Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Exodus 18:1

When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, [and] that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt;

1. Jethro (Exo 3:1), the priest of Midian ] See on Exo 2:15-16.

how that ] for.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

1 7. Meeting of Jethro and Moses.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Jethro was, in all probability, the brother-in-law of Moses Exo 3:1. On the parting from Zipporah, see Exo 4:26.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Exo 18:1-6

I, thy father-in-law, Jethro, am come unto thee.

Family gatherings

I. That this family gathering was permitted after long absence, and after the occurrence of great events.

II. That this family gathering was characterized by courtesy, by a religious spirit, and by devout conversation.

III. That this family gathering derived its highest joy from the moral experiences with which it was favoured.

IV. That this family gathering was made the occasion of a sacramental offering to God. Lessons:

1. That God can watch over the interests of a separate family.

2. That God unites families in a providential manner.

3. That united families should rejoice in God.

4. That the families of the good will meet in heaven, never more to part.

5. Pray for the completion of the Divine family in the Fathers house. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)

Character not deteriorated by honour

Nothing tests a man more than his bearing toward his former friends after he has passed through some experiences which have brought him great honour and prosperity; and when, as in the present instance, he comes back with his old frankness and cordiality, and is not ashamed of his old piety, he is a great man indeed. Too often, however, prosperity deteriorates character, and honour freezes the heart. The head swims on the giddy height, and the son returns a comparative stranger even to his fathers house; while the family worship, which used to be so enjoyed, is smiled at as a weakness of the old peoples, and avoided as a weariness to himself. Old companions, too, are passed without recognition; or, if recognized at all, it is with an air of condescension, and with an effort like that which one makes to stoop for something that is far beneath him. The development of character also estranges us from those whom we once knew intimately, and who were once, it may be, the better for our fellowship. But the consolation in all such cases is, that there can be no value in the further friendship of those who can thus forget the past. He is the really good friend–as well as the, truly great man–who, in spite of his deserved eminence, resumes with us at the point at which we separated, and carries us at length with him to the throne of grace, to acknowledge there our obligations to the Lord. There are men whom one meets from time to time with whom he has always to begin anew. They are like a book in which you never get fully interested, and which, whenever you take it up, you must commence to read again at the very preface; until, in absolute disgust, you cast it away from you, and never lift it more. There are others who are like a well-beloved volume, with a bookmark in it, which you can open at any moment, and resume where you broke off; and which, though you may be often interrupted, you contrive to read through to the end. Such a friend was Moses to Jethro, and Jethro to Moses; and though there came a final separation of the one from the other on earth, they would renew their conference in heaven. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)

Ashamed of parents

A fellow student of mine had very poor parents, but they had a great desire to give their son the very best possible education; and if you had looked into that home, you would have seen much pinching and self-denying on the part of those parents to give their boy a university training. Once, when he was away at college, they went up with proud hearts to see him, for was it not with great efforts on their part that he was there? He was walking in the street with a fellow student when he met them, and he tried to avoid them. You ask me, why? Because he was ashamed of them in their simple dress, and he was not going to own them until his friend had gone. That man reached the Presbyterian ministry, but he did not long stay in it, He fell from his position, and the brokenhearted parents followed him step by step. He went down lower and lower until a fellow minister and myself have rescued him again and again from police cells. Oh, the foulness of heart of one who is ashamed to own his mother, however poor. And yet there is still a greater sin; to be ashamed of That self-sacrificing love that nailed to the Cross the Son of God. (J. Carstairs.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER XVIII

Jethro, called the father-in-law of Moses, hearing of the

deliverance which God had granted to Israel, 1,

took Zipporah and her two sons, Gershom and Eliezer, and brought

them to Moses, when the Israelites were encamped near Horeb, 2-5.

He sends to Moses, announcing his arrival, 6.

Moses goes out to meet him, 7,

and gives him a history of God’s dealings with the Israelites, 8.

Jethro greatly rejoices, and makes striking observations on the

power and goodness of God, 9-11.

He offers burnt-offerings and sacrifices to Jehovah, and Aaron and

all the elders of Israel feast with him, 12.

The next day Jethro, observing how much Moses was fatigued by being

obliged to sit as judge and hear causes from morning to evening, 13,

inquires why he did so, 14.

Moses answers, and shows that he is obliged to determine causes

between man and man, and to teach them the statutes and laws of

God, 15, 16.

Jethro finds fault, and counsels him to appoint men who fear God,

love truth, and hate covetousness, to be judges over thousands,

hundreds, fifties, and tens, to judge and determine in all smaller

matters, and refer only the greater and most important to himself,

17-22;

and shows that this plan will be advantageous both to himself and to

the people, 23.

Moses hearkens to the counsel of Jethro, and appoints proper officers

over the people, who enter upon their functions, determine all minor

causes, and refer only the most difficult to Moses, 24-26.

Moses dismisses Jethro, who returns to his own country, 27.

NOTES ON CHAP. XVIII

Verse 1. When Jethro, the priest of Midian, c.] Concerning this person and his several names, See Clarke on Ex 2:15 “Ex 2:16“; “Ex 2:18“; “Ex 3:1“; See Clarke on Ex 4:20; “Ex 4:24“. Jethro was probably the son of Reuel, the father-in-law of Moses, and consequently the brother-in-law of Moses; for the word chothen, which we translate father-in-law, in this chapter means simply a relative by marriage. See Clarke on Ex 3:1.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

1-5. Jethro . . . came . . . untoMoses, c.It is thought by many eminent commentators that thisepisode is inserted out of its chronological order, for it isdescribed as occurring when the Israelites were “encamped at themount of God.” And yet they did not reach it till the thirdmonth after their departure from Egypt (Exo 19:1Exo 19:2; compare Deu 1:6;Deu 1:9-15).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

When Jethro the priest of Midian, Moses’s father-in-law,…. The Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan call him the prince of Midian, and so the word e is rendered in some versions; whose daughter Moses had married, and so was his father-in-law, of which see more in Ex 2:16.

heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people; the miracles he had wrought for them in Egypt, the dividing of the Red sea to make a way for them, the destruction of the Egyptians, providing them with bread and water in such a miraculous manner in the wilderness, and giving them victory over Amalek, and appearing always at the head of them in a pillar of cloud and fire:

[and] that the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt: which was the greatest blessing of all, and for the sake of which so many wonderful things had been done to Pharaoh and the Egyptians. And now Midian being near to Egypt, it is not to be wondered at that Jethro should hear of these things, the fame of which went through all the countries round about, see Ex 15:14, though it is not improbable that Moses might send messengers to Midian to acquaint his father-in-law, his wife, and sons, of what the Lord had done for him, and by him.

e “praeses”, Junius & Tremellius, Piscator.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The Amalekites had met Israel with hostility, as the prototype of the heathen who would strive against the people and kingdom of God. But Jethro, the Midianitish priest, appeared immediately after in the camp of Israel, not only as Moses’ father-in-law, to bring back his wife and children, but also with a joyful acknowledgement of all that Jehovah had done to the Israelites in delivering them from Egypt, to offer burnt-offerings to the God of Israel, and to celebrate a sacrificial meal with Moses, Aaron, and all the elders of Israel; so that in the person of Jethro the first-fruits of the heathen, who would hereafter seek the living God, entered into religious fellowship with the people of God. As both the Amalekites and Midianites were descended from Abraham, and stood in blood-relationship to Israel, the different attitudes which they assumed towards the Israelites foreshadowed and typified the twofold attitude which the heathen world would assume towards the kingdom of God. (On Jethro, see Exo 2:18; on Moses’ wife and sons, see Exo 2:21-22; and on the expression in Exo 18:2, “ after he had sent her back, ” Exo 4:26.) – Jethro came to Moses “ into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God.” The mount of God is Horeb (Exo 3:1); and the place of encampment is Rephidim, at Horeb, i.e., at the spot where the Sheikh valley opens into the plain of er Rahah (Exo 17:1). This part is designated as a wilderness; and according to Robinson (1, pp. 130, 131) the district round this valley and plain is “naked desert,” and “wild and desolate.” The occasion for Jethro the priest to bring back to his son-in-law his wife and children was furnished by the intelligence which had reached him, that Jehovah had brought Israel out of Egypt (Exo 18:1), and, as we may obviously supply, had led them to Horeb. When Moses sent his wife and sons back to Jethro, he probably stipulated that they were to return to him on the arrival of the Israelites at Horeb. For when God first called Moses at Horeb, He foretold to him that Israel would be brought to this mountain on its deliverance from Egypt (Exo 3:12).

(Note: Kurtz (Hist. of O. C. iii. 46, 53) supposes that it was chiefly the report of the glorious result of the battle with Amalek which led Jethro to resolve to bring Moses’ family back to him. There is no statement, however, to this effect in the biblical text, but rather the opposite, namely, that what Jethro had heard of all that God had done to Moses and Israel consisted of the fact that Jehovah had brought Israel out of Egypt. Again, there are not sufficient grounds for placing the arrival of Jethro at the camp of Israel, in the desert of Sinai and after the giving of the law, as Ranke has done. For the fact that the mount of God is mentioned as the place of encampment at the time, is an argument in favour of Rephidim, rather than against it, as we have already shown. And we can see no force in the assertion that the circumstances, in which we find the people, point rather to the longer stay at Sinai, than to the passing halt at Rephidim. For how do we know that the stay at Rephidim was such a passing one, that it would not afford time enough for Jethro’s visit? It is true that, according to the ordinary assumption, only half a month intervened between the arrival of the Israelites in the desert of Sin and their arrival in the desert of Sinai; but within this space of time everything might have taken place that is said to have occurred on the march from the former to the latter place of encampment. It is not stated in the biblical text that seven days were absorbed in the desert of Sin alone, but only that the Israelites spent a Sabbath there, and had received manna a few days before, so that three or four days (say from Thursday to Saturday inclusive) would amply suffice for all that took place. If the Israelites, therefore, encamped there in the evening of the 15th, they might have moved farther on the morning of the 19th or 20th, and after a two days’ journey by Dofkah and Alush have reached Rephidim on the 21st or 22nd. They could then have fought the battle with the Amalekites the following day, so that Jethro might have come to the camp on the 24th or 25th, and held the sacrificial meal with the Israelites the next day. In that case there would still be four or five days left for him to see Moses sitting in judgment a whole day long (Exo 18:13), and for the introduction of the judicial arrangements proposed by Jethro; – amply sufficient time, inasmuch as one whole day would suffice for the sight of the judicial sitting, which is said to have taken place the day after the sacrificial meal (Exo 18:13). And the election of judges on the part of the people, for which Moses gave directions in accordance with Jethro’s advice, might easily have been carried out in two days. For, on the one hand, it is most probable that after Jethro had watched this severe and exhausting occupation of Moses for a whole day, he spoke to Moses on the subject the very same evening, and laid his plan before him; and on the other hand, the execution of this plan did not require a very long time, as the people were not scattered over a whole country, but were collected together in one camp. Moreover, Moses carried on all his negotiations with the people through the elders as their representatives; and the judges were not elected in modern fashion by universal suffrage, but were nominated by the people, i.e., by the natural representatives of the nation, from the body of elders, according to their tribes, and then appointed by Moses himself. – Again, it is by no means certain that Israel arrived at the desert of Sinai on the first day of the third month, and that only half a month (15 or 16 days) elapsed between their arrival in the desert of sin and their encamping at Sinai (cf. Exo 19:1). And lastly, though Kurtz still affirms that Jethro lived on the other side of the Elanitic Gulf, and did not set out till he heard of the defeat of the Amalekites, in which case a whole month might easily intervene between the victory of Israel and the arrival of Jethro, the two premises upon which this conclusion is based, are assumptions without foundation, as we have already shown at Exo 3:1 in relation to the former, and have just shown in relation to the latter.)

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Jethro’s Visit to Moses.

B. C. 1491.

1 When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father in law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, and that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt; 2 Then Jethro, Moses’ father in law, took Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her back, 3 And her two sons; of which the name of the one was Gershom; for he said, I have been an alien in a strange land: 4 And the name of the other was Eliezer; for the God of my father, said he, was mine help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh: 5 And Jethro, Moses’ father in law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God: 6 And he said unto Moses, I thy father in law Jethro am come unto thee, and thy wife, and her two sons with her.

This incident may very well be allowed to have happened as it is placed here, before the giving of the law, and not, as some place it, in connection with what is recorded, Num 10:11; Num 10:29, c. Sacrifices were offered before in these mentioned here (v. 12) it is observable that Jethro is said to take them, not Aaron. And as to Jethro’s advising Moses to constitute judges under him, though it is intimate (v. 13) that the occasion of his giving that advice was on the morrow, yet it does not follow but that Moses’s settlement of that affair might be some time after, when the law was given, as it is placed, Deut. i. 9. It is plain that Jethro himself would not have him make this alteration in the government till he had received instructions from God about it (v. 23), which he did not till some time after. Jethro comes,

I. To congratulate the happiness of Israel, and particularly the honour of Moses his son-in-law; and now Jethro thinks himself well paid for all the kindness he had shown to Moses in his distress, and his daughter better matched than he could have expected. Jethro could not but hear what all the country rang of, the glorious appearances of God for his people Israel (v. 1); and he comes to enquire, and inform himself more fully thereof (see Ps. cxi. 2), and to rejoice with them as one that had a true respect both for them and for their God. Though he, as a Midianite, was not to share with them in the promised land, yet he shared with them in the joy of their deliverance. We may thus make the comforts of others our own, by taking pleasure, as God does, in the prosperity of the righteous.

II. To bring Moses’s wife and children to him. It seems, he had sent them back, probably from the inn where his wife’s aversion to the circumcision of her son had like to have cost him his life (ch. iv. 25); fearing lest they should prove a further hindrance, he sent them home to his father-in-law. He foresaw what discouragements he was likely to meet with in the court of Pharaoh, and therefore would not take any with him in his own family. He was of that tribe that said to his father, I have not known him, when service was to be done for God, Deut. xxxiii. 9. Thus Christ’s disciples, when they were to go upon an expedition not much unlike that of Moses, were to forsake wife and children, Matt. xix. 29. But though there might be reason for the separation that was between Moses and his wife for a time, yet they must come together again, as soon as ever they could with any convenience. It is the law of the relation. You husbands, dwell with your wives, 1 Pet. iii. 7. Jethro, we may suppose, was glad of his daughter’s company, and fond of her children, yet he would not keep her from her husband, nor them from their father, Exo 18:5; Exo 18:6. Moses must have his family with him, that while he ruled the church of God he might set a good example of prudence in family-government, 1 Tim. iii. 5. Moses had now a great deal both of honour and care put upon him, and it was fit that his wife should be with him to share with him in both. Notice is taken of the significant names of his two sons. 1. The eldest was called Gershom (v. 3), a stranger, Moses designing thereby, not only a memorial of his own condition, but a memorandum to his son of his condition also: for we are all strangers upon earth, as all our fathers were. Moses had a great uncle almost of the same name, Gershon, a stranger; for though he was born in Canaan (Gen. xlvi. 11), yet even there the patriarchs confessed themselves strangers. 2. The other he called Eliezer (v. 4), My God a help, as we translate it; it looks back to his deliverance from Pharaoh, when he made his escape, after the slaying of the Egyptian; but, if this was (as some think) the son that was circumcised at the inn as he was going, I would rather translate it so as to look forward, which the original will bear, The Lord is my help, and will deliver me from the sword of Pharaoh, which he had reason to expect would be drawn against him when he was going to fetch Israel out of bondage. Note, When we are undertaking any difficult service for God and our generation, it is good for us to encourage ourselves in God as our help: he that has delivered does and will deliver.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

EXODUS – CHAPTER EIGHTEEN

Verses 1-6:

Shortly after the circumcision of his son (Ex 4:20-26), Moses likely sent Zipporah and their sons back to live with her father. In Ex 3:1, Zipporah’s father is called Reuel. In the present text he is called Jethro. (See comments on Ex 4:18).

Following Israel’s victory over Amalek, Jethor brought Zipporah and her two sons to meet Moses, at the “mount of God.” This was likely in the plain Er-Rahah, near Sinai. There is no mention in Scripture that Moses had “dismissed” his wife and sons. It is assumed that the readers were aware of this fact.

Moses showed his faith in the names he gave his two sons. “Gershom” denots that Moses was a stranger in the land where his son was born (see Ex 2:22). “Eliezer” means “my God is my help.” This was Moses’ acknowledgment that Jehovah had delivered him from Pharaoh.

Custom of the day implies that Jethro sent a messenger to inform Moses of his arrival.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

1. When Jethro, the priest of Midian. This chapter consists of two parts. First of all, the arrival of Jethro in the camp is related, and his congratulation of Moses on account of the prosperity of his enterprise, together with the praise and sacrifice rendered to God. Secondly, his proposed form of government for the people is set forth, in consequence of which judges and rulers were chosen, lest Moses should sink under his heavy task. The greater number of commentators think that Zipporah, having been enraged on account of her son’s circumcision, had turned back on their journey, and gone to live with her father; but to me this does not seem probable. For Moses would never have allowed his sons to be deprived of the redemption of which he was the minister; nor would it have been consistent that they should afterwards be appointed priests, of whom God was not the Redeemer. Besides, if he had deposited his wife and children in safety, and had advanced alone to the contest, he would have been deservedly suspected of deceit, or of excessive cowardice. Wherefore I have no doubt but that he underwent, together with his family, that miserable yoke of bondage by which they were long oppressed, and by this proof evidenced his faithfulness, so that greater authority might attend his vocation. The statement, then, in the second verse, “after he had sent her back,” I apply to Moses, because he had sent back his wife from the wilderness to visit her father, either having yielded to the desire which was natural to her as a woman, or, induced by his own feelings of piety, he had wished to show respect in this way to an old man nearly connected with him. There is something forced and cold in the words, which some would supply, “after he had sent back gifts.” The text runs very well thus, After Moses had sent back his wife, she was brought again by his father-in-law, thus returning and repaying his kindness.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES.

Exo. 18:1. Midian.]If we mar assume that these Midianites were descendants of Midian, son of Abraham by Keturah (Gen. 25:2), our wonder will be lessened that among this Arabian people we should find the knowledge and worship of Jehovah had been preserved, as seen in this narrative. Thus this episode may be added to other incidental proofs of the continuance of pure religion among Gentile nations.

Exo. 18:6. Am come.] More exactly, Am coming; i.e., Am on my way; am at hand. This intelligence, sent forward by a messenger, would give Moses time to go forth to meet his father in-law, as we find he did. We have here a beautiful picture of Eastern manners. The relatives meet, embrace each other, and, after due inquiries as to each others welfare, turn at the head of their groups of attendants, and move on in conversation towards the camp of Israel and the tent of Moses. Nor may we takes the absence of any remark on the meeting of Moses and Zipporah as implying anything unfavourable to their cordial relationship to each other. It is much in the manner of the Eastern delicacy of feeling to pass by the matrimonial connection without remark. It is pleasant to find Zipporah restored to her husband. They have been parted but for a few months at most: in the interval, What hath God wrought!

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Exo. 18:1-12

FAMILY GATHERINGS

IT seems that Jethro, the priest of Midian, had heard of all that God had done for Moses, and became anxious again to see his son-in-law. It is well when men have their ears open to the tidings of Gods providential mercies to the good. The senses should be avenues of the Divine to the soul. Jethro was a Gentile, and resided at a distance, but national peculiarities and distance from great events will not silence the voice of heaven to a faithful soul. Gentiles hear of God when Jews will not. The distant magi come to seek Him when they at Jerusalem are ignorant of Him. Now we see the little party setting out on their glad journey. There is the old father, the wife, and two sons of Moses going to meet the relative from whom they had been a long time separated. The journey is long, but they are sustained in it by the glad prospect of reunion. We have heard tidings of the world beyond the grave; thither are we travelling, and shall soon join those who have gone before us.

I. That this family gathering was permitted after long absence and after the occurrence of great events. Moses had parted from his father-in-law some forty years ago, in order that he might go to Pharaoh and demand the release of the Israelites. He had not seen his wife and sons since the day he had sent them back, when a great peril threatened his life. Moses had left all behind that he might with greater fidelity and zeal execute the great work intrusted to him. During these years of absence God had done great things for the Israelites. He had manifested His omnipotent power on their behalf in the dire plagues which had fallen on Egypt. He had shown His faithfulness and mercy in their deliverance from bondage, and in the supply of their needs in the wilderness. He had given manna from the skies. He had given water from the rock. He had given the cloud to guide them. Now the tent is pitched. It is a time of rest. Families are often separated on earth, sometimes by stern need, in order to win daily bread; sometimes by the call of the Gospel, in order thereby to promote the welfare of Gods word and kingdom; and one separation awaits all families, even that occasioned by death. These separations are fraught with pain. But the time of meeting draws near; then what histories will there be to narrate, and what joys will compensate the sorrow past. Christ is gathering His family to the house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

II. That this family gathering was characterised by courtesy, by a religious spirit, and by devout conversation.

1. There was true courtesy. And he said unto Moses, I, thy father-in-law, Jethro, am come unto thee, and thy wife, and her two sons with her (Exo. 18:6). Thus Jethro sent a message to herald his advent to the tent of Moses. He might justly have approached Moses without this, but he had respect unto the official position and to the moral history of his son-in-law; hence the modesty which characterised his approach. A due respect for social position, for mental attainment, for moral character, and for providential circumstance, should exist even amongst members of the same family. The respect we pay to strangers is much more due to our nearest relatives. Discourtesy is never more out of place than in the midst of the tender relationship of life. This old priest of Midian would not be guilty of it. Reverence is due to authority.

2. There was a deeply religious spirit. Moses did not receive his father-in-law with proud and stately manner. He kissed him. The honours of office had not frozen up the tender feelings of his nature. He did not laud his own skill as a commander; he gave God the praise of all his victories. He indulged in no idle talk. He indulged no spirit of levity. In the midst of this family there was sacred joy, pure gratitude, and devout worship. There was no word of murmuring uttered at the long separation or in review of severe trials; but all hearts in that tent were true to that God who had watched over and brought them together once more. Family gatherings should be pervaded by a religious spirit; then the tent will become a sanctuary.

3. There was devout conversation. Moses told his father-in-law of all that God had done for Israel, also of the travail that had come upon them by the way, and how the Lord had delivered them. The Great Leader did not forget the sorrowful experiences of his life; great trials make a deep impression on the soul. But he remembered his God-wrought deliverances. We should not talk more of trials than of the aid we have received in them. We should not indulge gloomy conversation, but a conversation which derives gladness from its mention of Divine help. What happy communings will there be amongst the redeemed as the members of the heavenly family come from the east and the west to their great home.

III. That this family gathering derived its highest joy from the moral experiences with which it was favoured. And Jethro rejoiced for all the goodness which the Lord had done to Israel, whom He had delivered out of the hand of the Egyptians. And Jethro said, Blessed be the Lord, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh, who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods. Thus the supreme joy of this united family was not derived from its merely social intercourse, not from intellectual and pleasing conversation, not from the coming together of congenial souls, but from the moral experiences of each and from the devotion of all to the great God. This is the ideal of social intercourse. Not a cant reference to the mercy of God, but a sincere reference to God in the unfoldings of the heart to each other. Such intercourse can never fail to give joy, as the Infinite is the source of its rejoicing.

IV. That this family gathering was made the occasion of a sacramental offering to God. And Jethro, Moses father-in-law, took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God: and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses father-in-law before God. Jethro was not content to express his joy and gratitude in mere words, but in specific and solemn action. He was a worshipper of the true God; he had come to learn that none other was worthy of praise. The family had communed with each other; it now communes with God. Earthly communion should naturally suggest Divine communion. Jethro was joined by Aaron and the elders of Israel. Here is sweet concord in worship. Prayer intensifies the family relationship; it also enlarges it. All the elders of the Church will one day worship God together. Sweet is the bread broken at the table of the Lord. Let us thus worship before God. LESSONS:

1. That God can watch over the interests of a separated family.

2. That God unites families in a providential manner.

3. That united families should rejoice in God.

4. That the families of the good will meet in heaven, never more to part.

5. Let us pray for the completion of the Divine family in the Fathers house.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES

Exo. 18:1-12. God moved strangers and heads of nations sometimes to listen after His providences to His Church.

The fame of Gods stupendous works to His Church may affect strangers to come and see them.
Relations hearing of Gods goodness to their loved ones are justly moved to visit them.
Friends to Israels good cannot but be moved with the tidings of Gods great works for them.
The fame of Israels deliverance from Egypt may justify men to inquire after God.
Prudence may send away the dearest pledges from hindering Gods work.
As children are great mercies, so it is good to make them the memorials of Gods mercies to us.
The mercies of pilgrimage must not be forgotten by Gods servants.
Wilderness condition do not deter the true relations of the Church from coming to them.
In the wilderness God may have His mount, His stony place for His Church.
It is sweet meeting of Church relations after the defeat of enemies.
It is not unbecoming the highest places or persons in the Church of Christ to give due respect to their relations.
Grace does not unteach men manners and civil respect unto men.
It is a natural duty for relations to inquire of each others peace.
Gods servants filled with a sense of mercies cannot but declare them to others.
The friends of Israel are the fittest to hear of Gods wondrous works.
Great distress may befall Gods Church in the way of its redemption.
The friends of the Church rejoice in all the good that is done for it.
As Jehovah is the cause of good to the Church, so He is the object of joy and gratitude.
The great works of God set Him above all other gods. Holy teaching is consistent with holy worship.

Exo. 18:12 (last clause).

I. A common and necessary act.
II. A common and necessary act done in a social spirit.
III. A common and necessary act done in a pious manner.

Leaving now this illustrious example of friendship, we may proceed to make a few general observations. One obvious one is, that this world is not a scene adapted or intended to afford the pleasure and benefit of friendship entire. Jethro was to lose his inestimable friend, after long, and what must have been the happiest intimacy, was to see him once again; again to lose him, to see him on earth, probably, no more. What a measure, we may almost say, of his vital existence, he was to lose! Providence has, in numerous instances, interposed wide spaces of land, or even sea, between persons who might be inestimable to one another in near and habitual association. The one mind, and the other, and the third, and many more are filled with exercises of thought, with emotions, with affections which would glow with social and sympathetic animation, if they could be one anothers companions. But they have each their own assigned positions to occupytheir own moral track to cultivate, their own duties, labours, trialsand sometimes little happy in their actual associates; they have to fulfil their vocation amidst coldness, perversity, or imbecility, thinking, sometimes, how different the case would be if such-and-such were their companions and co-operators.
Inquisitiveness. Asked each other. And the mutual inquiries respecting welfare are made in a spirit very different from unmeaning complacence. When a friend is far away, it will sometimes occur to wonder and to imagine how he may be situatedhow employed. What at this time is the exercise of his mind? what part is he in of the process of an undertaking? what evil dispositions of his fellow-mortals is he conflicting with? what temptations is he beset by? When they meet the inquiry goes back over things, and it is gratifying to give the history to one who is so kindly interested in it at every step. And friendship will suggest many comments which would not occur to the thoughts of an indifferent person. It may be very advantageous for the instruction and improvement of the friends that they have moved a great deal apart, so as to have had a very different experience, different views of the world and of providence. Thus they bring in a much larger store to the combined account, enlarge one anothers knowledge, correct and mature one anothers judgment.
The last thing is serious anticipation. Each meeting should admonish them that their life is shortened (sometimes much shortened) since they met before. Sometimes they are forcibly struck by the change in each others appearance. After a considerable absence they can hardly meet without having to name some one who has shared their society, but meets them no more. When they part confessedly for a considerable absence, how possible is it they are looking at each other for the last time! Let it be considered what a melancholy thing any friendship would be that should be destined to expire with all its pleasures and advantages at death. That is worthy and happy friendship, and that alone where the parties are zealously preparing and have a good hope to meet in a nobler scene.(John Foster.)

ILLUSTRATIONS

BY
REV. W. ADAMSON

Jethro and Moses! Exo. 18:1-12. Here we have

1. Family gatherings, their
(1) Causes, and
(2) Customs.
2. Friendly greetings, their
(1) Courtesy, and
(2) Communion. These are capable of illustration from the Scripture histories of Jobs family and the prodigal son. Christmas festivities suggest another source of illustration in their (a) Pleasant and (b) Profitable aspects. Illustrations may also be drawn from the life of Bishop Crowther, or of Uncle Tom, or of Jesus and His disciples on the Galilean shore and in the upper room, or of Joseph and his brethren;when the pent-up thoughts

Of many years flowd from his eager lips,
As waters from a secret spring unseald.

Family Gatherings! Exo. 18:7. In the year 1690, the Vaudois fugitives from De Catinat and Fenguieres received tidings, as they lay encamped in Angrogna, the loveliest and most romantic of all the valleys of Piedmont, from the Duke of Savoys ambassadors that peace was theirs unconditionally. Day after day the prisons, in which hundreds of the sufferers had for years scarcely seen the light of the sun, were emptied of their captives, who were restored to liberty. A detachment was deputed to proceed to the Swiss canions, to bring back the female refugees who had been left behind. Never can that night be forgotten in the annals of Lucerna, when, under a bright setting sun, the returning wanderers were seen wending their way up the lovely valley. Wives restored to the embrace of their husbands, children to parents, brothers to sisters, friends to friends! Gratitude for present mercies softened and alleviated the bitter recollections of the past. Not unlike were the circumstances of Jethros visit to Israel, with Zipporah and her children. Such questionings

Of things that had befallen him since last
They met, and of his pathway thitherwards,
And of the freed host he had led behind:
Words with embraces interspersed.

Friend-Communion! Exo. 18:8-12. In March 1878 the Duke of Sutherland gave a complimentary banquet to Baker Pacha, on his return from the recent seat of war in the East, at Stafford House, St. Jamess. Amongst the noblemen and gentlemen who accepted the Dukes invitation were Musurus Pacha (the Turkish Ambassador), Field Marshal Lord Strathnairn, G.C.B.; Lord Houghton, Lord Eglinton, General Sir Alexander Horsford, G.C.B.; General Sir Charles Ellice, K.C.B., Major-General Sir Henry Green, K.C.S.I., C.B., General Foster, C.B., General S. Brownrigg, Major-General Hon. James Macdonald, Major-General Marshall, Colonel Wellesley, Sir Samuel Baker, Colonel J. Baker, Mr. W. H. Russell, and the Marquis of Stafford. After dinner, at the Dukes invitation, a number of guests assembled expressly to meet the guest of the evening, including the Duke of Teck, Prince Edward of Saxe-Weimar, the Persian Minister, Prince Ibraham, Midhat Pacha, the Marquis of Exeter, the Earl of Feversham, the Earl of Denbigh, the Earl of Orkney, Baron Hy. de Worms, and many others. It is noteworthy that when Moses entertained Jethro, everything was ascribed to the goodness of God. It is interesting to consider how far friends in holding communion praise God for past mercies. Moses acknowledged the hand of God in all the events which had befallen Israel. May we not here contrast this joyful feast before God, with such meetings for pleasure and social intercourse which take place in all ranks of life, but in which too often the element of lasting satisfaction is wantingwe mean, recognition of the Divine Providence.

Not unto us! How sweet to join the strain,
In self-deliverance blissful and complete;
And all our toils, successes, failures, pain,
To lose, O Christ Jehovah, at Thy feet.

Taylor.

Christian Converse! Exo. 18:9. In a house in the city of Zurich which crowns the northern extremity of the lake of blue waters sat a family group. The house-room was long and low, occupying the entire centre of the houseone large window looked into the street, two others into the garden at the back. Through these the last crimson rays of the sun were streaming upon a singular group. Some of the members of this family had been absent in Gods service for several years; and this was the familys earth-reunion. Sweet fellowship was theirs, but not without its tinge of shadow. They communed of the pastof the wonderful works of God in Germany and Switzerland, and the Low Countries, and of the gracious deliverances vouchsafed to themselves personally. Then came the song of praise to God for the mercies of the past; blended with prayer to Him for grace in the future to press onwards towards the mark. Such Christian converse was that of Jethro and Moses, in which hearts thrilled with holy joy, and spirits gushed over with grateful song.

Children and kith and friends; all in a breath
Ask of his welfare, and with joyous tongues
Pour all their love into his thirsty ear.

Mutual Sympathy! Exo. 18:9. A gentleman travelling on one of the river steamers to Philadelphia mentions his sensations over the rescue of a fellow-passenger from a watery grave. It was a cold winter night, and every one was impatient to be ashore. Before the boat reached the wharfs a man slipped into the water. The icicles had frozen on the wharf and they had frozen on the steamer. The ropes were lowered, and all stood with anxiety lest the man should not be able to grasp the rope owing to the cold. When he grasped it and was pulled on to the deck and we saw he was safe, although we had never seen him before, how we congratulated him. A life saved! With what fervency, then, must Jethro have congratulated Moses and his liberated host! The greater the peril, the fuller the tide of exultancy! The more hopeless the prospect of success and reunion, the deeper the fount of gladness!

Their streaming tears together flow
For human guilt and mortal woe;
Their joyful songs together rise
Like mingling flames in sacrifice.

Barbauld.

Life Lessons! Exo. 18:11. In Singapore, that wonderful emporium of the commerce of the East, established by the sagacious foresight of Sir Stamford Raffles, stood a house surrounded by an open verandah fenced with large tree ferns. At the time, a group of friends, the long-sundered members of an English family, sat together narrating their adventures, Separated by shipwreck from one another, sundered by the terrible typhoon of Indian seas, they had once again been united, after several of them had succeeded in escaping from the clutches of Malay pirates. All felt, as the hairbreadth escapes were related and the remarkable deliverances recounted, that truly the special Providence of God had guided and interposed. It was the first night of their reunion, and they sat holding fellowship one with the other. Should we not return thanks to Him who has preserved us! Then together they knelt in thankful acknowledgment of the Divine mercy. On rising, one of the family said that he had that night learned more about Godthat He was indeed a personal God caring for each, while He cared for all. Jethro here acknowledges that the recital by Moses of Divine deliverance and direction had given him a new view of Jehovah, Now I know that the Lord Jehovah is greater than all gods.

O Thou Eternal One, whose presence bright
All space doth occupy, all motion guide;
Unchanged through times all-devastating flight;
Thou only God! There is no God beside.

Derzhavin.

Family Religion! Exo. 18:12. Religion not only hallows and brightens the joys of life; it is also the true basis and crown of them all. Hence the gladness of Jethro. His gladness was not because of any advantage he himself had gained, but because of all the goodness which the Lord had done to Israel. Here we see the sympathy which flows from a heart ruled by the love of God. In this spirit Jethro offered sacrifices to God in the sight of the vast multitude. Thus the host of Israel shared in the family-joys of Moses. Even so in Paradise,all will share the feast of one anothers gladness. Not that love can be

Without the chosen specialties of love,
The nearest to the nearest most akin.
But none are strangers there,none sojourners;
And as the cloudless ages glide away,
New fountains of delight to themto all,
Will open in the fellowship of hearts.

Bickersteth.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

THE TEXT OF EXODUS
TRANSLATION

18 Now Je-thro, the priest of Mid-i-an, Mo-ses father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Mo-ses, and for Is-ra-el his people, how that Je-ho-vah had brought Is-ra-el out of E-gypt. (2) And Je-thro, Mo-ses father-in-law, took Zip-po-rah, Mo-ses wife, after he had sent her away, (3) and her two sons; of whom the name of the one was Ger-shom; for he said, I have been a sojourner in a foreign land: (4) and the name of the other was E-Ii-e-zer; for he said, The God of my father was my help, and delivered me from the sword of Pha-raoh. (5) And Je-thro, Moses father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife unto Mo-ses into the wilderness where he was encamped, at the mount of God: (6) and he said unto Mo-ses, I, thy father-in-law Je-thro, am come unto thee, and thy wife, and her two sons with her. (7) And Mo-ses went out to meet his father-in-law, and did obeisance, and kissed him; and they asked each other of their welfare; and they came into the tent. (8) And Mo-ses told his father-in-law all that Je-ho-vah had done unto Pha-raoh and to the E-gyp-tians for Is-ra-els sake, all the travail that had come upon them by the way, and how Je-ho-vah delivered them. (9) And Je-thro rejoiced for all the goodness which Je-ho-vah had done to Is-ra-el, in that he had delivered them out of the hand of the E-gyp-tians. (10) And Je-thro said, Blessed be Je-ho-vah, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the E-gyp-tians, and out of the hand of Pha-raoh; who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the E-gyp-tians. (11) Now I know that Je-ho-vah is greater than all gods; yea, in the thing wherein they dealt proudly against them. (12) And Je-thro, Mo-ses father-in-law, took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God: and Aar-on came and all the elders of Is-ra-el, to eat bread with Mo-ses father-in-law before God.

(13) And it came to pass on the morrow, that Mo-ses sat to judge the people: and the people stood about Mo-ses from the morning unto the evening. (14) And when Mo-ses father-in-law saw all that he did to the people, he said, What is this thing that thou doest to the people? why sittest thou thyself alone, and all the people stand about thee from morning unto even? (15) And Mo-ses said unto his father-in-law, Because the people come unto me to inquire of God: (16) when they have a matter, they come unto me; and I judge between a man and his neighbor, and I make them know the statutes of God, and his laws. (17) And Mo-ses father-in-law said unto him, The thing that thou doest is not good. (18) Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that is with thee: for the thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone. (19) Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God be with thee: be thou for the people to Godward, and bring thou the causes unto God: (20) and thou shalt teach them the statutes and the laws, and shalt show them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do. (21) Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating unjust gain; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens: (22) and let them judge the people at all seasons: and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge themselves: so shall it be easier for thyself, and they shall bear the burden with thee. (23) If thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt be able to endure, and all this people also shall go to their place in peace. (24) So Mo-ses hearkened to the voice of his father-in-law, and did all that he had said. (25) And Mo-ses chose able men out of all Is-ra-el, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. (26) And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Mo-ses, but every small matter they judged themselves. (27) And Moses let his father-in-law depart; and he went his way into his own land.

EXPLORING EXODUS: CHAPTER EIGHTEEN
QUESTIONS ANSWERABLE FROM THE BIBLE

After careful reading propose a topic or theme for Exodus 18.

What had Jethro heard about? (Exo. 18:1)

Whom did Jethro bring with him when he came to Moses? (Exo. 18:2-3)

What did the names of Moses two sons mean? (Exo. 18:3-4)

What formalities began the meeting of Moses and Jethro? (Exo. 18:5-7)

What did Moses tell Jethro about? (Exo. 18:8)

What was Jethros. reaction to Moses report? (Exo. 18:9)

What did Jethro learn about the LORD from Moses report? (Exo. 18:11)

What priestly act did Jethro perform? (Exo. 18:12)

10.

How long did the people stand around Moses? Why? (Exo. 18:13)

11.

From whom did Moses get knowledge to make judgments? (Exo. 18:15)

12.

What did Jethro advise Moses to do? (Exo. 18:20; Exo. 18:22)

13.

Over what groups were judges and rulers to be appointed? (Exo. 18:21; Exo. 18:25)

14.

Did Moses hearken to the advice of his father-in-law? (Exo. 18:24)

15.

Who judged the small cases? (Exo. 18:26)

16.

Where did Jethro go after the visit? (Exo. 18:27)

EXODUS EIGHTEEN: JETHROS VISIT AND JUDGES APPOINTED

Jethros Visit; Exo. 18:1-12; Exo. 18:27.

His coming; Exo. 18:1-6.

His conversation with Moses; Exo. 18:7-11.

His worship; Exo. 18:12.

II.

Judges Appointed; Exo. 18:13-26.

Moses labor; Exo. 18:13-16.

Jethros advice; Exo. 18:17-23.

Moses compliance; Exo. 18:24-26; Deu. 1:9-18.

EXODUS EIGHTEEN: JETHRO, A GOOD MAN

Kept informed about God and His people; Exo. 18:1.

Recognized Moses just claims to his wife and sons; Exo. 18:2.

Courteous; Exo. 18:5-6.

Rejoiced in others blessings; Exo. 18:9.

Praised the Lord; Exo. 18:10.

Worshipped; Exo. 18:12.

Gave good advice; Exo. 18:19-22.

Recognized Gods final and supreme authority; Exo. 18:23.

GODLY FAMILIES (Exo. 18:1-12)

Keep informed about one another; Exo. 18:1.

Seek association with one another; Exo. 18:2-5.

Courteous; Exo. 18:6-7.

Converse on the things of God; Exo. 18:8.

Bring spiritual blessings to one another; Exo. 18:10-11.

Worship together; Exo. 18:12.

THE FOLLY OF ONE-MAN RULE (Exo. 18:13-23)

Overburdens one individual; Exo. 18:18.

Delays justice; wears out the people; Exo. 18:18.

Interferes with the most important work; Exo. 18:19-20. Act. 6:2; Act. 6:4.

Going Godward for the people; Exo. 18:19.

Teaching statutes and laws; Exo. 18:20.

Leaves many useful people unemployed; Exo. 18:21.

EXPLORING EXODUS: NOTES ON CHAPTER EIGHTEEN

What is the subject matter of Exodus 18?

It tells of the coming of Jethro with Moses wife and sons to Moses (Exo. 18:1-12). Then it tells of Jethros suggestion to Moses that he appoint judges to help him govern the people. We entitle the chapter JETHRO AND THE JUDGES.

What spiritual implications can we observe in chapter eighteen?

We can see one of the fulfillments of Gods promise to Abraham: I will bless them that bless thee, and him that curseth thee will I curse (Gen. 12:3). Jethro blessed the LORD and His people Israel. As a result Jethro and his descendants received rich blessings after that.

We can also see the fulfillment of another part of Gods promise to Abraham: In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed (Gen. 22:18). Jethro was a non-Israelite who was blessed because of his association with the seed (descendants) of Abraham.

Consider the joy which God brings to nations that are friendly to His people: Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people (Deu. 32:43).

In the coming of Jethro to Moses there is a resemblance between Moses and the Lord Jesus. Many nations hated Moses and the Israelites (for example, the Amalekites); Many peoples hated Christ Jesus (Act. 4:26-27). But a few, like Jethro, came to Moses. Similarly a few people of other nations came to Jesus, ill at ease in the old dispensation, seeking the things of God. See Joh. 12:20-21; Mat. 2:1-2. Jethro was the first-fruits of many heathen who would later come seeking the living God.

What had Jethro heard about? (Exo. 18:1)

He had heard about all that God had done for Moses and for Israel his people. Jethro had kept informed of the progress and fortunes of Israel since they left Egypt. The news about Israels deliverance from Egypt was widely known in all the nations around Egypt. See Exo. 15:14 ff.

Regarding the name of Jethro and his office as priest, see the notes on Exo. 2:16-18; Exo. 3:1.

It is notable that Jethro had heard that the LORD (Jehovah) had brought Israel out. Even the word-of-mouth reports about Israel gave credit to Jehovah and not to Moses only. Apparently even Jehovahs name had become known.[281]

[281] The Greek LXX translates both the Hebrew words elohim (God) and Yakweh (the LORD) in Exo. 18:1 as kurios, or Lord. This is an illustration of the frequent lack of consistency in the LXX renderings of the divine names. This creates problems for those who desire to divide up the Biblical text according to the sources they think they can detect on the basis of the use of different divine names.

The name Jethro and the title father-in-law give some interpreters a bit of trouble. There is only one Hebrew word (hothen) for both father-in-law and brother-in-law. This term is applied to Hobab in Jdg. 4:11, where it is translated father-in-law in King James and R.S.V., but brother-in-law in A.S.V. Since Hobab was the son of Reuel (or Jethro; Exo. 2:18; Exo. 3:1; Num. 10:29), we are sure that Hobab was Moses wifes brother, Moses brother-in-law.

Whom did Jethro bring with him? (Exo. 18:2-4)

He brought Zipporah, Moses wife, and her two sons, Gershom and Eliezer.

We last read of these in Exo. 4:24-26. Moses had sent them back to Midian after the difficulty at the inn. Some have felt that Moses sent them back from Egypt during the conflict with Pharaoh. There is, however, no hint that they were with Moses when he met Aaron at the mount of God, or any time after that. See Exo. 4:27. We feel that Zipporah and the sons returned to Midian shortly after the inn experience.

We admire Moses self-restraint and faith in getting along without dissatisfaction on his part because of his separation from them. This separation had lasted no less than six months, and probably longer. (Mar. 10:29-30)

Regarding the meanings of the names Gershom[282] and Eliezer,[283] see notes on Exo. 2:22.

[282] Davis, op. cit, p. 187, suggests that Gershoms name is derived from the verb garash, meaning to drive or thrust away. This is possible, but we still prefer the usual explanation, a stranger there.

[283] Cole, op. cit., p. 187, argues that Moses use of the name Eliezer (a name containing El as the divine name) supports the view that the name Yahweh was unknown until Moses vision (sic!) at the burning bush at Sinail To assert this is to deny the historical accuracy of all the uses of the name Yahweh (Jehovah) in Genesis (as in Gen. 22:14).

John Davis wisely cautions that it is precarious to attempt to analyze the whole character and disposition of some Old Testament person on the basis of the etymology of his name alone. That is true; but sometimes the names do have significance which we ought to notice clearly.

It appears to us that Gershom was probably much older than Eliezer, having been born near the start of Moses stay in Midian and Elizer near its end. This would make Zipporah a rather elderly mother at Eliezers birth, perhaps sixty years old. All this is rather uncertain, however.

Where did Jethro meet Moses? (Exo. 18:5)

He met him at the mount of God, at Rephidim. See Exo. 19:2. This location appears to have been very close to Sinai, in the Wady esh-Sheikh, perhaps within ten miles of Sinai. Probably Moses camp was somewhat in advance of most of the Israelites tents. See Exo. 19:1; Exo. 18:5.

The events at Rephidim the water from the rock, the war with Amalek, and Jethros visit all occupied only fifteen days. See Exo. 16:1 and Exo. 19:1.

How did Jethro greet Moses? (Exo. 18:6-7)

With all the ceremony and exuberance of an Arab greeting!
First, Jethro, as he came near to Moses dwelling, sent word ahead: I, thy father-in-law Jethro, am come unto thee. . . . (The Greek and Samaritan Bibles render this, Behold, thy father-in-law Jethro is come. This puts the announcement into the mouths of others, rather than from Jethro himself.)

Moses then went out to meet Jethro. Moses bowed before Jethro. (Compare Gen. 43:26; Gen. 43:28.) Then he kissed him (probably on both cheeks). (Compare Exo. 4:27.) They asked one another about their welfare. Arabs still make a big ceremony out of greetings. No business can be discussed until all the personal news has been inquired into. (We rather like this. People are more important than business anytime.) The word translated welfare (they asked each other of their welfare) is the Hebrew shalom, or peace.

Moses respected Jethro for his wisdom as well as his age and for being his father-in-law. Such humility and respect for age is not popular in our times, but it is highly commended in the scriptures, and needs to be restored.

What did Moses report to Jethro? (Exo. 18:8)

He reported all that JEHOVAH had done. He gave all the credit to Jehovah, which was surely the right thing to do. Notice that Moses used the divine name Jehovah (Yahweh) in reporting Gods deeds for them. Note also that the text says God had done these things for Israels sake. Israel was Gods son, His firstborn (Exo. 4:23), His people (Exo. 7:4). How gracious God had been to Israel on their journey in the face of Israels almost-constant murmuring and disobedience! Moses also told Jethro of the travail and hardship they had endured on the way, and how Jehovah had delivered them from all of it. Compare Num. 20:14. Interestingly, the text does not suggest that Moses related to Jethro about the rebelliousness of the people.

How did Jethro react to the news from Moses? (Exo. 18:9-10)

He rejoiced.[284] Then he blessed Jehovah for delivering the people. Compare 1Ki. 8:56.

[284] The Greek Bible here reads He was amazed (or shuddered). This is based on a Jewish interpretation, which is recorded in a Midrash written in later centuries. See Cassuto, op. cit., pp. 215216.

Jethro was a good man. He could rejoice with them that rejoice. He had no jealousy or cynicism. He was a lover of good. He was glad to see how greatly his son-in-law had advanced from sheepherding!

The R.S.V. reading of Exo. 18:10-11 is an example of the numerous arbitrary renderings in that version that so impair the usefulness of the R.S.V. Old Testament. The last phrase of verse ten (who hath delivered . . . from . . . Egyptians) is removed and placed in the middle of verse eleven. The King James and A.S.V. follow the Hebrew reading. The Greek reading omits the last clause of Exo. 18:10, and in this the R.S.V. follows the Greek. But the insertion of the last phrase of verse ten into the middle of eleven has neither the support of the Greek nor the Hebrew Bible.

Cassuto[285] helpfully says that the three-fold use of the word deliverance in vss. nine and ten is intended for emphasis, and that the omission of the last clause in the LXX, although accepted by many scholars, is only due to lack of understanding! We agree.

[285] Op. cit.,p. 216.

What testimony about Jehovah did Jethro make? (Exo. 18:11)

Jethro said, Now I know that Jehovah is greater than all gods, yea (He is greater even) in the thing wherein they (the gods) acted haughtily against them (against the Israelites).
Jehovah excelled the gods of Egypt in the very thing in which their gods (and their worshippers) haughtily claimed superiority (such as the power to preserve their people). Jethro rightly perceived that the struggles among nations were conflicts of principalities and powers, conflicts between spiritual powers in high places.[286] Compare Eph. 6:12; Eph. 3:10.

[286] Ramm, op. cit., p. 109.

Jethros declaration that he now recognizes Jehovahs great superiority is in conflict with the so-called Kenite theory, namely that Moses first learned of Jehovah as a God from the Midianites, or Kenites, of whom Jethro was one. Jethro learned about Jehovah from Moses and not Moses from Jethro. The Bible clearly indicates that Israels forefathers had known Jehovah since the very beginning.
On the other hand we do not assume that Jethro did not at least know the name of Jehovah and a little bit about Him. The use of the word now in Exo. 18:11 contrasts present knowledge with former knowledge, not present knowledge with former total ignorance of Jehovah.

10.

What religious ceremony did Jethro perform? (Exo. 18:12)

He offered a burnt offering and sacrifices to God. After this Aaron and the elders came and ate bread with Jethro.
The fact that Aaron and the elders came stresses the validity of Jethros priesthood. He was a legitimate priest before God, like Melchizedek.
The act of eating together shows that a bond of community and harmony was established between them and Jethro. Aaron had not actually met Jethro previously.

Jethro offered his sacrifices to God (elohim). This is a very striking expression. In no other account of sacrifices in the book of the law (Gen. to Deut.) is a sacrifice offered to God; it is always to Jehovah (the LORD, Yahweh). Inasmuch as Jehovah is the covenant name which God used to designate Himself as the God of the chosen people, we suppose that the unique use of the term God here with reference to sacrifice was employed because Jethro was an alien. Despite his declaration about Jehovahs greatness, he had not yet attained to the covenant relationship with Yahweh that Israel had.

What were the sacrifices that Jethro offered like? We surely know very little about the sacrifices practiced before the time of the giving of the law on Mt. Sinai. Details of how the offerings were made and what was offered are not preserved for us. We read of offerings by Abel, Noah, Abraham, and others. From archaeological sources we know that even the pagan Canaanites (at Ugarit) in the time of Moses made offerings which had names like those made by the Israelites peace offerings, trespass (or guilt) offerings, burnt offerings, etc.[287]

[287] Millar Burrows, What Mean These Stones? (London: Thames and Hudson, 1957), p. 234,

We do know this much: since the very beginning God has required blood sacrifices from His worshippers. Without shedding of blood there is no release from sins (Heb. 9:22). In our times we cannot be right with God without accepting the blood of His son Jesus as our covering (or atonement) for sins.

The expression before God in Exo. 18:12 does not imply that the tabernacle had yet been built and that this visit of Jethro occurred later and is out of chronological position, as numerous interpreters assert. Any sacrifice offered in genuine worship of God or in an act of seeking Gods favor will be before God.

11.

What was the significance of Jethros visit to Israel and Moses?

Certainly it must have been very reassuring. Moses had had nothing but trouble and contention with Israel from the outset of their trip. There had been hunger, thirst, quarrelling, and attack by enemies. Jethros friendly visit was surely a lift for their spirits.
Cassuto (a Jewish scholar) feels that the favor shown to Israel by Jethro was indicative of the wonderful destiny of the children of Israel, and of their election (Gods choosing them) shortly to come up at Mt. Sinai. Cassuto entitles chapter eighteen Israel welcomed as one of the nations of the world. To a degree he is correct in this. However, Israels welcome was by NO means the unanimous sentiment of the surrounding nations!

12.

What did Jethro see Moses doing? (Exo. 18:13-14)

He saw him the next day spending all the day judging disputes between Israelites. The Israelites had said harsh things against Moses, but they sought him in times of disagreement among themselves.
It has been supposed that the division of the spoil of the Amalekites created numerous disagreement which demanded impartial decisions on the part of Moses. This may have been true, but we do not know for certain.
Note that the people stood before Moses, but he sat. These were customary positions for litigants and judges.

Probably the expression from morning unto evening should not be taken to mean every second of all that time.

13.

What did Moses make known to the people? (Exo. 18:15-16)

He made known unto them the will of God in cases of dispute. He taught them the statutes (ordinances) of God and His laws.

Moses was unique among prophets in that God spoke to him face to face (mouth to mouth). Num. 12:7. The Lord knew Moses face to face (Deu. 34:10). If Moses did not know Gods judgment on a matter, he would pray and then listen to what the Lord commanded about it. See Num. 9:6; Num. 9:8. The people seemed to accept Moses judgments as Gods, at least in their cooler moments.

At the foundation of this passage is the profound truth that all justice issues from God! Every judge, lawyer, and citizen needs to recognize this, Without God there is no real justice.

Of course, the statutes of God had not yet been issued in written form in the manner that they were soon written thereafter at Sinai (Exo. 21:1 ff).

14.

Why was Moses work as judge not good? (Exo. 18:17-18)

It was not good because he could not handle it all alone as he was trying to do. He was wearing himself out, and wearing the people out too, because they had to stand in line for long hours in the desert sunshine waiting for their cases to be heard.
Like many a Christian leader, Moses was wearing himself out by unnecessarily trying to do everything single-handedly. This is not always the sign of over ambition. Sometimes it is the mark of the over conscientious and the overanxious.[288] Moreover, it was wearing out the people, a problem often overlooked. Delay in administering justice was one of the causes of Absaloms revolt against David (2Sa. 15:1-6).

[288] Cole, op. cit., p. 140.

We feel that Jethros warning and his advice to Moses were good. Moses himself acknowledged that he could not carry all the people because it is too burdensome for me (Num. 11:14). Another time he asked, How can I bear the load and burden of you? (Deu. 1:12) Even our Lord once told His apostles to Come ye yourselves apart . . . and rest (Mar. 6:31).

15.

What responsibility was Moses to keep for himself? (Exo. 18:19-20; Exo. 18:22)

(1) He would be the representative of the people before God. No one else could do that job as Moses could. (2) He would bring their causes unto God by prayer. (3) He would teach them statutes and laws. (4) He would judge only the hardest cases that other judges could not decide. Moses, like the apostles later (Act. 6:2; Act. 6:4), dared not neglect the most important jobs of prayer and of teaching.

Jethro recognized Moses unique relationship with God. By this relationship Moses could come before God, or Godward.

Jethros words And God be with you seem to be a polite way of urging Moses to do as Jethro proposed. But it also carries the idea of submission to Gods will, if God would not confirm his advice. See Exo. 18:23.

For Moses to show them the way was quite literal in Israels case. But metaphorically it meant the way of life. Compare Gen. 6:12.

16.

What were the qualifications for Israels judges? (Exo. 18:21-22)

(1) Able, men. The word here translated able often means strength, usually physical. The Greek O.T. translates it dunatos, meaning strong, mighty, powerful. We suppose that the strength was more strength of character than of body. A judge must be tough-minded (but sometimes physically tough too!).

(2) God-fearing. (3) Men of truth. (4) Those hating bribes, unjust gain, or filthy lucre.

After the judges were selected, Moses gave them a marvelous charge. Read Deu. 1:16-17! Compare 2Ch. 19:5-7.

17.

How many people did each judge handle? (Exo. 18:22; Exo. 18:25)

Some were over thousands, some hundreds, some fifties, some tens. Dividing these totals into Israels population (600,000 men), we get about 78,600 judges![289] This averaged out to about one judge in every family. Everyone in Israel was either involved as judge or was related to someone who was.

[289] Keil and Delitzsch and others argue that we need not assume the existence of many thousands of judges, because the judges were taken out of the heads of the tribes (Deu. 1:15), and these can hardly have amounted to many hundreds, to say nothing of many thousands. To this we can only ask, How can there have been judges over tens without using one-tenth of the total population?

At all seasons (Exo. 18:22) means at all ordinary times. Moses handled the most difficult cases.

18.

What would be the results of Moses taking Jethros advice? (Exo. 18:23)

(1) Moses would be able to endure his work load.
(2) The people of Israel would go to their place in peace. Their place was Canaan, of course. Jethro recognized this as the appointed and true home of Israel.

19.

When did Moses appoint all these judges? (Exo. 18:24-25)

Moses appointed them later, at Mt. Sinai. See Deu. 1:9-18. One gets the impression here in Exodus 18 that Moses at once appointed the judges. However, the text does not actually say that he did it that day. And upon a moments reflection we realize that setting up a system of over 70,000 judges was not the work of a few minutes or even of a few days! We are not surprised therefore to find in Deu. 1:9-18 that the judges were appointed much later, near the end of their stay at Mt. Sinai of nearly a year.[290] We also learn that the people themselves selected their judges after Moses laid down the qualifications for them, an example later followed by the apostles (Act. 6:3). Moses probably did not even personally know very many of these judges.

[290] The account in Num. 11:10-16; Num. 11:24-25 of Moses appointing seventy elders to help him govern Israel has no connection with the event here.

This type of historical record, wherein related incidents are all fully presented in an unbroken section, even though that may mean getting ahead of the overall progress of a narrative, is not unusual in the Old Testament. One other example of this is the story of Calebs inheriting Hebron. Compare Jos. 15:13-19 and Jdg. 1:1; Jdg. 1:8-15.

Exo. 18:24 says Moses hearkened to Jethro. Meekness was a notable quality in Moses (Num. 12:3). Moses willingness to obey God and to take good advice was part of his great strength of character.

20.

How did Jethros visit end? (Exo. 18:27)

Moses let Jethro depart unto his own land, Midian. (See notes on Exo. 2:15 regarding the location of Midian.) We suppose that Zipporah and the two sons stayed with Moses, though we read nothing more about their being with Moses. In the land of Canaan years later, we read of Moses grandson (Gershoms son) Jonathan becoming an idolatrous priest. See Jdg. 18:30.

When Israel left Mt. Sinai, Moses requested Hobab, the son of Reuel (Jethro), to accompany them. See Num. 10:29-32. The family of Hobab grew into the Kenite tribe dwelling among the Israelites. See Jdg. 1:16; Jdg. 4:11; Jdg. 4:17; 1Sa. 15:6.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XVIII.
THE VISIT OF JETHRO.

(1) Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses father in law.On Jethros probable relationship to Moses, see the second Note on Exo. 3:1. On the priesthood of Reuel, which Jethro seems to have inherited, see Note on Exo. 2:16. It has been very unnecessarily supposed that the chronological order of the narrative is here deranged, Jethros visit having been really paid after the legislation of Sinai and the setting up of the Tabernacle (Aben Ezra, Ranke, Kurtz). Both the position of the chapter and its contents are against this theory.

And that the Lord had brought Israel out.Rather, in that the Lord had brought Israel out, It was this fact especially which Jethro had heard, and which induced him to set out on his journey.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

(1) The people want decisions which they can feel to have Divine sanctionthey come to him to enquire of Godand the ruling of inferior judges would not be regarded by them as equally authoritative.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

1. Jethro See note on Exo 2:18, and concluding note at the end of that chapter . He was, like Melchizedek, a patriarchal priest, and, as Exo 18:12 shows, was wont to offer burnt offerings and sacrifices unto God.

Heard of all that God had done The marvels of the Exodus sounded out among the heathen far and wide. Compare Jos 2:10. Such wonders made it conspicuous that no human hand or power, but Jehovah, had brought Israel out of Egypt. Thus was the name of Israel’s God magnified among the nations .

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Jethro Visits and Advises Moses ( Exo 18:1-27 ).

There is little doubt that under God, Jethro’s visit saved Moses from being on the verge of nervous exhaustion. In return Moses will bring enlightenment to Jethro about the things of God. God often uses the most unexpected sources in order to help His servants. But there is an indication of how necessary Moses training and expertise was for Israel.

Jethro Arrives With Moses’ Wife and Children and Is Warmly Welcomed And Learns of All That Yahweh Has Done ( Exo 18:1-9 ).

As the children of Israel approached Sinai they would come within the vicinity of the Midianite group to which Moses belonged, who would soon learn of their approach. Indeed it must be seen as very probable that Moses sent them notification.

a Jethro hears of all that God has done for Moses and for Israel his people, how Yahweh has brought them out of the land of Egypt (Exo 18:11).

b Jethro had taken Moses’ wife and his two sons after he sent her away of whom one was Gershom, meaning ‘a resident alien’ (compare Exo 2:2) because Moses had been a resident alien in a foreign land, and the other Eliezer, God is my help’ because God had saved him from the hand of Pharaoh (Exo 18:2-4).

c Jethro brings Moses’ wife and children to the camp of Israel at the mount of God (Exo 18:15).

c He sends a message to tell Moses that his father-in-law Jethro, with Moses’ wife and children, has come to meet with him (Exo 18:16).

b Moses goes out to his father-in-law and bowed and kissed him and they asked each other of their welfare and came into Moses’ tent (Exo 18:17).

a Moses told his father-in-law all that Yahweh had done to Pharaoh and the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, and all the trials they had had on the way, and how Yahweh had delivered them from them (Exo 18:18).

Note in the parallels how in ‘a’ Jethro had heard of all that God had done for Moses and for Israel his people, and how Yahweh had brought them out of the land of Egypt and in the parallel Moses tells Jethro of all that Yahweh had done for Israel’s sake. In ‘b’ we are told of Moses’ trials in his exile and how God had saved him from the hands of Pharaoh, and in the parallel we are told of what Yahweh had done to Pharaoh and how He had delivered Israel from all their trials. In ‘c’ Jethro bring Moses’ wife and children with him to the camp, and in the parallel Moses warmly welcomes Jethro (and all his party) and takes them to his tent. Central to the passage is that Moses’ tribal leader and father-in-law Jethro has come bringing Moses’ wife and children. This central position brings out that Moses did not overlook the coming of his wife, even though it was not important in the ensuing narrative.

Exo 18:1

‘Now Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, how that Yahweh had brought Israel out of Egypt.’

The news about what God had done for Moses would have come from Moses himself, who would no doubt have sent a fast messenger with the news of the deliverance. It was incumbent on him to keep his tribal leader informed. Note the change to ‘God’ (Elohim) in the first phrase. It has been noteworthy that up to this point the use of the word Elohim (God) by itself has been notably lacking from the narrative since leaving Egypt. The emphasis has been on Yahweh. In fact Elohim (God) has only been used in the technical term ‘the staff of God’ (Exo 17:9) and to define Yahweh as ‘your God’ (Exo 15:26; Exo 16:12). Thus this opening use of Elohim (God) is very much against the idea that Jethro worshipped Yahweh. Had he done so the sentence would surely have begun with ‘Yahweh’.

Note the use in this verse. Jethro hears of ‘all that God has done’. Thus he equates it with the activity of ‘God’ as he knows Him. But then when the deliverance from Egypt is mentioned it is referred to Yahweh. This distinction applies throughout the chapter demonstrating its unity.

This distinction is especially observed when we compare how the word Elohim (God) is also used when defining Jethro’s sacrifices (Exo 18:12) and in general conversation with Jethro (Exo 18:15), as well as when he gives his advice (Exo 18:17-23). It is only when speaking of the deliverance from Egypt that the name of Yahweh comes into prominence (Exo 18:1 b, Exodus 8-11). This also ties in with the fact that Moses’ second son’s name contains El and not Yah. In view of this it would seem clear that Jethro was not a dedicated worshipper of Yahweh, and certainly not a priest of Yahweh, while being willing to acknowledge that Yahweh was God and even greater than all the gods (Exo 18:11), by which he mainly meant the gods of Egypt of whose defeat he had heard. He quite possibly identified his own god with Yahweh, for Moses had spent forty years with the tribe. But if so the association was secondary for he speaks of him as Elohim.

Exo 18:2-4

‘And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law took Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her away, and her two sons, the name of one of whom was Gershom, for he said, “I have been a sojourner in a strange land”, and the name of the other was Eliezer, for he said, “The God of my father was my help and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh”.’

This summary brings us up to date on Moses’ family position. Moses had clearly sent his wife back to the family tribe while he was having his contest with Pharaoh. This was probably in order to ensure her safety and the safety of her two sons and to prevent them from being used by Pharaoh as a bargaining tool. It has ever been the policy of tyrants to get back at or control their enemies by attacking their families. But it may partly have been because a Midianite wife and two foreign sons were causing dissension among certain of the children of Israel (although such racial discrimination was not usual. It was only marriage to Canaanites that was frowned on because of their perverted sexual rites. There is no direct suggestion here or anywhere that Moses’ marriage was frowned on). And Jethro had accepted her and her sons back under his care. He had ‘taken’ her.

The details of Moses’ two sons are also given. They were mentioned in Exo 4:20, and the fact of Gershom’s birth and naming in Exo 2:22. This is now mentioned again, along with the naming of his second son Eliezer, important here because of its meaning.

“Gershom.” ‘Ger’ means a foreigner, a sojourner, a stranger. Moses construed the name here as meaning ‘a stranger there’, the regular play on words common with both tribal and Egyptian names. Moses’ comment suggested how hardly he understandably had felt his exile.

“Eliezer.” ‘My God is help.’ Exo 4:20 suggests that Eliezer was born in Midian before Moses left for Egypt. His name was basically a statement of faith, that God would be Moses’ helper. And Moses especially related this to his escape from execution when he fled from Egypt with God’s help. He now compares it in Exo 18:8 (see analysis) with their recent deliverance. In fact both sons may well now be grown up.

Exo 18:5

‘And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came to Moses with his sons and his wife, into the wilderness where he was encamped at the Mount of God.’

At this nearest point to the Midianite camp Jethro arrived bringing Moses’ wife and his two sons. Note the constant emphasis on his ‘father-in-law’ (Exo 18:1-2; Exo 18:5-8; Exo 18:12; Exo 18:14-15; Exo 18:17; Exo 18:24; Exo 18:27). This was considered necessary in order to make what happened here acceptable. It was precisely because Jethro was in a position of primacy over Moses as his father-in-law, as one who had taken the place of a father to him (compare Jacob and Laban where Jacob acknowledged the authority of Laban), and as his patriarch, that he was called on to offer sacrifices (Exo 18:12) and was in a position to give patriarchal advice to Moses. All would recognise his right to do so.

“Where he was encamped at the mount of God.” The movement of the whole tribe to Horeb, to the water gushing from the rock, has not been mentioned, but it is assumed (in Exo 17:1-7 it is only the elders who have been to the rock). Why else was the rock in Horeb revealed? The writer was concerned more with the glory of Yahweh than with the minor details of the doings of the children of Israel. (We can compare, for example, how in Exo 7:15-18; Exo 8:1-4; Exo 8:20-23; Exo 9:1-5 Moses is told to go to Pharaoh but the going and its consequence is actually not mentioned but assumed. The narrative continues on the basis that it has been done).

This movement is hinted at in Exo 19:2 where we read, ‘when they were departed from Rephidim and were come to the wilderness of Sinai, they pitched in the wilderness, and there Israel camped before the Mount of God.’ This latter is a dating summary, which see. So now they are in Horeb. They will need the plentiful supply of water for their comparatively long stay there.

“The mount of God.” This description was probably given to it after the events that follow. It may, however, have been earlier looked on as sacred by the Midianites due to its austere grandeur (compare Exo 3:1)

Exo 18:6-7

‘And he said to Moses, “I, your father-in-law Jethro, am come to you, and your wife and your two sons with her.” And Moses went out to meet his father-in-law , and bowed to him and kissed him, and they asked each other of their welfare, and they came into the tent.’

Jethro took Moses’ wife and sons to Moses, and they greeted each other warmly and came back to Moses’ tent.

“He said.” That is via a messenger. It explains the formality of the message. While friendly it is patriarchal. The leader of his clan is coming to meet him.

“Went out — and bowed to him.” Moses pays him the honour due to him with full formality, and Jethro responds accordingly, but the detail suggests it is friendly.

Exo 18:8

‘And Moses told his father-in-law all that Yahweh had done to Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, all the travail that had come on them by the way, and how Yahweh had delivered them.’

Moses had, of course, a responsibility to report events back to his tribal leader, from whom he had officially previously sought permission to go to Egypt (Exo 4:18), but the communication goes beyond that. Moses is concerned that his father-in-law should now see that he is tied to the children of Israel by Yahweh’s activities and demands. Jethro’s rejoicing in the goodness of Yahweh demonstrates that he is gladly willing to accept the situation and to release Moses from his tribal loyalty.

He speaks of the wonders performed against Pharaoh and the Egyptians, as well as His powerful provision made in the later difficult period in the wilderness, in which Yahweh had again revealed His glory ‘for Israel’s sake’. These wonders and gracious acts bring glory to Yahweh.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jethro Meets Moses In Exo 18:1-12 Moses encamps at Mount Sinai, while the children of Israel are still at Rephidim. While Moses was encamped at the mountain of God, he honours Jethro, his father-in-law. Jethro offers the sacrifice and they eat together. Jethro’s visit to Moses could symbolize Jesus Christ as He offers His blood at the Father’s throne. Perhaps the fact that he went ahead of the encampment symbolizes that fact that Jesus went before us to God’s throne to offer His atoning sacrifice in our behalf. There he met his father-in-law, who made a sacrifice unto God. This may symbolize God the Father receiving Jesus’ sacrifice, which was actually a sacrifice that God gave to mankind for his salvation.

Exo 18:1 When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father in law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, and that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt;

Exo 18:1 “When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father in law” – Comments The individual named Jethro, or Reuel, or Hobab, is the priest of Midian and the father-in-law to Moses. The Hebrew name Jethro ( ) (H3503) occurs ten times in the Old Testament Scriptures (Exo 3:1; Exo 4:18; Exo 18:1-2; Exo 18:5-6; Exo 18:9-10; Exo 18:12). He is also called by the name Reuel ( ) (H7467) (Exo 2:18) and by the name Hobab ( ) (H2246), the son of Raguel ( ) (H7467) (Num 10:29, Jdg 4:11).

Exo 2:18, “And when they came to Reuel their father, he said, How is it that ye are come so soon to day?”

Num 10:29, “And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Raguel the Midianite, Moses’ father in law, We are journeying unto the place of which the LORD said, I will give it you: come thou with us, and we will do thee good: for the LORD hath spoken good concerning Israel.”

Jdg 4:11, “Now Heber the Kenite, which was of the children of Hobab the father in law of Moses, had severed himself from the Kenites, and pitched his tent unto the plain of Zaanaim, which is by Kedesh.”

Josephus calls him by the name Raguel and Jethro ( Antiquities 3.3; 5.2.3).

“Now when Raguel, Moses’s father-in-law, understood in what a prosperous condition his affairs were, he willingly came to meet him” ( Antiquities 3.3)

“They also gave land for habitation to the posterity of Jethro, the Midianite, who was the father-in-law to Moses; for they had left their own country, and followed them, and accompanied them in the wilderness.” ( Antiquities 5.2.3)

Midian was the son of Abraham and Keturah (Gen 25:1-3).

Gen 25:1-3, “Then again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah. And she bare him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah. And Jokshan begat Sheba, and Dedan”

However, the book of Judges calls Jethro a Kenite (Jdg 1:16).

Jdg 1:16, “And the children of the Kenite, Moses’ father in law, went up out of the city of palm trees with the children of Judah into the wilderness of Judah, which lieth in the south of Arad; and they went and dwelt among the people.”

“heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, and that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt” – Comments The news of Israel’s exodus from Egypt and deliverance through the Red Sea quickly spread throughout the region.

Exo 18:2 Then Jethro, Moses’ father in law, took Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her back,

Exo 18:2 Comments Scholars are in general agreement that Moses must have sent Zipporah his wife back at the beginning of their journey to Egypt when they were at the inn (Exo 4:24-26). This was just prior to his meeting with Aaron.

Exo 4:24-26, “And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the LORD met him, and sought to kill him. Then 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. So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.”

Exo 18:3 And her two sons; of which the name of the one was Gershom; for he said, I have been an alien in a strange land:

Exo 18:3 Word Study on “Gershom” Gesenius says the name “Gershom” ( ) (H1648)means, “expulsion.” Strong says it means, “a refugee.” PTW says it means, “exile.” Note:

Exo 2:22, “And she bare him a son, and he called his name Gershom : for he said, I have been a stranger in a strange land.”

Comments – Exo 2:22 refers to the birth of Gershom, Moses’ first son. It is assumed that Gershom was circumcised in Exo 4:24-26; however, it is possible that the second son named Eliezer was the one circumcised on that day.

Exo 18:4 And the name of the other was Eliezer; for the God of my father, said he, was mine help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh:

Exo 18:4 “And the name of the other was Eliezer” – Word Study on “Eliezer” PTW says the name “Eliezer” means, “God is help.” Note:

1Ch 23:15, “The sons of Moses were, Gershom, and Eliezer.”

Comments Exo 18:4 provides the first mention of the second son of Moses named Eliezer.

Exo 18:4 “for the God of my father, said he, was mine help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh” Comments – The phrase “delivered me from sword of Pharaoh” most likely refers to the time when Moses first escaped from the hands of Pharaoh after killing an Egyptian taskmaster (Exo 2:14-15). However, if Eliezer was born or named during Moses’ return to Egypt, the name may declare Moses’ help in God to deliver him from Pharaoh upon his return to deliver the children of Israel.

Exo 2:14-15, “And he said, Who made thee a prince and a judge over us? intendest thou to kill me, as thou killedst the Egyptian? And Moses feared, and said, Surely this thing is known. Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelt in the land of Midian: and he sat down by a well.”

Exo 18:5 And Jethro, Moses’ father in law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God:

Exo 18:5 Comments – In Exo 18:1-12 Moses encamps at Mount Sinai, while the children of Israel are still at Rephidim. Perhaps Moses went ahead to scout out the location where God was leading the children of Israel. We find a reference to Mount Horeb in the preceding passage (Exo 17:6), which suggests that Moses did go ahead of the people (Exo 17:5) to Mount Horeb, which is called the mountain of God in Exo 3:1.

Exo 17:6, “Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.”

Exo 3:1, “Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb.”

Exo 18:6 Comments Jethro has sent a messenger to Moses telling him of his plans to visit. They must have agreed to meet at Mount Sinai, a familiar location for both of them.

Exo 18:11 Now I know that the LORD is greater than all gods: for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them.

Exo 18:11 Scripture References – Note:

Exo 12:12, “For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment : I am the LORD.”

Exo 18:12 And Jethro, Moses’ father in law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God: and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses’ father in law before God.

Exo 18:12 “to eat bread with Moses’ father in law before God” – Comments – This meal was symbolic of the Lord’s Supper in the New Testament.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Moses Honours Jethro – Exo 18:1-27 records the visit of Jethro to Moses at Mount Sinai (Exo 18:5) and their sacrifice and meal together. Jethro becomes the central figure in this narrative material, perhaps because Moses gives honor to his father-in-law when writing the book of Exodus. Jethro was greatly received and honoured by Moses. In this story, it is possible that Jethro serves as a type and figure of God the Father, while Moses is a type and figure of Jesus Christ bringing God’s people through redemption (1Co 10:2).

1Co 10:2, “And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;”

In the story of redemption, Jesus rose from the grave, ascended to Heaven, and offered His blood sacrifice once for all for mankind (Heb 9:12).

Heb 9:12, “Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.”

Perhaps the meeting of Jethro and Moses represents this atoning sacrifice of Jesus that God the Father gave to mankind when the Jethro brought a sacrifice and offered it unto the Lord (Exo 18:12).

Note two divisions to this section:

1. Jethro Meets Moses Exo 18:1-12

2. Jethro Advices Moses Exo 18:13-27

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Exo 15:22 – Exo 18:27 The Journey to Mount Sinai Exo 15:22 to Exo 18:27 records Israel’s journey from the shores of the Red Sea to Mount Sinai. This journey contains symbolisms of the Christian’s early journey immediately after water baptism as God divinely provides for his needs, guiding him to a place of greater spiritual maturity through the knowledge of His Word.

1. Israel Encamps at Marah ( Exo 15:22-26 ) Exo 15:22-27 records Israel’s journey immediately after their deliverance from the Egyptian army in the crossing of the Red Sea. This pericope takes the children of Israel from the shores of the Red Sea to Elim.

Israel’s first test of faith takes place at Marah, which means “bitter,” located in the Wilderness of Shur (meaning “journey”) where they become thirsty after three days of following the Lord through the wilderness. In the midst of their labours, they come to a spring of water, but find the waters bitter. Moses cuts down a tree and throws it into the water to make it sweet. The Lord then gives them a statute to obey His Word as an opportunity for them to prove their love and devotion towards Him. God had blessed the Israelites with prosperity and health as they departed Egypt. His statute promised them that if they would obey God’s Word, they would be able to walk in the blessings continually. This event could symbolize the first trial that a child of God experiences in which he must put his faith in obedience to God’s Word. Their choices would make life bitter or sweet. God gave them the choice. As God’s children, the things of this world no longer have to be bitter, for in obedience to Christ Jesus, He makes everything sweet. From the first day we believed in Jesus Christ as our Saviour, there is not a situation that we face alone. If we will seek the Lord, He will give us wisdom to deal with every difficult, bitter situation so that it becomes sweet, a blessing to us and others.

Illustration – The Lord spoke to me the night of 18-29 January 2005 and said, “The bitter and the sweet are all used by God to mould and shape your life.” This word came the same day that my sister-in-law Dyan was told by her Muslim “husband” called Nabal to leave her home and was only allowed to take one of her two children with her. It was “sweet” news for us that she has decided to leave this environment for the sake of her eternal salvation, but it is “bitter” news to know that her oldest child is being left behind. However, I know that God will work in her life in the midst of this heartache to draw her to Him and to work miracles for her as she learns to trust in Him. The following night the Lord spoke to me saying, “Be patient and you will see Me working in the midst of this situation.”

2. Israel Encamps at Elim ( Exo 15:27 ) The children of Israel found twelve springs and seventy palm trees when they encamped at Elim, which means, “trees.” In the Scriptures, trees can symbolize men, and leadership among men (Jdg 9:7-15), and wells are symbolic of the anointings of the Holy Spirit (Joh 7:38, 2Pe 2:17). These twelve springs may represent the twelve apostles of the Lamb and the seventy trees the first seventy disciples upon which the early Church in Jerusalem was founded in the upper room. This symbolizes the need for the new believer to join the body of Christ in order to continue his life of being refreshed by the Holy Spirit and walking in freedom and liberty from this world. It is in the local fellowship that a believer will find times of refreshing, in the midst of worship, the teaching of God’s Word, and genuine love from the brethren.

Jdg 9:8, “The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them; and they said unto the olive tree, Reign thou over us.”

Joh 7:38, “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.”

2Pe 2:17, “These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.”

However, these twelve springs and seventy trees may better represent the times of refreshing that God provides each of His children. Along our spiritual journey, the Lord leads us in paths of rest and peace, as described in Psalms 23. These times of refreshing follow seasons of trials.

3. Israel Encamps in the Wilderness of Sin ( Exo 16:1-36 ) In the wilderness of Sin, which means, “bush,” the children of Israel are given manna from Heaven and quail to eat. The manna symbolizes the daily word that God speaks to every one of His children as a part of His fellowship with them. God speaks to His children each day if he will just take the time to listen. The quail represent the stronger meat that God can give to those who are mature in Christ (Heb 5:12-14).

Illustration – As a young Christian in 1980, the Lord gave me a dream in which I saw an old, wooden, screen door with the familiar, metal sign “Colonial is Good Bread” fastened to the center of this door. This sign became famous because it was found on the wooden screen doors of so many country stores across the United States. The makers of Colonial Bread invested in an advertising campaign using these signs because they wanted everyone to buy a loaf of their bread when they entered the grocery store. This metal sign was not just fastened in the center of the screen door as a push plate to prevent damaging the screen; the message on this sign became embedded into the mind of every customer that entered the store to buy groceries. The Colonial Bread Company wanted everyone to partake of their bread. The unique aspect of this dream is that the metal sign on this old, wooden screen door did not read, “Colonial is Good Bread,” but rather, “The Bread of Life.” As a young Christian I interpreted this dream to mean that the Lord wanted me to open this door in my spiritual journey and partake of that bread that comes from heaven. He wanted me to read and study His Holy Word diligently, and on a daily basis.

4. The Water from the Rock ( Exo 17:1-7 ) Exo 17:1-7 records the story of God providing the children of Israel water from the rock. During Israel’s encampment at Rephidim, which means “support,” Moses struck the rock and water poured forth to refresh the children of Israel. The striking of the rock represents the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, and it symbolized the fact that God used men to crucify Jesus on the Cross (1Co 10:4). God, through man, brought about this act. God struck Jesus once for all that we might have living water. In Num 20:8 God told Moses to speak to the rock. When Moses struck the rock the second time out of anger (Num 20:11), it was a type of crucifying the Son of God a second time (Heb 6:6).

The water represents the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues that is available for every believer who desires more of God’s presence in his/her life. It also represents the daily infilling of the Holy Spirit that every child of God can experience by praying in tongues and worshipping the Lord (Eph 5:18-19). God sends His children the gift of speaking in tongues to support and strengthen the believer.

1Co 10:4, “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.”

Num 20:11, “And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also. And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them.”

Heb 6:6, “If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.”

Now man can speak to Jesus, call upon his name, so that we may have living water (eternal life).

Illustration – Over the Christmas and New Year’s holidays of 1986, work was slow. Therefore, I spent extra time praying. One morning the Lord as I awoke, the Lord said to me, “You will never walk in victory in your life unless you spend two hours a day praying in tongues.” During this time, I had become concerned and was asking Him why my life lacked so much victory, peace and joy. So the Saturday after New Year’s day, while praying in tongues at the church altar, I was led to turn to Eph 6:10-18. Immediately the Lord showed me that I would never have the total, abiding victory as a Christina unless I spend time daily, constantly praying in the spirit. I began doing this two hours a day then. And a heaviness lifted and peace and joy came from within, all day long.

5. Israel’s Battle with the Amalekites ( Exo 17:8-16 ) Exo 17:8-16 records the story of Israel’s first battle, which took place at their encampment of Rephidim with the Amalekites. The Lord allowed the children of Israel to be refreshed with a continual source of fresh water from the rock that Moses struck (Exo 17:1-7) prior to their attack. The water of Marah was symbolic of the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues. The water from the rock struck by Moses is symbolic of the continual filling of the Holy Spirit through a lifestyle of praying in the Spirit (Eph 5:18).

Eph 5:18, “And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;”

The Amalekites could symbolize the flesh or the demonic realm that comes against the children of God on their spiritual journey. The lifting up of the rod of God in the hands of Moses could represent a believer’s declaration of the name of Jesus in taking dominion over the powers of darkness. As Moses held up the rod of God, which symbolizes the authority of the name of Jesus, the enemy was defeated. God’s children must learn to use the name of Jesus when Satan attacks the body of Christ. Had Israel remained in Egyptian bondage, the Amalekites would not have attacked them. Neither would Satan attack God’s children if they would return back into the world. The Lord once spoke to a friend of mine, saying, “A king does not fight against a city he has already conquered.”

Illustration The Lord gave me a three-part dream, which opened my eyes and taught me how to exercise the authority of the name of Jesus in every area of my life. I had learned how to pray and make my requests to the Lord known using Jesus’ name. Now, I was going to learn to use His name to take authority over Satan. The first part of the dream was a vision of a pastor friend of mine sitting in his house peacefully reading his Bible in a chair. I still remember how peaceful and tranquil the scene appeared. Then, the Lord spoke these words to me, “There is peace in a home when there is dominion in that home.” Finally, the Lord brought the words “Luk 11:21 ” to my mind. I had no idea how that verse read nor if it applied to the dream. I woke up and read this passage, “When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace.” I knew immediately that this dream was from God. Through the next few months, I began to study the Bible and learn how to use the name of Jesus to set my household at peace. (4 July 1988)

6. Moses Honours Jethro ( Exo 18:1-12 ) In Exo 18:1-12 Moses encamps at Mount Sinai, while the children of Israel are still at Rephidim. While Moses was encamped at the mountain of God, he honours Jethro, his father-in-law. Jethro offers the sacrifice and they eat together. Jethro’s visit to Moses could symbolize Jesus Christ as He offers His blood at the Father’s throne. Perhaps the fact that he went ahead of the encampment symbolizes that fact that Jesus went before us to God’s throne to offer His atoning sacrifice in our behalf. There he met his father-in-law, who made a sacrifice unto God. This may symbolize God the Father receiving Jesus’ sacrifice, which was actually a sacrifice that God gave to mankind for his salvation.

7. Jethro Advises Moses ( Exo 18:13-27 ) – Exo 18:13-27 records the incident in which Jethro advises Moses on how to delegate judges to assist him in judging the matters of the people. After Moses honours Jethro, his father-in-law gives Moses wisdom regarding organizing leadership among the children of Israel so that all of them can receive wisdom and ministry. This event symbolizes High Priesthood of Jesus Christ, seen in Jethro’s comment to Moses, “You be for the people an advocate before God, and you bring the problems to God.” [71] (Exo 18:19). The ordaining by Moses of leaders over the people represents church order and service. Jesus is seated at the Father’s right hand to judge His church, while sending forth the Holy Spirit to anoint the five-fold ministry and give the gifts of the Spirit to the body of Christ (Eph 4:8-13). If a child of God will submit himself to the leadership of a local fellowship, he will be able to experience the gifts and anointings of the Holy Spirit and join in the ministry of helps.

[71] Translation by John I. Durham, Exodus, in Word Biblical Commentary: 58 Volumes on CD-Rom, vol. 3, eds. Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker (Dallas: Word Inc., 2002), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 3.0b [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2004), translation of Exodus 18:19.

8. Indoctrination ( Exo 20:1 to Exo 24:8 ) – The next phase of a believer’s life after regeneration is called indoctrination. The giving of the Law and statutes (Exo 20:1 to Exo 24:8) represents this phase in the Christian life. It is important to note that God guided them to Mount Sinai and throughout their entire forty-year wilderness journey with a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (Exo 13:21). This divine guidance symbolized the fact that every child of God must learn to be led by the Holy Spirit throughout his spiritual journey.

Exo 13:21, “And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:”

Motifs found within Exo 15:22 to Exo 18:27 – John Durham notes a number of contrasts within this passage of Scripture. (a) Israel’s Need verses God’s Abundance Supply The children of Israel entered the wilderness journey totally dependent upon God’s provision for their every need. Time and again God reveals Himself as having more than enough to supply their needs. (b) Thirst verses Abundance of Water This passage of Scripture opens with Israel in desperate need of water, only to find bitter water; and the passage closes with Israel encamped at Elim, where there was an abundance of water and trees. Understanding that God was leading them with a cloud by day and pillar of fire by night (Exo 13:21-22), it is easy to conclude that God was testing His children. (c) Israel’s Grumbling verses God’s Loving Patience An underlying motif found in Israel’s forty-year wilderness journey is Israel’s constant grumbling and complaining, beginning in this passage, being met with God’s continual intervention to meet their need. (d) Health verses Sickness – Another contrast is made between Israel’s promise of health and healing against the backdrop of the Ten Plagues of Egypt (Exo 15:26). (e) Disorder verses Order The multitude of Israelites began this journey in an awkward manner, in their encampment, in their travelling, in their lifestyles, so that Moses was overwhelmed with their problems. God sends Jethro with the wisdom to begin setting their lives in order. These contrasts reveal that God was gradually guiding them into an orderly lifestyle of faith and obedience to Him, a lifestyle that would meet their daily needs. However, the multitude of the Israelites were grumbling against change because it clashed with their old habits and customs. [72]

[72] John I. Durham, Exodus, in Word Biblical Commentary: 58 Volumes on CD-Rom, vol. 3, eds. Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker (Dallas: Word Inc., 2002), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 3.0b [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2004), explanation of Exodus 5:22-27.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Jethro Arrives with Zipporah

v. 1. When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, his given name being Reuel and his official title Jethro, heard all that God had done for Moses and for Israel, His people, and that the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt,

v. 2. then Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, took Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her back, which probably happened after the adventure in the inn, Exo 4:24-26,

v. 3. and her two sons; of which the name of the one was Gershom (a stranger I am); for he said, I have been an alien in a strange land;

v. 4. and the name of the other was Eliezer (God my Helper ); for the God of my father, said he, was mine Help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh. These two sons had been born to Moses in the land of Midian while he lived with his father-in-law Reuel, Exo 2:22; Exo 4:25. It seems that Moses had agreed with his wife that she should meet him when he would return with the children of Israel; for he had had, even at that time, the promise of the Lord that Israel would be delivered out of the house of bondage, and that they would worship God on Mount Horeb. As the news of the mighty deeds of God, therefore, went out into the surrounding countries, Jethro also heard it and acted accordingly.

v. 5. And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God; for the children of Israel had now established their camp in the foot-hills of Mount Horeb.

v. 6. And he said unto Moses, sent him a message before reaching the camp, I, thy father-in-law Jethro, am come unto thee, and thy wife and her two sons with her.

v. 7. And Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, and did obeisance, and kissed him, he welcomed him in a manner befitting his station; and they asked each other of their welfare, whether peace in the best sense of the word had been granted them. And they came into the tent. “Notice the delicate discretion which both men observe, with all their friendship towards each other. Jethro does not rush impetuously forward; he sends word of his approach. Moses receives him with appropriate reverence, but first leads him into his tent; for whether and how he may introduce him to his people is yet to be determined. ” (Lange. )

v. 8. And Moses told his father-in-law all that the Lord had done unto Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake while they were still in bondage in Egypt, and all the travail that had come upon them, that had found or struck them, by the way, since their departure out of Egypt, and how the Lord delivered them, how He had shown them His salvation in every instance, given them evidence of His almighty and gracious presence.

v. 9. And Jethro rejoiced for all the goodness which the Lord had done to Israel, whom He had delivered out of the hand of the Egyptians. It was not the mere polite interest of a visitor, but the genuine, sympathetic rejoicing of a man who felt that the God of Israel was the true God. Jethro here appears as the representative of a heathen nation, of the Midianites or Kenites, the first heathen nation to show kindness to the people of God.

v. 10. And Jethro said, Blessed be the Lord, Jehovah, the true God, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians and out of the hand of Pharaoh, who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians; it had been a salvation from galling bondage.

v. 11. Now I know that the Lord, Jehovah, the God whom Moses and the children of Israel worshiped, is greater than all gods, having manifested Himself as being exalted above all so-called gods, the idols of the heathen; for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly He was above them. The Egyptians, foolishly trusting in their idols, had acted wickedly in all their dealings with the Israelites, but the Lord had shown His superiority in the plagues which He had sent, down to the final annihilation of Pharaoh’s host in the Red Sea.

v. 12. And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God, the belief in whom he had so openly confessed, giving evidence of his faith by this act of sacrifice. And Aaron came and all the elders of Israel to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God. The children of Israel could enter into both religious and social fellowship with the man who had so openly confessed his belief in the true God. Eating bread before God was said of the sacrificial meal, the Lord being present as the invisible Guest. As Jethro here partook of the blessings of Israel, so heathen nations in after-years were called to the enjoyment of the Messianic hope and promises.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

JETHRO‘S VISIT TO MOSES.

EXPOSITION

JETHRO‘S VISIT TO MOSES. It has been noticed, in the comment on Exo 4:1-31; that shortly after the circumcision of Eliezer, Moses’ second son, he sent back his wife, Zipporah, to her own kinsfolk, the Midianites, together with her two sons, Eliezer and Gershom. Reuel, Zipporah’s father, was then dead (Exodus and had been succeeded in his priesthood and headship of the tribe by Jethro, probably his son, and therefore the brother-in-law, and not the father-in-law, of Moses. (The Hebrew word used, as already observed, has both meanings.) Jethro gave protection to his sister and her children until he heard of the passage of the Red Sea, when he set forth to meet and congratulate his kinsman, and to convey back to him his wife and his sons. The meeting took place “at the mount of God” (verse 5), or in the near vicinity of Sinai, probably in some part of the plain Er-Rahah, which extends for five miles, or more, to the north-west of the Sinaitic mountain-group.

Exo 18:1

Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law. Rather, “Jethro, priest of Midian, Moses’ brother-in-law.” See the comment on Exo 3:1; and note that the Seventy use the ambiguous word , while the Vulgate has cognatus. And that. Rather “in that.” The clause is exegetical of the preceding one.

Exo 18:2

After he had sent her back. Literally “after her dismissal.” It is curious that the fact of the dismissal had not been previously mentioned, yet is here assumed as known. Some commentators (as Knobel) find, in what is said of Zipporah, the trace of two distinct writers who give two contradictory narratives; but the difficulties and obscurities of the history are sufficiently intelligible, if we hear in mind

1. That Moses was addressing immediately those who knew the facts; and

2. That he was studious of brevity.

Exo 18:3

And her two sons. That Zipporah had borne Moses at least two sons before his return to Egypt from Midian, had appeared from Exo 4:20. The name of the one, Gershom, and the ground of it, had been declared in Exo 2:22. The repetition here may be accounted for by the present chapter having been originally a distinct and separate composition, written on a distinct roll, and subsequently incorporated by Moses into his great work.

Exo 18:4

Eliezer. Eliezer had not been previously mentioned by name; but he was probably the son circumcised by Zipporah, as related in Exo 4:25. We learn from 1Ch 23:15-17, that he grew to manhood, and had an only son, Rehabiah, whose descendants were in the time of Solomon very numerous. For the God of my father, said he, was my help. Eliezer means literally, “My God (is my) help.” It would seem that Zipporah, when she circumcised her infant son, omitted to name him; but Moses, before dismissing her, supplied the omission, calling him Eliezer, because God had been his help against the Pharaoh who had sought his life (Exo 2:15), and of whose death he had recently had intelligence (Exo 4:19). Thus the names of the two sons expressed respectively, the despondency natural to an exile, and the exultant gratitude of one who had just learned that by God’s goodness, the term of his banishment was over.

Exo 18:5

The wilderness. This term, which has the article, seems to be here used in that wide sense with which we are familiar from Exo 3:18; Exo 4:27; Exo 5:3; Exo 7:16; etc. It is not” the wilderness of Sin,” or “the wilderness of Sinai,” that is intended, but generally the tract between Egypt and Palestine. Jethro, having entered this tract from Midian, had no difficulty in discovering from the inhabitants that Moses was encamped at the mount of God,i.e; Sinai, and there sought and found him. There is no trace of any previous “engagement” to meet at a particular spot.

Exo 18:6

And he said. It is suspected that the true reading here is, “and they said,”i.e; some one said”to Moses, behold thy father-in-law” (or “brother-in-law”), “Jethro, is come unto thee.” So the LXX; and many moderns, as Kennicott, Geddes, Boothroyd, Canon Cook, and others. But the explanation, that Jethro, on arriving in the vicinity of Moses, sent a messenger to him, who spoke in his name (Rosenmuller, Patrick, Pool, Kalisch, Keil, etc.) is at any rate plausible, and removes all necessity of altering the text.

Exo 18:7

Moses went out to meet his father-in-law. Oriental ideas of politeness require such a movement in case of an honoured or even of a welcome visitor (see Gen 18:2; Gen 19:1; Gen 32:6; Gen 33:1; Luk 15:20; etc.). It was evidently the intention of Moses to receive Jethro with all possible marks of honour and respect. He not only went out to meet him, but did obeisance to him, as to a superior. They asked each other of their welfare. Rather “exchanged salutations;” addressed each other mutually with the customary phrase “Peace he unto you.” Came into the tenti.e; went together into the tent of Moses, which had been already glanced at in the word “encamped” (Exo 18:5).

Exo 18:8

Moses told his father-in-law. Jethro had heard in Midian the general outline of what had happened (Exo 18:1). Moses now gave him a full and complete narrative (misphar) of the transactions. Compare Gen 24:66; Jos 2:23; where the same verb is used. All the travail. Literally, “the weariness.” Compare Mal 1:13, where the same word is used. The Lord delivered them. The Septuagint adds “from the hand of Pharaoh and from the hand of the Egyptians.

Exo 18:10

Blessed be the Lord. Compare Gen 14:20; Gen 24:27. The heathen blessed God no loss than the Israelites; but Jethro’s blessing the Lord (i.e. Jehovah) is unusual As, however, Moses had attributed his own deliverance, and that of Israel, entirely to Jehovah (Gen 24:8), Jethro, accepting the facts to be as stated, blessed the Lord. Who hath delivered you. Kalisch takes the plural pronoun to refer to Moses and Aaron; but Aaron seems not to nave been present, since he afterwards “came” (Gen 24:12). It is better to regard Jethro as addressing all those who were in the tent with Moses. From them he goes on in the last clause to “the people.” And out of the hand of Pharaoh.i.e; especially out of the hand of Pharaoh, who had especially sought their destruction (Exo 14:6, Exo 14:8, etc.).

Exo 18:11

Now know I that the Lord is greater than all gods. It would seem that Jethro, like the generality of the heathen, believed in a plurality of gods, and had hitherto regarded the God of the Israelites as merely one among many equals. Now, he renounces this creed, and emphatically declares his belief that Jehovah is above all other gods, greater, higher, more powerful. Compare the confessions of Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 2:47; Dan 3:26, Dan 3:27) and Darius the Mede (Dan 6:26). For in the thing wherein they dealt wickedly he was above them. There is no “he was above them” in the original, nor is the clause a distinct sentence from the preceding one. It is merely a prolongation of that clause, without any new verb; and should be translated, “Even in the very matter that they (the Egyptians) dealt proudly against them “(the Israelites). The superiority of Jehovah to other gods was shown forth even in the very matter of the proud dealing of the Egyptians, which was brought to shame and triumphed over by the might of Jehovah. The allusion is especially to the passage of the Red Sea.

Exo 18:12

Jethro took a burnt offering. Or “brought a burnt offering;” as the same verb is rendered in Exo 25:2. It is not distinctly related that he offered the victim; but as no other offerer is mentioned, and as he was a priest (Exo 3:1; Exo 18:1), we may assume that he did so. Moses, Aaron, and the elders, partook of the sacrificial meal, regarding the whole rite as one legitimately performed by a duly qualified person, and so as one in which they could properly participate. Jethro, like Melchisedek (Gen 14:18), was recognised as a priest of the true God, though it would seem that the Midianites generally were, a generation later, idolaters (Num 25:18; Num 31:16). To eat bread before God. This expression designates the feast upon a sacrifice, which was the universal custom of ancient nations, whether Egyptians, Assyrians, Phenicians, Persians, Greeks, or Romans. Except in the case of the “whole burnt offering” (), parts only of the animals were burnt, the greater portion of the meat being consumed, with bread, at a meal, by the offerer and his friends and relatives

HOMILETICS

Exo 18:1-12

The blessedness of family reunions, when rightly ordered.

The family is God’s ordinance, and among the most sacred and blessed of his ordinances. All fatherhood is based upon his (Eph 3:15); and human family ties reproduce those of the celestial region. Upon earth partings must and will occur, the family bond being thereby not broken, but strained and impaired. Sometimes necessity breaks up the household. Wife and children may not go whither the husband and father is ordered to proceed, as in the naval and military services. Sometimes prudential considerations assert themselves, and the children must quit the domestic hearth to get their own living, or even the wife and husband must seek separate employments with the same object. Occasionally, the husband, having to go on a difficult or dangerous mission, where wife and children would be encumbrances, has to part from them temporarily, and to provide for their support and sustenance during his absence. This last was the case of Moses. In returning to Egypt, and coming forward as the champion of his nation, he confronted great dangers. The presence of wife and children would have hampered him, and, therefore, he resolved to return alone. Zipporah and his infant sons were left with her nearest male relative. But now the time had come for re-union. We may note as blissful elements in the re-union

I. THAT IT WAS COMPLETE, NO DEATHS HAVING OCCURRED SINCE THE PARTING. The bitterness of parting is especially in the uncertainty whether we shall ever see again in this life the individuals from whom we part. Death comes suddenly, and without warning; infants are especially subject to his attack; and when Moses, having recently parted from Jethro (Exo 4:8), sent back his wife and two young sons to be under his charge, he must have felt that it was exceedingly doubtful whether there would ever again be a meeting of the five near relations. But God brought it to pass. Jethro, with a promptitude which indicates a warm heart, no sooner heard of his kinsman’s safe arrival in the region of the “wilderness,” than he put himself to the trouble of a long journey, partly to congratulate him, but mainly to restore to him the wife and children, whom he had received as a sacred trust. He could not be content unless he himself delivered them safe into the hands of Moses, and thus “gave a good account of his stewardship.” And he was fortunate in being able to deliver them all safe and sound, and apparently in good health. No insidious disease had nipped the life of either child in the bud; no unlucky accident had removed either from the land of the living. Moses was able to greet, at one and the same moment, his wife, his two sons, and his brother-in-law. Doubtless, he felt that God had been specially good and gracious to him in restoring to him all his treasures.

II. THAT IT WAS CHARACTERISED BY COURTESY AND GOOD FEELING, AND FREE FROM ANY REPROACH ON EITHER SIDE. Jethro sent a message to announce his arrival, which was a courteous act, not strictly necessary. He relieved at once any anxiety which Moses might naturally feel, by letting him know that he had brought with him his wife and both his sons. That they had been able to make the long journey implied that they were well. Moses, on his part, responded by going out to meet his brother-in-law, thus requiting courtesy with courtesy; when he met him, he “did obeisance,” not standing upon his own present dignity; having done obeisance, he rose and “kissed him,” thus showing tender affection. Greetings by word of mouth followed, and then friendly conversation. The great leader had much to relate, and gave a full account, both of his perils and hair-breadth escapes, and of his divinely-wrought deliverances. Hereat Jethro “rejoiced.” No word of reproach or blame seems to have been uttered on either side. No discord marred the perfect harmony. Over the still tenderer meeting of the husband and father with his wife and children, the sacred historian, with a wise reticence, draws the veil. There are scenes which are at once too private and too sacred for description; and this was one of them.

III. THAT IT WAS CROWNED BY AN ACT OF RELIGIOUS THANKFULNESS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE GOODNESS OF GOD. The sense that God has been good to us should lead in all cases to an act of acknowledgment. Jethro was not content with mere words of joy and gratitudenot even with a solemn ascription of praise and blessing to Jehovah (Exo 18:10). He must shew his feelings by an act; so, in accordance with the ritual of the time, he “took a burnt-offering and sacrifices.” Christians should similarly signalise their own re-unions, and other important events in their lives, by joining together in the highest act of Christian worship-the Holy Communion. Joint participation in the “bread of life” and “cup of the Lord” brings home to us the sense of family oneness, as nothing else has the power to do. Prayers uttered side by side bind men’s hearts together in indissoluble union; participation in the same precious gifts gives the sense of unity in him who is the source of unity to all who are his. Aaron and the elders do well to join; their presence does not mar the family concord; it does but enlarge the family circle, and add new links to the chain that binds Heaven to earth. Some day the whole Church will be one family, of which all the members will worship God perpetually in the Father’s house. The nearest approach to happiness on earth is that anticipation of the final bliss which Holy Communion furnishes.

HOMILIES BY J. ORR

Exo 18:1-13

The visit of Jethro.

When Jethro “heard of all that God had done for Moses,”a hint that the news of the great events of the past few weeks had spread far and wide through the Sinaitic peninsula,and when he learned that the Israelites were encamped at the Mount of God, within reachable distance of the Midianitish settlement (cf. Exo 3:1), he at once resolved on paying his former friend, who had so suddenly blazed into an unexpected greatness, a personal visit. He came, accordingly, accompanied by Moses’ wife and two sons.

I. JETHRO‘S COMING (Exo 18:1-7). This visit of Jethro to Moses may be considered with reference to the following particulars. He came

1. Cordially recognising the honour which God had put on Moses (Exo 18:1). Moses had stood to Jethro for years in a relation of dependence. He had kept the priest’s flocks (Exo 3:1). Yet Jethro was not offended or made envious by this sudden greatness which had fallen to the lot of his old associate. The proverb was for once falsified that “a prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house” (Mat 13:5-7), for Jethro heartily acknowledged and rejoiced in all that the Lord had done for Moses and for Israel. It might have been otherwise. He might, like the Nazarenes in their slighting of Christ, have asked”Was not this my shepherd? Is not his wife called Zipporah? and his sons, Gershom and Eliezer, are they not with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?” But a far different spirit possessed him. In this, Jethro showed his freedom from a very common littleness of nature.

2. As an act of personal friendship. A large part of the joy of life springs from friendship. We see friendship at its best in the case of those who are thrown much into each other’s society, and who cherish for each other, under the conditions which most of all reveal and test character, a cordial respect and esteem. “Friendship,” says Cicero, “is nothing else than a perfect concurrence on all subjects Divine and human, accompanied by a feeling of kindness and attachment, and I am not sure that any better boon than this, with the exception of wisdom, could be conferred on man by the immortal Gods.” The bond of attachment thus created between good men makes association a pleasure, and, of necessity, causes pain at parting. While separation lasts, longings do not cease to be felt for a renewal of the prized intercourse, and when, after years of severance, an opening for such renewal of intercourse is presented, the opportunity is eagerly and joyfully embraced. Such friendship may be presumed, to have existed between Jethro and Moses. The two had lived in close intimacy for the space of forty years. According to the text, Moses was Jethro’s son-in-law; according to the more probable view, his brother-in-law. Jethro, with his stores of practical wisdom, his desert courtesy, and his evidently sincere piety, was a man whom Moses would early learn to respect, and with whom he would find it pleasant and profitable to associate; and the Midi-anitish priest, in turn, would never weary of the companionship of Moses, whose learning was so ripe, whose spirit was so excellent, whose early life had been spent under such different conditions from his own, and who had consequently so much to tell, which he (Jethro) would delight to hear. This intercourse had been suddenly broken up by Moses’ determination to return to Egypt (Exo 4:18); but an opportunity now presented itself of renewing it, and of this Jethro gladly availed himself.

3. Desirous of hearing more perfectly of the wonderful works of God. This, as is apparent from the sequel (Exo 18:8), was another motive of Jethro’s visit. He had come to be more fully and exactly instructed in the wonders which God had wrought “for Moses, and for Israel, his people” (Exo 18:1). Something of these “mighty acts” he had heard from current report, but what he had heard only whetted his appetite to hear more. It is the mark of the good man that he earnestly desires to grow in the knowledge of God and of his ways.

4. With the intention of restoring to Moses his wife and two sons (Exo 18:2-6). In taking this earliest opportunity of bringing Zipporah and her two sons to Moses, Jethro acted rightly. A wife’s proper place is with her husband. Sons, again, in view of the special responsibility resting on the father in connection with their proper up-bringing, should be as much as possible under direct paternal influence. The kingdom of God, doubtless, is to be more to us than father, or mother, or wife, or child; and should its interests imperatively demand separation, this must be submitted to (Mat 8:21, Mat 8:22): but relationships are not thereby dissolved, and the active discharge of the duties connected with them should be resumed at the earliest opportunity. For the sake of Moses himself, reunion was desirable. He was not a man who spurned the joys of domestic existence, but, like Peter, led about a wife (cf. Num 12:1; 1Co 9:5). It would contribute to his happiness to have his family beside him. Attention is anew called to the significant names of his sons (Exo 18:3, Exo 18:4). These noteworthy names would be perpetual reminders to Moses of the lessons of his stay in Midian. The one spoke of human weakness, the other of Divine aid. If the one embalmed the memory of his heart-loneliness in a strange land, the other told of how God had been his help even there. The one recalled trials, the other mercies. While in both was embodied a memorial of the heart-discipline, of the solitary communion with God, of the lonely days and nights of prayer, watching, and spiritual meditation, which had helped so largely during the forty years of that weary but precious exile, to make him the man he was.

II. JETHRO AND MOSES (Exo 18:7-13). The visit here described is a model of brotherly and religious intercourse. Christians would do well to study and imitate it. Observe

1. The courtesy of their greeting (Exo 18:7). The two men stood on a very different moral and intellectual level, but, in their exchanges of civility, Jethro is treated as the superior, and is received by Moses with every outward demonstration of respect. As on Jethro’s side there is no trace of mortification or jealousy at finding Moses, once the keeper of his sheep, in so exalted a position, so, on the side of Moses now Israel’s deliverer and leader, there is an utter absence of pride and hauteur, and a painstaking desire to put Jethroa plain wilderness priestas fully as possible at his ease. Everything is real. The greetings of the friends are unaffectedly cordialtheir behaviour towards each other studiously polite. Lessonthe duty of courtesy. Courtesy is an essential part of what has been defined as the outward grace of life. “By the grace of life is meant all that embellishes, softens, and brightens our present existence. It is that which is to human life what the shape and bloom and odour are to the plant. The flower is not simply useful. It is pleasing. There is grace about it . The grace of life has its simplest manifestation in our external behaviourin our manners. There is a joy to observed and observer in graceful motion and pleasant phrase Politeness is the science and art of the outward grace of life. It enunciates that strange code of salutations and farewellsthose buffers which soften approach, and with a last gentle touch make parting easy. Under the fiction of giving information as to the weather, one spirit expresses to its fellow respect and continued friendship. That spirit, in turn, under the form of confirming the afore said meteorological intelligence, reciprocates the kindly feeling. In such queer fashion is human kindliness flashed from heart to heart.” (Rev. David Burns.)

2. Their affectionate interest in each other‘s welfare. “They asked each other of their welfare” (Exo 18:7). Burdened as he was, almost beyond endurance, with “the cumbrance, and burden, and strife” (Deu 10:12) of the congregation, Moses could unbend to show his kindly interest in what was taking place in the quiet tents at Midian. This is a point of greatness. The greatest man is not he who occupies so serene an elevation of spirit, or whose mind is so engrossed with the duties of an exalted station, that he cannot stoop to share in, and, as occasion offers, to testify his sympathy with, the joys and sorrows of humbler people. No deficiency of this kind is seen in Mosesor in Jesus. It is well to cultivate the habit of putting ourselves in the place of others, however remote in station from ourselves, and of trying to feel a kindly interest in all that concerns them. This will prevent us from becoming self-absorbed and egoistic. Their lives, we should remember, are of as much importance to thegn as ours are to us, and the interest we show in them will be proportionately valued. A minister once wrote in his note-book: “Don’t pretend an interest in the members of your congregation, but try to feel it.” “Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love” (Rom 12:10).

3. The theme of their converse. “Moses told his father-in-law (brother-in-law) all that the Lord had done to Pharaoh, etc. (Exo 18:8). As under a former head we had a model meeting, so here we have a model conversation. Jethro and Moses conversed on the affairs of God’s kingdom. No greater subject could have occupied their thoughts. It is the subject of deepest and most central interest in historythe grandest in its essential nature, the widest in its relations, the most momentous in its issues. All other movements in time are side issues as compared with this one. In considering it man passes out of sight, and the only question is, What hath God wrought! (Num 23:23). We renew this conversation of Jethro and Moses every time we “speak of the glory of (God’s) kingdom and talk of (his) power” (Psa 145:11). Cf. the conversation of Christian with Prudence, Piety, and Charity in the House Beautiful:”Now the table was furnished with fat things, and wine that was well refined; and all their talk at the table was about the Lord of the Hill; as, namely, about what he had done, and wherefore he did what he did,” etc. (Pilgrim’s Progress.) Converse in heaven will turn on the same themes. Note

(1) It is profit able for Christians to exchange experiences as to the manner of the Lord’s dealings with them. Few but can tell something of “the travail that has come upon them by the way, and how the Lord delivered them.”

(2) It is a mark of grace to feel an interest in what relates to God’s work, and to the progress of his kingdom at home and abroad. This will show itself in a desire to read, hear, and converse on such subjects, and in the interest discovered, and zeal shown, in the general work of the Church, in special spiritual movements, in the success of missions, in spiritual operations in our own town and neighbourhood.

(3) Some are called to more active service in God’s work than others. There are those that fight the battle, and there are those who tarry at home and divide the spoil (Psa 68:12). And those who have been personally engaged in God’s workespecially those who have returned from the high places of the field (missionaries, etc.)have always much to tell which it is of interest to hear, and which will enkindle our hearts with new ardour in the cause of the Gospel. We should seek the society of such, and take the opportunity of hearing them when they are to be heard, that we may be instructed and profited. What a thrilling history, e.g; is that of Christian missions, but what an additional interest it gives to its narrations when we hear the story from the lips of the men who have actually fought the battles!

(4) Christian workers cannot converse together on the plans, methods, difficulties, conflicts, and successes of their work without being mutually helped and edified.

4. Jethro‘s joy in the relation (Exo 18:9-11). We are reminded of Barnabas, who, “when he came” to Antioch, “and had seen the grace of God, was glad For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith” (Act 11:23). The history which Moses gave to Jethro

(1) Filled Jethro with joy;

(2) Strengthened his faith in God”Now i know that the Lord is greater than all gods” (Exo 18:11);

(3) Incited him to praise”And Jethro said, Blessed be the Lord,” etc. (Exo 18:10). It will be observed how distinctly in Exo 18:11 Jethro seizes the point in the contest between Jehovah and Pharaoh, and draws the proper inference from it. God had chosen as a field for the display of his perfections a case in which all the pride and power of man were arrayed against him in a determined effort to resist, oppose, and make void his will, and he had demonstrated his supremacy by completely annihilating that opposition, and overwhelming the Egyptians, who embodied it, in the Red Sea. The army of Egypt was in some sense the country’s pride and boast, so that (though the translation in Exo 18:11 is apparently incorrect) it was literally true that “in the thing wherein they dealt proudly” Jehovah was “above them.” God exalts himself by discomfiting his enemies in what they deem their points of special strength. “Poor perfection which one sees an end of! yet such are all those things in this world which pass for perfections. David, in his time, had seen Goliath, the strongest, overcome; Asahel, the swiftest, overtaken; Ahithophel, the wisest, befooled; Absalom, the fairest, deformed” (M. Henry on Psa 119:96). “It is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent” (1Co 1:19).

5. The sacrificial feast (Exo 18:16). We have here

(1) Friendship cemented by an act of worship;

(2) Religious converse culminating in devotion;

(3) A feast sanctified by the enjoyment of the Divine presence”before God;”

(4) A foreshadowing of the union of Jews and Gentiles in the fellowship of the church;

(5) An instance of catholicity in worship. Moses did not scruple to join in sacrifice or to sit down at the same festival board with the Midianitish Jethro. The lesson is thus enunciated by Peter: “Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him” (Act 10:34, Act 10:35).J.O.

HOMILIES BY H. T. ROBJOHNS

Exo 18:1-5

The claims of home.

“And Jethro, Moses’ kinsnian (not father-in-law) came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God” (Exo 18:5).

I. CIRCUMSTANCES MAY JUSTIFY THE TEMPORARY REMISSION OF HOME RESPONSIBILITIES UPON OTHERS (Exo 18:2). For exampleand the history of Moses will illustrate each pointwe may be justified by

1. The nature of external duty. We may be providentially called away from home; or the discharge of public responsibilities nay for the time be incompatible with our usual attention to the interests of the domestic circle, e.g; Moses going to Egypt (Exo 4:1-31. compare with Exo 18:2).

2. The probability of danger.

3. Defective sympathy. It is clear that Zipporah was not in sympathy with the religious object of Moses, nor yet with his specific mission, indeed, however, to be on our guard against making this a reason for withdrawal permanently from home responsibility. Want of perfect compatibility in domestic life makes marriage to be an occasion for self-discipline, and is thus converted into a means of grace. (Eph 5:25-27.)

II. CIRCUMSTANCES SCARCELY EVER JUSTIFY THE PERMANENT REMISSION. There are a few cases, perhaps, in which this responsibility may be devolved: e.g; the case of the missionary who must, fur various reasons, send home from his station his children to be educated; and not seldom the wife with them. Other cases there are, no doubt. But generally the father may not devolve this obligation. It is one

1. Of necessity. No one else can meet the responsibility as the natural head of the familythis is true in all caseseven in that of the missionary named abovefor the children suffer.

2. Of duty:

(1) To ourselves. We owe it to our own convictions of truth, as to thought, life, and work, to perpetuate them.

(2) To dependents. Whether wife, children, or servants. [On this point some valuable suggestions in Dr. Taylor’s “Moses the Lawgiver,” pp. 173-176.]

(3) To our generation; and

(4) to the Great Father in heaven.

III. IF TEMPTED TO THIS REMISSION GOD WILL BRING HOME TO US OUR DUTY. Probably by some providence, may be painful or otherwise. At such a time, on such an occasion (Moses face to face with Sinai and the giving of the law) in such a place, Jethro re-introduced to Moses wife and children. Even such duties as his could not exempt him from domestic responsibility.R.

HOMILIES BY J. URQUHART

Exo 18:1-12

The Consolations of those who suffer loss for the Kingdom of God.

I. THE REUNION OF THE SEPARATED. To Moses, who had to leave behind him wife and children because God’s errand would brook no delay, these are now restored.

1. There is no loss to those who suffer for the kingdom of God’s sake.

2. God fills the cup of his servants with consolations. God’s care had been exercised not only over him in Egypt, but also over wife and children in Midian.

II. THE THEME OF THOSE WHO FEAR GOD. God’s marvellous works (Exo 18:8, Exo 18:9). It was not the subject of public discourse or formal greeting, but of private converse within “the tent.” This is a mark of the true servant of God; to him God and his goodness are the most real and wondrous of all things.

III. THE RESULT OF THE TESTIMONY.

1. Jethro’s confession of Jehovah.

2. His sacrifice to him. The stranger makes a feast before Israel’s God for the princes of Israel. Those whom we bring to God make a feast, in their faith and love, for our soul before the Lord.U.

HOMILIES BY H. T. ROBJOHNS

Exo 18:6-12

Friendship in its loftiest form.

“They asked each other of their welfare.” Exo 18:7. The visit of Jethro comes between the agony of Rephidim and the solemnities of “Sinai,” like the insertion of a sweet pastoral poem between two tragedies. Something may be learnt from it as to what should characterise friendship in its highest form, that is, between two devout souls, as consecrated and elevated by religion.

I. CONSTANCY. Moses and Jethro met as in the earlier years; no assumption with Moses, no sycophancy with Jethro.

II. COURTESY. Exo 18:7. The nearer our relations to each other, the more indispensable this grace.

III. MUTUAL SOLICITUDE. Exo 18:7.

IV. INTERCHANGE OF EXPERIENCE. Exo 18:8-11. Happy time, when the deeper experiences (religious) can be exchanged to mutual advantage.

V. COMMUNION IN WORSHIP. Exo 18:12. It is clear that Jethro and Moses were one as to Monotheism, in their common possession of the great Divine traditions of the race. Jethro spiritually was in the descent of Abel, Enoch, Noah, and Melchisedek. For him but one God, the God of heaven and earth, and therefore the God of Israel. Contrast with Amalek! Hence the sacrifice and the sacrificial feast.

VI. FIDELITY IN GIVING COUNCIL. Exo 18:14, Exo 18:17-23. Great courage required.

VII. HUMILITY IN RECEIVING IT. This the moral attitude of Moses.

VIII. AN ULTIMATE REFERENCE IN ALL INTERCOURSE TO THE DIVINE FRIEND. Exo 18:23. “And God commanded thee so.”

IX. SYMPATHY AS TO GREAT OBJECT. Jethro knew the destiny of Israel, and was concerned for the realisation.

X. PEACEFUL PARTING AT LIFE‘S DIVERGING PATHS. Exo 18:27. Apply this to moral and intellectual cross-roads; and to that which is so difficultagreeing to differand that with mutual respect and affection. All in view and hope of the Perfect and immortal amity that is beyond the sky.R.

HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG

Exo 18:1-12

Jethro’s visit-Moses in his domestic relations.

In this visit of Jethro three persons are brought prominently before usMoses, Jethro, his father-in-law, and Zipperah, his wife. Let us consider the details of the visit in their bearing on all these three Persons.

I. ON MOSES. Moses is usually seen either in the presence of God or in the presence of the people; but here we get a peep at his private and domestic life, and nothing is revealed but what adds dignity and beauty to his character. A servant of God must have the same character, in all circumstances. It is not every public man that could afford to have his private life laid open; and only too often an earnest plea for pity has to be based on the remembrance of how frail and infirm a thing human nature is. But in the instance of Moses neither veil nor plea are needed. This meeting with Jethro has to take place, and there was no reason to evade it; it had also to be mentioned, and there was no reason to conceal it. Moses had done nothing in his past residence in Midian to make him ashamed or afraid of returning to it. He had been a faithful shepherd to Jethro; a loving husband to Zipporah; an equally loving father to Gershom and Eliezer. It was Zipporah who had forsaken him, and not he Zipporah. He returned as a prophet into what, in a certain sense, was his own country, and, if not exactly honoured neither could he be dishonoured. Again we behold Moses showing, in the most practical way, his respect for the family relation and the ties of kinship generally. The importance of the family relation we have seen already brought out in the institution of the Passover and the provision of the manna. Here Moses puts emphasis on the relation by his own example. He showed himself one who regarded domestic obligations as of the first importance Zipporah has failed him once, and that in circumstances of great perplexity; but he does not make this a plea for getting rid of her. He knows his duties towards her, and by undertaking them in a manful and conscientious way, he may bring her to a full recognition of her duty towards him. A truly great nation, having a strong and beneficial society, is only possible by an aggregation of households where household claims are respected by all. And evidently he who must lead the way in acknowledging the claim is he who stands at the head. So Moses did here. Lastly, Moses makes clear by his reception of Jethro and Zipporah that he was the same kind of man as in the old shepherd days. Altered circumstances with all their temptations had not made alterations for the worse in character. How many there are who while lifted in one way are lowered in another! They become bigger men; but, alas! not better. Everything that reminds them of former and humbler scenes is as wormwood to the taste. To all such Moses, by his conduct here, teaches a most powerful lesson. His strength among the thousands of Israel was not that of a human ruler who was to be girt about with all the paraphernalia of government, in order to overawe the populace. Moses can step out of his tent, as if he were one of the humblest of Israel, not only in character, but also in position. He can go out and welcome his kindred, show to Jethro the outward signs of filial respect, talk to them all in the old familiar way, and do it without the slightest fear that his authority as leader is in any way affected. And this conduct would be all the more beautiful if, as we may easily imagine, Zipporah came back to him rather lifted up because of her husband’s new position, and disposed with feminine vanity to make the most of it for her own satisfaction.

II. ON JETHRO. This chapter, full as it is of Jethro, is another forcible illustration as to how much revelation of character the Scripture record can put into a small space. Jethro, hitherto known only as the near connection of Moses, stands before us here as a noble, pious, and truly affectionate and considerate man. Much, indeed, he has had to try and perplex him. Moses, who had made his first acquaintance with him under prepossessing circumstances, who had become his brother-in-law and faithful shepherd, all at once comes to him, without any previous notice, and asks his permission to return to Egypt. Moses, we know, had been sternly shut up to this course by Jehovah, and to Jethro it must have seemed entirely inexplicable. He had to part with his near relations; and a great void must thus have been left in his heart. Then presently Zipporah returns, with her sons, in a very sore and rebellious frame of mind. All Jethro can yet see is that this departure of Moses has brought nothing but domestic discord. And yet it is impossible for him to say that Moses has not done right. He can only wait for the unfoldings of time, listening meanwhile with what patience he can muster to reproaches from neighbours and daughter and perhaps grandsons, with respect to the unaccountable vagaries of Moses. And at last relief comes, and not only relief, but abundant justification. The information is such as to make Moses stand out in the esteem of his father-in-law more highly than ever. All suspense as to Zipporah’s duty is removed; she must rejoin her husband. It was Moses and not Jethro who was responsible for her; and, besides, Moses and Zipporah had a joint responsibility for their offspring. Jethro is commonly set before us, in contrast to Amalek, as the illustration of heathenism, looking favourably and amicably upon Israel. But even more let us look upon him as the great illustration of those noble souls who strive to unite what sin divides. Jesus in his teaching had occasion to lay emphasis on the dividing effect of discipleship to himself. He intimated that the acceptance of himself would only too often rupture, or at least strain, natural ties. But this of course was not presented as a thing to cause satisfaction, it was only another sad evidence of how sin turns to evil what God meant for good. And yet here we see the other side, reunion as well as separation. The liberation of Israel, glorious in its total result, and lifting Moses to high eminence in respect of personal character, has vet involved at the same time the wreck of his domestic peace. Whatever the comforts of wife and children in this world may be, he has lost them. But now these comforts are coming again, and coming in the most satisfactory of all ways, by the voluntary entrance of his old friend Jethro on the scene. Blessed are the peacemakers; and surely of all peacemaking, that is not the least fruitful of good which reunites and reconstitutes a separated family. Moses acting with a single eye to what is right has to part from his wife, and let her go back to her own family. Jethro acting in the same spirit, brings the wife to her husband again. Often we may have to become agents and helpers in division; but if we only go on, union and harmony will return. What Zipporah’s future was we know not; but Jethro had done his utmost to put matters right.

III. ON ZIPPORAH Her name occurs but little, and her appearance hitherto has not been such as to make us think she would prove a helpful companion to Moses (Exo 4:25, Exo 4:26). Still we must not judge too hastily from silence. It is not for Zipporah’s sake she happens to be mentioned here. It is sufficient to learn, by the way, that an opportunity for repentance and for devotion to him who had such a burden to bear, was now given her.Y.

HOMILIES BY G. A. GOODHART

Exo 18:5

Ye are come unto Mount Zion.

The way in which we view facts depends a great deal on the eyes through which we look at them. Here, as regards Moses and the Israelites in the wilderness, we may look on them through the eyes of Jethro, or of Zipporah, or of the children; for a change let us use the children’s eyes, and enquire how they transmit the facts to us. Sketch previous history of the children, their stay in Midian, and journey to the camp. Notice:

I. WHAT THE CHILDREN SAW AND HEARD. As they came they would notice, first, the mountains, then the camp in the plain, then, perhaps, people moving about and cloudy pillar suspended over all. At last, one man comes to meet them; their father is the leader of the host.

1. A new flock. In the old days Gershom must often have looked out for his coming home; then (cf. Exo 3:1) he had sheep to care for, now his flock is of another kind (Psa 77:20). No longer Jethro’s shepherd, but the shepherd of Jehovah. Not really changed his professionstill the same kind of workonly, having served his apprenticeship with Jethro, he has been called to a higher grade of service.

2. A memorable spot. How had he come to change his service? The very place would remind them of the answer. There is the rough hill-sidethere, perhaps, the very bush where the angel appeared. The whole scene a fulfilment of God’s promise and a pledge of his faithfulness (cf. Exo 3:12).

3. New-found relatives. A new uncle and aunt, never seen beforecould tell them about the old life in Egypt, their father’s birth and escapethe cruel slavery of their kindredall the past would seem more real now that they were confronted by these witnesses to its reality. Comparing the past with the present, a suggestive commentary on Eliezer’s name; Moses had good reason for saying, “my God is a help.”

II. PARALLEL WITH OURSELVES. (Cf. Heb 12:22-24.) We, too, like the sons of Moses, have been brought into new relations with our Father. As we approach him, what may we see and hear?

1. We find him in a holy place. Not a camp of wanderers in the wilderness, but a holy city, one which hath foundations, the settled home of its redeemed inhabitants. Pleasant for Gershom and his brother to find their father, but they still had to look on to the day when they should find their home; for us homo is our Father’s house in the holy city upon the holy mountain.

2. He introduces us to holy fellowships. As Moses’ children found new relatives, so do we: “an innumerable company, the general assembly of the angels, and the Church of the first-born, and the spirits of the justified.” We may picture the interest with which Gershom and Eliezer must have viewed the camp and listened to the story of deliverance; but the company to which they had come was very different to that to which we have come; the deliverance of which they heard was but a first step to freedom. They, no doubt, learnt to sing, perhaps from Miriam, the song of Moses; from those with whom we have communion we may learn the song of the Lamb.

Conclusion. After all, the children, amid all the new sights, would rejoice most at meeting their fatherat seeing him, and remaining with him. As Jethro led them towards the mount, their father was, doubtless, the subject of their talk; all else derived its interest only from its relation to him. Just so, too, with us. Heaven is our Father’s house; it is our Father’s presence that makes it home to us. As our Lord leads us thitherward, it is still of the Father whom he speaks. Those whom the Father has given into his care he will bring to their’ journey’s end in safety.G.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Exo 18:1. When Jethro the priest, &c. Houbigant and others translate this, When Jethro the prince of Midian, the kinsman or relation of Moses, heard, &c. See note on ch. Exo 2:18 and Gen 14:17. Like Melchisedec, he was, most probably, both prince and priest; see Exo 18:12. Father-in-law, throughout the chapter, should be read kinsman.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

FIFTH SECTION

The journey through the wilderness to Sinai. Want of water. Marah. Elim. The Wilderness of Sin. Quails. Manna. Rephidim (Massah and Meribah). The Amalekites. Jethro and his advice, a human prelude of the divine legislation

Exo 15:22 to Exo 18:27

The stations as far as Sinai

1. Marah

Exo 15:22-26

22So [And] Moses brought Israel from the Red Sea, and they went out into the wilderness of Shur; and they went three days in the wilderness, and found no water. 23And when they came to Marah, they could not drink of the [drink the] waters of Marah, for they were bitter; therefore the name of it was called Marah. 24And the people murmured against Moses, saying, What shall we drink? 25And he cried unto Jehovah, and Jehovah showed him a tree, which, when he had cast [and he cast it] into the waters, the [and the] waters were made sweet: there he 26made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved [tried] them, And said, If thou wilt diligently [indeed] hearken to the voice of Jehovah thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these [the] diseases upon thee, which I have brought [put] upon the Egyptians: for I am Jehovah that healeth thee.

2. Elim. Exo 15:27

27And they came to Elim, where were twelve wells [fountains] of water, and threescore and ten palm trees: and they encamped there by the waters.

3. The Wilderness of Sin. (The Manna and the Quails.)

Exo 16:1-36

1And 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, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt. 2And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness. 3And the children of Israel said unto them, Would to God [Would that] we had died by the hand of Jehovah in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh-pots, and [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 4hunger. Then said Jehovah [And Jehovah said] unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate [a daily portion] every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no [not]. 5And it shall come to pass that on the sixth day they shall prepare that which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily. 6And Moses and Aaron said unto all the children of Israel, At even, then shall ye know that Jehovah hath brought you out from the land of Egypt. 7And in the morning, then ye shall see the glory of Jehovah; [since] he heareth your murmurings against Jehovah: and what are we, that ye murmur against us? 8And Moses said, This shall be, when [And Moses said, Since] Jehovah shall give you in the evening flesh to eat, and in the morning bread to the full; for that [since] Jehovah heareth your murmurings which ye murmur against him, and [against him,] what are we? your murmurings are not against us, but against Jehovah. 9And Moses spake [said] unto Aaron, Say unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, Come near before Jehovah: for he hath heard your murmurings. 10And it came to pass, as Aaron spake unto the whole congregation of the children of Israel, that they looked toward the wilderness, and, behold, the 11glory of Jehovah appeared in the cloud. And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, 12I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel: speak unto them, saying, At even ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning ye shall be filled with bread; and ye shall know that I am Jehovah your God. 13And it came to pass that at even [at even that] the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host [camp]. 14And when the dew that lay [the layer of dew] was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay [the wilderness] a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground. 15And when the children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is manna [What is this?],7 for they wist [knew] not what it was. And Moses said unto them, This is the 16bread which Jehovah hath given you to eat [for food]. This is the thing which Jehovah hath commanded, Gather of it every man according to his eating, an omer for every man [a head], according to the number of your persons; take ye every man for them which [that] are in his tents [tent]. 17And the children of Israel did so, and gathered, some more, some less. 18And when they did mete [And they measured] it with an [the] omer, he [and he] that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; they gathered every man according to his eating. 19And Moses said [said unto them], Let no man leave of 20it till the morning. Notwithstanding [But] they hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them [and some] left of it until the morning, and it bred worms,8 and stank: and Moses was wroth with them. 21And they gathered it every morning, every man according to his eating: and when the sun waxed hot, it melted. 22And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man [each man]: and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses. 23And he said unto them, This is that which Jehovah hath spoken, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath [is a day of rest, a holy sabbath] unto Jehovah: bake that which ye will bake to-day [bake], and seethe [boil] that [that which] ye will seethe [boil]; and that which [all that] remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning. 24And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein. 25And Moses said, Eat that to-day; for to-day is a sabbath unto Jehovah: to-day ye shall [will] not find it in the field. 26Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the [onthe seventh day is a] sabbath, in [on] it there shall be none. 27And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to [day to] gather, 28and they found none. And Jehovah said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? 29See, for that Jehovah hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day. 30So the people rested on the seventh day. 31And the house of Israel called the name thereof Manna: and it was like coriander seed, white; and the taste of it was like wafers made [like cake] with honey. 32And Moses said, This is the thing which Jehovah commandeth, Fill an omer of it [An omer full of it] to be kept for [throughout] 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. 33And Moses said unto Aaron, Take a pot [basket], and put an omer full of manna therein, and lay 34it up before Jehovah, to be kept for [throughout] your generations. As Jehovah commanded Moses, so Aaron laid it up before the Testimony, to be kept. 35And the children of Israel did eat manna [the manna] forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat manna [the manna], until they came unto the borders of the land of Canaan. 36Now an omer is the tenth part of an ephah.

4. Rephidim. The place called Massah and Meribah

Exo 17:1-7

Exo 17:1 And all the congregation of the children of Israel journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, after their journeys [journey by journey], according to the commandment of Jehovah, and pitched in Rephidim: and there was no water for the 2people to drink. Wherefore [And] the people did chide with Moses, and said, Give us water, that we may drink. And Moses said unto them, Why chide ye with me? wherefore do ye tempt Jehovah? 3And the people thirsted there for water; and the people murmured against Moses, and said, Wherefore is this that thou hast [Wherefore hast thou] brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst? 4And Moses cried unto Jehovah, saying, What shall I do unto this people? they be almost ready to [a little more, and they will] 5stone me. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Go on [Pass on] before the people, and take with thee of the elders of the people; and thy rod wherewith thou smotest the river, take in thine [thy] hand, and go. 6Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that [and] the people may [shall] drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel. 7And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the chiding of the children of Israel, and because they tempted Jehovah, saying, Is Jehovah among us, or not?

5. Amalek. The dark side of heathenism

Exo 17:8-16

8Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim. 9And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek: to-morrow I will 10stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine [my] hand. So [And] Joshua did as Moses had said to him, and fought with Amalek: and Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. 11And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed: and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. 12But Moses hands were heavy: and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun. 13And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge 14of the sword. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a [the] book, and rehearse [lit. put] it in the ears of Joshua: for [that] I will utterly put 15[blot] out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. And Moses built an 16altar, and called the name of it Jehovah-nissi: For [And] he said, Because Jehovah hath sworn that [For a hand is upon the throne of Jah;9] Jehovah will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.

6. Rephidim and Jethro. The bright side of heathenism

Exo 18:1-27

1When [Now] Jethro, the priest of Midian, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, and [how] that Jehovah had brought Israel out 2of Egypt; Then [And] Jethro, Moses father-in-law, took Zipporah, Moses wife, after he had sent her back [after she had been sent away], 3And her two sons; of which [whom] the name of the one was Gershom; for he said, I have been an alien 4[a sojourner] in a strange land: And the name of the other was Eliezer; for the God of my father, said he, was mine [my] help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh: 5And Jethro, Moses father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped [was encamped] at the mount of God: 6And he said unto Moses, I thy father-in-law Jethro am come unto thee, and thy wife, and her two sons with her. 7And Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, and did obeisance, and kissed him; and they asked each other of their welfare; and they came into the tent. 8And Moses told his father-in-law all that Jehovah had done unto Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israels sake, and [sake] all the travail [trouble] that had come upon them by the way, and how Jehovah delivered them. 9And Jethro rejoiced for [over] all the goodness [good] which Jehovah had done to Israel whom he had delivered [in that he had delivered them] out of the hand of the Egyptians. 10And Jethro said, Blessed be Jehovah, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh, who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. 11Now I know that Jehovah is greater than all [all the] gods: for [yea], in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above [dealt proudly against] them. 12And Jethro, Moses father-in-law, took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God: and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses father-in-law before God. 13And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the people: and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening. 14And when Moses father-in-law saw all that he did to the people, he said, What is this thing that thou doest to the people? Why sittest thou thyself alone, and all the people stand by thee from morning unto even? 15And Moses said unto his father-in-law, Because the people come unto me to inquire of God: 16When they have a matter, they come unto me; and I judge between one and another, and I do make 17[I make] them know the statutes of God, and his laws. And Moses father-in-law said unto him, The thing that thou doest is not good. 18Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that is with thee: for this [the] thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself [able to do it] alone. 19Hearken now unto my voice. I will give thee counsel, and God shall be [God be] with thee: Be thou for the people to God-ward [before God], that thou mayest bring [and bring thou] the causes [matters] unto God: 20And thou shalt teach [And teach] them ordinances and laws [the statutes and the laws], and shalt shew [and shew] them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do. 21Moreover [But] thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness [unjust gain]; and place such over them, to be [as] rulers of thousands, and [thousands,] rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens: 22And let them judge the people at all seasons [times]: and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they [they themselves] shall judge: so shall it be [so make it] easier for thyself, and they shall [let them] bear the burden with thee. 23If thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt [wilt] be able to endure, and all this 24people shall also [people also will] go to their place in peace. So [And] Moses hearkened to the voice of his father in-law, and did all that he had said. 25And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. 26And they judged the people at all seasons [times]: the hard causes [matters] they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves. 27And Moses let his father-in-law depart; and he went his way into his own land.

TEXTUAL AND GRAMMATICAL

[Exo 16:15 . Gesenius and Knobel derive from , to apportion; Frst (Concordance) from the Sanscrit mani. But most scholars, following the evident implication of the narrative itself, regard as the Aramaic equivalent of . Even Frst so renders it in his Illustrirte Pracht-Bibel. Comp. Michaelis, Supplementa ad Lexica Hebraica.Tr.].

[Exo 16:20. And it bred worms: . The Heb. word seems to be the Fut. of defectively written, and therefore to mean: rose up into (or with) worms. Kalisch says, that the form is used instead of to show that it comes from (?) in the sense of putrefy. So Maurer and Ewald (Gr., 281, d). But it is doubtful whether (assumed as the root from which comes worm) really means putrefy at all. Frst defines it by crawl. Moreover, it would be inverting the natural order of things to say, that the manna became putrid with worms; the worms are the consequence, not the cause, of the putridness. Rosenmller, Frst, Arnheim and others render by swarm, abound, but probably as a free rendering for rose up. De Wette: da wuchsen Wrmer. The A. V. rendering may stand as a substantially correct reproduction of the sense.Tr.].

[Exo 17:16. We have given the most literal rendering of this difficult passage. But possibly , instead of meaning for (or because), may (as often in Greek) be the mere mark of a quotation, to be omitted in the translation. The meaning of the expression itself is very doubtful. The A. V., following some ancient authorities, takes it as an oath; but for this there is little ground. Keil interprets: The hand raised to the throne of Jehovah in heaven; Jehovahs war against Amalek, i.e. the hands of the Israelites, like those of Moses, must be raised heavenward towards Jehovahs throne, while they wage war against Amalek. Others interpret: Because a hand (viz. the hand of the Amalekites) is against the throne of Jah, therefore Jehovah will forever have war with Amalek. This interpretation has the advantage over Keils of giving a more natural rendering to , which indeed in a few cases does mean up to, but only when it is (as it is not here) connected with a verb which requires the preposition to be so rendered. Others (perhaps the majority of modern exegetes) would read (banner), instead of (throne), and interpret: The hand upon Jehovahs banner; Jehovah has war, etc. This conjecture is less objectionable than many attempted improvements of the text, inasmuch as the name of the altar, Jehovah-nissi (Jehovah, my banner), seems to require an explanation, and would receive it if the reading were , instead of Tr.].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

General Survey of the Section. Israels journey from the shore of the Red Sea to Mt. Sinai. The host enters the wilderness of Shur (the same as the wilderness of Etham), and its first camping-place is by the bitter waters of Marah. The second is Elim. Next comes the encampment on the Red Sea recorded in Numbers 33. Still later the entrance into the wilderness of Sin, and the encampment in it. With this is connected the sending of the manna and of the quails. Then follows the stay in Rephidim with three leading events: the water from the rock, the victory over Amalek, and Jethros advice concerning an orderly judicial system. According to Numbers 33 it must be assumed that the people encamped on the Red Sea just as they touched the wilderness of Sin; for it was not till after this that they entered the wilderness (Exo 16:11), as they also at the first entered the wilderderness of Shur, on the borders of which they found themselves at the very outset. Between the encampment on the Red Sea and that in Rephidim we find in the Book of Numbers Dophkah and Alush; and it is said that they journeyed from the wilderness of Sin to Dophkah. Knobel observes that these two stations, not mentioned in Exodus, are omitted because nothing of historical importance is connected with them. Also about this journey from Ayun Musa to Sinai there has been an immense deal of discussion, as well as about the journey from Raemses to the Red Sea. Vid. Robinson I., p. 90, Brm, Israels Wanderung von Gosen bis zum Sinai (Elberfeld, 1859); Strauss, Sinai und Golgotha, p. 124; von Raumer, Palstina, p. 480; Tischendorf, Aus dem heiligen Lande, p. 23; Kurtz, History of the Old Covenant III., p. 15 sqq.; Bunsen V., 2, p. 155; and the commentaries.

There is general agreement as to the locality of the first stations. It is assumed that Israel, after the passage of the sea, encamped at Ayun Musa (the Wells of Moses), opposite the high mountain Atakah, on the other side of the Red Sea. The next camping-place, Marah (Bitterness), is found about sixteen and a half hours, or a three days journey beyond, by the well Howara or Hawara, of which Robinson says: The basin is six or eight feet in diameter, and the water about two feet deep. Its taste is unpleasant, saltish, and somewhat bitter. The Arabs consider it as the worst water in all these regions (Pal. II., p. 96). Cf. Seetzen III., p. 117, and Keil II., p. 58, who quotes divergent opinions of Ewald and Lepsius.The next camping-place, Elim, is two and a half hours further south, in what is now the Wady Ghurundel, with a beautiful vegetation consisting in palms, tamarisks, acacias, and tall grass,a prominent stopping-place on the way from Suez to Sinai. The way from Howara to this place is short, but the camping-places of an army in march, like that of the Israelites, are always determined by the supply of water (Keil). The fourth stopping-place, called in Num 33:10 the one on the Red Sea, is found at the mouth of Wady Taiyibeh (Robinson I., p. 105), eight hours beyond Wady Ghurundel. From this point the route becomes less easy to fix. In Num 33:11 we read: They removed from the Red Sea, and encamped in the wilderness of Sin.10 Here in Exodus it is said that the wilderness lies between Elim and Sinai. This addition seems designed not only to give the general direction (since that would be quite superfluous), but to designate the middle point between Elim and Sinai. The chief question here is, whether the wilderness of Sin as traversed by the Israelites, is to be located further south on a sea coast, where the plain is for the most part a good hour wide, as is assumed by many (not all, as Brm says), or whether the high table land el Debbe, or Debbet en Nasb, with its red sand and sand-stones, is to be taken for the Wilderness of Sin (Knobel). Accordingly, there are two principal routes, of which the first again branches into two. By the coast route one can go along the coast as far as Tur (Ewald), and from that in a northeast direction come to Sinai; or more directly (i.e., at first in an inland direction from the fountain Murkha) enter through the wadies Shellal and Badireh (Butera) into the wadies Mukatteb and Feiran, and reach Mt. Horeb (de la Borde, von Raumer, and others).11 The other route, the mountain or highland route (Burckhardt and others) turns from Taiyibeh southeast through Wady Shubeikah over a high table-land, with the mountain Sarbut el Jemel, then through Wady Humr upon the wide sandy plain el Debbe, or Debbet en Nasb (Keil), and on through several wadies directly to Horeb. For and against each of these routes much may be said. Cf. Knobel, p. 162 sqq.; Keil II. p. 61. According to the latter view, advocated by Knobel and Keil, the camping-place in the wilderness of Sin is to be sought in Wady Nasb, where among date-palms a well of ample and excellent water is to be found. The second seacoast route was taken by Strauss and Krafft (Sinai und Golgotha, p. 127). Also the last time by Tischendorf (Aus dim heiligen Lande, p. 35). The same way is preferred by Brm in his work Israels Wanderung, etc. Likewise Robinson regards this as the course taken by the Israelites, though he himself took the one on the table-land. To decide is not easy, and is of little importance for our purpose. But the following observations may serve as guides: (1) If, as is most probable, the names Sin and Sinai are connected etymologically, this is an argument for the table-land route, especially as it also seems to lie more nearly midway between Elim and Sinai; (2) the water seems here to be, though less abundant, yet better, than in most of the salty fountains on the seacoast, whose turbidness also is easily to be explained by its situation on the coast (vid. Robinson, p. 110); (3) on the table-land, in the depressions of which vegetation was everywhere found, there was certainly better provision for the cattle than on the seacoast, where they were often entirely separated from pasture land by mountain barriers; (4) if the encampment in the wilderness of Sin was also an encampment on the Red Sea, the preceding encampment could not, without causing confusion, be designated by the term on the Red Sea. So much for the mountain route. Ritter has argued against the view that the journey was made on the table-land through Wady Nasb, in the Evangelischer Kalender. Vid. Kurtz III., p. 61. For the rest, each way had its peculiar attractions as well as its peculiar difficulties. The mountain route allowed the host to spread itself, as there was much occasion for doing; it presented grand views, and prepared the people for a long time beforehand for its destination, Sinai. It is distinguished by the singular and mysterious monuments of Surabit el-Khadim (Robinson I., p. 113; Niebuhr, p. 235). By the way which runs half on the seacoast, half through the mountains, we pass through the remarkable valley of inscriptions, Mukatteb, and through the grand valley Feiran, rich in tamarisks, in whose vicinity lies the lofty Serbal, regarded by Lepsius as the mountain on which the law was given. On the inscriptions on the rocks and cliffs in the valley Mukatteb, see Tischendorf, Aus dem h. Lande, p. 39 sqq.; Kurtz III., p. 64. By these they are ascribed for the most part to Nabatan emigrants and to pilgrims going to attend heathen festivals. On the rock of inscriptions see also Ritters reference to Wellsted and von Schubert, Vol. XIV., p 459. On the former city Faran in Feiran, see Tischendorf, p. 46. The camping-place in the wilderness of Sin is, as follows from the above, variously fixed; according to some it is the plain on the sea south of Taiyibeh, which, however, must then be called the wilderness of Sin up to the mountain range, if the camping-place is to be distinguished from the one on the Red Sea; according to Bunsen and others, the camping-place was in the place called el Munkhah. According to others, it is the large table-land el Debbe or Debbet en Nasb. The camping-places in the wilderness of Sin being indeterminate, so are also the two following ones at Dophkah and Alush (Num 33:12). Conjectures respecting the two stations beyond the wilderness of Sin are made by Knobel, p. 174, and Bunsen, p. 156. The last station before the host arrives at Sinai is Rephidim. This must have been at he foot of Horeb, for Jehovah stood on the rock on Horeb, when He gave water to the people encamped in Rephidim (Exo 17:6), and at the same place Moses was visited by Jethro, who came to him at the mount of God (Knobel). This is a very important point fixed, inasmuch as it seems to result from it, that Serbal is to be looked for north of, or behind, Rephidim and Horeb, but the Mt. Sinai of the Horeb range in the south.12 The great plain at the foot of Horeb, where the camp of the Israelites is sought, is called the plain er–Raha (Knobel derives , breadth, surface, plain, from , to be spread).13 For a refutation of Lepsius. who finds Rephidim in Wady Feiran, and Sinai in Serbal, see Knobel, p. 174. On Serbal itself (Palm grove of Baal) vid. Kurtz III., p. 67. Between Serbal and the Horeb group lies Wady es-Sheikh. From the mouth of this wady towards Horeb the plain of Rephidim is thought to begin. Other assumptions: The defile with Moses seat, Mokad Seidna Musa, or the plain of Suweiri. Perhaps not very different from the last mentioned (vid. Keil II., p. 79; Strauss, p. 131). The most improbable hypothesis identifies Rephidim with Wady Feiran (Lepsius).14

1. Marah. Exo 15:22-26

On the wilderness of Shur, vid. Keil II., p. 57. Particulars about Howara [Hawara (Robinson), Hawwara (Palmer)], Knobel, p. 160.The bitter salt water at Marah.15 The miracle here consists in great part in the fact that Jehovah showed Moses a tree by which the water was made drinkable. That the tree itself was a natural tree is not denied by the strictest advocates of a literal interpretation. A part of the miracle is to be charged to the assurance of the prophetic act, and the trustful acceptance of it on the part of the people. Various explanations: The well was half emptied, so that pure water flowed in (Josephus); the berries of the ghurlud shrub were thrown in (Burckhardt). According to Robinson, the Beduins of the desert know no means of changing bitter salt water to sweet. In Egypt, as Josephus relates, bad water was once purified by throwing in certain split sticks of wood (Brm). This leads to the question, how far the salt water might have been made more drinkable by Moses dipping into it a crisp, branchy shrub, as a sort of distilling agent. For this the numerous clumps of the ghurkud shrub which stand around the well, and whose berries Burckhardt wished to make use of, are very well suited. The distillation consists in the art of separating, in one way or another, salt, from water, especially by means of brushwood; generally, for the purpose of getting salt; but it might be done for the opposite purpose of getting water. In proportion as a bunch of brushwood should become incrusted with the salt, the water would become more free from the salt. For the rest, Robinson observes, concerning the water of the fountain Hawara, Its taste is unpleasant, saltish, and somewhat bitter; but we could not perceive that it was very much worse than that of Ayun Musa. It must further be considered that the Jews had the soft, agreeable Nile water in recollection. Kurtz has even found an antithesis in the fact that Moses made the undrinkable water at Marah drinkable, as he had made the sweet water of the Nile un-drinkable. We are here also to notice that the effect of Moses act was not permanent, but consisted only in the act itself, the same as is true of the saving effect of the sacraments in relation to faith. Here, too, is another proof that Moses had a quite peculiar sense for the life of nature, a sense which Jehovah made an organ of His Spirit. With the curing of the well Jehovah connected a fundamental law, stating on what condition He would be the Saviour of the people. Brm (p. 114) points out, with reason, that the Israelites, in drinking salty water, which has a laxative effect, might well apprehend that the much-dreaded sicknesses of Egypt, the pestilence, the small-pox, the leprosy, and the inflammation of the eyes, caused by the heat and the fine dry sand, together with the intense reflection of light, might attack them here also in the wilderness, the atmosphere of which otherwise has a healing effect on many diseased constitutions. Therefore, in curing that well, Jehovah established the chief sanitary law for Israel. It is very definite, as if from the mouth of a very careful physician well acquainted with his case. General rule: perfect compliance with Jehovahs direction! Explanation of it: if thou doest what is right in His eyes, and wilt give ear to His commandments, and keep all His statutes (in reference to the means of spiritual recovery, dietetics), then I will put none of the diseases upon thee which I have put upon the Egyptians, for I am Jehovah, thy physician.But how can it be added, and there he proved them? The whole history has been a test of the question, whether the people would obey the directions of Jehovah given through Moses, and particularly whether, after the singular means employed by Moses, they would drink in faith. Every test of faith is a temptation for sinful man, because in his habituation to the common order of things lies an incitement not to believe in any extraordinary remedy, such as seems to contradict nature. But out of the actual temptation which the people had now passed through, proceeded this theocratic sanitary law, as a temptation perpetually repeating itself. There is even still a temptation in the principle of the theocratic therapeutics, that absolute certainty of life lies in absolute obedience to Gods commands and directions. According to Keil, the statute here spoken of does not consist in the divine utterance recorded in Exo 15:26, but in an allegorical significance of the fact itself: the leading of the Israelites to bitter water which the natural man cannot and will not drink, together with the making of this water sweet and wholesome, is to be a , that is, a statute and a law, showing how God at all times will lead and govern His people, and a , that is, an ordinance, inasmuch as Israel may continually depend on the divine help, etc. If this is so, then the text must receive an allegorical interpretation not obviously required.

Furthermore, it is a question whether, after the tremendous excitements through which the people had passed, bitter and salty water like that at Marah, might not have been more beneficial than hurtful to them. Salt water restores the digestion when it has been disturbed by excitement. Notice, moreover, the stiff-neckedness or stubbornness peculiar to the disposition of slaves just made free, as it gradually makes its appearance and increases. It was in their distress at Pi-hahiroth that they first gave utterance to their moroseness; true, they cried to Jehovah, but quarrelled with Moses. They seemed to have forgotten the miracle of deliverance wrought in the night of Egypts terror. Here they even murmur over water that is somewhat poorer than usual. The passage through the Red Sea and the song of praise seem to be forgotten. In the wilderness of Sin the whole congregation murmurs against Moses and Aaron, i.e., their divinely appointed leaders, from fear of impending famine, probably because the supplies brought from Egypt were running low;the ample refreshment enjoyed at Elim seems to be forgotten. In Rephidim they murmur on account of want of water;the miraculous supply of manna and quails seems to be forgotten. On the other hand, however, the wise augmentation of severity in the divine discipline becomes prominent. At Marah nothing is said of any rebuke uttered by Jehovah, as is done later, Num 11:14; Num 11:20. Especially noticeable is the great difference between the altercation at Marah, in the wilderness of Sin, and the mutiny at Kadesh, Numbers 20. The altercation there is expressly called a striving with Jehovah, Exo 15:13.

2. Elim. Exo 15:27

A fine contrast with Marah is afforded here, both in nature, and in the guidance of the people of God, and in the history of the inner life. In Elim, Baumgarten and Kurtz find a place expressly prepared for Israel, inasmuch as by the number of its wells and palm trees it bears in itself the seal of this people: every tribe having a well for man and beast, and the tent of each one of the elders of the people (Exo 24:9) having the shade (according to Baumgarten, the dates) of a palm-tree. Even Keil finds this too supernaturalistic; at least, he observes that, while the number of the wells corresponds to the twelve tribes of Israel, yet the number of the palm trees does not correspond to that of the elders, which, according to Exo 24:9, was much (?) greater. On neither side is the possibility of a symbolical significance in the numbering thought of; without doubt, however, the emphasis given to the number seventy is as significant as that given to the number twelve. Keils allusion to the 23d Psalm is appropriate. See particulars about Elim in Knobel, p. 161; Tischendorf, p. 36.16

3. The Wilderness of Sin. Chap. Exo 16:1-36

Notice first the aggravated character of the murmuring. Now the whole congregation murmurs. And not against Moses alone, but against Moses and Aaron, so that the murmuring is more definitely directed against the divine commission of the two men, and so against the divine act of bringing them out of Egypt, that is, against Jehovah Himself. Moreover, the expression of a longing after Egypt becomes more passionate and sensual. At first they longed resignedly for the graves of Egypt, in view of the danger of death in the desert. The next time, too, they say nothing about their hankering after the Nile water in view of the bitter water of Marah. But now the flesh-pots of Egypt and the Egyptian bread become prominent in their imagination, because they conceive themselves to be threatened with famine. Corresponding to the aggravation of the murmuring are the beginnings of rebuke. Says Knobel, What the congregation had brought with them from Egypt had been consumed in the thirty days which had elapsed since their exodus (Exo 16:1), although the cattle brought from Egypt (Exo 12:38) had not yet all been slaughtered or killed by thirst (?), since after their departure from the wilderness of Sin they still possessed cattle at Rephidim, which they wished to save from thirsting to death (Exo 17:3). For the herds had not been taken merely to be at once slaughtered; and meat could not take the place of bread. In their vexation the people wish that they had died in Egypt, while filling themselves from the flesh-pots, by the hand of Jehovah, i.e., in the last plague inflicted by Jehovah upon Egypt, rather than gradually to starve to death here in the wilderness. In the verb used ( Niph.) is expressed a murmuring just passing over into contumacy. Yet here too Jehovah looks with compassion upon the hard situation of the people, and hence regards their weakness with indulgence.

The natural substratum of the double miracle of feeding, now announced and brought to pass, is found in the food furnished by the desert to nomadic emigrants. The manna is the miraculous representative of all vegetable food; the quails denote the choicest of animal prey furnished by the desert. The first element, in the miracle is here too the prophetic foresight and assurance of Moses. The second is the actual miraculous enhancement of natural phenomena; the third is here also the trustful acceptance of it: the miracle of faith and the religious manifestation answering to it. The ultra-supernaturalistic view, it is true, is not satisfied with this. It holds to a different manna from that provided by God in nature, and ought, in consistency, to distinguish the quails miraculously given from ordinary quails.

In this case, too, the trial of faith was to be a temptation (Exo 16:4), to determine whether the people would appropriate the miraculous blessing to themselves in accordance with the divine precept, and so recognize Jehovah as the giver, or whether they would go out without restraint I and on their own responsibility to seize it, as if in a wild chase. Here, therefore, comes in the establishment of the fundamental law concerning the healing of life; and this is done by the ordaining of the seventh day as a day of rest, the Sabbath. As man, when given over to a merely natural life, is inclined to seek health and recuperation without regarding the inner life and the commandments of God, so he is also inclined to yield himself passionately and without restraint to the indulgence of the natural appetite for food, and, in his collection of the means of nourishment, to lose self-collection, the self-possession of an interior life. As a token of this the Sabbath here comes in at the right point, and therefore points at once from the earthly manna to the heavenly manna, (vid.John 6).17

The announcement of the miracle. I will rain. The first fundamental condition of the feeding: recognition of the Giver, comp. Jam 1:17.From heaven. Though this in general might also be said of bread from the earth, yet here a contrast is intended. From the sky above, i.e., as a direct gift.The people shall go out and gather. A perpetual harvest, but limited by divine ordinance.A daily portion every day. Reminding one of the petition, Give us this day, etc. An injunction of contentment.On the sixth day. They will find, on making their preparation of the food, that the blessing of this day is sufficient also for the seventh.At even. A gift of flesh was to precede the gift of manna. Thereby they are to understand that Jehovah has led them out of Egypt, that He has provided for them a substitute for the flesh-pots of Egypt. But on the next morning they shall see the glory of Jehovah, i.e., they shall recognize the glorious presence of Jehovah in the fact that He has heard their murmuring against Moses and Aaron, and has applied it to Himself, in that He presents them the mannaFor what are we? Thus do the holy men retire and disappear behind Jehovah.But the people also must come to this same conviction, must repent of their murmurings, and feel that they have murmured against Jehovah, not against His servants. Thus with perfect propriety is a sanction of the sacred office interwoven into the same history into which the history of the Sabbath is interwoven. Hence it follows also that the true sacred office must authenticate itself by miraculous blessings. Both are sealed by a specially mysterious revelation. It is significant that in this connection Aaron must be the speaker (Exo 16:9), that he must summon the people before Jehovah to humble themselves before His face on account of their murmuring. Equally significant is it, that the congregation, while Aaron speaks, sees the manifestation of Jehovahs glory in the cloud. Especially significant, however, is it, that they see this glory rest over the wide wilderness, as they turn and look towards it. A most beautiful touch! With the wilderness itself the way through the wilderness is transfigured at this moment. If we assume (with Keil) that the summons to appear before Jehovah is equivalent to a summons to come out of the tents to the place where the cloud stood, then it must be further assumed, that the cloud suddenly changed its position, and removed to the wilderness, or else appeared in a double form. Neither thing can be admitted. Hereupon follows the last solemn announcement of the miraculous feeding, as the immediate announcement of Jehovah Himself.

The double miracle itself.The quails came up.This narrative has its counterpart in the narrative of the quails in Num 11:4 sqq., just as the chiding on account of want of water at Rephidim has its counterpart in the story of the water of strife (Meribah), distinctively so-called in Numbers 20. The relation of the narratives to one another is important. The murmuring of the people in the beginning of their journey through the wilderness is treated with the greatest mildness, almost as a childs sickness; but their murmuring towards the end of the journey is regarded as a severe offence, and is severely punished; it is like the offence of a mature man, committed in view of many years experience of Gods miraculous help. At the water of strife even Moses himself is involved in the guilt, through his impatience; and the gift of quails in abundance is made a judgment on the people for their immoderate indulgence. Another difference corresponds to the natural features of the desert: the quails do not keep coming; but the people find themselves accompanied by the manna till they are tired of eating it.Came up.. The coming on of a host of locusts or birds has the optical appearance of a coming up., with the article of a word used collectively of a class (Keil). LXX. , Vulg. coturnices. Large quails, whose name in Arabic comes from their fatness, fat. Says Knobel: They become very fat, increase enormously, and in the spring migrate northward, in the autumn southward. Here we are to conceive of a spring migration. For the events described took place in the second month, i.e. about our May (Exo 16:1; Num 10:11), and the quails came to the Israelites from the south-east, from the Arabian Gulf (Psa 78:26 sq.; Num 11:31). In his journey from Sinai to Edomitis in March, Schubert (II., p. 360 sq.) saw whole clouds of migratory birds, of such extent and denseness as never before; they came from their southern winter-quarters, and were hastening toward the sea-coast (?). Probably they were quails, at least in part. Further particulars on the abundance of quails in those regions, see in Knobel (p. 166) and Keil (II., p. 66). They are sometimes so exhausted that they can be caught with the hand (Keil). Some identify the fowl with the kata of the Arabs [a sort of partridge]. Of course it must be assumed that the Israelites in the wilderness were no more confined to the quails for meat than to the manna for bread.

The manna. Exo 16:13-14. A layer of dew. A deposit or fall of dew.A dust, i.e. an abundance of small kernels. If the . is explained simply according to the verb , to peal off, scale off, we get the notion of scaly or leaf-shaped kernels, but not that of coagulated kernels. But perhaps the notion of shelled kernels of grain is transferred, in accordance with appearance, to these kernels. According to Exo 16:31 and Num 11:7, says Knobel, the manna resembled in appearance the white coriander seeds (small, round kernels of dull white or yellowish green color) and the bdellium (resin). Again he says: According to the Old Testament, the dew comes from heaven (Deu 33:13; Deu 33:28; Pro 3:20; Zec 8:12; Hag 1:10); with it the manna descended (Num 11:9); this seems therefore like bread rained down from heaven, and is called corn of heaven, bread of heaven (Psa 78:24; Psa 105:40). Further on Knobel relates that the ancients also supposed, that honey rained down from the air; hence he should more exactly distinguish between the notions of atmosphere and of heaven as the dwelling-place of God, comp. Joh 6:31-32.Man hu.The explanation that is to be derived from , to apportion, and that this expression therefore means: a present is that (Kimchi, Luther, Gesenius, Knobel. Kurtz), does not suit the context, which would make Moses repeat what the people had said before him, to say nothing of the fact that the derivation of the notion present from the verb is disputed. On the contrary, the interpretation of the LXX., Keil and others, , perfectly accords with the connection. They said: What is that? because they did not know what it was. for belongs to the popular language, and is preserved in Chaldee and Ethiopic, so that it is indisputably to be regarded as an old Shemitic form (Keil).

The natural manna and the miraculous manna.Comp. the articles in the Bible Dictionaries. Keil says: This bread of heaven was given by Jehovah to His people for the first time at a season and in a place where natural manna is still found. The natural manna is now found in the peninsula of Sinai usually in June and July, often even as early as in May, most abundantly in the vicinity of Mt. Sinai, in Wady Feiran and Es-sheikh, but also in Wady Ghurundel and Tayibeh (Seetzen, Reisen, III., p. 76, 129), and some valleys south-east of Mt. Sinai (Ritter, XIV., p. 676), where it in warm weather oozes by night out of the branches of the tarfa-tree, a sort of tamarisk, and in the form of small globules falls down upon the dry leaves, branches, and thorns which lie under the trees, and is gathered before sunrise, but melts in the heat of the sun. In years when rain is abundant, it falls more plentifully for six weeks; in many years it is entirely wanting. It has the appearance of gum, and has a sweet, honey-like taste, and when copiously used, is said to be a gentle laxative (Burckhardt, Syria, p. 600; Wellsted in Ritter, p. 674). There are thus presented some striking points of resemblance between the manna of the Bible and the tamarisk manna. Not only is the place where the Israelites first received manna the same as that in which it is obtained now, but the time of the year is the same, inasmuch as the 15th day of the second month (Exo 16:1) falls in the middle of our May, or even still later. Also in color, form and appearance the resemblance is unmistakable, since the tamarisk manna, though of a dull yellow color, yet when it falls upon stones is described as white; the resemblance is likewise seen in the fact, that it falls in kernels upon the earth, is gathered in the morning, melts in the sun, and tastes like honey. While these points of agreement indubitably point to a connection between the natural and the Biblical manna, yet the differences which run parallel with all of the resemblances indicate no less clearly the miraculous character of the heavenly bread. Thus Keil leaves the matter, without reconciling the two positions. The miraculous manna, he says, was enjoyed by the Israelites forty years long everywhere in the wilderness and at all seasons of the year in quantity equal to the wants of the very numerous people. Hengstenbergs theory (Geschichle des Bileam, p. 280) that the natural manna which is formed on the leaves of the tarfa-bush by the sting of an insect (according to a discovery of Ehrenbergs), is the natural substratum of the miraculous abundance of manna, is combated by Kurtz III., p. 34. Kurtz can conceive that the people lived at Kadesh thirty-seven years in apostasy, and that nevertheless during all this time they received regularly their portion of manna for every man. By this method of distinguishing the miraculous from the natural manna, we come to the hypothesis, that the people of Israel were fed with two kinds of manna; for it will certainly not be assumed that the natural fall of manna during all this time was supernaturally suspended, as in a similar manner Keil on Exo 16:10 makes out two pillars of cloud. Von Raumer and Kurtz, we may remark, go as much beyond Keil, as Keil does beyond Hengstenberg. Vid. Keil, p. 72, and the note on the same page. Between the baldly literal interpretation and the embellishments of wonder-loving legends the view above described recognizes nothing higher; it does not understand the symbolic language of the theocratic religion, nor see how an understanding of this lifts us as much above the mythical as the literal interpretation. The defect of the latter consists, as to substance, in the circumstance that it identifies the conception of nature with that of the common external world raised by a Providential government only a little above a material system; as to form, it is defective in that it identifies the word and the letter, and cannot understand and appreciate the specific difference between the heathen myth and the symbolical expression of the theocratic spirit as it blends together ideas and facts. Kurtz refers to the miracle in John 2, without clearly apprehending that this miracle would be the merest trifle, if his notion of the miracle of the manna is the correct one, to say nothing of the evident conflict of this with Joh 6:32. Knobel, whose learned disquisition on the manna (p. 171 sqq.) should be consulted, thus states the distinctive features of the miraculous manna, which he regards as a legendary thing: (a) The manna, according to the Biblical account, comes with the mist and dew from heaven (Exo 16:14);so Kurtz III., p. 28. But since the mist does not come down from the throne of God, the meaning is simply that it comes from above, not from below. (b) It falls in such immense abundance that every person of the very numerous people daily receives an omer (Exo 16:16; Exo 16:36). The omer, however, is a very moderate hand measure, the tenth part of an ephah, originally hardly a definite quantity, vid. Keil II., p. 74. (c) Furthermore, those who gather the manna collect always only just what they need, no more and no less. This is clearly to be symbolically explained of contentedness and community. (d) The manna falls only on the six working-days, not on the seventh day, it being the Sabbath (Exo 16:26 sq.). On this is to be observed that this extraordinary fact was needed only once, in order to sanction the Sabbath; the fact may also be explained by the circumstance that on the day before an extraordinary, double fall of manna took place. (e) The manna which is kept over from one working-day to another becomes wormy and offensive (Exo 16:20), whilst that preserved from the sixth day to the seventh keeps good (Exo 16:24), for which reason, except on the sixth day, the manna must always be eaten on the day when it is gathered. This too is a singular, enigmatical fact; but it is cleared up by looking at it in its rich ideal light. The supply which heathen providence heaps up breeds worms, decays, and smells offensively: not so the supply required by the Sabbath rest, sacred festivities, and divine service. (f) It is ground in the hand-mill, crushed in the mortar, and cooked by baking or boiling, made e.g. into cakes (Exo 16:23, Num 11:8). (g) It appears in general as a sort of bread, tasting like baked food (Exo 16:31, Num 11:8), and is always called , even (vid. Exo 16:15), to say nothing of the miraculous doubling of the quantity (Exo 16:5; Exo 16:22). This latter feature comes at once to nothing, if we assume that on the sixth day there was a double fall of manna.18 How far the manna, which contains no farinaceous elements, but only glucose, was mingled with farinaceous elements, in order to be used after the manner of farinaceous food, we need not inquire; at all events the Israelites could not afterwards have said, of a properly farinaceous substance, and that too of a superior kind, Our soul loatheth this light food. The splendor with which faith, wonder, and gratitude had invested the enjoyment of the miraculous food had vanished. According to Keil, the connection of the natural manna with the miraculous manna is not to be denied, but we are also not to conceive of a mere augmentation, but the omnipotence of God created from the natural substance a new one, which in quality and quantity as far transcends the products of nature as the kingdom of grace and glory outshines the kingdoms of nature. But Christ, in John 6, speaks of a manna in the kingdom of grace and glory, in contrast with the Mosaic manna.According to Kurtz, who, especially in opposition to Karl Ritter, follows the opinion of Schubert, the manna was prepared by a miracle of omnipotence in the atmosphere; according to Schubert, that tendency to the production of manna which at the right time permeated the vitalizing air, and with it all the vital forces of the land, has propagated itself still, at least in the living thickets of the manna-tamarisks. The natural manna, then, is a descendant of the Biblical manna, but a degenerate sort, developed by the puncture made by the cochineal insect in the branches of the tarfa-shrub !

We are specially to consider further (1) the preservation of a pot, containing an omer of manna, in the sanctuary; (2) the specification of the time during which the use of manna by the Israelites lasted. As to the first point, the object was to preserve the manna as a religious memorial; hence the expression of the LLX., , is exegetical. The historian here evidently anticipates the later execution of the charge now given. Comp. Hengstenberg, Pentateuch II., p. 169 sqq. (Kurtz). As to the second point, it is expressively said that Israel had no lack of the miraculous manna so long as they were going through the wilderness; but Kurtz infers from Jos 5:11-12, that the Jews did not cease to eat manna till after the passover in Gilgal, though they had other food besides. The correct view is presented in the Commentary on Joshua, Exo 5:12, where stress is laid on the contrast between Jehovahs immediate preservation of the food of the wilderness, on the one hand, and the historical development that took the place of this, on the other hand, i.e., the natural order of things which belongs to civilized life; corresponding to the fact that the ark took the place of the pillar of cloud and fire, as leader of the people.

The question whether in this narrative the Sabbath is instituted for the first time (Hengstenberg), or again renewed (Liebetrut), is thus decided by Kurtz (III., p. 42): The observance of the Sabbath was instituted before the law, may even in Paradise, but the law of the Sabbath first received a legal character through the revelation on Sinai, and lost it again through the love which is the fulfilling of the law, in the new covenant (Col 2:16-17). In the fulfilment nothing indeed is lost, but every law becomes a liberating principle. It is noticeable how in the history of Moses, patriarchal customs, to which also probably the Sabbath belonged, are sanctioned by miraculous events and receive a legal character; as has already been seen in various instances (festivals, worship, sanitary laws, official rank, the Sabbath).

4. Rephidim

a. Rephidim and the place called Temptation and Strife.

Following the route of the mountain road the Israelites now came out of the region of the red sandstone into that of porphyry and granite (Knobel, p. 174). They came thither according to their days journeys, i.e., after several days journeys. In Num 33:12 the two stations Dophkah and Alush are mentioned. On the conjecture of Knobel (p. 174) concerning these places, vid. Keil II., p. 76.

According to Knobel (p. 176), popular tradition transfers the occurrence here mentioned to Kadesh, therefore to a later time, (Num 20:8). It is a universal characteristic of modern scientists that, not being free from the propensity to give predominant weight to sensible things, they are easily carried away with external resemblances, hence with allegories, and so may disregard the greatest internal differences of things. Thus as the external resemblance of man to the monkey is more impressive to the naturalist than the immense inward contrast, so Biblical criticism often becomes entangled in this modern allegorizing; even Hengstenberg pays tribute to it in identifying the Simon of Bethany with the Pharisee Simon on the Lake of Galilee, and so, the Mary of Bethany with the sinful woman who anointed Jesus.

As the sending of the quails in Num 11:5 sqq., forms a companion-piece to that in Exodus 16, so the water of strife in Num 20:2 sqq., to the water of strife in Rephidim. There is a resemblance even in the sounds of the names of the deserts Sin ( thorn?), and Zin ( low palm). So also the want of water and the murmurs of the people, and in consequence of this the seemingly identical designation of the place; also the giving of water out of the rock. Aside from the difference of time and place, the internal features of the two histories are also very different; even the difference in the designations is to be observed, the place Massah and Meribah (temptation and strife), and the water Meribah, over which the children of Israel strove with Jehovah, and He was sanctified (shown to be holy) among them. In the first account Jehovah is only tempted by the people; in the second, He is almost denied. In the one, Moses is said to smite the rock, away from the people, in the presence of the elders; in the other, he and Aaron are said to speak with the rock before all the people. Also the summary description of the journey in Deu 1:37, leaves no doubt that the second incident is entirely different from the first. Likewise in Deu 33:8, two different things are mentioned, and the temptation at Massah is distinguished from the strife at the water of strife, (comp. Psa 95:8). It lies in the nature of the case that the religious mind would celebrate in a comprehensive way its recollection of the most essential thing in the two events, viz., the miraculous help of Jehovah, Deu 8:15, Isa 48:21, Psa 78:15; Psa 78:20; Psa 105:41; Psa 114:8, Neh 9:15. Why chide ye with me?The true significance of this chiding with him Moses at once characterizes: it is a tempting of Jehovah. This he could do after what he had affirmed in Exo 16:8-9. After the giving of the quails and the manna, designed to confirm the divine mission of Moses and Aaron, they had now to do with Jehovah, when they quarrelled with Moses. But how far did they tempt Jehovah? Not simply by unbelieving doubt of the gracious presence of the Lord (Keil). They sinfully tested the question whether Jehovah would again stand by Moses, or would this time forsake him. Hence their reproach against Moses reaches the point of complaining that he is to blame for their impending ruina complaint which might well have been followed by stoning. Jehovahs command corresponds with this state of things. Moses is to go confidently away from the people to the still distant Horeb, but to take with him the elders of the people as witnesses, and there to smite the rock with his rod. But Jehovah is to stand there before him on the rock. Does this mean, as Keil represents, that God humbles Himself like a servant before his master? He rather appears as Moses visible representative, who rent the rock and produced the miraculous spring. The rock that followed them, says Paul, was Christ (1Co 10:4). Thence again is seen the divine human nature of the miracle, a mysterious synthesis of natural feeling and prophecy of grace. On Tacitus invidious narrative of Moses having discovered a spring of water by means of a drove of wild asses, see Kurtz III., p. 48.

b. Rephidim and Amalek. Hostile Heathendom.

As in the account of Amalek we see typically presented the relation of the people of God to the irreconcilably hostile heathendom; so in that of Jethro their relation to heathendom as manifesting a kindly disposition towards the theocracy.
Exhaustive treatises on the Amalekites may be found in the dictionaries and commentaries, especially also in Hengstenberg (Pentateuch II., p. 247 sqq., and Kurtz III., p. 48). In the way nations used to be formed, Amalek, a grandson of Esau, might quite well have become a nation by Moses time (vid. Genesis 36), Edomite leaders forming a nucleus around which a conglomerate multitude gathered. The Edomite tendency to barbarism was perpetuated in Amalek, and so in his descendants was developed a nation of Bedouin robbers, who might have spread from Idumea to Sinai, and perhaps in their capacity as waylayers had come to give name to a mountion of the Amalekites in the tribe of Ephraim (Jdg 12:15). Thus might a little people, which was kindred to Israel in the same way as Edom was, after Israel was regenerated to be the people of God, be the first to throw themselves hostilely in their way, and thus become the representative of all hostile heathendom, as opposed to the people and kingdom of God. In accordance with this was shaped the theocratic method of warfare against Amalek. and the typical law of war (see Keil II., p. 77). It is significant that the Midianites in the branch represented by Jethro should present heathendom on friendly terms with Israel, although the relationship was much less close. On the denial of the identity between the Amalekites and the above-mentioned descendants of Esau, see Kurtz III., p. 49. The descendant of Esau might, however, have received his name Amalek by transfer from the Bedouin horde which became subservient to him.

Then came Amalek. According to Deu 25:18, the attack of the Amalekites was a despicable surprise of the feeble stragglers of the Israelites. We have to conceive the order of the events to be about as follows: The murmuring on account of want of water and the relief of that want took place immediately after the arrival at Rephidim of the main part of the host which had hurried forward, whilst the rear, whose arrival had been delayed by fatigue, was still on the way. These were attacked by the Amalekites (Kurtz). The several features in the contest now beginning are these: Joshua with his chosen men; Moses on the mountain; the victory; the memorial of the fight; the altar Nissi and its typical significanceeternal war against Amalek!

Joshua. Jehovah is help, or salvation. Thus, according to Num 13:16, his former name, Hoshea (help, or salvation) was enriched; and perhaps the present war and victory occasioned the change.Choose us out men. It was the first war which the people of God had to wage, and it was against a wild and insidious foe. Hence no troops of doubtful courage could be sent against the enemy, but a select company must fight the battle, with Joshua at the head, whose heroic spirit Moses had already discovered. Precipitancy also was avoided. They let the enemy remain secure until the following day. The host of warriors, however, had to be supported by the host of spirits in the congregation interceding and blessing, as represented by Moses in conjunction with Aaron and Hur. See my pamphlet Vom Krieg und vom Sieg.

The completed victory was to be immortalized by the military annals (the book) and by the living recollections of the host (in the ears of Joshua).The altar Nissi (Jehovah my banner), however, was to serve the purpose of inaugurating the consecration of war by means of right military religious service. Accordingly, the two essential conditions of the war were, first, Jehovahs summoning the people to the sacred work of defense, secondly, Jehovahs own help. And also the war against Amalek is perpetuated until he is utterly destroyed only in the sense that Amalek typically represents malicious hostility to the people and kingdom of God.

Hur comes repeatedly before us (Exo 24:14, Exo 31:2) as a man of high repute, and as an assistant of Moses. Josephus (Ant. III. 2, 4), following a Jewish tradition, of the correctness of which there is much probability, calls him the husband of Miriam, Moses sister (Kurtz). According to Exo 31:2, he was the grandfather of Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle, of the tribe of Judah, and the son of Caleb (Chron. Exo 1:17.)

It is clear that the transaction with the rod of Moses was in this case too a symbolic and prophetic, a divine and human, assurance of victory. Therefore the rod must be held on high, and inasmuch as Moses hands cannot permanently hold it up, they must be supported by Aaron and Hur. In the holy war the priesthood and nobility must support the prophetical ruler. Thus is produced an immovable confidence in Jehovah Nissi, afterwards called Jehovah Sabaoth (of hosts). From His throne, through Moses hand, victorious power and confidence flow into the host of warriors. The book begun by Moses, in which the victory over Amalek is recorded, is important in reference to the question concerning the authority of the Bible. When Jehovah further commands Moses to intrust to Joshua the future extirpation of Amalek, it becomes evident even now that he is destined to be Moses successor (Kurtz). A conjecture about the hill where Moses stood may be found in Knobel, p. 177; Keil, II., p. 79. Subsequent wars waged against Amalek by Saul and David are narrated in 1 Samuel 15, 27, 30. Kurtz regards the elevated hand of Moses not as a symbol of prayer to Jehovah, but only of victorious confidence derived from Jehovah, III., p. 51. Keil rightly opposes the separation of the bestowment of victory from prayer, p. 79, but goes to the other extreme when he says, The elevated rod was a sign not for the fighting Israelites, since it cannot even be made out that they, in the confusion of battle, could see it, but for Jehovah. In all human acts of benediction prayer and the impartation of the blessing are united.

c. Jethro, and heathendom as friendly to the people of God.

Inasmuch as chap. 19 records the establishment of the theocracy, or of the typical kingdom of God, it is in the highest degree significant that the two preceding sections fix the relation and bearing of the people of God towards heathendom. Out of one principle are to flow two opposing ones, in accordance with the twofold bearing of heathendom. The heathen, represented by Amalek, who are persistently hostile, wage war against Jehovah Himself; on them destruction is eventually to be visited. The heathen, however, represented by Jethro, who are humane and cherish friendship towards the people of God, sustain towards Christianity, as it were, the relation of catechumens. The people of God enter into commercial and social intercourse with them under the impulse of religion and humanity; similarly James defines the relation of Christianity to Judaism. [There is nothing about this in his Epistle. Is the reference to Act 15:20-21?Tr.]

(i.) The pious heathen as guest, relative, and protector of Moses family, and as guardian of the spiritual treasures of Israel. Exo 18:1-4.

It seems like too legal a conception, when Keil calls Jethro the first-fruits among the heathen that seek the living God, and incidentally adduces his descent from Abraham. Jethro did not become a Jew, but remained a priest in Midian, just as John the Baptist did not become, properly speaking, a Christian, but remained a Jew. It is more correct, when Keil says that Amalek and Jethro typify and represent the two-fold attitude of the heathen world towards the kingdom of God. In opposition to the special conjectures of Kurtz and Ranke, especially also the assumption that there was not time enough in Rephidim for this new incident, see Keil, II. p. 84.19

(ii.) The pious heathen as sympathetic friend of Moses and of the people of God in their victories. Exo 18:5-9.

Notice the delicate discretion which both men observe, with all their friendship towards each other. Jethro does not rush impetuously forward; he sends word of his approach. Moses receives him with appropriate reverence, but first leads him into his tent; for whether and how he may introduce him to his people, is yet to be determined.

(iii.) Religious song and thank-offering of the pious heathen. Exo 18:10-12.

The lyrical,20 festive recognition of the greatness of Jehovah in His mode of bringing the Egyptians to confusion through their very arrogance does not involve conversion to Judaism; neither does the burnt-offering and the thank-offering: but they do indicate ideal spiritual fellowship, aside from social intercourse.

(iv.) The religious and social fellowship of the people of God, even of Aaron the priest, and of the elders, with the pious heathen. Exo 18:12.

A proof that the religious spirit of the Israelites was as yet free from the fanaticism of the later Judaism is seen in the fact that Aaron and the elders could take part in a sacrificial feast with Jethro. Common participation in the Passover meal would have been conditioned on circumcision.

(v.) The political wisdom and organizing talent of the pious heathen thankfully recognized and humbly used by the great prophet himself. Exo 18:13-26.

Jethros advice given to Moses, like political institutions and political wisdom, is not a gift of immediate revelation, but a fruit of the sensus communis. But observe that Jethro acknowledges the prophetic vocation of Moses, and Jehovahs revelation in regard to all great matters (questions of principle), just as Moses acknowledges the piety of his political wisdom. Moses and Jethro came nearer together than the medival church and ordinary liberalism. Exo 18:17-18 contain very important utterances concerning the consequences of such a hierarchy. On the distribution of the people according to the decimal system, see Keil, II., p. 87. The decimal numbers are supposed by him to designate approximately the natural ramifications of the people [ten being assumed to represent the average size of a family]. A further development of the institution (comp. Deu 1:9) took place later, according to Num 11:16.

(vi.) Distinct economies on a friendly footing with each other. Exo 18:27.

Analogous to this occurrence is the covenant of Abraham with Abimelech; the friendly relations maintained by David and Solomon with Hiram, king of Tyre, the queen of Sheba, etc.

Footnotes:

[7][Exo 16:15 . Gesenius and Knobel derive from , to apportion; Frst (Concordance) from the Sanscrit mani. But most scholars, following the evident implication of the narrative itself, regard as the Aramaic equivalent of . Even Frst so renders it in his Illustrirte Pracht-Bibel. Comp. Michaelis, Supplementa ad Lexica Hebraica.Tr.].

[8][Exo 16:20. And it bred worms: . The Heb. word seems to be the Fut. of defectively written, and therefore to mean: rose up into (or with) worms. Kalisch says, that the form is used instead of to show that it comes from (?) in the sense of putrefy. So Maurer and Ewald (Gr., 281, d). But it is doubtful whether (assumed as the root from which comes worm) really means putrefy at all. Frst defines it by crawl. Moreover, it would be inverting the natural order of things to say, that the manna became putrid with worms; the worms are the consequence, not the cause, of the putridness. Rosenmller, Frst, Arnheim and others render by swarm, abound, but probably as a free rendering for rose up. De Wette: da wuchsen Wrmer. The A. V. rendering may stand as a substantially correct reproduction of the sense.Tr.].

[9][Exo 17:16. We have given the most literal rendering of this difficult passage. But possibly , instead of meaning for (or because), may (as often in Greek) be the mere mark of a quotation, to be omitted in the translation. The meaning of the expression itself is very doubtful. The A. V., following some ancient authorities, takes it as an oath; but for this there is little ground. Keil interprets: The hand raised to the throne of Jehovah in heaven; Jehovahs war against Amalek, i.e. the hands of the Israelites, like those of Moses, must be raised heavenward towards Jehovahs throne, while they wage war against Amalek. Others interpret: Because a hand (viz. the hand of the Amalekites) is against the throne of Jah, therefore Jehovah will forever have war with Amalek. This interpretation has the advantage over Keils of giving a more natural rendering to , which indeed in a few cases does mean up to, but only when it is (as it is not here) connected with a verb which requires the preposition to be so rendered. Others (perhaps the majority of modern exegetes) would read (banner), instead of (throne), and interpret: The hand upon Jehovahs banner; Jehovah has war, etc. This conjecture is less objectionable than many attempted improvements of the text, inasmuch as the name of the altar, Jehovah-nissi (Jehovah, my banner), seems to require an explanation, and would receive it if the reading were , instead of Tr.].

[10]Inasmuch as Pelusium, as being a marshy city, is culled Sin, and Sinai, being a rocky mountain, is just the opposite, the question arises: What is the common feature of a marshy wilderness, and of a rocky mountain range? Possibly, the points and denticulations of the thorn-bush. An old interpretation calls Sinai itself a thorn-bush, from the thorn-bush () in which Jehovah revealed Himself to Moses. The stony wilderness may have the thorn-bush in common with the marshy fens.

[11][Lange omits another way which might have been taken, viz., from el-Murkhah along the coast, and thence up Wady Feiran, instead of the more direct way through the wadies Shellal and Mukatteb into Wady Feiran. This is the course which the members of the Sinai Survey Expedition unanimously decided to be the most probable, inasmuch as the road over the pass of Nagb Buderah, between the wadies Shellal and Mukatteb, must have been constructed at a time posterior to the Exodus (E. H. Palmer: The Desert of the Exodus, p. 275). Robinson also mentions this route as at least equally probable with the other (I., p. 107). Palmer is quite decided that no other route afforded facilities for a large caravan such as that of the Israelites.Tr.]

[12][This is not perspicuous. Inasmuch as Serbal is not mentioned in the Bible, no inference can be drawn from these circumstances respecting its location. Moreover, Serbal is not north of Sinai (Jebel Musa), but nearly easta little north only. And why is north called behind? The hinder region, according to Hebrew conceptions, is in the west.Tr.]

[13][The theory that Rephidim is to be sought in er-Raba (advocated by Knobel, Keil, Lange, and others), is certainly open to the objection that that plain is close by Mt. Sinai itself, and is in all probability the camping-place before the mount, mentioned in Exo 19:1-2. Palmer (p. 112) and Robinson (I., p. 155) are emphatic in the opinion that the plain of Sebaiveh, south-east of Jebel Musa, is quite insufficient to have accommodated the Israelitish camp. Rephidim, therefore, being (according to Exo 19:2) at least a days march from the place whence Moses went up to receive the law, cannot well have been er-Raha. Stanley (Sinai and Palestine, p. 40) and Palmer defend the old view that it is to be looked for at Feiran, near Mt. Serbal. Palmer argues that the distance, apparently much too great to have been traversed in a single day, is no insuperable objection, provided that by the wilderness of Sinai we understand the mouth of Nagb Hawa, which may have been reached in a single day by the direct route from Feiran.Tr.]

[14][On this point see the last note. A good map of the whole peninsula is to be found in Smith and Groves Atlas of Ancient Geography.Tr.]

[15]The Arabs call the well exitium, interitus, probably in accordance with the notion that that which is bitter is deadly (2Ki 4:40). Knobel. The Arabs may make humorous remarks about bad wells of water, like the Germans on bad wines, in hyperbolical expressions which are not to be taken literally.

[16][Wilson, (Lands of the Bible, Vol. I., p. 174), would identify with Elim, not Wady Ghurundel, but Wady Waseit (Useit), five or six miles south of Wady Ghurundel.Tr.].

[17]Further on follows the fundamental law of warfare in self-defence against heathen enemies, as well as the fundamental law for the unhesitating appropriation of heathen wisdom.

[18][This reply, apparently not very clear, is the same as the one made above to specification (d) of Knobel. Lange distinguishes between a miraculous fall and an extraordinary fall, and supposes besides that the extraordinary (double) fall may have been limited to one occasion.Tr.]

[19][Kurtzs conjecture is that what led Jethro to visit Moses was the report of the victory of the Israelites over Amalek; to which the reply is that nothing is said of this, but, on the contrary, that it was the report of the deliverance from Egypt that occasioned the visit. Rankes conjecture is that Jethros visit took place after the giving of the law, on the ground that the stay at Rephidim was too short; to which it is replied that, if (as is assumed from Exo 16:1 and Exo 19:1) half a month intervened between the arrival at the wilderness of Sin and the arrival at the wilderness of Sinai, ample time is afforded for all that is recorded in Exodus 18.Tr.]

[20][Lange regards Exo 18:10-11 as poetic in form.Tr.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The relation of an event in the family affairs of Moses, is introduced in this Chapter. The Reader will recollect, that when Moses with his wife Zipporah and his two sons were at the inn in their way to Egypt, as related in Exo 4 , it is said that the Lord met him. It is probable at this time it was that Moses sent back his wife and children to her father: while he proceeded to execute the commission he had received from the Lord. Here therefore in this Chapter, that part of the subject concerning Moses’ household is revived. Jethro, his father-in-law, brings into the wilderness to Moses, his wife and children: their mutual pleasure at meeting: and some other circumstances of their conduct and conversation are related.

Exo 18:1

Such wonderful events as had distinguished the Lord’s bringing out Israel from Egypt, no doubt had been much spoken of both far and near. Psa 44:1 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Exo 18:11

You cannot do wrong without suffering wrong. ‘No man ever had a point of pride that was not injurious to him,’ said Burke…. Treat men as pawns and ninepins, and you shall suffer as well as they.

Emerson on Compensation.

Exo 18:18

‘Manning,’ says Mr. Purcell in his Life of the great Cardinal (ii. p. 505), ‘never understood early or late the wisdom of cooperation; never valued the virtue of competition. His idea was the concentration of authority; one mind to conceive, one hand to execute. This narrowness of mind was his chief intellectual defect It led by degrees to the isolation of his life.’

Exo 18:21

Our Bishops in St. George’s Company will be constituted in order founded on that appointed by the first Bishop of Israel, namely, that their Primate, or Supreme Watchman, shall appoint under him ‘out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness, and place such over them to be rulers (or, at the least, observers) of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens’…. Of course for such work, I must be able to find what Jethro of Midian assumes could be found at once in Israel, these ‘men of truth, hating covetousness,’ and all my friends laugh me to scorn for thinking to find any such. Naturally, in a Christian country, it will be difficult enough; but I know there are still that kind of people among Midianites, Caffres, Red Indians, and the destitute afflicted, and tormented, in dens and caves of the earth, where God has kept them safe from missionaries: and, as I above said, even out of the rotten mob of money-begotten traitors calling itself a ‘people’ in England, I do believe I shall be able to extricate, by slow degrees, some faithful and true persons, hating covetousness, and fearing God.

And you will please to observe that this hate and fear are flat opposites one to the other; so that if a man fear or reverence God, he must hate covetousness; and if he fear or reverence covetousness, he must hate God; and there is no intermediate way whatsoever.

Ruskin, Fors Clavigera, Letter lxii.

‘Able men, such as fear God.’

The Italians have an ungracious proverb: Tanto buon che val niente : so good that he is good for nothing. And one of the Doctors of Italy, Nicholas Macchiavel, had the confidence to put in writing, almost in plaine Termes: that the Christian Faith had given up Good Men in prey to those that are tyrannical and unjust. Which he spake because indeed there never was Law or Sect or Opinion did so much magnifie Goodnesse as the Christian religion doth. Therefore to avoid the Scandall and the Danger both, it is good to take knowledge of the Errours of a Habit so excellent. Seeke the good of other men, but be not in bondage to their Faces or Fancies; for that is but Facilitie or Softnesse; which taketh our honest Minde Prisoner.

Bacon, Essays (‘of Goodnesse’).

One has nothing to fear from those who fear God.

Eugnie de Gurin.

References. XVIII. 21. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Exodus, etc., p. 88. C. Silvester Home, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xli. 1892, p. 403. XVIII. 24. M. Eastwood, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliv. 1893, p. 22.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

1. When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father in law (his relation by marriage, a term of very wide application), heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, and that the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt (the supreme fact);

2. Then Jethro, Moses’ father in law, took Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her back (after her dismissal by Moses),

3. And her two sons; of which the name of the one was Gershom; for he said, I have been an alien in a strange land:

4. And the name of the other was Eliezer; for the God of my father, said he, was mine help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh:

5. And Jethro, Moses’ father in law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God (used in a broad sense of the whole mountain region):

6. And he said unto Moses, I thy father in law Jethro am come unto thee, and thy wife, and her two sons with her.

7. And Moses went out to meet his father in law, and did obeisance (Oriental etiquette, not implying the superiority of Jethro), and kissed him (common form of salutation in the East); and they asked each other of their welfare (said to each other, Peace be with you); and they came into the tent 8. And Moses told his father in law all that the Lord had done unto Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, and all the travail that had come upon them by the way, and how the Lord delivered them.

9. And Jethro rejoiced for all the goodness which the Lord had done to Israel, whom he had delivered out of the hand of the Egyptians.

10. And Jethro said, Blessed be the Lord, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh, who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians.

11. Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods: for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them.

12. And Jethro, Moses’ father in law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God: and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses’ father in law before God (and thus acknowledged his priesthood, as Abraham had acknowledged the priesthood of Melchisedek).

13. And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the people (ability to judge was thought to indicate fitness for kingship): and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening.

14. And when Moses’ father in law saw all that he did to the people, he said, What is this thing that thou dpest to the people? why sittest thou thyself alone (this word is emphatic), and all the people stand by thee from morning unto even?

15. And Moses said unto his father in law, Because the people come unto me to inquire of God:

16. When they have a matter, they come unto me; and I judge between one and another, and I do make them know the statutes of God, and his laws.

17. And Moses’ father in law said unto him. The thing that thou doest is not good.

18. Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that is with thee: for this thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone.

19. Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee (May God be with thee, a prayer rather than a promise): Be thou for the people to Godward, that thou mayest bring the causes unto God (do the highest work):

20. And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shalt shew them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do.

21. Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men (Jethro himself had his subordinates), such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness (a comprehensive description of “able men”); and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens (organisation on the decimal system):

22. And let them judge the people at all seasons: and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge: so shall it be easier for thyself, and they shall bear the burden with thee.

23. If thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt be able to endure, and all this people shall also go to their place in peace.

24. So Moses hearkened to the voice of his father in law, and did all that he had said.

25. And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.

26. And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves.

27. And Moses let his father in law depart; and he went his way into his own land.

Jethro’s Counsel to Moses

Exo 18

The work which Moses attempted in his own strength strongly indicated the character of the man. He undertook to settle the dispute between the Egyptian and the Hebrew, and he did settle it by the destruction of the former. He interposed between the Hebrews who were striving one with another, and would have determined the contest without consultation with any man. He asked no help when he saw the shepherds ill-treating the daughters of Jethro; he took counsel with himself alone, and delivered the maidens from their oppressors. In the case before us we see precisely the same characteristics: Moses was the sovereign of Israel, and as such administered all matters, great and small. He did not foresee the results of the service in which he was so laboriously engaged. It was an older head than his own that saw the consequences of toil so uninterrupted and exhausting. For the time being Moses was borne up by the excitement of the situation, or by his love of the work; but Jethro foresaw that an increase of this kind of exacting labour would wear out the strongest and boldest man in all the hosts of Israel. The worker does not always see the bearing or the issues of the ministry in which he is engaged. Excitement suspends the judicial faculty. The warrior in the midst of the battle is not in a position to judge so completely and certainly as the spectator who observes the scene from a distance. It ought to be the part of a wise and generous friendship to point out to men when they are working too much, and wasting in exaggeration energies which might be beneficently exercised through a longer period of time. Some men live intensely, their lives are short, but the measure of their service is complete; they do not pause, they have no Sabbath days: with an unwise prodigality they expend their whole force within a brief hour. Such men are not always just to society. A rich man has no right to give so profusely as to cut off the occasion of liberality in others. The strong man ought not to be at liberty to do so much work with his own hands as to render the labour of others unnecessary.

It was upon this principle that Jethro proceeded in the case of Moses. The great leader of Israel, though leading a life of laborious self-sacrifice, was actually falling below the requirements of social justice. He seemed to be acting on the conviction that he only could manage, arrange, and otherwise successfully administer all the affairs of the people. It never occurred to him that he was allowing the talent of others to lie idle. Talent requires to be evoked. It is true indeed that genius asserts itself, and clears for itself space and prominence equal to its measure of supremacy; on the other hand, it is equally true that much sound ability may become dormant, simply because the leaders of society do not call it into responsible exercise. The counsel which Moses received from Jethro inspired Israel with new life. From the moment that it was acted upon, talent rose to the occasion: energy was accounted of some value, and men who had probably been sulking in the background came to be recognised and honoured as wise statesmen and cordial allies. There is more talent in society than we suspect. It needs the sunshine of wise encouragement in order to develop it. There is a lesson in this suggestion for all who lead the lives of men. Specially, perhaps, there is a lesson to pastors of churches. It is a poor church in which there is not more talent than has yet been developed. When Saul saw any strong man and any valiant man, he took him to himself. This is the law of sure progress and massive consolidation in church life. Let us keep our eyes open for men of capacity and good-will, and the more we watch the more shall our vigilance be rewarded. We should try men by imposing responsibilities upon them. There is range enough in church organisation for the trial and strengthening of every gift. Better be a door-keeper in the house of God than a sluggard, and infinitely better sweep the church floor than lounge upon the pew-top, and find fault with the sweeping of other people. Every man in the Church ought to be doing something. If the pattern be taken from the case described in the context, there need be no fear of rivalry or tumult. The arrangement indicated by Jethro was based upon the severest discipline. The position of Moses was supreme and undisputed; every great case was to be referred to his well-tried judgment, and in all cases of contention his voice was to determine the counsels of the camp. There must be a ruling mind in the Church, and all impertinence and other self-exaggeration must be content to bow submissively to the master-will. Very possibly there may be danger in sudden development of mental activity and social influence; but it must be remembered, on the other hand, that there is infinitely deadlier peril in allowing spiritual energy and emotion to fall into disuse. In the former case we may have momentary impertinence, conceit, and coxcombry; but in the latter we shall have paralysis and distortion more revolting than death itself.

Jethro counselled Moses “to be for the people Godward, that he might bring the causes unto God.” The highest of all vocations is the spiritual. It is greater to pray than to rule. Moses was to set himself at the highest end of the individual, political, and religious life of Israel, and to occupy the position of intercessor. He was to be the living link between the people and their God. Is not this the proper calling of the preacher? He is not to be a mere politician in the Church, he is not to enter into the detail of organisation with the scrupulous care of a conscientious hireling: he is deeply and lovingly to study the truth as it is in Jesus, that he may be prepared to enrich the minds and stimulate the graces of those who hear him. He is to live so closely with God, that his voice shall be to them as the voice of no other man, a voice from the better world, calling the heart to worship, to trust, and to hope, and through the medium of devotion to prepare men for all the engagements of common life. The preacher is to live apart from the people, in order that he may in spiritual sympathy live the more truly with them. He is not to stand afar off as an unsympathetic priest, but to live in the secret places of the Most High, that he may from time to time most correctly repronounce the will of God to all who wait upon his ministry. When preachers live thus, the pulpit will reclaim its ancient power, and fill all rivalry with confusion and shame. Let the people themselves manage all subordinate affairs; call up all the business talent that is in the Church, and honour all its successful and well-meant experiments; give every man to feel that he has an obligation to answer. When you have done this, go yourself, O man of God, to the temple of the Living One, and acquaint yourself deeply with the wisdom and grace of God, that you may be as an angel from heaven when you come to speak the word of life to men who are worn by the anxieties and weakened by the temptations of a cruel world.

Many a man inquires, half in petulance and half in self-justification, “What more can I possibly do than I am already doing?” Let the case of Moses be the answer. The question in his case was not whether he was doing enough, but whether he was not doing too much in one special direction. Some of the talent that is given to business might be more profitably given to devotion. Rule less, and pray more. Spare time from the business meeting that you may have leisure for communion with God. Some persons apparently suppose that time is lost which is not spent in the excitement of social activity. Understand that silence may be better than speech, that prayer is the best preparation for service; and that the duties of magistracy may well be displaced by the higher duties of spiritual devotion. Moses was, undoubtedly, to all human appearance, a much busier man when he did all the business of Israel himself than when he called lieutenants to his assistance; but what was subtracted from his activity was added to the wealth of his heart, and though he made less noise, he exerted a wider influence. Is there not a lesson for the people in the position which Moses occupied at the suggestion of Jethro? Is it nothing to society to have intercessors? Is it nothing that the chief minds of the age should be engaged in the study of truth for the benefit of others? It ought to be the supreme joy of our social life that there are men of capacity, of earnestness, and of high spiritual penetration and sympathy, who devote their whole energy to the stimulus and culture of our best powers. The ministry of any country should be the fountain of its power. Ministers are to study the character of God, to acquaint themselves with all the secrets of truth, and to comprehend as far as possible the necessity and desire of the human heart, and the result of their endeavours will express itself in a luminous and tender ministry. This is work enough for any man. He who is faithful to this vocation will find that he has no energy to spare for the trifles of a moment, or even for the subordinate questions of serious public life. The time which a minister spends in secrecy may enable him most successfully to teach the deep things of God. It is not enough that he be prepared with matter, he must have time and opportunity to enter into the spirit of his work. His knowledge may be wide and correct, but whatever is wanting in the reality and sensitiveness of his sympathy will be so much subtracted from his spiritual wisdom and strength,

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

FROM THE RED SEA TO SINAI (Continued)

Exodus 17-18

Our present chapter is a continuation of the last theme, “From the Red Sea to Sinai,” and this part of the theme is covered by Exodus 17-18. The chapter will be given catechetically.

1. What was the double sin of Israel at Rephidim?

Ans. The chiding of Moses and the tempting of God.

2. What was the occasion of this sin?

Ans. No water for the people to drink.

3. In what words did they chide Moses?

Ans. “Give us water that we may drink . . . Wherefore hast thou brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst?” This chiding of Moses is further repeated in their being ready to stone him.

4. How did they tempt God?

Ans. By saying, “Is the Lord among us or not?” That certainly ought not to have been a debatable matter. They should have remembered the indications of God’s presence with them when they were in Goshen, and the mighty work that he did in their deliverance, and how he was with them at the Red Sea and in the pillar of cloud and of fire. His presence was visible to them at all times. In their perplexities he had communed with them through Moses, and had just sweetened the water at Marah.

5. How was the want supplied?

Ans. Jehovah commanded Moses to take with him the elders of the people and the rod, the staff, and go to the rock in Horeb and smite it, and water would gush out of it. At the striking of that rock by Moses, the fountain was unsealed. The first time I saw Kickapoo Spring in Texas, I was reminded of the smiting of the rock. That spring cornes out of the rock just about on a level with your face as you stand in front of it, and the volume of water is about one yard thick, just gushing out, and trout are playing in it fifteen steps from where it gushes from the rock. An old Indian tradition is that in days long past a number of the Indians’ were there starving and that there came a thunderbolt which smote the rock and unsealed that fountain of water.

6. What names were given to these places? What of their derivation and meaning?

Ans. The names given were Massah and Meribah. They I are derived from verbs. Massah is the noun of the verb which j means “to tempt, or prove.” Massah, then, means temptation, trial or a proving, from Exo 17:7 : “And he called the name of I the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the striving of the children of Israel, and because they tempted Jehovah, I saying, Is Jehovah among us or not?” In Exo 17:2 the verb “to: chide” has for its noun Meribah, and the meaning is suggested by the verb “to chide.” Meribah then means a chid-. ing. “Wherefore the people strove with Moses, and said, Give us water that we may drink” (Exo 17:2 ).

7. How does Moses later refer to this sin?

Ans. Deu 6:16 : “Ye shall not tempt Jehovah your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.” There on the borders of the Promised Land about thirty-nine years after this event, Moses gave them this law.

8. How does our Lord apply these words of Moses?

Ans. We learn in Mat 4 and Luk 5 that when Jesus was tempted of Satan in the wilderness, he cut him off by this saying: “It is written, Thou shall not tempt the Lord thy God,” quoting Moses.

9. What does Paul say of this event at Rephidim, and what does he mean by the rock “following them”? And how do the rabbis explain that “following”?

Ans. Paul says that the fathers did all eat the same spiritual meat (referring to the manna), and did drink the same spiritual drink, i.e., the water from the smitten rock, and he is “That rock was Christ.” Now, the rabbis claim one of two alternate things: (1) That when the Israelites moved away from there that rock moved with them, carrying its fountain of waters, which is foolishness; or (2) that while the rock remained where it was, yet the water followed that company trough their march; that stream which started to flow at Horeb followed them wherever they went, and that, too, is foolishness, for a good deal of the time they went uphill, and that being so, there would be no necessity later on to get water from another rock, as we learn in Numbers. What, then, does Paul mean in this: “And all were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual food; and did all drink the same spiritual drink; for they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them; and the rock was the Christ” (1Co 10:2-4 ). The meaning is that Christ in his pre-incarnate state accompanied them all through their wanderings.

10. Contrast this water from the rock with a later occasion, as given in Num 20 , and expound the difference.

Ans. In the occasion at Horeb God commands Moses to smite the rock. In the occasion at Kadesh God commands Moses to speak to the rock, not to smite it, but to speak to it. But Moses, instead of speaking to it as he had been commanded, smote it twice in anger. The benefits coming from Christ originated in his being smitten, and he was smitten once for all. He has to die but once; the sacrifice was never to be repeated, but after he died we get the benefits which flow from Christ by petition; by speaking to him. We do not have to crucify him afresh every time we need anything from him. He was to be crucified but one time. But all through our lives we may speak to the smitten rock and get what we need. That is the most striking point of contrast.

11. What other great event occurred at Rephidim?

Ans. At that point the Israelites were attacked by Amalekites.

12. Who were the Amalekites? Their position among the nations ?

Ans. We learn in Genesis that one of the descendants of Esau, the elder brother of Jacob, was Amaiek; and hence many commentators make the Amalekites kinsmen of the Israelites, the descendants of Esau. I am not at all inclined to accept that. The only thing in the world to support it is that Esau did have a son named Amalek, and that is all there is. But in the Bible references the Amalekites are not reckoned as descendants of Shem. They are reckoned with the Amorites; Jebusites, Hittites, and Philistines, occupying the Holy Land and those neighboring to it. So I would say that the Amalekites were a tribe descended from Ham, and occupied territory assigned to them. Their principal territory at this time was in the Arabian Desert, extending all the way from Sinai to the borders of the Holy Land. We get at their position among the nations by certain words of Balaam, the prophet, who, under the inspiration of God, spoke a word against the Amalekites, calling them “the chief of the nations” (Num 24:20 .)

13. Who commanded Israel’s forces in this battle? How many times before this is he named? Was his name Joshua! at the time of the battle? If not, what was his name, and: when and why did he get the name Joshua?

Ans. Joshua commanded Israel’s forces in this battle. His name does not appear in the record before this incident. His name was not Joshua at the time of this battle. It was Hoshea which was later changed to Joshua by Moses when he sent the spies to view the land.

This shows that Exodus up this point, at least, was written after the incident of sending out the spies. Moses here calls him Joshua because by the time of the writing of this record he was known by this name. Just as I say, “When was Abraham born? When did he enter Haran and the Promised Land?” Now, his name was not Abraham but Abram when he entered Haran. I am speaking of it later and mean to say that his name was Abram then.

14. Explain Exo 17:11-12 of this chapter: “And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed; and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. But Moses’ hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.”

Ans. The principal thought is that while in the line of duty, Joshua with the armed members of Israel should fight his best, but there is praying to be done; fight and pray, like “watch and pray.” So the lifting up of the hands of Moses signifies the intercession to the God of battles that victory might be with the Israelites; that is the signification of it. The lifting up of the hands in the Psalms refers to the praying of the people at the time of the evening sacrifice. Now, while Joshua fought, Moses prayed. Moses had a part to do in that battle, and if his intercession stopped, then the Amalekites would get the victory, which means that if he pitched untried Israel against warlike Amalek and left God out, Amalek would win the fight, but one plus God is a majority always. Intercession keeps God on the side of Israel; and while Moses prays, the inferior Israelites will triumph over the superior Amalekites.

15. What is the thought and application of “Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands”? Illustrate.

Ans. It suggests the thought of there being something for everybody to do. Joshua must fight and Moses must continue his pleading; he is the great intercessor of his people, a mediator; and if weakness at last overcomes him, and his hands have to drop, that suggests something for somebody else to do. “I cannot fight like Joshua; I cannot plead like Moses; but I can stand by Moses and hold up his hands; I can keep the posture of supplication continually.” You have heard of the man who wanted to go down into a mire and rescue some perishing people, and there were a great many who were competent to do that. One of them volunteered, saying, “I’ll go down if you will hold the rope.” He had to be let down; and our foreign missionaries use that and say, “We will go to the heathen alone if you people at home will hold the rope. Don’t you quit praying for us. Don’t quit contributing; don’t let us get out of your mind.” There is something for everybody to do. You cannot do Joshua’s part, nor Moses’ part, but perhaps you can do the part of Aaron and Hur. You can hold up somebody’s hands. I heard a pastor once make this remark: “You have been unfaithful to me since I became pastor of this church.” The man said, “No man living has ever heard me say a word against you, and you cannot prove that I did.” “No, I cannot prove that.” And the man continued, “I have always paid my part of your salary promptly; you cannot deny that.” “No.” “Then why do you say I have been unfaithful to you?” The pastor replied: “You have not held up my hands. As a deacon of this church you had something more to do than simply to refrain from criticizing the pastor. You are an officer of the church, and the office of a deacon was instituted as a help to the pastor; you don’t stay up my hands.”

16. What was the memorial of this battle? What is its object?

Ans. It is expressed in these words: “And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in the book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: that I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.” The memorial was a sentence from God to be put into the book, the book of the Pentateuch. Moses would keep on writing; here he would put in some, then again he would put some in the book which was to be the Bible of this people, and of all God’s people until the end of time. God said, “Write.” “Write what?” “I will blot out the name of Amalek from the whole earth.” That is the memorial. The object of the memorial was this: To rehearse it to Joshua. You tell Joshua what you have written “So now, Joshua, you are to succeed Moses; after awhile you are to command the armies of Israel. You are never to forget that the sentence is in the Holy Book: ‘Amalek must be blotted out.'” Like the voice of old Cato every time he would make a speech in the Roman senate: Carthago delenda est, i.e., “Carthage must be destroyed.” Rome was not safe unless Carthage perished. Now you rehearse this to Joshua, and let Joshua’s successors see it in this book; and their successors said, “Amalek must be destroyed.”

17. What is the meaning of Jehovah-nissi? Illustrate.

Ans. Moses built an altar there and he called it “Jehovahnissi” “Jehovah is my banner.” Nissi means banner. I once heard my father preach a sermon on “Jehovah-nissi.” I was a little fellow, and I remember that he wanted us to get the true meaning of that title: “Jehovah our Banner.” How is the flag an ensign? “In order to get the thought,” he said, “go back to Moses praying.” As long as the hands of Moses were upheld the Israelites prevailed. What does that posture of Moses with outstretched hands look like? What does it make? A cross. The Lord is our banner; banners have something on them, like the English battle flag. Now you are to think of a banner with a cross inscribed on it.

Constantine reminds you of this, who, when he first became a Christian, declared he was led to conversion by something he had seen in a great battle with his enemy; that while the battle was at its hottest, and the Roman army seemed about to be defeated, he saw in the clouds a banner on which was written the words, over an inscribed cross. In hoc siano vince, “by this sign conquer.” Constantine always claimed that saw that flag in the air.

The first time that I ever heard of it was my father’s telling this incident n his sermon. Now he say, “This posture [with his hands down] would not be a banner; this posture [arms and hands outstretched, horizontal with shoulders] is & banner. As long as Moses held up his hands, Israel prevailed but if Moses let down his hands, Amalek prevailed. Therefore who did that whipping? It was not Joshua and it was nod Israel. When did the whipping take place? When Moses has his hands outstretched. That must have been Jehovah-nissi Jehovah Our Banner. In this banner we conquer.” Anyhow I tell it to you for whatever value you are disposed to attach thereto.

18. Explain the first clause of Exo 17:16 .

Ans. This is the last verse of the chapter. “Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovah-nissi; and he said, Jehovah hath sworn; Jehovah will have war with Amalek from generation to generation,” or the marginal reference, “Because there is a hand against the throne of Jehovah” (Hebrew) “A hand is lifted up upon the throne of Jah.” Because the’; Lord hath sworn. The difficulty of explaining that is this? The text of the Hebrew does not hold that out well. The’ real meaning makes sense. The Hebrew expresses the idea of putting a hand on the throne. “A hand is lifted upon the throne of Jah.” Now God would not swear by his throne; as we are told in the New Testament. Men swear by a greater; and because God could not swear by a greater than himself, he took an oath himself, by all his authority. That is why the King James Version is a bad rendering of the Hebrew. But somebody’s hand is reaching up to that throne. Whose and what is it? Amalek. What is Amalek trying to reach? The throne of Jehovah, working against the march of God’s people. That makes sense. Because he hath put his hand on the throne of Jehovah, Jehovah hath sworn that he will have with him from generation to generation. That is certainly a fine sense.

19. When and where do the Amalekites next fight Israel?

Ans. Num 23 . After the people have gotten to Kadesh-barnea, and the spies had returned, the people refused to go up. Moses then announced their doom. That was never to be recalled. So far as that generation was concerned, they were doomed; they had rebelled and murmured and now when God bad brought them to the very border of the land, they refused to go in. He now announces the doom on this generation, and this made such an impression on the people that they said, “We will go up.” Moses says, “You cannot go up because the Lord won’t let you.” “We will go up anyhow,” said they, in their presumption. They went up, and met Amalek drawn up in battle array. The same people that had fought them just before they had gotten to Sinai now fights them on the other border just before they go to enter the Holy Land; as God was not with them, and nobody interceded with outstretched hands, Amalek prevailed and Israel was defeated. That is the next battle.

20. When was the doom, pronounced by Moses, fulfilled?

Ans. This war was going on, and God had it recorded in the Bible that Amalek was to be blotted out from the face of the earth. When fulfilled? I cite you to 1Sa 15 , and if you know of anything later happening to these people, tell me about it. Saul, the first king of Israel, destroyed the Amalekites.

21. Who was the last Amalekite known to the Bible, what was his attitude toward Israel and what became of him?

Ans. After the monarchy had perished and Daniel was dead, Esther was queen to the Xerxes who led his army into Greece. Haman, the Amalekite, a descendant of the Agagites, sought to destroy Mordecai the Jew; and he himself swung on the gallows which he had erected for Mordecai; so the last we see of the Amalekites is Haman swinging. Look at this last of them. Hundreds and hundreds of years, we go back to this memorial written in the Book: “I will blot Amalek from the face of the earth,” and at last the sponge is passed over the slate and that problem is wiped out.

22. What momentous meeting took place at Horeb?

Ans. Jethro, father-in-law to Moses, having heard of his glorious success in the deliverance of the people and that he is approaching Horeb, goes to meet him with Zipporah, the wife of Moses, and his two sons. You see when Moses and Zipporah started to go to Egypt and had that little discussion about circumcising the second child, Moses sent her back., She did not go on with him. All that time she was in her father’s house. When the father hears that Moses has reached that mountain, he thought Moses had better have his wife and children, and I agree with him. How very handsomely I does he compliment Moses on his achievements; and they talk about each other’s welfare. Moses tells him all the details of the Israelites’ deliverance.

23. What valuable suggestion of Jethro was made to Moses?

Ans. Jethro was there as a guest, and sat around the camp, noticing Moses early and late. Moses would sit there and judge cases presented. Two women would come up after a dispute and ask Moses which was right. From all over the camp of three million people, every little judicial matter was brought to This man, and great crowds would be waiting to get brought to this man, and great crowds would be waiting to get audience. Old Jethro seems to have been a man of good common sense. So he says, “This is not good; you are killing yourself and wear-ing out these people. I suggest that you appoint a number of judges to whom all these small cases shall be referred. Let them decide such. But the things the big things that relate to God, let them be brought to you; and in that way you will live; and you will put some of the rest of these people to work.” It was a grand thought and was adopted by Moses. It was the commencement of the judicial system in the organization of the well-known justice court for small cases. We have a county, district, and a justice court. Little cases go to the latter; and if the cases require a bigger court, they go to the county court; and still rigger affairs that relate to more than one county go to the circuit court.

24. Compare this appointing of judges relieving Moses from the details of multitudinous affairs with a similar relief in Num 11:1-17 , brought about in exactly the same way.

Ans. These were not to have charge of judicial matters, but tribal. So God tells Moses to appoint seventy men of the elders of Israel, saying, “I will take of the Spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not thyself alone.” These elders were to judge the tribal cases. We have a similar circumstance in Act 6:1-6 : “Now in these days when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a murmuring of the Grecian (Hellenistic) Jews against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. And the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not fit that we should forsake the word of God and serve tables. Look ye out therefore, brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will continue stedfastly in prayer, and in the ministry of the word.”

25. Now compare this appointment of judges with the appointment of seventy elders in Numbers II and with the appointment of deacons in Act 6 ; define and illustrate the economic principle governing the three transactions.

Ans. answer to question 24. The economic principle is the division of labor. It is not worth while for a man to attend to details which anybody else can and will do. Never use a thirteen-inch cannon to shoot a humming bird. The division of labor is the answer. To illustrate: Dr. Howard, pastor of the First Church at Galveston, was one day approached by Deacon Dunklin, who said, “You are not doing well; you are doing too much, the whole thing, pastor, clerk, treasurer, and Sunday school superintendent. Now you are wearing yourself out and there are just a lot of good people in this church lying around idle who can help the pastor do some of these things; and they will be better satisfied if you give them something to do, and you will preach better sermon and do better pastoral work if you don’t have to worry over a thousand things.” That illustrates the point.

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Exo 18:1 When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father in law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, [and] that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt;

Ver. 1. Heard of all. ] And thereby was converted, say the Rabbis, being the first proselyte to the Jewish Church that we read of in the Scripture.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

When. This chapter is a parenthesis (App-6). Introduced here because Jethro, though he lived among the Amalekites, yet was not under their

curse (Exo 17:14-1 Exo 17:6). The event occurred between Exo 18:10 and Exo 18:11 of Numbers 10. Jethro’s counsel was given, and taken, when Israel was ready to depart from Sinai (Deu 1:7-14).

Jethro. Compare Exo 3:1. Probably a descendant of Abraham by Keturah, and not, therefore, an idolater. Compare Exo 18:12 and context.

God. Hebrew. Elohim. App-4.

the LORD. Hebrew. Jehovah. App-4.

Egypt. A reading (Sevir) reads “land of Egypt”. See App-34.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 18

Now when Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father in law ( Exo 18:1 ),

But the same Hebrew word could be translated “brother-in-law”, for we remember earlier, he was called “Reuel”; the father-in-law of Moses was called Reuel. So it could be that this is Jethro another name for “Reuel”, or it could be that Jethro is actually Moses’ wife’s brother. But he was a priest of Midian. As I say the word “father-in-law” could also be translated “brother-in-law” from the Hebrew.

he heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, and that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt; Then Jethro, Moses’ father in law, took Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her back ( Exo 18:1-2 ).

Now you remember when Moses was coming out with his wife Zipporah when God first called Moses to go deliver the children of Israel and Moses was heading down towards Egypt, and the Lord met Moses and almost killed him? So Zipporah knew what was going on. She quickly circumcised their boy, and she actually accused Moses of being a bloody man, and so forth.

Evidently at that point they-it wasn’t a pleasant scene. I mean it was quite a tiff between them. Evidently Moses just sent her back to her dad. “You go back to your dad, I’m heading on down to do my work in Egypt.” So Zipporah his wife didn’t accompany him, nor his two sons Gershom and Eliezer. But now as he is come back into the area of Midian, Jethro comes out and brings his wife and his two sons. “Zipporah Moses’ wife,”

And the two sons; of which the name of one was Gershom; and the other was Eliezer; Gershom meaning a stranger, and Eliezer is the God is my help. And Jethro, Moses’ father in law, came with his sons and his wife to Moses in the wilderness, where they encamped at the mount of God: And he said unto Moses, I thy father in law Jethro am come unto thee, and thy wife, and her two sons with her. Moses went out to meet his father in law, and he bowed to him, and kissed him; and they asked each other how everything was going; and they came into the tent. And Moses told his father in law all that the LORD had done unto Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, and all the travail that had come upon them by the way, and how the LORD delivered them. And Jethro rejoiced for all of the goodness which the LORD had done to Israel, whom he had delivered out of the hand of the Egyptians. And Jethro said, Blessed be the LORD, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of the Pharaoh, who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. Now I know that Jehovah is greater than all gods: for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them ( Exo 18:3-11 ).

That is, where the Egyptians were so proud, God was greater than they were and their gods.

And Jethro, [God is greater. Remember God said He was bringing the attacks against the gods of Egypt. So Jehovah is greater than all the gods, that is the gods of Egypt, “And Jethro”,] Moses’ father in law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God: and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses’ father in law before God. And it came to pass on the next day, that Moses sat to judge the people: and the people stood by Moses from the morning till the evening ( Exo 18:12-13 ).

Now Jethro built an altar and he offered a sacrifice, a burnt offering to God. Now he was a priest, but he wasn’t of the children of Israel. So other people knew God and worshiped God, who were not the children of Israel in those days, Jethro being one of them. He was a priest of God.

Now the next day the people came into Moses with their problems, and from morning till evening they brought their cases to Moses for him to determine and for him to decide. “This guy borrowed my shovel and he didn’t bring it back.” or “He broke the handle.” So Moses would say, “Okay you get him a new handle, or fix the handle.” All day long Moses was interfacing for these people. Giving judgment to them and so forth.

And when Moses’ father in law saw all that he did to the people, he said, What is this that you do to the people? why do you sit alone, and all the people stand by thee from morning till evening? And Moses said unto his father in law, [Imagine there were six hundred thousand adult males, and so they were a big crowd, “Moses said to his father in law”,] Because the people come to me to inquire of God: And when they have a matter, they come to me; and I judge between one another, and do make them know the statutes of God, and his laws. And Moses’ father in law said unto him, That’s not good. You’re gonna wear yourself out Moses, both you and the people that are with you: for this thing is too heavy for you; you’re not able to perform it thyself alone. Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God will be with you: Be thou for the people to God-ward, that you may bring the causes unto God: And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shall show them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do. Moreover thou shalt provide out of the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place over them such, to be the rulers over the thousands, over the hundreds, and over the tens ( Exo 18:14-21 ):

So he’s saying, “Hey Moses, hey you’re gonna kill yourself, man, trying to keep up that heavy schedule. You can’t do it. So it isn’t right that you just wear yourself out in doing it. So you need to get other men to help you with this thing. Now you teach the people the ordinances and statutes of God. But pick out men over the thousands, and over the hundreds, and over the tens, and let them bring their cases to these men. Let them do the judgments. You teach them what the judgments and statutes of God are, and let them handle these matters. Then in the areas where they can’t handle them-” Moses more or less became the Supreme Court so that every case wasn’t brought to Moses, but just those that could not be handled by those men under him.

Quite often when you have a person of Moses’ caliber and strong leadership, that he becomes overburdened with things that actually don’t always pertain to just the leadership. It’s possible for you to find yourself so engaged in little non-essential things that you really don’t have time to do the essentials.

Now life has to be made up of priorities. We must determine what is most important and then we’ve got to do the most important things. It’s easy to find yourself majoring in the minors, and spending so much time in minor issues of, of no count, that you really don’t have the energy and the strength for the major things.

I believe that Satan likes to wear people out on piddling little things. Sometimes I get involved in a project, and I enjoy doing mechanical things. I enjoy working on mechanical things. But I have found that there is-I think they call it Murphy’s law: “If anything can go wrong it will”. Sometimes you’re just tightening a bolt, and you think, “Well I’ll give it just a little bit more, you know I want to make it good and snug”, and you snap the thing. You know, you can waste all kinds of time trying to get a stud out that you’ve snapped off in a block. You find yourself working for an hour and a half just because you wanted to give it an extra little tug and cinch it down. I think of all that wasted time just for the sake of cinch down. Oh, help.

You find yourself sometimes involved in things. Thus you’ve got to lay out your time and your priorities, and what is really and truly important, and lay out your priorities so that you’re not spending all of your time in issues where someone else could just as easily handle them.

Now this came up in the early church. They began to lay upon the apostles all of the decision-making processes. The church had a welfare program, and they were distributing to the widows in the church. Those widows that had a Grecian cultural background felt that the widows who had a Jewish cultural background were getting a better deal. They were getting favoritism when they were doling out the church’s welfare program.

So they came to the apostles and said, “That’s not fair. The Grecians aren’t getting the same deal as the Hebrews.” They wanted the apostles to, to move in, and to do something. They said, “Hey, let’s appoint men who are full of the Holy Ghost who could report” and wisdom and so forth, “that they might take care of the waiting on of tables, because it isn’t right for us to leave the Word of God and prayer, to wait on tables.”

But I think of how many ministers have been forced to leave the Word of God and prayer, in order to wait on tables. Demands are being made upon the ministers that really a minister shouldn’t have to fulfill. As a young minister in a small church, you’d be amazed at the things the people ask you to do. “Can you come over and pick me up, and take me to the store?” You become a taxi cab. You find yourself a handyman, and you find yourself doing all kinds of things that really don’t pertain to the true ministry of the Word of God and prayer. In fact, I oftentimes found myself so involved in doing these other things that I didn’t have time for the Word of God and prayer, and thus the people suffered.

Now with a church this large you could imagine the demands that are made upon our time. How many times people will call and say, well they’ll only speak to Chuck. They don’t want to speak to anybody else. They’ve been watching him on TV you know, “and if he’ll come and talk to them, I know they’ll get saved.” “Well here’s a guy that’s dying and he needs to have the Lord”, and you get hundreds of these calls. If we tried to go around and to minister to everyone who called for us, we would never have time for the Word of God and prayer. We don’t have enough time for it now. So you’ve got to establish priorities. You’ve got to do just what is truly the most important thing that God has called you to do.

Now God has called men to various ministries within the body, and God has anointed some men for the ministries of counseling, and has anointed others for the ministry of health, and has anointed others for the ministry of government. And it’s a blessed church that has the various ministries functioning within the church, so that all of the demands aren’t placed upon one person to do everything.

Moses’ father-in-law said, “Hey man you’re gonna kill yourself. Not even taking time out to rest. All day long these people are standing here. You don’t have time to really wait upon God.” So he offered a solution to Moses.

Now the interesting thing to me is the qualifications that they required of the men. First of all,

Men that fear God, men of truth, and men who hate covetousness ( Exo 18:21 );

Hey if you can get men like that, you can allow them to do almost anything, men who first of all have a real fear of God or a reverence of God. You know there are some people, I’m sure, from their actions, they don’t even reverence God. They don’t even consider God at all. I think that some of these evangelists and all, this Reverend Ike, there has to be no fear of God in that man, no fear of the judgment. The big hype that he puts on you have to realize that the guy has no fear of God or else he could never do the things he is doing.

This isn’t just true of him, but it’s true of many, many men who are involved in ministries. If you really look at their lives, it’s just one big hype, and you have to realize, “Hey these people, what they lack is a real fear of God.” To realize that some day they’re gonna have to stand before God and give an account for these things. Boy, I’ll tell you that, that is something that really weighs upon me. The Bible says, “Be not many masters, knowing you’re gonna receive the greater condemnation” ( Jas 3:1 ).

So being a teacher of the Word of God puts you in a very precarious position, because someday you’re gonna have to answer to God for your teaching. That’s why I do my best to just stick to the Word of God and when the Word of God speaks on an issue, I’ll speak on it. When the Word of God is silent, I try to be silent. I don’t want to say more than what the Word of God actually says. Because the teachers are gonna be in greater condemnation. But there are some who have no fear of God, because they’re saying all kinds of wild, weird things that are even contrary to the Word of God. And so you just know they really don’t fear God. They don’t have the fear of judgment in their hearts.

Secondly, “they were men of truth” and thirdly, “hating covetousness”. Men, who really had no ambitions for themselves, hating covetousness, these were the men who were chosen.

And let them judge the people at all seasons: and it shall be, that every great matter that they shall bring to you, but every small matter they shall judge: so it is easier for you, and they shall bear the burden with you. And if you shall do this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt be able to endure, and all of these people shall also go to their place in peace. [So, “God commands you to do it.”] So Moses hearkened to the voice of his father in law, and did as he said. And Moses chose able men out of all of Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers over the thousands, rulers over the hundreds, fifties, and over the tens. And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought to Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves. And Moses let his father in law depart; and he went his way into his own land ( Exo 18:22-27 ).

So evidently Moses’ wife and children stayed with him at this point, and his father returned home, father-in-law. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Here we have an interesting interruption of the main narrative. Jethro arrests our attention and compels recognition of certain facts which we are liable to forget, as also were the Israelites of old. This man was evidently of a caliber different from that of the ordinary run of those not included in the divinely created nation. He was at once a prince and a priest. He declared his own faith in Jehovah to be confirmed by the deliverance wrought under the leadership of Moses and he offered sacrifice to Jehovah. Here, as formerly, when Melchizedek met Abraham, we find a recognition of the fact that on the basis of faith and sacrifice it is possible for others than the chosen people to approach God.

The advice Jethro offered Moses was that of a man of excellent common sense. He saw that instead of devoting himself to the more important work of leadership, Moses might also attempt to do work which could well be delegated to others. This is a common mistake. Men called by God to lead are always in danger of attempting to encompass more than they are able. Jethro’s advice was reverent in its recognition of the divine authority, “If thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so.” The fact that Moses acted on Jethro’s advice is almost certain evidence that he recognized that God was speaking to him through this man. It is well for us to remember that God has different ways of making known His will and the fact that He sometimes comes to us through the advice of others should save us from anything like arrogant self-sufficiency.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

Moses Tells Jethro of Gods Goodness

Exo 18:1-12

The names that Moses gave his two sons betray the drift of his thoughts during the forty years of his shepherd life. May we ever remember that we are strangers here, and our only help is in God. How humble Moses was in attributing to God all the glory of the Exodus! This is the sure cure of pride; and what are we but the axe that lies at the tree-foot, or the dry jaw-bone of an ass! Jethro belonged to another type of the religious life. He was not one of the chosen people, nor did he follow the methods of Jewish worship. But holy souls recognize their kinship the world over, and in loving embrace disregard the minor disagreements. Grace be with all those who love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Exo 18:7

I. This world is not a scene adapted or intended to afford the pleasure and benefit of friendship entire. Men cannot collect and keep around them an assemblage of congenial spirits, to constitute, as it were, a bright social fire, ever glowing, ever burning, amidst the winter of this world. They cannot surround themselves with the selectest portion of humanity, so as to keep out of sight and interference the general character of human nature. They are left to be pressed upon by an intimate perception of what a depraved and unhappy world it is. And so they feel themselves strangers and pilgrims upon earth.

II. It is contrary to the design of God that the more excellent of this world’s inhabitants should form together little close assemblages and bands, within exclusive circles, detached as much as possible from the general multitude. On the contrary, it is appointed that they should be scattered and diffused hither and thither, to be useful and exemplary in a great number of situations; that there should be no large space without some of them. Thus it is a world that dissociates friends. Nevertheless friends do sometimes meet; and then it is quite natural to do as Moses and Jethro did: “ask each other of their welfare.”

In the meeting of genuine friends, after considerable absence, these feelings will be present: (1) Kind affection. (2) Inquisitiveness. “They asked each other.” (3) Reflective comparison; not an invidious, but an instructive, one. (4) Gratitude to God for watching over them both. (5) Faithful admonition and serious anticipation.

J. Foster, Lectures, 2nd series, p. 208

References: Exo 18:7.-A. K. H. B., Towards the Sunset, p. 127. Exo 18:13-26.-S. Cox, Expositor’s Notebook, p. 52. 28-Parker, vol. ii., p. 141.

Exo 18:17-18

Various lessons may be gathered from the fact that Moses was wearing himself away by undue application to the duties of his office, and that by adopting Jethro’s suggestion and dividing the labour he was able to spare himself and nevertheless equally secure the administration of justice.

I. We see the goodness of God in His dealings with our race in the fact that labour may be so divided that man’s strength shall not be overpassed, but cannot be so divided that man’s strength shall be dispensed with.

II. It is a principle sufficiently evident in the infirmity of man that he cannot give himself incessantly to labour, whether bodily or mental, but must have seasons of repose. We shrink from the thought and the mention of suicide, but there are other modes of self-destruction than that of laying hands on one’s own person. There is the suicide of intemperance; there is also the suicide of overlabour. It is as much our duty to relax when we feel our strength overpassed, as to persevere while that strength is sufficient.

III. God has, with tender consideration, provided intervals of repose, and so made it a man’s own fault if he sink beneath excessive labour. What a beautiful ordinance is that of day and night! What a gracious appointment is that of Sunday 1 When the Sabbath is spent in the duties that belong to it, its influence gives fresh edge to the blunted human powers.

IV. Each one of us is apt to be engrossed with worldly things. It is well that some Jethro, some rough man from the wilderness, perhaps some startling calamity, should approach us with the message, “The thing that thou doest is not good; thou wilt surely wear away.”

V. At last we must all wear away, but our comfort is that, though the outer man perish, the inner man shall be renewed day by day.

H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 1512.

References: Exo 19:1.-W. M. Taylor, Moses the Lawgiver, p. 182; Parker, vol. ii., p. 147. Exo 19:1-6.-D. J. Vaughan, The Days of the Son of Man, p. 197. 19-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 202. 19, 20-Ibid., p. 204.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

CHAPTER 18 Moses and Jethro

1. The coming of Jethro (Exo 18:1-5)

2. Moses and Jethros communion (Exo 18:6-12)

3. Jethros advice (Exo 18:13-23)

4. Moses action (Exo 18:24-27)

This chapter concludes the first section of the second part of Exodus. We have in it a beautiful dispensational foreshadowing of things to come. God had redeemed Israel , delivered them from Pharaohs host, manifested His power and had given them victory. The priest of Midian, a Gentile, now comes, having heard all that Jehovah had done for Moses and for Israel , his people. Zipporah, Moses wife, and his two sons are with him. What a happy reunion. And there was praise unto Jehovah from the lips of the Gentile as well as burnt offering and sacrifices for God. It foreshadows what will take place when Israel is finally restored and delivered. Then the Gentiles will come and many nations shall be joined unto the Lord in that day (Zec 2:11). Read Jer 16:14-21. First Jehovahs power in the restoration of His scattered people is mentioned; then the coming of the Gentiles is announced. The Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth.

Moses judging, and the faithful men, fearing God, judging with him, may well remind us of that day, when He who is greater than Moses will judge the earth in righteousness. Then we shall have share with Him. Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? (1Co 6:2).

what grace is and grace has done and will do is the most beautiful and precious revelation of Exodus up to the end of the eighteenth chapter. Jehovah took notice of the poor slaves. He heard their cry. He sent them a deliverer. He smote Egypt with great tribulation and judgment. He sheltered His people under the blood. He led them forth as His redeemed people. Their enemies perished through His power and He brought them through the Red Sea . He gave them bread from heaven and water out of the rock. Victory was on their side and the glory of His name extended to the Gentiles. But over our brief and imperfect annotations we have to write, Not the half has been told.

Exodus19:1-25

2. At Sinai: The Covenant and the Law

CHAPTER 19 Israel at Sinai and the Covenant

1. Israel before Mount Sinai (Exo 19:1-2)

2. The covenant and calling of Israel stated (Exo 19:3-6)

3. The covenant accepted (Exo 19:7-15)

4. The glory of the Lord at Sinai (Exo 19:16-25)

Sinai is mentioned 31 times in the Pentateuch and only three times more in the rest of the Old Testament. In the New Testament the word occurs only in Act 7:30; Act 7:38 and Gal 4:24-25. The place where the law was given is a barren wilderness of high towering rocks. Moses went up to God and Jehovah reminded the people first of all of His gracious dealing with them. Then He revealed His purposes concerning them as a nation. They were to be His peculiar treasure above all people and to be unto Him a kingdom of priests and an holy nation. This purpose is founded upon a theocracy, that is, He Himself would reign over them as King. For this He must ask obedience from them. How else could they be a kingdom of priests and a separated people, unless they harkened to His voice, and kept His covenant? But it is still the purpose of grace. Jehovah in His grace would make all this possible if they had received it. The law which followed, with its principle, obedience, as the place of blessing, never led to the realization of Israel s calling, nor ever will. When at least Israel becomes the kingdom of priests, it will be through grace and not of works.

It was a fatal thing, which all the people did when they answered together, all that the Lord hath spoken we will do. It was a presumptuous declaration, which sprang from self-confidence and showed clearly that they had no appreciation for that grace which had visited them in Egypt and brought them hitherto. They had received grace, they needed grace. With the vow they had made, they had put themselves under the law. The legal covenant had its beginning with the rejection of the covenant of grace, and the legal covenant ends with the acceptance of grace. God permitted all this for a wise purpose. For what the law serves, why it was given, is fully answered in the New Testament (See Romans 7 and Galatians 3). In this we cannot enter here.

At once the scene changes. The character of the law they had chosen and its ministration unto death is manifested in the outward phenomena of clouds and darkness and in the first mention of death since they had left Egypt . Whosoever toucheth the mount shall surely be put to death. On the third day the glory of the Lord appeared. The thunderings, lightnings, the trumpet, the trembling of the mountain, the voice of God, which accompany the manifestation of Jehovah, may be traced throughout the Bible. All this will be repeated in His glorious second coming. (Deu 33:1-3; 1Sa 2:10; Psa 18:7-16; Heb. 3; Rev 10:4, etc.)

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

Jethro: Exo 2:16, Exo 2:21, Exo 3:1, Exo 4:18, Num 10:29, Jdg 4:11

heard: Psa 34:2, Psa 44:1, Psa 77:14, Psa 77:15, Psa 78:4, Psa 105:5, Psa 105:43, Psa 106:2, Psa 106:8, Jer 33:9, Zec 8:23, Gal 1:23, Gal 1:24

God: Act 7:35, Act 7:36, Act 14:27, Act 15:12, Act 21:19, Act 21:20, Rom 15:18

done: Exo 7:1 – Exo 15:27, Jos 2:10, Jos 9:9, Neh 9:10, Neh 9:11, Psa 77:14, Psa 77:15, Psa 78:50-53, Psa 105:36-41, Psa 106:8-11, Psa 136:10-16, Isa 63:11-13

Reciprocal: Gen 25:2 – Midian Exo 2:18 – General Exo 18:8 – told Jdg 1:16 – Moses’ 2Ch 7:10 – goodness

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

The eighteenth chapter is somewhat parenthetical in its nature, inasmuch as it recounts an episode in which Moses’ father-in-law played a considerable part. To get the more direct dealings of God with the people we have to read straight on from the end of Exo 17:1-16 to the beginning of Exo 19:1-25.

Jethro must have known the full story of Israel’s sufferings in Egypt for Moses had dwelt with him for forty years. Now he had heard the wonderful story of their deliverance, and he came to rejoice with them, bringing Zipporah and her two sons. Only now do we learn that Moses had sent her back to her father, and what was the name of the second son.

The episode related in Exo 4:1-31 had shown us that Zipporah was not prepared for circumcision, the sign of the covenant with Abraham, and the type of the cutting off of the flesh. And, in that chapter it is “son,” in the singular, which we take as applying to Gershom, previously mentioned in Exo 2:1-25. In naming his elder son Gershom, Moses revealed his consciousness of strangership in the world where he sojourned, and the cutting off of circumcision was very appropriate in regard to that. Now the second son is mentioned, and we pass from what is negative to what is positive, since Eliezer signifies, “My God is an help.” This had now been made very plain, and in these two names we find Moses saying in principle what Joseph before him had said in the names of his two sons, which meant, “Forgetting,” and “Fruitful.”

Many see in this chapter a picture, though perhaps a faint one, of what will take place at the end of Israel’s history. It is given to us before we turn from God’s dealings with the people in grace, under the old covenant with Abraham, to the fresh covenant of law, with which Exo 19:1-25 is occupied. Let us consider this picture in its broad outlines.

In the language of Deu 33:5, Moses was, “king in Jeshurun, when the heads of the people and the tribes of Israel were gathered together.” In our chapter we find the heads of the people being selected, as Jethro counselled under God; for he only advised it, if “God command thee so.” So it seems that here we have a little sample of the coming kingdom. Moses is king; the people are subject to him; the Gentile, in the person of Jethro, comes to rejoice with him and his people. Moreover his Gentile wife is there, though she had disappeared during the time when God was redeeming His people by powerful judgments, and in her we see a faint type of the church.

Further, in the men appointed as rulers under Moses we see a type of those who will reign with Christ in the day of the kingdom. This is in keeping with Dan 7:14; Dan 7:18, where we are told that while the Son of Man will take the kingdom as the supreme authority, the saints also will take the kingdom in that day. The men who took authority under Moses were to be, “able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness.” This reminds us that the places of authority in the coming kingdom of Christ will be given to those who have approved themselves as worthy during the present time of responsibility here.

Exo 19:1-25 opens with the people camping at the foot of Sinai in the third month after their deliverance from Egypt; and, reaching that spot, Moses was called by God to go up into the mount in order that he might receive from God and convey to the people a fresh proposal.

The people were reminded what God had done on their behalf, bringing them to Himself in His grace. They however had not responded aright. They lacked faith in God, and did not really know themselves. Would they now have their footing with God established on a legal basis? Should God’s attitude towards them be governed by their attitude towards Him, so that, if they obeyed they should be in favour, and if they disobeyed they should be rejected?

In order more fully to grasp the difference between law and grace we may note the contrast between verses Exo 18:4-5 of our chapter and 1Pe 2:9. In Exodus the people were to be “a peculiar treasure,” “a kingdom of priests,” “an holy nation,” but only if they obeyed God’s voice indeed. In Peter the Christians of Jewish nationality are reminded what they are, without any “if.” They are not only “a royal priesthood,” “an holy nation,” “a peculiar people,” – three things almost identical with the three things of Exodus – but they are a fourth thing, which does not appear in Exodus. They are “a chosen generation,” and that made a difference of immense import. They were a new generation of God’s choice – a born-again people.

As a result of this, grace had set them in a new and wonderful position, and being this they were to show forth the praises of the One who had called them into it. In Exodus, the position of privilege before God was only to be theirs if their conduct merited it – if they obeyed. And, as we see in other Scriptures, they had to obey in everything and all the time. Hence the position was forfeited. They never had it, and on that basis they never will. Law can only say, “Do and live,” whereas grace says, “Live and do.”

This legal proposal was laid by Moses before the people, and their reply was promptly given, “All that the Lord hath spoken we will do.” Evidently it never occurred to their minds that they lacked both inclination and power to do what the law of God would enjoin. It is just this that both they and we have to learn. But did not God know it? That, He most certainly did.

We may wish then to ask why did God propose the law, if He knew from the outset what the result would be? This is virtually the question that Paul raises in Gal 3:19. He answers it by saying, “It was added because of transgressions,” while they were waiting for the advent of Christ, the promised Seed. The force of this becomes clearer if we read Rom 5:13; and Rom 7:7-13. God gave the law to Israel that by it they might have their sinful state brought home to them. Sin is lawlessness, and it was filling the earth from the days of the fall; but, immediately the law was given, a clear line was drawn, and stepping over that line a man became a definite transgressor. His sin could now be imputed to him in a way not possible before. God intended that in Israel definite proof should be given of the fallen and sinful state in which men were found.

Let us not forget that Israel was chosen, not only to be the central nation in God’s scheme for the government of the earth under Christ, but also to be the sample nation, in whom was to be made the test as to the real state of fallen humanity. They are a nation that has sprung from the finest human specimen – Abraham, who was “the friend of God.” Moreover they came into being by a miracle – the birth of Isaac. They were specially separated from the idolatrous nations and divinely educated by the voices of the prophets. Nothing could be fairer than this test of humanity in this people, who were the finest obtainable sample. We Gentiles were never put under the law, but we must never forget that, when we speak of how the law brought condemnation on Israel, we are thereby condemning ourselves.

In our chapter then, we see the people accepting the law as the determining factor in their relations with God, and doing so in the confidence that they would be able to keep it all. Had they had any true knowledge of themselves they would never have done this. Having accepted it, however, a complete change came over the scene. God veiled Himself and came to Moses in a thick cloud, as verse Exo 18:8 tells us, and from thence He would speak with Moses and make him His mouthpiece to the people.

Moreover, there would have to be special preparations on the part of the people. For two days they were to be set apart; they were to wash even their clothes, and bounds were to be set, preventing any from touching the mountain, under pain of death. The law was now to be given, and it was important that the people to whom it was given should be impressed with the holiness of the One who gave it.

From verse Exo 18:16 to the end of the chapter we have a vivid description of the tremendous scene that took place on the third day when the law was given. The people were marshalled at the foot of the mount that they might meet with God, as far as it was possible for them to do so. On the crest of the mountain Jehovah descended in fire, heralded by thunders, lightnings, cloud and smoke, and also the loud sound of a trumpet and quakings in the earth. It must indeed have been a scene to strike terror into every heart. If we turn to Heb 12:21, we discover a detail which is not mentioned in Exodus – “So terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake.” Exodus tells us that the people trembled, but that Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went up into the mount. Hebrews tells us how he quaked as he did so.

Verse Exo 18:22 shows us that there were already in Israel men who were acknowledged as priests, and in chapter Exo 24:5, we read of certain young men who were sent to sacrifice unto the Lord. Who these were is not disclosed, and not until we reach chapter 28 do we find Aaron and his sons named, as to be set apart for the priest’s office. What does appear clearly in our chapter is that the special privilege connected with priesthood is that of drawing “near to the Lord,” and that such nearness demands sanctification in no ordinary degree.

Verses Exo 18:1-17 of Exo 20:1-26 put on record the ten commandments which specially summarized the demands made by the holy law of God. The next chapter opens with the “judgments,” which were to be set before them. If we turn to Mal 4:4, we find both “statutes” and “judgments” mentioned as well as the “law.” The three words evidently cover all the legislation that reached Israel through Moses, and as we begin to consider the legislation we shall do well to note that in the days of Malachi, nearly a thousand years after it was first given, it was still as binding as at the beginning. It was for “all Israel,” and valid all through that dispensation. What God originates at the beginning of any dispensation stands good, and He never swerves from it however much His people may do so.

In giving the commandments God presented Himself to Israel as Jehovah, who had become in a special sense their God by having delivered them from Egypt, the house of their bondage. He addressed Himself therefore at the outset directly to the people, as verse Exo 18:19 indicates.

In the first three commandments God demanded that His rights as Creator, and their Redeemer from bondage, should be respected. He alone is God, so they were in the first place to recognize no other “god.”

In the second place they were to make no attempt to have an image or material representation of any unseen power. God is “in heaven above,” and anything purporting to be an image of Him is forbidden. Many other powers there are both invisible and visible, and no representations of such are to be made. All the idols of the heathen are strictly forbidden, and in this connection the warning is issued as to the sins of the fathers descending in retribution on the children. God knew how terribly infectious such idolatrous practices are; and, that if the fathers start them the epidemic rages with tenfold virulence in the children, and brings down the judgment upon their heads.

On the other hand the government of God would be in favour of those who are obedient because they love Him. Thus at the outset was it indicated that love is what is really enjoined in the law. Love is the fulfilling of the law, as we know very well.

In the third place the name of the Lord is safeguarded. Though Jehovah Himself was unseen, His Name had been manifested, and His supreme place in their midst would soon be disregarded if His Name were to be used in an unworthy way.

It is remarkable that the commandments given with the object of asserting and safeguarding the glory and the rights of God should be three, and this long before the reality of the three Persons in the Godhead was brought to light. We cannot but see in the second the clearing away of all that would be calculated to confuse the issue when our blessed Lord Jesus appeared as “the image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15). In Him, and in Him alone, is found the true and perfect representation of all that God is.

Similarly it is remarkable that when the Holy Spirit – who is not incarnate, but invisible – was sent forth He was sent by the Father in the name of the Son (see, Joh 14:26). That name has to be safeguarded, and it is further to be noted that it is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, who has come in that name, which is the unpardonable sin.

The fourth commandment concerns the due observance of the sabbath day, which was to be the sign of the covenant which was just being established. The first three commandments lay down man’s duty in regard to God; the last six his duty in regard to his fellows. Between these two divisions stands ‘the sign of the covenant, for it of necessity drew a clear line of demarcation between Israel, who as God’s people were to observe this weekly day of complete rest, and the rest of the nations, who did not observe it.

The Gentile nations had by this time lost all knowledge of the true God and of His work in creation. Israel alone had the knowledge of this and of the fact that God had rested on the seventh day. In the law God was enforcing His creatorial rights over man, and by Sabbath observance Israel was to have His creatorial work in constant remembrance.

We Christians are not under the law but under grace. The Sabbath, as the sign of the law covenant, has therefore lost its significance for us, as we see in such a Scripture as Col 2:16. Nevertheless there can be no doubt that a rest of one day in every seven is the wise and beneficent intention of God for man. The resurrection of Christ is the seal of our faith, and hence the first day of the week, on which He rose from the dead, became the day that Christians have from the very beginning devoted to His worship and service, and it has become the day on which we cease from our ordinary toil. Israel’s week worked up to the day of rest. The Christian’s week starts from the day of rest, based upon the resurrection of Christ.

The world around us has turned it into a day of amusement, sport and sin. Let us take good care to use it aright for the glory of God and our own blessing.

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

Giving the Glory to God

Exo 18:1-22

INTRODUCTORY WORDS

How fittingly does our chapter open: “When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel His people, and that the Lord had brought Israel out of Egypt,” etc.

Whoever recounted unto Jethro the story of Moses and of Israel coming out of Egypt gave God all the glory. Jethro also gave God the glory.

1. Who stood before Pharaoh and said, “Let My people go”? You answer it was Moses. We answer it was Moses sent of God. Moses was no more than the voice of Jehovah. He spoke the words of God. He wrought in the stead of God. God was in Moses commanding that Pharaoh let His people go.

Moses himself had trembled too much, and hesitated too long in a hearty readiness to approach the king of Egypt, to dare to take to himself any of the glory. It was only after God had demonstrated to Moses His power in two miraculous demonstrations that Moses would go at all. It was only when Moses knew that he was merely the voice of God to Pharaoh, and, as such, was backed by all that God was, that he felt assured of any final success in his task. To God was the glory.

2. Who wrought the miracles known as the ten plagues, which were sent upon Pharaoh to force him to let Israel go? Moses knew that he, of his own strength, could never do such wonders and signs. God alone could accomplish all that he wrought. He did it through Moses. Again to God was the glory.

3. Who divided the Red Sea, and made it stand up in a heap? If Moses did it, much less Moses’ rod, then another Moses, or man of Moses’ power, of our day, could do it. No other man since the time of Moses has ever even tried to cause such a volume of water to part, so that an army could pass through, as by dry land. The reason is plain: Only God could and only God did accomplish such a task-once more to God be all the glory.

4. Who carried more than a million men and women and children, with unprecedented goods, through so great a howling wilderness? Who provided the quails, the manna, the water, for their needs? Who stayed the rage of fevers, and caused their sandals not to wear out? Only God could, and only God did do it To God be all the glory. Not one word of praise to Moses for his leadership-the glory belonged to God.

5. Whom shall we praise throughout all eternity? We shall gather round the throne of God on high. Our gifts, our service, our everything which we have done in His Name-our work and labor of love-will not be the theme of rapturous praise. Our all will assume small proportions as we stand before the throne of God and behold His glory, and the riches of all that He hath done for us.

Heaven will give one great and loud acclaim of praise to God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, as we voice our heart throbs in that day.

I. “GERSHOM * * AN ALIEN IN A STRANGE LAND” (Exo 18:3)

1. The unsaved are aliens to God. There is a Scripture portion in Eph 2:1-22 which speaks of the unsaved in no uncertain terms. It says, “That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the Covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world.”

2. The saved are aliens TO THE WORLD. Abraham and Isaac and Jacob were strangers, tent dwellers, having no certain country down here. They were also pilgrims to a City whose Builder and Maker is God. However, they were aliens and strangers and pilgrims amid the people and the things of earth-while they were members of Christ and of God.

“I am a stranger here,

Within a foreign land;

My home is far away,

Upon a golden strand;

Ambassador to be

Of realms beyond the sea;

I’m here on business for my King.”

We fear that many today would like to change the well-known song quoted above, and sing it thus:

I am a citizen here,

Upon my native land;

My home is here to stay,

Upon this earthy strand;

Ambassador to be

Of realms down here, you see,

I’m here on business for earth’s king.

While I am quoting poems, let me quote a poem written by a Western preacher of the old days:

“My rest is in Heaven, my rest is not here;

Then why should I mourn when trials are near?

Be hushed, my tired spirit:

The worst that can come

But shortens my journey

And hastens me Home.

“It is not for me to be seeking my bliss,

And building my hopes, in a region like this;

I look for a City which hands have not piled,

I sigh for a Country by sin undefiled.”

II. A HELPER AND A DELIVERER (Exo 18:4)

Moses named his first son Gershom, which being interpreted means, “An alien in a strange land.” He named his second son Eliezer, which means, He “was mine Help, and delivered me.”

1. God is our Helper. When the Ark was brought out of the land of the Philistines, Eleazer was appointed to keep it and guard it from the enemy. Here is a name much like Eliezer.

In those days the Philistines drew near to battle. Then the Lord smote them, and Samuel the Prophet set up a stone, as a sign, saying, “Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.”

In Heb 13:5-6, we have the promise of the Father, “I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee”: along with this promise is found the response: “So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my Helper.”

In Act 26:22, we gather the resume of Paul’s response to Agrippa. Here are Paul’s words, “Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day.”

Surely the Lord will help us in every time of need.

2. God is our Deliverer. How blessed is the song of Psa 32:7 : “Thou shalt compass me about with songs of deliverance.” And He does this very thing for us. He puts the song upon our lips when He delivers us from so great a power of darkness.

If God said to Jeremiah, “Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee”; and if God did deliver Daniel from the lions, will He not also deliver us, if we trust in Him?

III. ENCAMPING AT THE MOUNT OF GOD (Exo 18:5)

1. The mount of God stands for fellowship with God. “He took Peter and John and James, and went up into a mountain to pray.” Up above the din of the crowd; up in the heights of those higher and holier things; up, alone with the Lord, in fellowship sweet and abiding. That is the place for you and for me.

2. The mount stands for transfiguration. “As He prayed, the fashion of His countenance was altered.” So will our faces be altered, if we will withdraw in the heights, alone with the Lord. You remember the words of Miss Havergal, “And when e’er you leave the fragrance of that blessed, hallowed place; you must mind to bear the image of the Master in your face.”

3. The mount stands for vision. “They saw His glory, and the two men that stood with Him.” If we expect to see the things of God, we must go to the heights where He dwells in the beauty of His holiness.

It is not enough to be there, but to be awake and alert to see Him. We love the verse which runs like this, “But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory.”

4. The mount is the place of instruction. Jesus took His disciples and “went up into a mountain: and when He was set, His disciples came unto Him: and He opened His mouth, and taught them.”

There is, then, no place more precious unto us than the mount of God. There we can hear words such as no man ever spoke. We can hear Him even now, on the mount, as He said, “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.”

IV. TRAVAILING BY THE WAY (Exo 18:8)

“And Moses told his father in law all that the Lord had done unto Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for Israel’s sake, and all the travail that had; come upon them by the way.”

1. It is given unto saints to suffer. Christ never promised to His followers a pathway strewn with roses.

“The thorns and the thistles around me may grow,

I would not He down on roses below;

I ask not a portion, I seek not a rest

Till I find them forever, on Jesus’ breast.”

The Lord said, “In the world ye shall have tribulation.” He said again, “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated Me before it hated you.” The Lord hath called us out of the world: that is why the world hates us.

For this cause, let us not think it strange concerning the fiery trials which may befall us. This is part of our calling.

2. After the suffering comes the glory. The Lord Jesus travailed that children might be born. What then? “He shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied.”

We, too, shall be satisfied. “I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed in us.” Is it not recorded “If we suffer (for Him), we shall also reign with Him”?

Listen to the Holy Spirit: He says, “But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto His eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while.”

Beyond doubt there is travail by the way. However, at the end of the way there is life, and light, and joy forevermore.

“Affliction may damp me, but cannot destroy;

One glimpse of His love, turns them all into joy;

And the bitterest tears, if smiles but on them,

Like dew in the sunshine, turns diamond or gem.

Come joy, or come sorrow, whatever befall,

One hour with the Saviour will make up for all.”

V. THIS THING IS TOO HEAVY FOR THEE (Exo 18:18)

1. All spiritual tasks are too heavy for us apart from God. Moses was undertaking a titanic task, enough to strain the powers of any man. Jethro, his father-in-law, saw this at a glance. He said to Moses, “Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that is with thee: for this thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone.” This may often be true, for physical reasons.

Let us, however, look at our service from another angle. We, as believers, are sent to accomplish those things which demand the special anointing of the Lord. We cannot preach as we ought, pray as we ought, give as we ought, live as we ought, sing as we ought; in fact we cannot do anything in the realm of the spiritual as we ought, if we are leaning upon our own strength.

2. We can do all things through Christ who strengtheneth us. Yes, we mean all things that the Spirit demands, all things that God requires or asks us to do. Have we not His blessed promise, “Ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you.”

Did not the Lord say, “All power is given unto Me in Heaven and in earth. Go, * * and, lo, I am with you”?

What then? Shall we try to do His work in our own strength? We cannot.

3. Nothing is too hard for God. We cannot: God can. It is a task too heavy for us, but the task is nothing to Him. “I know that Thou canst do all things.”

VI. BE THOU FOR THE PEOPLE TO GODWARD. (Exo 18:19)

1. There is special ministry given to saints. It is a ministry where there is real need. Man’s knowledge of those things which concern man may be ever so acute, while his knowledge of God may be weak indeed. Great men among the world may be ever so wise in earthly lore, and yet be ignorant as children in the things of God.

It is written, “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, for they are spiritually discerned” (1Co 2:14-15).

The ministry, therefore, that believers have from God, is a spiritual ministry. We are to proclaim those things which belong to the realm of faith-the Divine things,

2. The ignorance of the populace is the root of the need of our being unto them to Godward. In our tour of India we found among the people as a whole, such an appalling ignorance of things Divine. Even in the things that should have been known of them, such as His eternal power and Godhead, they were blind. There they were, bowing down with abject ignorance to gods of wood and iron and stone, which see not, nor hear, nor know. Those same people, however, in many cases were truly intellectual. They were far from untaught in the things of men. They excelled in many things. Both in knowledge and in workmanship they were at the top. With all that, their foolish minds were darkened to Godward. Let those whose hearts the Lord hath opened go forth to preach the things of God.

VII. PROVIDE ABLE MEN (Exo 18:21)

1. Provide able men. Men who are able to wield the sword? No. Men who are taught in the best schools of the land? No. Men who are able in the world of physical prowess? No.

Who are able men, whom the church may choose to put over the Lord’s business? To the Word and the Testimony. Here is what the Lord said about the selection of the first set of seven, who were needed to look after the business of the church: “Wherefore, brethren, look, ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.”

2. Provide men that fear God. It is not a question of appointing popular men; We need men who fear God. Shall the church seek out from among the world citizens who are great and noble, or shall they hold themselves strictly to men who know God and fear Him? We believe and are sure that the unregenerate have no place whatsoever in the service of the Lord. Men who do not fear the Lord cannot acceptably serve Him.

3. Provide men of truth, hating covetousness. We need not only true men, but men who are of the truth. How well did John, in the Spirit, write of those who walk in the truth! Not only must we have men of truth, but men void of covetousness. The servants of the Lord, who represent Him in places of authority and power, must not be men who serve their own selfish desires.

We can, even now, seem to see the Spirit writing about the selection of bishops: “A bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; but a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate; holding fast the faithful Word as he hath been taught.”

AN ILLUSTRATION

Until we realize the glory of God we will never be able to appreciatively glorify Him.

The glorious Name which Jehovah here (Gen 17:1) assumes is literally El Shaddai, the all-sufficient One, “the God who is enough” as Matthew Henry happily translates it. The great question that determines the magnitude of every life is the kind of God we have. The man who has a limited God will have a limited experience. The man who has caught the vision of El Shaddai will live up to that glorious standard. Let us not look so much at ourselves and try to pull ourselves up to a higher plane, as someone has said, by our bootstraps, but let us look up to the God who is calling to us from on high, until, like a mighty magnet, He attracts us to His own transcendent plans. It was the revelation and realization of God that made Abraham the great discoverer of new worlds of faith and vision, the Christopher Columbus, as someone has said, of spiritual discovery. Beloved friend, how large a God have you? Abraham’s God was sufficient to enable him to give up his home, country, and earthly prospects and go forth to a new world with nothing but God. * * Abraham’s God was sufficient to enable him once more to renounce and let go all present earthly prospects when the selfishness of Lot demanded the best of Abraham’s inheritance. Instead of wrangling with his unworthy nephew, Abraham let Lot take his choice and kept what he left. And then God came to him that night and told him that all the land, including Lot’s portion, should be his inheritance forever.-A. B. Simpson.

Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water

Exo 18:1. Jethro, to congratulate the happiness of Israel, and particularly the honour of Moses his son-in-law, comes to rejoice with them, as one that had a true respect both for them and for their God: and also to bring Mosess wife and children to him. It seems he had sent them back, probably from the inn where his wifes unwillingness to have her son circumcised had like to have cost him his life, Exo 4:25.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Exo 18:5. Jethro came to Moses at the mount of God. Horeb and Sinai, where God resided in glory, wrought miracles, and published his law. It would seem that Jethro stayed with Moses till the law was promulgated on Mount Sinai; and that Moses inviting Jethro to go with them to Canaan was at the parting, for he adds, I will return, &c. See Numbers 10. But he advised him to appoint judges and military officers, the day after his arrival.

Exo 18:6. Iam come to thee. The LXX relieve us of the awkward reading of this verse, in the English and Latin version. It was told Moses, behold thy father-in-law Jethro is coming to thee, and thy wife, and thy two sons with him. This occurrence comes in properly here, because Jethros flocks grazed near Horeb. How consolatory for Jethro to find Moses conqueror of Pharaoh, and king in Jeshurun!

Exo 18:11. The Lord is greater than all gods. To compare the Lord with idols, or with princes, is shocking. The translator was not aware that the Hebrews form their comparative degree by prefixing or min or mem, sometimes to the adjective, and sometimes to the substantive; michcol, great above all gods. The translators of 2Ch 2:5, and of Psa 95:3, have given us the true reading: The Lord is a great King above all gods.

REFLECTIONS.

We have a fine example of mutual love and relative affection in Jethro and Moses. Jethro had received the Hebrew exile into his house; but he knew not that he had received the greatest of prophets, and the wisest of kings. He had proved his fidelity as a servant, and rewarded it with the gift of a daughter; now he could rejoice in the highest fruits of his hospitality. How happy when good men, and religious families have known one another for forty years, and can bless God that his providence led them to friendship, and that his grace united their hearts.

By the emancipation of Israel, Jethros faith was greatly increased in the belief and worship of the one true and eternal God. He entered into all the wonders of the Lord, and despised the gods of the heathen. How good it is when the heart properly appreciates the mercies of the Lord, and when we can find friends to aid our weakness by their mutual faith. It is good to associate with those whose hearts are full of heaven and full of love.

Mark also the respect with which Moses received his father-in-law. He went to meet and embrace him, and he made him a feast with all the elders of Israel. The Lord had now raised Moses from pastoral life to regal dignity; but he was still a son, and relative duties are not superseded by elevation and honour. Jethro had most kindly received Moses as a stranger; and now Moses wished Jethro to accompany Israel, and to share in the blessings of their covenant. This overture he declined, being a priest of Midian; but where grace prevails in the heart, where happiness reigns in the house, the bonds of religious friendship are so pure, that however distant in situation, the recollection and attachment remain for ever.

Jethro having participated in the joy of Israel, is in return made useful to them by his advice. He saw the fatigue of Moses in judging the people; and advised him to elect, if God should approve, the sanhedrim or national council of seventy members. And God did approve, and he anointed and qualified the judges for their office, by the spirit of prophecy. This grand council existed throughout all the vicissitudes of the Jewish nation, till long after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans; and it often proved a source of salutary counsel, and contributed both to the support of religion and the defence of the state. Civil government is a divine ordinance, and an infinite blessing to a nation. It defends the lives and property of men by a grand chain of magistracy, from the prince to the people; and every magistrate holding his commission of God, as well as the king, should be superior to bribery and corruption, and to all respect of persons. Being called to the high duties of giving effect to the law, of protecting the oppressed, of tracing the mysteries of iniquity and maintaining the rights of God, he has need to be endued with an excellent spirit, and with the wisdom from on high. What but the grace of God can render him superior to passion, to party, and every private consideration? What but the anointing which fell on the seventy elders, or the genuine spirit of virtue and religion can divest him of the fear of man, and enable him to act as in the sight of God?

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Exodus 18

We here arrive at the close of a very marked division of the book of Exodus. We have seen God, in the exercise of His perfect grace, visiting and redeeming His people; bringing them forth out of the land of Egypt; delivering them, first, from the hand of Pharaoh and then from the hand of Amalek. Furthermore, we have seen, in the manna, a type of Christ come down from heaven; in the rock, a type of Christ smitten for His people; and in the gushing stream, a type of the Spirit given. Then follows, in striking and beautiful order, a picture of the future glory, divided into its three grand departments, namely, the Jew, the Gentile, and the Church of God.

“During the period of Moses’ rejection by his brethren he was taken apart and presented with a bride – the companion of his rejection. We were led to see, at the opening of this book, the character of Moses’ relationship with this bride. He was “a husband by blood” to her. This is precisely what Christ is to the Church Her connection with Him is founded upon death and resurrection; and she is called to fellowship with His sufferings. It is, as we know, during the period of Israel’s unbelief, and of Christ’s rejection, that the Church is called out; and when the Church is complete, according to the divine counsels, when the “fullness of the Gentiles is come in,” Israel shall again be brought into notice.

Thus it was with Zipporah and Israel of old. Moses had sent her back, during the period of his mission to Israel; and when the latter were brought forth as a fully delivered people, we read that “Jethro, Moses’ father in-law, took Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after he had sent her back, and her two sons, of which the name of the one was Gershom; for he said, I have been an alien in a strange land; and the name of the other was Eliezer; for the God of my fathers, said he, was mine help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh. And Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God. And he said unto Moses, I thy father-in-law, Jethro, am come unto thee, and thy wife and her two sons with her. And Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, and did obeisance, and kissed him; and they asked each other of their welfare; and they came into the tent. And Moses told his father. in-law all that the Lord had done unto Pharaoh, and the Egyptians, for Israel’s sake, and all the travail that had come upon them by the way, and how the Lord delivered them. And Jethro rejoiced for all the goodness which the Lord had done to Israel, whom he had delivered from the hand of the Egyptians. And Jethro said, Blessed be the Lord, who hath delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of Pharaoh; who hath delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods; for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them. And Jethro Moses’ father-in-law, took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God: and Aaron came, and all. the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God.” (Ex. 18: 2-12)

This is a deeply interesting scene. The whole congregation assembled, in triumph before the Lord – the Gentile presenting sacrifice – and in addition, to complete the picture, the bride of the deliverer, together with the children whom God had given him, are all introduced. It is, in short, a singularly striking foreshadowing of the coming kingdom. “The Lord will give grace and glory.” We have already seen, in what we have travelled over of this book, very much of the actings of “grace;” and here we have, From the pencil of the Holy Ghost, a beauteous picture of “glory,” – a picture which must be regarded as peculiarly important, as exhibiting the varied fields in which that glory shall be manifested.

“The Jew, the Gentile, and the Church of God” are scriptural distinctions which can never be overlooked without marring that perfect range of truth which God has revealed in His holy Word. They have existed ever since the mystery of the Church was fully developed by the ministry of the Apostle Paul, and they shall exist throughout the millennial age. Hence, every spiritual student of Scripture will give them their due place in his mind.

The apostle expressly teaches us, in his Epistle to the Ephesians, that the mystery of the Church had not been made known, in other ages, to the sons of men, as it was revealed to him. But, though not directly revealed, it had been shadowed forth in one way or another; as, for example, in Joseph’s marriage with an Egyptian, and in Moses’ marriage with an Ethiopian. The type or shadow of a truth is a very different thing from a direct and positive revelation of it. The great mystery of the Church was not revealed until Christ, in heavenly glory, revealed it to Saul of Tarsus. Hence, all who look for the full unfolding of this mystery in the law, the prophets, or the psalms, will find themselves engaged in unintelligent labour. When, however, they find it distinctly revealed in the Epistle to the Ephesians, they will be able, with interest and profit, to trace its foreshadowing in Old Testament Scripture.

Thus we have, in the opening of our chapter, a millennial scene. All the fields of glory lie open in vision before us. “The Jew” stands forth as the great earthly witness of Jehovah’s faithfulness, His mercy, and His power. This is what the Jew has been in bygone ages, it is what he is now, and what he will be, world without end. “The Gentile” reads, in the book of God’s dealings with the Jew, his deepest lessons. He traces the marvellous history of that peculiar and elect people – “a people terrible from their beginning hitherto.” He sees thrones and empires overturned – nations shaken to their centre-every one and everything compelled to give way, in order to establish the supremacy of that people on whom Jehovah has set His love. “Now I know,” he says, “that the Lord is greater than all gods: for in the thing wherein they dealt proudly he was above them.” (Ver. 11) Such is the confession of “the Gentile,” when the wondrous page of Jewish history lies open before him.

Lastly, “The Church of God collectively, as prefigured by Zipporah, and the members thereof individually, as seen in Zipporah’s sons, are presented as occupying the most intimate relationship with the deliverer. All this is perfect in its way. We may be asked for our proofs. The answer is, “I speak as unto wise men; judge ye what I say.” We can never build a doctrine upon a type; but when a doctrine is revealed a type thereof may be discerned with accuracy and studied with profit. In every case, a spiritual mind is essentially necessary, either to understand the doctrine or discern the type. “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Cor. 2: 14)

From verse 13 to the end of our chapter, we have the appointment of rulers, who were to assist Moses in the management of the affairs of the congregation. This was the suggestion of Jethro, who feared that Moses would “wear away” in consequence of his labours. In connection with this, it may be profitable to look at the appointment of the seventy elders in Numbers 11. Here we find the spirit of Moses crushed beneath the ponderous responsibility which devolved upon him, and he gives utterance to the anguish of his heart in the following accents. “And Moses said unto the Lord, Wherefore hast thou afflicted thy servant? And wherefore have I not found favour in thy sight, that thou layest the burden of all this people upon me? Have I conceived all this people ? have I begotten them that thou shouldst say unto me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child, unto the land which thou swarest unto their fathers. . . . . I am not able to bear all this people alone because it is too heavy for me. And if thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray thee, out of hand, if I have found favour in thy sight; and let me not see my wretchedness.” (Num. 11: 11-15)

In all this we see Moses evidently retiring from a post of honour. If God were pleased to make him the sole instrument in managing the assembly, it was only so much the more dignity and privilege conferred upon him. True, the responsibility was immense; but faith would own that God was amply sufficient for that. Here, however, the heart of Moses failed him (blessed servant as he was), and he says, ” I am not able to bear all this people alone, because it is too heavy for me.” But he was not asked to bear them alone; for God was with him. They were not too heavy for God. It was He that was bearing them; Moses was but the instrument. He might just as well have spoken of his rod as bearing the people; for what was he but a mere instrument in God’s hand, as the rod was in his? It is here the servants of Christ constantly fail; and the failure is all the more dangerous because it wears the appearance of humility. It seems like distrust of ones self and deep lowliness of spirit, to shrink from heavy responsibility; but all we need to inquire is, has God imposed that responsibility? If so, He will assuredly be with me in sustaining it; and having Him with me, I can sustain anything. With Him, the weight of a mountain is nothing; without Him, the weight of a feather is overwhelming. It is a totally different thing if a man, in the vanity of his mind, thrust himself forward and take a burden upon his shoulder which God never intended him to bear, and, therefore, never fitted him to bear it; we may then, surely, expect to see him crushed beneath the weight; but if God lays it upon him, He will qualify and strengthen him to carry it.

It is never the fruit of humility to depart from a divinely-appointed post. On the contrary, the deepest humility will express itself by remaining there in simple dependence upon God. It is a sure evidence of being occupied about self when we shrink from service on the ground of inability. God does not call us unto service on the ground of our ability, but of His own; hence, unless I am filled with thoughts about myself, or with positive distrust of Him, I need not relinquish any position of service or testimony because of the heavy responsibilities attaching thereto. all power belongs to God, and it is quite the same whether that power acts through one agent or through seventy; the power is still the same: but if one agent refuse the dignity, it is only so much the worse for him. God will not force people to abide in a place of honour, if they cannot trust Him to sustain them there. The way lies always open to them to step down from their dignity, and sink into the place where base unbelief is sure to put us.

Thus it was with Moses. He complained of the burden, and the burden was speedily removed; but with it the high honour of being allowed to carry it. “And the Lord said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand there with thee. And I will come down and talk with thee there; and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not thyself alone.” (Num. 11: 16, 17) There was no fresh power introduced. It was the same Spirit, whether in one or in seventy. There was no more value or virtue in the flesh of seventy men than in the flesh of one man. “It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing.” (John 6: 63) There was nothing, in the way of power, gained; but a great deal, in the way of dignity, lost by this movement on the part of Moses.

In the after part of Numbers 11 we find Moses giving utterance to accents of unbelief, which called forth from the Lord a sharp rebuke. “Is the Lord’s hand waxed short? Thou shalt see now whether my word shall come to pass unto thee or not.” If my reader will compare Num. 11-15 with Num. 21, 22, he will see a marked and solemn connection. The man who shrinks from responsibility, on the ground of his own feebleness, is in great danger of calling in question the fullness and sufficiency of God’s resources. This entire scene teaches a most valuable lesson to every servant of Christ who may be tempted to feel himself alone or overburdened in his work. Let such an one bear in mind that, where the Holy Ghost is working, one instrument is as good and as efficient as seventy; and where He is not working seventy are of no more value than one. It all depends upon the energy of the Holy Ghost. With Him, one man can do all, endure all, sustain all. Without Him, seventy men can do nothing. Let the lonely servant remember, for the comfort and encouragement of his sinking heart, that, provided he has the presence and power of the Holy Ghost with him, he need not complain of his burden, nor sigh for a division of labour. If God honour a man by giving him a great deal of work to do, let him rejoice therein and not murmur; for if he murmur, he can very speedily lose his honour. God is at no loss for instruments. He could, from the stones, raise up children unto Abraham; and He can raise up, from the same, the needed agents to carry on His glorious work.

Oh! for a heart to serve Him! A patient, humble, self-emptied, devoted heart! A heart ready to serve in company, ready to serve alone, a heart so filled with love to Christ that it will find its joy – its chief joy – in serving Him, let the sphere or character of service be what it may. This assuredly is the special need of the day in which out lot is cast. May the Holy Ghost stir up our hearts to a deeper sense of the exceeding preciousness of the name of Jesus, and enable us to yield a fuller, clearer, more unequivocal response to the changeless love of His heart!

Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch

Exo 28:1-12. Jethro as Priest. Exo 18:1 a (Midian) J, Exo 18:1 b E, Exo 18:1 c (supply heard) J, Exo 18:2-4 Rje, Exo 18:5 E, Exo 18:6 a(b) Exo 18:7 J, Exo 18:8 ab (was) E, Exo 18:8 c Exo 18:9 a (Israel) J, Exo 18:9 b E, Exo 18:10 a(b) Exo 18:11 a(b) J, Exo 18:12 E.The analysis of Exo 18:18 as shown here is that of Gressmann. In J, Jethro hears of Israels deliverance by Yahweh (Exo 18:1 ac), and sends to announce his arrival (Exo 18:6). Moses welcomes him with Eastern courtesy (Exo 18:7), and tells him the good news fully (Exo 18:8 c). Jethro rejoices (Exo 18:9 a), and pronounces a solemn priestly ascription of praise to Yahweh (Exo 18:10 a, Exo 18:11 a), as though he were a bishop visiting some place within his diocese. Similarly in E, but with the additional reason that he might bring his wife and two sons (contrast Exo 2:22), Moses father-in-law, hearing of all that God had done, comes and hears the story more fully (Exo 18:8, read God, Exo 18:9 b), and then (Exo 18:12) took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God; and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses father-in-law before God, i.e. to share in a solemn sacrificial feast. What does all this mean, but that the Midianitish priest acted as it were as godfather to Moses and Israel, and that, as the N. Israelite priest (2Ki 17:26 ff.) taught the settlers in Samaria the manner of the God of the land, so Jethro imparted to Israel the ritual customs and rules of the God of Sinai, Horeb, Seir, Edom, Teman or Paran (Jdg 5:4 f., Deu 33:2, Heb 3:3), for all these places are named as the early centres of Yahwehs presence. Midian, geographically close, may also have been thus named, but, if so, was omitted by the final priestly editors for reasons of prejudice (Num 25:6-18, Num 3:1), which show the strength of the tradition which retained so much about Mosess relations with Midian (cf. Exo 2:18*).

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

MOSES RECEIVING JETHRO

(vs.1-12)

Apparently Moses took his wife Zipporah and Gershom, his son, to Egypt when he returned there at God’s call (ch.4:24-26). Likely his second son Eliezer, was born in Egypt, for we are told in this chapter (v.2) that “he (Moses) had sent her (Zipporah) back,” evidently to stay with her parents until God set Israel free. Now Jethro, her father, hears of all that has taken place (v.1, and he comes with Zipporah and her two sons to meet Moses (vs.2-5). The meaning of the name of Eliezer (“my God is a help”) seems to indicate that he was born during the time of Moses’ contention with Pharaoh, for Moses said then that God had been his help in delivering him from the sword of Pharaoh (v.4).

Moses shows all due respect for his father in law, who was a priest of Midian (v.7). There is no suggestion of his being an idolatrous priest, and it may well be that he was more like Melchisedec, “who was priest of the Most High God” (Gen 14:18). For God is able to preserve some true reverence for Himself, even outside of Israel.

When Moses told Jethro all that God had done in the judging of Pharaoh and Egypt in order to deliver Israel, and all the affliction through which Israel had been preserved (v.8), Jethro’s response was one of ungrudging thankfulness and rejoicing. He gives every honor for this to the Lord. As Meichisedec said to Abram, “Blessed be Abram” and “Blessed be the Most High God” (Gen 14:19-20), so Jethro says to Moses, “Blessed be the Lord” (v.11). Jethro also at this time offered a burnt offering and other sacrifices to God, in which Aaron also and the elders of Israel showed evident fellowship in eating before the Lord with Jethro. Though Aaron was the high priest of Israel, yet he did not begrudge the fact that Jethro acted as priest in this case, but expressed fellowship with him in doing so.

JETHRO’S ADVICE TO DELEGATE AUTHORITY

(vs.13-27)

The following day Moses spent the entire time in judging cases that had arisen among the people. There is no doubt that this was a wearing occupation, and Jethro immediately discerned this, questioning why Moses was called upon to sit “from morning till evening” in doing such work. Moses told him that this was necessary because the people desired answers from God in regard to their problems.

Jethro had a simple solution which had not evidently occurred to Moses. He tells Moses that this continual labor would wear him out, and the people too. Why not concentrate on representing God by publicly teaching God’s statutes, while at the same time delegating authority to “able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain,” who could judge minor disputes among the people, and bring matters of major importance to Moses? (v.22).

Moses no doubt considered this logical and wise, and acted on Jethro’s advice. However, let us carefully consider this whole matter. Jethro said, “I will give you counsel, and God will be with you” (v.19). would it not be better to say, “God will give you counsel, and I will be with you?” He was so sure of his own counsel that he did not advise Moses to ask counsel of God. Moreover, Moses himself ought to have had concern to first ask God’s counsel. If God intended Moses to do all the work himself, He would certainly give him strength for it. Another principle is seen here also. By this division of authority the people would have a less direct contract with the supreme ruler. Do we today not need to take all of our trying matters directly to the Lord Jesus? To introduce intermediate authority is the very principle of legality, which allows people to be content to remain at a distance from the Lord. This provides a moral reason for the introduction of law, beginning with Chapter 19.

However, shining above any failure on Moses’ part is the typical significance of this occurrence. For here is the typically heavenly priest (Christ) giving counsel as to the administration of the earthly kingdom. His joy, and that of Zipporah (picturing the Church) would suggest also Gentile recognition of Israel’s deliverance from the tribulation of the last days. How striking a history this is to illustrate God’s great sovereignty in using even man’s failure in responsibility to bring greater glory to His name!

Jethro remained only long enough to see his advice followed with the appointment of able men as rulers over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens (vs.26-27). This organization surely seems plausible and convenient; and no doubt Jethro left with the persuasion that he had done a valuable service to Moses. He had not before suffered along with Israel, and had no intention of remaining with them to share their future sufferings. How different is the priestly work of the Lord Jesus, who remains with His own in all their trials and afflictions!

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

The names of Moses’ sons (Exo 18:3-4) reflect his personal experiences in the providence of God. However, not all biblical names carry such significance.

"It is a very precarious procedure to attempt to analyze the character or disposition of an Old Testament character on the basis of the etymology of his name alone." [Note: Davis, p. 187.]

Many names were significant (e.g., Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Israel, etc.), but not all were.

The mount of God (Exo 18:5) is the mountain where God revealed Himself and His law to Israel, Mt. Sinai. The wilderness was the wilderness near Sinai.

"Moses’ summary [Exo 18:8-10] is a proof-of-Presence summary, a confession of Yahweh’s powerful protection of and provision for Israel." [Note: Durham, p. 244.]

Jethro acknowledged the sovereignty of God (Exo 18:11). This does not prove he was a monotheist, though he could have been. Jethro was a God-fearing man, evidently part of a believing minority in Midian. He gave evidence of his faith by offering a burnt offering and by making sacrifices to Yahweh (Exo 18:12). The meal that Moses, Aaron, and the Israelite elders ate with Jethro was the sacrificial meal just mentioned. Eating together in the ancient Near East was a solemn occasion because it constituted the establishment of an alliance between the parties involved. That is undoubtedly what it involved here. The fact that Aaron and all the elders of Israel were also present demonstrated its importance.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

CHAPTER XVIII.

JETHRO.

Exo 18:1-27.

The defeat of Amalek is followed by the visit of Jethro; the opposite pole of the relation between Israel and the nations, the coming of the Gentiles to his brightness. And already that is true which repeats itself all through the history of the Church, that much secular wisdom, the art of organisation, the structure and discipline of societies, may be drawn from the experience and wisdom of the world.

Moses was under the special guidance of God, as really as any modern enthusiast can claim to be. When he turned for aid or direction to heaven, he was always answered. And yet he did not think scorn of the counsel of his kinsman. And although eighty years had not dimmed the fire of his eyes, nor wasted his strength, he neglected not the warning which taught him to economise his force; not to waste on every paltry dispute the attention and wisdom which could govern the new-born state.

Jethro is the kinsman, and probably the brother-in-law of Moses; for if he were the father-in-law, and the same as Reuel in the second chapter, why should a new name be introduced without any mark of identification? When he hears of the emancipation of Israel from Egypt, he brings back to Moses his two sons and Zipporah, who had been sent away, after the angry scene at the circumcision of the younger, and before he entered Egypt with his life in his hand. Now he was a great personage, the leader of a new nation, and the conqueror of the proudest monarch in the world. With what feelings would the wife and husband meet? We are told nothing of their interview, nor have we any reason to qualify the unfavourable impression produced by the circumstances of their parting, by the schismatic worship founded by their grandchildren, and by the loneliness implied in the very names of Gershom and Eliezer–“A-stranger-there,” and “God-a-Help.”

But the relations between Moses and Jethro are charming, whether we look at the obeisance rendered to the official minister of God by him whom God had honoured so specially, by the prosperous man to the friend of his adversity, or at the interest felt by the priest of Midian in all the details of the great deliverance of which he had heard already, or his joy in a Divine manifestation, probably not in all respects according to the prejudices of his race, or his praise of Jehovah as “greater than all gods, yea, in the thing wherein they dealt proudly against them” (Exo 18:11, R.V.). The meaning of this phrase is either that the gods were plagued in their own domains, or that Jehovah had finally vanquished the Egyptians by the very element in which they were most oppressive, as when Moses himself had been exposed to drown.

There is another expression, in the first verse, which deserves to be remarked. How do the friends of a successful man think of the scenes in which he has borne a memorable part? They chiefly think of them in connection with their own hero. And amid all the story of the Exodus, in which so little honour is given to the human actor, the one trace of personal exultation is where it is most natural and becoming; it is in the heart of his relative: “When Jethro … heard of all that the Lord had done for Moses and for Israel.”

We are told, with marked emphasis, that this Midianite, a priest, and accustomed to act as such with Moses in his family, “took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God; and Aaron came, and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses’ father-in-law before God.” Nor can we doubt that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who laid such stress upon the subordination of Abraham to Melchizedek, would have discerned in the relative position of Jethro and Aaron another evidence that the ascendency of the Aaronic priesthood was only temporary. We shall hereafter see that priesthood is a function of redeemed humanity, and that all limitations upon it were for a season, and due to human shortcoming. But for this very reason (if there were no other) the chief priest could only be He Who represents and embodies all humanity, in Whom is neither Jew nor Greek, barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free, because He is all and in all.

In the meantime, here is recognised, in the history of Israel, a Gentile priesthood.

And, as at the passover, so now, the sacrifice to God is partaken of by His people, who are conscious of acceptance by Him. Happy was the union of innocent festivity with a sacramental recognition of God. It is the same sentiment which was aimed at by the primitive Christian Church in her feasts of love, genuine meals in the house of God, until licence and appetite spoiled them, and the apostle asked “Have ye not houses to eat and drink in?” (1Co 11:22). Shall there never come a time when the victorious and pure Church of the latter days shall regain what we have forfeited, when the doctrine of the consecration of what is called “secular life” shall be embodied again in forms like these? It speaks to us meanwhile in a form which is easily ridiculed (as in Lamb’s well-known essay), and yet singularly touching and edifying if rightly considered, in the asking for a blessing upon our meals.

On the morrow, Jethro saw Moses, all day long, deciding the small matters and great which needed already to be adjudicated for the nation. He who had striven, without a commission, himself to smite the Egyptian and lead out Israel, is the same self-reliant, heroic, not too discreet person still.

But the true statesman and administrator is he who employs to the utmost all the capabilities and energies of his subordinates. And Jethro made a deep mark in history when he taught Moses the distinction between the lawgiver and the judge, between him who sought from God and proclaimed to the people the principles of justice and their form, and him who applied the law to each problem as it arose.

“It is supposed, and with probability,” writes Kalisch (in loco), “that Alfred the Great, who was well versed in the Bible, based his own Saxon constitution of sheriffs in counties, etc., on the example of the Mosaic division (comp. Bacon on English Government, i. 70).” And thus it may be that our own nation owes its free institutions almost directly to the generous interest in the well-being of his relative, felt by an Arabian priest, who cherished, amid the growth of idolatries all around him, the primitive belief in God, and who rightly held that the first qualifications of a capable judge were ability, and the fear of God, truthfulness and hatred of unjust gain.

We learn from Deuteronomy (Deu 1:9-15), that Moses allowed the people themselves to elect these officials, who became not only their judges but their captains.

From the whole of this narrative we see clearly that the intervention of God for Israel is no more to be regarded as superseding the exercise of human prudence and common-sense, than as dispensing with valour in the repulse of Amalek, and with patience in journeying through the wilderness.

THE TYPICAL BEARINGS OF THE HISTORY.

We are now about to pass from history to legislation. And this is a convenient stage at which to pause, and ask how it comes to pass that all this narrative is also, in some sense, an allegory. It is a discussion full of pitfalls. Countless volumes of arbitrary and fanciful interpretation have done their worst to discredit every attempt, however cautious and sober, at finding more than the primary signification in any narrative.[32] And whoever considers the reckless, violent and inconsistent methods of the mystical commentators may be forgiven if he recoils from occupying the ground which they have wasted, and contents himself with simply drawing the lessons which the story directly suggests.

But the New Testament does not warrant such a surrender. It tells us that leaven answers to malice, and unleavened bread to sincerity; that at the Red Sea the people were baptized; that the tabernacle and the altar, the sacrifice and the priest, the mercy-seat and the manna, were all types and shadows of abiding Christian realities.

It is more surprising to find the return of the infant Jesus connected with the words “When Israel was a child then I loved him, and I called My son out of Egypt,”–for it is impossible to doubt that the prophet was here speaking of the Exodus, and had in mind the phrase “Israel is My son, My firstborn: let My son go, that he may serve Me” (Mat 1:15; Hos 11:1; Exo 4:22).

How are such passages to be explained? Surely not by finding a superficial resemblance between two things, and thereupon transferring to one of them whatever is true of the other. No thought can attain accuracy except by taking care not to confuse in this way things which superficially resemble each other.

But no thought can be fertilising and suggestive which neglects real and deep resemblances, resemblances of principle as well as incident, resemblances which are due to the mind of God or the character of man.

In the structure and furniture of the tabernacle, and the order of its services, there are analogies deliberately planned, and such as every one would expect, between religious truth shadowed forth in Judaism, and the same truth spoken in these latter days unto us in the Son.

But in the emancipation, the progress, and alas! the sins and chastisements of Israel, there are analogies of another kind, since here it is history which resembles theology, and chiefly secular things which are compared with spiritual. But the analogies are not capricious; they are based upon the obvious fact that the same God Who pitied Israel in bondage sees, with the same tender heart, a worse tyranny. For it is not a figure of speech to say that sin is slavery. Sin does outrage the will, and degrade and spoil the life. The sinner does obey a hard and merciless master. If his true home is in the kingdom of God, he is, like Israel, not only a slave but an exile. Is God the God of the Jew only? for otherwise He must, being immutable, deal with us and our tyrant as He dealt with Israel and Pharaoh. If He did not, by an exertion of omnipotence, transplant them from Egypt to their inheritance at one stroke, but required of them obedience, co-operation, patient discipline, and a gradual advance, why should we expect the whole work and process of grace to be summed up in the one experience which we call conversion? Yet if He did, promptly and completely, break their chains and consummate their emancipation, then the fact that grace is a progressive and gradual experience does not forbid us to reckon ourselves dead unto sin. If the region through which they were led, during their time of discipline, was very unlike the land of milk and honey which awaited the close of their pilgrimage, it is not unlikely that the same God will educate his later Church by the same means, leading us also by a way that we know not, to humble and prove us, that He may do us good at the latter end.

And if He marks, by a solemn institution, the period when we enter into covenant relations with Himself, and renounce the kingdom and tyranny of His foe, is it marvellous that the apostle found an analogy for this in the great event by which God punctuated the emancipation of Israel, leading them out of Egypt through the sea depths and beneath the protecting cloud?

If privilege, and adoption, and the Divine good-will, did not shelter them from the consequences of ingratitude and rebellion, if He spared not the natural branches, we should take heed lest He spare not us.

Such analogies are really arguments, as solid as those of Bishop Butler.

But the same cannot be maintained so easily of some others. When that is quoted of our Lord upon the cross which was written of the paschal lamb, “a bone shall not be broken” (Exo 12:46, Joh 19:36), we feel that the citation needs to be justified upon different grounds. But such grounds are available. He was the true Lamb of God. For His sake the avenger passes over all His followers. His flesh is meat indeed. And therefore, although no analogy can be absolutely perfect, and the type has nothing to declare that His blood is drink indeed, yet there is an admirable fitness, worthy of inspired record, in the consummating and fulfilment in Him, and in Him alone of three sufferers, of the precept “A bone of Him shall not be broken.” It may not be an express prophecy which is brought to pass, but it is a beautiful and appropriate correspondence, wrought out by Providence, not available for the coercion of sceptics, but good for the edifying of believers.

And so it is with the calling of the Son out of Egypt. Unquestionably Hosea spoke of Israel. But unquestionably too the phrase “My Son, My Firstborn” is a startling one. Here is already a suggestive difference between the monotheism of the Old Testament and the austere jealous logical orthodoxy of the Koran, which protests “It is not meet for God to have any Son, God forbid” (Sura 19:36). Jesus argued that such a rigid and lifeless orthodoxy as that of later Judaism, ought to have been scandalised, long before it came to consider His claims, by the ancient and recognised inspiration which gave the name of gods to men who sat in judgment as the representatives of Heaven. He claimed the right to carry still further the same principle–namely, that deity is not selfish and incommunicable, but practically gives itself away, in transferring the exercise of its functions. From such condescension everything may be expected, for God does not halt in the middle of a path He has begun to tread.

But if this argument of Jesus were a valid one (and the more it is examined the more profound it will be seen to be), how significant will then appear the term “My Son,” as applied to Israel!

In condescending so far, God almost pledged Himself to the Incarnation, being no dealer in half measures, nor likely to assume rhetorically a relation to mankind to which in fact He would not stoop.

Every Christian feels, moreover, that it is by virtue of the grand and final condescension that all the preliminary steps are possible. Because Abraham’s seed was one, that is Christ, therefore ye (all) if ye are Christ’s, are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to promise (Gal 3:16, Gal 3:29).

But when this great harmony comes to be devoutly recognised, a hundred minor and incidental points of contact are invested with a sacred interest.

No doctrinal injury would have resulted, if the Child Jesus had never left the Holy Land. No infidel could have served his cause by quoting the words of Hosea. Nor can we now cite them against infidels as a prophecy fulfilled. But when He does return from Egypt our devotions, not our polemics, hail and rejoice in the coincidence. It reminds us, although it does not demonstrate, that He who is thus called out of Egypt is indeed the Son.

The sober historian cannot prove anything, logically and to demonstration, by the reiterated interventions in history of atmospheric phenomena. And yet no devout thinker can fail to recognise that God has reserved the hail against the time of trouble and war.

In short, it is absurd and hopeless to bid us limit our contemplation, in a divine narrative, to what can be demonstrated like the propositions of Euclid. We laugh at the French for trying to make colonies and constitutions according to abstract principles, and proposing, as they once did, to reform Europe “after the Chinese manner.” Well, religion also is not a theory: it is the true history of the past of humanity, and it is the formative principle in the history of the present and the future.

And hence it follows that we may dwell with interest and edification upon analogies, as every great thinker confesses the existence of truths, “which never can be proved.”

In the meantime it is easy to recognise the much simpler fact, that these things happened unto them by way of example, and they were written for our admonition.

FOOTNOTES:

[32] Take as an example the assertion of Bunyan that the sea in the Revelation is a sea of glass, because the laver in the tabernacle was made of the brazen looking-glasses of the women. (Solomon’s Temple, 36:1.)

When Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses’ father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, [and] that the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt;

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary