Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim.
8. Then ] Heb. And (Amalek came &c.). The immediate sequence expressed by Then is not necessarily implied in the Heb.
fought with Israel ] In Deu 25:18 it is said in particular that Amalek ‘met Israel in the way,’ and ‘cut off at the rear (lit. tailed) in thee all that were fagged behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary,’ exhausted by heat or other accident of the journey.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
8 16. The victory over the Amalekites. The Amalekites were what we should call a nomad Bedawi tribe, who are spoken of as having their home in the desert S. of Palestine: in the ‘Negeb,’ or ‘South,’ of Judah, Num 13:29; Num 14:25; Num 14:43; Num 14:45, about Kadesh Gen 14:7, and in the same neighbourhood in 1Sa 15:7; 1Sa 27:8; 1Sa 30:1: they corresponded in fact very much to the Azzimeh tribe, who now inhabit a large part of the elevated limestone plateau, called the Tih, between the mountains of the Sinaitic Peninsula and the Mediterranean Sea. Their appearance here in the Sinaitic Peninsula is not a substantial difficulty: as Di. remarks, ‘a branch of them may have been settled in or about the oasis in W. Feiran (Leps., Ebers); or they may in May or June have led their flocks up into the cooler and fresher pastures in the mountains (Kn. Ke.); or they may even have made a raid against Israel from their homes on the Tih (Bunsen)’: whichever supposition is the correct one, ‘it was natural enough that the nomads, who lived on the scanty products of this region, should do their utmost to expel the intruders. That the narrative, in spite of its legendary features, has a historical foundation, cannot be doubted’ (Nldeke, EB. i. 128).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Then came Amalek – The attack occurred about two months after the Exodus, toward the end of May or early in June, when the Bedouins leave the lower plains in order to find pasture for their flocks on the cooler heights. The approach of the Israelites to Sinai would of course attract notice, and no cause of warfare is more common than a dispute for the right of pasturage. The Amalekites were at that time the most powerful race in the Peninsula; here they took their position as the chief of the pagans. They were also the first among the pagans who attacked Gods people, and as such were marked out for punishment (see the marginal references).
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Exo 17:8
Then came Amalek, and fought.
Fighting and praying
Then came Amalek; that is, after the manna had fallen, after the rock had been smitten. First food, then conflict. God spared His people all battles in their early days. In our march to heaven, it may happen that one part of the way is free from conflict; but let no man wonder if things change. One of these days we shall read this despatch from the seat of war, Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel. Do not court attack, nor even desire it. When you hear the older folk talk about their inward conflicts, do not lament if your chronicle of wars is a short one. It has often been the Lords way to give His people space for refreshment before trying them. We cannot work for God too soon; yet it is possible to go to work before you have sharpened your tools. There is a time for every purpose; and each thing is good in its season. Learn, and then teach. I would have you serve the Lord successfully: wherefore, as God gave to Israel manna and water before He sent them to fight with Amalek, so should every believer feed on the truth himself, and then go forth to teach others also. Feed, that you may work, and work because you have been fed. After the manna and after the smitten rock, came the fight: Then came Amalek. He was a descendant of Esau, full of his fathers hate. Note well, that in this battle of the Lord, there were two kinds of fighting. The first was the Joshua-service; and that was done in the plain by the fighting men. The second was the Moses-service; and this was done upon the side of the hill, by the men of God, who communed with heaven. We need both modes of warfare.
I. To begin with, we want much of The Joshua-service.
1. This is the service of many. Moses said to Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek. We have a battle against sin, error, pride, self, and everything that is contrary to God and to His Christ; and in the Joshua-service many can be employed. Every believer should be a soldier in Christs own army of salvation.
2. In this Joshua-service all the combatants were under due command. Joshua did as Moses had said to him, and the people did as Joshua commanded them. In all holy service, willingness to be led is a great point. Certain workers may be very good personally; but they will never combine with others to make a conquering band. They work very well alone, or as fore-horses in the team; but they cannot trot in double harness. Soldiers without discipline become a mob, and not an army. Friend, will you be one of the steady workers?
3. In Joshua-work courage was required. Go out, fight with Amalek. The Amalekites were fierce, cruel, strong. They are said to have been the chief among the nations; by which I understand first among the plunderers of the desert. The soldiers under Joshua had courage, and faced their wolfish foes. Saints need courage for Jesus in these days. May God, in His mercy, make His people bold against scepticism, superstition, and open wickedness! We are called, not to flirt with error and evil, but to fight with it; therefore, let us be brave, and push on the conflict.
4. Those fighting under Joshua did not grow weary. Moses had the more spiritual work, and his hands grew heavy: we sooner tire in private devotion than in public service. Joshua and his men were not weary: never let us be weary in well-doing. Do you ever grow weary in one peculiar way of serving God? It may be useful to try something else. I mean, do something extra. Variety of labour serves for recreation.
5. In the Joshua-service they were successful, for they discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword. Beloved workers for the Lord: may He grant you like success against evil! The devil goes to be beaten, and he shall be beaten.
II. The Moses-service–the service of Moses and his comrades. These did not go down to the battle-field themselves, but they climbed the mountain-side, where they could see the warriors in the conflict; and there Moses lifted up the rod of God.
1. Note, that the Moses-service was essential to the battle; for when Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed; and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. The scales of the conflict were in the hand of Moses, and they turned as his prayer and testimony failed or continued.
2. This holy work was of a very special character. Only three were able to enter into it. I believe that, in every Church, the deeply spiritual, who prevalently commune with God, and bring down the blessing upon the work of the rest, are comparatively few.
3. This Moses-service lay in very close communion with God. Moses, and Aaron, and Hur were called to rise above the people, and to get alone, apart from the company. They climbed the hill as a symbol, and in retirement they silently communed with God.
4. In this sacred engagement there was a terrible strain upon the one man who led the others in it. In the process of bringing down the Divine power upon the people, the vehicle of communication was sorely tried. Moses hands were heavy. If God gives you spiritual power to lead in Christian work, you you will soon find out that the condition of such leadership is a costly one.
5. In this hallowed service help is very precious. When Moses hands began to drop down, and he himself was faint, Aaron and Hur gave him substantial aid. Are you a worker? Have you a leader fit to lead you? Bring a stone and put under him: cheer his heart with some gracious promise from the Lords Word, or with some happy sign from the work itself. Cheer the good man as much as possible. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The battle between good and evil
I. That the good are required to do battle with inveterate enemies (verse 8).
1. Every soul has to contend with the Amalek of
(1) an evil heart;
(2) a wicked world;
(3) fallen angels.
2. The soul is led gradually into the moral battle of life. We cannot get to heaven without being interrupted by many enemies–by Satan, by poverty, by sickness, by prosperity; all these will seek to stop or slay us.
II. That the good in this conflict must combine prayer with the utmost exertion to overcome their enemies (verses 9-11). Truth has lost many a battle through bad generalship. Truth needs a man like Luther to lead the attack. If we would overcome evil within us and without us, we must summon the best energies of our mental and moral nature, and put them under the command of Christ; then shall we be led to victory. Joshua fought. Moses went up the hill to pray. Prayer is often uphill work. And the conflict between Good and Evil necessitates the use of prayer and activity. Man must pray over his evil heart, and he must also fight against its sinful tendencies. Sin is persistent in its opposition to the soul.
III. That the good in this conflict are often impeded by the weakness consequent upon the physical condition of life (verse 12). Nature at the strongest is weak. But the hands of Moses were supported by Aaron and Hur. Holy companionship is helpful in the hour of severe moral conflict. Two are better far than one. Christians should seek to hold up the hands of ministers. They must bear one anothers burdens. The insignificant members of the Church may render service to the most important; Hut may strengthen Moses. The hands of our heavenly Intercessor never grow weary with pleading; and the infirm Christian will soon be as the angels. It is consoling that God knows our frame, and remembers that we are dust.
IV. That the good in their conflict should keep faithful record of their victories (verses 13, 14).
1. To aid memory.
2. To inspire hope.
3. To awaken gratitude to God.
V. That the good in this conflict should ascribe all the glory of victory to God (verses 15, 16). Lessons:
1. That there are inveterate enemies to moral goodness.
2. That these enemies are doomed to ultimate defeat and destruction.
3. That the good must pray and fight to this end.
4. There will be a final celebration of victory. (J. S. Exell, M. A.)
War with Amalek
I. First, then, we have here the experience of every individual Christian,
1. Observe, the Children of Israel were emancipated from bondage, and had left Egypt behind, even as you and I have been rescued from our natural state and are no longer the servants of sin.
2. The Children of Israel were probably anticipating ease, forgetting that the Promised Land was yet many days journey beyond them. Inexperience made them expect a continuance of uninterrupted song and feasting, and there was a time when we indulged in the same foolish hopes.
3. Like Israel, we soon experienced tribulations. You must fight if you would win the crown, and your pathway to the other side of Jordan must be the pathway of an armed crusader, who has to contend for every inch of the way if he is to win it.
4. In proceeding with the narrative we notice that they found opposition from an unexpected quarter. It is just where we feel most safe that we should be most cautious. I do not think the Christian has so much to fear from open and avowed enemies as from those deceitful foes who feign to be his friends. Sin is never so much a Jezebel as when it paints its face with daubs of respectability and patches of innocence. Things dubious are more dangerous than things distinctly evil.
5. When the assault was made, the people were commanded to exert themselves. The message was given, Go, choose out men, and fight with Amalek. Israel never fought with Egypt. God fought for them, and they held their peace. The yoke of sin has been broken by Gods grace from off our necks, and now we have to fight not as slaves against a master, but as freemen against a foe.
6. Spiritual fighting must be conducted on most earnest and prudent principles. They were to choose out men. So we must choose out our ways of contending with sin. The best part of a man should be engaged in warfare with his sins.
7. This makes me notice that though the men of Israel were to fight, and the chosen men were to be selected, yet they were to fight under the command of Joshua, that is, Jesus, the Saviour.
8. That where holy activity is joined with earnest supplication, the result as to our sins is absolutely sure–the enemy must be defeated; we shall put our feet upon the necks of all our sins. There is no fear of their overcoming us if we do but lay hold on Divine strength.
9. And, if ever we overcome sin once, it should be the signal for proclaiming a general war against all sin. The fight and victory over Amalek brought from Gods mouth the solemn declaration that there should be war with Amalek for ever and ever. Have you mastered one sin? Slay the next, and the next, and the next.
II. The whole narrative may be interpreted as the history of any one Christian church. In any one Church there will be, there must be, if it be a Church of God, earnest contention for the truth and against error. If we do indeed hold the very truth as it is in Jesus, we must fight for it valiantly, for if we do not fight Amalek, Amalek will certainly fight us, and the hindmost will always be suffering and the weakest go to the wall. It is on behalf of the weaker brethren, who are easily perverted, that we must watch and fight perpetually. To all Christian effort in every Church must be added unpleasing intercession.
III. But lastly, the history of the whole Christian Church is here before us as in a picture. The sacramental host of Gods elect is warring still on earth, Jesus Christ being the Captain of their salvation. He has said, Lo! I am with you always, even to the end of the world. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The war of truth
I. The great warfare.
1. Not with men, but with Satan and error.
2. A most righteous warfare.
3. A war of the greatest importance.
4. Insidious and very powerful foes.
5. A war of perpetual duration.
II. The appointed means of warfare.
1. Hard blows.
2. Hard prayers. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Both sides of the shield
I. First, let us look at persecution in its double aspect. On the one hand, notice that this attack upon Israel was Amaleks great sin, on account of which the nation was doomed to be extirpated. Because of this, God said, I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. But, on the other hand, this assault was the result of Israels sin; for it is significantly put after the strife of Massah and Meribah, Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim. The point is this: persecution may come to you from evil men, distinctly from them, and it may be their wicked free will which makes them assail you; and yet, at the same time, it may be your sin which lies at the bottom of it, and because you have erred they have been permitted, and even appointed, to bring trouble upon you. Let us think of these two things.
1. Notice well that assaults upon us may arise from the sins of others. It is right that we should recognize this, lest in the dark day we should become unduly discouraged. These Amalekites attacked Israel, and greatly sinned in so doing, for they were the first that made war against Gods people. But the impiety was still worse; for Amalek went out of his way to attack Israel. The people had not come into his territory; they were a good way off it, and were passing quietly by; but we read, Then came Amalek. His envy was stirred up so much that he came away from his own region to fight with Israel without any provocation. Moreover, Amalek in this act went forth to fight against God Himself. It was not with Israel alone that he warred; he battled also with Jehovah, the God of Israel. When you are persecuted for righteousness sake, the Lord takes notice of it. Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me? Let us now turn our thoughts to the other aspect of this subject.
2. The guilt of ungodly men in persecuting Gods people is not inconsistent with my next statement, that assaults upon us may also arise from our own sins. We may have brought the evil upon ourselves. When they had chided with Moses, and murmured against God, Then came Amalek. Israel had been quarrelling with God. Do you wonder, then, that other people quarrelled with them? You may often read your sin in its punishment. They put a question about God, Is the Lord among us, or not? But, because they questioned God, God makes it a serious question between them and Amalek. If we make God a question, God will make our safety a question, and we shall have a stern fight for it. Moreover, we find that Israel had uttered threats against Moses, so that he said, They be almost ready to stone me. Now, if they would stone the man of God, is it at all wonderful that the men of the world were ready to kill them? If you go against Moses, God will sent Amalek against you, for remember that God does chasten His people. So, there is our first point. We may sometimes justly charge our afflictions upon the ill intent of ungodly men; and yet, at the same time, we may have to charge them also upon ourselves.
II. In the second place, let us think of instrumentality in its double relation. Here, again, another contrast is to be found in the text and its connection. If you will notice, in the fifth verse, God says to Moses, Take with thee of the elders of Israel; and thy rod, wherewith thou smotest the river; but when Moses talks about the rod, in the ninth verse, which forms our text, he says, To-morrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine hand. In both verses it is the same rod which is spoken of.
1. One side is that God calls it the rod of Moses, and so honours him. Wherever there is an opportunity of doing honour to the faith of His own servants, God is never slow to use it. He is a King who delights to give glory to His warriors when they behave themselves bravely in the heat of battle. Moreover, it really was the rod of Moses, and would not so well have fitted any other hand. God does not put into a position of influence a man unfit for the post. Even Moses did not work wonders with the rod until he had renounced the riches of Egypt, and borne the burden of life in the wilderness. There was a fitness in the fact of the rod being in the hand of such a man. Thus, in a very real sense, it was the rod of Moses. In addition to this, it was the faith of Moses which gave power to his rod; he himself was the conductor of the Divine energy. Had the rod been wielded by another man, self-appointed, and lacking the confidence which Moses had come to possess in God, it would have been simply a powerless stick.
2. On the other hand, Moses calls it the rod of God, and so honours God. He whom God uses gives God the praise, for God is ever the source of our:strength; and if any work is done that is worth the doing, unto Him must be ascribed all the glory. Not unto us, O Lord; not unto us, but unto Thy name, give glory. Let us learn, from these words of Moses, that instrumentality is not to be decried, for God uses it; but the instrument must never be allowed to usurp the place of God, for it must be always remembered that it is God who uses it. The axe must not exalt itself against him that heweth therewith; but, when there are trees to be felled, it would be folly to throw the axe away.
III. Behold, in this incident, prudence in its double activity. You have that in the text. Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek. To which Joshua might have replied, Yes, I will gladly do that, and you will go too, Moses, and fight, will you not? No, no, he will not. To-morrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine hand. Prudence prays with Moses, while it fights with Joshua. In like manner, in the activities of our holy faith, we must learn to balance work and worship, prayer for victory and conflict with the enemy.
1. In the case before us, we see that the means are not neglected. Moses did not call all the people to pray when it was time for fighting. He prayed, but at the same time he set the battle in array. This is true wisdom, for faith without works is dead. The means must not be neglected. Observe how Moses prepared to fight the Amalekites. He said to Joshua, Choose us out men. He did not lose sight of the necessity of:having the fittest warriors, because his trust was in God. Let the Church always see to it that she tries to get the best men she can to fight the battles of the Lord. It is a mistake to suppose that anybody wilt do for Christian work. The leader was also chosen–Moses said unto Joshua. He did not pick up the first youth that he met, and say to him, Go and fight these Amalekites. The time for the battle was also chosen. To-morrow I will stand on the top of the hill. Why not fight them at once? Well, because the people were not ready; it would take a little time to get the fighting men in order. Choose the best time. Serve God wisely. Go about the work as if all depended upon you, and then trust in God, knowing that all depends upon Him. Note, again, that the battle was most real. Moses did not say, Choose you out men, and go and drive Amalek away like a flock of sheep. No; but Go out, fight with Amalek. Believe me, we make a great mistake if we think that this world is to be conquered for Christ without mighty efforts. Some talk as if the expenditure of a few pounds, and the going forth of few men, will end the whole war.
2. But, on the other hand, in this battle, reliance upon God is not neglected. Moses ascends the hill holding up his banner, and that banner is the rod of God. Unfortunately, in our work for God, we generally fall into one of two blunders. Either we get a lot of machinery, and think that we shall accomplish everything by that; or else we are like some whom I have known, who have confided so much in prayer that they have done nothing but pray. It is a very heinous fault to trust the means without God; but, though it is a much smaller fault to trust in God, and not use the means, yet still it is a fault. Practical prudence will lead you to do both.
IV. Behold here, in a wondrous type, Christ in his twofold capacity. Christ is represented to us here as Moses on the hill pleading, and as Joshua in the valley fighting.
1. Learn, first, that Christ is pleading for us. He is not here: He is risen. It is because He intercedes for us that we win the victory. In His mediation is our confidence.
2. But, then, do not forget that He is also warring for us. On the very eve of His departure, He said, Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. This is the dispensation of the Holy Ghost, and in Him Christ is always with us, our greater Joshua, fighting for the people whom He will one day lead into the promised land, the heavenly Canaan. I think that I see our Joshua now, sword in hand, chasing our adversaries; and I turn my eye upwards, and see our Moses, rod in hand, pleading for His people. Let us see Him in both capacities. Believe in Christ in heaven, and trust Him with your prayers. Believe in Christ on earth, range yourself on His side, and rest assured that no foe will be able to stand against Him. So, you see that, though two things may look contradictory, they are often both really true, and are both different sides of one shield. Try, then, always to see both sides of every truth revealed in the Scriptures. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The assistance of prayer
An unaccountable revival broke out in a congregation in a village, and about one hundred were converted in a few weeks. At last the minister discovers the secret of the revival, and relates it thus: There is a sister in my Church who has for years been an invalid, and confined to her bed. She lives several miles from the village, and the other day I rode out to see her. As I sat by her bedside she said, You have had a very precious revival? We have, I answered. I knew it was coming, she said. And then she proceeded to give her pastor an account of the burden that had been upon her for weeks, and the manner in which her soul had gone out in prayer for the unconverted, in midnight hours and at other times; and before the interview closed the pastor felt that the unaccountable revival was accounted for. Like Hur and Aaron, who held up the hands of Moses, this bedridden sister had by her prayers obtained victory for the soldiers of Christ.
Encouragement
There were four boys, all brothers, walking along the banks of a stream, and playing as they went. Like most boys, their idea of fun was to go as far into danger as they could, and at length one of them fell into a deep place. He could not swim, but immediately his brother who could, plunged in to rescue him. He got hold of him but could not bring him to the bank, then another brother, catching hold of a branch, stretched his body out its whole length so that the swimmer could catch hold, and thus all three were brought safe to land. When they got home they all began to tell their father about the affair. Now give me time, he said, and Ill hear you all. Turning to the oldest, he asked, When your brother fell into the river what did you do towards his rescue? Well, father, at first I was paralyzed with fear, and I stood on the bank for some seconds trembling for his safety, then I recovered myself and plunging in, caught hold of him, and strove to bring him to shore. Then facing the second boy he said, And what did you do to rescue your brother? I could not swim, father, but when I saw they could not reach the shore, I bridged the water between them and the bank so that they might pull themselves in. Now there only remained the youngest, a little fellow of four years, and turning to him the father asked, And what did you do? Oh, father, I could do nothing. I just stood on the bank and clapped my hands and shouted, Well done, well done! Yes, well done, my boys, all of you, I am proud to have such sons, exclaimed the happy father. Christians, standing safe on the bank, What have you done for the rescue of your brother? At least you can by your words and prayers encourage others who are stronger to go to the rescue of the lost. The working layman:–We shall find that the Church, like warring nations, expects every man to do his duty. If, as we suppose, Hur was not of the priestly office, we think the laymen of our day may find that this Scripture was written for their learning. They are, we fear, very far from walking in the steps of Hur, and from following his example. It will be noticed that it was a personal service in which he was engaged, one that required not only labour but the sacrifice of his time. Until the going down of the sun he stood by Moses and stayed up his hands. When Israel was at war with Amalek, he did not content himself with wishes for success, nor did he rejoice over a victory which he had not laboured to win. He did not serve God by proxy, nor send a substitute to perform his personal duties. When he was needed upon the mount, he did not beg to be excused; he pleaded no want of leisure and no press of worldly engagements. It is the great want of the Church in our day–working men and working women, especially working men; men with the true missionary spirit and zeal; men who, like Hur, will not grudge to spend a day on the mount, to stay up Moses hands. While Aaron and Hur stood on the one side or on the other, the strength of Moses failed not. It is in vain to have officers if men will not fight, or men willing to fight if there are no officers to direct and guide them. There must be the co-operation of all, if we expect prosperity. Our strength is not to sit still. Here is a field which we all may equally occupy; where wealth has no advantage, and where poverty is no loss,–the field of religious influence and personal exertion. We all can do something, many of us can do much, to promote the prosperity of the Church. To destroy Amalek, to bless Israel, we must labour as well as give; we must stay up Moses hands, as well as worship in the tabernacle. If the priest must pray and preach and toil, no less do we look for them to work. Hur, on the mount with Moses and Aaron, was a type of a working layman. (G. F. Cushman, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 8. Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel] The Amalekites seem to have attacked the Israelites in the same way and through the same motives that the wandering Arabs attack the caravans which annually pass through the same desert. It does not appear that the Israelites gave them any kind of provocation, they seem to have attacked them merely through the hopes of plunder. The Amalekites were the posterity of Amalek, one of the dukes of Eliphaz, the son of Esau, and consequently Israel’s brother, Ge 36:15-16.
Fought with Israel] In the most treacherous and dastardly manner; for they came at the rear of the camp, smote the hindmost of the people, even all that were feeble behind, when they were faint and weary; see De 25:18. The baggage, no doubt, was the object of their avarice; but finding the women, children, aged and infirm persons, behind with the baggage, they smote them and took away their spoils.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Then, i.e. when they were upon their march from Rephidim to Horeb, Deu 25:17,18.
The ground of the quarrel was the prosecution of the old hatred of Esau a against Jacob, and-the revenging of themselves and their father upon the posterity of Jacob; for which they thought this the fittest season, they being now great and potent people, Num 24:20, and Israel now weak, and unarmed, and dispirited with long servitude.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
8. Then came AmalekSome timeprobably elapsed before they were exposed to this new evil; and thepresumption of there being such an interval affords the only groundon which we can satisfactorily account for the altered, the better,and former spirit that animated the people in this sudden contest.The miracles of the manna and the water from the rock had produced adeep impression and permanent conviction that God was indeed amongthem; and with feelings elevated by the conscious experience of theDivine Presence and aid, they remained calm, resolute, and courageousunder the attack of their unexpected foe.
fought with IsraelThelanguage implies that no occasion had been furnished for this attack;but, as descendants of Esau, the Amalekites entertained a deep-seatedgrudge against them, especially as the rapid prosperity andmarvellous experience of Israel showed that the blessing contained inthe birthright was taking effect. It seems to have been a mean,dastardly, insidious surprise on the rear (Num 24:20;Deu 25:17), and an impiousdefiance of God.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then came Amalek,…. The Amalekites, who were not the posterity of Amalek, a son of Eliphaz, the son of Esau, by Timna the concubine of Eliphaz, Ge 36:12 who dwelt in the desert, to the south of Judea, beyond the city Petra, as you go to Aila, as Jerom says t; and so the Targum of Jonathan describes them as coming from the south; and Aben Ezra interprets them a nation that inhabited the southern country. Josephus u calls them the inhabitants of Gobolitis and Petra; but they were the descendants of Cush, and the same with those who were in Abraham’s time long before Amalek, the descendant of Esau, was in being, Ge 14:7 and who bordered eastward on the wilderness of Shur:
and fought with Israel in Rephidim; so that this was before they came from hence to Sinai, very probably as they were on the march thither, and before the rock was smitten, and they had been refreshed with water, and so while they were in distress for want of that, and therefore this must be a great trial and exercise to them. What should move the Amalekites to come and fight with them, is not easy to say; it is by many thought to be the old grudge of the children of Esau against the children of Israel, because of the affair of the birthright and blessing which Jacob got from Esau, who were now on their march for the land of Canaan, which came to him thereby: but it is hardly probable that these people should know anything of those matters at this distance, and besides were not of the race of Esau; and if anything of this kind was in remembrance, and still subsisted, it is most likely that the Edomites would have been concerned to stop them, rather than these: it is more probable, that these had heard of their coming out, of Egypt with great riches, the spoils of the Egyptians; and being an unarmed, undisciplined people, though numerous, thought to have taken this advantage against them of their distress and contentious, and plundered them of their wealth; unless we can suppose them to be an ally of the Canaanites, and so bound by treaty to obstruct their passage to the land of Canaan: but be it as it may; they came out against them, and fought with them without any provocation, the Israelites not attempting to enter their country, but rather going from it; for these seem to follow them, to come upon the back of them, and fall upon their rear, as appears from De 25:17.
t De locis Hebr. fol. 87. M. u Antiqu. l. 3. c. 2. sect. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The want of water had only just been provided for, when Israel had to engage in a conflict with the Amalekites, who had fallen upon their rear and smitten it (Deu 25:18). The expansion of this tribe, that was descended from a grandson of Esau (see Gen 36:12), into so great a power even in the Mosaic times, is perfectly conceivable, if we imagine the process to have been analogous to that which we have already described in the case of the leading branches of the Edomites, who had grown into a powerful nation through the subjugation and incorporation of the earlier population of Mount Seir. The Amalekites had no doubt come to the neighbourhood of Sinai for the same reason for which, even in the present day, the Bedouin Arabs leave the lower districts at the beginning of summer, and congregate in the mountain regions of the Arabian peninsula, viz., because the grass is dried up in the former, whereas in the latter the pasturage remains green much longer, on account of the climate being comparatively cooler ( Burckhardt, Syr. p. 789). There they fell upon the Israelites, probably in the Sheikh valley, where the rear had remained behind the main body, not merely for the purpose of plundering or of disputing the possession of this district and its pasture ground with the Israelites, but to assail Israel as the nation of God, and if possible to destroy it. The divine command to exterminate Amalek (Exo 17:14) points to this; and still more the description given of the Amalekites in Balaam’s utterances, as , “the beginning,” i.e., the first and foremost of the heathen nations (Num 24:20). In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only be terminated by the complete annihilation of the ungodly powers of the world. Earlier theologians pointed out quite correctly the deepest ground for the hostility of the Amalekites, when they traced the causa belli to this fact, “ quod timebat Amalec, qui erat de semine Esau, jam implendam benedictionem, quam Jacob obtinuit et praeripuit ipsi Esau, praesertim cum in magna potentia venirent Israelitae, ut promissam occuparent terram ” Mnster, C. a Lapide, etc.). This peculiar significance in the conflict is apparent, not only from the divine command to exterminate the Amalekites, and to carry on the war of Jehovah with Amalek from generation to generation (Exo 17:14 and Exo 17:16), but also from the manner in which Moses led the Israelites to battle and to victory. Whereas he had performed all the miracles in Egypt and on the journey by stretching out his staff, on this occasion he directed his servant Joshua to choose men for the war, and to fight the battle with the sword. He himself went with Aaron and Hur to the summit of a hill to hold up the staff of God in his hands, that he might procure success to the warriors through the spiritual weapons of prayer.
The proper name of Joshua, who appears here for the first time in the service of Moses, as Hosea ( ); he was a prince of the tribe of Ephraim (Num 13:8, Num 13:16; Deu 32:44). The name , “Jehovah is help” (or, God-help), he probably received at the time when he entered Moses’ service, either before or after the battle with the Amalekites (see Num 13:16, and Hengstenberg, Dissertations, vol. ii.). Hur, who also held a prominent position in the nation, according to Exo 24:14, in connection with Aaron, was the son of Caleb, the son of Hezron, the grandson of Judah (1Ch 2:18-20), and the grandfather of Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle (Exo 31:2; Exo 35:30; Exo 38:22, cf. 1Ch 2:19-20). According to Jewish tradition, he was the husband of Miriam.
The battle was fought on the day after the first attack (Exo 17:9). The hill ( , not Mount Horeb), upon the summit of which Moses took up his position during the battle, along with Aaron and Hur, cannot be fixed upon with exact precision, but it was probably situated in the table-land of Fureia, to the north of er Rahah and the Sheikh valley, which is a fertile piece of pasture ground ( Burckhardt, p. 801; Robinson, i. pp. 139, 215), or else in the plateau which runs to the north-east of the Horeb mountains and to the east of the Sheikh valley, with the two peaks Umlanz and Um Alawy; supposing, that is, that the Amalekites attacked the Israelites from Wady Muklifeh or es Suweiriyeh. Moses went to the top of the hill that he might see the battle from thence. He took Aaron and Hur with him, not as adjutants to convey his orders to Joshua and the army engaged, but to support him in his own part in connection with the conflict. This was to hold up his hand with the staff of God in it. To understand the meaning of this sign, it must be borne in mind that, although Exo 17:11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping of the hand (in the singular), yet, according to Exo 17:12, both hands were supported by Aaron and Hur, who stood one on either side, so that Moses did not hold up his hands alternately, but grasped the staff with both his hands, and held it up with the two. The lifting up of the hands has been regarded almost with unvarying unanimity by Targumists, Rabbins, Fathers, Reformers, and nearly all the more modern commentators, as the sign or attitude of prayer. Kurtz, on the contrary, maintains, in direct opposition to the custom observed throughout the whole of the Old Testament by all pious and earnest worshipers, of lifting up their hands to God in heaven, that this view attributes an importance to the outward form of prayer which has no analogy even in the Old Testament; he therefore agrees with Lakemacher, in Rosenmller’s Scholien, in regarding the attitude of Moses with his hand lifted up as “the attitude of a commander superintending and directing the battle,” and the elevation of the hand as only the means adopted for raising the staff, which was elevated in the sight of the warriors of Israel as the banner of victory. But this meaning cannot be established from Exo 17:15 and Exo 17:16. For the altar with the name “ Jehovah my banner, ” and the watchword “ the hand on the banner of Jehovah, war of the Lord against Amalek, ” can neither be proved to be connected with the staff which Moses held in his hand, nor be adduced as a proof that Moses held the staff in front of the Israelites as the banner of victory. The lifting up of the staff of God was, no doubt, a banner to the Israelites of victory over their foes, but not in this sense, that Moses directed the battle as commander-in-chief, for he had transferred the command to Joshua; nor yet in this sense, that he imparted divine powers to the warriors by means of the staff, and so secured the victory. To effect this, he would not have lifted it up, but have stretched it out, either over the combatants, or at all events towards them, as in the case of all the other miracles that were performed with the staff. The lifting up of the staff secured to the warriors the strength needed to obtain the victory, from the fact that by means of the staff Moses brought down this strength from above, i.e., from the Almighty God in heaven; not indeed by a merely spiritless and unthinking elevation of the staff, but by the power of his prayer, which was embodied in the lifting up of his hands with the staff, and was so far strengthened thereby, that God had chosen and already employed this staff as a medium of the saving manifestation of His almighty power. There is no other way in which we can explain the effect produced upon the battle by the raising and dropping ( ) of the staff in his hands. As long as Moses held up the staff, he drew down from God victorious powers for the Israelites by means of his prayer; but when he let it fall through the exhaustion of the strength of his hands, he ceased to draw down the power of God, and Amalek gained the upper hand. The staff, therefore, as it was stretched out on high, was not a sign to the Israelites that were fighting, for it is by no means certain that they could see it in the heat of the battle; but it was a sign to Jehovah, carrying up, as it were, to God the wishes and prayers of Moses, and bringing down from God victorious powers for Israel. If the intention had been the hold it up before the Israelites as a banner of victory. Moses would not have withdrawn to a hill apart from the field of battle, but would either have carried it himself in front of the army, or have given it to Joshua as commander, to be borne by him in front of the combatants, or else have entrusted it to Aaron, who had performed the miracles in Egypt, that he might carry it at their head. The pure reason why Moses did not do this, but withdrew from the field of battle to lift up the staff of God upon the summit of a hill, and to secure the victory by so doing, is to be found in the important character of the battle itself. As the heathen world was now commencing its conflict with the people of God in the persons of the Amalekites, and the prototype of the heathen world, with its hostility to God, was opposing the nation of the Lord, that had been redeemed from the bondage of Egypt and was on its way to Canaan, to contest its entrance into the promised inheritance; so the battle which Israel fought with this foe possessed a typical significance in relation to all the future history of Israel. It could not conquer by the sword alone, but could only gain the victory by the power of God, coming down from on high, and obtained through prayer and those means of grace with which it had been entrusted. The means now possessed by Moses were the staff, which was, as it were, a channel through which the powers of omnipotence were conducted to him. In most cases he used it under the direction of God; but God had not promised him miraculous help for the conflict with the Amalekites, and for this reason he lifted up his hands with the staff in prayer to God, that he might thereby secure the assistance of Jehovah for His struggling people. At length he became exhausted, and with the falling of his hands and the staff he held, the flow of divine power ceased, so that it was necessary to support his arms, that they might be kept firmly directed upwards ( , lit., firmness) until the enemy was entirely subdued. And from this Israel was to learn the lesson, that in all its conflicts with the ungodly powers of the world, strength for victory could only be procured through the incessant lifting up of its hands in prayer. “ And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people (the Amalekites and their people) with the edge of the sword ” (i.e., without quarter. See Gen 34:26).
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| The Conflict with Amalek; The Defeat of Amalek. | B. C. 1491. |
8 Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim. 9 And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek: to morrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine hand. 10 So 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. 11 And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed: and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. 12 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. 13 And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword. 14 And the LORD said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. 15 And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovahnissi: 16 For he said, Because the LORD hath sworn that the LORD will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.
We have here the story of the war with Amalek, which, we may suppose, was the first that was recorded in the book of the wars of the Lord, Num. xxi. 14. Amalek was the first of the nations that Israel fought with, Num. xxiv. 20. Observe,
I. Amalek’s attempt: They came out, and fought with Israel, v. 8. The Amalekites were the posterity of Esau, who hated Jacob because of the birthright and blessing, and this was an effort of the hereditary enmity, a malice that ran in the blood, and perhaps was now exasperated by the working of the promise towards an accomplishment. Consider this, 1. As Israel’s affliction. They had been quarrelling with Moses (v. 2), and now God sends Amalekites to quarrel with them; wars abroad are the just punishment of strifes and discontents at home. 2. As Amalek’s sin; so it is reckoned, Deu 25:17; Deu 25:18. They did not boldly front them as a generous enemy, but without any provocation given by Israel, or challenge given to them, basely fell upon their rear, and smote those that were faint and feeble and could neither make resistance nor escape. Herein they bade defiance to that power which had so lately ruined the Egyptians; but in vain did they attack a camp guarded and victualled by miracles: verily they knew not what they did.
II. Israel’s engagement with Amalek, in their own necessary defence against the aggressors. Observe,
1. The post assigned to Joshua, of whom this is the first mention: he is nominated commander-in-chief in this expedition, that he might be trained up to the services he was designed for after the death of Moses, and be a man of war from his youth. He is ordered to draw out a detachment of choice men from the thousands of Israel and to drive back the Amalekites, v. 9. When the Egyptians pursued them Israel must stand still and see what God would do; but now it was required that they should bestir themselves. Note, God is to be trusted in the use of means.
2. The post assumed by Moses: I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in my hand, v. 9. See how God qualifies his people for, and calls them to, various services for the good of his church: Joshua fights, Moses prays, and both minister to Israel. Moses went up to the top of the hill, and placed himself, probably, so as to be seen by Israel; there he held up the rod of God in his hand, that wonder-working rod which had summoned the plagues of Egypt, and under which Israel had passed out of the house of bondage. This rod Moses held up to Israel, to animate them; the rod was held up as the banner to encourage the soldiers, who might look up, and say, “Yonder is the rod, and yonder the hand that used it, when such glorious things were wrought for us.” Note, It tends much to the encouragement of faith to reflect upon the great things God has done for us, and review the monuments of his favours. Moses also held up this rod to God, by way of appeal to him: “Is not the battle the Lord’s? Is not he able to help, and engaged to help? Witness this rod, the voice of which, thus held up, is (Isa 51:9; Isa 51:10), Put on strength, O arm of the Lord; art not thou it that hath cut Rahab?” Moses was not only a standard-bearer, but an intercessor, pleading with God for success and victory. Note, When the host goes forth against the enemy earnest prayers should be made to the God of hosts for his presence with them. It is here the praying legion that proves the thundering legion. There, in Salem, in Sion where prayers were made, there the victory was won, there broke the arrows of the bow,Psa 76:2; Psa 76:3. Observe, (1.) How Moses was tired (v. 12): His hands were heavy. The strongest arm will fail with being long extended; it is God only whose hand is stretched out still. We do not find that Joshua’s hands were heavy in fighting, but Moses’s hands were heavy in praying. The more spiritual any service is the more apt we are to fail and flag in it. Praying work, if done with due intenseness of mind and vigour of affection, will be found hard work, and, though the spirit be willing, the flesh will be weak. Our great Intercessor in heaven faints not, nor is he weary, though he attends continually to this very thing. (2.) What influence the rod of Moses had upon the battle (v. 11): When Moses held up his hand in prayer (so the Chaldee explains it) Israel prevailed, but, when he let down his hand from prayer, Amalek prevailed. To convince Israel that the hand of Moses (with whom they had just now been chiding) contributed more to their safety than their own hands, his rod than their sword, the success rises and falls as Moses lifts up or lets down his hands. It seems, the scale wavered for some time, before it turned on Israel’s side. Even the best cause must expect disappointments as an alloy to its successes; though the battle be the Lord’s, Amalek may prevail for a time. The reason was, Moses let down his hands. Note, The church’s cause is, commonly, more or less successful according as the church’s friends are more or less strong in faith and fervent in prayer. (3.) The care that was taken for the support of Moses. When he could not stand any longer he sat down, not in a chair of state, but upon a stone (v. 12); when he could not hold up his hands, he would have them held up. Moses, the man of God, is glad of the assistance of Aaron his brother, and Hur, who, some think, was his brother-in-law, the husband of Miriam. We should not be shy either of asking help from others or giving help to others, for we are members one of another. Moses’s hands, thus stayed, were steady till the going down of the sun; and, though it was with much ado that he held out, yet his willing mind was accepted. No doubt it was a great encouragement to the people to see Joshua before them in the field of battle and Moses above them upon the top of the hill: Christ is both to us–our Joshua, the captain of our salvation who fights our battles, and our Moses, who, in the upper world, ever lives making intercession, that our faith fail not.
III. The defeat of Amalek. Victory had hovered awhile between the camps; sometimes Israel prevailed and sometimes Amalek, but Israel carried the day, v. 13. Though Joshua fought with great disadvantages–his soldiers undisciplined, ill-armed, long inured to servitude, and apt to murmur; yet by them God wrought a great salvation, and made Amalek pay dearly for his insolence. Note, Weapons formed against God’s Israel cannot prosper long, and shall be broken at last. The cause of God and his Israel will be victorious. Though God gave the victory, yet it is said, Joshua discomfited Amalek, because Joshua was a type of Christ, and of the same name, and in him it is that we are more than conquerors. It was his arm alone that spoiled principalities and powers, and routed all their force.
IV. The trophies of this victory set up. 1. Moses took care that God should have the glory of it (v. 15); instead of setting up a triumphal arch, to the honour of Joshua (though it had been a laudable policy to put marks of honour upon him), he builds an altar to the honour of God, and we may suppose it was not an altar without sacrifice; but that which is most carefully recorded is the inscription upon the altar, Jehovah-nissi–The Lord is my banner, which probably refers to the lifting up of the rod of God as a banner in this action. The presence and power of Jehovah were the banner under which they enlisted, by which they were animated and kept together, and therefore which they erected in the day of their triumph. In the name of our God we must always lift up our banners, Ps. xx. 5. It is fit that he who does all the work should have all the praise. 2. God took care that posterity should have the comfort and benefit of it: “Write this for a memorial, not in loose papers, but in a book, write it, and then rehearse it in the ears of Joshua, let him be entrusted with this memorial, to transmit it to the generations to come.” Moses must now begin to keep a diary or journal of occurrences; it is the first mention of writing that we find in scripture, and perhaps the command was not given till after the writing of the law upon the tables of stone: “Write it in perpetuam rei memoriam–that the event may be had in perpetual remembrance; that which is written remains.” (1.) “Write what has been done, what Amalek has done against Israel; write in gall their bitter hatred, write in blood their cruel attempts, let them never be forgotten, nor yet what God has done for Israel in saving them from Amalek. Let ages to come know that God fights for his people, and he that touches them touches the apple of his eye.” (2.) Write what shall be done. [1.] That in process of time Amalek shall be totally ruined and rooted out (v. 14), that he shall be remembered only in history.” Amalek would have cut off the name of Israel, that it might be no more in remembrance (Psa 83:4; Psa 83:7); and therefore God not only disappoints him in this, but cuts off his name. “Write it for the encouragement of Israel, whenever the Amalekites are an annoyance to them, that Israel will at last undoubtedly triumph in the fall of Amalek.” This sentence was executed in part by Saul (1 Sam. xv), and completely by David (1Sa 30:1-31; 2Sa 1:1; 2Sa 8:12); after his time we never read so much as of the name of Amalek. [2.] This is the mean time God would have a continual controversy with him (v. 16): Because his hand is upon the throne of the Lord, that is, against the camp of Israel in which the Lord ruled, which was the place of his sanctuary, and is therefore called a glorious high throne from the beginning (Jer. xvii. 12); therefore the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation. This was written for direction to Israel never to make any league with the Amalekites, but to look upon them as irreconcilable enemies, doomed to ruin. Amalek’s destruction was typical of the destruction of all the enemies of Christ and his kingdom. Whoever make war with the Lamb, the Lamb will overcome them.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Verses 8-10:
Amalek was a grandson of Esau. His mother was a Canaanite, Ge 37:12. His descendants occupied much of the Sinai Peninsula, particularly the central hills and valleys. They were very jealous over the water and pasture rights in this area. When Israel approached this territory, Amalek met them with treachery and hostility. They attacked the stragglers when they were exhausted and unable to defend themselves, De 25:18; 1Sa 15:2. Then they launched an assault against Israel at Rephidim.
Moses assigned Joshua the command of Israel’s fighting forces.
He was of the tribe of Ephraim, about 45 years old. At that time his name was Oshea or Hoshea (Nu 13:8), meaning “salvation.” Later, Moses changed his name to Jehoshua, meaning “Jehovah is salvation.” This name was contracted to “Joshua.”
The text implies it was late in the day when Moses heard of Amalek’s sneak attack upon the rearguard. He instructed Joshua to select as many men as he thought appropriate, to attack Amalek the next day. Moses would stand on the hill-top overlooking the battlefield, where he could see the battle, and where he could be seen. In his hand would be the “rod of God,” the emblem of certain victory.
With Moses were Aaron and Hur. Jewish tradition says that Hur was the husband of Miriam, sister of Moses and Aaron. He was later appointed with Aaron as a judge to hear disputes while Moses was in the mount with God, see Ex 24:14.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
8. Then came Amalek. These were the first enemies whom God arrayed against Israel, after having delivered them from Egypt, and having kept them for some time in peace and quietness. It was principally for two reasons that He chose them now to be involved in war, either to punish them for their recent sin, or as a correction of their idleness, lest it should ensnare them into iniquity; for, as among soldiers sedition often arises from a cessation of labor, so also the more God spared this people and indulged them, the more did their forwardness increase. No wonder then that they were awakened by war, when they had taken occasion from their state of tranquillity to wax wanton. But some imagine that the Amalekites were impelled to take arms with this design; first, to avenge (190) the abdication of their ancestor; and secondly, because they were unwilling that the posterity of Jacob should enjoy the inheritance of which Esau, the grandfather of Amalek, the founder of their nation, had been deprived. And, certainly, it is probable that the recollection of the injury which had been inflicted on their ancestor still remained, and that they were instigated by the devil, in order that the promise of God, whereby the right of primogeniture had been transferred from Esau to Jacob, should be frustrated and fail of its effect. This might, indeed, have been their reason for the war; but God had another object, viz., to render the people more obedient to Him, by humbling their pride. Perhaps it was on that account that He withdrew Moses from the leadership, and substituted Joshua, as some token of His indignation; for although the assistance He gave them was sufficiently manifest, and their victory was obtained by His grace and the prayers of Moses, yet would He have them reminded, by the absence of Moses, of their recent transgression, that, being humiliated by their fear, they might submissively ask for pardon, and fly more earnestly to Him for His aid. He orders chosen men to go forth, partly to inspirit the whole people, and encourage them to hope for victory, because He does not deign to employ the whole army to repel their enemies; and partly in consideration of the cowardice of this unwarlike mob, lest they should faint with terror if the enemies should make an incursion into the midst of their camp. For Moses does nothing of himself, but occupies the station appointed him by God on the top of the hill, to contend with the enemy from afar, but he sends down the others to fight hand to hand before him, since it had pleased God thus to order the battle. It is plain that he did not avoid the fight to spare himself, but because God had given him a different employment; and this appears from his wielding the rod of God, like their general and standard-bearer, and promising the successful issue of the battle, of which he had been assured. For that single rod was of more avail than as if they had gone into the field preceded by a thousand banners. I have already observed that this is sometimes called the rod of God, sometimes of Moses, sometimes of Aaron, according to circumstances; because God used it as an instrument to exercise His power through His ministers. So God does not detract from His own honor, when He works effectually by His ministers. It is a prelude to Joshua’s future call, which we shall notice in its place, that. he should be appointed commander of the troops; for he had not yet reached the dignity of next in command to Moses, unless an extraordinary commission had been given him by God.
(190) Ut paternae abdicationis ultores essent. — Lat. Pour venger l’opprobe de leur pere, de ce qu’il avait ete desherite — Fr. This, Willet in loco paraphrases: “to revenge their father Esau’s quarrel for the loss of the birthright.” The Jews themselves appear to have recognized the double cause of this war, viz., the jealousy of Amalek, and the sin of Israel, referred to by Calvin. “After they had passed through the sea, they murmured for waters: then came against them Amalek, who hated them for the first birthright and blessing which our father Jacob had taken from Esau; and he came and fought against Israel, because they had violated the words of the law,” etc. — Targum on Son 2:15, quoted by Ainsworth in loco. For a popular account of the origin of Amalek see Illustrated Commentary on 1Sa 15:0.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES.
Exo. 17:16. The Lord hath sworn.]A far-fetched if not an impossible rendering. The words are literally
For (or because) a hand upon (or against) the throne of Jah;
War for Jehovah with Amalek from generation, generation.
If the hand refer to Amalek (Kalisch), the sentence runs thusbecause his (Amaleks) hand was against the throne of Yah (the Kingdom of God, which includes His people), &c. The meaning is here simple and easy; the connection with what goes before is sufficiently plain; and the reason assigned for perpetual war until Amalek be extirpated, is intelligible and suitable.(Murphy). This on the whole seems to be the moat satisfactory explanation.(Speakers Commentary.) Some scholars (Gesenius, Frst, Davies) think the rare word , throne, to be an error for , banner; and one of them (Frst) proposes the following translation: The memorial is upon the banner of God,Jehovah wages war with Amalek from generation to generation.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Exo. 17:8-16
THE BATTLE BETWEEN GOOD AND EVIL
It is through much tribulation that we enter the kingdom of heaven. The Israelites had experienced hunger. They had experienced thirst. Both had been supplied. Now they are to pass into a new experience of sorrow, they are called to do battle with numerous and fierce enemies. Thus the trials of the Christian life are numerous, varied, unexpected, and come in rapid succession. They test strength. They require wisdom. They are to be met in dependence on God. All pure souls are in a militant condition as long as they are in this world; they are met in their moral progress by terrible enemies, whom they must conquer or before whom they must fall.
I. That the good are required to do battle with inveterate enemies. Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim (Exo. 17:8). These people were descended from Esau, and seem to have been animated by something of the old enmity which once existed between Jacob and Esau. They were also envious of the mercies which were Divinely vouchsafed to Israel, and were anxious to spoil them. Some people can never live in peace and let the children of God pass by unmolested. These foes came secretly upon Israel (Deu. 25:18). And so every pure soul has its Amalek. It has to contend with the Amalek of an evil heart; with the Amalek of a wicked world; and with the Amalek of fallen angels. These enemies seek to impede its progress to heaven. They are cunning in device. They are vigilant in purpose. They are intense in hatred. They especially imperil those who loiter in the rear of the Christian life. Peter followed afar off, and was overtaken by the enemy. No pure soul is exempt from this conflict. Are we surprised that God did not avert this war from the Israelites? They were only just out of bondage; the newly-converted soul is speedily called to meet enemies. They were undrilled; the good learn their drill in the battle. They were unarmed; the weapons of the good are not carnal. Thus they were prepared for coming warfare with the Canaanites, whose territory they were to possess. The soul is led gradually into the moral battle of life. We cannot get to heaven without being interrupted by many enemiesby Satan, by poverty, by sickness, by prosperity; all these will seek to stop or slay us.
II. That the good in this conflict must combine prayer with the utmost exertion to overcome their enemies. And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek: to-morrow I will stand on the top of the hill, with the rod of God in mine hand (Exo. 17:9-11). Thus the Israelites were not with indifference to look upon the invading army. The good cannot afford to treat the progress of sin in the world with cool contempt. Joshua was to muster the best men for the conflict. The good require to be well led by the purest and most heroic spirits in their midst, in their strife with evil. Truth has lost many a battle through bad generalship. Truth needs a man like Luther to lead the attack. If we would overcome evil within us and without us, we must summon the best energies of our mental and moral nature, and put them under the command of Christ; then shall we be led to victory. Joshua fought. Moses went up the hill to pray. Prayer is often uphill work. And the conflict between Good and Evil necessitates the use of prayer and activity. Man must pray over his evil heart, and he must also fight against its sinful tendencies. During the battle some are better qualified to pray, others to wield the sword; both conduce to the victory. Hence varied talents are brought into helpful service. We must not go to this war in our own strength. Christ within the veil prays for every soul engaged in dire conflict with the worlds evil; and in this is the hope of victory. We must trace all our moral victories up to the intercession of Christ; He prays for us that our faith fail not. Yet the conflict may be severe and long; even prayer and effort do not always win a speedy conquest. Sin is persistent in its opposition to the soul.
III. That the good in this conflict are often impeded by the weakness consequent upon the physical condition of life. 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 (Exo. 17:12). The physical man soon tires in religious devotion. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. The best of men are not exempt from the infirmities which inhere in the body. When prayer is interrupted, the enemy of the soul gains an advantage. Moral declension begins here. We conquer evil as we pray. Nature at the strongest is weak. But the hands of Moses were supported by Aaron and Hur. Holy companionship is helpful in the hour of severe moral conflict. Two are better far than one. Christians should seek to hold up the hands of ministers. They must bear one anothers burdens. The insignificant members of the Church may render service to the most important; Hur may strengthen Moses. The smallest services are potent for good in the great conflict between Good and Evil; even the holding up of enfeebled hands. All can do something toward this ultimate victory. The energy of one may aid the weakness of another. The hands of our heavenly Intercessor never grow weary with pleading; and the infirm Christian will soon be as the angels. It is consoling that God knows our frame, and remembers that we are dust.
IV. That the good in their conflict should keep faithful record of their victories. And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword. And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book (Exo. 17:13-14). Thus the Israelites were victorious. They were delivered from their enemies. They gained warlike experiences which would be useful to them. They would gain courage and hope in reference to the future. And one victory over self prepares the way for another, though we may have to wait long for final conquest over selfishness. The power of Satan will one day be destroyed. The Church must conquer all foes. Christ is its Captain. He has triumphed by the cross. A record should be kept of all our soul-victories, to aid memory, to inspire hope, to awaken gratitude to Him to whom it is due. They are worthy of permanent name. They are interesting and instructive. And soon may the record of final victory be penned, and the kingdoms of this world become the kingdoms of the Lord.
V. That the good in this conflict should ascribe all the glory of victory to God. And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovah-nissi: for he said, Because the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation (Exo. 17:15-16). The Israelites had fought under the banner of Godto Him was due the glory of victory. They recognised the Divine helpnot their own valour and fortune. They set up a memorial of it. We should set up grateful memorials of our victories over sin. LESSONS:
1. That there are inveterate enemies to moral goodness.
2. That these enemies are doomed to ultimate defeat and destruction.
3. That the good must pray and fight to this end.
4. There will be a final celebration of victory.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES
Exo. 17:8. New plagues for new murmurings God can make quickly to follow sinners.
Greatest enemies of the Church God may make to arise from the fathers of it.
The weakness of the Church is an occasion unto wicked enemies to oppress it.
Amalek will for no cause seek to fight and destroy Israel.
Whatever enemies intend, God orders all their victories against Israel for good.
Exo. 17:9. In case of oppression by hostility, God allows His Israel to make this defence.
God in His wisdom orders several parts to several instruments for safety.
The Church needs leaders in its war against evil.
Counsel for praying and fighting given by God, and taken from Him, is defensive to His Church.
Exo. 17:10. Counsels for defence of Gods Church are not only to be given and taken, but acted upon.
Good associates in praying are sweet helps to save the Church.
Gracious instruments are ready to climb hills to God for the help of the good.
Exo. 17:11-13. The human hand:
1. Helpful to God, as an instrument
2. Feeble in prayer, as an infirmity.
3. Strengthened in service, as indicative of friendship.
4. An encouragement in battle even to victory.
Doubtful may be the fight of Israel as to success against its enemies for a time.
Good helpers to strengthen hearts and hands in faintings are especially useful.
By such aids souls may be faithful to God unto time of victory.
Exo. 17:14. Jehovahs victories over the enemies of the Church He giveth in charge to be recorded.
Writing and tradition are both Gods ways of recording His works for future ages.
Gods book is the best record of His mighty works done for His Church.
A memorial would God have kept by the records of Gods works to men.
Exo. 17:15-16. Worship-memorials are the best monuments of Gods glorious victories in the Church.
In all such worship-memorials, Jehovah must be known as the banner of the Church.
Gods oath against the enemies of His Church is a strong reason for naming Him their banner.
God has sworn successive destruction to all of Amalek to the end.
ILLUSTRATIONS
BY
REV. WILLIAM ADAMSON
Amalek-Associations! Exo. 17:8. The Amalekitesa nomad people dwelling in tents, and rich in flocks and herdsat this time occupied the peninsula. Some have supposed them to be descendants of Esau; but doubtless they had an earlier origin. Smith says that Arabian geographers state that they came from the shores of the Persian Gulf. At any rate, they were a numerous and powerful nation, occupying the region between Southern Palestine and Egypt. There is every reason to believe that Paran is just the spot which the Amalekites would have been sure to defend. It contains a beautiful oasis well worth fighting for; and the place is capable of being easily defended against large numbers by a comparatively small force. Whether Amalek regarded Israel as an intruder, or whether, for the sake of plunder, they seem first to have assaulted the rear of the column as it wound up through the narrow defiles, and cut off the infirm and stragglers, the motives which Amalek had in view seem to have been so base and reprehensible that they called forth from God a special and terrible announcementnothing short of extermination. This incessant struggle against Amalek furnishes an admirable application for the Church. She must not let go the sacred banner displayed because of the truth, nor cease waging a perpetual moral crusade against sins and corruptions until she has effectually destroyed them, and can say, They are no more. The course adopted by the Scottish monarchs for the resolute extirpation of the Border raiders may supply an analogy. In nature, one species of the ant tribe thus exterminates its foes. The missel thrush, knowing the cruel propensities of the jay as they grow up, watches the young of these birds, and deliberately destroys them wherever it can. It is an instinctnot of revengebut of self-defence and preservation. So with Israel! Defence not defiance!
Thronging hosts have gathered round me,
And the pilgrims God defied;
But His armour fitteth closely,
And His sword is at my side.
Mountain-Mediation! Exo. 17:9. Not the hands of Moses, but the rod was the banner. That rod was held forth as a banner over the battle-fieldnot in the midst of the fight, where sacrilegious hands could graspbut high above, i.e., 700 feet, on the top of the hill overlooking the scene. When Moses let down this banner, the hands and hearts of Israel sanktheir hopes of victory faded. The Great Mediator faltered in His earth-struggle; but even as Aaron and Hur sustained the uplifted hands of Moses, so the attributes of Messiahs priesthood strengthened Him to uphold the banner of the truth. Henry of Navarre bade his soldiers look for his snow-white plume, that crested his princely helmetin place of the celebrated oriflamme or standard of Franceand press towards it for victory. As it fell, so sank their hopes; but as it rose again in sight, they fought and won. Our Mediator, high on the heights of heaven, sustained by His priestly powers, uprears over the great battle-plain of earth His glorious standardthe rod that smotethe truth of God. Now His hands never sink, but are upheld unweariedly until at eventide His mountain-mediation secures ultimate victory. It has, however, been suggested that Aaron and Hur represent those children of God who are shut out from active effort for God and His Church by sickness or infirmity. Such cannot fight like Joshua on the plain; but with Moses on the height they can pray. So that the lesson designed by the incident is not so much the power of prayer by us as the might of His mediation. Christ the strength of His people,both on the mount and in the valleyboth as Moses and as Joshua. The most honoured of earthly standards may lead to defeat, as when the consecrated standards of the Crusaders were grasped by the sacrilegious hosts of Saladin; but the name of the Lord, the truth of God, must lead to victory.
Is not He who fights for Israel
Pledged to make my cause His own!
Keeps He not for me the palm branch,
And the overcomers crown!
Pleading and Praising! Exo. 17:14. These are twins, which ought never to be sundered. It was a quaint notion of the learned Goodwin that prayer and praise were like the double action of the lungs, what we receive in answer to prayer being given back in praise to God. Moses had been wrestling on the hill while Israel was wrestling in the vale; now praise follows. What joyful songs of praise rose up as the last rays of the sun faded behind the hills. Standard-bearers, captain, soldiers, all rejoice together.
Long, indeed, may last the conflict,
But the victory is secure;
And the new sweet song of triumph
Shall from age to age endure.
Banner-Beacons! Exo. 17:15. It was Jehovah who led Israel to Rephidim, that place of mercy, which Israel turned into a place of murmuring. It became a place of battle; and on it Israel erected a banner. On the field of Waterloo there stands a huge mound, surmounted with the Belgic lion; and here and there may be seen monuments where heroes such as Picton and Ponsonby fell. These are to mark the place of victory. The victorious Israelites erected not a monument, but a memorial-altar, thus acknowledging the source of victory. Thanks be to God who giveth us the victory! After the fearful and bloody strife at Sedan, the warrior veteran monarch of Germany telegraphed to his anxious Empress that God had given them victory, and she must at once announce a solemn Te Deum throughout the land. If there be baseless pretension, it is when dust claims honour as the worker of Jehovahs works. The tool is not the agent, the pen is not the spring of thought, the spade of the labourer is not the source of growth and ripeness in the corn. It is the Lord who fights for His people. Under this banner they advance from victory to victory, until all their enemies are destroyed Led through countless conflicts, yet they never lose a field. They march to the throne of God in heaven, before which is spread a banquet, overshaded by a banner. When the Waterloo banquet was first held to celebrate Wellingtons victory over Napoleon, the banqueting hall was hung round with standards, and a canopy of English banners was suspended over the heads of the Iron Duke and his officers. He brought me into His banqueting-house, and His banner over me was Love. Blessed are they that are called to the marriage-supper of the Lamb.
Jehovah, my standard! How bright is the blessing
Of them who go forth in the name of the Lord,
To combat with those who long since have been vanquished
By Him who has given this rallying-word.
Intercession-Influence! Exo. 17:10-11.
(1.) We have read of the missionary travelling in the desert, and resting for the night with his little company without any other covering than the canopy of heaven, rising the next morning and observing the footsteps of the beasts of prey within a few inches of his person, and yet no injury done. But have we thought what intercession-influence in England secured this safety?
(2.) Look at the statesman wielding the destinies of the nation, presiding at the helm of national affairs. We think that his talent has brought all these popular measures about; but if we only knew the real truth, we should find that these wonderful acts are the result of intercession-influence. In the world that lies beyond, we shall see how often God has answered prayer even in national history; and how many of the measures which have delighted and blessed us have been the fruit of believing prayer in some humble cottage home.
Mora things are wrought by prayer
Than this world dreams of.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(8) Then came Amalek.The Amalekites had not been previously (except in the anticipatory notice of Gen. 14:7) mentioned as a nation. Their name marks them for descendants of Amalek, the grandson of Esau (Gen. 36:12; Gen. 36:16); and it would seem that they early became the predominant people in the Sinaitic peninsula. Balaam speaks of them as the first of the nations (Num. 24:20); and though we do lot meet with the name in the Egyptian records, yet it is probable that they were among the hostile nations whom we find constantly contending with the Egyptians upon their north-eastern frontier. Though Edomitesn they are always regarded as a distinct race, and one especially hostile to Israel (Exo. 17:16). Their present hostility was not altogether unprovoked. No doubt they regarded the Sinaitic region as their own, and as the most valuable portion of their territory, since it contained their summer and autumn pastures. During their absence in its more northern portion, where there was pasture for their flocks after the spring rains, a swarm of emigrants had occupied some of their best lands, and threatened to seize the remainder. Naturally, they would resent the occupation. They would not understand that it was only temporary. They would regard the Israelites as intruders, robbers, persons entitled to scant favour at their hands. Accordingly, they swooped upon them without mercy, attacked their rear as they were upon the march, cut off their stragglers, and slew many that were feeble, faint, and weary (Deu. 25:17-18). They then encamped in their neighbourhood, with the design of renewing the struggle on the next day. It was under these circumstances that Moses had to make his arrangements.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
CONFLICT WITH AMALEK, Exo 17:8-16.
8. Then came Amalek The Amalekites were a nomadic people of whom we find the first trace in the life of Abraham, (Gen 14:7,) who seem to have been pressed westwards into Southern Palestine and the Sinai Peninsula, from the shores of the Persian Gulf, by the advance of the Assyrian empire . (Knobel’s Volkertafel .) There are now found in the desert primitive remains of tombs, stone circles, and archaic sculptures, which are referred to this people. Stone huts of the beehive form, seven to ten feet high, with well-made door-openings two feet square, made of rubbed stones, are also found in various parts of these deserts, and are assigned by many antiquarians to the Amalekites. (See cut on opposite page.)
This tribe, or nation, now held the great thoroughfare from Egypt to Palestine by Wady Feiran and Akabah. We have already seen that the Philistines held the northern thoroughfare along the Mediterranean shore, by Gaza and the maritime plain, so that collision with the one or the other of these nations was inevitable. This was now their first conflict with this wide-spread people, who harassed them at intervals through all the period of the Judges, who were signally defeated by Saul, and finally destroyed by David. 2Sa 8:12. This was chiefly a guerrilla warfare, the Amalekites blocking the steep, narrow passes against the advance of Israel, and harassing their flanks and rear. Deu 25:18. At Rephidim, however, three miles above the rock just described as the rock of Moses, in the Arab tradition, the Wady Feiran broadens out into a plain which extends up into two branch valleys along the flanks of the lofty Mount Serbal . The conical hill Tahuneh, above described, commands a full view of this plain and of these branch valleys, between which rises the jagged front of Serbal. (See cut on opposite page.)
The only objection worthy of notice which is made to locating this conflict before Tahuneh is thatxodus 19:2, states that when Israel departed from Rephidim they “camped before the mount,” Sinai, which is more than a day’s march from the oasis ofFeiran. But Mount Sinai is not stated to be the next station after Rephidim, and the itinerary of Numbers xxxiii shows, as we have already seen, that several intermediate stations are omitted in the Exodus narrative. Dophkah and Ahesh, between the Desert of Sin and Rephidim, find no mention here. Of course those who (like Knobel, Keil, Murphy) suppose that the Israelites went to Sinai by the Debbet er Ramleh, place Rephidim somewhere in that sandy plain. See Introduction to chap. 16.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
A Sudden Attack From an Unexpected Foe ( Exo 17:8-16 ).
Up to this point the problems of the journey have been physical problems arising from the environment, but now the children of Israel are reminded of other dangers, the dangers arising from people who resent their presence. This would seem not just to be a raiding party but a determined attack to prevent their progress. A sub-tribe of Amalekites had no doubt spotted them and reported their presence and their large numbers, to the wider elements of the Amalekites, who were Bedouin tribesmen and who would see this area as their territory, and under invasion. The Bedouin roamed widely in the semi-desert seeking pasturage, food and water. They were fierce warriors and very independent. This was probably an amalgamation of a number of their sub-tribes for a determined attack No doubt they also hoped to gather much spoil. It does not mean that they had permanent residence in this area.
a Amalek come and fight with Israel in Rephidim (Exo 17:8).
b Moses tells Joshua to select men to go and fight with Amalek (Exo 17:9 a).
c On the next day he will stand on the top of the hill with the staff of God in his hand (Exo 17:9 b).
d Joshua did as Moses had commanded and fought with Amalek (Exo 17:10 a).
e Moses, Aaron and Hur went to the top of the hill, and whenever Moses held up his hand Israel prevailed, but when he let it down Amalek prevailed (Exo 17:10-11).
e Moses hands were heavy with tiredness and they put a stone under him and he sat on it. Then they supported his hands, one on one side and the other on the other, and his hands were heavy until the going down of the sun (Exo 17:12).
d Thus Joshua discomfited Amalek with the edge of the sword (Exo 17:13).
c Yahweh tells Moses to record what happened in a written record as a memorial and remind Joshua of it constantly, that He would blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven (Exo 17:14).
b Moses built an altar and named it, ‘Yahweh is our banner’ (Exo 17:15).
a Moses says, ‘Yahweh has sworn. Yahweh will have war with Amalek from generation to generation’.
Note that in ‘a’ Amalek come and fight with Israel in Rephidim, while in the parallel Yahweh will continually war with Amalek from then on. They had been foolish to interfere with His people. In ‘b’ Joshua has to select men to fight with Amalek, and in the parallel Yahweh is their banner. In ‘c’ Moses stands on the top of the hill with the staff of God in his hand, and in the parallel Yahweh tells Moses to record what happened in a written record as a memorial and remind Joshua of it constantly, that He would blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. Moses’ intercession had been so effective that it has reached even into heaven, and into future generations yet to come. In ‘d’ Joshua fought with Amalek, and in the parallel he discomfited them with the edge of the sword. In ‘e’ the raised hand of Moses causes Israel to prevail, whereas when it falls Amalek prevail, while in the parallel his hands are successfully supported by Aaron and Hur all day (so that Israel finally prevail).
Exo 17:8
‘Then came Amalek and fought with Israel in Rephidim.’
The short terse phrase ‘then came Amalek’ stresses the unexpected and surprise nature of their attack. The Amalekites had connections with the sons of Esau from whom they possibly took their name (Gen 36:12). (‘All the country of the Amalekites’ in Gen 14:7 may be a scribal updating of a previous description. Alternately Esau’s son’s name may have been taken from Amalek).
They are described by Balaam in Num 24:20 as ‘the first of the nations’ and he forecast their destruction. This probably means the first of the nations to attack the children of Israel after they left Egypt, or the first to attack them on their reaching Kadesh (Num 14:45). Or it may suggest an admiration for their nomadic way of life seeing them as nearest to the lives of the ancients.
This verse probably refers to their first attack, for in Deu 25:17-19 we are told that the first that the children of Israel knew of their presence was when they attacked the rear of the party, where the weakest and most feeble were found, at a time when they were all weary. It would leave them stunned and apprehensive. This treacherous behaviour ensured the Amalekites’ later condemnation.
“In Rephidim.” The rock from which the water came was in Horeb. But at this point only the elders had been to that rock. Thus this attack may well have taken place when the elders returned from the rock and when the people started off to move there to take advantage of the water (the Amalekites attacked the tail of the caravan). The final movement of the children of Israel to Horeb to take advantage of the water from the rock is not mentioned, it is assumed, and by Exo 18:5 they are encamped ‘at the Mount of God’ in Horeb. We have seen previously how sometimes Yahweh commanded something and its occurrence was then assumed. But before that they have to deal with this menace.
Exo 17:9
‘And Moses said to Joshua, “Choose us out men and go out and fight with Amalek. Tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the staff of God in my hand.” ’
It is possible that the Amalekites, having made their presence felt and having realised the largeness of the numbers they were against, then approached and demanded that the children of Israel turn back, with the warning that if they did not do so they would be attacked again in force. But whatever the case Moses, having no doubt sent out spies to ascertain the source of the attack, recognised that the large force they had detected meant that they had a fight on their hands. Joshua may well have been one of those spies.
The Amalekites were not to know that the children of Israel were inexperienced warriors. But in fact they were so, for we must remember that the children of Israel had done no fighting either before or since being delivered. There can, however, be little doubt that Moses would have ensured that they had some military training while on the journey, for it would have been folly not to have done so. And he was presumably aided in this by Joshua whom he no doubt found to be a willing pupil, and who was a ‘young man’ (Exo 33:11). It was the young men who would have been most willing to do the military training and there were no experienced older men to assist with it (although their numbers may have included ex-mercenaries). Moses may well have been the only one trained to handle arms, unless possibly they had with them some Israelites who had been mercenaries, or some ex-mercenaries were included in the ‘mixed multitude’ of Exo 12:38.
Thus we should not be surprised to find such a young man being given the responsibility of leading the troops. The fact that he is mentioned without introduction need also not surprise us. His name is at this point simply mentioned as the one chosen to select the best fighters, whom he would know from training, and to lead the attack, possibly because he was the spy who reported back on the situation. It was only later that he received a permanent appointment, although he may even by this stage have been in charge of the Tent of Meeting (Exo 33:11). Besides the incident was specifically recorded in writing (Exo 17:14) and the compiler probably copied this down without addition. At the time it was first recorded Joshua would be the hero and would need no introduction. He would be known to all.
“Joshua” is sometimes called Hoshea (Num 13:8 – dropping the Yah prefix). He is later called a young man and becomes the servant (aide-de-camp) of Moses (Exo 33:11).
“I will stand on the top of the hill with the staff of God in my hand.” Once more Moses’ staff is called ‘the staff of God’ (compare Exo 4:20). It was the sign that Moses’ authority came from Yahweh. Thus it demonstrated that Yahweh would fight for them. Note Moses confidence, ‘I will stand’. It would not be long before he would have to sit. The battle was to be longer than he expected, and his confidence in his own strength was too great. But the fact that he was there with the staff of God would be a huge confidence booster to Joshua.
Exo 17:10-11
‘So 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. And so it was that when Moses held up his hand Israel prevailed, and when he let down his hand Amalek prevailed.’
The length of the battle emphasises the size of the Amalekite forces, and the inexperienced Joshua with his inexperienced troops had a real fight on their hands. Meanwhile Moses went with Aaron and Hur to the top of the hill, probably so that he could be seen by his troops. This incident reminds us how old he was. We tend to forget that he was now an old man. Hur is mentioned again along with Aaron in Exo 24:14 (see also Exo 31:2) which emphasises his authoritative position.
“And when Moses held up his hand Israel prevailed.” This was, of course, with the staff of God in his hand. This was no doubt seen as because this ensured the assistance of Yahweh. But there can be no doubt that such a belief would have given the troops new life whenever they saw it. And when his hand fell the reverse would be the case. They were not seasoned fighters like the Amalekites and their only hope lay in their larger numbers, and in Yahweh.
Note the description of the battle – ‘Joshua — fought with Amalek’, then ‘when Moses held up his hand Israel prevailed’, then ‘when he let down his hand Amalek prevailed, then – ‘Joshua discomfited Amalek’. It is made quite plain Who was the source of the victory.
Exo 17:12-13
‘But Moses’ hands were heavy, and they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it. And Aaron and Hur held 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. And Joshua mowed down (Hebrew ‘prostrated’) Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword.’
This brings out the genuineness of the account. Moses was not seen as a superhuman figure but revealed as a weary old man unable to last out the day, simply because it was so. This was a contemporary record. Yet his importance comes out in that without him the battle would have been lost. Inexperienced troops need such incentives as he provided if they are to succeed in a tough battle. They needed to know that Moses and the staff of God were in action.
The lifting up of the hand was the sign of entering into a solemn oath (Gen 14:22; Exo 6:8; Exo 17:16) and the raising of both hands may have symbolised the fact that Moses was calling on the throne of Yahweh for Him to be faithful to His covenant oath. But the final idea is clear. All depended on Yahweh.
The length of the battle emphasises the size of the Amalekite force, but in the end they were ‘prostrated’ before Israel. Their superior experience could not combat the size of the opposing Israelite force when its morale was maintained by knowing that Yahweh fought for them. God wrought for them but He also expected them to fight for themselves.
The battle would be an important lesson for the future. It gave them their first experience of victory, and it let them know that with Yahweh fighting for them they were invincible. They had seen it against the Egyptians but now they experienced it in live battle. The next time this would make them stronger.
Exo 17:14
‘And Yahweh said to Moses, Write this for a memorial in a document, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the remembering of Amalek from under heaven.’
The instruction to write the details of what had happened is given because Yahweh wants His covenant concerning Amalek to be read and reread to Joshua. This confirms the practise, which we gathered from an examination of Genesis, that important covenant documents were written out in this way ‘for a memorial’, with the reading out of the covenant to those involved in view.
“For a memorial.” To act as a constant reminder.
“I will utterly blot out the remembering of Amalek from under heaven.” The crimes of Amalek were firstly, that they were the first to attack the children of Israel after they left Egypt, and secondly, that they did so in a cowardly way, attacking the weakest and most helpless of Yahweh’s people. We are constantly reminded throughout the Old Testament of Yahweh’s great concern for the weak and helpless, the widow and the orphan and suchlike.
Exo 17:15-16
‘And Moses built an altar and called the name of it Yahweh-nissi (Yahweh is my banner) and he said, “Truly with a hand to the throne of Yah I swear, ‘Yahweh will have war with Amalek from generation to generation’.” ’
The altar would be built for the purpose of offering sacrifice, and we note that Moses is said to have built it (been responsible for its building) and not Aaron. Moses was still looked to as the tribal priest. Its name was ‘Yahweh is my banner’. This may look back to his activity on the hilltop with the idea that his staff was like a banner, although the parallel in the analysis also connects it with the going into battle, but its main meaning is that Yahweh will always go with Israel into war as their banner, in this case against Amalek.
“Truly with a hand to the throne (or ‘to the banner”) of Yah I swear.’ The Hebrew is uncertain. The word translated throne (kes) is not known elsewhere but can be taken as another form of kisse (throne). The raising of the hand was a strong form of oath (Gen 14:22; Exo 6:8). However Hebrew n is very similar to k and in context we may possibly read ‘nes’ (as in Exo 17:15) meaning banner suggesting a very early copying error. But we are always loath to suggest such errors without evidence.
“Yahweh will have war with Amalek.” There would be no lasting truce with the Amalekites. They had proved their treacherous nature by their actions here. They dwelt ‘in the land of the south’ (Num 13:29 compare Gen 12:9 where this means the Negev) and would cause further trouble to the children of Israel when they were at Kadesh, an oasis in the south lands. They were a constant problem to Israel when Israel was weak (Jdg 3:13; Jdg 6:3-5; Jdg 6:33; Jdg 7:12; Jdg 10:12) and Samuel sought their destruction on the grounds of what had happened here at Rephidim which possibly patterned contemporary behaviour (1 Samuel 15). The remnant of the Amalekites were finally destroyed at their stronghold in Mount Seir in the days of Hezekiah (1Ch 4:43).
“From generation to generation.” The blotting out was not to take place immediately. It would be a process through a number of generations.
Note for Christians.
In this passage the people of God were attacked by an enemy after they had been saved from Egypt and were on their way to live under the Kingly Rule of God. From that point of view they can be seen as a type of the Christian, who is saved from ‘the world’ and is a pilgrim on his way to the heavenly Kingdom of God. For the assault of evil on the people of righteousness has been true in all ages, and never more so than in our spiritual warfare today. And the way of deliverance is the same in all cases. It is through trust in God, and standing firm against the enemy. It is especially interesting here that the general who saved the people was called ‘Yahweh is salvation’ or ‘Yahweh saves’.
We may note here that technically Moses did not pray. He did not need to pray. His confidence in Yahweh was such that he knew that all that he had to do was indicate Yahweh’s presence as there on their behalf, and Yahweh would do the rest. Prayer would only have been necessary if Israel had sinned. We also need to learn that sometimes it is not prayer that is required, but confidence in God. There comes a time when prayer is not necessary because we already have God’s promise. Then instead we may praise in confident expectancy of what He will do. It was said of Praying Hyde that he gave up much of his time to praise because he found that it was the more effective in bringing down the blessing of God.
End of note.
The Battle with the Amalekites 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)
Exo 17:8 Word Study on “Amalek” PTW says the name, “Amalek” ( ) (H6002) means “warlike, dweller in the vale.” John Durham says it possibly means, “trouble-maker.” [77]
[77] 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 17:8.
Gen 36:12, “And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son; and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek : these were the sons of Adah Esau’s wife.”
Comments – The Amalekites are first mentioned in Genesis as a tribe dwelling in the land of Canaan (Gen 14:7). In addition, the name Amalek refers to the son of Eliphaz, the son of Esau (Gen 36:12). Since Balaam called Amalek the “first of the nations” (Num 24:20), it is likely that the Amalekites is a reference to the more ancient tribe. However, scholars are divided as to their exact identity.
Gen 14:7, “And they returned, and came to Enmishpat, which is Kadesh, and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwelt in Hazezontamar.”
Num 24:20, “And when he looked on Amalek, he took up his parable, and said, Amalek was the first of the nations; but his latter end shall be that he perish for ever.”
Moses later reminds the next generation of Israelites of this unprovoked attack by the Amalekites recorded in Exo 17:8-16 and promises the children of Israel that God will utterly wipe them out (Deu 25:17-19).
Deu 25:17-19, “Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt; How he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God. Therefore it shall be, when the LORD thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it.”
Exo 17:9 “to morrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine hand” – Comments The rod of God that Moses used to implement the Ten Plagues and part the Red Sea represents divine authority and symbolizes the fact that God gives the name of Jesus to the New Testament Church, which they use to take authority over the enemy. When Jesus sent forth the Twelve and the seventy to preach the Gospel and to heal the sick and cast out demons, He gave them His name. When the disciples spoke His name, they exercised all of the authority in His name (Luk 10:17).
Luk 10:17, “And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name.”
Exo 17:11 And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed: and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed.
Exo 17:11 Jas 5:16, “The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.”
Psa 8:2, “Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.”
Jos 8:26, “For Joshua drew not his hand back, wherewith he stretched out the spear, until he had utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai.”
In the epistle of Barnabas, an early Christian document that Clement of Alexandria ascribes to the apostle Barnabas, who would have written it in the first century (A.D. 70 to 100), the author states that the lifting of Moses’ hands signified that the children of Israel could not be saved unless they put their trust in Him. The author also states that Moses held his hands out as a symbol of the Cross of Christ Jesus.
“Yet again He speaks of this in Moses, when Israel was attacked by strangers. And that He might remind them, when assailed, that it was on account of their sins they were delivered to death, the Spirit speaks to the heart of Moses, that he should make a figure of the cross, and of Him about to suffer thereon; for unless they put their trust in Him, they shall be overcome for ever. Moses therefore placed one weapon above another in the midst of the hill, and standing upon it, so as to be higher than all the people, he stretched forth his hands, and thus again Israel acquired the mastery. But when again he let down his hands, they were again destroyed. For what reason? That they might know that they could not be saved unless they put their trust in Him.” ( Epistle of Barnabas, 12) [78]
[78] Epistle of Barnabas, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, eds. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, c1885, 1913), 144-5.
Exo 17:13 And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword.
Exo 17:14 Exo 17:14 Deu 25:17, “Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt; How he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God. Therefore it shall be, when the LORD thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget it.”
1Sa 15:1-3, “Samuel also said unto Saul, The LORD sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the LORD. Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.” This was a time of unrest for Israel. Note 1Sa 14:52, “And there was sore war against the Philistines all the days of Saul: and when Saul saw any strong man, or any valiant man, he took him unto him.”
The Amalekites were not entirely destroyed until the days of Hezekiah.
1Ch 4:43, “And they smote the rest of the Amalekites that were escaped, and dwelt there unto this day.”
Exo 17:15 And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovahnissi:
Exo 17:15 Num 21:8-9, “And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole : and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.”
Psa 60:4, “Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, that it may be displayed because of the truth. Selah.”
Exo 17:16 For he said, Because the LORD hath sworn that the LORD will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.
Exo 17:16
The Battle with the Amalekites
v. 8. Then came Amalek, v. 9. And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek; v. 10. So Joshua, v. 11. And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, v. 12. But Moses’ hands were heavy. v. 13. And Joshua discomfited, v. 14. And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua, v. 15. And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovah-nissi v. 16. for he said, Because the Lord hath sworn that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation. EXPOSITION
THE WAR WITH AMALEK. The Amalekites seem to have been descendants of Amalek, the grandson of Esau (Gen 36:12). They separated themselves off from the other Edomites at an early date, and became the predominant tribe in the more northern parts of the Sinaitic peninsula, claiming and exercising a sovereignty over the whole of the desert country between the borders of Palestine and Egypt. We do not find the name Amalek in the Egyptian records; but the people are probably represented by the Mentu, with whom so many of the early Egyptian kings contended. The Pharaohs dispossessed them of the north-western portion of the mountain region; but they probably claimed the suzerainty of the central hills and valleys, which the Egyptians never occupied; and on these they no doubt set a high value as affording water and pasture for their flocks during the height of summer. When the Israelites pressed forward into these parts, the Amale-kites, in spite of the fact that they were a kindred race, determined on giving them battle. They began by “insidiously attacking the rear of the Hebrew army, when it was exhausted and weary” (Deu 25:18). Having cut off many stragglers, they attacked the main body at Rephidim, in the Wady-Feiran, and fought the long battle which the text describes (Exo 17:10-13). The result was the complete discomfiture of the assailants, who thenceforth avoided all contact with Israel until attacked in their turn at the southern frontier of Canaan, when, in conjunction with the Canaanites, they were victorious (Num 14:45). A bitter and long continued enmity followed. Amalek, “the first of the nations” to attack Israel (Exo 24:1-18 :20), was pursued with unrelenting hostility (Deu 25:17-19), defeated repeatedly by Saul and David (1Sa 14:48; 1Sa 15:7; 1Sa 27:8; 1Sa 30:17; 2Sa 8:12); the last remnant of the nation being finally destroyed by the Simeonites in the reign of king Hezekiah, as related by the author of Chronicles (1Ch 4:41-43).
Exo 17:8
Then came Amalek. The bulk of the Amalekites would have been passing the spring in the lower plains, where herbage is abundant after the early rains, while later in the year it dries up. They would hear of the threatened occupation of their precious summer pastures by the vast host of the Hebrews, and would seek to prevent it by blocking the way. Hence they are said to have “come”i.e; to have marched into a position where they were not previously, though it was one situated within their country. We must remember that they were nomads. And fought with Israel For the nature of the fighting on the first day, see Deu 25:18; by which it appears that the original attack was made on the rear of the long column, and was successful. The Amalekites “smote the hindmost” of the Israelites, “even all that were feeble behind them, when they were faint and weary.”
Exo 17:9
And Moses said to Joshua. On hearing what had happened, Moses summoned to his presence an Ephraimite in the prime of lifeabout 45 years oldand devolved on him the military command. The man’s name at the time was Hoshea or Oshea (Num 13:8). lie was the son of a certain Nun (ibid.) or Non (1Ch 7:27), and the tenth in descent from Ephraim, the son of Joseph (1Ch 7:23-27). Some forty years later Moses changed his name from Hoshea to Jehoshua. which became contracted into Joshua. The occurrence of this form in the present passage may be accounted for.
1. By Moses having written (or reviewed) Exodus late in his life; or
2. By a later authorised reviser (Ezra?) having altered the text. Choose out for us meni.e. “Select from the congregation such a number of fit men as appear to thee sufficient, and with them fight Amalek.” To-morrow. It was probably evening, when Moses heard of the attack on his rear, and there was consequently no possibility of retrieving the disaster till the next day. lie could but make his arrangements for retrieving it. I will stand on the top of the hill. It is implied that there was a conspicuous hill (gibeah), not a rock (tsur) in the near vicinity of Rephidim, whence Moses could see the fight, and be seen by those engaged in it. Dean Stanley finds all the conditions answered by an eminence on the south side of the Wady Feiran. Others suggest the Jebel Tahuneh north of the same wady. With the rod of God in my hand. Moses meant to indicate by this, that he looked for victory to God alone, and did not trust in an “arm of flesh,” while, nevertheless, he sent his soldiers to the combat.
Exo 17:10
Hur. Hur has not been mentioned hitherto. According to one Jewish tradition, he was the son, according to another, the husband of Miriam. Scripture only tells us of him, that he was descended from Judah, through Caleb the son of Hezron (1Ch 2:18-20), and that his grandson, Bezaleel, was the artificer of the tabernacle (Exo 31:2). He is again associated with Aaron in Exo 24:14.
Exo 17:11
When Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed. The elevation of Moses’ hand, with the rod held in it, was an appeal to God for aid, and must be supposed to have been accompanied by fervent prayer to God, that he would help his people and give them victory over their enemies. So long as the hand was upraised, the Israelites prevailed; not because they saw it, and took it as directing them to continue the fight (Kalisch), but because God gave them strength, and vigour and courage, while Moses interceded, and left them to themselves when the intercession ceased, It may be said, that Moses might have continued to pray, though his hands were weary; but only those who have tried, know how difficult a thing it is to pray with any intensity for a continuance. Probably Moses’ spiritual and physical powers collapsed together; and when he dropped his hand through physical fatigue, he rested also from his mental effort. To impress upon Israel the importance of intercessory prayer, God made success and failure alternate with its continuance and discontinuance, thus teaching his people a lesson of inestimable value.
Exo 17:12
But Moses’ hands were heavy. Moses, no doubt, held the rod alternately with one hand and the other, until both were so tired that he could hold them up no longer. It is this natural weariness which is expressed by the words”his hands were heavy.” When Aaron and Hut perceived this, they brought a stone for him to sit on, and then, standing one on either side of him, alternately supported his hands until the sun set and the battle was over. To reward the faith and perseverance of the three, God gave Israel in the end a complete victory.
Exo 17:13
Amalek and his peoplei.e. “the Amalekites proper, and the tribes subject to them, who fought on their side.”
Exo 17:14
Write this in a book. The original has, “Write this in the book.” It is clear that a book already existed, in which Moses entered events of interest, and that now he was divinely commanded to record in it the great victory over Amalek, and the threat uttered against them. The record was to be for a memorial
1. that the victory itself might be held in remembrance through all future ages, as a very signal instance of God’s mercy; and
2. that when the fulfilment of the threat came (1Ch 4:43), God might have his due honour, and his name be glorified. Rehearse it in the ears of Joshua. “Hand down,” i.e; to thy successor, Joshua, the tradition of perpetual hostility with Amalek, and the memory of the promise now made, that the whole nation shall be utterly blotted out from under heaven. (Compare Deu 25:19.) The special sin of Amalek was,
1. That he attacked God’s people, not fearing God (Deu 25:18);
2. That he had no compassion on his own kindred: and
3. That he fell on them when they were already suffering affliction, and were “feeble, and faint and weary” (ib,)
Exo 17:15
Moses built an altar. An altar naturally implies a sacrifice, and Moses may well have thought that the signal victory obtained required to be acknowledged, and as it were requited, by offerings. In giving his altar a name, he followed the example of Jacob, who called an altar which he built, El-Elohe-Israel (Gen 33:20). Moses’ name for his altar, Jehovah-nisi, meant “the Lord is my banner,” and was intended to mark his ascription of the entire honour of the victory to Jehovah but had probably no reference to the particular mode in which the victory was gained.
Exo 17:16
Because the Lord hath sworn. Rather, as in the margin, “Because the hand of Amalek was against the throne of the Lord””because,” i.e; “in attacking Israel, Amalek had as it were lifted up his hand against God on his throne,” therefore should there be war against Amalek from generation to generation.
HOMILETICS
Exo 17:8-13
The uselessness of fighting against God.
Amalek was “the first of the nations” in audacity, in venturesomeness, perhaps in military qualities, but scarcely in prudence or longsightedness. Amalek must precipitate its quarrel with Israel, must “come to Rephidim” and offer battle, instead of letting Israel go. on its own way unmolested, and shunning a contest. They might have known that they were about to fight against God, and that to do so is useless. None can contend with him successfully. It is curious that sinners do not see this. Some of them seem to hope to escape the notice of God; others appear to doubt his power; a few seem to disbelieve in his existence. The uselessness of contending against him would be generally recognised, if men would bear in mind, as most sure
I. THAT THERE IS A GOD, DESERVING OF THE NAME, THE MAKER AND RULER OF THE UNIVERSE. The disbelief in a Personal God underlies much of the resistance which men offer to his will on earth. They admit an impersonal something external to themselves, which they call “Nature,” and speak of as having immutable “laws.” These they profess to respect. But the law of righteousness, decreed by a God who is a Person, and written by him in the hearts of his human creatures, is not among these “laws of nature,” they think, since in many people it is not found to exist. Neither to this law, nor to the God who made it, do they profess any allegiance. They claim the liberty to do that which is right in their own eyes. But, as surely as they are confounded, if they set themselves in opposition to a law of physical naturewalk on the sea, or handle fire, or seek to fly without wingsso surely does a Nemesis attend their efforts, if they transgress a moral law, be it the law of chastity, or of truth, or of general kindliness, or of special regard for God’s day, God’s house, God’s ministers, God’s people. The Amalekites attacked the last, and were overthrown. Final discomfiture will assuredly overtake all who attack anything that is God’s or in any way set themselves in opposition to his will.
II. THAT GOD IS REALLY OMNIPOTENT. It often pleases God to allow for a time the contradiction of sinners against himself, and even to let the ungodly enjoy a long term of worldly prosperity. Some of the worst men have prospered during their whole lives, and have died at the height of earthly greatness, self-satisfied, so far as men could see, happy. Men have questioned whether God, if really onmipotent, could have allowed this, and have doubted his ability to carry on a real moral government of the entire universe. But omnipotence is included in the very idea of God; and it is quite inconceivable that any of his creatures should be really able to thwart or resist him further than he himself permits. Their very existence depends on him, and unless he sustained them in being, they would perish at each moment. He temporarily allows the opposition of other wills to his, not through any defect of power, but for his own wise purposes. Some time or other he will vindicate himself, and show forth his Almighty power, to the utter confusion of his enemies.
III. THAT GOD IS ALSO OMNISCIENT. The Psalmist tells us (Psa 73:11) of those who said”Tush, how should God perceive? Is there knowledge in the Most High?” and, again, “God hath forgotten; he hideth away his face, and he will never see it” (Psa 10:11). These are bold utterances, such as men scarcely make nowadays; but still there are many who in their inmost heart seem to cherish the Epicurean notion, “Deos securum agere oevum,” that the Divinity does not care for what men do, or that, at any rate, words or thoughts are beyond his cognisance. He, however, himself declares the contrary. “For every idle word that men shall speak they shall give account.” “Thou knowest the very secrets of the heart.” “All things are open and revealed unto him with whom we have to do.” We cannot resist him secretly or without his knowledge. He knows all our words, and all our thoughts, as well as all our acts, “long before.” We cannot take him by surprise and gain an advantage over him. There is not a word in our mouth, or a thought in our heart, but he “knows it altogether”has always known it, and has provided accordingly. If we were “wise,” if we were even moderately prudent, we should give up the idea of resisting God. Instead of “raging” and “imagining vain things”instead of “taking counsel together against the Lord and against his Anointed”instead of seeking to “break their bands asunder and cast away their cords from us” (Psa 2:1-3), we should submit ourselveswe should be content to “serve the Lord with fear and rejoice unto Him with reverence”we should “kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and so we perish from the right way, if his wrath be kindled, yea, but a little”we should “take his yoke upon us, and learn of him”satisfied that in no other way can we prosper, in no other way can we obtain rest, or peace, or happiness.
Exo 17:9-13
Diversities of gifts, but the same spirit.
DIVERSITIES OF GIFTS. The needs of life are various, and the gifts which God imparts to his saints are correspondingly diversified. In Moses, at the age of eighty (Exo 7:7), the qualities required for the successful conduct of military matters were not present. It may be doubted whether he would at any period of his life have been a good general But his age, his temperament, and his training made him emphatically a man of prayer. Joshua, on the other hand, in the full vigour of middle life, active, energetic, bold, intrepid, indefatigable, was a born soldier, and a man well suited for military command. To Moses belongs the credit of having recognised the needs of the occasion, and the “diversity of gifts” in himself and his “minister.” He took the duties, for which he felt himself fit, upon himself; he delegated those, for which he knew that he was unfit, to the individual who, among the thousands of Israel, appeared to him, and. no doubt was, the most perfectly fitted for them. In a minor way, it may be noticed that Aaron and Hur, unsuited for either military command or the leading part in sustained intercessory prayer, had yet gifts which enabled them to play a useful secondary part in support of Moses, and were selected by him for their fitness. The recognition of DIVERSITIES OF GIFTS is required
1. For the best utilisation of all the powers possessed by God‘s people at any given time. Unless diversity be recognised, all aspirants naturally seek the same posts. All are rivals. Jealousies, sure to arise, are intensified. Discontents multiply. Rulers find the difficulty of government augmented. Again, special talents are wasted. The man most suited to one post occupies another. The gifts which he needs he often does not possess; those which he possesses he cannot exercise.
2. For the satisfaction of individuals. It is a sore grief to feel unfit for the work which we have to do; but it is a still sorer grief to be conscious of powers which have no field of exercise, while we see others in possession of the field without the powers. Individuals perhaps ought to be content if they can -perform satisfactorily the work that is set them. But minds of superior capacity are not, and never will be, thus satisfied. They want a congenial sphere, an occupation which would put their powers to the proof, a task which they would feel that they, and they alone, could perform properly. Hence, it is of great importance, for the contentation of those under their charge, that such as have the rule over men should both recognise the fact of “diversity of gifts,” and seek to obtain a full knowledge of the special gifts of those to whose services they have to give employment.
3. For the general advance of God‘s kingdom. It is only by utilising to the utmost all the gifts possessed by members of the Church at any given time, that the Church can be brought into the highest possible state of efficiency. “Diversities of gifts” are a fact (1Co 12:4). “To one is given the word of wisdom; to another, the word of knowledge; to another, faith; to another, the gifts of healing; to another, the working of miracles; to another, prophecy; to another, discerning of spirits; to another, divers kinds of tongues; to another, the interpretation of tongues” (1Co 12:8-11). Unless this be recognised, unless each gifted one is put to his proper use, there is a waste of poweran absolute loss to the Churcha stoppage of possibilities which might have occurred, had things been better ordered.
THE SAME SPIRIT. Different as are the duties of life, various as are the calls made upon the individuals who compose the Christian communitynow for courage, now for counsel, now for governmental capacity, now for military skill, anon for earnest and prolonged prayerthere is, after all, but one spirit in which all have to act, as there is also but One Spirit from whom the power to act aright in all cases comes. The merchant in his trade, the soldier on the battle field, the minister in his parish, the man of learning in his study, all may and all ought to act in one and the same spirit, diligently, manfully, earnestly, striving to do their duty, under their various circumstances, in singleness of heart, as unto the Lord and not unto man. The true Christian temper is one and the same, whatever a man’s occupation may be; and it is not very difficult to recognise in a Havelock or a Lawrence the identical tone and temper which we have admired in a Channing and a Wesley, a Pascal and a Fenelon. From One Spirit flow all the graces that adorn the Christian character; and the unity of the source is traceable in the graces themselves, which, amid all their diversity, have an element of likeness.
Exo 17:14 16
God’s mercies need memorial, and obtain it in several ways.
Deliverance from Amalek was a great and noticeable mercy. It was.
1. UNDESERVED, as the people had just been murmuring against God, and threatening to stone his prophet (Exo 17:3-4).
2. TIMELY. Defeat, or even an indecisive success, would have brought upon the Israelites a host of enemies, under whose combined or continuous attacks they must have succumbed. The complete discomfiture of the powerful Amalek struck terror into the hearts of the neighbouring peoples, and induced them to leave Israel for nearly forty years unmolested.
3. WONDERFUL. Amalek was warlike, accustomed to contend with the great nation of the Egyptians; Israel had had all warlike aspirations checked and kept down by above 400 years of servitude and peace. Amalek was no doubt well armed; Israel can have possessed few weapons. Amalek knew the country, could seize the passes, and select a fitting moment for attack; to all Israel, except Moses and Aaron (Exo 4:27), the country was strange, the passes unknown, and perhaps the very idea of their being attacked unforeseen and unexpected. The attack actually came close upon the great suffering from thirst, when Israel was “feeble” and “faint and weary” (Deu 25:18). So signal a mercy deserved special remembrance. Men soon forget the favours they receive at God’s hands. That this favour might not be forgotten, God required two things:
1. That a record of it should be inserted in his book. There is no other memorial comparable with this, whether we consider the honour of it, since to obtain record there, an event must be indeed an important one; or the enduringness, since God’s book will continue to the world’s end; or the celebrity, since it is read by all nations. And God’s special command for the insertion, stamps the event with an extra mark of dignity,
2. That it should be handed on traditionally to Joshua, and through him to others. Tradition is one of the modes by which God maintains the knowledge of his truth in the world, and is at no time wholly superseded by the written Word, since there are at all times persons in the world too young or too illiterate to have direct access to the Word, who must receive their religious instruction orally from teachers. Tradition alone would be a very unsafe guide; but tradition, checked by a book, is of no little value in enlarging the sphere of religious knowledge, and amplifying and rendering more intelligible the written record. To the two modes of securing continued remembrance of the defeat of Amalek required by God, Moses added a thirdthe erection of a material monument, to which he gave a commemorative name. Many victories have been thus commemorated, as those of Marathon, Blenheim, Trafalgar, Waterloo, etc.; but no erector of such a memorial has ever given to his work so noble and heart-stirring a name as Moses gave. “The Lord is my banner”under no other standard will I serve or fightno other leader will I acknowledge no other lord shall have dominion over me. “The Lord is my banner”under this banner I engaged Amalekhe, and he alone, gave me the victorythrough him, and him alone, do I look to discomfit my other enemies. Be the enemies material or spiritual, external or internal, to him only do I trust to sustain me against them. None other name is there under heaven, through whom salvation is to be obtained, the adversary baffled, Amalek put to confusion.
HOMILIES BY H. T. ROBJOHNS
Exo 17:8-16
Christ our Banner.
“Jehovah-Nissi.” Exo 17:15. Historical introduction: The Amalekitestheir territoryreasons why they barred Israel’s way.
1. Fear.
2. Religious animosityincidents of the engagementthe two memorials, book and altarjudgment pronounced on Amalek, and whythe slow execution through the centuries, ending in the final blotting out of the nation. “The counsel of the Lord standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations.” Show further that the rod of Hoses was in reality the banner of Israel; the pole of a banner without drapery, affording a rallying-point for Israel’s armies, a memorial of past achievement, a force therefore, a guide, an appeal to heaven, an earnest of victory. By that banner Israel conquered. But again, as with the water and the rock we ascended to the First Cause of all refreshments, so here we ascend beyond the rod-banner to the Real Cause and Giver of all victory, i.e; to Jehovah, i.e; to Christ.
I. ALL IN THE WILDERNESS MUST FIGHT.In the moral wilderness there are only two great hosts Amalek and Israel, pilgrims going to the heavenly country, and children of the desert that withstand their way.
1. Amalek cannot let Israel aloneif of the world we must fightfor there seems a certain constraint that will not permit us to leave the truth, Christ and God, without antagonism.
2. Israel will fightdutifullyand inspired thereto.
II. PILGRIM WARRIORS MAY BE TAKEN AT A DISADVANTAGE. See Deu 25:18. The attack of Amalek was
1. Sudden.
2. On an undefended rear.
3. On the faint.
4. On the demoralised by sin.
Trace the analogies in moral conflict.
III. OUR BANNER COMPENSATES FOR ALL DISADVANTAGE. Jehovah-NissiChrist our banner. See Isa 11:10-12; Rom 8:37; Rev 12:11; Constantine’s “In hoc signo.” The banner Christ:
1. Rallies to decision. Christ lifted up in the realms of thought, domestic life, business, social life, political life, men must take sides; must answer the question, What think ye of Christ? A Christ-side to every moral question. Reason why Christian men not always on the same side in reference to particular questions (e.g; abstinence) may be, because in actual conflict issues get confused. But wilful trimming not permissible. Nothing like the conduct of the Frenchman, who at the outbreak of the revolution wore both cockade and tricolour, one under one coat lappel, the other under the other. Rather should we be like Hedley Vicars, who, the morning after the great decision for God, unfurled his banner by laying an open Bible on his table for all his comrades to see.
2. Is a memorial of victories achieved. It was so with the rod of Moses (go over instances). So is it with regimental ensigns, inscribed oft with glorious names, e.g. Salamanca, Vittoria, etc. Picture the shot-rent, tattered banners, hung under vaulted roof, for a memorial. So Christhe shines before us in the light of ten thousand victorieson “his head many crowns.” Recall the history of t he Church, public and more private, its confessors and martyrs.
3. Is a force therefore (Rev 12:11). The moral power for a regiment in the possession of its colours; its demoralisation when lost. Christ seen in the host. Illustration: Castor and Pollux at the battle of Lake Regillus.
4. Is direction in the fray. No man in a battle can see it, understand it. Leadership necessary by trumpet, by signal, by aide-de-camp, by banner. So was it here. Moses directed the battle by the standard in his hand. So Christ to every soldier-saint. We may not fight for our own hand, nor according to our own whims; but take direction from him.
5. Is appeal for heavenly help. That banner-pole of Moses was not only for encouragement and lead to Israel, but also was an appeal to God for that aid which ensures victory. So, wherever Christ is, the intercessor is. O. Is earnest of victory. Christ is a force that cannot fail (Rom 8:37).R.
HOMILIES BY J. ORR
Exo 17:8-16
Amalek.
Various circumstances are to be noted in connection with this attack of Amalek on Israel.
1. It was unprovoked. “Then came Amalek” (Exo 17:8).
2. It was unfriendly. The Amalekites were descended from a grandson of Esau, and so were related to the Israelites (Gen 36:12).
3. It was bitterly hostile. This fierce and warlike tribe attacked Israel in the rear, and with great cruelty smote those who had fallen behind, whether from natural infirmity or from weariness and faintness in the march (Deu 25:18). This was a peculiarly malignant and vindictive act, and as perpetrated upon the people with whose well-being God had specially identified himself, was never to be forgotten. It was in truth one of those wrongs which burn themselves into the memory of a nation, and never can be forgotten. A special Nemesis waits on acts of flagrant inhumanity.
4. It was not without knowledge of the mighty works which God had wrought for Israel. We may be certain of that from what was said in Exo 15:1-27. of the effects produced on the surrounding peoples by the deliverance of the Red Sea. The Amalekites knew that the children of Israel were the people of Jehovah. They knew what great things Jehovah had done for his nation. They probably shared in the fear which these wonders of Jehovah had inspired. Their hostility to Israel, indeed, may partly have sprung from this cause. The opportunity seemed given them of making a successful raid upon a people whom they both dreaded and despised, and they hastened to avail themselves of it. Knowing that the Israelites were inexperienced in war, and being themselves numerous and powerful, they may have counted on an easy victory, especially as the people were fatigued with marching and. encumbered with baggage, with women and children, and with the aged and infirm. It was a time well chosen for delivering an attack, and for inflicting a mortal injury on the advancing host.
5. It was the first attack of its kind. And this circumstance gives it a very special significance. It makes it typical. In the issue of the conflict with Amalek is to be seen the result of the whole conflict, prolonged down the ages, between the friends and the enemies of God, between the Church of living believers and the world that hates and seeks to destroy it, waging against it an incessant warfare. Consider
I. THE BATTLE.
1. HOW fought. Observe
(1) Fighting was in this case called for. It was not a case, like that at the Red Sea, where the Israelites could do nothing to help themselves. The command, accordingly, is not, “Stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord” (Exo 14:13), but, “Go out, fight with Amalek” (Exo 15:9). When means of help are put within our reach, God expects us to use them. He would have us exercise our own powers, still, however, in the spirit of due dependence upon him. “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God which worketh in you,” etc. (Php 2:12, Php 2:13).
(2) The conflict was entered upon with a full appreciation of the gravity of the crisis. The leaders did not commit the error of despising their enemy. They knew how ill-prepared they were for entering upon a contest of the kind. There was no disguising the fact that the men of Israel were raw, undisciplined, wanting in courage, and prone to panic, while those of Amalek were men of the desert, bold, warlike, fierce, able to hold their own with the stoutest foe. This was the first battle of the former; it was but an episode in the life of continual warfare of the latter. Judged by appearances, the chances of war were, therefore, greatly against the Israelites, and it was felt that the most strenuous efforts, aided by earnest intercessions, would be needed to gain a victory. The Church, in like manner, will do well not to take too poor an estimate of her spiritual enemies. They are not to be made light of. They are not to be fought with sham weapons, or in the indolent, half-in-earnest spirit, with which so many are content to attempt the conquest. “We wrestle not against flesh and blood,” etc. (Eph 6:12). The Church need not count on cheap victories.
(3) The dispositions for the fight were made with skill and judgment. The men sent into the battle were picked men, and over them was appointed a brave generalJoshua (verse 9). This is the first appearance of Joshua in the history, but he must have been already known to Israel as a man possessed of the strategical and other qualifications needful in a military commander. Another lesson as to the use of means, and as to the adaptation of means to ends in God’s service. The battle was God’s, but it was to be fought through human instrumentalities. The strongest, bravest, most valorous men in the camp were, accordingly, selected for the service. No measure was omitted which was likely to ensure success. It is the old law of the economy of miracles. What man can do for himself, God will not work miracles to do for him. Doubtless, but for Moses’ intercession on the hill, the battle would still have been lost; on the other hand, had the military arrangements been less perfect, even Moses’ prayers might not have turned the tide of conflict so decisively in favour of the Israelites. Cf. Cromwell’s advice to his men”Trust in Providence, and keep your powder dry.” Note, further, how the same God who gave the Israelites a Moses, gave them also a Joshua, when a man of Joshua’s gifts was specially required. Cf. with the promise as to Christ, Isa 55:4. It is for our own benefit that God thus summons our gifts into exercise, and furnishes occasions for their trial and development.
2. How won. First, as seen above, by dint of hard fighting, but second, and more specially, by Moses’ intercessions. This portion of the narrative (Isa 55:10-12) is full of richest instruction. Observe
(1) Moses took with him Aaron and Hur, and ascended to the hill summit, to watch the battle, and to pray (Isa 55:10). Advanced in years, he could not personally take part in the melee; but he could pray for those who were in it. His prayer was as essential to success as their fighting. It was fighting of its own kind (cf. Col 4:12). Real prayer is hard, exhausting work. Even had Moses been physically capable of taking part in the conflict, he was better employed where he was, in this work of earnest intercession. Gifts differ. Joshua’s right place was on the field; that of Moses, on the hill. Many can pray who are debarred from fighting, e.g; invalidsMoses sitting on the stone (verse 12), they, perhaps, lying on their couchesand it is well for them to realise the value of their work, how much they can still do, how useful they are. Note, also, it was in view of the battle that this intercession of Moses was carried on. Prayer needs to be fed by knowledge, by watchful interest in events as they shape themselves around us, by study of the special needs of circumstances of the time. Of what essential service would it be in the warfare of the Church were praying men and women to act more on this principleseeking, as far as possible, to keep themselves informed of the progress and vicissitudes of the Lord’s work at home and abroad, and endeavouring to order their prayers with constant reference to the fluctuations in the battle! Moses praying on the hill may remind us of Christ in heaven, interceding for his Church militant on earth.
(2) Moses interceded, while holding up in his hands the rod of God (verses 9, 11). The rod was the symbol of God’s power as pledged for the defence of Israel. Faith holds up the rod in laying hold on God’s word and promise, and pleading the same before him.
(3) Moses had able coadjutors. Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands when they grew heavy through fatigue (verse 12). It is a happy circumstance when those who bear the principal burden of responsibility in spiritual work can rely on being aided by the sympathy and co-operation of others, “like-minded” (Php 2:20), with themselves in their desire to see God’s kingdom making progress. God’s people hold up the hands of ministers by praying for them (1Th 5:25).
(4) The intercession of Moses had a decisive influence upon the tide of battle. When Moses held up his hands, Israel prevailed; when he let down his hands, Amalek prevailed (verse 11). His hands being steadily supported till the going down of the sun, Amalek was completely discomfited (verse 13). The letting down of Moses’ hands may have been accompanied by a corresponding flagging in the earnestness of his supplications; or it may have been that the outward act, as indicative of the need of sustained and persevering entreaty of God, was itself made essential to the victory. In either case, we have a testimony to the power of prayer. Would that the Church were more alive to this secret of gaining victories by earnest supplication! The influence of prayer cannot be overrated. It decides battles. It sways the tides of history. It opens and shuts the windows of heaven (Jas 5:17, Jas 5:18). It puts to the rout spiritual enemies. Paul made use of this mighty power (Rom 1:9, Rom 1:10; Php 1:4, Php 1:9, etc.). But even Paul did not pray so much as Christ.
3. Connection with previous miracle. Is it fanciful to trace in the boldness, valour, and spiritual confidence of the Israelites in this battle, some relation to the wonderful deliverance they have just experienced? It was “at Rephidim,” the scene of the miraculous supply of water, that the attack of Amalek took place (verse 8). This water, in the first place, refreshed the Israelites physically, and so enabled them to fight; but we may believe that it had also a powerful, if temporary, effect upon their minds. It would banish doubt, restore trust, inspire enthusiasm. They drank of the brook by the way, and now lifted up the head (Psa 110:7). Thus does God time his mercies to our trials, and make the one a preparation for the other.
II. THE RECORD IN THE BOOK (verse 14). This command to insert in “the book” an account of the battle with Amalek was connected:
1. With God‘s design to give his Church a Bible. A “book” is presupposed, in which, apparently, a journal was kept of the transactions of the march. Such a contemporary record was plainly necessary, if exact accounts of these mighty acts of God in the desert were to be preserved. In no other way could the knowledge of them have been handed down to posterity without distortion, mutilation and adulteration. And God was not giving these mighty revelations of himself, to waste them on the air of the wilderness, or to leave them to the risk of being mixed up with legendary matter of man’s adding. This part of Israel’s history was being shaped and guided with a view to the instruction of the Church to the end of time (1Co 10:6, 1Co 10:11); and it was requisite that a proper account should be kept of its memorable events. Hence the existence of “the book,” out of the contents of which, we may believe, these narratives in the book of Exodus are principally compiled.
2. With a special significance attaching to this particular event. Amalek’s attack on Israel was, as already observed, the first of its kind. “In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only be terminated by the complete annihilation of the ungodly powers of the world” (Keil). This explains the severe sentence pronounced upon the tribe, as also the weighty significance attached to this first defeat. It takes many types to set forth completely the many-sided enmity of the world to God and to his Church. Pharaoh was one type, Amalek is another. Pharaoh was more especially the type of the enmity of the world against the church, viewed as having escaped from its power. Amalek, as Edom afterwards, is peculiarly the type of vindictive hostility to the kingdom of God as suchof implacable hate. Between Amalek (spiritually) and the church, therefore, there can never be aught but warfare. “Because his hand is against the throne of the Lord” (marg.), therefore “the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation” (verse 16). In this first defeat we have the type of all.
III. JEHOVAH–NISSI. Moses reared an altar in commemoration of the victory, and inscribed upon it the name”Jehovah-Nissi””Jehovah, my banner’ (verse 15). This name inscribed upon the altar is at the same time a name of God. It extracts and generalises the principle involved in the victory over Amalek, as a former name, “Jehovah-jireh” (Gen 22:14) extracted and generalised the principle involved in the interposition on Moriah; and as the words, “I am Jehovah that healeth them” (Exo 15:26), extracted and generalised the principle involved in the miracle at Marah. The truth taught by the name is precious and consolatory. Jehovah is the Church’s banner. His invisible presence goes with her in her conflicts. His help is certain. With him on her side, she is assured of victory. His name is her sure and all-sufficient trust. Learn
1. God’s deeds reveal His name. The revelation of the Bible is a fact-revelation.
2. It is the Church’s duty gratefully to remember the interpositions of God on her behalf.
3. It is her duty to seek to apprehend the principle of God’s dealings with her, and to treasure up the knowledge for further use.J.O.
Exo 17:15,Exo 17:16
Jehovah-Nissi.
The use of this name by the Church bespeaks
1. Her militant condition. “The Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation.”
2. The side on which she fights”My banner.”
3. The name round which she rallies”Jehovah.” “One Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph 6:5).
4. The confidence by which she is inspired. The inscription on a banner frequently sets forth the ground of confidence. “God and my right.”
5. The certainty she has of victory.J.O.
HOMILIES BY G. A. GOODHART
Exo 17:9
Thou hast given a banner unto them that fear thee.
1. THE ATTACK BY AMALEK. It was cowardly, malicious, merciless (cf. Deu 25:17; 1Sa 15:2); not open, straightforward enmity; cutting off the feeble and the stragglers; a vulture-like hostility; a type and sample of diabolical hatred. Notice the parallel between Israel’s position with regard to Amalek and our position with regard to Satan and his emissaries.
1. Israel was. passing through the wilderness. So God’s people are passing through this world (Heb 11:14). The country through which the route lies is not claimed by those who use it.
2. Amalek considered the wilderness as their own. So Satan claims to be the prince of this world. In either case the authority is usurped.
3. Amalek took Israel at a disadvantage. No cause of enmity assigned, only apparently the right assumed for the stronger to prey upon the weaker. Satan, too, always endeavours to take us at a disadvantage. He did not attack Christ until “he was an hungered;” he attacks us, also, when we are weakest.
II. THE DEFENCE AND CONFLICT.
1. A chosen captain. Joshua”Jehovah is hell).” Perhaps name changed from Hoshea at this time; shows, at any rate, whence the leader derived his ability to lead. Our captain, “manifested to destroy the works of the devil.” Had it not been for Satan’s enmity, how should we have known the power of Christ?
2. Selected soldiers. Not all the people, but chosen from the people. All share the danger, but the defence may best be undertaken by a few, though, no doubt, these few are supported and encouraged by the general sympathy. In the war with Satan the brunt of the battle must fall on the selected soldiersChrist chose apostles, and in every age the majority has been protected by representative champions. Satan must make more headway than he does, were it not that the weaker and more ignorant are sheltered from direct attack behind the bulwarks raised by the stronger and the wiser.
3. An uplifted banner. Usually the colours go before the army; here the bannerGod’s rodis upheld upon the mountain
(1) in full sight of all;
(2) in a position of comparative security. Notice
1. This banner was a sign of God’s helpful presence.
2. It was in full view of the fighters, and the fortune of the battle varied according as it was raised or lowered. Two things were necessary to ensure victory
(1) that the banner should be held up;
(2) that the fighters should keep looking at it. In the fight with Satan the same principle applies. God’s law, God’s righteous purpose, must be upheld by the Prophet, supported on one hand by the priest, on the other by the noble; but, further, the fighters must keep it well in view, nothing less than the assurance of its fixedness can nerve them so as to ensure victory.
III. THE MEMORIAL.
1. A book. This victory a pledge of Amalek’s final exter- ruination.
2. An altar. “Jehovah our Banner,” sign of a continuous war to be ended only with the fulfilment of God’s purpose.
In the fight with Satan our Lord’s victory in the wilderness and on the cross, a pledge of final victory for all.
1. It is written in a book. Who has not read of it?
2. It is commemorated by a memorial, which all may see. “This do as a memorial of me.” So long as there is evil in the world, so long there must be war. God’s soldiers must fight from generation to generation until the final victory be achieved. What is the secret of their strength? The banner uplifted upon the mountain. The rod of God. “It is written.” The prophet uprears it. Priest and noble, in so far as they fulfil their office, unite to support the prophet. The fighters h,ok up to the banner, and, encouraged by its steadfast maintenance, fight on till victory be secured.G.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
Exo 17:8-16
The discomfiture of Amalek in Rephidim.
I. AMALEK‘S IGNORANCE OF THE RESOURCES OF ISRAEL. Amalek attacked Israel in Rephidim. Rephidim stands very well as the type of all places and positions where human resources appear utterly wanting. It was a place where no water could be found, and where of course there must also have been little growth. Everything therefore would lead Amalek to say, “We shall easily conquer these people, being but an undisciplined, unmanageable crowd.” How should outsiders understand anything of the way in which the Lord had led Israel? To Israel itself, the way had been one which it -knew not; and to Amalek, able to judge only by first appearances it would seem the way of folly, rashness, and certain ruin. The Amalekites could very well see that there was no ordinary source of supplies open, and extraordinary sources were beyond their ken, beyond their powers of imagination. We shall do well to consider, before we oppose anything, what its resources are; apparent weakness may not only hide real strength, but may be almost the condition of it. We shall do well also to consider whether under erroneous notions of self-preservation, we may not often be found fighting against God. These Amalekites went out to war against Israel upon motives of self-interest. It seemed to them if they did not destroy Israel, Israel would destroy them. Yet if they had only inquired, if they had only asked the question how this great company had managed to get so far, they might have been spared all anxiety and the great destruction which came upon them. The wisest plan would have been to leave Israel alone and wait; then it would have been seen that Israel was not going to stop in that district.
II. THE WAY IN WHICH ISRAEL MEETS AMALEK.
1. The spirit and conduct of Moses are to be considered. Hitherto in his difficulties he has cried to the Lord, not of course despairingly, but feeling deeply his need of Divine direction. Here however he is ready for action at once. No mention is made of recourse to God, from which we assume that the line of action was at once apparent to Moses. The promptitude of his action is indeed remarkable; and yet it is clear from the result that there was nothing presumptuous in it. Everything evidently accorded with the will and purpose of God. This was an occasion when Israel could do something, and they were bound to make the attempt. Moses was a man who appreciated the principle that God helps those who help themselves. When the people were entangled in the land by the lied Sea they could do nothing; when they came into the wilderness with its scarcity of food and drink, they could do nothing; they had simply to wait on God’s provisions. But here where fighting men appear against them, and there is space and time for resistance, Moses rightly takes means to bring the strength of his people into operation.
2. The spirit and conduct of the people are also to be considered. Their faith, promptitude and composure are also very remarkable, more remarkable even than the like conduct on the part of Moses. Those who had been so long, and only so lately, unbelieving and unmanageable, all at once manifest a surprising readiness to meet the foe. Considering the way in which they had recently behaved, it is a marvellous thing that all was not thrown into panic and confusion, immediately on the appearance of Amalek. To what then can this composure and readiness be attributed? Evidently it was the effecta temporary effect certainly, yet not insufficient for its purposeof the gift of the manna and of the water in a dry and thirsty land. God took care that all troubles should not come on them at once. They were strong with a strength Amalek knew nothing of; and it was in the fresh consciousness of that strength that they made ready for the battle. We imagine that on this occasion, Joshua found abundance of volunteers, and that those who went out against Amalek were the very pick and pride of Israel’s warriors.
III. THE WAY IN WHICH GOD SIGNIFIES HIMSELF TO BE THE CONTROLLER OF VICTORY. Moses knows right well that after all preparations, the victory must come from Jehovah. He sets the discriminating Joshua to lead a chosen and competent army against Amalek, as if everything depended upon them, and yet at the same time he remembers that God must be glorified in the very best of human preparations. God will have us to honour him by our very best, and yet our very best must be considered as no more than the humble channel of his power. We must not suppose, because it pleases God in his wisdom, to put the excellency of his treasure into earthen vessels, that we are at liberty to offer him anything which first comes to hand. And then Moses, having done his best in the choice of means, takes his conspicuous position on the hill, to cheer his fighting friends with the sight of the lifted rod. Through the lifting of that rod the energies of victory were to flow into the bodies of Israel’s warriors. To Amalek the sight of Moses told nothing. They knew nothing of the significance of the rod, and may rather have wondered why he should stand so long in this position of constraint. But Israel, we cannot doubt, quickly discerned the significance of their leader’s attitude and the close connection between the lifted hand and the progress towards victory. The lesson for us is the oft taught one, that while God would have us to labour strenuously and bear the heat and burden of the day in all the inevitable conflicts of life, we must do it with the remembrance that victory really comes from him. We are only strong, as Paul felt he was, by the strength which Christ puts into us.Y.
HOMILIES BY J. URQUHART
Exo 17:8-16
Victory through faith.
I. IN THE WARFARE OF FAITH, PRAYER AND EFFORT MUST BE JOINED TOGETHER.
1. Arrangements are carefully made for both.
(1) Men are picked out for a battle, and Joshua descends with them into the valley.
(2) Moses, with Aaron and Hur, climbs to the hill-top with the rod of God in his hand.
2. Joshua discomfited Amalek with the edge of the sword; but the battle was for or against Israel, as Moses’ hands were lifted up in strong supplication or hung down in weariness.
(1) To pray without using means is to mock God.
(2) To use means without prayer is to depise God.
II. AIDS TO PREVAILING PRAYER.
1. The remembrance of past deliverances and services. Moses takes the rod of God in his hand.
2. The union of many hearts: he sat on the hill-top in sight of Israel.
3. Friendly help in weakness. Aaron and Hur hold up the wearied hands.
III. IN THE VICTORY OF THE RIGHTEOUS, A YET FURTHER TRIUMPH IS PROMISED. The promise is recorded in the book that that against which they war shall be swept from under heaven.
IV. THE GRATITUDE OF THE REDEEMED IN THE HOUR OF TRIUMPH. The monument of victory is an altar and its name Jehovah-Nissi.U.
Exo 17:8. Then came Amalek We learn from Deu 25:18 that the Amalekites fell upon the hindmost part of the Israelitish army, and smote all that were feeble behind, at a time when they were all faint and weary at Rephidim. After this attack upon the rear, they came to a pitched battle in the plain below Mount Horeb, Exo 17:10. The Amalekites inhabited some part of Arabia Petraea, near Rephidim, between that place and Canaan. They were descendants of Esau; and are therefore supposed to have hated the Israelites, the descendants of Jacob; whose settlement in the land of Canaan they, perhaps, were desirous to prevent, as imagining they themselves had an equal right to it.
The origin of Amalek we find in Gen 14:7 . Observe Amalek is the first of the nations to oppose God’s people, and remark his latter end; Num 24:20 . Is not this also to be spiritually considered? Amalek is of the seed of Esau, in whom there is a natural hatred. Gal 4:29 .
Exo 17:8 Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim.
Ver. 8. Then came Amalek. ] Not having the fear of God before his eyes, Deu 25:18 but carried on by the ancient enmity: for Amalek was Esau’s grandchild.
Then came Amalek. See on Gen 21:25 and Jdg 5:11. Amalek came to fight for the water. Compare Deu 25:17, Deu 25:18. Amalek came behind and attacked the rear, and he “feared not God”, Deu 25:8.
Amalek, Figure of speech Synecdoche (of Part), App-6, put for Amalekites. At Rephidim, they got water plus Amalek; at Meribah, water plus Edom.
Gen 36:12, Gen 36:16, Num 24:20, Deu 25:17, 1Sa 15:2, 1Sa 30:1, Psa 83:7
Reciprocal: Gen 14:7 – Amalekites Exo 17:1 – Rephidim Exo 19:2 – Rephidim Num 13:29 – Amalekites Jdg 5:14 – Amalek Jdg 12:15 – in the mount 2Sa 1:8 – an Amalekite Jer 31:2 – The people
Exo 17:8. Then came Amalek When they were upon their march from Rephidim to Horeb, (Deu 25:17-18,) and fought with Israel The Amalekites were the posterity of Esau, who hated Jacob because of the birthright and blessing. They did not boldly front them as a generous enemy, but, without any provocation given, basely fell upon their rear, and smote them that were faint and feeble.
17:8 Then came {e} Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim.
(e) Who came from Eliphaz, son of Esau, Gen 36:12.
4. The hostility of the Amalekites 17:8-16
Whereas the Israelites had feared the possibility of having to battle the Egyptians (Exo 14:10), they now did engage in battle with the Amalekites.
"The primary function of this section in its present location is the demonstration of yet another proof and benefit of Yahweh’s Presence with Israel. The occasion for the demonstration this time is an attack from the outside instead of an internal complaint. The result, however, is once again an undeniable supernatural intervention of Yahweh. . . . Yahweh is present, when the need arises, to fight alongside and even on behalf of his people." [Note: Durham, p. 234.]
Moses used "Amalek" to represent the Amalekites, as he often used "Israel" for the Israelites (Exo 17:8). The Amalekites were a tribe of Semites. They had descended from one of Esau’s grandsons (Gen 36:12) and had settled in the part of Sinai the Israelites now occupied. They also inhabited an area in southern Canaan (cf. Gen 14:7). They evidently opposed Israel in battle because they felt Israel was a threat to their security.
This is the first biblical reference to Joshua (Exo 17:9). Moses selected him to lead Israel’s warriors. Moses’ staff was the means God used to accomplish miracles for Israel and to identify those miracles as coming from Himself (cf. Exo 17:5, et al.).
Hur was the son of Caleb (Exo 17:10; 1Ch 2:19; not the Caleb of later fame in Numbers and Joshua) and possibly the grandfather of Bezalel, the architect of the tabernacle (Exo 31:2, et al.). Josephus said he was the husband of Miriam. [Note: Josephus, 3:2:4.] He was an important man in Israel (cf. Exo 24:14).
"Moses went to the top of the hill that he might see the battle from thence. He took Aaron and Hur with him, not as adjutants to convey his orders to Joshua and the army engaged, but to support him in his own part in connection with the conflict. This was to hold up his hand with the staff of God in it. To understand the meaning of this sign, it must be borne in mind that, although Exo 17:11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping of the hand (in the singular), yet, according to Exo 17:12, both hands were supported by Aaron and Hur, who stood one on either side, so that Moses did not hold up his hands alternately, but grasped the staff with both his hands, and held it up with the two." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, 2:79.]
"Moses lifted his hands, in symbol of the power of Yahweh upon the fighting men of Israel, surely, but in some miraculous way Moses’ upraised hands became also conductors of that power." [Note: Durham, p. 236.]
Moses’ actions suggest that he was engaging in intercessory prayer, though reference to prayer is absent in the text. The emphasis is on the rod that Moses held in his hand, the instrument of God’s power.
"The lifting up of the hands has been regarded almost with unvarying unanimity by Targumists, Rabbins, Fathers, Reformers, and nearly all the more modern commentators, as the sign or attitude of prayer. . . . The lifting up of the staff secured to the warriors the strength needed to obtain the victory, from the fact that by means of the staff Moses brought down this strength from above, i.e., from the Almighty God in heaven; not indeed by a merely spiritless and unthinking elevation of the staff, but by the power of his prayer, which was embodied in the lifting up of his hands with the staff, and was so far strengthened thereby, that God had chosen and already employed this staff as the medium of the saving manifestation of His almighty power. There is no other way in which we can explain the effect produced upon the battle by the raising and dropping . . . of the staff in his hands. . . . God had not promised him miraculous help for the conflict with the Amalekites, and for this reason he lifted up his hands with the staff in prayer to God, that he might thereby secure the assistance of Jehovah for His struggling people. At length he became exhausted, and with the falling of his hands and the staff he held, the flow of divine power ceased, so that it was necessary to support his arms, that they might be kept firmly directed upwards . . . until the enemy was entirely subdued." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, 2:79-81.]
"The significance of this is that Israel’s strength lay only in a continuous appeal to the Lord’s power and a continuous remembrance of what He had already done for them . . ." [Note: Gispen, p. 169.]
"Why do you fail in your Christian life? Because you have ceased to pray! Why does that young Christian prevail? Ah, in the first place, he prays for himself; but also, there are those in distant places, mothers, sisters, grandparents, who would think that they sinned, if they ceased to pray for him, and they will not fail to lift up their hands for him until the going down of the sun of their lives!" [Note: Meyer, p. 202.]
This battle was more important than may appear on the surface.
"As the heathen world was now commencing its conflict with the people of God in the persons of the Amalekites, and the prototype of the heathen world, with its hostility to God, was opposing the nation of the Lord, that had been redeemed from the bondage of Egypt and was on its way to Canaan, to contest its entrance into the promised inheritance; so the battle which Israel fought with this foe possessed a typical significance in relation to all the future history of Israel. It could not conquer by the sword alone, but could only gain the victory by the power of God, coming down from on high, and obtained through prayer and those means of grace with which it had been entrusted." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, 2:81. Cf. Zechariah 4:6; John 15:5.]
What was the immediate significance of this battle for Israel? Israel learned that God would give them victory over their enemies as they relied on Him.
"Jehovah used the attack of Amalek on Israel, at the very beginning of their national history, to demonstrate to His chosen people the potency of intercession. The event reveals a mighty means of strength and victory which God has graciously afforded His people of all ages." [Note: D. Edmond Hiebert, Working with God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession, p. 57. All of chapter 5 of this excellent book deals with Exodus 17:8-16.]
AMALEK.
Exo 17:8-16.
Nothing can be more natural, to those who remember the value of a fountain in the East, than that Amalek should swoop down from his own territories upon Israel, as soon as this abundant river tempted his cupidity. This unprovoked attack of a kindred nation leads to another advance in the education of the people.
They had hitherto been the sheep of God: now they must become His warriors. At the Red Sea it was said to them, “Stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord … the Lord shall fight for you, and ye shall hold your peace” (Exo 14:13). But it is not so now. Just as the function of every true miracle is to lead to a state of faith in which miracles are not required; just as a mother reaches her hand to a tottering infant, that presently the boy may go alone, so the Lord fought for Israel, that Israel might learn to fight for the Lord. The herd of slaves who came out of Egypt could not be trusted to stand fast in battle; and what a defeat would have done with them we may judge by their outcries at the very sight of Pharaoh. But now they had experience of Divine succour, and had drawn the inspiring breath of freedom. And so it was reasonable to expect that some chosen men of them at least will be able to endure the shock of battle. And if so, it was a matter of the last importance to develop and render conscious the national spirit, a spirit so noble in its unselfish readiness to die, and in its scorn of such material ills as anguish and mutilation compared with baseness and dishonour, that the re-kindling of it in seasons of peril and conflict is more than half a compensation for the horrors of a battle-field.
We do not now inquire what causes avail to justify the infliction and endurance of those horrors. Probably they will vary from age to age; and as the ties grow strong which bind mankind together, the rupture of them will be regarded with an ever-deepening shudder,–just as England today would certainly refuse to make war upon our American kinsmen for a provocation which (rightly or wrongly) she would not endure from Russians. But the point to be observed is that war cannot be inherently immoral, since God instructed in war the first nation that He ever trained, not using its experience of His immediate interpositions to supersede all need of human strife, but to make valiant soldiers, and adding some of the most precious lessons of all their later experience on the battle-field and by the sword. Now, it assuredly cannot be shown that anything in itself immoral is fostered and encouraged by the Old Testament. Slavery and divorce, which it was not yet possible to extirpate, were hampered, restricted, and reduced to a minimum, being “suffered” “because of the hardness of ‘their’ hearts” (Mat 19:8). The wildest assailant of the Pentateuch will scarcely pretend that it fosters and incites either divorce or slavery, as, beyond all question, it encourages the martial ardour of the Jews.
And yet war, though permissible, and in certain circumstances necessary, is only necessary as the lesser of two evils; it is not in itself good. Solomon, not David, could build the temple of the Lord; and Isaiah sharply contrasts the Messiah with even that providentially appointed conqueror, the only pagan who is called by God “My anointed,” in that the one comes upon rulers as upon mortar, and as the potter treadeth clay, but the Other breaks not a bruised reed, nor quenches the smoking flax (Isa 41:25, Isa 42:3, Isa 45:1). The ideal of humanity is peace, and also it is happiness, but war may not yet have ceased to be a necessity of life, sometimes as ruinous to evade as any other form of suffering.
Another necessity of national development is the advancement of capable men. The empire of Napoleon would assuredly have withered, if only because its chief was as jealous of commanding genius as he was ready to advance and patronise capacity of the second order. It is a maxim that true greatness finds worthy colleagues and successors, and rejoices in them. And while the guidance of Jehovah is to be assumed throughout, it is significant that the first mention of the splendid commander and godly judge, during all whose days and the days of his contemporaries Israel served Jehovah, comes not in any express revelation or commandment of God; but the narrative relates that Moses said unto Joshua, “Choose out men for us and go out, fight with Amalek: tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in my hand.” They are the words of one who had noted him already as “a man in whom is the Spirit” (Num 27:18), of one also who had unlearned, in the experience now of eighty years, the desire of glittering achievement and martial fame, who knew that the deepest fountains of real power are hidden, and was content that another should lead the headlong and victorious charge, if only it were his to hold, upon the top of the hill, the rod of God.
Once it was his own rod: with it the exiled shepherd controlled the sheep of his master; that it should be the medium of the miraculous had appeared to be an additional miracle, but now it was the very rod of God, nor was any cry to heaven more eloquent and better grounded than simply the reaching toward the skies, in long, steady, mute appeal, of that symbol of all His dealings with them–the plaguing of Egypt, the recession of the tide and its wild return, the bringing of water from the rock. Was all to be in vain? Should the wild boar waste the vine just brought out of Egypt before ever it reached the appointed vineyard? And we also should be able to plead with God the noble works that He hath done in our time. For us also there ought to be such experience as worketh hope. As long as the exertion was possible even to the heroic force which age had not abated, Moses thus prayed for his people; for the gesture was a prayer, and a grand one, and must not be criticised otherwise than as the act of a poetic and primitive genius, whose institutions throughout are full of spiritual import. While he did this, Israel prevailed; but the slow progress of the victory reminds us of these dreary centuries during which we are just able to discern some gradual advance of the kingdom of Christ on earth, but no rout, no collapse of evil. And why was this? Because the sustaining and permanent energy was not to flow from the prayers of one, however holy and however eminent; three men were together in the mountain, and the co-operation of them all was demanded; so that only when Aaron and Hur supported the sinking hand of their chief was the decisive victory given.
Now, the lesson from all this does not concern the High-priestly intercession of our Lord, for the office of Moses is consistently distinguished from the priesthood. Nor can the notion be tolerated that if our Lord requires mortal co-operation before asking and being given the heathen for His heritage, which is obviously the case, the reason can be at all expressed by that weakness which needed support.
No, the Lord our Priest is also Himself the dispenser of victory. To Him all power is given on earth, and to Him it is our duty to appeal for the triumph of His own cause. And here and there, doubtless, a Christian heart is fervent and faithful in its intercessions. To these, unknown, unsuspected by the combatants in the heat of battle,–to humble saints, some of them bed-ridden, ignorant, poverty-stricken, despised, holy souls who have no controversial skill, no missionary calling, but who possess the grace habitually to convert their wishes into prayers,–to such, perhaps, it is due that the idols of India and China are now bowing down. And when they cease to be a minority in so doing, when those who now criticise learn to sustain their flagging energies, we shall see a day of the Lord.
Observe, however, that as the active exertion of the host does not displace the silence of intercession, neither is it displaced itself: Joshua really bore his part in the discomfiture of Amalek and his host. And so it is always. The development of human energy to the uttermost is a part of the design of Him Who gave a task even to unfallen man. Let none suppose that to labour is (sufficiently and by itself) to pray; but also let none idly persuade himself that while energies and responsibilities are his, to pray is sufficiently to labour.
Thus it came to pass that Israel won its first victory in battle. Another step was taken toward the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham to make of him a great nation; and also toward the gradual transference of the national faith from a passive reliance in Divine interposition to an abiding confidence in Divine help. Let it be clearly understood that this latter is the nobler and the more mature faith.
With martial ardour, God took care to inculcate the sense of national responsibility, without which warriors become no more than brigands. So it was with Amalek: he had not been attacked or even menaced; he had marched out from his own territories to assail an innocent and kindred race (“then came Amalek” Exo 17:8), and his attack had been cruel and cowardly, he smote the hindmost, all that were feeble and in the rear, when they were faint and weary, and he feared not God (Deu 25:18). Against all such tactics the wrath of God was denounced when, because of them, Amalek was doomed to total extirpation.
Moses now built an altar, to imprint on the mind of the people this new lesson. And he called it, “The Lord is my Banner,” a title which called the nation at once to valour and to obedience, which asserted that they were an army, but a consecrated one.
* * * * *
Now let us ask whether this simple story is at all the kind of thing which legend or myth would have created, for the first martial exploit of Israel. The obscure part played by Moses is not what we would expect; nor, even as a mediator, is the position of one whose arms must be held up a very romantic conception. If the object is to inspire the Jews for later struggles with more formidable foes, the story is ill-contrived, for we read of no surprising force of Amalek, and no inspiriting exploit of Joshua. Everything is as prosaic as the real course of events in this poor world is wont to be. And on that account it is all the more useful to us who live prosaic lives, and need the help of God among prosaic circumstances.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
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: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary