherib besieged Jerusalem, Hezekiah began to fear that they would take it: to secure him against that fear, Isaiah promises him an approaching deliverance. Hezekiah is afraid lest the sins of the people should stand between him and the Divine good A. M. 2433. A. C. 1571; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 3763. A. C. 1648. EXOD. CH. i–xiii. Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain.' For how can a future event serve for a sign of the accomplishments of a present promise? The common solution of this difficulty is,-That God designed this for a token to Moses, in order to root out of his heart all remains of infidelity, which might perhaps be found in him, even after he had delivered the Israelites out of bondage; but this is a sense by no means allowable. For how can we suppose, that after God had brought out his people with an high hand, and a stretched out arm, by making himself justly terrible to Pharaoh and all his court; by turning rivers of water into blood; by changing the day into night; by slaying all the first-ness: to secure him against this apprehension likewise, born in Egypt; and by causing the king and his whole army to be swallowed up in the same waves of the sea, which were a wall on the right hand and on the left,' | and opened a way for his own people to pass; how can we suppose, I say, that this faithful servant of his should have the least doubt whether this mighty deliverance was to be ascribed to providence or chance? Or, if there was any further occasion for tokens, why should a smaller than any of the foregoing be proposed? Or, when proposed, why should it be presumed sufficient to produce an effect which others, much more considerable, were found incompetent to do? To evade these questions, some of the Jewish doctors have devised a new partition of the words; and when God says to Moses, This shall be a token unto thee,' they think he means it of the bush, from whence he spake, all on flames without consuming, which was, questionless, token enough that God had sent him; and thereupon, they make the subsequent words the beginning of a fresh sentence, and declarative of a farther purpose, for which God would bring forth his people out of Egypt, even that from that mountain he might give them a law, which was to be the rule and directory of their religious worship and service. But there is no necessity for this subterfuge, when the difficulty may be fairly resolved, by distinguishing the promises of God into two kinds; those that depend on certain conditions, and those that have no conditions at all. To be the messenger of the former kind of promises, is exercising a glorious ministry; but then it is a ministry attended with danger. He upon whom God confers it, may live in perpetual fear of promising something without effect; because they to whom the promise is made, may forfeit it by not performing the requisite condition: but nothing can discourage the man to whom God has given a commission of the latter kind; because the infallibility of the event supports him against all the obstacles that can possibly arise. Now to apply this to the case in hand. When God promises Moses a deliverance of his people, Moses might fear that their impiety or unbelief might be a bar and obstruction to their deliverance; and therefore God, in order to cure him of this fear, endeavours to make him sensible that the promise he now gives him, was not indefinite and general, like those which depended on certain conditions; but that it was one of those whose accomplishment was decreed in the Divine councils, independent on any event, or any condition: and therefore he not only promises, but foretels, and particularizes Exod. xiv. 22. and to convince him that the resolution God had taken to deliver his people was irrespective and infallible; "" This shall be a sign unto thee,' says he, 'ye shall eat this year such things as grow of themselves; and in the second year, that which springeth of the same; and in the third year, sow ye, and reap, and plant vineyards, and eat the fruit thereof.' To return to Moses. Had this promise indeed been the only sign which God had given him, it might have administered some umbrage of suspicion; but when it was attended with several other signs and mighty wonders, it could not but be of great use for the confirmation of his faith in his present undertaking, since he knew it was as certain as if it had already been effected; because it proceeded from the mouth of the Almighty, whose promises, when absolute and unconditional, are always yea and amen.' I know of few passages more difficult to be understood, than that which contains the adventure of Moses' family in the inn, where the Lord met him, and sought to kill him, until Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, surely a bloody husband art thou to me.' Zipporah is commonly represented as a perverse and forward woman, who looked upon circumcision as a cruel and unnecessary ordinance; and therefore prevailed with her husband, who, perhaps, might be too indulgent to her in the case of her younger son, to omit it. But it ought to be considered, that as she was a Midianitish woman, and descended from Abraham by his wife Keturah, she could not have any aversion to the rite of circumcision, in which she acquiesced in the case of her elder son Gershom, and in which she was so expert, that upon her husband's incapacity, she herself performed the operation upon the younger. The Midianites might perhaps, in this respect, imitate their neighbours the Ishmaelites, who did not circumcise their children until they were thirteen years of age; and, for this reason, some have imagined that Moses' son had not as yet undergone the operation: but Moses knew very well that there was a limitation of time in the institution of the ordinance; and therefore the more probable reason for this omission seems to be, that they were now upon their journey, when Zipporah was brought to bed, and that therefore they might think that the danger of the wound to the infant might excuse the deferring of his circumcision, as it excused the Israelites afterwards in the wilderness. But as it does not appear that Moses lay under any necessity of taking his family, especially his wife with child, along with him, so this omission of circumcising his son might be imputed to him as a greater fault than ordinary, because he may be supposed to have understood the will of God concerning this rite more perfectly than any other man, and was, but just before, reminded of the benefit of that covenant whereof this ordinance was a seal, and some part of which he was going now to take possession of. A. M. 2433. A. C. 1571; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 3763. A. C. 1648. EXOD. CH. i-xiii. This is an interpretation which not only the Septuagint and Chaldee Paraphrasts seem to countenance, but what most modern masters of Jewish learning have approved. And as it seems to clear the character of But how absurd would it have been for Moses to be made a lawgiver to others, when himself lived in an open violation of God's laws? or to be appointed a chief ruler and instructer of the Israelites, to whom he was to inculcate the obligation of this ordinance, and on whom he was to inflict pains and penalties for their neglect of it, when himself was guilty of the same sin? Nor was this omission only a great sin in itself, but a great scandal likewise to the Israelites, who, by his example, | Zipporah, so may it receive some farther confirmation might very likely be led into the same miscarriage, and be tempted to suspect the call of a person who showed such a visible contempt of God's law. As Moses therefore was a public person, and just invested with a commission from God, his disobedience to a known law was more enormous, his example might have done more mischief; and therefore God's severity against him, either in afflicting him with some sudden sickness, or affrightening him with some terrible apparition, was necessary to remind him of his duty. And accordingly, whatever the means was, we find, that it brought to his wife's remembrance the neglect of their not having circumcised the child: but we injure her character, if we think that the words which she is made to utter upon this occasion, were any angry taunt or exprobation to her husband, since, according to the exposition of a very learned writer upon the text, they are not directed to him, but to her son; and are not the effect of any angry resentment, but a solemn form of speech made use of at the time of any child's circumcision. from the subsequent behaviour of the angel, who, as soon as he saw the ceremony performed, and heard the solemn form pronounced over the child, let Moses go, and did not slay him ;' whereas had the operation been done in the manner that some pretend, grudgingly, and of necessity, with inward regret and words of reproach to her husband, this, one would think, would have incensed the angel, either to have continued the punishment, be it what it will, upon Moses, or rather to have transferred it to his wife, who, upon this supposition, seems most justly to have deserved it. Upon the whole therefore it appears, that the words of Zipporah were addressed to her son, and not her husband, and were the usual form of admission into the Jewish church; that it was at the child's feet that she laid the foreskin, and did not throw it at her husband in anger, when she spake the words above-mentioned; and that in this whole affair, there was neither any squabble between Moses and his wife, nor any indecent behaviour, or opprobrious language used by her. Several of the Jewish doctors tell us, that it was a It cannot be denied, indeed, but that God, from the custom of the Hebrew women to call their children, very first day that he appointed Moses to go to Pharaoh, when they were circumcised, by the name of Chatan, intended to deliver his people from their captivity, and that is, spouse, as if they were now espoused to God. when once they were departed out of Egypt, that they And to this custom the apostle perhaps might allude, should never return again; and yet they are directed to when he tells his Corinthians, 2 I am jealous over you demand only to go three days' journey into the wilderwith an holy jealousy, for I have espoused you to one ness.' This was not the whole of what was intended; husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to but Moses lay under no obligation to let so bitter an Christ.' However this be, Zipporah, who was an Ara-enemy as Pharaoh into his whole design. It is sufficient bian woman, might the rather make use of this term, and apply it to her son, because the Arabians, whose language has great affinity to the Hebrew, and who themselves, as descendants from Abraham, did all along use the rite| of circumcision, make the word chatan signify to circumcise, and chiten, circumcision, as manifestly appears in their translation of the New Testament; which can no otherwise be accounted for than from this custom of calling a child chatan when he is circumcised, even as we, because a child in baptism is made a christian, use the word christen for to baptize. 5 to absolve him from any imputation of disingenuity, that he acted according to the instructions which God gave him; and God certainly was not obliged to acquaint Pharaoh with all his mind, but only so far as he thought proper: and for wise and good reasons, he thought proper to make the demand no higher at first, than three days' journey into the wilderness,' that by his denial of so modest a request, he might make his tyranny more manifest, and the divine vengeance upon him more just and remarkable. It must be acknowledged again, that the expression of If Zipporah's words then were directed, not to her flowing with milk and honey,' when applied to any husband, but the child whom she had just now circum-country, like that of king Solomon's making silver to cised, their proper meaning must be," I, by this cir- be in Jerusalem like stones,' is hyperbolical. It denotes cumcision, pronounce thee to be a member of the church." very rich pastures and grounds which should feed cattle 22 Cor. xi. 2. 'Mede's Discourse 14. 3 Mede, b. 1. Discourse 14. Exod. iv. 26. Poole's Annotations in locum. 1 Kings x. 27 A. M. 2433. A. C. 1571; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 3763. A. C. 1648. EXOD. CH. i-xiii. yielding abundance of milk, and which should produce | tion in him to have persuaded him to have avoided it: great plenty of flowers and plants, for the bees to make but that Moses, with all possible application, endeavoured honey. It represents indeed a general fruitfulness all to make an impression upon Pharaoh for his good, is the country over; for which Palestine, according to the manifest from this passage,* glory over me,' that is, do account of writers of no mean character, was certainly me the honour to believe me, when I shall entreat for once famous, however it came into Strabo's head to thee, and for thy servants;' wherein he makes an earnest disparage it. For, to mention an author or two of some address to Pharaoh, to induce him to be persuaded to note, Aristeus, who was there to bring the seventy inter-part with the people, which he certainly never would preters into Egypt, tells us that immense and prodigious have done, had he been satisfied that God himself had was the produce and plenty it afforded of trees, fruits, prevented his compliance, on purpose to bring him to pasture, cattle, honey, besides the spicery, gold, and | ruin. 1 precious stones, imported from Arabia, Josephus It is farther to be observed, therefore, that not only in describes the country as it was in his time, that is, in the the Hebrew, but in most other languages, the occasion of time of our Saviour and his apostles, as most remarkably an action, and what in itself has no power to produce it, fruitful and pleasant, and abounding in the very choicest is very often put for the efficient cause thereof. Thus in productions of the earth. Bochart, much later, and since | the case before us, God sends Moses to Pharaoh, and the country has been inhabited by the Turks, lived in it Moses, in his presence, does such miraculous works as for the space of ten years, and as he was particularly would have had an effect upon any other but because curious and diligent in informing himself in every thing, he saw some of the miracles imitated by the magicians; speaks the greatest things imaginable of the richness of because the plagues which God sent came gradually upon its soil, and the choiceness of its products; and to name him, and by the intercession of Moses, were constantly no more, our own countryman, Mr Sandys, who, in the removed; he thence took occasion, instead of being beginning of the last century, travelled through it, gives softened by this alternative of mercy and judgment, to it the character of "a land adorned with beautiful become more sullen and obdurate. When' Pharaoh,' as mountains, and luxurious valleys; the rocks producing the text tells us, saw that the rain, and the hail, and excellent waters, and no part empty of delight or profit.' the thunder ceased, he sinned yet more, and hardened And certainly those who either were natives, or have his heart.' The mercy of God, which should have led him sojourned a long time in a country, may be supposed to to repentance, had a contrary effect upon him, and made have a more perfect knowledge of it than a foreigner, him more obstinate: "for an hardened heart (as one who lived at a distance, as Strabo did. expresses it) is neither cut by compunction, nor softened by any sense of pity. It is neither moved by entreaties, nor yields to threatenings, nor feels the smart of scourges. Itis ungrateful to benefactors, treacherous to counsels, sullen under judgments, fearless in dangers, forgetful of things past, negligent of things present, and improvident for the future :" all which bad qualities seem to have con The truth is, if we consider of what a small compass the land of Canaan is, and yet what a prodigious number of inhabitants, both before and after the Israelites became masters of it, it maintained, we must conclude, it could not but deserve the character which the authors above cited have given us of it; and the barrenness and poverty of its soil, which some modern travellers seem to com-centered in Pharaoh. For whatever might have contriplain of, must be imputed either to its want of tillage and buted to his obduration at first, it is plain, that in the cultivation, (which the Turks, its present inhabitants, are event, even when the magicians owned a divine power, utterly ignorant of,) or to the particular judgment of in what they saw done, and were quite confounded when God, who, for the wickedness of any nation, has they felt themselves smitten with the boils, and might frequently performed what he threatened to the Jews of thereupon very likely persuade him to surrender, he is old : 2 ، I will break the pride of your power, and I will | so far from relenting, that he does not so much as ask a make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass, and your strength shall be spent in vain; for your land shall not yield her increase, neither shall the trees of the land yield their fruits.' remove of the plague. It was therefore entirely agreeable to the rules of divine justice, when nothing would reclaim this wicked king, when even that which wrought upon the ministers of Satan made no impression upon him, to let his crime become his punishment, and to leave him to eat the bitter fruit of his own ways, and to be filled with his own devices.' Several things are said in Scripture to be done by God, which are only permitted by him to come to pass in their ordinary course and procedure: and thus God may be said to harden Pharaoh's heart, only because he did not The Israelites, we own, did carry out of the land of interpose, but suffered him to be carried, by the bent of their captivity several things of great value, which they his own passions, to that inflexible obstinacy which proved had from the Egyptians. But then we are to consider, his ruin. That Moses, to whom God used these expres-that the word which our translators render borrow, does sions concerning Pharaoh, understood them in this sense, more properly signify to ask of one; and what they is evident from many parts of his behaviour to him, and render to lend, is as literally to give. For the case stood especially from his earnestly entreating him to be per- thus between the two nations. The Egyptians had been suaded, and to let the people go. Had Moses known, thoroughly terrified with what had passed, and especially or even thought that God had doomed Pharaoh to with the last terrible plague upon their first-born, and unavoidable ruin, it had been an unwarrantable presump-were now willing to give the Hebrews any thing, or 1 Antiquities, b. 5; and Fuller's Pisgah-Sight of Palestine. Levit. xxvi. 19, 20. Shuckford's Connection, vol. 2. b. 9. 4 Exod. viii. 9. • Patrick's Commentary 7 Le Clerc's Commentary. |